The URL can be used to link to this page

276975 WHITE - CITY CLERK - [� (l }}yy CANARY - DEPARTMENT COUIICII JF� h� /� BLUE - MAYOR � G I T Y O F S A I N T PA U L File N O. F`� �� Counci Presented By Leonard W. Levine " Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, Como Park has provided enjoyment for the residents of Saint Paul and the Metropolitan area since 1872; and WHEREAS, The Council of the City of Saint Paul wishes to acknowledge the significant positive contribution of Como Park to the quality of life in Ci ty; and WHEREAS, The park is in need of physical improvement and redesign for its maintenance as a vital resource, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED; That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby approve and adopt the Master Plan for Como Park, and, further be it RESOLVED; That the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby authorizes the Department of Community Services to submit the Master Plan for Como Park to the Metropolitan Council for approval , and, further be it RESOLVED; That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby support the efforts of the Department of Community Services to secure needed funding from the Metropolitan Council and the State Legislature for the further development and improvement of Como Park. COUfVCILMEN Requestgd by Department of: Yeas Nays Hunt Levine [n Favor Maddox � McMahon __ /�gal�St �'�..e..�..-"'•�.� - Tedesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date JU� 9 1981 Form prove by or .- Certified •sed by Council cretar B : Approv by :Vlayor: Da JUN �t.�, tgg� Ap ov by Mayor Su ii •ion to ouncil By _ _ B PUBLISHED J UN 2 01981 r 7 7 ' � t � � � � � � � � � � � � 1 MASTER 1 � PLAN �� 1 � va.m s �=a �� e3 . �� 1 ' � � �_ � �� 1 , PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES � DIVISION OF PARICS AND RECREATION ' ' � , BY THE DESIGN SECTION OF THE , DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION � � ' , WITH DIRECTION AND GUIDANCE OF: COMP PARK PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE ' AND PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS: RALPH BURKE AND ASSOCIATES ' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC DIVISION � � , ' , CITY OF SAINT PAUL �.4 CtTt O�; � ; DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES ' � iii�ti 1p ;� DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION � �O +•.. 300 City Hall Annex, 25 West Fourth Street � St. Paul, Minnesota.55102 GEORGE LATIMER 612-292-7400 MAYOR , Como Park is a unique facility which has a special place in both the , St. Paul Parks and Recreation System and the Metropolitan Area. The diversity of activities--from family picnicking to lakeside concerts to visits to the zoo or conservatory--make this 378 acre park a favorite recreational area for people throughout the region. � The City of Saint Paul is pleased to present this Master Plan for Como Park. The plan is the culmination of a three year process to evaluate � the condition of the park, identify current and future needs , and develop a direction for the redesign of Como Park. The process has been very detailed involving extensive research and planning, and ongoing participation ' by both the community and professional staff. We believe that the Master Plan reflects the development necessary to improve basic park functions and to make the recreation experience at , Como Park safe and enjoyable for all visitors. At the same time, the plan respects the character and historic aspects which have always distinguished this park. , As the most heavily used park in the metropolitan area, Como Park is a key element in the Metropolitan Regional Park System. The improvement of ' the park is essential if we are to make better use of existing resources to meet the increasing demand for close-to-home recreation opportunities. During its 108 year history, Como Park has filled the recreation needs I of many generations. The proposed improvements to the park will ensure that it can accommodate the recreation needs of future generations as well . ' Sin ly, , Robert P. Piram, Superintendent John Heggarty, Chairman Division of Parks and Recreation Como Park Advisory Committee ' � � ' ' ' ' ' TABLE OF CONTENT3 , I Planning Process Process Diagram - Citizen Participation p. 1 � Goals and Objectives p. 2 TI Analysis ' History p. 6 - Analysis: Explanation p. 8 - Soil Analysis p. 9 Analysis of Existing Conditions p. 10 - Analysis of Existing Use Areas p. 11 ' III Circulation ' Introduction p. 12 - Analysis of Existing Through Traffic p. 13 - Analysis of Internal Circulation p. 14 - Proposed Vehicular Through Traffic p. 15 - Proposed Internal Circulation p. 16 - Parking p. 17 - Parking Deck p. 19 - Park Shuttle System p. 21 - Bus Connections p. 22 - � Short Term Parking p. 22 - Handicapped Access p. 22 - Proposed Parking: Evaluation p. 23 - Proposed Bike and Pedestrian Circulation p. 24 - Underpass p. 25. iIV Master Plan � Introduction p. 26 - Proposed Use Area p. 27 - The Master Plan for Como Park p. 28 - Acquisition p. 29 - Master Plan Components p. 30 - L a k e P a v i l i o n p. 3 1 - P i c n i c A r e a p. 3 2 - A muse r n pn ts p. 3 2 - Master Plan Interaction: Zoo and Conservatory Plan p. 32 - Golf Course , and Clubhouse p. 34 - Pool/Tennis Facilities p. 34 - McMurray Field p. 35 - Como Park User Capacities p. 36 - Master Plan: Operational Details p. 38 jV Phase Development � Phase Development: Explanation p. 39 - Chart VI Maintenance � Maintenance Review p. 40 - Park Shuttle Operating Cost Projections p. 41 VII Cost Estimate p. 43 � VIII Appendix � � � � �; � �� ._ § �t� . :.� � . �a , , � � � ,,. , .�, � � > � _ �. �� , v. � . � ,� * � - a. ,� _. , . <t ,��;.. � � ``-t ,�. , �� . v-� � � �: v . . , ,. ry��t- . ' � � � � � � � � �� . �. , ,5 � �� , � � � � �..� �� ' . ,�� . - e � u � � � � A . - � � � :., � y= �. _ �o� , _ �. .. � , , �� ,�� C� �YII � r � '�� ,n +� � �� e. `i��W �� e � � � Y s �� , �� r- f ,��r ��ei Y � 0 s �� `• � �' „��rMlr �~ ; ; �� w� � ` y' �§�� #�� i�°' t��'�"`�' "�`�""it +��. � +, ' 4�&k Yta 6i' F �z��i�' 'w � �� ... � ar �,A�e,��k ��., , � Sa 7 ��^� � w�_� � '�It°� ��r � �.'��YI� �� '��j� ±R'b'Nt� a�� w'��w�.s. � , � �'�`�� ' 'c � � ��,�,.��* ��,��,�^� '�A,"��"�1�:..�rv r1r" . '� � �.. �� d;. �`.yh�. �` ".n �� .� � t ,• 4 „ .�"� *�,�'+" "�'yi..`+C��"T^Vf1T��'''�`�'�'��i , t �� s +s�,A ` .,� �`a+.,,��`��"` �. :sk S �. � .� . � V°� �� «„4,,,�>i,"r .�� ai��.�� i.�w :,a. '"+s.. +c �`�` � � ` . e W ""t��. �` �. "^.t..'� �� i ��tSfF. }� �'�x£� �', { � �� e t� ��$�r� �� ; +w . . -��, , � . •�. , ,� . �., .�`,� �''� w � �� *- , 4 ,� `�*`�° �'� �-,� ��":',,,., , a..��e�^� u' €,� �:�r�, ��.�. � "-- � ,'„ t . �- �� .��. '�z'� ��s � �, '""��` 'i�� *� �� ,�,. � ��' �� '�: «�- _ � �.�,, `�,,, � �,� - � �, � � � '� " �^� �`��ik,,% � � '�'+,g";'��" �+., . ��`°�"° ^�+°��`�'� `�'+R .'�� '� r, . ��'r�,-`��°�': .�% F ... �. "'"'�r•�...,,,_ � ��' +'�' * N�+�"�""i��,r��+ c '��, ''•w �"�,� V� •'�I,1+ , g_ �� e, � � �° �,��r a"'y" ��'�# ��",�� '�-,�*' ��' '��' �y... � �,'F. �. ..J�� .o+L _ t � � � � �� ,�r, '� r �' '., � t � "'� �'.,, !�b+�I��L: v� � ' °'��'��"+ts�:�'. ,',.!4��`�"'��:� Fa.E ;�t�`'�a�;„� � �- ?� S�"'�" '�,a'�`i , +.� �"ia�"�^� � � '�'t 1, -`'r° ,�..�s� . _�,„,� .*. ��.rw p � �� : � �8'wh�a�.7�"►�. .� "��,.� .,�,�t;' �°�c�... ^!C �' ��,.��C s�'�5�.„��"+#�f.� ��..��.`��p�4..+,�i."x s'+6,v, .. j '+�l'�, �� a��.av�..�WM��'� +ir� �.9 ��wN�. ,�y ��,��;��.�, �k g � ��e,�,..>�a :t� . :..+��'M► �. �:. w � �� *� +�r�y� �R''�$`r"'s�' ��+` "��`��' � � � '�►•t�'!-�'�`+., �..�'� �,��'�eYR�S a��AZar�� M�*�f°''4�'`�'��h�� "'"'.'��+�`��'� �''�x r��,. M � l'�a^,�`•�-- ' _ "��,��"!�'�., �"« $�'� � �y'� �r � t✓� �l �`A � r'i .� .�"� � '"�'' �e, ,,� .. •y , „� ~!� y�. s +�x�°�°��"�'� . `+c�,�'pF�,� �.' �. '�;� '�� " ��'��M'a��,�r��A�p��'v Qy ;��y..�,+ ��K�� `�'� ��,... �' ..�+�►.�+e•.; �"�''�'"� `� � �� '+�.:,��", " � �1 ^� ♦ J' „��ry� �w�..i,,�� '�(t�,�}�� , ,- ��,+�. �� '.. � � t s °� � <�.�,„ '�' � '.R-`'a i°`^ �., YY � y'�M. � �.��M'^.t ',iN 1 Y �lE ^'A';it, '� �� ` . • / • - • � ' PLANNING PROCESS The intent of the Como Park Planning Process was to create through planning and corr�nunity participation efforts, a plan for revitalizing tfie park which reflects the relative importance of specific goals, park elements, and park ' activities. This Como Park Planning Process diagram illustrates the process followed and ' illustrates the relationship between the various steps completed to arrive at the master plan and review process. , This document is the result of the process as described and establishes a direction and guide for future park development based upon the stated goals and objectives. � 1 ' ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' ' , Phase � � Analysis Circu- Master Develop- Mainte- Cost qppendix ' • . - lation Plan nance Estimate ment ' COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' � ' ' � ' , STEPS PROCESS OUTLINE •Identify scope 8 context -Identify interest groups •Identify generel interests •Develop [ime/task framewor ' •Eslablish management proa •Initia[e plamm�g base for inventory work ' IMPLEMENTATION •Forma[ion of park advisory •Assign project coordina� •Begin data collection •Establish lines of commun 1 ' PHASES PROGRAMMIN� I I ' PARTICIPANTS II CITV PARKS ADMINISTRATI � KEY: Review status —FOrmal report � Working report ----Formal presenta[ion ' �—_—. Informal presen[a[ion ' ' ' ' � � ' COMO PARK PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS 1 , John Heggarty, Chairman � Phyllis Arhart, Secretary Greg Bies James Mulholland ' Margarita Billings Anne Neil ' Chauncey Ellington Liz Olson Jackie Finley Tom Peterson ' Joe Friberg Frances Rosner Alan Forsberg Jack Schlukebier ' Sally Frost Bernice Flowers Strane ' Terry Huntrods Bob Tebbutt Cheryl Lange Adolf Tobler ' Sam Lindberg Keith Wietecki Judy McLaughlin Ann Wynia ' Dick Miller Deanna Winger , Bob Moder ' , . , � Phase ' Analysis Circu- Master Develop- Mainte- Cost Appendix • . - lation Plan ment nance Estimate ' COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' ' CITIZEN PARTICPATION The role of Citizen Participation in the Como Park Process goes back to the early '50's when a citizen support group called the Como Zoological Socity was , formed. This group's major purpose was to improve the conditions of Como Zoo. Over the years, they have established a Newsletter, a Speaker's Bureau and helped organize the 1974 conference that led to the Como Zoo Master Plan of 1978. These ' efforts resulted in the first grant from the Metropolitan Council for Como Park being directed toward the rehabilitation of the Zoo. ' At this time, the City of Saint Paul formed a committee to assist in the planning and design process for Como Zoo. In addition, another committee was started to proceed with the planning efforts for the Park as a whole. These two committees were formed within a week of each other during August of 1977 and met every other ' week thereafter. Each committee has representatives on the other and have worked together on areas of mutual concern. , The Como Park Advisory Committee is composed of residents appointed by the District Councils immediately adjacent to the Park as well as those from other inte rested Districts. The Como Park Advisory Committee has met on a regular basis for three ' years to assist City staff and provide community input in the preparation of the Master Plan. ' � � �� $�� : � �� < �, � �� , � � �� - �:a �� a g�a�-��5�� . � � ' � � ��$s'ae�'�� 4 �� a��u��¢�&�� a��x a� � �� '� ,9 �m.. �a�s� �y�5�a $ R �"� �,a� � �� h ' �*�� "� ' ; e ; � � , ��ma`a. � ! NfieF� i106i �'�:` ��. ' � � ��i � �Vx � ��:Bt „�a� y �,�i;i�� {yr, � � r � -��p�� ii� �+�.� �5.".. ��:;. � � � �� t , .,�, ��..�».,,,� �* �� ,.�< ,�.w ' � � v,,ti �n } . .�: Photo 1 - Band Concert �r ' ' at Como Park's Lake- side Pavilion , ca. 1904 = � , , Phase . • Circu- Master Mainte- Cost ' , Analysis lation Plan Develop- nance Estimate APPendix ' � ' ment i � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 1 ' GOALS 8� OBJECTNES One of the first tasks of the Como Park Advisory Committee was to establish a ' direction for the Master Plan. The following program is a generalized, written version of the Master Plan compiled by the Committee with the assistance of City staff. The Program is stated in terms of goals and objectives ' which identify problems and suggest solutions. These unprioritized goals and objectives were used as a guide in the preparation of the Master Plan, ' 1 . GOAL - ADOPT A DESIGN PHILOSOPHY WHICH WILL CREATE A PARK ATMOSPHERE WHICH REINFORCES AND RETALNS THE UNIQUE CHARACTER, HISTORICAL ' SIGNIFICANCE AND MANY UNUSUAL ATTRIBUTES OF COMO PARK. 2. GOAL - PROVIDE A UNIFIED AND HARMONIOUS, TOTAL RECREATIONAL FACILITY. Objectives , 1 . Unify park elements - color, texture, materials ' 2. Provide underground utilities 3. Improve quality of lighting 4. Preserve existing park flora and fauna ' 5. Pursue completion of park reforestation 6. Select plant materials attractive to wildlife 7. Provide adequate drinking fountains and sanitary facil�ties 8. Provide separate circulation links - pedestrian/bike/auto ' 9. Minimize pavement areas �n park 10. Relate parking to corresponding activities 11 . Provide complimentary zoo-park relationship , 12. Increase land area at lakeshore 3. GOAL - REDUCE TRAFFIC VOLUME, INCREASE PARKING FACILITIES, AND fLIM1�NATE ' CIRCULATION CONFLICT AREAS. Objectives t 1 . Provide separate circu�.ation links - pedestrian/bike/auto 2. Improve on bike and pedestrian pathway systems 3. Provide a North-South park drive through the park ' 4. Provide an East-West park drive through the park 5. Discourage circular traffic patterns 6. Decrease congestion at intersections , 7. Decrease non-residential traffic and parking in surrounding residential areas. 8. Reduce numbers of roadways thus decreasing vehicular surface areas ' 9. Provide comprehensive informational and directional signage throughout the park 10. Increase land area between lakeshore and roadways ' Phase - . . Circu- Master Mainte- Cost Analysis Iation Plan Develop- nance Estimate ��dix ' ' • ' ment COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 2 ' , � 11. Increase off-street parking facilities 12. Relate parking facilities to activities being served ' 4. GOAL - MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE PARK EDGES AND BUFFERS. Objectives i1. Improve and protect existing buffers 2. Provide buffers between park and residential areas even in areas where they do not presently exist ' 5. GOAL - PROVIDE FOR THE SECURITY AND SAFETY OF THE FACILITIES, PARK USERS AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. � 6. GOAL - PROUIDE FOR IMPROVED MAINTENANCE WITHOUT SACRIFICING PARK CHARACTER AND AESTHETICS. , Objectives 1 . Plan for ease of maintenance in the facility and site ' design process 2. Plan for reduced energy demand 3. Establish a maintenance program and i�s projected cost , for park and zoo 7. GOAL - MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE UNSTRUCTURED SPACES SUCH AS OPEN "MEAD04JS" , AND SP�IALL INTIMATE AREAS WHICH WILL COMPLIMENT INTEN�IVE USE AREAS. 8. GOAL - CREATE A MORE FUNCTIONAL PICNICKING SYSTEM. 1 Objectives ' 1 . Provide activities and space within the picnic area that will accorrmodate may types of group and family picnics simultaneously 2. Provide convenient access to adjoining park areas from Ithe picnic area 9. GOAL - IMPROVE AND EXPAND ON USE, QUALITY AND AVAILABLE SPACE ADJOINING ' LAKE COMO. Obj ecti ves ' 1. Develop a land use of lakeshore that takes full advantage of what the lake has to offer 2. Improve and expand on existing facilities and programs in ' use at the lakeside pavilion , Phase � � Anal sis Circu- Master Develop- Mainte- Cost pppendix , • . - y lation Plan nance Estimate ment ' 3 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 ' 3. Protect and improve on lake quality by working with Ramsey County to develop plans � 4. Increase land area for pedestrian space at lakeshore 5. Decrease conflicts preventing pedestrian use of the lakeshore 6. Provide separate circulation links - pedestrian/bike/auto ' 10. GOAL - PRESERVE, PROTECT, RESTORE AND RENOVATE THE LAKESIDE PAVILION, CONSERVATORY, OLD COMO STATION AND OTHER WORTHY STRUCTURES. � Objecti ves 1 . Repair structural weaknesses of the conservatory and ' rehabilitate the entire facility 2. Provide for major renovation of lakeside pavilion 3. Improve and expand on existing facilities and programs in � use at the lakeside pavilion 11. GOAL - IMPROVE MCMURRAY FIELD. ' Objectives 1 . Improve parking facilities ' 2. Increase fields ' playability 3. Develop workable support facilities for users 4. Improve appearance and atmosphere, soften edges ' 12. GOAL - PR011IDE 18-HOLE GOLF COURSE AND ADEQUATE SUPPORT FACILITIES INCLUDING THOSE FOR WINTER ACTIVITIES ' 13. GOAL - PROVIDE A WIDE RANGE OF ACTIVITIES FOR ALL PEOPLE Objectives ' 1 . Provide accessibility for handicapped, over and above code 2. Provide sensory activities and exhibits ' 3. Develop an arboretum area 4. Develop an historical area or room 5. Provide for the following activities : � Summer Activities Hiking/Walking Biking Nature Trails Tennis , Sitting Unorganized Open Space Musical Events Swimming Cultural Events Jogging ' Plant identification Rifle Range (indoor) Golf Concession Conservatory Zoo Area Ex ri r Gardens Non-M torized Amusements ' . , � Phase Anal sis Circu- Master Develo Mainte- Cost ' • - y lation Plan p nance Estimate APPendix ' ment COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ' 4 , � � Lake Oriented Activities Viewing Row Boating Fishing Canoeing � Paddle Biking Picnic Activities - (Easy access to other related sumner activities) � Large Group Playlots Small Group Softball Family Volleyball Blanket Badminton � Croquet Frisbee Bocce � Municipal Athletics (McMurray Field) � Support Facilities Baseball Softbal l Football Soccer � Rugby Broomball Hockey ' General Skating Winter Activities Unstructured Cross Country Winter Carnival Events � Skiing Downhill Skiing Unstructured Snowshoeing Sledding Conservatory Tobogganing , Concession Skating Historical Display Structured Cross Country Skiing Cultural Events Zoo Area � ' � , ' ' Circu- Master Phase Mainte- Cost . � � Analysis Iation Plan Develop- nance Estimate APPendix j ' ment , 5 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � `. � F � ,, • � 'rp►• � �� * � e '� �� *� � ��' �* X �, � ��' � �"�'�,�� ` �S �� '1�" � ,,� '� , � F � �. � - � ,� ;�''� � * �� °�. �� .�ia �� i e � '�� , '� �' i � � � � � � � � �� ,� �� .� � +�, � �� i ,� F � � � � - + � � � .ew , .�;., ,� � �. � � � � � � �� : �� ;:`� � �� - ,� � � + d �� „ � 4�� j � � � ,�� , �. .'� Nt_� � � � s. ,� � "�t�� . � +`, � � �. � '�� " �� , � �� '� � �„ 4�" �� x, p� � �� *� � f�av� �' N� � f � = s�. � �•• �F �n � �, � �., ��k ;:, . �. � �} �°° �' � �- �. �r �; � �° �� t x°..�. � � y �„�a �,,° �•_� � � , , � � �, �,% . � : �,� ,� �, _� .,� r �, � � � �MI 'y , e e�� , ��, , , t .. � ,��k . � -� � � 9,� , � , . 4 v e �� ,�' �" � _ ,�,,�.e ,�� , �� $ �, � .� �� , �. ,„� . s�� ".s � � ""r'�"..rK ,�� .e � � �a � ��6 Q � � � .� �� 6� ' f � � � ��a � �� '�. . �a � •w � � �� ... 4 ��' � � �� a � ��1�"� �� ,� a " � � m �� s, � #a� e ,p � � �..� : �;: .,� �;, .. � . ° .#� � ,� ,�. � m.;� ;. ' 'er^' g�f�s ##,'&%�►e4��iY'�1� .. . ��x . . �. ��. `hlp . `�„�ys',� .,� ^ �s, '� �3<q��.xr�a#��!�a�'. . s+�"'��'j � ��° ��. ,.��; ° ,�_ i" , � , � , , � u � °� � . �a e 1F��1� , _. � � �� q.�� ''�ke fa . ' 3;&� #�{�� _. , . �,� . ' r�r c,�+r: . ��a re.��►��'it�pg w� . �. . "`• � �� a, .W,. � �'��f.�,„��,. a�a R,° t� ,r��t*� ��.��ft#l��_' �*�� y�,.,� ° �:.ee. ,�..'��va° ��: ,�y�,��"��a��sy£ta��`�+€�,�i.��t$A��"��c.��t.��`�"NI�I .�� - *rz�� *�s� ��s��y,��e� '�� +� y�� "__ -q�.«a�:� �� a�F��ap�84a§s��.�at,��r a'�;°`+yita�tx�+��, , y " . � �$r- � �.,, ��r'�r'+1� aa;�� &ie�� ,�^��"�es,�l�,.'�t��#��"��,� ��t�, � ` � � � b .� �� +�t ,��*s s x��1�yg,��ri��r�_ '�^lla�.��'ler� `�'F .�'� . r��: �� a� s� �+ro.�f �b,1! �� '�",��n� � �lii � �s. '$�� '�' , �""�.��` �� ;�`� � � ;��s�.� �" � .�' s. , , . ��3� �� ' * ��'° �� .� � �.f �. � . .. .�3.a��v'� .:?�\� . .�.� I""n - . i� � h � „� �. S � +�'i,` � _ �y �� 'v�.�,��,`�`��.,`�� t ��o� �� ` �A� �, �' �� \�� , �� i, �' ,�°, � s� ' �� \�� \V�� `�� .,' ..�, � .�,��„qk. �,:�.��.� �.'.�+* ��.�, '�. �y�� ,�,�, . , ' ' � :� HISTORY OF COMO PARK In the mid 1800's Charles Perry farmed the land around a lake he named after '�;' his birthplace, Como, Italy. At this time the property was outside the city limits. However, with an eye to the future, the City purchased this area in 1872 for $100,000. In 1887 a board of park commissioners was established ` � with John Estabrook named the first superintendent of parks. Early plans for the park called for a park designed in "accordance with the highest standard of art". This encouraged gifts from private citizens such as the fountain that Dr. Shiffman brought back from Barcelona, Spain. In 1897, the St. Paul Railway ' Co. ran an electric streetcar through the park to the picnic pavilion. The lakeside pavilion was built in 1903, the conservatory in 1914. The majority of the zoo buildings were built by W.P.A. crews in the ' 30's. (See Appendix, History A, 1-3) � Como Park is now one of several regional parks located within the corporate � boundaries of the City of Saint Paul . The park consists of 378 acres of land, 72 acres of water with residential neighborhoods surrounding it on all sides. � Metropolitan residents have access to Como Park from either I-94 or Larpenteur Avenue. Como is connected to the rest of St. Paul 's parks via three major parkways : Lexington, Midway and Wheelock Parkways. In addition, Como can be reached by several local routes, including Como and Maryland Avenues. ' ,�. ,• � ,��,�� •�-_ ,.- ,. '�� II � '�� , � � ;� .. �a, , �.�.m �r�� ' �P�� "^ . ; N �..;��. Y�� Photo 2 - Gates Ajar � R6 � and Shiffman Fountain, $�� ," current � �,. ..��s,:a� g-� ° � _ �: , � �� °�� Phase � � �� Circu- Master Mainte- Cost , � ' e � ' lation Plan �evelop- nance Estimate APPendix , � � � `� ment �@A 6�.9� ��e e ' COMO PARK MASTER PLAN s . 1 e �'� l �:.a I x u r -- � �r�d�" �r��19 � __ � � � N. � Y _ _ � . 7��' Os°c9 BmoklY^ Park � ... SV�Y^ � � s� rn �.�i ,;�, � X t f- � ��a�y �✓ � lalce � � .. . � `t-J J �ce��..o.'� s � ' a _ � DaMw u •a.; ncK.�.. � .,��orfhOaks � � c..m��;�y s.�a as��. �a i � `' u O v a. po.xx �� . �>x � 1� � � `° .• i •,., y.k��1. - �5 " Y o t �I��'`-Pdwn 5T. 1 _ ,. "r[• 1 �-�� .ii,:: -I 6 T �tl11��15 /� ' � � ,6,,;a Fridiry � 3 co `` 5 g8 ";:: �2 ;�'i � •'filli�:; �, lJ � LI. eVEX � �2 1 I 1 I � �; Vadna{s I ( + � I s 3 � :., � He � x .,�w Q r s 1 ' ., -- �{tND AVE X. � � N Center pp - ___� t VI yy�ipe g�g Villa � b f K. I io W New ., a ^ Shorcvlew ;- Gem laks la4e �'L � l . � 3 Brlghtor co �ao ` � � 1 .. ,� �vc 'il olumb I N � s� . � � is �- ^I Tw1Yr,� , I_ HNg� ' _ . c.k.a �. �o� ,Y �.i _ � � � �,.d �, _ IT,.::�.: 1 C✓M uc� � �riUl � � -J �� I�O ' µ I m-, ? e � --- -1 3 b �_.r � New � � �� _ co. ao.o� t I Z � ' a Robbl $ �:... � ttle � -� 61 ; � � Can � � � i- �'3:.�. .. 5 ^ ' > 5� i LITTIE��AQA R :;:,r:s oAlr � 1 "J 1 b �M 5 Y, �., �� ~' Ma ewood � uNortl� e I I � - 3. c..�;,h 1 3» /9 � � ,n 100 I g ' 1 � ' 4 Mo' p�y� a.u. I N�� . I _ I �.L 1 L • ,�3' �I^ d'N.l� � �v:�T,r,: � ,,,s . � ,E. COMO PARK� bK.,,. b�s �� °�—��„- � � j°�� ; °pr. s.«�nL�b�, Hd Ms = �nT[ �.. , ' �ax. . 4 1� AY[. 6 �Y ey,°'coii. c�S : � � .s.r,;, Zo• � ♦ -r Golden Valley�t6ywppo r�<o��r4 �. r �- l2 I � 16 �N , ry = , i ♦ � 7,"+ s 3,9 =u' o SL Louis � Park ,� y,b, <v j � cdAw • 5 - 7 6 T It ' = 9 q BIVD. 3 �. �1Y�� I i��'� �pkbu � � I ��{ 1(�, �--15 - _�ry >� . . '�+, �� M°'�°'B'O° .. �:.. j3 BUTLFR v�i �V. �` IMTFRUCXEN . N � ,y lylli� � �V(. �Yi,, `��'�o ' F BLVD. b •n � I !'I, � �)10Q' 63 TNOMPSLN AVF. a e; p ---0 ��' �' °k!F �I�� ' � ^� � WestSt P I �4y��`�. I '�. � � . < WENTWOqTM �Vf. SL PWI 4 •� !�� i . �.6� a 3 ' � ; � � $�ONy HavsO,..:_,:'$`e P PHn� O 4 6 1 �W � _ -�, �. .. �Mendota~ Ob EN t�m � ' l�vo.� .� � •e � e. ssrx r � � F� .. ll0 _ � , �e M� �n.rby 14 g °Mendoh 2 � � ,�,o,.v.�, e.o.,a q �. Xe hts 3 I a�Ey � W RkhBeld '" ��M„M, „ L ap ,. � ��. s�" � � � / ' � ry �v L. .r r.� .5�t^�� SS ii ANe•• ,� i SunBSA � �'M k N��qo�f � ]f 5 .: �� ra � k Lake �� '� � I I P.., � � a ' s;u. _�� .•�� l� r �—__' bM _ S � r 6��= °� �' _ -=1 c d �s � �N I 5 3 2 . �„ •` r s � �. 49 I � �� .. 4 N sTQ "'S..e;�,�, xQ � . aL'° � ea� I 52 3 < ��r )0 � 32 ,"'i j 3 ~ � - �y 26 � � � � $ � C . F~ � I 3 � SL�MI� 3 � � s �N � +4 '�. � � g Inver Grove ►�A I e�� -�v� � � HelpAb . 1- � . � ' m n wT� sr. s: 39 � z D A K 0 I �A ,,, �� , �� • � 4 7� � , `�� c,�m"";; T� �6 Ha,m.�mi< ' ` �� I � �„ �e comm�.;,, o ,..:.-� imis 13 s" � ce� . . 1 ° v : J cao-g< f�Tx Sr. a � � yu o W�scon s � � i� �,5�`/ p.,.,.. e . b: A �N' � � I puaY H��~% �19 �•� I � r, P�E � ap Eagan : °i.� 5a �' o ' • , N,•� W � 5N�'� I067 T 23 MeCar1AY L. 71 .„ � y �e � w f u ��k Bbominpton +� � �.°� � 105 x s � lw� � _ ' I °�:�; "'� �. ��w � ss a � < c;:m„„�g°r , I � e . .;�. . �P� 0.�, Sr�r;o.�P CUif ��P.�k =j � IIO7N T. � §j' , '�y . .y�, � �eo � • � � : �� as 0R[Y I � L.. � 0`r cuvv I � _/ -1 �` � �� fa .. � � u ; i �� .,�: ----1--- ,. , � SITE LOCATION MAP � Phase Circu- Master Mainte- Cost �ndix ' • lation Plan Develop- nance Estimate A ' ment � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ' � � ' ANALYSIS ' The following series of maps illustrate the Analysis Process and the findings that this process generated regarding Como Park. The analysis is important in measuring the preceeding goals and objectives with respect to the existing park � resources. The analysis process is broken down into two major categories: Site Analysis and Circulation Analysis. Circulation Analysis was further divided into "Vehicular Through Traffic" and "Internal Circulation". Each analysis considered � the following: SITE ANALYSIS CIRCULATION ANALYSIS � .Existing Vegetation VEHICULAR THROUGH TRAFFIC . Existing Topography .Vehicular Plan .Existing Use Areas . Intersection Problems � . Existing Features .Park Entrances .Existing Parking .Conflicts .Use Conflicts .Visibility , • INTERNAL CIRCULATION .Major Pedestrian Flows .Parking Congestion Areas , .Trails and Paths .Conflicts � In addition, the Metropolitan Park User Survey Data was utilized throughout the analysis process to provide insight into park usage. (See Appendix, E1-10) � � � 1 � .�.. �- 1 �R: � �� . . � , ��, � r:� �f �I': ` #. ,�, �< !�x`� � �a � � fi �x�� ., ��s� Photo 3 - Como Park � Li1y Pond, 1910 . -` : . .><,9 � G �9 . � � Circu- Master Phase Mainte- Cost , � � ' • PPendix ' iation Plan Dmentp nance Estimate A e a ��e; �:a.�.,.e e ; .�e�. _ � � �. � �� - COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 8 � � SOIL ANALYSIS Detailed soil studies done for Como Park show that Como is made , up of a variety of soil types. Each soil type has been categorized for its suitability for construction. This knowledge of soils is important so in�prove�ents can be planned to avoid poor soil areas which necessitate costly constructlon techniques. ' The fifteen different soil types found in Como Park have been condensed into two categories: Soils suitable for development and soils not suitable for develop�nent. In this case, "Development" means either building or road construction. ,, The area of soils not suitable for construction occur primarily in the Cozy Lake bed (now the golf course) and the old gravel pit area (now McMurray Field). ' � � , ' � � � , � � ' Circu- Master Ph�e Maints- Cost ' lation Plan ��p� �ance EstMnals , e COMO PARK MASTER P�AN ' � ' .—� , -- -- " �`— — ' �R_AYE SOIL ANALYSIS ' � � o ; 0 4-b=o � � 3oa�o ,� � � a;: � 1'�� o b o o ° d'"'Y° Soils not suitabls for devebpment p CALIF R�. a - �. p o00000 I1 �n °- � , . �-+ f �� F , r , rl'riT"i_ �ff- � �ep d; oa:�o � o ao�joo�0000 , o a �olo' a e a o � Soils suitabte for development IQ�X AV .o I oo,o Q�i, qaPd, o�0000 0 i _� =a, n- � 'X ` o i o° e I � ..° GJd'o o '4'apo I I i � - 0 �t � Q.. 9 $ - o _o i M.1 M� � ., o-� ° r_o u s�A� oz-.. PL 1° o , � .i I ��.4 .'.� c n��,.o i e " �°--u-- � � � � ;�I'� 1_•_ c �� _�a r$-. b $ i� g a q � I°'.°°°, i°�'°i I"I"I �I'� � � - iL p= O:b 0 '. l A i ��o 0 oaaoo I �p '�,'.I?! e o � ,00 t__ .�° � � � �� -i-�- o y`_ ,� ,,C� ;�, 'daoobao'a o° � i°°o i ` , � � L_ o � � � W MONT�NR o ooN .a°� ' _�) P 9aa9°po;�� °i o a�o�o�oo N- � a �?e a � ° � + �.,� �' o o b o�ol o•o�ob - o \ . 0 N R� K� 4 1 p o�ITd p�pp� a o000 0000 od oi0000 00 a o ; =� d I'� COURSE � LL i.1LL1J � •o � 0 o a , - ° - a �� o ! o 00 000 0000000000 �� i o. g� � a . � a. ..-o� 6 .�� .�� p ., . � � o o aoo 00000 00 - o 'V o 00 a � ! _ � � 1[ o�e' .A - - � I.IITI II_ `a � �"o a�o` o , o io� ARLIIGT ejsT Q I�ARLIIoNGTONo oAVE; o 0 0 o p o 0 0 4 8 �,�;' f ; �' ! � � ° o 0 8p 91�I ��E` �. — O 0 000000 Q ^1 �� O �y� Q� � �o O IQ O O�OIOIO� O � Q � _ o r oao,000 c ��s � °.° i 4 °�°O o�° �' -?�� i �Q� w�Nw[n �r �� ' ' °o 0 0 0 0 o•oj n Cl 1T 0'- T � � '� �, �I rl I S c�o_000000 i 1 , ,�7 �� o_+. � O � � � bi I �o I lol°lo W -. � � � (�� ;■ �nanr� � LAKE � L��VIEW�AVE.o . �o lo 0 0'0 0�l � o o Z�o °�� PAVILION � � ��o'�9 P i��l 'o � °o '° �� l � ��,o aro o o;� ul�pyy p ��J�_ SER ORY —�,�'°o �° i� �,� o °l05 T �-" a� __ ' �� ;.olo oo�oioo�� o l° _ 0 0 0 0 � ° j^ � � ° '� o° o o.�ia f, � � � °�n . �i�o° 1�� °�- , I �- k iElD6 � °- �� __j`fo o - •_ � f� ^��Q I� o _ p - .o o : COMO LAKE � ="� � �0000.., o d o , -�� wc Pi � - o 00 �-o 0 00 � o°---,.-°o ��. uOME r..�„ o 0 0 , �9NELTER. � ��--� �i4 �� yT �° o_ r 4 o�,� S � � � � � .�., ,o o i, 0 0 _.�__ o j.a.. o;oo �� 'j o � conip;;e. �. , " � .� o °,� o �� M o�o�o o;; 0000� 1 �~ ° a..� s- U�I o � L9 0o b O O O o O'_'. O O �-p" 'Y O F'�p , � NL7UAR� / _ "� __ � o 0 0o j ��uw.i�. 0000 '4J � � � ° i� ° �� n a - .� ) o{ _ oE _ �� o . �� o �a� o 0 opo i ; ��''' � - ��o 0 O _ I COY �V 0 - �-. p MTE AY p.. � O ., �� o O' _ _ °;,, o p M�r� LD �� °_ �o 0 a o o_ , 0 0 0 � � ; o ��o A��aP �o�� -- - � �; � � ` - ..< < � � . � �, l� s �� 7 0�, ��_�.E��I� �z .�,��. � - -- _ _ : �--JESSAMINE AVE _ ; > Q a , -� �FcTr_-H��Y:� ..i - Y C�-� 6 .J" P�� ]�E,� :4 - 8- - -�t- } � .> o � a� o � i- t j a ,- � °� � � o 0 0 0 _I`�..._ . . �p��- �� / '��- �fs vi��'� A�.bb �.odl o000 o��'u',. oq�o ?� .a s ° ,� � C � � � -_.. .:- � I_ - ��-�:..[��! ,a.' � : q'°�°o - o- o � I �- �� - � � f_�� o R b - �� L_� L#��.� _ o ��.� -E _ , ��° �� ° � � i�,� _ �;=_ a ° � �� - � R � �� _. } � � v r r ai LI:-1� \�_ ._ - :�- � IJ T T y' � O b Q O O � , � i :_ , _. .." L._— ....___. p + � � - �a0 o g � P ' b � ✓I \ DE'COUR�C�Y� _ __- ._ . ' DR � Z q� .�f� �t-� o-�� o � �� 1"y-1�� b..�a . p o '� __ �T ;. . VE � $ ...�.�`� ��.��L.�"�'� o �o�o � � oos dY t� �.m o do�o�� v v o .o no��r6 � � � � �� ,I�AVE�.� �° � �-_�- - - - - -�� Z � �� f� _ F T, b , � .,,. _. o �� - _ x '4 ' ..,.. �I�, oo_o � 0 40o eoo �000 W ° t�_.�° ; � ,, �o e-7� �__� � -- � ,�� _ , �,. arrr►, ; , ! ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS � The topography of Como Park consist of steep slopes, rolling hills, and flat open areas. The land area makes up 378 acres of park while 72 acres of water form Como Lake. � The slopes indicated on this map are those 12% or greater. Erosion problems may occur depending on soil and vegetation conditions. Maintenance of these slopes � is nearly impossible. Recreation potential is limited. The majority of these steep slopes have evolved as buffers in the park. 7ree cover indigenous to the site consists primarily of Elm, Ash, and Oak. Black , Cherry makes up the dominant understory vegetation in areas where there is dense undergrowth. Plant material in addition to the above that may be found are Spruce, Cedar, , Hackberry, Silver Maple, Poplar, Pine a�d Mulberry. Plant material that has been added to the site to supplement existing vegetation � and provide a variety of tree cover are such plants as Crabapples , Northern Catalpa, Tuliptree, Walnut and Birch varieties. - Two major concentrated activity areas have developed at Como Park. One activity � area consists of the zoo, conservatory, and picnic areas. Another includes the lake pavilion, and the lake area. These areas are intensely used and contain , the greatest number of park users and activities. . All significant park features and monuments have been located, catalogued, and evaluated as to condition. (See Appendix, F,1 - 2) , � � � � � .�� i Phase Circu- Master Develop- Mainte- Cost � ' lation Plan nance Estimate APPendix ment COMO PARK MASTER PLAN , io 1 ' ' '�--J ' , ' _ _ _ �R_�Y ANALYSIS OF � �' ° �_ ° 4 °- ° �� '°�`° �p ` °°°°°°°°°��EXISTING CONDITIONS � o a�� 3 � o b o o a'alYo oao �ooa000e,� g c�uc� ' �� 1, , . °- i .� °° °�°° a0000 � F , . �o � a .Concentrated Activity Areas � '� ' �Q- � � � ob o0 ob'do ' e '� d' Krola �c;cioc o0 1 N �� ' �_ �_ �� ° �� ,��Qa �� ' � � � ;'Recreational Areas o= f _ W } � - °-e I � ° o 0 oJdl00000 oad�''.boo 0o I . ' o__ p. l =. _o _ t � M11 � � 'r Q_ o a O' 0-�' p � �2.,�p ` , 1 O 00 I ^ �_ j' $ � �r a o= ' o o� � o�I $ignificant Buffers 0 nI II A _ � a o 8 i " o��obTdo� �� L I°I°��°bPol `F_-�- �qp000ioo�o�oo , � o��p e o000000 oi 000io�000 C�ItICB� Total Parking ' __ F'- �� Slopes(12%+) 25 in Area � � �� a'o,baa�d 000�oo 0o io r�- o- ��' � I� M TANA o00 00'0 �� i � `�i % ; p�:l ' Q��pao� ° ° ao�000 00o Memorial or � � � oio 0 o�aFeature �Views o�o ob - �� -4 0_ 1 ' � � \� oob o�o ' M R� 1 _— o- `+ , ( . ' /i � � •o� �� -�' .� � oLLLllJ_LJJ o000000 0 000o a op o�o a- ° �' � �� GOLF COURSE ,; � �� o�� ° �� _ � __ � � � , o- I ` ° �- �I '-- - � � � � � �� o00 00 000 / o 0 .o_ ...o. � I ,p I F �� •, o00 0000 0000Q 1 --{�° 1 . __ _ � , ,� o 0 0 u000 0 , — - �'i �n � �. � � ,-_ _ o00 0� . � � o 0 0 o : f'1TiT11- o � � � � � � ,�� , � � ,Q� a�;oo eoo o',o -°.b�1 a e �,;( �� '� j � J - - \ ��,ARLINGTONo qiE. � _ o � - _. 0 0 0 000000 �� ' � ° ° ° ��' � \� _ =: �� o 0 0" oe o _ � \ �� -, � �� c�. 1 0 o cip u c 'oic�o'�c �. o��-o �,p:0�0IO O O , � \\\ \ J � \ � �� 0� ;000 0 p`000 ' o ' p �1 �. Z ��. \. ' I '� I I I I j i', p O . �,OIOID� � ��.� � �uNiE I�C6 � "� l L�i: _ o , o 0 0 o i � � �\ , � � � � / . ,�� o ��o� ._000000 ° ♦. ��j 1_... � / I ' �o��o�t000!o �o�o�o b o _o o ,. � _� . dt � ��, �/ ; � KE LAK�VIEW AVE.o o lo'o o'�ob� � o ,o � , �� w =.- � � �o ,o�� o �� +�� ' � T PAVILLION �� I �, � � �o ��.op ��ob�o 0 _° _ 31 NSER ��r„� � � `�� f �� °�° � ;� oe000, a , ' •�\ o • o 0 0 - a oi, � •. ° °`�� o r o 0 � I � ��"'' • °� o � ,C_ a _ o �+- ,000 —o • �� r' ;� , � COMO LAKE -a ! �. ' ��e �_�. 1 � , . � � ° o 0000 o a 0 00 . �!flLTEN � o �� o — � °o— PAYI.ION ■ � �,'; o �T o° �� e �_e �o� 0 0 0 0 ) .��e :�. o.o � �� .� �` �.a �� Stl �-- cotiMJ "A l < , Zoo o ��ro 0 0 � IIpiTON A � � V, O 00 � �, � o00 °�I°1°L°p° � oeoo _ • o � 'ti ,o , O Q 0 0 0 0 0',b � �7F1Ny J�-� /� �, o ° p �f ° n. I ��aJilj o�o o �Q—�a°°��—� ° .4 �7 0 0 ,� o ,..».M., s� `'- o�� , poo _ _ � o �11�11�1�- III11/1��( �' �I�enly� � o �_ a o o � ' � _ o�:., o o �o�er: �-� W1cMURRav FIF� ° � � ° o 0 0 � 172 � �_- ��1lyE q P t�� -_- 1 `�/ � � � _ o_��; �:�-o ��• '`"",.»- _ a o 0 0 0 . *v � �:.t� ._.�' .. -�t_��:�:�_•_� .-'_ � ..,_ . ,..� - .�. _ - o 0 �� /�� _.�.r o $�E ��T � U, � ri_�i. _-!F T�,,_�.y�- _ __ - A� _ ___ _---�[ .n�T 0 � _ �'. �...__ �-�� -=c�-_r:- ' __ _ .. .s- . . � > n o- J _-�-' S Q .. ao . .o o ' ' a_ 6" _. ._.- - ��'�� en r - -. a'a� __c o II: ` _ _ ��G7 �. " - �� a b'd b .�° �. � o q° �'� - � - � ,� IIc � L4 � ��. .. �=- —___" �� 'A:' i � O �6 �OOr � G O _ 6 _� __o �. O `\ \ .J' �� I ��: A�--��D Q �°��i.-�7 0 0 -,�' �'�� p. . �_..? ..-_.� -. � � o � �' Li � 6tl o 000 v: o .< � o 0 .-.. o_ �� . . t � � � '._c,c Q ' . ._� - , ..._.o � l 8 a � DER6URCY ..._. . .. ._. . . . . � 4';Q � �` �o i._ g��-a6� I - o i � ��- °o 0 I ORIVE T. �i � o r- a� -� �'-� o - 6 -p � - 0 — _. / V V ' � r�FoR�ONT°wo E'�'" o� �'c a' �� e � /---- --- L"; 'i� , o o 'o o�Tb . ___ � :_. - - �� 3 ?;�� '�� o�� ' I - . � ° �'J� - _[. '� o soo eoo woo II �o� 1J �. J �� 4 i ^'^ o~o 0 0 0'o Z �� : � _Gp y_ - , ❑ waRif� , � _. ' , �--� � -- -" ' �u E�R A� fXISTING USE AREAS o q b o @ >...a4p ip� o000000ao ; o ��l � � � � 4 Buffsr sr�as �� i� � a�b�0 O d'b��° �0000 000000000;; a_ q ic i , -,i l °- o00 00000000 � a n o o �b d�r� ` � b ' �o o Picnic aroas a o d� o:a o'oloo 000uo eo I •N �� I y_ _ _ P- oop o00 0 . 0�', Q�Qd,x e 000aoaj000� �__ k_ -- W ' ° ° I � Q� ° _ oJ d a o0 0 0 0 o ddlb o0 0o Rscrestion srsas • i o- � °o f- Q C o <w i r� �� Q o �•-o ..:y��"r__ ��° a'�= z op... oo � o oi000 o �o�o�ey�e�o�u�o�o�o�I a E g ° � o ^ � o ob dbb .L- n �� t f r ' I I ;n 7: a � $ o� � � o o �� Opee spact A o�ppo oaoao oo' o�. p e o00000000 00�000�0 ' y o �^r ' o l �' �` � � �o�oo b o o d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'0 � ZOO � CiO11NIW�0/y _� a t ... Y.M T� A �� .k"� Q_ �� C .c q.opa�o 0 0 00000 i� o ;Q o � � o'o ob o � �' � \' aab o o �a�o N R• � � �: � Q. od o00 0000000 0000 oQ o�ooaoaoo o_ _, n o ? ff 9.� __� " p ' o � V _ _ 0 o - �1 � D � 0 Oo O o000000 0�0� O,� -yy 4 - :.St ro � I -� O . Q .p -p M k. ,. a ��_Q. ��•'Q Z"� 'a.�.� ,.. �\ 00 00 0 000O�.0 .-�1r. I . _ _ � o:. ff 7[-.o . �`�'c .: . . o _ _ �.r o 0 0 I.I�T11�_ o s an, �, �Qe o000 0 0 000o db� oo�o o:� � :� �� > F ARL „ o : ° �' o o� . oa - -.°�� + � , o 0 o iNGTON o o�Eo 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 o �. � � , �� , � o 0 fi� �� --�:� � �, o 0 0 , �F� � , .• ^—r�T o-�{ o� o-000eao , ��F o �1 -r,,Y #i �� 7�0 oolp�,o�oo�ol000wo o r- - �-I.: I I rR,,,: -� o a io :o 0 0 0 o � t, � ' � � � e000�o0,oaloo '. o o .-� �. i -=o � � �ar - � --_�.�l 1 i il� o o � o'oio�,o� � .--h:.�� _ . �"`d�' � � � ..�". �i o� o �-_. \�� a � o 0 0000 � �,.°� � p!°I°�o�o�o�o�o�o �'p o o °o� y . �� - N` � � � LAKE � L��IEW A{�.'o °e� o�o o'ooi �° � � �, � PAVILION � io�o ol q p lo I o0 0 � - ° '�onioo� �� ° �� sE �� , , ��1��o o�,oe �� Mi�iw Picwr ' ,�� o , �,, °o.��o � � � � o000o a- o 0 0 � � a � g°�a ° o 0 0 afp OI�� O � O � 1� . J p O-j L O O ''_ �O I o , � � _J� O_�kG O ._ _ �� _ �� COMO LAKE _a � ' �� ' 0 �� o 0 � o00 , �°�� o 00 _ o 0 �ap+n.e� ' � a � ��? o � � �� ;, a , _ sr o �� •ut�Ewa � � � � �, . _-�� "/'�� _�io -o .�L_a eo �� ` �� - _ °- �o�- �� o 0 ,o �,� �,� . � o 0 00000 � _ o� . �� 0 000 - , o `9 o I 00000�. 4� O o $ o"_ 1WNY�.. a ��• ...- o 0 � � o , oa o 0 0000 ,. o 0 0 , D 0 L::�� ° � F � a�� ,• N.. L ^ o e. .... �7�_' �� , o 0 0 0 ' colop ._ '` �L (� �� o;' .. I � r : o � . � o Y o 4 � a �v �� o o p� — 0 0 �" , � � �^?,.�. l� �°� o � o . o�,, '�'_ o � �{ D o °_ o k �d, I �j�'i 777�� ; �� 4 �]f 0_ � __ C�L':LIJ l�K'�„� 4 9 �',� _ ��"' � } '{ (p [L��,7, �[p�� µ . .. , �i...l-' -� �1 0 �f n�� P_ o � e �,..o �`��,1..-" �:O��t �' 0 � _ ,, _�ESSAMINE AYE. T�� _ �5C o F—*--- �•-� , Q-. � =_�F --��a-�-�.� _ _�s�-.---;_' - - - - --- - -- a � - 6 ° _. __ .. �-�-c.-�--t—� c _'� _ "� . _. ..�-?. F � y _ A °- a- =a .?,^ � � o 0 _s�aLg i� � � - �O ✓ o ° II. _' .. . . .'- .� ' ��/ � ///. � �-' c ° � o�� 'a�7. � _c � � . �o� b bb 60d� d � 000� �,.. � �6 a ° o � ��+. _� '_ �� `� ��• a` 00 - n � ��E o - � /� o_ o � —�-_ .: i �,U .- °�IH�a 9 ��L1 CIl=��a ff� � -� _ .�� . �� 'I i"�' - _ � �- I'�C�� : o I ��:_.:.' . ._ ° � �LJ� �4° °°� �V. �.. . ��`' .._ . _ _ ._ T I� � I \ . .Q_.O� .� - O (-0d '� p � O o- - 0 .a $�<-op� , \�� _ _�,'. . . . . . .�� ._�� o a _-_ . o �__ _ I� DE EOURCY � = o� _� � y �0 4 � � - . o. .. � o / . DR�yE � � - `� � { AVEI,� o a� ,� ..,_ - u ,-r� � -,� "'o � – �F��., �c�_a_ �. rr - ��. o ��N�`fal4,a��4�h�o�R 'o :o a e � �� ,. '- - - �-�- - � �_�.,.�.o a 0 3 o e 9 �' °o�� _ --- .... J .�t r n,L� D � 0 400 000 1000 I � -' _ qu eoo'o'o � �_ p �� _�=�-- ` - 1 � � �� Q �.. � � v�� -�+'ec 6� a.` a � �" �, � �� " 4� d * � �� #'€ r � , � °` �� r � ,� �.a ,� � a�°�y ar�",�� ` �� „ �` �� , ,�� 3� z'°, I � J � +F' S d , �� yy �� J � s # � :.�' ��""��. a� Y� �• ( �� 4.u° � �.. ,,�� ° �. � ` ..� r <�� ' � .�` � L�� . � �x w � ��t �' �� *� �� E., �. � +� �� "�"W . `.sa,e ��A * `� t P� �� a. ��,.. �.� �� N= m. e � —� � �'a ,�e � �_� � I � � < � �, � � �I�i�� ;��' w �. � e , , .: . .. „. � ,�,b .. � .. ,� . . � �� ,r � � �� , � , �a� � �' � �� `` n`�� .'� �s� �� "44 '`��:��!< � �� .,'°8w?� �� w. .. � �� :�:#�,� ,�',� .y �. �, ta� .. .. �_ �5£ � �_ � �� . l , � �� ' �.�� § ... � �°d� X .�.f i �'.� �� j.x � a � `A. � � � ' ¢J�P, I �C , ptia. � d'�. '+. �� 1�,. � � y. 4 �,� ii�,. i _=1 � � � �� e$ 4 � � � �. �^N � a �� 4 v a � 4� � � #�� YiL .9 "�� a� �`�.a�'�a. . a � y` °'� ;�r, �� a � � �. ..! f � ��,�° � . � �. �.. � � �t� `t � �,, � _�,� � ;� •�W, '� ��' � ;*/ � ` .. ` �`.�`"i � ��, � .•,�.., ,,� _ �`° �.:� � � � 3 ��''��. "` '-.�„ � '' ��`� �. �� .� .� � � :� � � ` �' "� � �; �b � "�' � �,� ��` � � �` � ` �" �� b � �� k � � � � r '" �,- ` %°a� ��A.� � � , � ti� � µ� ,. „�'",y�., r� r' � ... `v� .:� '.ii..�'. � �� . . ��,�� 'e �a .�'��.i d,� ^�'!� �� _ . ' � � � �� ,,,+� ,� � � � � �� ° ,��. � � `� � � ��, � ff � � > t� �� ,� ��,�� ;� ' a., �� ">�'� '�"`s . � R�• ``� �Y� +1,' d� 9�� ' k�. T �. � $V F ',.� �� e� �: <� 4 $ � i % � � '� !' � � ��Y��I'� � � � , , M. z� � � � � � � r� . 'rz" �``� , � � i t � � < # �� 'ar:' y2 #` �. 3 � �knt�.. S� � g � � � � . � w. �� a'� 't A � � ��'� �ri�� ' �"' � � *4 � � . _ �. '( � ��'s .s ,� �� `�� < � � � � . F �� ,, r .^�. �.'q . > "e:... g� _ d �1° . A_.. , a. .i, . . . . . . `.�'�. " � � '� � ` � ' f' t � � V�� i�»� �. � � � ,� � � . � ' �.° � ° y � j({ }y'� � , � �,�,,� �a" � „_ � � � , � R .$t �i\" R +�� .. '' '+� .',�c k1 -& � ��. r � � fi� � � � � �� , , � � , � �� '� �� x �� ' , a F;�= � � � � i � ��, � � �• � a �� ,,. � �.� �� s �." � � �" � � � � ; ,� p*� 3 ji� I" �,-� , ��. i � �� i� y; �.k,� �, '�c '� ��, ° �� e ��.�, / � �� s�� . � � � ��'� n �'' � ~ � �a. �� ""f ��_ . .� �'� �, .e� ^� � . . '�.'�.'�� « , �_ �. � „ � : � �., �� - � � ,. � , .. �''°i� (�, � ,� �� . , .t � y �� ._�� ` � �� ' `� � t.,�� •� �,�,�� ,� � � �� ,�, '� �":�� ., ��: ��.� �; �„�+r° �. "�� '�•' ��f� � <� � �"� --� ,. � ,�. � ,� �,I�; ; � '� ` �,, �L � �� , • ��``+�„r,,� ,� ' � �`�`�� ^;a �� . �.�, � �' _� �- �� `� :.�,� , . � � J�'"' � ' �� '-� �"�� .� � '`' �_ < � : ; �� 0 , � � , MITRODUCTION A study of the roadway system in and around the park was the Advisory Committee's first priority regarding circulation. It was a consensus that the design of a , roadway system to meet the planning criteria was an important component in the preparation of the Como Park Master Plan. The proposed roadway changes in and adjacent to the park are the result of a lengthy and comprehensive effort conducted � by the Advisory Corr�nittee and its subcommittees, the Park Design Staff, Ralph Burke and Associates (traffic consultants), and the City's Traffic Engineering Department. In June ef 1978 three traffic subcommittees were formed by the Advisory Committee � to study park and traffic related problems. One of the City's and the Parks Comnittee's prime goals was to de-emphasize the impact of the automobile in and a�^ound the park, with minimal �iistruption to the park's general character and the � surrounding neighborhoods. The consultants approach is outlined in Appendix, B-4. The plan was to incorporate a major north-south roadway and a major east-west � roadway. The procedure followed was to first seek acceptance of a location for these roadway "corridors" - a generalized routing without specific traffic direction design details. After a corridor plan was accepted, it was then planned in detail , and the secondary roads and parking were prepared. See Appendix, B , 7. 1 "First Proposals for Corridor and Review", and figures 7.2 and 7.3. The impact of the road changes on site lines, grades, and existing vegetation was � carefully considered. After the roadways were plotted out, the alignments were verified in the field. The impact of these changes was projected by the consultant and evaluated in their traffic study, Traffic Planning for Como Park. See Appendix B-1 through 80. , The proposed modifications included elimination af certain roads, realignment of others, creation of one-ways, and the redesign of several intersections. These � modifications are necessary to simplify and improve circulation, to reduce hard surface area, improve safety and security, and to provide a better park experience. The proposed roadway system is illustrated by May No. 7. � � � , ' �' � ��.&�3 'a g �ti � �g �� Phase� � �� a � Master � Mainte- Cost � � �k � � ��$� �� Develop- Appendix �� p � . Plan ment nance Estimate � ��e e: ��a� ee� �,��,��.�a e- �g ,.�� _ y�. � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN » i ' � , ANALYSIS OF EXISTING USE AREAS A use area is an area in which similar activities occur. The edges of a use , area are determined by barriers such as roads, changes in topography, or an abrupt change from one activity to another. The following existing use areas are found in Como Park. � 1 . Zoo/Conservatory 2. Buffer Areas 3. Picnic Areas � 4. Recreation Areas 5. Open Space By studying the use areas as they exist i�n Como Park, a better understanding of 1 some of the problems in the park can be seen. The adjacent map shows how existing roadways act as barriers and divide similar activitity areas. An example of this can be seen in the picnic areas where three similar recreational areas are divided � by roads (Beulah Land and Midway Parkway). The result is a congested and hazardous situation. Park users must cross roadways to utilize all of the recreational facilities of this use area. Likea�ise, the lake and the surrounding area is an � open space which is segregated from the rest of the park by other roadway barriers. � i ! 1 I � i ! � � F� Phase '� � Master Mainte- Cost ' ; Plan Develop- nance Estimate APPendix �� a ' ment ��¢3��,.�� .e . � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 12 � ' ANALYSIS OF EXISTING THROUGH TRAFFIC ` ' ` `-��- � ' In addition to the conclusions drawn from the analysis of the use ar�as;: t�he Rark Advisory Committee pointed out many problems that stemr�ed from circu.la�:}�n- issues. ' It became evident that a detailed analysis of circulation was needed , ,i4•study af the entire subject of how park users come to the park was undertaken by the Committee and Park's staff. Internal and commuter automobile traffic, parking demands , the � pedestrian, the bi�yclist, the charter buses, and M.T.C. bus routes were all explored. Como Park has several major through traffic routes which serve as major commuter � routes in the morning and evening. The north-south routes are Lexington Parkway and East Como Lake Drive. The east-west routes include Horton, P1idway Parkway, and Gateway Drive. This map illustrates the areas of extreme congestion which � exists between park traffic, park users, and through traffic. In addition, problem intersections and points of route confusion are noted. � � � � � � i 1 i ! Master Phase Mainte- Cost Plan Develop- nance Estimate APPendix � ' ' ment 13 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � r � ', , ' ` F' ' ' `� ANALYSIS OF EXISTING EUR AVE , �' � � q � � �o� � Yo�`° �p0000 oOOOOOeO THROUGH TRAFFIC ,�� o _ a;�_s 3� 0 o b o o a�di C4LIFOF �.. � -a F - r o - ooioo�,00 � II �� o a.00 000 � , r T r.r�-° �ff- , °r,_, i { Maja through traffic o b o d'o J,bld o d �� 4 I o�'�a-� o plo 1 �H AV . - - oo�o � o�o G:' q9�Pd 00000�000� ° f0. — ;* � X�� Route confusion _ e o. o. �fe Q~s: �-{-o ot � CJdioo � o'ad�0000 ' .- o_ .. _ W IOWR. � r.4 ° � �D oz P o�o 1 �� ° �-� � �Cai I �z � � � s�$� ,o g i g a� a � �� Extrerr�e congestion Q. � i V,ob ,0';'p 'on. a — -0 �.: 4P�oo� oo�o �aop d o ao 0 o�oaoo a � .. � ' _ �"' r - , � +�;` �� P►owem interseccion � �� dooQboa a a�� ' I �� . ° `��— w w Nraqa o ' e - p opa,q pia,00 {° '�,°� oloo 000�oN �.� tr � / ��I � jQ o 0 a,o ob ° _ - �i a s �ol o oi; � o .N R4 NA o Q ' �_, ' r�-�--rrrr� •O Q opl Iq lololoql o 0 olu o oIo 0 0'0l O a o Q o ° 9- o $ � ° a GOLFCOURSE 0 ° oo L o� 00000l00000 �o� °oo �' g �i I a � °- =n I �_ o. > o -o� - _Q 2 - � � � - - o q rn.al��" �,i � ..._ � o��o 00 o�a . -T- �� i �� 9� �L 9 to Q . o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � . � ^ o : _ r - : � �t� � � �0000 � _AR��NGTONooIWE.� �° � o o�a I ITT111 1 ARUNGT A �� ;� p � sT o� o 0 0 $ ... ic�u�t' . t� � J °_w � °i o. o NoVS�- .. � � o o�o 4 o�r�o � _ � ' lo 0 oao T� �. � - � /� � , . o-F .o _ n 4'F-.o � 7 op o� w•oioo ° o �[�`.� T o�io �ooi000 � T r��/ ool IO q o �= �� o S � ��ill� WLDFLOWER . . i ; I ' � O o u� c��H ;'euio Hc�Nce T T� i'�� a�... ' I � F o0000 � <2dI6�\ � J Aao N� � LAKE pI�A1fEVIEW I AVE% �,e {_ � �� i�1 � � ' '., � PAVILION �°� �°i°�� b' o � o • MI�Wp�P An.kp�N S •�� '� SER ORY _ � _� _ ��o� �_� y��i a �° °°'c� o �o oo� ' � ` o0 0 o ti� °_'9° � � � o N ��.� ° ' ° o IILL Q �� ,� .- ' FELD6 � �L � o _ o�000-.._Q � _Q -�.�,iO� �ip- p-,� — T' COMO LAKE ° a,� o � - � � pN PIGNICKING 0 � IOOOO I �O� UU�E Q rp O . O .p ' S �SIIELTEP � _'0 �•O�'_� � ° PAVILION ��' s �� st V �u a�. o:oo p- . •STR �u�.10 V��y�� . �J ��;o�o r�4 �V BALLFIELDS� ,�J� e [IO(JCj y 'I / �-"�' o i�.D , ,, }r �o � COMO� g ° '-�� 0 � u lo I�lol I� 0 ,��y �n y s-u�inters�'ior� p;,'_o � `°o ' �c u r v�r c n� M°�l�l°�l°�A L°1 1 000o p 0 9,p000 1 � �_ _ - � � NCNARY . a „ o Q � �� .pi;_b � S C) '��,rera«s ,►•1� o{F o j`°p(��. o �, �J oi _ 1 \Joo � .,e.;,.. �`l;'jPOOL o - ^:� o IE COY ,��/��..o � �o� �I . ,V o AY �� M RAMSEY COIMTY � o 0 � �� 1 � � O� MIM�NE SOGETY � McMURRAY FIEI a Q- � �'~ J oro ■ r _ '�� o �� a o � � ��I ��CQe��E� L°.�° p�°�j � � � � 0 4_ � a ,. � �� {� �� .�� —� 1-�- J o 3� ��a�� a , , Q. , y ., o,. ' � _# - -- :-��:�_�, �� =E SAMINE A . ___ o�� ° o- J S VEV ` � "'"_ `��>. - _ ��- ;� a T - �o � �_ e =- . _ � _ � I� . _ - �n'-`:_ ,'�i ,,,°�; �� } b�� E��r ` �.Q � -o � ; � � Q � � .� ......_. �O�J. . G � - � i p O g_,o 6�..06 ,�o .I� O��C�;:0 00 I_slr� - .�4 � ..�\ .�. .. . -_' _ _ � � _' _- __ , � o � " � ''� is �-� ��?� o po a o. fI� ''�''F�11 �"'�o 1 �.��\ __ . ;i } 7i R�: _ -.a 4 J 4�a �Ito ( ��1 �'��I L I�t a !� a o J �' --�-�_ �:� o o f a.- � o ��\� - — ---- ,r °'c`"'� X cr 1 � 0 0 0 �po � • o o a a�a �_ ._. .., �— ��'y�� [[[ppp ��. . �-`��: . ' � � , . .. .._ �. o� a o i{ l ��.° 9 .a a U o i � \ .:. �� o o _ o 0 _-. ..__ !� I o DE couRCV �-_' _____ ;' - A V `� . a � a° —� �— �RIVE Z I"i. . � II 0 . o t P �� _�. � J `I� I—�, .. • `.o��:�=a�aWF°�C=.l..�:L � � O�o Mo o''..O � $ � � � - , �� f- FRONT AVE. G�:°�� e �; - - ,a _ �; �_ _ _ _ , � `,1 Z �. �� °°'� X ou � ..1 ,, o � . :- p_. 'o��r. -_-° . . 0 600 t000 � ' � °�4 � � � _., � �° �.�_�`� aMOO �oeTTeoa � .� � 4�=-:��= - _ > � . , ' - i ' f � � � � � o ANALYSIS OF INTERNAL -� EUR AV i o 0000aoo; � �� , °9-° q � 3°°`° 'p ° °° CIRCULATION a;� �?�� _ � g � a a�a a d�' o� ooa o0000000 - � o - - o00000 ooaoo� ' � ' o � � o000 i , -= fi � _ o��o �Major through traffic � � ob oo db'd� o o A dl �Ole ool000loo 000 00 i •H �v. 000 �i: aP 000000�000� � � a- o00 , ��C � �Internal road system o� �� ° _y 4JdAOO�oo 0 oqd�bo�o 00 � o f 6 .I__ .. � _q oi IM� �- o - o a - �f �-g a 1 �� ° , � �°°p' Y;J �q �°°°�°° .�...�... Existing pathways l:'�iiii'� Q o $ � _ � �-� � �e �� a �$ 1 0= 4� � ob db' o oi.o o�io�0000 o� b e o000000 00000 ''-� i°P°°° °°°°'° ��_� ;; , � F - - * Probkm intersection � � - -_ dao'naod o0 00 000�do �` a �C— � I/ i M nr� �� J-� � � p;i P 9:9pqi?, o 00 00000000� � �o � � Route confusion �ob - o �� ' � a,o 0 o a b o olol o 0 0 � Q .o M R♦ NA .O Q � i � .�--i ) o od o00 000000a o 0000 oQ o ao �` - -`-�\ o 00 000 000a0000OOl o0000 Q 4 � � � � : �, ._ c_o�couRSe � ° �a� ' , _ o J Jr-� C � r-. � '. Q . �I,AQ y /� �_�- _ r I a_ �Co . o Q ��r-,� ' � �� _�-\__ V � ( � a o�o 0 0 0 0 � o , o` � ! � � � ' � -. � ..o 0 0 0 � f'.IiTlll ��' _ -�� ___� o000 0 0 ' 0 410 00 �'e� ��r... . ��- •�4��,,,�, I1R�INGTiON /WE. n �� '�� -c��"`"J �'S'�`�� r ��000 i0000.o l0000 0 0 0 000000 o .. , o _ o ooio�aoo'loo 8 � � � � �, �, ��., . i 1 �� i .' o � , �� _ Mous�-� �\ ........ • � �r' -�. o ' o O o 0 o e o 0 � _ ` O�O.O O � � � J O - � � A�.00000 �\ O {. I � T� > -. \� '. / -i00001000�000�,0 � � Y� � T nU wanF�OWEN �\ i � ..7� � � i I 11 I � o ° o-� oio��o� x �,.� � �� ,� �� "" ��, ��TrT7 i �, , o a � ��00000� � �� I I I '! _ b lO. o� . . � ; �o�000 iolo�o�o�o�o P_. _o 0 1.;' � ��J•/�� j PAVILION ��o�o q piA�p �o °o� o o� o'ool � \/ �l l� �l�fl��` �'.1�_:..:.L.�4�I „o °�.�oboo MID KW cV��--, SER Y P� -- T' a�° � S • ,/� � �'�`�o � � .... : ��o 0 0 0 0 0'� o 0 0 0�� v � <� � - � \ � � 1C� o h-o 0 :E o t o 0 0 0 � Ie�Oi ° lOF7B11L1�. � '�. i� � n �� o �" FElDB - o ��, p _(_ ' COMO LAKE -; ° �� ° � � q�, � _ qcwu�a � �` ��. iar : , o�, sr'��o a�� !, � �� '`�° 1�` P , e _ ,_ �� , �� ° � � CO ��: ��: , �::: ;O IIOIITON • ��p�� wu � •�• ':`4s... ......... .. .• ....�...• . � 1A��LIV�], • � ol000 o � o _ 11,�o�o� � °o °�o � , a � o e o 0 0 0 ...�.,,., rcn�nr __ -1 . ° __ Q °o � � 0 0 0 0 0. O 1�wws j� o , � o-� � ��jFOOL ' � � F� � -... � o. o;o E �y� o _ _ _-. � o �V I O�� o •W W ..- 0 � o L �� I� � � � � � d ° � ° � _ 0 0 iuwer ca�rr � � o_ o _ o YSxE sxEn' McMURRAY FIEL o 0 0 0 I °o - �Ld',Y�!�A� o v' o '� - .. � � � �J�� -L� .�- o��o - °�, 9 Tt'�IY�r o.-o �� ,F�o a pJFrSSAMINE �A�IE LJLI - o .,s I o � — --- — - -.1 . — _ '� -'- '-- -- -- o o- -_ - ,.�_ #��."�. .' �_T.r�_'r:. . F:� 6. C � ' "".-. ... �! _ _ A � Q a `C .� ''__y�'�/ p . -b .p . J 8'- p �tt�� _� _,_ .�. — , Q � � o /�/ j.>J Q V ! i �', 6 �� -d O O / D � . �OQ � - 'd Ob '.Od p�" 000 j� ). - i � :: -_ _ - `� � {oo�] o - _ .� *� .v�{{�� \ ' R o 4 ' �LJ�$ O_� a-: s_E�. ...'' � , � � l�F�, o �-_--=` - - � , °� � o'L_1� 0 tl d o o '� �LP1.C"ID I \�'=` Q � ,�.f�- (.�.�--T I�...=-. . 4�� L"IL ' �'L T�3J LJ- - o, ��,j�°�� o oa o _ o o�.i- - ' OE ROUNCY 4 I a` �:. o.a+P�-�� - .o o - DRIVE r df'�`�T d r� �� OY11Ii1�� O • � - ° , oov - � � � -.-- �F��A�E_:b � o eoq� o�',o o>t. .. _ . . � ---� �i q '� � W'oN oo �U.o� e �o ., � �.- --': .---- ---- -- - = ------ - -- x il I .1.- ...['�:i.l 0 400 !00 1000 o _ � ! �y�- �°�� _ _.. J p°�� , . .a eo'e o�0 5 � �. _ ro p \— � I PROPOSED VEHICULAR THROUGH TRAFFIC � The functions of the parkway were reviewed in relationship to the roadways and it , became apparent from the circulation analysis that some existing use areas could be reinforced by the elimination and rerouting of specific portions of existing roadways. For example, the rerouting of Lexington Parkway to the existing alignment of � Sterk Drive would permit the removal of the roadway between the lake pavilion and the Hamm's water falls. This change in alignment does not affect the flow or volume of traffic on this route but it does remove the pedestrian-vehicular conflicts from � the lake pavilion area and provides a less congested activity area with more pedestrian oriented spaces near the pavilion and lake. The change that has the most pronounced affect on the neighborhood and the park is � the one-way street proposals. These streets include East Como Lake Drive and Gateway/West Como Lake Drive. East Como Lake Drive will be a northbound one-way route starting at North Victoria an continuing a ong the entire length of the � lake up to the intersection of Lexington Parkway and East Como Lake Drive. This one-way proposal will permit the reduction of the roadway width so that additional space is made available between the lake and the street, providing room for separate bicycle and pedestrian paths along the east shore of the lake. On the west , shore, the direction of traffic on Gateway/West Como Lake Drive starting at West Como Blvd. will be one-way east to Como venue. is c ange is necessary to provide south and east bound traffic a route to Como Avenue and, again, provides room for � separate path systems along the lakeshore. Prior to construction, the roadway changes will be implemented and monitored for � a period of one year. Certain roadways will be blocked off, others will be narrowed with temporary barricades. In addition, one way streets will be created via signage. Intersections will also be modified to simulate the proposed plan. Based upon data gathered during this period, the performance of the plan will be � evaluated by City staff, the Advisory Committee, and the Traffic Consultants. The Consultant will base his conclusions on "before" and "after" data. If the � findings warrant, alternatives will be explored to correct unforeseen problems. See Appendix, B- 86 7.5 "Elements of a Test Period Monitoring Program" , and 7.6 "Subsequent Revisions". � � ' � � � i � �� Phase � � Master Develop- Mainte- Cost A �� 6 � . . Plan ment nance Estimate PPendix , �a �°e.��;�€5��,�a; �xe�, � �� a �5 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' ' —� ' � � � A� PROPOSED VEHICULAR � � � � � ��- • ' `-,_ a�a�"a o � '''3�r o � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o THROUGH TRAFFIC � o �. 0400 o �p� li � : ! �`I . 4 dw� ' °- 4 � � v � �;o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Reclaimed park land , I o 0 db oo dbd'o� 0 d� ��'a�o olo 000000000 " A o 0 0 0 'o_ o �- o o, , o, o p x , ��!��o MajOr through traffiC � � cJd�booloo 0 oo0�doo 00 � ' o- o_ �_ - _ =-o°2 .I VA o ¢_ �7T�-�7� Q- �- p s�- ooiP o 0 000 0 ';I�� ° � ' �� f1@-W IOK�� µ�T-i�f-��;-�II n { l�l.l I II�� '� � _ $-rtQ � ` �°�$_.; o zo � .z �obi 00000�o o li � FA qPpa �opqp �, D d o0000000 0'0000 � ' � °.'° � _ � F , _ ��n On—street parking elimin�t�d � - . -.-� � I! do o��b a o e o o d o'��o'c a �____-_ -� M T� o �— � �� . i � \� �p,lop q� pa,or ° o�0000000 .. _ -�/ � �� o � I � 1 i o�'o o� � - o V � I,, �' /il,. a a b olo � NA � � 1 �,/}�`� � e J J - . r . o o� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' GOLF COURSE � o o , , i , �_ o ° �I � '� ;o � o _ - _ � ' :a _ 0 0 0 00000001; 'do � �,� � _ . ... e r� ' ,_ � , ..; ��, � �� r�i7rrn �� a � � �i a o � �.^ �� ' — .�V ��. o 0 0 000000000 � < , �� o � . ' p _ \ � , \ '-� _ ' __ D 9 ��1 �-_ �_— � I \ LI _�� O O O �� fr�`� ` haru�1�trn—3' ° � , ° o ' �� \ - �oo o r J�000aeoo�oo�o000� 0° o0 _ � � � AR��NV'TON piE e o 0 0 0 0 o ° �"�WS�1 � .�� '—' - ��' 1' � � 'I e c_ �7 ' / \ \ ,, � --r� � - o 0 0 o e o � � � � � � -�o 0 16� o�olowoa�o � o � �.�1 �� ' � o o b,o oio 0 0 � rv `-' j.....r\ �\ � 'I� iM�ME1uNCE .i o 0 o OIT a�o 0 0 .-Y-� L { 00 ' 0 2 - ^J Q W plD�LpEN WER I ]�11 I �.�1 . � O��o 0 0 0'0 � 1V .�� 1 l�DNO I 1��I I .T� p OOOOOi ° °� � •O�_ �A��,n�� a�,o�lo�� o,o,o �� ° � ; ' � �y LAKE �ICE�1IEW �`' , o olo •o'oo� a1 (t ��O_I � �� '�"'-"'�i PAVILION �o �o�q�p �o' �°o MIDWA � �S C`�� •� SER I��r "/ � � ,--�-1 ' �°o��jo ;aboo, b Y n °F�rft �. n �rr° , o - . �' � / � ;�000ao o� ol oo� �� a � ' o0o FELDBALL O � � o��.-�1 0 0..iL? o �`_ � ._� � �� G � o � TI �� G-��.o _ � �� COMO LAKE �Q � ,1 0 �o a o � PICIMGKNO ,� � �Y ��,N -. ' o �0!oO��p� o 1 �811ELTER � �Y-J' � �1 G �� PAVLION � '� �4kk� �LWA �?� 4_��-$ Ir aJl �s � a�d�t�nal �� o 0 e�ur�ins � rVeA1' �kPi 51'bl' o " ° �'° � ,�I � G �' o ��a/. ' ' � l�.. COMO A ' ° �� o , 0 0 � 000 0 ° o°�o- �o ooaoo ' ° o�'� ° Fo a- Rr o o �' 0000 ,, J O iENW$]� O O a o� � C O.._' i�nr xw b [__- ' � o �.. �� o � ?.Q 0 0� E � �y O�� p p_ O �-� �J � � � �� o �.� � o - ' o "��so°UNCETY � McMURRAY FIEL , _ ° o_ o 0 °r° � o � 1�.-1 AVE o ,��T j �' - � � � � �''�� `� LJ � o_�� — _ $ 09 k$� g q: o �;�C�L�� `7#�",. , �E _ _ - s _ .A ° 0 �=_ �r��e�_ —.— _.�: � _. �:. A , e � _ � r-�• � j9 4 . cs�' _.. �� ..: �-�-�--•� ' �' _ ' .a _ o� o. . � . o o ° : o .o . . i;'.• 6� - o .o _ � s. 0 0 ' °� o a i f -c ° = _ Qo� �]">i� e � a�bb o-od� �o �i�� oo �� a a- - _ o ' �. .:._`: --�c� �, o o J _ �. o a �'��.. �-:E.�� . ''J—_ /� �I � o� a a o..�o ° ��° o a ,d .; ._-.r;: - ,.�/ . �-� �� bd�o 000 �p�' �� - ��__._ .'. �,.- _ I o o ° .� ,.: � . _. - ._: _.__ i ' _ .�_"_ . .f '.�. . _ j � . O 7 _ ] 0.6 , ,.DER6URCY�_ � �I� J� ��... D_. �p � o � � a t-1_C�� o, o o O'' O DRIVE fd �'TT^ r� l��i� [b��'?T'�� _� __"__"' �_"_�'� r d �. — / " � � ��Q�L�� 11 9A ' m^oo �0 fPl�l"Pq1C 0'�O,�i� M�il'�� 0 4�0� .�.. l{0 0.� _ Q l ' ___._ __ .__'_ _____ _... L �I' , _ ��°°�� (p� _ .,. � �u��.�..^�. ^{T'e aae o0 6 � � .,_�.: _�� \__ ❑ _ ' 7 ' PROPOSED INTERNAL CIRCULATION As illustrated by the analysis (Map no. 5) the internal roadway circulation was ' an unorganized system of roads built over the years. As a result, numerous pedestrian-automobile conflicts, hazardous intersections , and confusing route choices exist throughout the park. � The proposed changes in the internal circulation of Como Park includes the removal of certain streets, and the rerouting and realignment of others. In addition, an internal park shuttle system is being proposed to assist in the movement of park ' users (see "Park Shuttle", Page 21 ). The recommendations made are the results of R.B.A. 's study and a careful evaluation of the pro's and con's by the Advisory Committee and City staff. ' The changes result in a more simplified, better organized internal circulation system that has a positive impact on the park. For example, the removal of Beulah � Lane between Midway Parkway and Horton and the changing of the alignment of Midway Parkway results �in the picnic area becoming a unified use area without the pedestrian-automobile conflicts. Another example is the rerouting and removal of a portion of Kaufman Drive. This closing results in better control over access and ' eliminates route confusion. Both examples contribute to the overall reduction in hards�;rface areas within the park. Finally, the internal shuttle system also contributes to the internal circulation ' of the park. Park users will be able to enjoy other areas of the park without having to use their cars, thereby helping to reduce unnecessary traffic movements ' in the park. 1 ' ' ' ' ' ' Master Phase Mainte- Cost . . Plan Develop- nance Estimate APPendix ' ment 16 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ' � � � � ' ' ' ' ' ' PROPOSED INTERNAL UR AVF � � o ' o q o o -,a ' 4�Ei,�..?�� : � o a o o�o ooio a �1�� a ° ._- o b o�o `�'° �Y�- �� o�oo CIRCULATION GAUFON�,�a ° °° 1 . . . � �- _ ' Q o - �� o � $�-- _,o J� f. _ i� TT pz '. �o TrTI ' � `��ii' � Pn � ��,o ��afTd o,�Foloo ,��, oo' . �'� Major Through Traffic c�D o'�o p o d o �i o� I AN �V . -�� _ - 4.. 90�' G.P!a po�p� F ' o - �1��_ - ool K i ¢ r'i" O � ._ _.. 'o�1.I.. �-�� o;�� . Q ` g o"t� w ��f t � +r��J� Internal Roads and Parking �� -�+�-� y.}--� _ aJa: �� c o 0 o��oa o�oo 00 � � po'�L .7�_ p I p 0 9 � -?J o ��:-o�W.I WA ❑ ' —r�� Q F`Q � . O p�i.4 0 }) O�A�F P O'0 O.o�o.o il,,'i,� � .= 4y`._Il ..�.,0 0 OZO-1 O 1Y�-o � "- ..s 1 0.000 `11 � `"�� o � Q,g a 8 8�g z�I � p b�� "p o �o,o o,0,1 aProposed Shuttle Routo T�� A - ¢ 0 o pl°I D d �. � � �� o ��'�i �'o XXXXX Roads �Total Parkiny �� o� � ��7 � ' w o�r��°�.o 0 0�` � Elimirl8t@d Availabl! Q o a - Q 9 p ao;,o ia,aoo � ioo 4 0 ; •One-way n �� o � _ �/ � , �� , • Shuttle Stops o��d�b � �� Roads � o I ME-RASK,1 � 4 /., � � od�opo 00000000o OO�O,pI :o� oi000 00 •O U O_ � O O �t� .4 4 '' ° �$ n g o � � ' GOLF COURSE o . . f- a _. .J I - -- _ o o . 9�__-. , ,� ,. _ � - o0000000" o--r- �- - - '�� - o oio 000 00 a. o. o ��e _a �. _. .. -__. _ o a { �O -o , o00 oiQ� � . 6__4 0 \�` , � - . o j 4 0 � �o •� ' ° ; ___ �� o00 0 _� ._ - .�__ _ _��dIGT � A � �' �� °'�00000 �a oj0000l000alo ;n � � /MIEo Q � � r� � ARUN(3TON � Q � �-,A -_ _ �-� �� oo � o � , Y E � - o 0000 0 fl .... n� �..t h, � ,o . I .�o 0 0 q o o n�o � �H`a�isE�- . . ��r � � - � � _ oi �oo eao �-' P�..rv-,i 7, 0 14, oo�ioi0000 o�° n a�. o -, o �:s �l'C/,'�i ..00i+�r� J,.� S ti'�,'!��1 .-o o, �o 0 s l_ � `��' CL�Rt �biC'K`� , ' ;.�!,�.:��✓ ��o o i0 0 0 0 � -�i-�-- ��1� -° w��r°wen�,QYr ,i;t�Tl1'P� Af° A � � O0 7�,�� [ .�i � o � I D I� �1 � .;�' . ' �M�R1lEN�NCE , Q, o o . .o '�. _� ,� . ieukorrc� � I� � I� � � ' o �'--000 0 � • �1� ;o o �' 'lojolo 0 0 1 i, _ ( �, �nanriesE �AKE �AK�VIEW AVE % o�„� '� ZOLT � RDEN �� a� oo� �l �� c , � �, � PAVILION �-j' II?�pi�� MIPWA,Y PKWY � �' � SER ORY a ' , =° �°° o°o o� o�ob �� ,�., � �� ° °o��o � Ooo, _ \� �y .O O O� 6' p� o p� Y O 9�.o�dl�� .� � � � p0�o�. .� � O fo0 O�� - b so�..�« � � � � J - � o:�� o FELD6 . p T'B"° ' COMO LAKE � '� ° ��' `-;� �.� ''� -° �o 0 L �� ° R��+ �i f m111C1� •i� o o Q o � �� i ,, o� . '��, or- ` { � o 0 0 � ..Q. PICNICKf1G (' . � � � JYI'7.�1 �K.Y� QXP�fA. � O O O O O - o ��-1 PAVILION - � � �"" fc"C�P P�]y - o s ° o 'r o °-�� I �6TH '� ` � .�t '~`.� �� BALLFIELOS � O O ��--0 � � _ �_- o �.a 1 �o�d'd�� ;125 �" �� COMO AV `� � � HOqTON A E 11H oM�iL D C ��ol �� P��`� ° - /� �no � °al°_l__L°ioo i_ � ��y o ✓ r � r�o � o q o 00 � __ ��010� -O ..J1�SC�i71lA.F' ArUA p � �n • �nr o o 0 0 10�-io�� P,r,ror;�iue,��la o F '�°p ° o 0 `,ol la G' '�tiYP�:1�S ��100 �� - �_..._� � c - .,... . , _ � F. _ � o � ,ov �__-- ,,a . °° ue �a� .�,v�l�'/�� o , o XX7(Xo� w�r - � � ��- _. �, � ,� ��.? ��..J o o � � - n�rser counrr .. ° h � o_�'�� --i o O• � o O Hwu�socErr MCMURRAY FiELD � � 1E �� ° r� a.o j57� o f - ��AVE o'a' �� ' '-_---: ,� � �� r �o � �� p � ��/ _J�', ' .� o F ' ° ��9� a , ] E � � �, . � �� °,� ° o �r a ,� � �° �LJ,�'L__i ��' L� - �- o, fi�: 1 --T---- - -� - - � - " �:JESSAMINE A1/EV � -a - . �. : a �c_f r s-r v/` , , Q. o r :_ . __ �* v�}a. –_�� r o �� `�". . jo � o � a � �� — ��'�� -��?'� 1 "e 11f �i`� ° :j- � ° b� a ; _ s ° o ,: 1 - , T� � e � �- ' �� d - � ` � „ o b b >I d l T q� , 0 0� ,ar+w o'_o __ _ o 0 0 0 � _ - _ - ' � - . d,o �o � , s o �\�� ` �� -��'"`/' , � ° A o °o�o a Q7ta �`R °JI"J�� o�. -.o. � s.. �� .;l �, . �' -; '-- f o _ � � \ r r � 4 r- ,-r� I\\��-._ - ,o� �.- �—._ . . �._—-] � � 0 d a I o p � 'pq�. - � i oNe� o � —-__ 7 . �_ '` . � o q _ _ ' �..._ .:�_ • . .�L�� 6': % �� .�� O 6� o O ' pa � , _ _ �Z �� r- a�� `yrrr��-,�^.��I � — a �'` J DE COUPCY - � � a p —�.�' �-= T�_DRiVE .1' � ��n-��.-� � o o - � � t,� � � �F�IT�AVE�� ° � o o O�oa� ' v �o��Ic oo��b ° "o � � ° _ _--- �- o� c � �� ' � _ . _. . W . -_ -1 . � - - ------- ----- �.�. '��o 0 oeo Z n> oi - - _ � �4 � ��- �_ ..�. � `o a _ O 4 /000 =- <? �R�� _ __J_- �-.... J � �� 7 �. � PARKING � The parking criteria established by the Advisory Committee for Como Park is to � remove on-street parking from the park roads and to locate adequate parking areas conveniently adjacent to each park facility and use area. The parking requirements of the lots were determined by the traffic consultants based on an estimate of parking demand which could be expected at each use area. (See Appendix, B-58 ' for Methodology) Based upon the consultant's calculations , numerous parking schemes were evaluated by the Parks Design Staff and the Como Park Planning Advisory Committee, and the most functional schemes selected for inelusion in , the plan. The most difficult activity area for which to satisfy the projected parking requirements was the Zoo/Conservatory area. After analysis by R.B.A. it was determined that 96� parking snaces for the Zoo/Conservatory complex would � meet the parking need for 98% of the year. Based upon the criteria and the consultant's calculations , numerous parking schemes were evaluated by the Parks Design staff and the Advisory Committee. Solutions � that involved creating larger paved lots were first considered. This posed problems because there is limited space available around the zoo/conservatory. To change would have forced the removal of existing buffer areas and would have required � extensive grading. Subsequent schemes attempted to reduce the impact of these lots by placing a portion of the parking on hard surfaces, and the "overflow" parking on existing grass areas , similar to the state fair and other special event plans. � This proved to be impractical since it was determined the grass areas could not withstand such heavy weekly use. Different seed mixtures as well as concrete and grass waffle patterns were evaluated. None could provide the durability and aesthetics required. The Park's maintenance staff determined these areas would � require extensive maintenance and would still appear shabby - at best. In addition, no aesthetically suitable means of containing the automobile in specific overflow parking areas could be found. � After reviewing these options , it became apparent that certain areas near the zoo/ conservatory were being infringed upon and compromised, with areas designated as open space or memorial gardens beinq eliminated to provide large parking lots. As � shown on the graphs on the adjacent page, large acreages of land were being required to meet this need. Developing these areas as parking was contrary to the goals and objectives and it became apparent that surface parking lots alone would not suffice � to handle the number of cars and still maintain the existinq park character. At this point, the entire subject of how park users come to Como Park was reviewed. � The automobile, the pedestrian, the bicyclist, the charter buses, and M.T.C. routes were studied. What resulted was a careful blending of park facilities and various transportation systems that would work together and compliment each other. Ralph Burke Associates ' report was reviewed and discussions were started with the M.T.C. , � other parking options were explored, and additional data was gathered. For example, the Ralph Burke report pointed out the parking demand time at McMurray Field was different than the demand time for parking at the zoo/conservatory. We met with the � M.T.C. to see if they could alter existing bus routes so buses could run into the park on weekends in hopes of releaving some of the parking problems. We also studied the use of the P1.T.C. and fringe parking at Midway Stadium and the state fair grounds. � Phase ��r� Master Mainte- Cost �� y��e . . p�an Develop- nance Estimate APPendix � � � e ment 17 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � HARD SURFACE AREA FOR VEHICLE CIRCULATION AND PARKING AS COMPARED TO PER�ENT OF ZOO/CONSERVATORY PARKING REQUIREMENT MET � CHART B � c�c y � oNC o�c oNc � U a a U U U U (� � O <O N � � N � � � � n � � ti � � ...i v v � �..i ' W W LLI 1J� IJJ LLI Q Q Q Q Q Q r � � � o � � ui c�i o � � co � � � r � � % PARKING REQUIREMENT 98°6 95� 929a 98� 959'a 92� � MET PARKING LOTS PARKING LOTS AND FRINGE PARKING (300 CARS) � � MASTER PLAN PROPOSAL � � � � � � � U Ca.? U U U U � � (O N � (C N � � � � ti � ... ._.. �., �• ..� �,,, � N W W W � � � � � � Q Q Q a Q Q � O N O O N � N N N M � N O o0 O o0 cC � � � � 9890 959'0 92qa 98% 959'0 929'0 PARKING LOT AND PARKING LOTS, PARKING DECK (400 CARS) � PARKING DECK (400 CARS ) FRINGE PARKING (325 CARS) Master Phase Mainte- Cost � Plan Develop- nance Estimate A�ndix ' ' ment � i$ COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � The final solution proposed for parking at Como Park includes a two level parking � deck, a small short term parking lot, an internal park shuttle system, improved M.T.C. connections, convenient drop-off points, and charter bus parking areas. In addition to being very flexible in meeting future needs, this solution is the most � versatile as well as the least expensive. (See Chart C) � PARKING DECK , To meet the majority of the parking requirements for the zoo/conservatory area, a two level , 400 car parking deck is proposed. The parking deck will occupy the same area as a portion of the existing zoo parking area and the paved amusement area. � A parking deck is essentially a surface parking lot with a second level added above. In this situation, partial depression of the lower level will significantly reduce the visual impact on the surrounding area. The highest point of the deck will be � approximately 9' 0" above the ground. In addition to careful siting, the parking deck will be built of materials compatible � with the new zoo architecture and will be extensively landscaped. The incorporation of planters, and the extensive use of shrubs , trees, and berming will make the deck appear gardenlike. To further minimize the impact of the structure, the deck will be designed to permit the maximum penetration of natural light to the lower level . � The deck will be designed so that it can be secured when not in use. The parking deck was discussed with the Zoo Advisory Committee and their consulting � architects. The opinion was that such a deck would provide a well defined edge to the south!�rest corner of the zoo and would be compatible with the proposed plans for the adjoining earth sheltered primate house. To insure adequate parking for both the zoo and conservatory during park construction, the parking deck is scheduled for � year two in the phased development plan. � � � � � Master Phase Mainte- Cost . . Plan Develop- nance Estimate APPendix � ment �s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � � I � . , r � ' ��,y J � f r` �'� ��f� ''� :�� .,-� ,�. ,r ., „�'�fi ;� �� , �.�s'.'� _ - „ . � ' � �,r .'' � ' , ' v(� �� ;_ � ,"'�� '� � - ��T .� Up)�-�� .i. � . �(i �;�, ��J ��`�i �j�� •• 1 �� I `_l _ �• �, j ) (Y) ��J �� l`� �� ' � �... �� ' I r (/� ��f�" � ♦ � J ` �Jp� �� _�, I� �� - _:,p , � � � �,1�j �;�� F7 _� U ✓ l��t` ,`� �- , /� � � � � �� \ln�,� � � � � -0 �� ' . � ,,�� i� ,,a. �' � ��"�' � - �-�� q��:,��1) '� ��='--� �;,,,,� '' - . �� , i' � � � '�. o��aU° � ��?^�,t ,� ��/ FI'` Q � ` ' � �y?, � "-! 1 W/`' � v "°e. � �, ,'r ` � � �% F' . ��^ � �./�� .� � . �� • , I � " �� ti � � . _ •. i ��,. �i i, � ��!^ �� , . . �-;. ,,r� _ ��--- � _ i " - =� , i, . �,,,} � _ . �'� � �;� J L � .,_ _�` ' ��Q�� 2 �� A \ � ♦ ' 1 - �� '�OYLII 1 � �*�.I' II �7� I� (.��/��'r.l i � � �. � � _ •d '•O � • c .► � ��• �' . r _ -- �: :}�. , � - , , , ;: '. . : . . , � �' - �"'r'�-', -� _ - ,� . . �� -_ ,t�;;�}�'° a+ �►.`S _ ° �a - �— J�.�� , ;C',, �_ . , . i . ��,i� , • . � . . - , _ ; - , � . . - - I d b' .. II I . ,. ,. � -,.. . .� ,,,. li„ � .. , N i�,. . , . ��:I..I� ;,ll l . �j. ►eM:, i � : � _ -- % II - - \ - _ � - _ . _ - \ _ . _ _ . � _ _ l = ' � PARKING DECK � ` � �' Phase Master Develop- Mainte- Cost A �; . . Plan nance Estimate PPendix ment ', COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � _ ,'�. � o�- 1 .�' �}� , ��3 �T, r. �. A. , r., __ -, � . ,;�g, � � . � � , �_- �l' . �� .a � , _ � � .h., � ! : . �� . �:'. d ,��•�� s`. �r ' ° + � �� y f � � � �, . I,; ;Ili i � F7 '` r � " � � �� ! �� i �I � '.� � �f � � M�14' ''�.� .� � � � . � �. �' �� ' .�.,�-. � � -'v'�,,-r. � , � "�� Y t rr • ., � ,� y� �� . _ � \ � Y'. ,� ' s � � � ' M� �'�' -- '«. `� ,d �� + » �, � �� I, ✓ � _--r � '�'I�� il ,� � ' _ � , ui,i,9�li�� '! ��y � __ - —., .t_. � � � __�._; Midway Parkway Buffer �P2rking Deck � SECTION OF PARKI NG DECK � � � � � j Master Phase Mainte- Cost Plan Develop- nance Estimate AP�endix � � ' ment COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � � �'� � +� N \ +� O r-`� N L W J +-� J RS U O 4- � � � O � r �r 2 Q1 J C •r N � S�.t h- C •r �O Ql N O 3 C. C •� C� Y > d-� C r- N Z � O Y •� L (C U•r �.'- y � � � r0 U a O +� � � � > 'a � F- r- d NI •r O O O +� �0 t a � a i •� O i. aC i0 C tn a U Y O rti� i O � O ro O N � tn N N U rtS0 U4- O U � O N O 4J t � N U ^ O ^ O t.[) tp U C) � N +.� 3 ' C� • � t0 M O O� � � �3 S- S. O� O N 00 ,.�N Q1 00� '- O II. O rCf rO ^ p� �t b4 Lt7 64 ��b4 M b4 tf} r- N +�� +�► O•r Rf•� i. i�->r� � � N� C O +� C '� r0 O 3 O � •r �O •r F- J +� 1 +-+ �+� O C +-� p � � U 1 U V1 r N S-. �--� R7 r •r � •r � � Q . � � O �k C J � � +� • •�-� g O U C1 � +� � c� O O N O� 4- � p .•�- � E o �C •� 3 � C i- rts v a�� c tn d R3•r S.. � 1 Q Ql i�•r QJ L O � C R3 �• O } O � r �O U I C Q N N � � O Rf �i--� N•� N � •r- E N rt5 O � S.. C •r- � i-+ � r n. N •r I � N �If rC Q1 � S.. . Qf S.. R7 � C_ O � L •� O i. a C N � � C C O Y � > � O i � C.) � rtS O U � C> � �O � �. L •r- .p S� 4J i. �O C al E � � N N� Rf > N Gl � � O � U tn �O �M � i� � A U rC v� a b'C +� N r- C 'n O M O N 00 \`�G� M O N L +-�r- � G1•� � C O t.G �O V 07 t!i I.C)H} r��b9- Ef3 r � r C RS C� U C 0'�t � C i-� f0'C � ? � � Rf � •� R3 N a 3 � 3 � �`' a . • v� vs } �'-' o r-- -v �n � c c w o � .� O z � +� � � i +-� v O•� O C C', � 0�0 +� O � � N Gl� � � � J � •i-r O 3 �- E � O rt Z C '� !O � � � QJ •r" C �. � Q O G1. C •r U Y � }1 Q � N � N � i- �C •O i •C r6 O RS V � � � •r C N +� 7 C � r- � O•r OJ d d' r- rt3 U �- O +� 1. •r 1. N R9 Q' U N W 0 r d (n •r 0 Z ro L i. O �O � O ro O 00 C tn i C� O O S�- +� C +� � U • ro C� v 4- C c� C� p � � G E •� O•� tn Q M C.J O L[) l� U U a�G i-�r Rf C i C O ll') lD M O O r � L L y � L U O N O N OC ..�`"a1 CO Ol N O Q O fC f0 O'C7 7 r0 a � i-� O �(./�- L!')EfT r`�i� r ff} b4 r fn �-1 U a. U f0 i-� 3 � � � � N rn a�.c u► •� s�.. � i fn -, � +� Ys. vi� � � a +' � ~ � � �•��> a�i °-o� ro � � � J � O � +� �•r•r- +� CJ V1 O +�►�- C7 ^ GJ C Qw � � (� Q C Cl +� (� GJ N� +� GJ a a O� • rtf i L r0 +� L N �C C •r U Q � �•� N �i-> >•r 'Q � � ¢ uo i •� W p � � c� o �� sa. c i1OE �� 0 � n r- �, � � o �o L•� a� �a� o c ai o t p �- d N • O U O n.�- � C fl.�� O S-. U U U W L •r O i- d O NO ^ � � � (n �'3 � i- O r6 O r O W M •r .a 4J N N .. O C..� (C O U 4- C� �i-> l0 • •r S-. Q) ^ � U (n d N U O I �--� � a O � �O N Y X � N N Q1 W � �1 O O • �n tD M � d' .- N i. C1 +� i. G1 C F-- � V a �v> °+�'�r °r°�� v�i� d � Q p C� � fl.�� n+� U z � � � � Phase � Master �e10 Mainte- Cost . . Plan mentp nance Estimate APP�ndix � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � PARK SHUTTLE SYSTEM � ��Because the parking deck and lots immediately adjacent to the zoo/conservatory area � ` will not meet the peak needs of the zoo/conservatory or the lakeside pavilion area, the concept of fringe parking was explored. However, a means of shuttling people f rom parking to activity areas is needed if fringe parking is to be effective. Various transportation systems were considered including a variety of bus systems using either , regular or propane fuels. The small mini �uses r�roved to be expensive and the ' committee felt that park users would consider the mini buses an unattractive and � unappealing system that would not be used. � After careful consideration , the Advisory Committee chose a street car, or trolley system. The trolley system would utilize a classically designed victorian trolley � car operating on a narrow gauge track. These cars are similar, yet smaller in scale than the street cars which originally served the Como-Harriet corridor. Similar systems have been installed in various parts of the country and have proved to be � efficient, dependable, and well accepted by patrons. Ralph Burke and Associates were asked to evaluate the feasibility of a shuttle system with regard to its carrying capacity and its compatibility with the traffic � and parking proposals. In addition , a conceptual operating pattern for the vehicles and a proposed schedule to determine the number of cars required was developed. (See Appendix, C, 1-35) The Como shuttle would consist of a one track system con- � sisting of two loops. These l000s would provide trips between the core area and the lakeside pavilion. The separated loops provide increased capacity and reduced waiting time. The trolley would run on weekends , holidays and for special events � at either the zoo, the corservatory, or the lakeside pavilion. The shuttle will make two major stops and two minor stops. The P1cMurray Field oarking area and the zoo/conservatory are major stops; and the lakeside pavilion and the picnic area are minor stops. � � � _ � � , � : : � Phase Master Mainte- Cost Develo pp � . . Plan mentp nance Estimate A endix _ _ � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � .. , . . 2� � U .► '��'� �� ' � \ � '�.� i�, 1, � � 1 i ."I �, r � 'i. i 11�/4► . � �,►� I. ;� r;, .��'/� .` �+' . i � �Y�: �, � `� . ,�. �. �. �/� � , _ ��, 'i �� I� �ili) . ,� i 17 �� i / /. � �� / q 'r 1/ �� ' - l �1� I � ��1��1 ■'' � ,' �� I��;,� / �� .�... �.� ; � i iI 1 , -/. `� ,i �. �� _� � .�_�� `'�, /�II p 1l� � �� r �'/ /1��i I[ �� . � � �r� ... � �� ;• � ' �� v• •�'' 'f .��I�� •� ��IIJ,�`�1" �j �� i��,�v�'I>`\, r 1, ��,�, �_p_��'��j;`'/ ��i! � , _ �~•►. ;�� ,,�� \ w '1� �,:� ��' � �� —� V��'��.�`�✓�� .s0 �(/��4'%° ��, `; .,��' �� -� � � ,:' �� !, �� \�`.i� ��,�•��`�\\� �� '� i.'Mgi�i' ;w . _. `�� '.�i/, �� ''�� . � �.t:• %. � �'�� b�.��` c,•� �. ♦'� i��. i .�'. �I� R��:, ' � �� _ ►_ �\ np i��i✓: •�+��I ' �'11� q�1 ��.' .��+ �� II,} "'`��.��' �i 1 �"` ,.�� h �`- � �,��j =', �= �!1\ �.� ♦ 1" 1:!i � � � � �„��'/�. .. '��sp�il� `i�e '� A � .♦ \ � a_c �r� �� 1 1' '�' �� .� � +�'•• �, � `! � /_ ��IG ►' � � .!�/�� U � u bM . ��'�� I A7/� �1A. ,F 1 � ��.i•r 1�� 1��:-�� ,`� r ��s'. .•vny y . . � .�,� �� i ��q�`",4 }��J,v3 r�'`_.4�.:R _�./I�.�+��1� `�< ( i.�. f.� � '�� `� �I �3. ,` ��`��T�,�FI�� ,�iii`p � ' �� ./,\�,/�" `�` 1 �'�� 1 !� •i '� � y 11"-v• 1� /�� j'��,. 1`1, �- `r. ,�t;t��r'�i,{� � _��. ��.� �? �' �+�t ��.,�%' __ •�► /!� �, ''1 ��,;t '�� _`_ ,��a':�- �� , �/'�'�► � ;,o, ; t%< � . , o �� "1� i� �i��i `��.,R� ��1� -.: ••��J �]-� ;ii�� 4,1�: �� . . '� , r . r� I . ' ` 1 .,�.f� ,` , ;� .'� � ,w{ � I � �y i•' ,, �f�a'. :i \�a� �t . , 1 �1 �� ' � � �\ � ,l�,�. �`�'' Ilt ; 1 ` '`+`'-=�j ��,�^""w4s�`��) , ;. �. �� . �J � � �.'��;r A ��e'I _= ' � � N,�"'-I �� '�� _,C��.� �'-��, '�� '�, `,'. - , ..��., �� . �.� ;;� , �;::;:�- -�, ��, � �r�� - ��..�,,l� �..`�'My�=-� - `� , �, , .., . � � -�. _� , ��' , ,,: �• � � �";r�,�'"� _ � . �j�i.' i ��lL�.� +� �„ _ �i �„, �� !'� L�' °�� 6 "''�ii R�;,'� i .�'� //� V 6 j h - .�' �if �' �.I 1��'�.�� i / �,�� -� � � �� ( � � � ;"' -�-, r� �(I k� i��l��l .�/ � j' �' - I��I1��`�.`b .I� � I i � � r� �� /�: �� . �r�' , � � r r �� • _ �� -� l��rCiu� • � � ' - • • � • • ' • p � lation ' - - • • ' � ' � ' ' � N TIONS � BUS CON EC The possibility of an MTC bus connection where the shuttle intersects the existing Horton (Como) bus stop (MTC Route No. 5) has been discussed. Bus drivers would be � instructed to wait at this stop for the trolley, providing a convenient link between the Park's shuttle and the Metropolitan Transit System. � SHORT TERM PARKNG A small 50 car lot is proposed near the zoo/conservatory entrance. A lot this size � according to our studies will be sufficient to handle users who visit the conservatory during the week. HANDICA PPED ACCESS � The location,accessibility, and convenience of parking for both the haadicapped � and elderly was a concern of inembers of the Park's Advisory Committee. All parking proposals were carefully scrutinzed to see if they would meet the needs of the handicapped or elderly. � In addition to the zoo/conservatory area, the following describes the parking � requirements and solutions proposed for the other various activity areas in the park: Picnic/Amusement Area - The picnic areas will be served by two lots off of Horton � Avenue and a portion of the lot located on Midway Parkway. These parking lots allow removal of the on-street parking on Horton Avenue and permit the safe loading and unloading of people and picnic paraphernalia. The existing Como pool parking area � also may be utilized by picnickers. Lakeside Pavilion - The lakeside pavilion area will be served by two lots with � both lots having bus drop off areas. Convenient bus parking will be available across Lexington near the existing golf maintenance building. In addition, the park transit system will shuttle people to the pavilion area for special events. McMurray Field - The acquisition of 2.87 acres of land from Burlington Northern � will permit the construction of parking areas to serve McMurray field and to act as fringe parking for the park. These parking areas will serve a dual purpose. � During the week, they will be used by league� using the athletic fields. On the weekends, when parkina is critical in the park, they will provide fringe parking served by the Shuttle System. � � � � ��; � ��p e��°��. Phase Master Develo Mainte- Cost . . Plan p nance Estimate APPendix � ment COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 22 � � PROPOSED PARKpVG — EVALUATION � The parking demand for Como Park as projected by R.B.A. 's Como Park Shuttle and Parking Deck Study is shown in the following table along with the parking provided by the park pl an: � ESTIMATED PEAK PARKING ACCUMULATION* BY ACTIVITY AREA COMO PARK � ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA Surplus Deficit Demand Design** + � l. McMurray Athletic Field 460 Cars 576 +116 = 2. Picnic Area/Open fields 225 Cars 411 +186 3. Zoo/Amusement/Consevatory 1000 Cars 450 - -550 � 4. Golf Course/Skiing 110 Cars 90 - - Z� 5. Pavilion/Lakeside 300 Cars 244 - - 56 � 6. Swimming Pool/Tennis 100 Cars 100 - - TOTALS 2195 Cars 1786 +302 -626 � NET DEfICIT -324 * Does not include buses. � ** Based on July 9, 1980 approved park plan. As shown, the net deficit expected is 324 cars on the peak days of the year. � The report concurrs with the Park staff and Advisory Committee recommendation that it is "not economically feasible to park the peak capacity of cars, nor is it aesthetically desireable to have large amounts of paved areas near the core area � of the park. " The following is the R.B.A. 'parking spatial distribution evaluation' of the park plan: � "The distribution of parking within the park is, however, the key to proper management of the overflow. Table 11 � (see Appendix) shows the parking use estimated by time of the year for each area of the park. The rrbst critical deficiencies are noted near the core of the park, parti- cularly the Zoo/Conservatory area. The peak demand is estimated as 1000 vehicles, while the area has a capacity � of only 450, leaving a deficit of 550. The picnic area has a capacity of 411 , and an estimated demand of 225, leaving 186 surplus spaces. Since the amusement area has been moved into this area, some of this surplus will be � absorbed by families going primarily to the amusement rides, but other overflow is expected to absorb the � � s ` �� % �� Phase � Master Mainte- Cost � pP� ` P�an Develop- nance Estimate APPendix � � �� • � ment �� 9 ��,a�� &�� ; � 23 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � remaining spaces. The 550 overflow minus 186 leaves 364 still � looking for space. ;he McMurray Fields' parking has an estimated peak demand of 460 with a capacity of 576, leaving 116. Note that about 300 vehicles remain unable to find parking which were headed to the Zoo/Conservatory area. This � would theoretically occur only on the peak day of the year and could not rationally be used as a requirement to provide parking for these vehicles. The next period of the year, typical spring-surtrner weekends> however, have simiTar over- � flow problems. What is critical is the fact that even during typical spring-surrQner weekends a deficit of 150 is felt in the Zoo/Conservatory area. The picnic and McMurray Field areas have surpluses of 276 and 246 respectively for this period of the year. It is here that a Transit Service � is needed to provide remote parking for these surtmer weekends." Finally, R.B.A. concluded the following regarding the parking concept for � Como Park: "The proposed (parking areas), transit system, and parking � deck are closely dependent on one another. An anslysis of the July 10, 1980 park plan shows serious deficiencies in parking capacity around the Zoo/Conservatory during the surmner. While the 450 spaces offered will provide adequate � parking for about three-fourths of the year, all spring- surtmer weekends will have an overflow of people seeking a place to park, creating an intolerable situation for much of the summer. � With remote parking available that is accessible to a transit link, allowing the visitor a way to get to and from the Zoo/ Conservatory, this overflow can be accommodated on all but about 2% of the year. Thus, it is implied that the two � proposals should be treated as complementary parts of an overall program to handle visitor parking within Como Park. . ." � PROPOSED BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION � Como Park is a favorite of pedestrians and bicyclists alike. One of the goals of the Como Park flaster Plan is to provide a system of separated pedestrian and bic.ycle pathways. The pr000sed Master Plan includes 7.8 miles of pathways. This � will make more of Como Park accessible arrd add to the overall park experience by reducing conflicts between users whenever possible. The pathways will connect all regions of the park as ��ell as join existing and proposed pedestrian and � bicycle corridors which intersect the park. !�pproximately 7.4 miles of the pathu�ay system are separated, however in areas where demand is relatively low, the pathways will be combined to reduce � maintenance cost. The pathways will be asphlat and constructed to accommodate park maintenance and emergency vehicles. ��a �� e�� Phase � � �' Master Mainte- Cost ��P _ P�a� Dmentp nance Estimate APPendix � � . �� 0 ° ;b b�e COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 24 � � ' —� � ' '---' ' (�' ' P _ PROPOSED BIKE U AVE. � ' Y 4 i•.i O`0 O C L(LLL��...�� I�' ° o�o�000l . o � o O b O O �F� a k�o o�o oio � o 0 0�o� AND PEDESTRIAN ' � °- 4 ' �a��,a�� C IRCULATION � =- , , L � �' ; , �`' - d's co' fidc! �, Q- �e d! oi�� o-i o�oio'I,o�o „ Major pedestrian movement without a- o,: a v _ aut t a_ � o o conflic s -- �ac - o- - — � - 0000000 o- o � a p � �qic�� o 1 � � } _�M 1 M� a- o �= ��yy o a °` Prohibited bike area � -_� n�._{- c.� °iP ° I i :.o �oo 0 a � L � '0000 00 °-�� Q �-�� g oz oi�rob db' �Tr�r(I. '?�� ol* o o _ ; oo� ��. (�.OfVIb11Nd �Cf ' ' oo '' o e 'I 000, � �� Bike path d� edestrian A �--. Q,. . ;�� _ � � �� , �� ,� °000000 ,000� .. P �_� pathway � - i oc o,h tl o d �� ✓ -�` � W.M T�N• o a- �� j--� : PEf�QStflafl ��831 f18�lf� � o 00 � alo o- 9 ,� � � _ �� a;�a a p „ i o 00 000000i� • pathweY � bike parking �I o eb � - o- \` �1 . // `�� o q'b �' I o lo�<y � o N �R4 1 0 1 i �, �� ..� � , , o� o000000 0 0 00 oQ00000000 0 � o- .. •__n `^V:) o 0 � � GOLF CWRSE o � ° �/ / � � - � � � -- ... � o0 o n e000000�I �b- - - -- ... -o I �j - - � ^ ` o e-- --o� v-� I�� \ � . 0 0 � - q ��P `- �\ . . , . e� o 000 000000000 �.. 7. _ __ ', .y., �o o�. o 0 0 � ��.`1TTTl� R C � ' - - , _. . `��0000 o-. o• d!a� .o �o�-IOO � � � n�uNC�oN vE. ARLINGTON AVE �< ,_ _ , �,) � � r � � o. :� � � � -, - � � \_ --- ' T. - BKE/PE�$7py� @ C � ��100 IO loii� '.O O O O O o 0 0 00 O ./ (.��_ _`- �� elaiiP�es �'�E . � I I I i ��. � ° o 0 ___ CLIIC�_ � � � - 1 � o 0 0 _ MWlE � \\ '-T'�'T _- . p o o�o 0 0 0 0 �� 'C� ' '�° ��oo ly000�oloa��'�oo�o o' o � 2 � \\ p - O Ai0�.0I000 p�� .. � , i00001000 I000 � O � ."�..�«. i - I "�l O�RtDLNOWEN �--� p � �� l.l:' �11 I� o - o�oo�o�oio ��, YANTEMANCE -II -O p� a � � I g° � ,�. � BUILD�i6 I _ .� 1�I� � p �.O O 0 O O 0 � ( Q�}... � � .IAPNESE _. . t' 1Wo� IW owl-o�o`o_� o _o y.;_' . � � 6AFOEN � � , AKE I�Y1/ A °oo �o o�o o'ov , •0 00 9P �o , o., o o � j � .. f.'. � ��srn PAVILbN . �1 lu_�I°i�o� °°o . a o;o o c i. : + 1.�. . �� NSERVAT ...\ ovena�. T o o ° Q• , . ....... o� o �IIIIDWAY KVVY o oecK •� o 0 0 0, o' ;�, ,,� � e ' n�•. c ' � O � o, o P• o� ll.4J o F o '��0�°O �L� .. V ° o ?._'�4 '�olo a srnu�' ° ��'�+-- ° � '1 I�ERY�SS �� p-��p �- 00000--�a � ;0 O �G �`� E,°�$.,�,N i COMO LAKE OERGA68 0 00000 ��$ a �� - o � �1 ;�.� �� _ =o ��o 0 � nes PA • °o sT� o--�-- � �� E o� �,,_ o �, f � 1 � SlFEL08 � �° o' r_a. o�� .1• ••n• '�o � � � � 'conno av .�E �1 ' � ' ��1� � � � - � � � �� 0 00 ` � _-- � �> �,ro �,�°��1� •�. — •� �� ; < � -- � 6000 � � \�%�� /�V'9�" T�1��1 ,�/� y c_, •NC7UARY ZI � ' � ."7 �' 0 0 0 \�\,O i'�L�J •Y.,' � u ��E, ��€ 'E" �%7 °`�b ��:b '\ � n_. ...,...,.. ��caa�v�r«� ti o_� d�`�° D o n, �'*� ._ � t Y ,v �� o-�- 4 � o- � o �] � U �.�� ° �� o, ° /� p{ o �{(a�.li COMO�E( '�{ °,;, p �� McMIqiRAY FIE o1 °:_� -+r �F- ' . { G-i �c r- 1 IF R P .o: � -.- � � � L-J -.....\ �^ � °� j �C a- � 9 L�o - � L��CTL�._ e�s . \ f� LJ J � 1 � �r�oo�i (_�J �_' "� j I �T 6 ��l& '- � � �-- o ` . -- _ . - _-F , Q -_ _ , .-- r"�--�` ,:�. f--=�. ......._. -:--�--�•- -- �- �" -° � o ° o ♦ .�,,.-�1.; - : >r-�!- i - ai.- a o } :s 0 ^= � .� ._�c J` .9.9, 'R % en "�° .1.� �' o 0 y ' o _ � ��o � o.- � : o __o / � ❑ _ �-� � ..-. -� --0��' ��9i�j'� �� I� e'a o d' ad�l� � oi�j o00 'a°i7' c a a �. � - - - � c - q� [ `F[ - . —. '/ '� i f �I �G_F �1�� p 1"{r� p•`a o�� o � �. � d S 6 �\� \ �-� ' �� ,.�: � �� 9 C�r�o �� `� .� C 6 - a� . �+�'��' °�� :iL9 oao o� �'� a _- ' r'_— -- _�— ^ � -- .�... _ -�' _ ��T�� `��`�('�^..1 {� _' _ �_ 1 .�a- � '� . C-,� a��.L� t '.T b� � 9 O� a a "-oa� _O O 1... DE UIICr � � � �o� o- � p� o E V DRIVE � � � . . o 0 � � _ � , � _ � � ` � o��i.;°!_«o F oloi�� '�io � f�loN�l°i'ea�PS�k o o : o 'o oo"'o -` -G �o 0 _: --- . z �i -"- ---- -� -----_..------` ---- . q' . _ o - o___ „ -- ----- X ir. .. r:T. � �00 1000 � �- .. ..�. - i.�.. °o. �� J o q o b�o p '_ _ ___ �_._�` o,_o .`_. bA v IIOIRII � � \ � , � UNDERPASS The Como Park Master Plan strives for unrestricted, safe pedestrian and bicycle connections between various activity areas in the park via underpasses. These � underpasses unify the park by serving as critical links between major activity areas. In •addition, the underpasses provide a separation of vehicular traffic from the pedestrian-bicycle traffic. � These structures would be located in areas where the topography would be conducive to a separation of circulation. Lights and gates will be provided for security. � Landscaping and suitable building materials will be incorporated to blend these structures into the park's setting. � C �} � �� .,� � �' y ��, � _ w:�. ;� �� ; "� � : � : ;, # �;< " � s.��"�� ,�� fi �' � . � . � • � � p-�;� ,�� ,� `�� .�,, �',,s< °�arilu ;i�� .,: , .��.,�A�'" ...:, � � _ � Photo 4 - Cozy Lake ��° � Bri dge, 1905 ��. .. . , � . �_ .. � � � � � , �� Master Phase Mainte- Cost , . Plan Develop- nance Estimate APPendix � ment COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ,� �25 � ' i f 1 � - . �,� ,...r..�.i-.�"�•.,�-.�� 1�.-%t�` -J� ""''� � ,�. ��'�� ` � , � J. .�f+' _ �T`'{ �r---",l �`�r�.� ,+/l^, ' .. � lI � - - 4 , ��.. ,� •c•! ��F r � J ,� ��A -� ^��;� .�� . • `I f ��j � . _ t..�, , :�� ¢,a; h►,,� � � ��6 � � -, .4„ .p y. ey v,y�" p�, K «-,► � a,� �3"'^'� . ��{'�6v 6� � �o --� •i , " +,�„'�t� � , , , ' .,^ �V: �,� � .,,, _ v n � .n w ��tn,� � � . . . � .., � ��' � �� t �, - i�'- '.w �3 �. �; u� ;%' .�.?T� � , �"-s- �� `�,.y,� "r�v� ! e 4, U'� x �f .... �rrl� `!�11,� r i ^1T� �, ( � ,a � �,� r � ��. � � � �� '� �1 , : `��i � y Do, +. '� oo / e �`C>' � �: LW'�6 � �' � �� i:'� . - I � , �� ';�.'�'.jrrr. � v�� / �V . .� ` � ��i`VYr �n � \ c4� _ � , • N �bd` '�, . , _ � ,• � - 'J I ��. �M , . '� ' � ,�e_ . � . '9 � � e � �^^,^�� \ i � � � .. � � ` ,��, . ) w� r; '� \ � `tU1�v' , . ��t+ ' ^ ' � . UNDERPASS � � � :y�� e �' �a� ,��a. Phase Master Develop- Mainte- Cost A�endix � �a � , . Plan ment nance Estimate � � � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � �,q . 7 �`, l� �� ' ii �,., �� % 1 i�... M�` � � � � � �e9 � Y�� , � � y�y � �- � �,;�� !�� I ..��I�.. ,e '�°s� �� Y��t � I il� ' g°' �� t�= �s �� <.�t� �� a.. �.- �° �� e.. � � . � e - � _ � � � � � .� ��,� • . �r <,� _�. � ►a' � .� � �� .� �: .e� .�' ��.� ��, '3� *�,�� `e� 7� � * � �� a�� a, �i� a ��s"� �� ,�� ,� ��v I — � E -� "''��` ''�`;, � �;,,�� t� �� "� I � �• " � ,� �� , .•�� '� , ,. � ,r , , , �,�„ ��r e t �'�� "y� 1 � �'�..r.. +►. +�t ,��M ",R.. . •: .,.s , , ,,,.. 4� s°' ' . e ,; , �� <�,: - � � ` . � " � f , e�. .. � ��w,f ,► ,� - „��.» w�3�` "�;` -,,;�„��q��,'+1�°"� `„�t µ°". '��+��.� . .- � ,,;� < � $_�".� +"M` �v • e,yx � '�.�,� �"� �' �.� o � � . . w.w�['"': f ..: � ° '� e.. , . T+ W e , a:.. � �� .....�.r.a,. � �+ � .w, m� , ._ � a .��a�,. �,me.,.e °« .. ��z. ,� �.�.� .maw° .,�,. ° " � '�` .w�a �a,. . . �.. : �.�, � • .�:.r�,,..�,�y,,,r"1141r�".:'"` � �� ""'+111�.. "�^ �� wi:.T��'r� .�\ R� ,ir � � F. � • ..� ,+e.� � � ��. � A,,,�� a�: � � � � �. � z , `: � .� '`�` ..�,y�,.b�u. ' e. ' .. . � •' ' °- ° � a... --«� .. ....a.�„ e . . +�,y+ , �:. '`"�.'^`�'°y� . .,,,,..�,�,,.�- . �� . � ' . ..w. �,,'`±..r.�...'.� '� �� .« .. "�` �' "�° ' � . ,,, • �°� � y � � � � Y t ,,,. �` �� ,,�.,� ,�; �� -� �.., � ` �.�, ��.� �. ,�, .�+�.� . � �„ "+r+r�r .. � �"� ww,: ... . :�.. '��",° ,�°:� a'°. + :� .,,x� ' � ,.e-+Ne. " `.-a,�� - .� � +�a.:� . r . . e. �e. '� -� e� ... . . . , . ,�„'^ .... „r,...: ' ._. �, . ..,.,. �^a:.. ,. „ ... . � ,a::� . .,. .�.., .: � , � �` ,..,. �� , W w.r= +�n► � ,. ra+ � . „ .e 9m�3� Pa � . ' �� + .-.. - a r. °. ,. . e . ; Aw�. a°,a' �.., �'�x s ..� � , � � .. •, .. , � ,eA �e a -�,K=+�� . � . �.. ,„em_ .�. ,� „ . .�,..:.. .. ,. . .��.,.,r�. e ,.•e.., � -�� .. . . R - � . � .�� ,.< � ��» .»��a�-... � ... ��,,.,M ., ��»,,;;�'� .. � . n+r' '. �. � .�� . . � . ee - � I "� i� i, ' �.+" ° ""�e,. � w..�,...:� +as"'".„.�„ ` ^ �„. . �e�'�`�m y �-��-+�1�. ""!E' ...... .. � '`�;d 4. �� ._. ., ++� » « . ' a �. k_ . - .r .. � ,,,• : � . ,r�F�„" _ � . . . , �� .. , � �� e., �� .. . � e . ..� . � —...��_ . ";.... � ...� � � �„r.. -...,� '""�., ... . +M �'.:„:..�.,.,...� � , _ ..,.�*"'r ' � �� ° �� .� �.��e..�..e. I,: �� ,�°�a� �` :"M �r�F� � -� v �� . m,.., �� s-,� �� `�✓"�d�""�. ��M��Mr�� .. . .�. .e, � ,: � ,;�.: �x.�..... ..��* �w�� "" " � . .. .wMI�� . ,d�'� ,. � _ � , ,..z: " . w. wr^ :� , ,". .+�.�., O�i�� .......,..,,. " ,,,,�:..„ ,",. .. ..�� " .�d�.�. �; � ' ��' � � . .. .... �r" . , � A.�"� .... . ., .. .r. .,-p , . �� ae ?�. �.,.� ..,..e .,. �e..y,e y a a ` .,. . ..,.. : �v34.. .� . .. , � �_ -!► . a . ° �p w.,.. Nr,,,. � * �� ....r... ' ' �, �� , � .,p+xla.<y,�yM.. ,nyf1W � �r. ' . �,,a* . . � � �.. ,.,� � �,. �„ �� ,. _- � � .�'" '"s� _.""''" ` v. " ,+i�ll �� , � .�.�` ' �"y�� ..:� . � � �"" � MW��IN �+r, � � � ,.a,.. K. . �,+�^�`" ;e,:3. �.,,. ,�,,,m:.,^, ` � �� "r °° ,.�.�„w,z, , .,�. , „,��s, a"°,�,,,,,�.' ��. w.r,-,a.,� . ��"°``� ..,..��trrr _ .. , ... ..� � � � � � PROPOSED USE AREA3 The master plan can best be understood by examining a diagram of the proposed use i areas. Conceptually, the master plan for Como Park is divided into �he following use areas: 1 . Zoo/Conservatory � 2. Buffer Qreas 3. Picnic Areas 4. Recreation Areas � 5. Lake Area The proposed use areas have been slightly modified to reflect the planning criteria r (see Analysis, map 8). Wherever possible, barriers were removed and similar use areas adjacent to each other - such as the picnic area - were unified. Other use areas are still separated by either roadways or natural barriers , but whenever ` possible these use areas have been linked together by a system of bike and pedestrian links. This linking of ��solated areas provide for the first time a unified park. s f • � r � i � � � Phase Mainte- Cost � ; Develop- nance Estimate APPendix men# 27 COIUIO PARK MASTER PLAN i � ' � U f � L—� ' ' RP �R A�E. PROPOSED USE AREAS � � � ° Q ° ° "'� � �oa�° 'p � � o b o o '�'_'-'-�`~ � Butfer areas i i ..' ,II .�l = __- . Q - �.��F�R . �.� � a . . .. i J =- 'k , " �i i � ', --�ff- d d� �0�:� ol;o��lpp o,00 � d s o e� d�c e p � o 0 0 0� Unifying bike andAw pedestrian links i •n •v . a,', o-P�_o � 0000�000 . u_ - - Q— o X o o- ko- �-��o - . o- o ... � � � 4 �� d'a o0 o a d o 4'd''a�oe oo /� Unchanged use areas 1 0_ o � �r o o<w i w� /.�� 8 � Q � G V'tt� o= '.P� ol� � 'a O . � Q" a � � � 'b � '� $`g i p'e T °' , ! � �o�oc a Redefined use areas �i � " o 00 0:0' oa ' YT AVE. o o� , o F. y i `` �r o00 � a � � �� i- 000��bood o00 � �,d o� � _�t� � f f w r Hr�wa �o o Q- _..�"�.�� I p 9a 4:�Pa� �i�,olo� 0 0�0 olo � �Ji�.� �a � �� o d b o� ialc o- • , � o 0 0 • � / / (� �� c o000 0 0;0000000 NE RA NA Q � � d O o •o- — o �, . . i , / � �. � , o p n � 0 oQ o o U000 o _ . � W :� � L� � _ i 4 E O o- il � � _ (� � _ t__ � _�— O � Y f ( ��-�. '� .. 00 00 0000000�� ' 1 ^ ° � � I � . ar �. � _c. - � a . .. � � °_ ..:o. o , ',_ ,. i _ __ � o00 00 0 00 0 0 '� ��,'Q ;I. C , �)� o o . � �Vrl� 'o 0 0 � M1 � � ��o Q i [ � � -.�� a.t . r ��aJ�, �_GiotF f.z�-trs� :� oo d a� o0 0,e�� 1RLINGTON �'�, �--- —` —. „c , �.;AR41N.�TONo., �r � �� - �E,� r��oo io o a o 000 . _ o ° , tG'- �`� � ' � � � � o�o 0 0 -$ �� ay.� -� �. � _ _ � � . o�� o0o a a T"" / , � �. , �� ,� ° o ♦ S L �\ . �� fQ OIOOlOiO� O O �,;O�O'.OI000 O-- \/l\�� ! 00 OOd00 � O T-"�. �O� W = � �� 1 'LI I I: 0 � 0010',O pO�C � OA �i � ( �. � � 1 L .o= _ . � � i 1�lUILU�NO^� � ��,.�I�� o F o Q o0000 � �� .. . . � � � ;6 �o'io�o�o� �ololol°�o _ o �.�: � —�-�v°�,� � �+ - ,iEw A �s ` �°'o�o'a o�o�� a� � ' �� '�� ° 0o J o _L o ��oba� �� rr- o oi� ,. ``' �J o� ��M�IDW�' �' oao �' a l° oo< O�CK �� r^�� -I o o� O � � �� G o — � � 0 0 .- � O�� O �' O O— F O O � I � G _,� O_�L O. O ��oioi0i°o ��ii i,�,; �:s. srnuN � �� YCp._. ° ° '"- ° - i+a�ss 9 �t -o 0 1 s, —o o ; ? '(E/PED t� A£ I ERP�SS � y�0� MENT$ �s�`'� o � o�' � wcKNC lCX1lf.�YC0.S ricmcKx�c '° °— i~� � NE5T1100M3/ PAVLION �� , °� ST\ .A r:g� CONCESSIONS� � �b'y*�, t. � o,e�p-'�E_y � lJ1Y�--�� 3 � BALLFIELDS �.a�� L _ �___ � y'__'.S— � o � I �� , a ��o � a , o� o<,� ooi� �}Li � �� W� A!'PA� � n. o J �qi o 0 �� o� o �� ARY - S 0 0 o O 'TeHHis�r,"c � o �(,�a °� o c o� O,°Q o � � ,r — I I ...,...,.. �COM �i�)� o�tl 4 ... � o . � ✓ COY o �� -� o o _ r O �M Y CWNTY r� � o { L/ � o � • NE SOCETY �1�_� LI O I� �YP� o J F 4 r o {� T�O, � COmV AYC:P � / 1 O � � �.F.G� . ' � { � o.� o _.1=-' " -, I � rI �� II {[l_ �,. � �.� LJ ll[9TIIOOMSi f. _ L �1 R R J �� o-� ' � o ��r��i ��-L��o� . O++'� � ESSqNS � �'' o ° — sz. -' , ` _ ' n �#_� iF'--5=' � o a- � ` : �_;�- :�:y � a - T o�€. , o 0 , �] 4 � -= _ � s� - �;' �t, , L gp� ; Q o- , �'��_ � - :-. -- _ ��i �:' �� ' �� , ,.1�+w _ o `\ ^pQ- rl o_ 3 6b .�o a � 0"�'�� 090� ��. o _ >. � _ — ` � C� � ` � ��'I1 {I '' � - �\ ��— . - � -_�� • 'i 4 �O�ol � r � '� O V` l. ��O �. q `rI� '� O � f. J t � 6 0 � �p II \. ` �--.� -` . � � D � I. a � � ��=i __ j/ i . �I� -,�� `� O�a U � I00 �� " '— -- . � T G , l . � a — __ . . . i ___�J � � �3 � ° IF 4 o o' a L u '�6 I �DER6URC�� i DR�V . �� Jr.O ��.� a 6j�� G G_o � 6 E-o o rrb �� - , ` � f��:�`� ��4�� — � . k d o 0 0 � o eoo o a o ao i � , . _ � � . � y _ _ X - � � '0 -- -- �. �a �-�w.� � . . I � o« � .�:;:i � 400 1000 J o q� o ooeoo �. � �,I o eo r_ ,.' �' .,�; 0 'r _-- _ �/J ._ �- _ _ , _ '6 000�0�0 00 00 OOr �}►� � a , THE MASTER PLAN FOR COMO PARK The unique character of Como Park will remain undisturbed. The memories, the � views , the "special" places will be undisturbed or enhanced. The demands on the park resources by the park user will be reduced by the dispersal of park activities over larger areas of the park. ' The lake shoreline will be designed to enhance the enjoyment of the pedestrian and bicyclist. The congestion will be eased through simplification or separation , of circulation wherever possible. In addition, the lake area will be united with other areas of the park by a system of underpasses and pathways which separate the pedestrian/bicycle from the automobile. The traffic circulation problems have been carefully modified to reduce the � impact of the automobile on the park and the surrounding neighborhoods. The access routes to the park remain and have not been eliminated. In addition, no expectation � of a heavy traffic burden on the neighborhood is -projected. Parking will be in off-street lots to reduce and/or eliminate on-street parking in the park. An internal transit system will provide a greater flexibility and eliminate the need � for additional surface parking lots in the zoo/conservatory and lake pavilion areas. Long neglected and heavily used facilities in the park will be either completely replaced or restored. In addition, existing monuments and other familiar site � features will be restored. The existing park boundaries will remain the same with the exception of a strip of � land s�uth of P�cMurray Field proposed for acquisition. This property would be acquired for additional parking. � � � � , � _ : � asa �� da �� @ 5 ��=�� Phase s ��'�� q �a�'�g�� Mainte- Cost Develop- Appendix � �a+ � �� ment nance Estimate awa � ��a d�� ,n��a�e 2s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � , � p � �� ` �� a �� '�� s�,' .r,� �� y�� ` ��`c �� '� x'° � gra��"� 4 s � s - : > �a�� ; '��"� �',�ue. ��'�' ��'� mfi�` f, ,,�; �k„ �r ;}, r.9��+�sf&d sy�"� ,� ��F � �� '�. � � �� ,� � �� `�` �,� t�' �? �� a � ��3��, � �"� `� � � „,�, ��x .d.w...�..i ��_.:�� ,t j �.':�-�{- � ,-�� • -;� �; �� 1 �° � � �,P�; ; =r�"; ;�� r �t . . , �`, r.,.• ;N��.;<;, P �- �. ;� ➢ � .�� ,: �.r �` g�� t�. ,r� ��, ;, �� `� ��" � ��'�� ;�� , °" _. �. .: ., v*r . �' p ` . '�S �,.k_". .. .; _.. : `"". _,e;:.., 'v. .:,.; . '.n7�. ..�... » r,. ,. <::.::.�_ � '��" w�� ' �:� �. � • �, , : , Y .� t . � �� ,�^�:�' . ,. s. �' � � ., , ��. �M^��; �� ,��.. �'s Xe:. . �S, , � � ., v � ,'. _ < . .. _ #d „� & F � e � � _ . ,. ... .. -" k�� ' ,� . < 4 . � _ �. �. ,.}. ,. . , ..; . .. „ ,,; . , ,;;. �� .�4� �,`' a �p �� v, , �� t � � _ 7f�"4'�� .w* r, 'z" _ � �v k '�d�a'� �y�� }p '�'.�-��y� � ��rt �� , � t �� '� aa +r � '� s.'�;„,. -!c; �� ° � � �+�*R��,"4.�W� `°.C.;,. � �,,� .� ��.+� � ��,,. �, � � �� ' i� f3 !$ L �j) � .'Z,�. �` , 7 P t. �� .`� ?$ � �� $ �,l E: 3'�:�-m , � .§� � � v . �,x �p f.. b'� � �� ,'4� '� �-� � '�,a`?�'#��. f +,i �,% '.�i� .: p g� �.� � �, z�' � d 4 ,��,,.: r { i ' � '�' z R� t � '� �'+s' � �" �* : � a�.�. �L „� s �§ ^�,� '�'� � �,� �� ' � � � � �� a,��" � : �r ��" v �- � w�v;�. �' ��. : .. �;�g, ��'"'+*'� r. ��'�°� � � ��^ { � 4.' ,�` i,�, '� � 3 ..�h3., �, €:,k4� r, r . a.^� �'"'k '�`� f �� ..E � "�#�s g� � . �` � �, ,„k �� 7 f �E� � , " 1 r : ._ . 4 � �y� ��.�`t'�'�.��'v�r .,�?„�, ' S. �� ,� ' �,� `" . . �' ' '� , � . l ,� .: �'t"°".'.�� , 'k�, '- C r�.� �� 2 :� � �-'a,� � �� G � �''g� �n r � � �� `� P�" z�^� ��" :r'��t+, s� �� t ��'�,'�,'`��,��,� r'" �'� "� s�, :`�` �J�! `�, @. �.,��d� �� % �a d � � � `' � �� s .s a"� �'t��m� '�"�� '�,'�i `x:'� ..�S. .�fi� � �� _ �,} � � ,+'�� r��,� �� •, �� .� a'�"`�� ,..� try'� t„�', r�:n.,5�¢ �t . , " .r,,�,"��,. °�T ��°�. . � , a �.' � �.�� s^ �..�.._ � �� r_ � ��_�� .�:.v �.� �', :� ;53 �� "'� ,��. � z,,� �-•.F . � ' �� , . �� . � � �. . .. ,a � },�� ' ACQUI.STION The master plan for Como Park requires the acquisition of a single parcel of land ' from Burlington Northern. This 2.87 acres of land is just south of McMurray Field, between Jessamine Avenue and the railroad tracks. (See map, opposite) This land is needed to supply adequate parking for not only McMurray Field, but also, for fringe parking for the zoo/conservatory. In addition, a portion of this parking � will be used for the park's maintenance operations. It was determined after conversations with the Park's Maintenance staff, that if additional parking could be provided adjacent to the maintenance shops , existing parking space could be � utilized for storage. Acquisition costs for this parcel is estimated at $255,000 by the City's Valuation ' Division. (See Appendix D, Page 1 ) � � � , � � � � � � P�� e � a�� s� � �� g�� :�� a� Phase , a � � Mainte- Cost � �� T Develop- q �� nance Estimate Ppendix � �:� a � � � �� ment � ��a9e� , � �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 28 � � . � ' � , ' � �_ - .. � —��---a---- - -- . �� -- ` ` _ ___..._ __�_.. ._._. - '"T � / , � , � ...., y ; ! � � --�_. J Exrx�w ne.e a►.krN�... � � , � � P.000..a rtow�r«Nra An. � ; C� I� , - y . PS OP � S �An�Te M AeauMW �� ■ � � �� McMURRAY FIE�D � �'i : .�. '------------ ------ ------ - ----------- '%'" s � . . S rr r�w ..... Y ;�� `J . y ; :�:�Y�11Y: �1 � '�Mr.M ":: y .. + . ..,, " ''.. ..': ' '.:_ . J 'f -S.�My. . V ::;.... ,. .f.:M:w�.�r�F�...»�fw �...la�:4K iW.�1Y�;2,st'w!ijvw.rr'4l��.�.r:...�Y.wi►:i��.vr��..F:�+4..�c1�.i►�w�:lvr. 3Far�v`Li�c'y`C'r,�►ri►r........ Ml _ i •�.�. �`_—._.��...._ _. . _��--- � _ .--�--+--«=r=�—s==�-':- .---.—.- -Uf1L�fiG'YWV'NORtNERR RAtLNOA�. - -�----•---•-- ,... .,_..� � -. - •-----•=•--•--�—•-^-•--�-�---•.__.._...._ , 2600' ' I ACQUISTION � � , � ' Phase Mainte- Cost ; Develop- nance Estimate APPendix ment � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � MASTER PLAN COMPONENTS The Master Plan for Como Park consists of many different components. Each one � is an activity or use area that makes up a critical portion of the master plan. The following are more detailed descriptions of the proposed changes. � LAKE COMO Lake Como Comprises 72 acres of the 451 total acreages of Como Park. The lake is the most important resource of the park. The urban setting of Lake Como attracts � large numbers of people putting a tremendous pressure on this resource. The shoreline, the lake related activities, and the water quality are all interrelated and affect the condition and enjoyment of this resource. , LAKE SHORE . Due to intense use, the shoreline is the most vulnerable portion of this resource- � Automobile traffic, bicyclists, pedestrians all compete for a limited amount of spaee around the lake. The goals and objectives for the park call for "improved and expanded use of available space adjoining Lake Como". The goal is to reduce � conflicts by modifying existing pathways and roadway alignments , establishing buffers between circulation routes when possible, and providing pathway amenities. Such amenities include signage, benches , lighting, and in general a less congested � feeling. Also, additional landscaping will be installed where needed to enhance the experience of reinforce existing buffers. LAKE ACTIVITES � Activities on Como Lake range from paddle boats , canoes, and row boats during the summer months to speed skating in the winter. The Como Park Master Plan does not � recorrnnend any changes in these activities. The future Como Lake Restoration project, however, could improve the quality of the lake to a condition where recreational fishing from the shore may be possible. - , LAKE RESTORATION The total restoration of Lake Como is not a part of this Master Plan. However, ' certain proposed changes will have a beneficial affect on the water quality. For example, when the roadways near and around the lake are changed, the street drainage which presently runs i�nto the lake will be diverted. Likewise, large paved areas � adjacent to the lake will be drained away from the lake. In addition, erosion along the shoreline will be checked. � � � Phase Mainte- Cost ." Qevelop- nance Estimate APPendix ` ment 30 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ! � � . , ' , � ' �� . � ��' � �� `�r� -�� ,---�� , ,...r�.� .�� -r� � � � �-_..��, � � �°��- �_,� � -�J . , � � �„ � _. � � o . � � ' I ' ` f;� ,I.�i i � . , ,'! , �', p� +e I ' d r, � ';. , � �u � ' I'�� ;' J �`I'I '�: . 1 ��b� �I �f � �li � �� s� , �� V, I ��: I � r I' � f� Y . .i ' �I .�; ! � Y -� , 1 � Existing Roadway Width � � Lakeshore Pedestrian Buff�r BiCycle Buffer Propoaed One- Path Path way Roadway � PROPOSED LAKE COMO SHORELINE � � , , , . Phase Mainte- Cost . , Develo�- nance Estimate APPendix ment ■ COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 r LAKE PAVILION The restoration of historically significant structures in Como Park is one of the ' goals of the Master Plan. The lakeside pavilion is a structure that has long been associated with pleasant park experiences and has been the gathering point for many ' activities. The complete structrual renovation of the lake pavilion and the realignment of Lex- ington Parkway away from the pavilion area will provide expanded opportunities for � outdoor events, and will provide a pleasant setting for the restored pavilion. In addition, the added space wil.l provide opportunities for new pedestri�n and bicycle pathways, and more convenient parking lots and charter bus drop off points. � The lakeside Ravilion area will be served by two parking lots with each lot containing a bus drop off area. Convenient bus parking will be available across Lexington near ' the existing golf maintenance building. The park shuttle system will serve this area and make the parking deck available for special events. � �,�� 4 � .,..� �� „ , , �* � �� ,. �. ,r��f��t� ��,. ��, � „ ��, '..',M`�� k.. �':�y.,�, � �� ,�� Photo 5 - Como Park ,�, . Lakeside Pavilion, ca. 1900 `� - �--- � � � a�� Phase �� a � � �� Mainte- Cost � g ,' Develop- nance Estimate APPendix " �� °�� a ment �� a d � � � � ''�� : e; eee_s :e e. e e..= a eA �..ea .� �a�..,.e ae;�e�.. .eeP , .:e. �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 31 � /I/ ,�� j��' >i'! �u� /f��i��'7 � �1��,� �y .,I�.-�i�;�e L�;�.ti�- �'� �:� ►f � Ir i\7 ►��i��Ar►�l_i1��:: .� -.�1 �� .-�,'!,I!.I/� i �'.� /iI ��;�� •I �ir,4:;'�/�� ,`��.n i��'�I I.�!A;'�` ��. ' ��/j �/1� �� `,i � �� . ,, �.:,.. '�'� '/ � .�� ♦ � L-:'i`/� �9��'�w�I� .� .��•�/! ��'� �I, I�� ► \ �� '`' 1/`i �� `�y �� r♦ ��i.1��i-j � ..1 � �I, �� r .� �� l . +`�f � :��'� ,. ' . � � �7^��A "�� ,i� !.` ��,.,� r,� , �!�,,= y .' . .� e��/� �.�I. � �� 7�,:\ �,'t� n � C• �' ♦�Cr.I� � t� 1;: ✓ /,� al�i� �� i � - � � �A� �� ♦ �?' . (f�� ;��:,1�, '�:%��'��;. � `'`�iw.��! ' ��'., ., .� <\ir�:: 1l�,�►�'�'��.,1 i � +'f�'�\ �il� ',�• .�~` � _ ` ,.� �� ,?!► �� j, � i�\ �; � � ��, ,` , � .t i,l i'� � �I�� /�G— %�\��=`��u1�� _ ��,�� ,�� i • 1 t`,� �{..�'�°��1; � , /� ' �,� �.!;�i ��r��r� = � ..i`�'C`�� > � � �'��o � '` ��'� ��./ � ;y j ' I�:�. ,i � � �j'1+ �8�� "' f j �'-�� ,.. 1 � �� ,}i � i \ , � �� - - - , — �� y� ' � �� +i •� ,�� ;� t � �,_ �,�;' � -.-;� .�� ,� �'t:.i �,,:; . � ' ♦ ` •,i �� .. � � ��:� � �Y, ' ' . ,� � ��i. � . . � � �� •---^'__UIiIIIWlllfq��d�N' �� v� �, ��,J�p/ r, �' ��T 'f j�_�,°r . _ � �- �;,�� /1��11�►'�� (� � / i� „�� . � ��a , .,�/�1�'��'�� 9�� .�1�,"'�-� o7r��,;.,�� ',�� '��a11"��"A, �l'"�� rV"npi'��Itl��IIA � ` , i?�iIII�K��,l�'��I� ' I�uui�� 1 . �l �� '� L�:' �,_� 't��7...�i �� .,�. �f"r _�`y'��-_�+►w��. /I��A��li � ,. L� �'�r � � _ �:�" -��'�'� �;i=.��°-- _';._�=-;,;�y�� .� ,'IF �'-�,, 5► , � ,� �� - .. :��i�j �r�,��,� ;� , _ ��.� ., ;, ,;; � , ,� � � .� � . ;�h,� �:i � ��• � s ,��►� � ,��' —�a.,l,-��-�;'1�-��a�iL �.-: � �V',L� �� ,p' ��'�� , � �i� '��._.�y�,��i�! �I�, ��'�� ,'�� INQ � -��r► � �� !, ; �!��i��i,,��►;��.�� .►-�.�.� , i � � i �� ! �� ,,,, I I I � Fil� �I�, � � � ,�`; II�I� .�� II�L ,� `� � . � �,�� -'' � � ' �,..,, �r ,,\v _ `''"7,• � �� '�- �'I� �,s �,,i,q '�I,u. �� i. I�� ,'„y. ��,l�Pi ` ��I��il'��Itr . �'�' �� + ,; ,;��R�I�t� ., ,r� �5s +�I�(��ji� � ,. � ;► ��f, � ; i ' �, � � . � . ��` �� Master - • � • . � . . - . �� Plan �ve� � � � - • • ' � ' � ' ' ' , PICNIC AREAS ' One of the most popular activities at Como Park is picnicking. In fact, more picnics are scheduled at Como Park than at any other St. Paul Park with 220 large group picnics scheduled in 1980 alone. Several large corporations schedule � their annual company picnics at Como; many times up to 6,000 people are in attendance at one time. During a typical picnic season over 60,000 people attended scheduled events of this type. � Therefore, a goal was established to create a more functional picnicking area for Como Park, separating the large scheduled group picnics from the small , informal family picnics. The family picnic area will be served by picnic shelters, while � the group picnic area will be served by a picnic pavilion. Additional "blanket" picnicking can be accommodated with the changes proposed around the lake. Picnic areas will be located close to open areas for activities such as baseball and � volleyball . Parking lots adjacent to the picnic areas will be provided for convenience and safety. AMUSEMENTS � The amusement rides contribute an experience that has led to Como's reputation of � being a totally diversified park. The Metropolitan Council 's Recreation User Survey indicates that a picnic outing usually ends with a visit to the amusement area and/or the zoo/conservatory, and to better serve this need, the amusement area will be � relocated further into the park and will be more closely associated with the picnic areas. The amusement area design will strive to create a pleasant family atmosphere. The � sound levels , the size of the amusement area , and the variety of rides will be negotiated by the City's Park and Recreation Division and the concessionaire. The Advisory Commitee has suggested that the motorized amusement rides be selected to � appeal to those who are 10 years of age or younger. MASTER PLAN INTERACTION � The master plan for Como Park does not represent the entire planning process for Como Park. Due to the variety and complexity of the issues, the master planning process for the park was broken down into three separate and distinct master plans : � the Park, the Zoo, and the Conservatory. Each master plan is the product of a separate planning process with each having their own citizen's advisory committee providing input. � Considerable interaction occurred between each group. One person from each committee was a member of the other corr�nittee and reported on the progress. Frequent mini- presentations were conducted by one committee for the other two. In addition, the � project coordinators for each master plan held meetings to discuss problems and issues of mutual concern. The following is a brief explanation of how the various master planning processes interfaced with each other: ' Phase �� ° = Mainte- Cost � �� ,�� ." , Develop- nance Estimate APPendix ,��t��;e=�' ment COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 32 � I � � ,., / , � �� q'��/y �� , r: �, ,1 ' � ' - -", '` , , %l��i►�i!'/l� f�+//'� /1,�� k�� n _ 1� / �. ,�� l � �� F,�/�y' �/ �f�� j �' _ � ♦ /� f� � �'��- �?'�•.. �':+j*a.!�',!1� r� � '^ I'�, ' , , � �''r�'//+6 S /f� "`''^'�'111F t �.��' ' �A �� ,.r �16�� '�� V,��'//� �� "�,.� ��..�°" -t—��3 �`=� �� '�� /�'!�h�.� �.�,��1:*1� G'" `��, j fs�ii�i��is��ts:�'' � ,} .� ��( r;'`�j��'�r ''� �, �. �' .� ��''*�►�\�� .•• � � �A��'^I� -� . � - �� ,� , +�:�a,� � �,�- �S ��,jI ',r"�1�'II 1 4, I, �� , : �IL��I� i � �f��. ` ,ti __.�. --" �}i ��`1• �� ' +p� -!1"'� ry � � �� [` f� I � °��.t��l. '�1'� �J �: �.► �'�i i, ' ,. ' —J � ` � ► I � � � .�. 'v�� v � 4,��t � �; � � .'!; i �-�a�%�I=� � .i► �� t;; _ll ,�,,� � 1 :.� '�rr,---1i �hat�� _ ,/ f�� .' � � ;� '� r.�l/,�fik y � ��'�� j/.�'j �,�:��1�. � �IN'� .�%,'/:� f \ . . '� �� Q .�a;� � � i^ •, � �// � � i , �:V.�i • �RY� �//11� �!� ��.' %j� �• � 1 ��1�,� :.A'�">' '��' �� ' _ � i� � ��I r `\v�:" � �. �a .. � ..t`. ��il,l,� ♦ ,.�:V•�•y \ � � i � � .� � �� 1-� '� '��1�'I,l � � � � � � i7 i �r� V�� : i �j 1 ��(� �� /y � ��;� �\�� , � � ,.�j,l\I�� 1►�� i.� �� /� i 1.1 �.� ;r�� ie!�`� ��i p�.� ��,�`� ��w.,'�,y,_i��y�,,��ii��!\ ��r f��"i ';,1' , �`��j0 � ) �..,� � � �. . � . �... �'��.�TiIA�.T• � % ti �;�,� ;� � �� ,' ,:��,,r/'i ,� �:;� , ��;•`, �„_. �' �1l� •� s ' ��Ir• ♦�� i— ^ 1►,ju M:' / • i�� i) �J1 � � �..-..e UQ:CJ1 ,i�. 1�1.�' `� ��'�'. �: ��,., ��, ., 'i/°',�i�k,� � � �^� i��. ,�, �� ,� �'i1� ��.� •r` '"►'� ` s � � l�. � � ` .��. : ' r . .� �/- ' �` � �� \I� � 1 �% 1 � � � � COMO ZOO MASTER PLAN The Como Zoo Master Plan of 1978 has established the physical limits and the � character of the zoo. However, the relationship of the Zoo Master Plan and the Park Master Plan required that specific items such as the parking deck, pathways, zoo security, buffer protection, and service access be examined in detail to ensure � compatibility. The result is an aesthetically pleasing and functional edge joining the zoo development and the park. i COMO CONSERVAT+ORY MASTER PLAN No other structure or site represents the essence of Como Park as much as the � conservatory. This facility has long been a popular feature of the park and the City, and attracts visitors from throughout the country and around the world. The Como Park Planning Committee has studied the relationship of areas and activities ' around the Conservatory and how they relate to one another. The City established a Conservatory Planning Committee similar to the Como Zoo Design Committee. This Committee has been meeting since May, 1980 and is developing a master plan based on an indepth analysis of the physical needs and programs of the Conservatory. � In addition, the Conservatory Planning Committee has been working closely with the Como Zoo Design Committee and City staff on the development of a resource center � that will become the main entrance and link to the zoo and conservatory. This facility will serve as an educational and information center for visitors and will be easily accessible from parking and picnic areas. � � �,� , �ue �� u ' � � � �+ro:, 3 ,' � +°.Nr ��,. i��,W.�,.�� li � r: ' -- q� — � lll�ir�� .��,�� '�. �`��'' � ��. � ,� � a � .�i;i+J' ��1i9�� i �I.... r �"a vr� Photo 6 - Como Park �� Conservatory and Pond, ' � � 1931 ,,- �� s: � .. ��,T.�� . . .....�� ..��.� ,��..:• �,,. , F�� : Phase �� Mainte- Cost � � �� Develo �°� � �� ° � � � p nance Estimate APPendix : � �� . � � � � � � � � � � ��5� ment �� K� �� e �� =a� � ��.� ��_� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 33 � .� �q�1T � 1i .,� �`�`�,�� I �..�'� � i ',� � ��`,�, ' �I � ,' \ ..�� ' % :�, . � /�. . . �„�1 I, .,�Z ��..�• � .� �t � �.,....�I � y �i� , ii , P�� _ �+, .;.. , � \\• � ,,�-��.,�, ,� �1 ' h� `� �'' ��i '` '�', �� 1 � (�'j^' / � �� \� �I I� (/'[��.�I� I A� �1 �I�i� � �� . ` � �� • � � �'/�� l��v� � `� �, �`. , �''; �� t�, ��.t�►�,� '� 1 - \ j 7� , / ��' � � � � �;, ��, 1.11'i'�� %1�`, � ;� ,, . ' � � �� i� ��N �`r'3' _v� ��'� '1� /_ ' I 'a , `�It 1 . �,� � '� � �r, ,� �,. ,`' l�� ''�/,� ��C� •�z�. �I � ~ �` `a,,�;'� 1�: �;:•:�� ` �!T+ � \�i '�4�;+ � \ � '� � �3i!',��, tl ' �r i/' �i;�i`,�:"•"'"j /.:� �I -Z��" �� g 1,1 �1�`�t� - ��.';�+i Ii • �. �,j� i 1• � �� C��1' � . - `S' �� — �� L'i�� '�� ' � �� '�" ��„r� ��r.{ ;��'�1 �r�"�*'��il -� ,��..��z � .��%:� ��„ ��, � �� 1��.��-;��'�� 1'� , �r f �7 ,i,i. y� i y .L��1��I�N�IIf � j,a - -�4 � • \ , .� t. , �Ill� � �, .lT, � , h h . `C' v ��h��11��'�_, �� ^X ._ -� a,� s 7ft", ,�.k M. �:.� . �� `�� ,, p � ., ra��! ��`�� I :. �� .'�� ,�� .�Uy�,�,�� +, .�+��'� ��: � �#��:�,��)�� l� ,f ��/,�'y� �� `' �� /� 'r Il /I •`�� I�l�'�•_ �,,►�� , .� J�� :r�j f,F '� �I�� N J� ��IY��T �L. ,i � � ��, ► r � �i �� '� N ' � �►� .-. ��i �i�� F 'i�� '�T � � � �'; � ��—� . �� „j c� ��'. � ��_ �I '_ ��w..� _ ',i ��/ i"�� _ � '�� "�`"i�� '�t y� 1: �� ';�y�+�' �.,�,� �� . �� ,�.._� ;� �I�r�Mi� #� �,,.,., II� e�� , ` �„U \ 1�' .� � � r��,�� . � ��i. �I u . —�s >�,w:- iir-.j.a;ll`,'#�> a � � �. � �� L ' �� , �__� � � � � I '� J '�— ��..,��!� v � . � � . • • Master • , � - - . . � . . - . • . + Pian - � � � � - . - - . � GOLF COURSE � CLUBHOUSE With the exception of expanding the clubhouse parking lot, based on the R.B.A. study, � and the redesign of the fifth hole as necessitated by the rerouting of Lexington, the golf course and the clubhouse are not addressed in the Park Master Plan. The Como Lake Restoration project might include the construction of holding ponds on the golf � course as well as modifications in the storm sewer that crosses the golf course. For these reasons, this area is not scheduled for redesign at this time. Even if the course is not redesigned in the future, however, the clubhouse is ! inadequate and should be razed and rebuilt. Relocation of the clubhouse closer to the ski area should also be considered so this facility could be better used during the golf and ski seasons. � POOL/TENNIS FACILITIES � The recreational function of the pool complex and te�nis court area will remain the � same with the exception of added pathways which will link them to the rest of the park. The pool , which is in need of repairs, will be upgraded. The R.B.A. parking study determined that the present 100 car parking lot is adequate � for projected use of this area. .� .� - � ��.:�, � �•<- d � +a-�y^? a,^. _ qF�._. � ;�� a� � ��^- � �� 1t� �' ,�.. � `�f � � ��^! �I� �. ;�^". � ,., .. ,,<,< � _r� �,==.. � ,-.�� ;" Photo 7 - Excedra at , Como Park, 1929 � �x - � � �� A: �� , °�� ` � Phase � �� ` Mainte- Cost �� ; Develop- nance Estimate APPendix � � � ' ment � �� s ��A� �� r�m, x �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN , 34 � � McMURRAY FIELD � McMurray Field will remain an athletic field complex. During development, this area will be upgraded to improve it for softball , baseball , football , hockey, and possibly soccer. ' The present relationship of McMurray Field to the rest of Como Park is thought to be minimal because of the location of the area (the far southern e�ge) and because i of present programming for league sports. Adding t� this feeling is the lack of vegetation and flat topography. Although McMurray Field ,�ill remain programmed �or league sports, it is felt that some things can be done to enhance the relationship � between this area and the other portions of the park. This plan calls for multi- level vegetation to be planted in areas around McMurray Field, helping to integrate this arPa into the rest of the park. The reduction of Como Avenue as a through-street will also aid in producing a sense that McMurray Field is more of a part of Como Park. ' This integration is important to the concept of fringe parking discussed in the parking section. � The primary problem with the existing fields is that the softball and baseball fields are undersized for adult play, presenting a poorly organized and sometimes hazardous situation. To increase the field dimensions, the number of fields will be decreased � and rearranged, with the fields lighted for evening use. The existing steep slopes around a major portion of McMurray Field makes access to the fields by participants and spectators difficult. Staircases will be built � leading from parking lots to the fields to make access easier. Also, v�here appro- priate, bleachers will be built into the slopes for spectators. In addition, another restroom building will be built toward the west end of the site along � Jessamine Street. The amount of existing parking available for McMurray Field, both on and off street � is grossly inadequate. When the ballfields are being used the area around them is extremely congested with parked vehicles, some actually parked on private railroad property. ' Parking requires a very large amount of space which cannot be taken from the present field areas. The area with the most potential for development into parking borders the southern edge of McMurray Field, and will be purchased from the Burlington � Northern Railroad. Related to the need for parking is concern for safety at the intersection of ' Lexington Parkway and Jessamine Streets. The existing railroad bridge and street grades make visibility very poor. This intersection will be moved north along Lexington Parkway approximately 100 feet from its existing location to increase traffic visibility. Jessamine Street will remain a two-way street. � ' �� Phase � e t�� . �i�� s . - Mainte- Cost ��,��, � , Develop- Appendix �� `�� ment nance Estimate e..,s e„ e. e e e. �;e ee e � 35 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � COMO PARK USER CAPACIT�S The following chart illustrates the summer and winter user capacity for Como Park. � This process aids in determining the existing number of people who use each facility as well as aids in determining the impact of the proposed master plan. The factors that were used to determine peak capacity and daily turnovers were , derived fr`om the Minnesota State Comprehensive Outdoor Plan and actual attendance records. , The only projected increase in capacity for Como is the bike and pedestrian pathways. This results from a more extensive pathway system throughout the park. Presently � 1 .6 miles of pathways exist, when complete, over 7.8 miles on new pathways will exist in Como Park. PROJECTED ' RESOURCE PEAK DAILY PEAK CAPACITY fACILITY QUANTITY CAPACITY TURNOVER CAPACITY INCREASE Summer use _ Outdoor Concerts 1 2,000 1 2,000 --- � Plcnicking *General High Density 29.8A 1,192 2 2,384 --- (40 Percons/Acre) *General Low Density 1.OA 10 2 20 --- � (10 Persons/Acre) *Group Picnicking 13.BA 462 1 462 --- (33.5 Person/Acre) � Lakeside Pavilion *Water Bike Rentals 25 25 7 175 --- � *Bicycle Rentals 100 100 1 100 --- Bike Paths � (45 Persons/Mile) 1.6M 72 10 720 1,670* Pedestrian Paths , (90 Persons/M91e) 1.6M 144 5 720 2,560** Conservatory 1 260 18 4,680 --- � Zoo 1 14,000 1 14,000 --- , Swimning Pool 1 232 3 696 --- TOTALS 19,812 25,957 � Pleasure Driving through Como Park , 15,175 cars x.1.5 persons/Car � 22,763 Persons Phas p_ Mainte- Cost a endix � ,' Develo nance Estimate pp ment 3s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � � , r PROJECTED RESOURCE PEAK DAILY PEAK CAPACITY � FACILITY QUANTITY CAPACITY TURNOVER CAPACITY INCREASE Winter use General Skatin9 150 5 750 (125 Cars @ 2/Car) ' National Speed Skating --- 3,000 1 3,000 --- � Tobo9ganing & Sliding 25A 1,000 2 2,000 --- (40 Persons/Acre) � Sled Dog Races 1 10,000 1 10,000 --- � Winter Carnival Activity 1 2,000 1 2,000 --- Conservatory 1 260 16 4,160 --- � � Zoo 1 2,652 1 2,652 --- fSkiing 45A 135 2 270 --- (30 Persons/Acre) � TOTALS 17,197 20,752 � ' , � � � Phase Mainte- Cost ' .' Develop- nance Estimate Appendix ment I COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 37 � ! MASTER PLAN - OPERATIONAL DETAILS ' Operating Responsibility - The City of Saint Paul , Department of Communi�y Services , Division of Parks and Recreation has maintenance and operational responsibility for � Como Park. � Park Hours - General hours for the park will be from sunrise to 11 p.m. Specific ' facilities such �s the zoo, conservatory, and concessions will have varying hours of operation. Si'gnage - The signage through out Como Park will be consistent with the standardized � signing the Parks and Recreation Division has developed for its park system. Traffic Control - Provisions will be made for closing all parking areas with , security gates. These gates will be under the control of the Police Department. In addition, Midway Parkway between Hamline and Lexington will be gated and closed off after hours. � Stewardship Plan - The City of St. Paul , Division of Parks and Recreation will maintain and operate the park and existing facilities until , during, and after the reconstruction of the park. � Regulations & Ordinances - Existing park ordinances as well as applicable City ordinances shall apply to the regulation of Como Park. Operating Cost - See Maintenance Section. , Operating Fund Source - City of Saint Paul Annual Mil Levy. � Public Safety Service - Police-The Saint Paul Police Department has jursidiction over Como Park. ' Fire-The Saint Paul Fire Department has responsibility for fire protection. Ambulance-Ambulance service is provided by the paramedics of the Saint Paul Fire Department. ' City Park Ordinances - See Appendix ' , � � ��° � � � ��;�e�� a,�� Phase � � �� ° Develo Mainte- Cost � � p nance Estimate APPendix . �� ment � �� ,; 0: . , e�, .;.�.evem, ,�;�: 38 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' �- `.; .,�:�i�I�dt4Y�t11i��W1��I 1` e•„fj� :;�;; - �-�� , �,: a �° �� ' �" � 5�, �` � , � � s�a� � � °y�� „ �� .. _ � i , �4 � � � � �� ere ° �� .. � a�. �a .�°` � �� n" _,.� �� ° � � "`��#� ,� � '� ..•� � t rv�� >t d4 �Yl u�} „�F ,a�. � � �^a.r � �p � 1a e� � � � �;° ��e �. � , a � � �� ; , ,� . i � � �A� � � , �� v.. .,��p �+4 � n� ��,��e� !I � �,. ��; .�P � ' � �� , � �,% s'� �sg „�e �� .� Il�lil°1ti $ e, � �� : �, Y�.y�, ",,a�.��, e a� .�9k.2 $ .� ; < ' � � W�'� � �q�k;�a�� I �'4 §;. °�r,_ - . i � � �� x�4e: , �,� �� _�:�.< �� ", ' � � �� . :�� : ' ., � �° �', �a �+ M 3e w �1{�� v� „ � v . � s �.��y , � ��`� �s""�.� �� e.±� �� ;: �� t;° ro : � 4 � :�� ;� �y � . � � . ' .: �� tt �� z.:,,�2x��'�° %�,�� . .:. '^, . ��* �� *� ,a'� s Y` �� ;� .d !`�I�� .� - � .� >�y s �i� .. a� I . .. . . _..� .. .. � �� . �"3' . -. : � .�� a... �,.., �;.. � � �` � � �� F'Y' * t L .. �� . ."6 '�: . .. . . . . . . �'.. '. �� . ' , ' ' PHASE DEVELOPMENT Following acceptance of the Master Plan, its concepts will be refined to more detailed designs for each use area. The Advisory Corr�nittee as well as the City's � maintenance and programming staffs will review these more detailed solutions and will be further involved as priorities for development are determined. ' After this stage, plan documents will be prepared for bidding and construction as funds become available. � The Phase Development of the Park Master Plan is provided for the preparation of the Five Year Capital Improvement Program for the regional system. This schedule illustrates the interrelationship and impact of one item or task to � another over a time line of six years. Important considerations in the prepara- tion of this schedule were the project's scope and complexity, the availability of funding, and the fact that the park cannot be completely closed. ' ' �, � � � F � � � �3 � � ' � ,....� ,. �.> �. ' -' x..' ' S�'. '$ M��'�'�P .. ...,. " .. -.W � � '.& 4 43��' .,.,�; , ..n -� : �0. ��"- �'`i cg k�_.�� .,+a*- '4��' .'w c'a� � _ ,K', Y .f �� .r�' g-��a�a �w��m�s g�4��.y.,_ � � „ 4 : ,��. ' ;, � � �,��' �� q� �- ��x z ��; .� � �,y �p � �� 4 �. ' �q4 �"�°�°�,a° �W��"? � ��' .� :.:� �z� ^.. s �`� ,-•"" �„ r ' � ��». � Photo 8 Como Lake �°"°° ;� Boat House, 1895 � � �� - - � �� Mainte- Cost qppendix � ��"�� °�' � � �� nance Estimate � �� e.aeea . e„a ea va 9e aa_a9 eae . � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 39 , � ' TASKS 5 6 � ' ROADWAY SIMULATION & EVALUATION DESIGN PARKNG DECK/MDWAY ENTRANCE/AN�JSEN@I 1 UTILITIES STUDY LAND ACOUISITION RESTORATION OF Pl4RK FEATURES d� MONUMENTS � RESTORATION OF SCHIFFMANN FOUNTAIN DESIGN LAKESIDE PAVILION � DESIGN PICNIC PAVILION CONCESSION STUDY LAKE RESTORATION STUDY ' McMURRAY FlELD RENOVATION RELOCATE AMUSEMENTS BUILD PIARKINa DECK � ROAD CONSTRUCTION UTILITIES MOD�ICATION , UNDERPASS CONSTRUCTION TROLLEY UNE � TROLLEY MAINTENANCE eLDG PICNIC PAVILION & SHELTERS ' LAKE PAVILION RESTORATION , PICNIC IMPROVEMENTS LAKESHORE RESTORATION MAINTENANCE EXPANSION , CONCESSION BLDGS. McMURRAY FIELD COMO OFFICE RESTORATION � BITUMINOUS PATHS LANDSCAPING & LIGh�N� ' ' CHART D ' � ' , � , � � ' ' W�. , , � � --- "'� � � � `� �� r � �� `. � _ � ' �r.,�.�w,_ �;�� .� -�,,� ��.� �� ,, � � _�;�, � x . � , ;��- � � � �� r�'. `` , 1 � ; �,g ..� ,r �� . e'$�^�gu.�qwn» y�•;e�M¢4"C��y� � ]a�e� Y, ...�� *� x�� °`��µ._ym�s '�' �Y .- � � . � b ��"ii"aM.. t` � �� '� .-�- s'w�µy� t . � Yffi*s. • ` �. � �;Y� � . t..n q a p,r er . S?'Y w' _ '°'� :Ib". >E6 '�C' �j�,.» ��. � ^�x" � . ' ;� a - i � 3 '^�+s � � � �+ w' yt R�':i�� t'M'�y .g,R^'a�,a�`' $> . � �' �'.:n.. • v ��*... ... . ...- `.aP .... . iiM"^G.,.Y"J'r.x ...�. ¢:v'M�.� ,r±.?SU':.� <� . . . . . . ... . ..�..�. �� ' ' ' MAINTENANCE REVIEW � tThe cost to maintain a large heavily used park such as Como is of primary significance in the development of a master plan. Although the maintenace . staff has definitely felt the affects of inflation, the p.ark's condition ' has not been severly affected at this point. It is very important that any proposals for park improvements recognize maintenance costs and requirements and the budget constraints which a ect maintenance services. ' Como Park lies within the Como Maintenace District which inelu�es Como Park, McMurray Field and several smaller Neighborhood parks. The Como Maintenace ' District's budget for 1980 was $ 300,666.00. The maintenace acreage for this district is 378 acres for the park and an additional 90 acres for the smaller parks. This breaks down to a cost per acre of $ 833.33. ' Como is classified as a Class 1 Park which receives seven days a week maint- enance. The size of the maintenance staff for this district varies with the seasons. During the winter season(Oct. 15-April 15) the Como District has a. ' foreman and four groundsmen. During the more critical summer season(April 15- Oct. 15) the staffing increases to include a head supervisor, a crew leader, 3 groundsmen, 10 park aides , and a matron for the picnic pavilion. The park ' also has a night shift(3pm-llpm) which includes one groundsmen and two park aides. The Master Plan was presented at a park's staff ineeting where general main- , tenance concerns were discussed. After the meeting, copies of the plan were given to each maintenance person assigned to Como Park for their review and comment prior to a second meeting. At that meeting a more detailed review of ' the plan was made to determine whether there would be an increase or decrease in the established maintenace level for the park. From the meeting, for example, it was determined that many of the proposed ' pathways will require regularly scheduled sweeping and plowing. In addition, the parking deck and the other lots will require additional sweeping and more diligent trash collection. On the other hand, potential savings were seen in , other aspects of the plan : improvement of picnic facilities , increased num- ber of restrooms, and restored/refurbished park fountains and monuments. The maintenace staff repeatedly discussed the need for small , efficient parking , lot sweepers and a centralized trash pickup system. In addition, concern was expressed regarding the operational cost of the proposed s�uttle since the staff was unfamiliar with its operation. � Based upon these discussions , a study was made regarding the projected oper- ating cost of the shuttle. The following is a detailed analysis of those costs . , � �� ,� ' �E��..�E�«%a�� a��s2�$,.,�� '` � � � �� .�� 3 aa �a ��a � � �� m�� Estimate APPe�dix �� R � � � � �� ,, �� : � � h� � �� fi�� e� �� I COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 40 , ' PARK SHUTTLE OPERATING COST PROJECTIONS Operating costs have been calculated on the 7000 feet of track proposed. The ' calculations are based upon an average use of 40 days with 3 cars in operation. d salaries re resent the lar est cost of any o eration of this sort. ' W a g e s a n p 9 p �perator wages are figured at $8.00 per hour which is the beginning scale for bus drivers with the MTC, and the mechanic's salary is estimate d on t he basis of , pay for personnel of similar duties. The electricity cost is predicated on the City's commercial rate of .035¢/kilowatt , hour. This figure is based upon the off-demand time for commercial users. Cars such as those proposed for the Como shuttle may draw as much as 50 amperes when starting, but much of the time the car will be coasting or stopped, so an average ' draw of 10 amperes per car is projected. Times 600 volts = 6,000 watts, or 6 kilo- watt hours per car hour. Major repair costs are the most difficult to project. Based upon figures from ' other municipalities, a 5,000 contingency fund was established. A like amount was allocated for major roadway and power system repairs, though this money should probably be accumulated for major jobs every few years. An additional $10,000.00 ' has been projected for annual costs of lubricants and maintenance parts for cars and roadway. Assuming: ' *40 day (33 days consisting of weekends & holidays plus 7 days for special events) *6000 watts or 6 kilowatts/per car/per hour ' *5 cars - 3 for the zoo/conservatory-McMurray Field run 1 car for the zoo/conservatory-lake pavilion run 1 spare ' (6 KWN x 4 cars x 6 hrs/day) x 40 days a year = 5760 KWH x .035�/KWHA= $202.00 Electric Use/Year. Operators , 3 operators requiredg 2880 hrs x 38.00 = 3 23,040.00 Mechanic � 1 oart time mechanic required 160 hrs x $10.65 = S 1,704.00 , Electrician p 1 part time electrician required 80 hrs x y12.66 3 1,013.00 Groundsmen (Clean Up) E � 2 part time groundsmen 320 hrs x $8.40 = � 2,688.00 Lubricants & Parks (estimate) $ 10,000.00 Exterior Repairs on cars 5 4,000.00 ' Major Roadway and Power System Repairs $ 5,000.00 Miscellaneous Contingencies $ 5,000.00 5 52,649.00 (1980 Dollars; � � �� e '' � g �� &��a� �,�' �� l � � � k R v �O�a � � � � �� &�A°,'� ��,� e a �. .,g �* ' �g � � � � �� Estimate AR3�endix � , � � � �� .e �� 4� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 1 ' , Footnotes� ' A. - Based upon off demand time for comnercial users. B. - Three operators required because two cars run in tandem C. - Maintenance check in Spring and fall during operation D. - Maintenance check in spring and weekly inspection of lines and substation. E. - Assumin� two hours clean up per car x 40 days. i , The trolley system being proposed for the internal park shuttle system is the same system that is currently in operation in downtown Detroit Michigan. We met with Mr. Conrad Mallet, Director of the Detroit Department of Trans- ' portation to. discuss Detroit's trolley car system as well as to show him our proposed plan. After showing Mr. Mallet our proposed trolley system, it appeared to him that the two systems are similiar in many respects. Both systems incude the same amount of track, the cars are the same gauge, and a ' maximum of four cars can run on the track at the same time.Passing points are used in both systems rather than an open loop system. , With regards to maintenance, Mallet said the cars are basically very low main- tenance. Detroit has one mechanic who doe preventive maintenance; major repairs(such as rewinding coils) are sent to J.P. Stevens in New York. He ' pointed out that this is very rare since the equipment is very dur.able. While some specialized training is necessary, in Detroit the training was actually done using retired street car mechanics. Mallet offered Detroit's assistance in training if we need it. , In conclusion,the overall assessment of the maintenace staff is that the proposed Master Plan for Como Park will not significantly change the Maintenance ' program currently in effect. From these discussions , it appears the design development stage is more critical since the staff must live with the details of the plan. As the planning process continues, and the Design Development stage proceeds to specific area, the r�aintenance staff will be an integral part ' of the design process. ' , , , �x� � COSt , Estimate APPendix I AN COMO PARK MASTER PL 42 ' '�� . . i � �� a�, a �"�e� '�,�."�• -��. ��m � �� '�'''�*'a�s�.. `� � .� � 3 � �� l° � � e � - � � �.. � `�;�� _ < " q� �� Cg� ff., � " $s', �� . x e . ��,� .�,� �.. "� � �� ",� , i'' ''�x+��`« �' '°'+�° �� • Y � � ' � � � �:�� "�� '�, , . � � � a, !s', w �� . .�� ,� �,� �re ' � ,�° �°�` �� , � � �� ,� 4 } �""� .�►r �.e �� e_�',�� , �� `� � '� � , � � � � .. � e �l' "+ � � � �` � A� t ��+�' ' � � � � '.�d� • * . �, � � , r� +1�d � �� _�` � � � �- - #,. " ' � 's�' � � � ��'' `�T .,F � • * � � � � '�If �w ��` �.� � � � � ��, � ; ):` � �!C � �� : � � -� .d� ��" � � ,Ai " p S�� .. -R � t•� ! 4� � � � '4} � � �s t � �� u �� • � � � � ,"� � '" , ° .€� .: �� i�� i � �&� �� i �. �� g � .'�r ��q`�� _` � E . g � "y„. } ,�4 �� a §� � �#. � g t. �j i, #�°" . �� si4 �F i�� F �° � °• . . , ��'� �� z � �� ``1� �,� k� � � � �� t t l�b�° r� �� `+`� ° ��" �.� ``� •s� '�°'�` . �.., .. . . �j . �� ° � �� 1 � � �� . Q � .� � � � �� ;. , . , � ,� $ '� �* � ��; , r ' . � � ,��'� � _ � �, �� ` �,� , 'a� '� ,�a`'" �� °'°�' ��,� �,,`,` •'v�« �, � •�^ .�^� �~ � f� �; � � � � � � a`+a�* a�Y ��n� �' �� .# �� , ° � �� ,� ��*.a`� �� .�+,�� . � `� � s `� #im � ��E �� ` � �. . , +".�! *�� ;' ,•A~�� ., � �i ' , .,�° ,� �Mr: � �, �� #�a t`�,j�., � }I# �` . , ♦ ♦ 4 ° � � t�xR J4 '" �� S� � � . �r�� , �� r.� °� . . '� � 'r ,�� -�k .' „��,�' � ' s S � -r • � ! +. � � � � M. t ! ♦" s �� . ` �! * � ; '� , �" � ' , � ' � �: < k �, � ,� ��, � �� #.� ° ��, t � � � � ` � � � �� • � 1 y ��' � � � � � ''� H i� , � a� � ' � W.h , . g� �y♦ . _ X�� , _a �� i� � � - a �� I'c' ji° � N w 3 r i� � � .�� i� �m • �s . s , yq � � 1 s � aA �F. , .y � � ,� -j . '� � � , . &k k , �:� � ` .. �t �i ,.. . � - �i, � � � • <w a � �ir � y ��w,. t� .` � � �� w ��,: � �; � �. � �� i � ! ��*b � '' � � �,J� ��1 #'�b- ..6 t • , � y� a � ` �� f � at � � ..� � �� . � � � '�.... .�� t��,. �, .�,b, ��,� •�,s'�`�� `�� ` 4� � �� ,� °� • � "�, ��, �� t � „<�� L �' '� �� 1 y1' � � '�• w �' '� ��".a':°�� R� � � � � �' � �' a � } �� '�i�.�+�,r� �„�-``;•;.• �� .� ' � ��' •�► � «�� • � ��;�• �� ,,+�, �,+i�!'► �� °i� '� 4� i►4 g � �"�' � , ] , ' r t ` • + , . �" ,° " ' , �t ."��rr'1 , . � � �'� ' � +�� , � »�� M''<�� r � r , � ' 1�� s� • / � COMO PARK DEVELOPMENT COSTS (1980 Do11ars) IFUNDING SOURCE BREAKDOWN , AMOUNT DESCRIPTION MET COUNCIL C. I.B.1 M.S.A.2 � 300,000 Land Acquisition 300,000 ' 8,478,000 Road Work 7,393,000 1 ,085,000 2,598,000 Site Work 2,229,000 369,000 � 4,990,000 Building Projects 3,726,000 1 ,264,000 193,000 General Park Utilities 193,000 , t $16,559,000 TOTALS : $13,841 ,0003 $1 ,633,000 $1 ,085,000 � 993 000 DESIGN AND ENGINEERING (6%) $ � � $17,552,000 TOTAL PROJECT COST i � 1 1 1 I1 Capital Zmproyement Bonds (So1d by the City of Saint Paul ) 2 Lexington Parkway is d state ajd road and would qualify for M.S.A. funding. � 3 One million dollars of this amount has already been allocated by Metropolitan Council an� is being held until approval of the Master Plan. � � 43 i � COMO PARK DEVELOPMENT COSTS LAND ACQUISITION ! JESSAMINE R.O.W. 300,000.00 � I Construction � Roadwork A. Demolition 664,000.00 � B. Street Paving 1 ,696,000.00 C. Parking 2,227,000.00 D. Misc. Paving & Associated Work 1 ,312,000.00 � E. Sewers/Misc. Drainage 780,000.00 F. Bridges _ 693,000.00 $7,372,000.00 x .15%�= $8,478,000.00 � II Sitework A. Demolition 53,000.00 ' B. Earthwork 415,500.00 C. Misc. Construction 738,000.00 D. Landscaping 231 ,500.00 E. Transit 745,000.00 � $2,259,000.00 x .15% _ $2,598,000.00 III Building Projects � A. Buildings 4,159,000.00 B. Building Utilities 180,000.00 - � $4,339,000.00 x .15% - $4,990,000.00 IV General Park Utilities $ 168,000.00 x . 15% _ $ 193,000.00 � $16,559,000.00 i � 1 15% represents Contractor's overhead and proft. , � �� ' � � � �� me,..� � � �g�� +� � ppendix � � . � g �� A � �� `�$ � �� @ �; � : ��'1�� °�� 6: � �6 �,,�. . e„eam� e��9�e�a�s9.«� , �� ee, . «e .eb. .. ; ee�e, e e mee. a�e s�,... �� 44 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN i � COST ESTIMATE � ROAD WORK QUANTITY UNITS UNIT COST TOTAL COST � � A. Demolition 1 . Remove Asphalt 86,790 Sq. Yd. 2.00 173,580 2. Remove Asphalt with Base 65,080 Sq. Yd. 4.00 260,320 3. Remove Curb & Gutter 73,700 Lin. Ft. 1 .50 110,550 � 4. Remove Concrete Sidewalk 950 Sq. Yd. 2.00 1 ,900 5. Remove Bituminous Path 4,500 Sq. Yd. 4.00 18,000 6. Remove Side Inlets 50 Each 75.00 3,750 � 7. Remove Asphalt with Base Parking Lots 24,000 Sq. Yd. 4.00 96,000 � 664,100 � B. New Paving - Streets 1 . Asphalt Overlays 70,990 Sq. Yd. 10.00 709,900 2. Asphalt & Base 21 ,760 Sq. Yd. 10.00 217,600 � 3. Misc. Base 7,250 Cu. Yd. 10.00 72,600 4. Concrete Curb & Gutter 53,850 Lin. Ft. 8.00 430,800 5. Adjust Catch Basin Covers 50 Each 120.00 6,000 ' 6. New Side Inlets 50 Each 220.00 11 ,000 7. Connect #6 - 8' Each Average 400 Lin. Ft. 20.00 8,000 8. New Lighting 200 Each 1 ,200.00 240,000 1 ,695,800 � C. Parking Lots 1 . Asphalt 51 ,000 Sq. Yd. 10.00 510,000 I 2. Base 17,000 Cu. Yd. 10.00 170,000 3. Curb & Gutter 17,800 Lin. Ft. 8.00 142,400 4. Curb Cuts 21 Each 20.00 400 � 5. Gates 21 Each 2,000.00 . 42,000 6. Lights 50 Each 1 ,200.00 60,000 7. Parking Deck 1 ,200,000 8. Landscaping (Lot & Deck) 102,000 � 2,226,800 D. Misc. Paving & Assoc. Work � 1 . Pathwork 50,300 Sq. Yd. 9.00 452,700 2. Conservatory Plaza 16,000 Sq. Ft. 40.00 640,000 3. Bollards 600 Each 100.00 60,000 � 4. New Entry Columns 4 Each 10,000.00 40,000 5. Orn,amental Gates 4 Each 6,000.00 24,000 6. Relocate Entry Columns 2 Each 2,500.00 5,000 7. Traffic Signal 70,000 , 8. Signage 20,000 1 ,311 ,700 � E. Sewer/Drainage Work 1 . Storm Sewer 2. Lagoon/Holding Ponds 3. Sanitary Sewer � 4. Storm/Sanitary Separation $ 780,000 45 � . COST ESTIMATE � ROAD WORK QUANTITY UNITS UNIT COST TOTAL COST � W rk � � F. Bridge o 1 . Remove Lexington Bridge (Nor�h of Horton) 15,000.00 2, Remove Lexington Bridge Over Lagoon 15,000.00 � 3. Remove Pedestrian Bridge Over Lagoon 3,000.00 4. Replace Lexington Bridge (North of Horton) 400,000.00 5. Pedestrian Over/Underpass-Lexington 60,000.00 � 6. Pedestrian Underpass-Lexington 60,000.00 7. (2) Pedestrian Underpasses-Midway Parkway 140,000.00 � $693,000.00 � � � � � � � � � , � a ;� � �� ,� � ��r� ��, �� • � � a �� ppendi �� : e e �� x : : : _ x � ��F� � ' � ..., a ,e see a� .vaa�a :ee e � , ee PLA � e,. e.o ee A e 4 s COMO PARK MASTER N ! ' COST ESTIMATE ' SITEWORK QUANTITY UNITS UNIT COST TOTAL COST IN PLACE ' A. Demolition 1 . Remove Backstops 18 Each 500.00 9,000 2. Tree Removal 170 Each 200.00 34,000 � 3. Contingency 10,000 53,000 � B. Earthwork 1 . Cut/Fill 85,000 Cu. Yd. 1.00 85,000 2. Rough Grade 85,000 Cu. Yd. 1.50 127,500 ' 3. Finish Grade 30 Acre 2,100.00 63,000 4. Topsoil 5,000 Cu. Yd. 10.00 50,000 5. Cor�non Barrow 15,000 Cu. Yd. 6.00 90,000 415,500 tC. Misc. Construction 1 . Reconstruct #5 Green, #6 Tee on ' G.C. 55,000 2. Picnic Tables (New) 50 Each 1 ,000.00 50,000 3. Refurbish Picnic Tables/ Misc. Picnic Faciliti�s 50,000 ' 4. Backstops 13 Each 5,000.00 65,000 5. Field Lighting 6 Each 21 ,000.00 126,000 6. Agrilime 13 Each 3,700.00 48,000 ' 7. Misc. Retaining Walls 500 Lin. Ft. 50.00 25,000 8. Japanese Garden Screen 200 Lin. Ft. 40.00 8,000 9. Misc. Fence 1 ,000 Lin. Ft. 10.00 10,000 ' 10. Benches, Bleachers 55,000 11 . Signage 47,000 12. Restoration Monuments/Park Features 175,000 13. Schiffmann Fountain Restoration 150,000 ' 814,000 D. General Park Landscaping ' 1 . Sod 19,000 Sq. Yd. 2.00 38,000 2. Seed/Mulch 30 Acre 1 ,000.00 30,000 3. Trees: Deciduous 500 Each 200.00 100,000 ' 4. Trees: Evergreen 400 Each 140.00 56,000 5. Shrubs 500 Each 15.00 7,500 231 ,500 ' E. Transit 1 . Track 1 .36 mi. Lin. Ft. 20.00* 221 ,800 2. Cable 65,000 ' 3. Cars (5) 125,000 4. Poles 33,000 5. Barn 100,000 6. Electric Service 200,000 ' 745,000 ' $2,259,000 * Based upon used light weight track. 47 1 ' COST ESTIMATE BUILDING PROJECTS Q UANTITY UNITS U{VIT COST TOTAL COST � � A. Buildings 1. Zoo (General ) NOT INCLUDED � 2. Conservatory NOT INCLUDED 3. Picnic Shelters (2) 220,000 4. Picnic Pavilion 569,000 , 5. Picnic Restrooms Remodel/Addition 160,000 6. Pool and Building Remodeling 1 ,000,000 7. McMurray Restroom/Concession 250,000 8. Existing McMurray Restroom Remodeling 40,000 , 9. Como Office Remodeling 220,000 10. Lake Pavilion Remodeling 1 ,500,000 11 . Amusement Area Buildings 200,000 ' $4,159,000 B. Building Utilities ' 1 . Gas and Electric (Buildings Only) 100,000 2. Sewers and Water (Buildings Only) 80,000 3. Underground Electric (Entire Park) 90,000 4. Misc. Sewer and Water 78,000 ' 348,000 1 ' 1 ' ' ' ' '�'�fl��° , y e ��. r � _ �'. � eflg � g �� E 9d � �� a �� 4�� ' qppendix x ' @ � � � � £ a � � �� 5 � � ��t `B�� "�t e�� g� ,�t � e a�� s� ..� �. � x ;��t�e �� x ��f� �� aem � �48 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � ' � �1' � � �� Y � ¢� * � .t�� .�' . � s > s t ' � , �'� � a�+�. � � �4 s� �� '� �� ° � . �� #� �F � � � � r ��. . ' �,�y� +�:� ° � � �� , i �n r w � ,;�� #�°,�s ry A�. '' � � � ��1 , � '� � »�° € �`� <" •e •> � � ��, . � � �s �"" �; � �� .'� , �� . . a � � t� • '�{ti:, � 3�.°. M . � � :� �� ;- - .,� »., � � � � �� _ , � �� „*� �� ;� � _ �+P � . �� .� , �„ � , � � � � � M � e � e . _ .� ° � - � �s ,� •.� �� . � ��` < e �, �� t�� ire � � �' a' , , , � . � � %�t � � 't ;; ,,,,,n�.r r'�+ �_ �° �� '"� ` f =� ;a -1 B �� k `�� ,' t�t y .. "�� i - �.�'`�-�..5 � , '"� k:� . �r ,,.z �, i � � f , `., � • �� + � �� •. . ; q�,� \ , � � , �„-. , � ..; � ,. � � " e,:;• .:�1, r �� A � . .. 9, :� � w . '`,�' � .., . a � . �� ! t �' � ,.r , � � 4 ' ��, � r , ' � �� . ri. ' ., , �, ';. \ � � 'r '��t.`� 'r ��°. '� � _ t a � ...` � " • e �� '�� e�'ar� � R ! *A �4 �' � �r� � � �� • .�,r � `+ • �� ". , � , "� � ,, � � , .,r ��' • _ ,''' - . • �� .�e�` � � :^'t' � ,� �/ . � �.� � ' • • , � � � � � . � � � . . . . , . - . - � . - . - . - . - . . - . . . . - . - . - - . . � �... , u� jr �f'Ir.'�'��,~R > ! f.yr�\1��1;�;;,4Y,i�.��111'�/1(f/ � � � ��.�M�,,,.�\�`��W�U�.�\U��\.��nwiu'MI�.. '• + ,a��;,��u� ' � 1 iia,�;i�.r.�WUU41W.,�� f "�IIA„� � � /" ,i+►�i�°- • ��,.,.p�y � � �i.��;_ ' �"' '0 � i;;`�7 � ` ' ` 't ,� � �1��M �>f) ♦9 / `• • f • � � � � .� . � V +� es � ,,,r..� �j. �t� + ��1 q�� , � ;,� + ' ! y� R • ,s:kS�� ;�m,� ' � �.�lti-,,�'•�� tirdv� r !� e 1 s _-,�w,�lr'l�A!'y��„ia .~r '� �,.;�, �'�/1qC. _ � 4A,�i,�j�1�:i ,rt j�. y,:..�.a •. �! � � • �I:f, �� '^��iM1 f +x�Ya�', w. .r �f!.i! `r',� � %. . �� •�'i-. I��'. ` .i� �r�� •,'�� E;� �� . '.+ ' ` �r• �, � �� 7 � �.,,,• Y� - /I f� `�R�4✓;"�4..i��C�yy �� , ��i� y� � �'!.. .� i. L�� 1�+J� i 1 ' ��j �'+T!�. */ � . �r 1l.� 1 �� S �i��i•.,"li��''H.w�� J�\ � �Y v;�• f l�. :�� ,I II+I� � ;''f � 1f�!� 1►°��I `�•'�� iSi1�� a ��,�� ,� �� '� �I�� 'W R1,� „ � 1 f� :,�,�J� ��.�� y,�� illll � r��y/, iii '� � � /��►' .�;P� �":� f. �� L�,�i� ��M1; )�.` 1' M� i ,� �,f. ; �, --� -`,;� r,�ar.e�,� �rd�•�!�''' ,. �`��rv"� �� +�ti� ��`�� ..:�•� �, 1� � � �;. �� * ' . �,�,� _ � �i�� .rr.�w ,� • ; ,�� '�, �� =*;,� �. t �,� • r .,.� •-;, l* �;� � , '.�"'�. ,�e.' �. .,.� r: ,; �+ �''�t �� , �, i • "', , �+`� :��'.' �� i�` .r �R , 1 ' � �� d 7�� .�* .�.�'ti I� � ;ru � � \ { .� , -y,if l. w;�-:.` ��,l� ., •- '\��, 'lA ,` I•. ' `��' �i/ , _��'�.,:iW u -,✓ i ,r 1�� \� w� �1^� / r�� i.ti1�_ - ` Y ';� � �i� ��, � _ � � � i � � '� ��'V��'� --�� ., 1/-J.,�� 71�� ,�� {� � �� I/^ N'� � / � A� �� 1 � ♦'� � ,"� Y ,M .s �. `-� �� ,.. �: M��,►' � .�'y �.� �, - � ,, ��,��,� ,� ► � y' ��, ,i+;'�,v.�;h!�'"n s� �, -�, y�j�►' r : , ��I �� .,.�, �''�'. ,.MS�1v�f� "' .��=,�.�,•�,•{'•�.,�;�., ,yp,'! ,,�. '41 ''.!� ''�`I . /'Y`�i �I~�✓�� . �I �.�J yA 'i '� ;� �� ' /. � ��i�^'��j' �� _ �� ,-.- .. `r � �'�'.��..� ,�� :a,/"��f_�,,f''�' �:�.4w�,'�j'Ay�,. � �1�.�4 �, �;��j�j, , ��J;,i�� •��'�/;1� --�� r��li;�` I �'�to��% ii*^r� ; �: ,//�;± ,✓ .4,� .�.,' � b�1 ' � �•�� fr��,�,��w��`� .,��-9-�_ �p.,i� � ��. '.� ,��j��l t`r,i �"'�''' �-�ij �X�v,.' ��'r�'�.� �4 4 ��+ �i-''{r'�� ,.�,�- �,J'��, �4l� i � �✓�✓�f�---'vi�J�; �' �"-� �7,; 'ir '�Cii -�:,�,-� »�, 7�; .h..� +tR � ai� 1 , �'''�� ,, r , �; � , � �., ' .,�«� � 11 s . , r. �_ '�1 �� J. �iit.� v. �r�^ T T _ � �� ... �i�A'�,--�-'L � '��'�t'f'�� / —� ..a�_�.– . y.��" t�'� `r�_+"'�� a �="�_�,•�rr_c+ �.J'�-i _ �,isr •°y�/;v 4 _�. ir♦'�.� ,�� "�i� �s�� ?��tiT�rf<�,wa.r., � � �� 1 - --" - _ - �//a.' _ __..�--�---�-- �I ��"� '► ' __ _ �I 4 Yti r ! 'R�:��r7't�;a �:; :7� u� �,�,��_ . __'r+'j1y;1 4s,',i:i�r:�:::r�7i�.J 1 � � � � � � • � � � � . ' • • 1 � COMO PARK REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS � 1 .0 Introduction , 1 .1 Summary of Park Development 1 .2 Assignment of Ralph Burke Associates to Project � 2.0 Planning Guidelines 2.1 Consultant's Approach � 2.2 Goals and Objectives 2.3 Summary of Community Concerns 2.4 Site Analysis � 3.0 Recommended Roadway Layout and Traffic Plan � 3.1 Description of the Recommended Plan 3.2 Impacts of the Changes 3.3 A Test Period is Planned � 3.4 Layout of Parking Areas � 4.0 Traffic Surveys 4.1 Roadway Traffic Description � 4.2 Summary Road Traffic 4.3 General Description of Intersection Flow 4.4 Origin Destination Study - East Como Lake Drive � 5.0 Parking Surveys � 5.1 Existing Parking Facilities 5.2 Parking Utilization Characteristics � 6.0 Park Users Surveys 6.1 Winter Use Survey � 6.2 Downhill Skiing Survey 6.3 Summer User Survey 6.4 Bicycle Surveys � , � °�� '�� .Fr�� r� �"�`� �na�+�±� ��t�� e ye � e� e e e � � e e a e e: : � �. .�. eeeee ...e.vm eee9 . ee� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' � Table of Contents (Continued) � 6.5 June 2, 1979 Park User Survey � 6.6 Conclusions 7.0 Alternatives Considered � 7.1 First Proposals for Corridors and Review � 7.2 Second Alternatives Proposal and Review 7.3 Third Alternatives Proposal and Review 7.4 Location of Secondary Roads and Parking Spaces � 7.5 Elements of a Test Period Monitoring Program 7.6 Subsequent Revisions � � � � � � � � � �� . �� x�� ,� � �,� E � �� a � �� 3��2�� a� � , .� �e�� '�s �� a � �.��.9e��e s a�e� �, ��°k ��2�� ?� - e � • • ' • � £ � g �� d k �d 43�� ' � ��; �� 6�i��g�� a � �� m e m e � Q�_� s ,�� e�P��w9e-e .ve,a��,��, � .pe �.�� ,��e �=a�:e°� ��a �az.e Ae� �� e�.ee P6„ 9a�ae ,e ....ee . e,,.,.., .e,.. ee- .,.. ee COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � FIGURES � � 1-1 Historical Perspective 3-1 Select Committee Traffic Routes ! 3-2 Lexington-East Como Lake Drive - ADT 3-3 Accident Locations - Hail Mary � 3-4 Reconfigured Intersection I 4-1 MnDOT Traffic Map 4-2 City of St. Paul Traffic Map � 4-3 Cordon Line Count Locations 4-4 Cordon Ring Location No. 1 - Average Weekday Traffic 4-5 Cordon Ring Location No. 1 - Average Weekend Traffic � 4-6 All Locations - Weekday Traffic (2 pages) 4-7 All Locations - Weekend Traffic (2 pages) � 4-8 Combination of Al1 Traffic Flows 4-9 Origin-Uestination Study � 5-1 Parking Lot Capacities and Locations � 6-1 Como Park Sub Areas � 7-1 Corridors for Alternatives Study 7-2 Second Review - Corridor Alternatives � 7-3 Third Review - Corridor Alternatives � � � = � �1+�� 0 4�1� �t�� i�� +�� ' - Pt�3 e� y° e,�� e �� . � a,�.,e e ; � �t� f% � ' .. '.:ee .:. �: � ��. � . ��. ,;::.' �.:e ' - . . � � �. . . ,ee..: aa..e.ee =,._,eP.,e.. �e , ,eF:� .ee.,„ ee.�. .eps :."�„ e e .. e ■ : e . . ee. . vae.,.e. . e. �. ..e . � COMO vv PARK MASTER PLAN � r � TABLES � 2�1 Summary of Comments by Traffic Subcommittee � 3-1 Traffic Change on Major Streets � 4-1 Traffic Conversion Factors 4-2 Summary of Traffic Flow � 5-1 Parking Survey Results - On-street Parking � 5�2 Parking Survey Results - Off-street Parking 5--3 Parking Survey Results - Summary � 5-4 Parking Survey Results - By Area 5-5 Supplementary Parking Survey Results (May 12, 1979) 5-6 Number of Parked Motorcycles by Activity Area � 5-7 Summary - Estimated Peak Parking Accumulation � 7-1 Evaluation of Alternatives (3 pages) 7-2 Results of Alternatives Preference Survey � � � � � � ��;, �� : � ��$��9�� sA�s �� . �� . � . . - . � �� ,� �� . �� - �� ,e�� ;� � � „ ,�� . m: 9 � „�- 0 C�� e e� P , e d9me�-. � ,e� ee� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � � � APPENDICES � A - Meetings with Como Park Planning Committee and Subcomnittees A, B and C. � B - City of St. Paul Reports which mention Como Park. C - Roadway Traffic Measurements. � D - Intersection Traffic Measurements. E - Origin-Destination Traffic Survey. � F - Parkin Count Background 9 � G - Transportatiot� Related Items - Como Park User Survey H - A Critical Lane Analysis of Horton-Lexington Intersection � I - Morning Rush Hour Disruptions Caused by Como Park Road Changes � � � � Table of Contents (Continued) � � 6.5 June 2, 1979 Park User Survey 6.6 Conclusions � 7.0 Alternatives Considered 7.1 First Proposals for Corridors and Review � 7.2 Second Alternatives Proposal and Review 7.3 Third Alternatives Proposal and Review 7.4 Location of Secondary Roads and Parking Spaces � 7.5 Elements of a Test Period Monitoring Program 7.6 Subsequent Revisions � ,t3 � � �� g � an e.. � ��r `� ��r ��, p� ��:��g�� £ � � � �� ;�� a �� v�e. x ' s �° �� " ��' �' ° .a : - ��. � � � � ' • � § � � �� s�� ,a��',�'�a� a �ta��°agi k *�� s�� ¢ �� *� ��r�� ,��°� e.`, e � �, � e ., Ke.,. :� �m�� em�maaa ,,e ee.e � .. �.vmee oeaa: aa� , �g�_�,�� :� e .e,��,. w. e .�� . , � .�� a..:�e�. ��... . �� y �� .�:. COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � , � ��:�:�:�::::>::;:�::�::=:�:�::�::�>�:�::::�::�:::;�:�:�:::.;�:�:�>::;::.::.;::�::::>;:�>:•>:�:�»;:�»:�:::•::::�::;::::::::::::::•::::.�::::::.::::�::.�:.�:•:::........................................ �...:;..``''��.��:�:::��:,::i:.:�:;;{.....'`.'....''''��....��::'''�'.�..�..�.:�:��::`�'.�.;:;��:��:`.:>�;'�.....'..'�':�:'.'�'.``�;�?:::``.....:.�.�:::::``..�:::�`:''�`.'.>,::;:;i:.:�..;::.::;;:;:;:�``.::............��:::::��`��..+.��.��:�:;...��:��.;.:��.:`:..'�.�.��.�.�:�,..;;::::::....�..:......'..:�.�.�..��...�.��;s:�..?.::::.':::::::::;:;:::.;::;;:::;:<.:::.':. :::::;.;. .::•::::::::: .. ...............:::::::::•::::::::::::::::::::•::::::•::•:. • • •:::•::.�..... .. . ....:5:��::�::�::f�:::... ............. ;:::::::y'':�';�f:�:::�::�:_:�:::�::........ �:�:5:�:;�::�f:�i:: ::;::�:;�::��::�:�:�::�:;::::' 2�:�::�:�:::;:;f;:�:�::�:�:�:::_:��:��i:�:::��:i:�:�:�::::�:�:�::::�:i:'�::�:�:::::�:2�:::::::�:�i�:�:::;::;:::�:�:::�;:................................................. ........... :M ::::. ....: ..�.: . �:�: :: .'�:>':. : :•':'•. ::�::;�::::::�''.�::::��..��:�::i':�:;::;��'�2� :�:��:�;;::'��'��:i`.:;�{';.'�: c;:;•::::>:oi:;:;;:?::'�:�::�:;;:�:::;;:;�:;;:;:;�:::;::;:;:;i:;i:;:;:;:;;:�::;::`;:;:;�::g:;;:;�:�:;:;:::�:�:�::i:;:;;:�:i:;;::;:;::�:��::::;:?:;�::�<::::'•:::�i:�:;;:;�::�;:;:;i:::�:�::�::�:::::;�:�r:�:: ��:�::::::�:�::::::::::::::: .......��. . . . �r.��...... .::..::::..:.:. �� ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::;:::::::::�:::::::::;::::::::::::::::�:::::::::::�:�:::�:�::::::��:::::::::�:��:�:�;::::::::::::::�::::::::::::::::::��::::::::::::::::::::::::::�:�::�::::::::::::::::�:::�::::::�:::-::::::::�:�:�:�::::::::::�::::::::�:::::::::::�:::::::::::�:::::�::::::::��::::::::�::�:�:::::: 1 � 1 1 � 1 � 1 � � t � � � , HISTORY OF COMO PARK ' Como Park began as a potato patch. In the mid 1800's Charles Perry settled and farmed the land around a lake he named after his birthplace, Como, Italy. When � Henry McKenty, a real estate investor, bought the land he decided Sandy Lake would � be a more descriptive name for it. But in 1856 he changed his mind and renamed it Como Lake. Perhaps McKenty was the first to consider use of the lake shores for a � purpose other than potato farming; he spent $6000 in gold to have a road paved around the lake. He lost all of his possessions in the panic of '57, however, and � the land had to wait a few years to become known as a park. � Controversy surrounded Como Park's purchase and early years. During an economic � upswing in 1872, the properous legislature saw the need for preserving some of "God's creation" in their rapidly growing metropolis, authorizing the issuance of � bond for park land. So the young city of 20,000 spent $100,000 for the 300 acres of land and �Che 70 acre Como Lake. At that time the generous amount of land was � situated well away from the greater part of the city's population. The panic of '73 caused many people to regret the purchase. A petition circulated calling for � the sale of Como Park and the use of the money for important and necessary things � such as bridges, roads, and sewers. Some even considered cutting up the property into 5 acre parcels and handing them out as industrial incentives. Fortunately, � these extremists could not quite convice the entire City Council . Como Park suffered 14 years of neglect but remained a park. � It wasn't until 1886 that the State Legislature authorized the issuance of $25,000 � in bonds for park improvements. One year later a Board of Park Commissioners was � established, naming John Estabrook as the first Superintendent of Parks. German-born e e.e � � � � �� . ��m,��w` ��.u°� � � �� '� �� a � � � .e � � � . . - . r e x m��_ � ��°� � 4�� ° � °°e,. ,:_ ,e .�e.. , �. — A� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' Fred Nussbaumer succeeded him in 1891 . , Supt. Nussbaumer dreamed of a unified park system for St. Paul that would rival � all other cities nationwide. Como Park was to be at the heart of a radiating plan of bouleva�ds and parks. The plans emphasized its "quiet rural beauty" even � though cattle, goats and swine or any farming was forbidden on park property. � Nussbaumer made an inventory of the existing vegetation, then set about adding more exotic plant species. He built and planted the original "Gates A,jar", � remembered from a desiqn he had seen in Germany. An irrigation system was bought for the new nursery and picnic grounds. The 7 m.p.h. speed limit kept the park � safe for pedestrians and horses. � Maintaining a satisfactory water level of the lake became the first and consistant major problem at Como Park, since Como Lake was rapidly evaporating. Dredging in � 1895-6 changed the average water depth from 5' to 15' . The dredged mud was used � for fertilizer. The St. Paul Railway Co. obtained permission in 1897 to run an electric streetcar � through Como Park, with a stop at the picnic grounds. Care was taken to preserve � Como's "native sylvan beauties" while still serving the needs and comforts of its users. Sunday afternoon band concerts attracted many people. One of the earlier � bandshells floated on Lake Como so people could rent boats and listen to the concert on the lake. � The zoo at this time consisted of some deer, elk, cebus and fox enclosed in a � pasture by a wire fence. Dr. R. Schiffman donated the trees and shrubs for a � ,� � � � a'aaa �a�� °�e�& �. � � � _ �$ �. �y g� � �� g �. � 8 �4 g � � a� „�t.� � .� � � � r . � � , �� ;� � . a��,E �'�e � � '. '��. � ` �k � � 88�g� �9 $ ��. ��'- .�� & 9 } � °�°�°,��#�` " � .� ��"��a� � a.u�..�� °.��.� �. { 3 �:��a� v ., 3 r : „e�Y,�:�� s r��°;��:� a� �k��eTg,e,s,�ee e?ee e i.°vm e99,ee �eeee. ��. e.ee.�. ;;,..eeee. ; e..... :...ee�e, . . %� e�P�b ,e�.,�-a � A 2 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' , Japanese Garden that was built in 1905. The early planners, concerned with having a park in "accordance with the highest standards of art" , encouraged gifts like the � fountain Dr. Shiffman brought back from Barcelona. , � lhe 'increasing popularity of Como Park made the need for a new pavilion most urgent. ' In 1903, $38,000 was found to finance a suitable building. Fred Nussbaumer was primarily responsible for the design and supervised its construction. It offered a � restaurant, assembly room, covered auditorium with seating for 2,000 and "ample room for promenading" , plus a warming room for winter skaters and boat storage. � The next major building, the conservatory, was constructed in 1914. The King Con- � struction Co. of Torawanda, New York built it for $58,825 - the foundation and service buildings cost $15,000. As a showplace for a growing botanical collection, � the conservatory kept with the theme of Como Park as a place designed for the � education and enjoyment of school children and the public. � During the 1920's, Como took on a more recreational and sophisticated character than its wilderness beginning. Cozy Lake was drained to help stop leakage from � Lake Como and to make room for the golf course. A parking lot was put in next to the park pavilion to accommodate the increase in cars. The first bear, Peggy, � came to the zoo as well as the first small animal cages. Most of the zoo buildings were constructed by W.P.A. crews in the '30's - monkey island in '32, main zoo � building in ' 36, the bear grotto in ' 37. Before this there were no modern shelters � or sewer systems in the zoo. The animal cages that had existed were built on low muddy ground so as not to detract from the flower exhibits. During the winter, , � �� , � � � � � � ; � €�"9#�`��f#�� ,�� § ',� �• `' s ef�a��°� � � � � � � e ��ga�� m� �,� � �� P� � � '� �� €� �C� �� a e � �� ,�� '��. s�'g �� 5�,, �� '� �� • • ' • . : � �� .,. � . � ��ro' � .e _� � � � �� .� �� e -. � � � � R . � � � �': � �� ' � � z �° � �r � �� E A4se,e� e e,sem._, ��w, am �P a.�e see.. °e_,�e�e .��e.�� , :m�� ee�,. . � � �� e.ee .ee,... e.,, �. e.e e..e_ ms e.. �� a � . 69..ee... � e�� e.a e �. A 3 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � , animals which could not stand the cold temperatures were kept in the conservatory. , The City-County workhouse, which the City Council allowed to be built on park ` property in 1883, was not remov�d until 1960. Constructed during Como Park's � dormant years , on the southwest 40 acres (now taken up by the pool and McMurray � Fie7d) , the workhouse had long been thought of as incongruent with the rest of , the park. Durin the 40's and 50's maintenance became the major concern and expense of the � 9 park. Vandalism increased. Studies were done to see what could be done about the � "teenage problem". The animals in the zoo suffered the most from vandals and lack of adequate space. As early as 1955 City officials recommended closing the � zoo but a Citizens Volunteer Committee fought to keep it open. They not only succeeded, but also added to the zoo collection. � Como Zoo got its first director in 1957. in the same year a children's zoo was , built. Twelve years later the primate house was constructed. A volunteer leader � and guide program, the Como Zoo Docent Association, was started in 1969 to accommodate the growing number of groups visiting the zoo. The conservatory also increased its � educational services by offering garden classes , beginning in 1974. The Como Zoological Society, a citizen support group, was organized in 19 74 to aid and � encourage the �improvement of�th� zoo. They have contributed a bi-monthly newsletter, � a Speaker's Bureau and helped organize the 1974 conference that led to the Como Zoo Master Plan. � ' � �� , �� _ � � � � x�� ; � r � � �'e�" �... '� m�..m � "�� g . £+"��a. ��_ �� e��a9�`�� `'�� a�,„� � "� � �. � � • • • �� ' �`,�,� # �Q�� . �� 9�� ,e e-e� e. e � , � �, °°� � �� °�� eF a.ea . .�. ,.e.. . ee�e. a � A 4 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � r . 1.0 INTRODUCTION ` Como Park is being renovated over the next few years to modernize the Zoo Area, and to improve the utilization of the other Park areas. The renovation pro- gram is being progressed by the City as funds become availahle, principally � from the State. In the renovation program, the City is assiduously taking steps to include citizen input, and particularly the citizens in the Park neighborhoods. ! As part of the renovation program, and in answer to neighborhood representatives, the City has authorized this study of traffic flow, roadway layout, and parking , needs. The overall aim of the study is to aevelop a comprehensive vehicular flow and parking system, that enhances the movement of Park users and commuters, without undue impact on the surrounding residential areas. Autos, trucks, buses, bicycles, and pedestrians all are to be consiuered. � As would be expected, the increasing numbers of vehicles and park users are resulting in problems both within the park and for the neighborhoods that � surround it. There are times when park use is restricted due to heavy vehirular flow, especially along the lakeshore. �lso of concern, is adequate parking facilities within the park to reduce use of parking on streets in the surrounding � communities. These and other problems are dealt with in the selection of a series of alter- native layouts that will result in a system-wide plan. The most import�nt 1 result of the Traffic and Parking Study has been to recommend a compatible road and parking infrastructure in coordination with development of the overall Park plan. � The report presents first the extensive data base compiled to form a basis for the study, and then the study of alternative layouts. � During the study, which started in February, 1979, a determined effort has been made to seek active inputs from neighborhood representatives. The main communi- cations channel has been the Citizen Participation Program. Appendix A tabulates � the formal meetings that have been held. The study results have been shaped to a great extent through the community input. � 1.1 SUMMARY OF PARK DEVELOPMENT The history of the development of the Park provides a useful background to the � plan for renovation of the Park, including renovation of the roadways and parking facilities. � � � e e e � � � � � �P"I��€ �� , �� f �� g � �� ' :� � e � � 6 �e�s , � �`�� _ e � �: � � �� , • • • eeea�e.beee. ,., �ee;:,ee�..be : a�..e..e. ;; ...�.ee ,e e.. : . e..e e; . . ..e�s�e ,ee�� e3. eee ..,,.ee. ��e.�: � mee ee.... . B� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � r The Como Park property was acquired by the City in 1873 through the issu`ance � of bonds. The bulk of the park, approximately 300 acres of primarily farmland, was purchased for about $100,000. Until the 1880's, little was done with the land and there were questions as to whether the money had been wasted on a park. By 1887 a Park Board, the city's first, had been created and in 1890 the Park ' Baarci hired Mr. Frederick lVussbaumer. During his term as Superintendent, from 1890 to 1922, the Como Park was landscaped, the lakeside pavilion built (1906) , storm sewers installed (1916) , the conservatory constructed (1�14) , and the , zoo started. An electric railway also began serving the area in 1893. A rendering of the park plan, probably prepared before 1900, is shown in Figure 1-1 . A second phase of major construction occurred during the depression years with ' the aid of the Works Progress Administration ('�J.P.A.) . The golf course was started (1929) , sidewalks constructed (1930-32) and the zoo building finished (1937). Little building construction has been done since then except for a � Picnic Pavilion (1940) and a primate house (1968) . Fl larre cat exhibit has been constructed and a marine mammal exhibit is currently under construction. McMurray Field (leveled in 1956) , the swimming pool (completed in 1963) and � several tennis courts (1977) are the most recent non-building projects. A lake improvement program is contemplated, but not yet in the design stage. Some � privately owned amusement rides have also been operated within th� park. There were pony rides in the early 1940's, with the present large motorized rides being introduced since the early 1960's. The approximate breakdown of the various park facilities by acreage and percent � of total is shown below. PRESENT PARK FACILITIES ` Open Space 167 acres 37.Q% � Golf Course 112 acres 25.0% Water Surface 72 acres 16.0% Pavement 34 acres 8.0% Athletic Facilities 25 acres 6.0% , Picnic Area 15 acres 3.0% Zoo Pens 10 acres 2.0% Gardens 5 acres 1 .Oi' � Buildings 5 acres 1 .0% Amusement Riaes 2 acres C.5% Miscellaneous 3 acres 0.5% � 450 acres 100.0% Beginning in 1976, the City of St. Paul has developed a renovation plan for the Como Park Zoo and has completed a Master Plan for the remainder of Como Park. � This study is part of that renovation planning. � s � � � � zss � � � - x �� '�� t�'�s� � � �� '�g� g ��° �� ,�r g �I � � ��€��aa� a�� j� � �� "` �� s� _ ' �; � � �. a�� S `�� ` � g � • • ' • a d� ¢ � e^ � '� � � �� iz �� A � � �� .�� a� ��ca d� � � , � a� �� , �� e�� e�e °��-� �ed� , ��e.�,seo.e��ee�E � 9ae �aa `�' e en� e., e e ��c,ve$..:�� e .e..,.. �°f� ��+��s, ��:a��fs�.e, e-�.eeeeem: e.�^'°aa�m.em �ee eeee .e e ��se., ee. B 2 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � i histori cal perspective ' FiGURE 1-1 PH0700RAPH COURTE3Y MINNE30TA HISTORICAL SOCETY ,� � �,Y v 1 �>�>�^� , �� , •,�"rn� �� 7 9 �.y �7�..� .�,► ��:��'�^q..�� '! r1• 1'1 �.,-� ,�" �s �Q.y+ t .♦ '�� 1 n � 11�11�1�� 1 ��)�f '1 9 � ) �) ��l� 1N9�.��,� ., ��7,.1 , ,,�1 1 7� '�.1� 1�.1'l.l")�.►'l'1� '1y��M•1 1.1..y l�1 ' ' 1�,�r} � h 1 � +� '1 �'� ^f�fM'�yfr . `�' � � �. 11 �� A1 '�,) '}1 �.� . . .�7`. yy � �� 1 � 11 �, t � y'y �1��• � ') �• � 7'� '�+f,'1"�:1 •111"�1 1�l�' .� N �A 9^��. �7 , !1Alf �.�n��>•..� �� `�-�' ';� 1'1 �t�;.;::a;. A , �^� � 9' , :' w�,pAYI�' � '�f� , �'.� , � ° � '; � ^� ,ir�`, 1.�'ti � - � � ?� 1� �� ,"ti�a•• 't� �� TY 'Iti ��,�??�� , � 1� Tl » �,.57.�� s�� 7�r�1?�-^'1/0'�� n��,�1+,1�''� , , � ��`t1 � �y " , ��', 1��_, � �~� ,�� I � Y9 w�l, 1�� ' 1 Zy a� a 9 � ��' ►♦ t �s<» ,� z ;�;,... �, _ — � ��1.1��).�1)?�f �'�;'� � — �'1'1�1h.)'11�1.� 1 ,7 �__—.. � 7� 11 � � , � 911 �''��7�A �� 11 � .�l $ ' / � '�� .� �Il y�'?� l'1'1'�.;� ��,��;��, �j�r � . `*i�'�1. �� 11 �1� �'' IC .�� •^ � i.'�'�;.t - -1�� '�,� y'? � 3 . s?S�T': ��yY \ .1 i ��' �� y �� / ,1� 'ttiyj:.M1 _f�y.S. `a � w9 Y �f1 '�1'y1 a►7f��?+'f� 1 •.�. �. ��t{�4 T�. . 3� � �t i '�. ' ' 9'� �:7 �. �!�'x• a A +n :�°.�+.. �� 6 ., . ,�ey, , �{i�, /.'t•;��;'•-+�iaA�•� , . � ��'�.��`�,� .'�.i�_'^_�^^ �:� �' � ��' ti � Y,;; ��^�y��yz',��. � � :,�,` zr. ,* h%i��'+�� ?9e�� ^1'� .�,�i' ;ti � ��11� �n �K+'f7�!f�,�ynjf�� 1}�y,�y, . '� :i�t �3 ;`' ��q o } �N ;�') �'7 ♦,�- \; . 'i . � ��` �2T".+' �i�1 ."/ '►� ��: 2`. ''C � ....Y ...�;''�, 1 1 '.X7 � • .• 1 �1 � ��. �� ",'3' , ,:. ?�:��i�y'i�-� 1. � 1 � ♦.., �'•� �7` .r.�• � �� a n�.';:'��',';��;4�'�'��'`�v'rtir'��r-��' I � �� _ ,'`-� _`>' �;, a `�.,', — `� `'�Y°',•,,;+'fi'�'�'R '��y�� I �/A , 1�� h� � • � � �� '♦ !. 1�9 �;': 1 �� ' +'• � .�> � *+-^a��"��'s-i~?��4'sis��' . . �i� ;� S'ir' �� ' ¢ i.,.'•:...�y �� ,�°��''� �� y�� . •.� ) � � s � '��'s �' I .� ,� '• �� ' ° "1��1'`��J�''3' 'L''�+e � . � , , �i • �_ . • '• • N >>�� . 1 �� c `0 '�") � 1 h 1.+�`�. -�' 1�f �s f�f � ;`t ` T^+;^�''`.1 \ �J (�� '1�'4� �� O �+�:�iti�T ��' �� -,�;: z ,t�, ; „^, � '�,;� .'��'> q ,�, . � � � v� , � � :� �;� . ��:, 2.;, A i , , ,�, :� '�� 1 , � � ,� v. .:a � • �� a > .y�'�� 'S' :\� n' � +� "A~f '�. . ;' /+ ,.^; � � �;,T� �7�y? • ¢ Fp��,,��'+��:.��•'-?+ �� a '�,� ps��:+` �,'i� �,•'�� .Ci� ,h '�� ° +,�.'iy�_t,.3t�=.',�. ��;A>>" �� i �q � � '9,^7i'1',a M'f . ti �+/ +;7 ''' ,: • '",'• � „Sa:.'�Y{'S,'��'titi �;:..,t' ♦;`'`,:. .�. �N' �1 ''7 `7 ':By r:�'� ��'••'^ ',+��Qa'_ `` ::': Yt� ' �' ' � '� r' y . -� :•� r� •a"',r ,'�-u�.t.� , '�� ',:� ;'.� ,� � ;: +F;i��r�''r' "' _'=`�'i`;��'• �, � o ° �1 � :�-�'��`�i�7;'0.�.� � ��Y y t -��' �� ti'�"`�� ,�` �� r � 'i� . ;if _:��V>��, ti .'7 �..�� , q ti,�� .r��y,�,� t-. �� n � -.-i .L ' i � �- ` � �� r � � .,� 3., � w�� +�s,� f$�' �`�5�, , � � � " ��1 ��!}1 �/E. ' i�.; '� .� �c �'� K� ' � Y��4'��a��,i,?'�.r ��(''� �I L i w e 3' >>}!S � = 1 rt t '� f i� � .�?�i�'`t � �� ' �� '.,� ��. � t� �� + � �^,T ti T�` �}' �J �_ o � �� -� � � l�'�� k �i � �� .�� j`�� . � ;��'�.,; ♦fv; e��•�'„� T�� n � - . ' � { }'�� . o . '�' i a � E � . � � ti . � �l� ? � ��'J ^+ I � r'H • � o � `,� i"? � ��., 1:' �� .. ,,.F \.�. ,�'?+y��` s '.y��1�� '•j�� 1a 't� � �� ',.� 1 �t�.. �i��r�.. rr ` oY� i C. j� h�j. �: ` 7 S"� ,L R 7� .i O H >J�n _.�� ' j '� .t� Il � ' ,'�;�� 3.�.t�in • �C ��.1 • j �' � ��T��`� � e a<" s ��'r S lLt?.��,�ilti � 4 ' ""t ?,_. �.�, ,-1,�n.,� �;� •N�+ ;� `? w�t�+��n;��..�� 03°` � < - � ..�r,2 �+.�2� �:.,�1 . �. '.� ,i_1�+�s� ��s,�r-�;� �' �� ', I� t o N � • � �t\ ��y �}T � A , . , ,• '� 1.� M 1�1 ��.M ti a -�� 7�.. 3��-� V �.�.ii�. �?: ' - .� � i,-� � -a T ♦ �'+±��.��j � �'n ° � '�^i.;� �^ d,i��`+�� -�� ,' . �,_� �3 � ��o�� ,�'��M+',+��'�+�'` �1�� +��'�1, � � W • � .."�1 �� `�['f�yCS��.es� ',�.�� 1 . � C�.+��;�!C� �=�.�s',�1��1 ''�1'�,wq 7^7�1+2+y � F : '!",,.,: .�h, �.� v,�C+ , l'P � � 'u°' - � l �Qiy��' �' �n ��"'� '° ♦y" �� t ��•>�v 1��1 n � ^['..'�aa.�l�..� �.- . �,..,,., -�._, .{.s �:.e.,��* , f�. S � ^o�+�r t~��'�'��J'f � � � � h�7 � . . . . �.� •e e�°� n a �t�>'t'v � s. .H7 t �� 7 7 's '> >^� � � S�l. ' -� ��}�i . e n�,�» '�ne 3 s .�ti 'f �1 l ,�7 7 ,1 n Y 7'0'9 1 rn 1'q n n o 4','9 n n n;'n'n n n n�i''�'f^i"7iA�°.�l . � �� I) �7 1 � �ti 7� b , :�F�� +C� ��r �� I�� e e � � a��, e i�� F . . . - . e. � � e �� ; e .s e r�� . . `� � �. 3 e B 3 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � , � Appendix B provides background information on several City reports of planning , for Como Park. This is a helpful reference for this study. 1.2 ASSIGNMENT OF RALPH BURKE ASSOCIATES TO THE PROJECT � In August of 1977, the City of St. Paul began working with the Como Park Planning � Committee. The Committee was established to develop citizen input for the Como Park Master Plan. One of the more difficult problems in the Como Park Plan was how to handle the parking and traffic. In June of 1978 three Traffic Subcommittees � were formed to study park and traffic related problems. A program of goals and objectives was developed in August of 1978 which outlines a philosophy for the park Master Plan in which future improvements of Como Park � will be contained. One of the City's and the Park Corr�nittee's prime goals was to de-emphasize the impact of the automobile in and around the park, with minimal disruption to the park's general character and surrounding neighborhoods. � The Planning Committee also recommended that the City retain a traffic consultant to assist the City and Subcommittees in development of the Plan. In September, 1978, a request for proposals for technical professional service , for a traffic study of Como Park was released by the City. Through a selection process in October and PJovember, Ralph 6urke Associates (RBA) was chosen and � contracted to begin work in February, 1979. The role of the consultant in summary, is to work with the City staff, the Planning Corrmittee and the Subcommittees to: l . collect traffic and user data in order to establish a sound technical � base for planning. 2. prepare alternatives and make recommendations for a traffic and parking � plan for Como �ark. In order to achieve these objectives it was necessary to establish open communi- � cations with City staff, and the representative community groups. The groups were encouraged to identify their goals, needs and concerns relative to Como Park traffic and parking. � � � < e . . � �lc1t��€�9 ,� ��'� �� ` ,� �� J��'' �� ' � � • . • . , P�D�� +�� t�� : : e e � e e �;, , � ; �ee �,..e�s �F., eee9 . e.,� e�, : e e .. e.. e. . ... ..: .e.e.e m B 4 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' , , •;�:: �:�ti::�:�:�::�:�::�:�::�:�>:�:�>:�:�>:�:�>:�?:�:�>:�:�>:�:�>:�:�::�:�::�:�:�:�:�:�:-:�:�:�:�:�:�>:�:�s:�::�:;�::�::�:�>:�:<�:�:�::<:�:==:=:::��:�:�::�::�:�3:�:�::�:�>:�:�>:�:�>:�:�::�:�»:�:�>��:�::�:�#:�:�>:�::�:�:::::::: ::::�':'::�:�::�:�:�::�:�:�r:�:�:%:;;:��;��4:'r:�:��:�:�:�::�:�:�r:�:�:�r:�:�::�::;.�;.�:''::�:�:�::�:�::�:�:�::�:�:�::�:��;':;:�:;::�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�::�:�:�::�:�:�::�:�:�3:�::�::::::::.'•;:;::::::.':::::::::::::�:�::�S:�S:�::�::�i:�::�::�5:�::.{.::::::::::::.::::::::::::::_::;�:�::�::�::;::�:;::�::�::�::�::�:c�:�:::�=::':�r:�::�i:�i:�::�i:�5:�::�::�::::::;::��' .•.•r��:�:�:::;:;:;::;:;:;:;:;:;: ::�::�i:;`::::::::::::::r: :;:;y::�::;: :�:�:�`:��'�''�'��' :;:i;.;: '::��..........•.:��::�:<�:�:�::�::;:�:;::�:�:..............::��:;;:::;'�''�'�'�;;:�:�:;::.`� ....... ..•��........:•:�:��:�:::�::�i:;�:�::�::�:::�i:::;::�.........::::.:::'''��::�:;;:;::�5:;i: :�:��'��>::•::•::•>:•::•::•::�>:•::•::•::•::�:�:�:<�r:�i:�::�i:�::�::;:;.;::�:::•::•::•:::•:::•::•::�::''��.�•��:�:�:::�: :;�•: .................................--............--•----�----�---........................................................._,..._,....:.�,.. .. __._.,,,,,,,.....,.............,,................................................ :�:��''�.�' � � � � , � � � � � � , � � , 2.0 PLANNING GUIDELiNES � The guidelines used by Ralph Burke Associates to develop the proposed plan involve several facets which are described below in the Consultant's Approach. ' This approach was developed based on objectives and concerns of the Planning Comnittee and the Community and other factors, such as site limitations. � 2.1 CONSULTANTS' APPROACH RBA's role was approached as one of seeking to understand the City and the , - Planning Committee's objectives for traffic and parking concerns; to encourage community representatives to voice their goals and concerns on these areas; to develop technical data on which to base a development plan; to develop alternative solutions and their evaluation which indicate the best plan in the ' Consultant's opinion; to present the results to the City and Committee; and to detail the alternative selected by the City/Committee. 1 To a large extent this approach requires planning from a standpoint which provides a balancing of impacts, which were found to be: , 1 . Impact on the community as to a. living and residence adjacent to or near park roadways. � b. access to the park for the community. 2. The impact on park users who live outside the immediate park environs. , 3. The impact on roadway users who can be looked on as: a. commuters, � b. the community, or c, park users. � 4. Relative cost The Consultant's initial approach was to meet extensively with community groups to learn of their goals and concerns and these are presented in the subsequent � text. During this time of ineetings a plan was formulated for gathering the extensive traffic and parking data needed as the base for planning. As the needs picture and the data of existing situations became available, alternative solu- � tions were proposed and discussed with the subcommittee and committee groups. From these meetings, planning progressed to the recommendation detailed herein. � � � � � �� '�e�� gfi� � �� & �a"�� e�'��.�' g � � � �. t � � �� °� $ � �� . ��, '�'�g ♦ � � � � p � � �� . �� P° I � � f . : �$- � :�$��°� �� da�� a?��as��3 �� : �` � � $" � s s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � i In developing the alternatives and the final plan, there are a number of philo- ' sophic criteria which have been applied and a►�e discussed in the following paragraphs. A major determination from the corro�ittee and subcommittee meetings was relative , to the traffic flow which should be accommodated in the future on park roadways. It was the Consultant's deduction from discussion at several �reetings, that � community representatives would continue to support traffic levels at about today's levels, on the basis that it would not be a responsible action to re- quire diversion of traffic outside the park into other comn�unities. They would ' meet their broad objective of reducing traffic by confining through-traffic to a major north-south and a major east-west roadu�ay system. However, they would not wish to have the traffic increased and they wished it controlled as to speed as well as volume. ' It should be noted that even though total traffic volumes are maintained at today's levels, the volume in particular areas within the park could increase � if the internal roadway system is changed. Several streets in the park area are used by children going to schools. `�ome � residential properties front the park with very little buffer between them and traffic in the park. These may need special consideration. Where resi�iPnces are situated on only one side of a traffic route, the vehicular conflicts ar� reduced, however, pedestrian conflicts may be still classified as unde��rabl�. t,Jhere � residential frontages near the park are on both sides of a r�ajor route, the traffic flow r;ay be acceptable if the park has specific control over points of access to this area. � The future use for particular sites within the park r�ust be cons�dered and it is also necessary to assess the existing and potential us^_s of !�i,ildings. Activities � which generate large pedestrian movements are noted in rF; ation to their particular �rea of influence. It is necessary to distinguish these facilities in order to coordinate pedestrian and bicycle networks with vehicular f�ow. Similarly important, are uses which attract high vehicular movement during par- � ticular times. Major attractions connected with vehicles include virtually all major attractions in the park. The Zoo, Conservatory, Pavilion, picnic areas, � and lake front all have large parking areas near them. The kind of activities which overflow into residential on-street parking spaces � can be identified as particularly annoying. In order to identify current use for residential parking, streets were examined at night. Streets were then re- examined on a peak park use day together with corr�nents from the neighborhood. It N�as possible to make an estimate of the extent of residential parking then by � the park user in order that future plans include adequate provision for such parking within the park. � ��, R� g�v� g��`` a�� °�i �,��°°�� :' � �� a ° �a � �� &�� t�� a��° ��a� � �� ,�g�,�` �a � � �� "��.� ��°��,� �� E� ge� �� a� �� D � �� .° � � �,�.�� 4 �#- . � � � • • ' • � g �' � g �� 8 . : . g°��g.°'.�&' :;'��*'` �` _ . ��, 8��„�-;� � .� g � � m � . s �: � � � ��m�� °� 3 .� �a �.e,�e. �� . eess � B s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � , , An examination of the existing and historic layout of the street system made it possible to determine not only the original design and practical capacity of specific areas, but also the degree of segregation between cars, bicycles, � and pedestrians that could be incorporated - an important aspect of environ- mental management in the park. � An examination of the conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles is an important aspect of this study. Records of accidents with pedestrians are an aspect of utmost importance in planning considerations for a park. These include street , crossing layout and the degree of crossing activity in relation to the speed and flow of traffic. The vulnerability of the young and old in crossing traffic routes must be carefully examined. Children are often careless from a lack of knowledge, as well as their preoccupation with other things, while the elderly � can be inattentive or unable to hear and see traffic. This study included an inventory of the �aidth and number of lanes of particular � streets and possible uses , the location of gradients and "bottle necks," the types of junctions and their frequency on the roacl network and locations of access to residential properties. The location and extent of streets used pre- � dominantly for service vehicles was noted, as well as the routes used for public transportation. � 2.2 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Como Park Planning Committee developed the following goals and objectives to � provide guidelines that could be followed to obtain a comprehensive Master Plan. l�Jhile not all aspects of the Master Plan are concerned with traffic, it is an integral part of the park infrastructure and indirectly aff�cts location and � relationships between most sub-areas of the park. The following is quoted from the August 9, 1978 "Program for Como Park Design": "3. Goal - Reduce Traffic Volume, Increase Parking Facilities, and Eliminate , Circulation Conflict Areas. Objectives � l . Provide separate circulation links - pedestrian/bike/auto 2. Improve on bike and pedestrian pathway systems � 3. Provide a north-south park drive through the park 4. Provide an east-west park drive through the park 5. Discourage circular traffic patterns 6. Decrease congestion at intersections � 7. Decrease non-residential traffic and parkinq in surrounding residential areas 8. Reduce numbers of roadways thus decreasing vehicular surface � areas ° P : g � � ��t�� e� N� �� r�� - ��!� _ .� 3 :, .e e � e � � � �� : �� e, �+�t'1� ��I�� w �l��G@�S e e. , , : . ■ be.. ....�'° :e...: e,e°;.�,. . ' „ �.. °i ee... `.e e. . � e9. . ,.:�. ..�ee ; , e��,.,. ,. `, ,«..�ee.'' ■ B � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 ' 9. Provide comprehensive informational and directional signage ' throughout the park 10. Increase land area between lakeshore and roadways 11 . Increase off-street parking facilities , 12. Relate parking facilities to activities being served "4. Goal - Maintain and Improve Park Edges and Buffers. � Objectives 1 . Imp�ove and protect existing buffers ' 2. Provide buffers between park and residential areas even in areas where they do not presently exist" Discussion and consideration of the above items at Committee meetings and by the � Consultant, resulted in the interpretations recorded below. A decrease in non-residential traffic and parking in surrounding residential � areas was interpreted to mean that the commuter traffic should be assigned a particular route, preferably a single road east-west and a single road north- � south. This is consistent with an overall reduction of the number of roadways and the circular flow around the lake. A goal in reducing traffic volume was to prevent the possibility of future � traffic growth in the park, i .e. , to accept the 1979 levels but to discourage future growth above the existing situation. To improve bicycle and pedestrian safety by separation of the modes onto different � pathways (without a major change in location) requires that on the east and south shore of the lake, the roadway n�ust either be moved back, or narrowed to provide � an increase in land area between the lake and roadway. This narrowing is also consistent with the overall reduction in roadway pavement surface. A decrease in congestion at all intersections is probably not feasible, or in � some cases, not physically possible. To restrict a particular intersection with signs, signals or other means probably would congest another. A certain level of "built-in" congestion is often desirable �oth from a cost-benefit standpoint � and to discourage traffic volume increases. However, unnecessary congestion caused by lost or confused vehicle operators should be eliminated with a clearly defined road system, comprehensive information and directional signs for the � unfamiliar park user. An increase in off-street parking when related specifically to the activity or facility being served can be accomplished fairly easily in most cases. Ideally, � the vehicles should enter the parking area on the side of the parking area which is farthest from the entrance to the attraction. This eliminates pedestrian/ vehicle conflicts at the most heavily congested point. , �� . �� a�. �� .. R ��a �a �� ,�� s � � �� ,r,' a� � �� " � • • • � e � °�� . � �� °�� B�s�� s s �„� ��° �e � ra ��"`t��s, �sm��, �� $ � a .�,.�e�=, a. .,�.e .�.. ,�..b:�.e ..�.. ,.e a�b��, .�.eeee m,�m�„ .., .e3,a.,9 � B a COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � , ' In addition, the Traffic Subcommittees suggested that "traffic reduction" could also mean an increase in travel times, with a decrease in total numbers of vehicles. � Another goal of the Planning Committee closely related to traffic levels is to improve or develop buffers between the park and the community, and provide for buffers where they do not now exist. They would serve the park and residential 1 areas, to shield the impacts of park traffic. This implies that park roads cannot be moved into or traffic increased in the residential areas. 2.3 SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY CONCERNS ' Working with community representatives to discuss the problems of traffic control and planning, of parking, and the effect of congestion on the surrounding areas, is one of the most important elements of the study. This was done in various � ways, but the most useful included the organization of Traffic Subcorr�ittees. Information was obtained: , . on the impact of the traffic on the communities and on the committees' ease of access to the park; , . on the impacts of park users on the communities; . on the intimidation experienced by pedestrians who use the park roads; , . on the worry experienced by parents in allowing children to cross streets in the area; � . on the community's attitude toward traffic noise (inside buildings as well as on the streets) ; and � . the community's degree of satisfaction with current traffic restrictions. An important issue was also the community's knowledge that they could par�icipate in planning for future handling of the traffic and parking which can have an � effect on their physical environment. From the Subcommittee input and analysis, it was possible to define groups of � neighborhoods into environmental areas. Three areas around the park were defined - the west and northwest as Area A, the northeast as Area B, and the southeast and south as Area C. � The 7raffic Subcommittee from each of these three areas was asked to have their members write down any concerns that they had which aff ect the park or their neighborhood. The comments varied from fairly vague "Traffic is a problem on. . . � (a certain street)" to "A blind corner exists at. . . (a certain intersection) ." Some comments were at opposite poles on the same subject, with some suggesting "Eliminate all autos from park" and others suggesting "Increased parking space , is needed in the park. " � '�� e . � +'�'� s�� g � & � �� e ��, � � ��7�,�, e s� � �� g �- � e��c.� �� e °�� • • - • e � � � � � ,6 �� , �. � ��°�e� 9ma.... ,;:..ee...,� �e. ee.�...eee,,.; e.e. .e � �.. .ee: �ee..be ,� ee..9eea�a ,..eAa ,ms,.e.e,. . eee� ,....... ,.' ,,.3.ee e � e, ,aee... s s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' While the comments were varied and often had several points to make, an attempt ` was made to isolate and simplify each concern as an individual comment. The result was a listing of over 250 concerns with some overlaps. While an attempt ' was made by RBA to rank the concerns by degree of seriousness, the subcommittees rejected this and all comments were considered equally important. Subcommittee comments generally could be grouped into four types of concerns-- ' those about 1 ) traffic, 2) pedestrians, 3) bicycles, and 4) miscellaneous comments. Of the total number of comments, 70% were about auto-related problems, 20% were ' about pedestrians, 5% were about bicycles and the remaining 5% were miscellaneous. By neighborhoods, Group A (west and northwest areas) perceived problems in the � neighborhood to be more serious than in the park, primarily parking and pedes- trian concerns related to the Zoo/Conservatory/Amusement complex and the State Fair. Neighborhood B (northeast area) had few nei�hborhood complaints, but a high , concern for access to and from the Lake Como area. Neighborhood C (south and southeast areas) shared in the concern for access to , the lake, and also expressed high concerns for their neighborhood, mostly for traffic impacts. � Pedestrian and bicycle problems were largely confined to the lake area, with few comments made of non-auto problems in the McMurray Field or Zoo/Conservatory. The Traffic Subcommittee comments are surranarized in Table 2-1. � 2.4 SITE ANALYSIS � The Como Park area has several unique problems which cio not allow for a simple solution to changing the traffic flow patterns. Certain aspects of the park t topography are a barrier to traffic both east-west and north-south. The most obvious barrier in the area is Lake Como which along with the railroad tracks and existing street patterns forms a north-south obstacle to any straight line � east-west traffic in the park area. Similarly, Lake Como's 200J foot width (in an east-west direction) and topographical features in the park presents an obstacle to north-south traffic. The golf course extends these barriers another � 1500 feet north and 3000 feet east. With only two grade separated crossings near the park, the heavily used Burlington-Northern main tracks and Como rail yards on the south provide further barriers to north-south and east-west travel . � ��, ' � � . . - . ' 9� ��°�� . B� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � , ' TABLE 2-1 � SUMP+IARY OF COMMENTS BY TRAFFIC SUBCOMMITTEES (in percent) � ' Comments on ' Traffic Bicycles Pedestrians General Comments by Subcommittee � Neighborhood A 14 0 4 1 � Neighborhood B 3 0 0 0 Neiqhborhood C 9 0 1 0 ' Additional Comments About , Zoo/Conservatory Area 9 � 3 1 Lake Como Shore line 29 3 11 1 , McMurray Athletic Fields 6 1 1 1 Totals 70 4 20 4 � ' � i i 1 � 3 .� j ° �G � � �� $ a� k SF�'� ��Cn�`�8� ��a ��3� - � &` �. � � g��"g 8 g� �S � � �� p � � � �� x ; � . ' . . - . e. � �� s, � � �� f �� , �� ' '"� �� rco w .�w ee._. ,.,eeee aeaae�..e� ':�.,xseee . e�e ,. ..,,eea_ .e� �..eee�f.&�� .�e� e.e,.ee.,,�,�a. .. '�.aaa ;6 .eaaa,e 'e.. , �� ■ B a� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 ' Thus within the park, planning is limited to a single north-south route on � Lexington Parkway w�th an alternate as East Como Lake Drive on the eastern park edge or Hamline Avenue on the west; and a single east-west route through the ' park on Horton Avenue and West Como Lake Drive, with alternates of Como Avenue on the southern park edge, or Hoyt Avenue on the north park edge. Since all of the alternates except East Como Lake Drive have residential frontages, any substantial diversion of traffic would affect traffic in residential neighborhoods. � ?here is one unused east-west right-of-way along the north side of the railroad tracks (Jessamine from Lexington to Victoria) but the difference in grades at ' Chatsworth and Lexington Avenues and an awkward rail crossing at Victoria, make this right-of-way extremely difficult to use without massive capital investments. Likewise, the lake shore on the east and southeast is very steep precluding any ' lateral road relocation or widening without raising the road as well , bringing it both higher and closer in relation to residential frontages on the parallel roads. , Taken together, the alternatives for changing flow locations are very limited and careful study is needed. � ' , � , � � � , D,� �y� da� a � �. �.� s �. ? a � � � a � ��. ��. ��, r -� � E°��d��Q% � '�� r� ��r°�� 5 �� `" � � ° d �. �. ° , � �. a _ �� - � &. � � - � • • ' • � � �. 7 � � � �� .�F$S d �R°:�"9 �'�� $.� a . ��e �'�a��°' � av£k. S .. & 9 . ��. � � 6,99e6��.��'�`° . m .& ..ee..o,...,e.,e�m .�'eee.-e �.ee�� ees .,e..va..«a. _.,ee e. .ese.:.e,.e e ,.6., e efi�s e � � 9 � A� b�e 1 B r t C O M O P A R K M A S T E R P L A N 1 r � . i 1 _ . . . . . ..................... :::::��::.:::::::::.:..:::::::::::::::::::::�:�:::::::::::::::::::�:::::::::::::::::��::::��::��::��:::::..:::::_:.::::::::.::::.:::..::::..::::::....::::::..::.:::..:::..:::.::::::::::��::::_::::��:��:::�:�:��::��:��:::::::::::::::::::.::_::�:��:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::�:::::::;��::::::::::::�:::::::::::::::::��:�:�::::::::::��::��::::::�:��:��:`: ::::::�:.�� :.�:::.::::::::::::::::::. ::::::�::::::::.::::::;:::�:::�::::::::::::::::::::��::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ��::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: :::��: : :. :�::::�:::��::::::��:::�:::::::::::.:.::�:�::::::::::�:::�:::::�::::�:::::::�:��: .:.::�:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::�::::.::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::��:::::::::::::::::::::;:::::;::::::::::�:�::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::��::::::::�:: ..:. .: . . .: �:::�:�:::. .� . .... . . . .. .... ......... .. : :::.: �:.��:�: :: � �... ....�........................................................... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::�::. . . .: ... :�::.��:::�...:�............. ................................ ........................................ .......................... .:: .:::::.�::::.::.::.::.::::::::::�:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::��:�::. .:.::.::.......... .................. ...................:................................ ........................................:::........................... ....:.�:::::::::�::::::::::.�::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.�:::::::::.:�:::::.�:.::::. :.:. .::::.�::::::::::::::.:�:::::::::.�::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. .:::.:�.::::::::::::::::::.�:::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::..... ....�::.::.:::........................................................................................................................................................ ..�.:::.�::::::::::::::.::�:::::::::.�:::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::..�:.:::.::......................................................................................................................................................................... � 1 1 t 1 i 1 1 � 1 1 1 1 i select committee traffic routes � ��-, � i � !+orT �J�J l_J L...J� ' �-- � o . � = oL � ° ��° � �' M°"�""" � ° traffic routes I �� /��j � X �� t;/l. � � a � � ji � 8 � �I� � � o � �,,, �� NFBRASKA �II�II� tWO Way I o �� o � one way '� � � .____� o �EVADA �� W �j � �—o �p�\\� o � U o � e o � � �a � -, � /�� P-'��—�D' ', Q � 0 0 �a �LINGTON � � �\ � —_ O �� U Q o ,-II� a�°d�'d-..'a��O �_—� \ � 000�� 0 �� .� � r— �p�\�� i/ � Q� O .. �. l Q o � \'� " �( �0 �� O `� � � ,;�r�� D'•:.::-.5:t::::.''r'' �� y o A �a � o \1 0 � q � A LS`�� Oo U� � Q __ � o :;a � ti � � O p'� a 6a o o` r 4 � P � ,� U � � �� PP Q G� � O � � E � � �� 0 7 �� ..pQ... HOR �� MARYLAND 0 / � n 0 � �� /J 9 V OSE � � oo� � C � � p o✓ '��o�� J O fl� � �_ 3 TE Q 0 Q o�p T � ¢ COM � � i = - n . JES M � ao ' % ¢ _ ��—� —»—_ : : -��--_.-_ : . -. :-:- =r -.-.-. - :.-_ _......� . .-._.:- -. . � —�� . . .,. ,r ^. f . � .. . �G�� l�� ,��V .��% � Q.1'E'��+�` ��` ��t�� =.e��l"�. > ';':�1�� • • — • ..;�� B 15 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN i i 3.0 RECOMMENDED ROADWAY LAYOUT AND TRAFFIC PLAN � Background � Como Park has gone through a number of major revisions over the years in the roadway network. Figure 1-1 in Chapter 1 is a park layout from the late 1800's and gives a perspective from which the present roadway system can be viewed to � understand some of the shortcomings that have developed through previous changes. The plan proposed here, Figure 3 1 , is the result of a careful study of the base data, detailed reviews by the City of St. Paul 's various ciepartments and Como ' Park Planning Committee input. Chapter 7 presents the alternatives considered and the coordination process followed to conclude on the proposed plan shown in Figure 3-7 . � 3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE RECOMMENDED PLAN � A basic premise of the plan is to provide a roadway system which will hanGle today's level of traffic. Thus the roadway system proposed is not planned to accommodate substantial increases in traffic level . � The plan proposes the abandonment of some park roads, arid the termination of some roaGS in parking areas. Two roads are proposed to be changed from two-way to one- � way traffic and one major bridge is to be removed and the crossing relocated. The recommended plan will affect both the east-west and north-south traffic through the park. The primary cause of this change in traffic flow is the adop- , tion of a one-way pair of roads along the lake shore. The constricted nature of the existing two-way road around the lake makes it a ' safety problem for several reasons. There is no buffer between automobile traf- fic and the bicycle/pedestrian paths along most of the lake shore, and the present volumes of traffic on the narrow curved roadways are presenting a barrier , to park users. While several alternatives were considered, �he most feasible is a conversion of the existing 30 to 35 foot two-way roadways to 16 to 18 foot one-way roacways. Thus, East Corno Lake Drive, a primary north-south route, and west Como Lake Lrive, a primary east-west route are proposed as the one-way � pair: the West Como Lake Drive to be one way to the east and the East Como Lake Drive to be one way to the northwest. , Ihe major east-west route, Florton Avenue, thus continues as a two-way route substantially in its present alignment from the west edge of the park across Lexington Avenue to West Como Lake Drive. Traffic continues eastward on a � one-way route along West Como Lake Drive on to the east edge of the park. � �� Qa ��'��,�� fr °'� �` � �� a s°��„ � . e , �� - .�� e� � � ' � �� «� Ea� a � .s°g''`� � ,� �� '� 4 � • • • �� `4��,� �� °��a�� 6�,�� € ��'g �',,��`��, aa��. ' �°,�i �� aa� �`,� _ � w :. ;A .. A , ,a.m. . .e,: . . �a , . .. , .. B 13 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 � lexington - east como lake drive - adt i FIGURE 3-2 � � LEXINGTON SOUTHBOUND LEXINGTON NORTHBOUND � , 6000 5850 C� � Z Z H � f- � � � w , W ,/ � � 3820 �C � 2180 3175 2675 Lexington Parkway East Como Lexington Parkway, East Como � Lake Drive Lake Drive � 6000 6900 � w /� �, � I � � � � __ �. ~ I`` � LL- 6000 �C � �� 3175 � � 3725 Lexington Parkway East Como Lexington Parkway East Como Lake Drive Lake Drive � (ONE WAY NORTH) sum�ary � Northbound Southbound Total � � LEXINGTON (North of ECLD) r Existing 5850 6000 17 �50 Future 6900 6000 12900 (+9%) � LEXINGTON (South of ECLD) Existing 3175 3820 6995 � Future 3175 6000 9175 (+31%) ECLD (South of Lexington) Existing 2675 2180 4855 � Future 3725 0 3725 (-23%) �' � � � � � The traffic which originates in the southeast and is headed northwest will possibly see some improvement in flow �ue to a redesigned East Como Lake Drive (one-way northwest) . The northern part of the Como Avenue-Gateway Drive-Maryland � Avenue-Victoria Street intersection is to be reconfigured so that the left turn onto East Como Lake Drive will be at one point. rather than over an indefinite road section, which will improve safety. Figure 3-3 shows locations of accidents � from 1972 to 1976 and Figure 3-4 shows a concept considered for the Maryland- Victoria-East Como Lake Drive-East Como Blvd. Intersection. ' Fast-west traffic will experience some inconvenience, a��d Front Avenue is expected t.o have approximately a 33% increase in traffic on the west end between Lexington and Chatswortf+ and about E6% increase on the east between Dale and Chatsworth. These changes in daily traffic have been estimated and are depicted in Table 3-l . � See also Appendix I . Other streets north and south of the park are expected to receive diversions of a � more minor nature, as listed in Table 3-1 • Key intersections which will need careful analysis and possible retiming of signals � are Horton-Lexington, where a much greater percentage of left turns will occur, an� Front-Lexington, where an increase in through traffic and right turns will occur. � A street on which a substantial decrease in traffic will be observed is Como Avenue between Como Place and Chatsworth Street, which will be severed from East Como Boulevard and eliminate traffic taking a shortcut to Lexington via Chatsworth. � 3.3 A TEST PERIOD IS PLANNED ' The proposed plan is recommended to be implemented partially for a test period during which the impact will be assessed. Traffic measurements will be used to determine the changes in traffic flow, and to check the geometric layout. Co- � ordination with the Como Park Planning Committee will be accomplished to determine if any changes are needed before permanent implementation. � 3.4 LAYOUT OF PARKING AREAS � Chapter 5 reported on the present parking practices and existing lot capacities. Future parking lot capacities by area were recommended. As the roadway layout was developed, consideration was given by RBA to parking lot locations and to their impact on traffic flow. The final parking lot plan was developed by the City of � St. Paul as part of the assignment of space for park uses. i � � : � P �� 9 s � �� e �� fi - � es . q : e: � . e �� e . a a e �e e � a e e �e: es� e e . � eb . e e .� e. e .�ma se e e s e �� e� e � � � � 1 a e e s � ....� e e e e . ree ee B 18 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � • ' • . • • � • � • :;� �� I � • ' • • . �� ' � o � ,� r;\�1�� .. ��i�.. • ll�A��. �r`q �ti�s�:�� ;bo� a�� I� , . • ��►� , �� e � � �►'IP�.�:1► �o° =a�i�►��5;,,,�. 9 Cjpl i��;�ro � ��.�iA�'�j��;=�a e `� a-oo �'-°�i��w�(�� %� = t,�C i � �r�1�'��'•,�?Ri, ��0 ;�• �D �r:� ' i�� I�d �;�`�� Pj:��T'w� Io � ►��%�� " ' ��'�,.p�� i � 1�:�.,� ':��r�Er►.�� s�.ti cs.��pt.► � • � � �9'� � �•s f`•;i� . d`�%p . d7JJ � �Ov, ' ■ a � �.� � � ��n �� '�7 • �:�?y . '�%a��lO � � � � ��d� ��1e l�l,�� ;f��..��J��.��o � ��iQ�j�ii�� + � f�`L.• ,�� :�•�/d�' �� e� � � a` , • o��o� - � ��a. • �'+� ' 0�'' !� ' '!►`� , ��1 . �� `w. . �p;; � ,��.. ey�; s,� , o�a� , p,� w w � �:�� ° ��.�,� � . � � � � ''-�� ° " � Appendix d� :A. ��*� ` �� • • - . - . - - . � �� °,..K.T-c:.J?-_rp„r�.<.. ;�«.�_� . F,.. .- . . .. . .. � � � � .-� .--. .-� � oQ oE 3�° o\° 3� 04 O O �.n O � M � l�0 +' M M lp + �� v `i �� i O O �[1 O t,[� O ++ �O � u7 N O O � � � fh t0 Op pp I� I-- � Q C •r � � O lA � 00 00 O X � t1� CO � t0 W ' � N H W W � f- � N O..' O 7 � � , i � M Z C W � O O O O O O � J W U 00 O 00 M Q Z 4- N N r- � + h- Q 4- f0 1 + + � 2 �C W U �i U � Li � � lL •r � O � 41� 'fl � � Q O O O O O O Gn +� t0 N 00 00 N 01 Vf t t t M N r— � 1 + + 3 � ��.� � .-. N CJ N � � L > > QJ � +� 7 +� � C O•L O •i. C GJ O O � O O +� d O� O � �> Q +� N ¢ �1-� N � •� U � U N �C Q N+� N i-� C > ,G �G 3 +� � co +� N rC � •�- � +-� rts +> ro N O C W S C 3 L � �C ufJ NJ +-� E O�U O�U i rtS �O � r6 O i i c� _! W 3 c.7 U Li LL ' _ $� # � � � p�£ 8 s " " 3 - ��+�� . � "N ��I�� 4; ��I�� , e ��a�'� ��"�� ` � � � g� �� '�� °�� • • • • � a � °`� � �. � 9 � �� . �� }"�� . ��,.P � 9 �� ,. �,�� .��e.: e �� ...e.s''==.e ,.e ..9. e,�e�e �.,..e,e e,. �.� � e . ... es . e,.ee��...e �. �e �� ee. _ ee � . .�e.. ..� e,. be. .b.e � . �a. .,e. � � P�� COMO PARK �MASTER PLAN 1 reconfigured intersection r , �IGURE 3-4 � r ' ¢ � I � I I < I o ' � F < � U = ' � � � � Z � O �� Z � � � ' � � � % / � � � % / 9�� y �EAST �oMO B��o. -_ NEW PAVEMEN7 . , � , Yn»s�ce0.wMtKT-F.�.cc> ::�<:�'.:i l� � . .�� j A�CEV o�.��oc o�us j � . 1 / � � �i � f ��P 1! �:'. . I__ .:::P ;'.I { _ �P'�- !If"' '� P �� j� �iE %�V`E � �� \ ' ::.: �.1::� : . . ' ��O , S,w6�E� ,� wwEw�,-� #' � �{_ �� PAVEMENT WIDENING •s•a..�e.a. Rwow��.� '}YI;,.�` , '' �� '�ii �� `\, � % 4`{� :� \ • '\ 11 �f-.::4.`::• � - 4\wv�E-u cE�Z4A�V.> � ` � ..f� � / �' 4S' oJ�S\O• �O�u S _ v��Q o � , � � •�o I . ,V _��_�_�� i� � � \ " / � '' _ W. MARVLAND AVE. � � ; i >r / � � ,�:::fr � i a i � i�. ii' � i I I �I-.� , i ,,�, I I�� K',� ,i. r:= ��i LAKE COMO / _��- .�L,.i � -:: � � PAVEMENT ABANDONED . , � � � , � ' ' � � � , � , i , 1.1 i i 1� / / i � � � / �� f • � `� � / WESi R09E �VE. �j �/ � / / � 'N v � y'�0� � `�` o 1 O .t.r r N � ` SCALE W 1"-50' 0 25 SO NORTH � � a-��g�� x2�ep..�g��" � g��'8 �� '� �'� a �'.. .. .. .,e ..e .... �..: � �.�.a . .. �s . � . COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 � � , � � ' � ' �`��'��...::�'�?::�'�'�'`'��;::�'�:�:�:�:�>:�>:�:�»::�:�>.:>:�>�'_�.?�:�:�.�:�:�?:�;;:::::::;:;;�`::::::::::::::::::;:::z�;::.':.`::::>;z:::':::::::::;>:::::::::::::::...:':�:�:�:�>:::::::�:;:::::;:;?..;.:::::;�::;::::��<.'.::�;:::�:::�::::::::::::;:::::;:;>:��:�:�:�::�:�::�:�:�s:�:�:�:�:�>:�:�:�:�:>:�::�:�:�>:�:��:�::�:��:�:�:��:�:�>:;:::>:�::�:�:�:�::�:�:�::�:�:�::�:�:�:�::�:;�:�::�:::::�`::::�:�:�:�>:�:�:�:�>:�:�:�:�>:�:�:�: :�:�i:�i:::`::':::':�::�`:�:�::�::�ii:�ii`:22��:�i:`�::�:�::�:�:::�:�:�ii:�ii:t�::�:_�i':�:�:•':�::�:�::�:�i:�:�i:�:�:�:�::�::�::�::�:�:�i:�:�::::�:�::�:�::�:�:�::�:�':�:�::�:�::::::;:::::;�:�:�i:�:;�:�:�:2�:��:�i:�:;�:�:�i:�:�:�::�::�:�::�:�:�::��::::�i:�:�:� ��'��Y:�:�i:�:�:�::�:�:�::�:�:�i:::�'�'�:�::�:�:::;:;:;:;�:�:;;:�::?:�:�>::�::�:�:�:�::�:2�:�:�::'t;:'`: ��i::::'�:�::;:;�:':....�::��':�:�:'�.:�:�:�:'�..�.'•::::;:::.':�••;:...�.�'<..�'�'�....��.��'�.:'�:�:��':�5:�:�:�::�:::'`�.....5.......:'��:�i:�:�:�:�::�:;...:�:....2<.�....�:�:'�':':�i:��::�:'��.'�':�:�:�:�:�>:�::�:��'>`�:.'•:�::�:�:�:�::;�:�.'•:...:...:;.�...�::::..::: :• � •::•::�:�i:� ' :�::�::�:3:�:�i:�:�:��: :�: :: . �'`::�:�i." . �'� :�:�:• ::•." :�:••:�•.�":>::�:�:��:�:�:�r:�:�:�:�i:�:�:�:�::� �:�:�::::i::�::::;::ss>:;� :::�:�::�:t�::�::t�:�;:�:�;;::�;:�:�:;:::;:�::r:�:�i:�:�>:�:�::�i::�;;:�:;:�:�;:�:�;:�:;::;::::;:::;;:::i:�:�:�:�;>:�i:�:�:2�;�::;3:::�:�:::�:�i:�:�;;:�:�>:�:�;:�;:�:�:�:�i::::�::::�:�i:�::�:�::�i::�:�i:� � '.��......�l�Y .�FI�� .... ... ... . ...................................................................:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::................................................................................. .�.::...:::.:::::::::::.....::::::•:::::::•:::: ::::�•::::::::::::..::.................................. �:.s:•....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... � 1 � � � ' ' ' , � 4.0 TRAFFIC SURVEYS � In the early years of land development, the primary purpose of roadways was to move goods and people from one place to another. Little regard was paid to ' environmental and natural resources except in some isolated "scenic overlooks. " Now, we are realizing the tremendous impact that even minor roads have on the communit.ies through which they run and transportation engineers must be concerned with the compatibility of roadways and the environment which surrounds them. 1 Certain aspects of the impact of a roadway can be measured. Changes in levels of traffic, air quality, noise levels, and hazardous traffic situations can be � identified and evaluated. Others, such as visual esthetics, neighborhood division, and social impacts, are more difficult to measure, but nevertheless these aspects can impact the communities through which a road passes. � A major objective of this study was to measure and document the existing vehicular flow, and from this infer impacts on communities and road users. � The traffic data collection for Como Park took place in two phases. The first phase consisted of weekday counts of roadways in the park area in combination with counts of critical interior roadways. These counts were used to , analyze the commuter traffic flow which enters and exits the park on a daily basis. They were scheduled to include at least two typical good-weather weekdays. Road tube traffic counters, supplied by the City were put on all � routes which went through the park. The counters were placed such that all entering and leaving vehicles couid be counted separately. The automatic traffic meters were left on the roadways through the weekend to coordinate the counts with the second phase of the traffic data collection process. , The second phase of traffic data collection involved parking lot and st.reet usaye counts during a typical weekend within the park. This took place on the weekend , to observe the traffic and parking characteristics of park users separated from the daily commuter flow as much as possible. Coordination of the two weekend days of automatic traffic counts with the occupancy of the large parking lots at the Zoo and Conservatory, was planned to approximate parking accumulation within � the park. By recording the intensive use of sectors of the park by different park users, a clearer picture is obtained of what areas may increase in parking lot use and what areas may remain static (or decrease) . ' The majority of the new data used to determine traffic and parking use in Como Park was collected in late May and early June of 1979. The five major areas in which ' new data was collected (supplemented with existing data in sorr�e cases) are: (1 ) traffic volume by automatic traffic counting meters, (2) intersection turning counts, (3) surveys of park users, (4) parking turnover and occupancy count, (5) ' origin-destination survey. In addition, much historic data was used to augment the traffic flow data. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 are traffic maps of the arPa used by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the St. Paul Department of Public Works. ' �:. .�.�a. e.g ..�y �� .� ��apS� ^�"w8�� a$� �m .x"e�°S,:o. 8�s„�� ,$4. ,r�"ag�� "� � � *� P�& �� $ � • • ' • i � �� „„. e " .°e 9 0 - � � m�g��a�� : � ' B 21 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � Mn. DOT traffic map o -. �.,.��..� _ . _.._. • .-6sxt ,.> ,- ,��,� FIGURE 4-1 � �o :�.. ., sxel9 ,� . `�',°.�., `-A ; � '� �r - �. SSBLS � " r 0 �t� . � - � ti � _. ' ', � ' .„ � ... , � � � - � � , . 4 �� ' < � �o y z �2 � :,. :_ m �l' �. _ � . , . 9 I �.�OBS � �5�9 OQd9 i� , o '� ' _ . / + a ' � o 0 0 0 � :n , ,o, o ° � ° � � � � � ' ... W - �..o :' ,'...' '� in OUZbI 00661' 00 � �91 ooear ooe�r � � � � � o o i i f--.. N Q b• - _ ; i • � .' ..�,. ' . � � / � �b � 0 � . .-��. . _ _ .O��O _ ,._.- _ _ , ::�J �_, o�,!` ,___ � S b _. —_ - — - .. �. 7� , � , — , ` �1GLbS � ro _ _ ' — - ° —i-- '^ . , W N O . N m ___ m - m � d. __ _ _� . � _ M . .,. , - � _ _ _ � ti 0868 �� -SZ9t '�0018 OOIB = • � � � � 0 �S96 _ � I 1 O 6 I M = - �o ' J o a', n o �.: � ;� � o � � ... �, , . � . 2 A , ✓� ,- ` o . _ Q„ . �qr i � � q � .,� . } .i,. N �: .� �m . �.._ .. i .u..... . ,. � ' Sd� sk� � I SLB I � 4 0 - L 9Z .� ,�i - � p .��v�. "':, . � :'. �. N - y60 � O` '. yry�O .� .�\ n o ' O p 6 .. '� N � Q / � M �O NS. - l �j`� _ b a �� te i � �: �°s � o si a si ssii oi�i oc¢i — � i : ,�� oei �:�" o " �� o � s .�, � : : ' :.� - L n w -- y x x <t. g �� " �� I o - o �° " � �v �) a w. ♦ � m� _ ' , p '01 �n - SQ� \ �' � .. _n � . i�n .. , �0916 " S 9 S bL �� S � m OOb£ �� 9 �� 008 r . � OSZ I � " � � � � r f 1 . " � i 1�� '. N_ o � � .o o p 5... � w p �... .. � $ 3 . � � v ,�` � \ m' 1� .� . , rv�b I' N I .,J ,� . _ � A .Ir � . O .�a N' r O � ors �ooisz e�„ ' .:oo I ti=� 5 i si ; ti , �, �9Z £ •, '�� ..Q�£� / . � OO �� O ,ni AF� - ' �� 4 \� `,� r � � N � �� P ��\� � 1 � � + '�it. .„��, .� , • _; ; 000[ O61£�� . �� , S6 0 I � �.S �'� 01991 O .,..�v. �� .. I � o �" � OA� 61 - M. g -,...c I .<. l� \�� £f N t fp/�yoSZL4�. ' .,... pO....' � I , �Y 1 N''� p6 �� ,� , S9fB �:: �,� �� 0088 '�.26 �FE� �,� � . - b. �_A o Ob£L o � o � �� ` �09 �j � m A o m . � � _ � t� � - - t � � � � �- �� . . . � , � � Y � �'��Q� '�� °a � , � : � ... ..,.... ,� � � �� ,�' ry%' � �' yb „� .. `. ] f � ' � 93= b �� " � ' _ fI. ,� 1- �� e � � S£ }� 1�i°` — ,,, � ' . �� '.P _ . . . � /,'�� , •a.'� — , � � � �� ` r � � 3� v 8 s � � �� s�� g a� � � � '�. �� p �� r -+ . �.g �� k g �. g, - .�& � � • • � • � � � �� ,� g ��` ��°�� : a� �� g��m�e,e„emeee�: .,eeee+. ��;9....r, e m.� «ab.., e �� a,e.,.b�� .e'..,.� .: �va�:.,,. �� ,me3. . �.,�A = e eee�e. 9 . ,e.e�,. � COMO PARK AAASTER PLAN � � � city of st. paul traffic map FIGURE 4-2 ' �r~-� pti m� �ti �ti c�o� �� 01_ � N pp�MdD, -- aro ?- 3:i1� � �nr O � of� �N � cDOD �� O�` O�i r ' N O iA m V N Od �Ob � r �- a � J �� O �~ � OOti N `��Ttim io Mr ti � mr rn 1 oti � ,Q��~ '� � oti mab pm -� Ot� Mdp ti or 1�i�,. �ti �nA ti�o� ,nti pr- � � r�' MO �r �` � ��' a �N Na31S3M 'r'- ,��°� �� o ' T �JO�� y'� p�` �i� � �r,r� o r- �nr � i OM n� c� I� ��i N�i �t0 M ��p ppM �f� �O� � NN �O r- Ow _ v M� �O M� O� cp !� I� � O 1� �n cr0 �p_ p I� � �� mm �m �0 mC O 31V4 N N N r- r.. o� �°n� �I� Nt- O~ cpN ar� oti ,�co � r�-r�'- -- ' �f� > Nt0 �� m O� l0 olloa� N`� � �'� o� a° am m r o � Z �� v co o� � ° o � U N � ? �~ � J (O Q �� `� � �1 In�` �� Nm - �7aD � �� aD1D Vl0 �m viaol�in �� Q�. �� N� pm �� In N a LL� � N� Go�o �AK�� r �� o M � � N N tf�- O ctiD O r' �, Q o*� �� o o�� _�p G� c� � _ Oti � O� Hla0MS1VH� w �r � �� N r = /N M �1- OD N� � �N �� N~ �r tOO�p w (O w N 8�- " �' -a a '� ti �� m �� ti �� o m �r N~ NOl`JNIX3� �� 'M � NOI�NIX3l' �� io� , z � "_' � r �Nr- a� > o� �- �o�<° m � � 'n � = NM � vr- w � � � � Oti z w �� TO p �p7 �� f� ' W N� O� �O �f` a a� O N r �O� � � - a 'Oa�D 3� N� �Q f) � �p �C)� IA� �A p � IA F a m N �� 1n f� �� ' N N • 1` � r N N N� �� 3NIlWVH �eif n� N'.' _ ,��'m r�- Z a O� O Q n � w Q �� t� ��` Z O O� 5 2 � �� t~- N� a �f� � O�F O r 2 � � ~ c�ur ' �� C�SVd �� -� pao � in� or „��; r�'i�� r� z , gr; H N� M� �W �jaD N� �n� Or Nr� � 01 p ��` Ma P �n � �j0> m� �(O of�1 � �� ' Or NtD Mt0 Ndf �N� �JNI�l3NS �° ��'�� e��.�- �+�� :�� `l��' �� e . �� s ��e ' • • - • .- e . e- � .� :� e; COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' General Description of Traffic Counts for Como Park ' The automatic traffic counting meters were set up to form a "cordon" or ring ' around the park. The cordon included approximately 250 houses on the south side of the park which lie between the park and the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks, shown in Figure 4-3. The cordon was designed to obtain information on the total number of vehicles � inside the cordon area and the number entering and leaving by time of day. This tvpe of count is especially suited to small areas of special interest or intensive ' use such as Como Park. The cordon line for this study was generally the park boundary on the west, north and east sides of the study area, and the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks on the south. Traffic entered and left the park at � 11 locations, on 15 separate roadways. This cordon count involved 23 traffic counters supplied and supervised by the City, all of which were in place during the weekend of June 2 and 3 of 1979, and � one or two weekdays on either side of that period (not all meters were set out on the same days) . The various count stations are numbered in this report starting with Lexington ' Avenue on the south side of the park and proceeding clockwise around the cordon. Some locations had more than one counter. For example, Station #10 had four ' counters to collect data for both Como Avenue and Gateway Drive in the eastbound and westbound directions, while Station #5 had only one, since it was a very low volume and it was not considered necessary to count in both directions. Traffic volume was measured at 10 of the 11 cordon crossing points shown on � Figure 4-3. The one point (Location #7) at which traffic entering and leaving the cordon was not counted is the Lakeview-East Como Boulevard-East Como Lake ' Drive intersection. Since traffic was measured on East Como Lake Drive south of this area and on Lexington Avenue past the East Como Lake Drive-Lexington intersection, the majority of the vehicles going into and out of this area were ' detected. Appendix C contains more details of the traffic measurement with automatic counters. To complement the automatic counts, several major intersections were counted ' manually and the details of the count are included in Appendix D. The number of vehicles entering the intersection and the direction of their movements in the intersection were recorded. The counts were totaled every 15 minutes and ' the percentage each movement was of the total number of vehicles through the intersection was calculated. The intersection counts were taken on a spot basis, usually during the peak ' morning and afternoon period of the day. There is, of course, some statistical error in assuming that a spot sample will be representative of the off peak , 3 e e �e �.� �� a � �e � ��ri,�� .�..' ��`�� ` � �� e� '� � a � � �� .:� �� ; �� e a : � �e �� 5 � � � � . . . � � � �� ,ea� . , . � A .; e�e �e;��: z �� e.. , 6.,. e m. �. eee ,e.. e. . ee�oeee. .. ee�;� e,e �. � B 2 3 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � tflow of traffic, but this procedure has been shown to yield estimates within several percent of the true totals for vehicular movements. � In addition, an estimate of vehicular composition was made at selected points within the park to determine the percentage of heavy vehicles. Several streets are restricted for truck use and very few heavy vehicles other than buses were � noticed within the park. Parking Area Counts ' Parking lots and selected streets near the Conservatory and Zoo were counted on an hourly basis to determine occupancy. The last three digits of the vehicle � license number was also recorded and the turnover was calculated. The percentage of capacity for each lot or street reached on June 2 was computed and compared to the available parking and its location. Chapter 5 presents the results of � the parking lot survey. Pedestrian Interviews � Over 700 park users were surveyed while walking in the park, at selected points. The survey was conducted on an informal random basis and dicl not necessarily cover all park areas. The questions were intended to get data in areas of the � park which received the heaviest use, times people had arrived and the length of stay. In addition, their parking location, type of vehicle and number of people in the car was recorded to aid in the parking area occupancy survey. � This data was then correlated with previously collected park user data from the Metropolitan Council . This material is presented in Chapter G. � Origin-Qestination Survey To determine who used the East Como Lake Drive, an origin-destination survey was , done of a.m. peak hour commuters on Friday, June l , 1979. This was in the form of a prepaid postage card (see Appendix E) . It asked, in addition to origin and destination, if the trip was for work and if the driver went out of the way to go through the park. The response of this post card survey was very good, with , 61% of those handed out being returned. � 4.1 ROADWAY TRAFFIC DESCRIPTION Location #1 , As expected, Lexington A,venue at Location #1 had the highest volume of traffic. For the week in which traffic was counted, the weekday average was 18,148 and the � � � � � � � � a � 9 � � � $�� a� ��a �° �`�°�s�� - .�� E ��.a��g�°�� , *�� a��,�. � �g g� �re � 9 9�%a��'��.� �� . � � � �. � � g � �� . � � �. � � �� k� � �. . e `� �$ � �. � � � � c.a 3 �� . � � '��e� � � • • ' • � - �' -: � �. ��' '. a � � � � g �� '�� a r� �,�� t r�`� � � � � �� & �� %�� ' ��,6�� € -�� ;�F��e��e�� ;�� E � s° �� g��:� �*�' aW�z�ae�e�'��'�� ,°,��.� �49e �� n r .e�s�s�a , a . B 25 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � weekend average, 15,761 . This weekday average is considerably above the 13,150 � shown on the City of St. Paul traffic map shown as Figure 4-2. The difference can be explained by the fact that 13,150 is the average daily traffic (ADT) expected on a yearly basis. ' To get ADT values, the counts recorded in the recent (1979) measurements, must be adjusted to �et a planning value. The adjustments are explained below to � show that the planning values will be 15,967 for weekda.y average daily traffic, and 15,761 for weekend average daily traffic. Table 4-1 shows the adjustment factors used below. ' Sample Calculation of Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for Lexin ton Avenue The following calculation is included to aive an example of how ��T is obtainea � from the raw hourly counts. These numbers are for Lexington Avenue at Location #l . The weekday count was done cn June 1 and June 4, Friday and �londay. The sum of the hourly counts resultea in a total of 8,795 northbound vehicles and 9,353 � southbound vehicles for a total of 18,14� total vehicles. In Table 4-1 there is not a Friday/Monday percentage, so we compute this to be 110.1°0 + 99.4% = 104.8%, an average of the two days. 2 � In other words, a count taken on f�onday and Friday is 4.8% above the average day. Similarly, a count taken in June is 8.5% above the average month. If we want the average daily traffic (that is : "The traffic on �;he average day of the �veek and � in the average month of the year") we divide by these factors. idote that the percentages are now change� to real numbers. 18,148 = 17,317 vehicles on the average cay of week � 1 .048 - �1�dD � 17,317 15,967 veh�cles on the average mont6� of the 1 .085 year on the average �ay of t�e ��eek. Sirnilarly, the Saturday/Sunday factor is 8p.8�, and June again is 108.5%, so that ' the cornbined northbound an� southbound total of 15,761 from June 2nd and 3rd is first divided by .898, then that number is divided by 1 .085 to c�et 16,176. Nowever, ' in the Como Park area it was obvious that Saturday and Sunday traffic was not 10.2°0 below the average day (100% - 89.8% = 10.2%) , because of the high usage of the park on summer weekends. The weekend numbers from Table 4-1 would be nore typical � of a normal residential neighborhood. Therefore, the lower number of 15,761 vehicles should be used as the average weekend day. This may not be true of a.11 locations within the park. � � a� �� °� �� `�°� � � � �� "°��g � � � • � e� ," , � �.�.�" e` a 2s qN ■ COMO PARK MASTER PL � r � Table 4-1 ADT CONVERSION PERCENTAGES ' % of Ave. Mo. % of Ave. Day � 1 . January 84.6 Monday Q9.4 2. February 94.3 Tuesday 103.1 � 3. March 101 .0 Wednesday 103.5 4. April 107.9 Thursday 104.3 � 5. May 106.5 Friday 110.1 � 6. June 108.5 Saturday 98. 1 7. July 102.6 Sunday 81 .5 � 8. Auqust 103. 5 Weekday Combinations 9. September 102.4 M-T 101 .3 � 10. October 101 .0 M-T-W 102.0 1 11 . November 95.5 M-T-W-TH 102.6 12. December 92•2 M-T-W-TH-F 104.1 � T-W 103.3 T-W-TH 103.6 � ST. PAUL T-W-TH-F 105.3 � TRAFFIC W-TH 103.9 EfdGINEERING W-TH-F 106.0 � JULY 1 , 197$ TH-F 107.2 S-SU 89.8 � � g s g�� g ��e � ��i�s�� s�� $ ° s �� °��: s � � � �� $� � ° ,t� ��9 �, � �' � �s � �'� �.�'�* eas��a'� �",�.�. ��'e� °�e�.� � � �� .P��. � • • ' � � � � .. �a � ..�� :�. �� e' � � � , � �r � � �a, � �� a �°�Z ��a m � . a� �� e , �� 9 a , 9 � ��e �� a�� : �a �� . �� '�e a�,.. �9��..,e��e,, ee ma.��ae�. P �.�e a�, ��. ,�� . ,. bF B � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 cordon fine and count locations r FIt3URE 4-3 � .�UUUL.r.JUL___.J� __ .-_- _-. C�� 1 '__ ._J��i . il / /i /'''��r 8 �� II I' / I f �� °� � � � °� �� C � �, �--�\o• ,r o _� �J , 0�� —�_� �° \ � � ��o � �1��r � _- ..�e.o o_ . �Q aQ �.�� ,. 0 �� _ \ � —ao _ .Q_ _ : o o � J ` a •^,�-_°-�� '-'�- � - � oc 0 oc o � o°o•��\o --��a, '-�� a :-\,t,o �-__��_:+ o ,�� \ o� \ °�a�— �� .,.`�\��\ �.`��+ �b J'n 1 1� \ D �� , V n/�I � �.�','�'�?f �`� �:� `o �. �— �; / 1 �/ O 4 '� v � � ` . / � `��,� o U\ '�� I �l �0 � � !j � o0 6-�0 �^ / � 7 � ,B � � a 7 C ° �;�� ° o ° � 1 ,� O O� � � n � i � Q� 0 O � �� O � 0� C� J O 1 � � q� oo � � � � J � Q e , o _ � —�� b� � � �� I o o� � � � � { � � � , � n�u ( � ✓ , r � o �° � � ° � � � ° � u 0 0 oc� � �o . � , . __ �� 1 11 n . . -_ � . - � �,..........�.. __ . � ;,�� " � f � ,�. # � fi a ..a � � ��. r �� P � �� - . �� '' ��. � � .� �� t '. aF�y-a � . + � � � fi � _ �� ' a � � � �� . � • • ' • �� i�� . � d8� �#� �� -_ ; : �'. � �� a . "� ` �� . �� . , e�.o...ee.�.s e. �� ..ms.va, s k��eb.. . �ee ee�ee; n-,ee..e. ��. 9 �me�:��, .� � -a t ' �,e �` � B 3o COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � Hourly Variations on Lexington (�venue - Cor�muters , Hourly variations in traffic flow and the directional distribution were also measured separately in the north and south lanes shown as Figures 4-4 and 4-5. L In any urban area separated from the central business district by some distance, total "in" and "out" volume of traffic on two-way streets is usually found to be nearly equal at the close of each time period which includes a normal workday cycle or weekend park-use period. However, there occur certain hours, or days, , �vhen unbalanceu flo�vs exist. In sone cases, this r�ay be almost a "rotary" direction of flow on portions of the network. � At Location #1 the directional split between the north and southbound for the average of the weekdays was 48.5% and 51 .5%, res�ectively, However, on Figure 4-4, note that from 7 to 8 a.m. it was 68% southbound �nd 32% northbound and at 4 to 1 � p.m. it was 57% northbound and 43% southbound. This implies that it is a r�ajor commuter route in the rnorning to the south and north in the afternoon, reaffirmino w h a t h a s b e e n p r e v i o u s l y k n o w n. T h i s p e a k i n g i s v e r y o b v i o u s o n t h e f i g u r e a n d gives it a distinctive double hump curvature. 1 The weekday average peak hour was 1555 vehicles from 4 to 5 p.m. This is due nostly to commuters heading north�varci home fron work, but also to some � weekday park users. It is 8.6% of the total traffic for the day. :°�nother peak occurs at 7 to 8 a.m. and is �.5°� of the day's total . The average of the top eight hours on the weekclays is 1285 and these eight hours account for 57% of the � day's traffic. hourly Variations - Park Users � Tsie �veekend directional spl it is much rnore even as sho�vn in Figure 4-5, in the top eight hours of the a.verage weekend day. The clirectional split was : � Hcur N8 S� 11-12 53.7% 46.3% 12-1 53.5% 4G.5% � 1-2 52.1% 47.9% 2-3 50.0% 50.0% 3-4 50.�+% �9.6% � 4-5 47.8% 52.2% �-6 47.5% 52.5% 7-8 41 .4% 58.6% .� and was 49.4°o north and 50.6% south over the whole day. � � �- a ��, J .� .: �� 'a` ��be.�� °.�°°�" a r �� ,�f$�� : � �; ��., �_ � �:. � '� � �a �� ,�. � ,� 't e.�� ,a �� 9&� d �.8 d ff� �ayFy 4� � '�s`� �� d Y g ��' � � � � `a `g 8 � � r � �� ; �'e �a � � � �' ��. 5 ��`¢,p"�„3.�a � ��4 . � " ' � � € °'�p , �° e � �°�'�F�� P�*a a�9 � �_ '" a i � �,„ z�,_«� ° s �� °-' �e. �9 e a ..r.��a�e�a�,�. m�.eva9ee,.vme ,. . � .��,,� ..e ,.�e me�e,a a ,g�9 A3�.e,,,�..' a 2s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � cordon ring location no. 1 - average weekend traffic FIOURE 4—b � EXINGTON VENUE OUTH 100 LOCATIOP� #1 � 90 , N0 R T H ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,4 g� SOUTN �' � � 70 _ _ = i � _ = 60 - ' _ = _ __ = e � a ° _ _ _ " _ � SOO' _ _ _ _ _ _ � w = = = _ = = = o = = = _ _ _ _ a � _ - - - - - � � 4p = ' ' - = = _ ' ° c - z = _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ e � 30 = _ = _ = ' _ € _ _ � = _ = _ = _ = = = _ _ = = = e =_ e ' __ __ _ = `_ _ = _ ; � 20 = - - _ = _ _ = = _ - = _ _ _ ' _ = = = _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ = = ` _ _ _ = ' = _ `- ' _ _ = = - - � 10 = = = _ = _ _ _ : _ = = _ _ _ _ '_ = ` e ' ° e � = _ _ = = _ = _ = = ° = ' � - _ - _ - = - - = = _ _ = - - = = - = � = = � ° - ° _ _ = _ ° = _ ' _ _ _ = " _ _ _ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1D 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 � � �� Q�� „��€ � s � � � �� e � fi � 9 �"�SS�� g ' R � �� C g �' �� 3 � � sm 2 � � � °�'�� z � � � �� "' , � � �� ♦ e �'� � � ' ��. • • ' • � g � �. °. ..se. ,. -. a3ae.e. .. mae, ...�..`�e.�, .. ,�,. .�,�'�.��..��e. s-- ee...�...es.�. .,:e, va e,.�,a 9�.�eamee-. 3:�a � � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � r cordon ring location no. 1- average weekday traffic , FicuRE a-a _ EXINGTON VENUE UTH � - - � - 100 �OCATION #1 .. _ _ __ _ _. __ . __ . � _ ___. . .. _. ._ _ . _ _ . . . . . . ._ _... .._ ._ _ ._. ... ' 90 . . _ ...__... . a�uun�unuum e _. NORTH � e _ _ . _ _.._..._. . __ ' __. _ _ = � . _ _ . .. _ SOUTH ° ° 80 . _ _ . ... . _._ _ ...__... . __ __ _..._. . __ _. _.. _ � _ �. ._ _. ....._ _.__.._ _......_...._. � __ .._ ......_ ____.. _____..__. _ _ _ _. ._ _ ._ _ _ _ _ ......... __._... _ _. _... _ _ _ _ . .�.� _... _ . . ..... _.. _..._ .__.�_. ...._ _ _ - _ _ _ _ .. __.. .....__. - - � _ = ` _ = _._ - - - - � 60 _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - . - - - _ - N._ _ . _ _ - - - z - _.. - - - - � - - _ _ _ - � _ _ _ _ _ = _ _ = ___ - - - d - - - - - - _ 50 _ - - - - _ _ � � _ _ U = _ ' - - - - - - - _ - w.__ . _... _ - - - - - _ _.. _ _ - _ = = - - = � _. O E = = = = " = - = � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _... _..... a : = ' ' _ e w - - - 40 - - _ ' - s Cq _.._ _ __ _ _ - __ � ' ' = - ' ' - - = - - - - - - � = = - = = ° = °- - - - - - - - - - � - - - - - - - - : - a - - � - - _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ z - - = = - - - - � _ - - ' _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ _. - - - - - - _ _ _ _ a _ _ _ - _ _ _ - ' - - - - = - - = - - - - - - - - - - : - - - - - - - _30� _ _ _ __. . _ - - - - - - - - - _ _ � _ = = ' ' ' .�. C� ._. .__.. ._ . _..... . .. ._. _._ _.. ? = = ' , __._. : = = = = = � C c ? � _ ' ' s � _ o. _ ... ' ' - _ ..._ _ _ m _ o - ' " " - - - ' - - - - ' " " ' - - - - - - - - - ' ' � " - - - ' - - - - �� _ - - ' " = = = - - c - _ _ _....__ __._.__ ____ _.._ __ °_ _ - � _ - _ - _ - - _ " - ' _ - . - _ : = e � � _ e _. = - - - - - - � = - ? = E - E E = E - = �.Q _..._ _ _ - - - _-- ' - _ _ _ _...._ .._ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - . e. e - - ' - ' � - - - - - - ' ' ' ' ' ' _ ' ' ' - = - - - ' - - - - - ' ' ' - - - ' ,_ � _ __ _ . � � _ _ = ' = = � � = o _ _z. � ' � ' _... ' ^ ' ° ' _ = ° = = ° = ° ' = e = - e e � 2 s 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 � ___. .__ __ _ _ _ _ _ TIME OF DAY �, s � �� ' s s�� c� R� �'��i�a a&� z � �s� e y � $ z � �� qRk�� I �� o- �� 1 � SYY�° � e � a � � �� g �., �� 8 � �� e � � � 8P4�„ e. -�' . �� . � . � � .� :. s tl:'::e.. � �'��S'° � .:� 9e....s��:�.m. .ee+:.e 9ees..�.,�. m ro q�e�.. .e,e... a ..e,ee...e . .:...ee.. °� �.. .e..�o.. :. .ee. .e=:�. ,. �e. ,..e � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � Tt�e implication here is that park user traffic in the morninr is northbound , and in the afternoon southbound, a reverse �f the commuters. The most densely populated residential area lies to the south and east of Como Park, so we can assume that people come to the park from the south in the morning and co home � in the afternoon. This same flow appears to take place on weekdays also, but on a reduced scale, and is overlaid by the commuter flow. Note that the sharp a.m. and p.m. peaking evidenced on the weekday figure is absent on weekends and ' the traffic assume a r�ore bell-s��aped curve, with a single peak at about 3 p.m. The weekend peak hour is from 2 to 3 p.m. and is 1303 vehicles or 8.3% of the total . At this time equal ar�ounts of traffic are ooing north and south. The ' top eight hours in the Gay average 1182 and account for 60% of the total weekend average day. Lastly, in looking at individual weekend days, the totals for the two days were � about equal with Sunday being ubout 3% lower tha�� Saturday. The hourly use, however, varied somewhat. On Saturday 28% of the total flo�� for the day was � detected before noon, whereas on Sunday only 22% was detected before noon. This difference is made up for on Sunday later in the day. Low park use on Sunday rnorning and organized athletic euents on Saturday r��ornings account for this difference. � Location #2 The traffic volume and �he �traffic flow curves for all locations are shown on � Figures 4-6 and 4-7 and Table 4-2. (See also Appendix E.) Traffic in the park is hereafter compared to Location #l , Lexington Parkway, on � the south edge of park. For relative ranking, Lexinc�ton is the heaviest f1o�N (100%) and other locations are given as a percent of Lexington. Location #2 (Jessamine �":venue) showed a very �ow ievel of• traffic when compared i to Locatior� #1 . The average weekday was 17% of the traffic at Location #1 , 1910 vehicles, and the average weekend, 7% of the traffic at Location #1 , 1141 vehicles. � �lo historic �ata was available for comparison, b�at it appears consistent with observations. The average daily traffic for a weekencl N�as 40% lower than the average weekday traffic, quite diff erent than Location #1 , but not unexpected. The maintenance facilities, apartment building complex, dog pound and Humane � Society offices would account for this activity on weekdays. The average daily weekday traffic was estimatea to be 1676 and the average daily weekend traffic, 1171 . Use of McMurray Field on the weekday evenings also contributed � to the high weekday usage. � � �� °�� '� �sa� e � �_ �, r � � � a ��..�� a�� - �'�.;�� -' .� �:.� �� aa'��°a ��°,�� `� �,��.��.:�. �� t ��.�� e ` s� e�� a � �� •es�P �� • - • ° � ` `�� °°°�� , �� a�� _ � �� ,� � �' ' �� 6 3 COMO PARK �MASTER PLAN 1 � , all locations-weekday traffic FiQURE 4-8 ' .. -� ... :� , �— , � �� . _� � �' ! I ...�.._._......9 e I 9 � w � �Q^ � " m m � ,n n r a 6 — .� a m n n �n � ... rv . , � ...:i ...`l ._�.i .......� , � _...._ ...._.�.�... � � � a o . ._=_.,�a . ' I ..�s £ - I __S � w s w a • ' .• a m ,- .o �„ � m r ,. N a m � u 5rin e . m n � . r - _......_ .�� „_� __.,_,,._.,... _ .. _� _,� r ____..�.. -- _ _ __ . .�_� �= _ _ _._ � _ ._ - � o _ -�.�.� o . a � _� � � �� , I � � � I 3 , w 3 1 1 ° Pm � � � :---aa eam . � � . � � . svv.�ao xanwnx o ao xaeunu 1 � � � ' � � ...� .� . . . . . � :. .; �,��- � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 all locations-weeKday trattic ' FKi11FiE 4-6 _..... y , . _ __ r o � a _ � w .__.__. � x „ , Ng � a = __..__._ _ 2 = . . �a � . o � o� _.__._.:, 4 � _ _. o � a o 0 0 ...................,y w �n t� _..._� �+ . F� I .....�.......�...� E ....�.'a ti u j u w _ ......................�.........e, J S a I w..9 i ..........._............_......... . ........_......m > w = N � 0 6 I N a -v i .o .� �e — r. r� .� y a m r .o �n �r r. rv .� � , II � .�....�� ... ,...�...... � ......� I ..................................... �a �...a � I ....W n i .............................�...�.....�....�.....� � N . .............�......ti..................... ^ F �..�.. e i' — �n m .....�.„� c ..............._...._...._ a o I � w rv � � t w z , � ° . o � o .. o — ....�...,.,�., z � � w d i £ a ._......_....._ 7 0 > a '.7 0 � �._. _..❑ '....� I w � I �..._..9 i- _ I '9 I z �n a w � N m m n .o .n e ., n .4 6 n m r n �n a n n .� � N39HI1N .._ _._ r ._ _..._ _...� � .� _ - - - — � — . _.._...._.._._._.m � w� �s ._.:......_..___._. _ � } _ _ w= .. .._._ _..__.._ a � . �o _ o o _ a_ _ � .._. _..._.._..___�. � 0 4 =a 3 � � o 0 0 _._._._..__. y . � � r : � _ y . �J . ._._.___. _ � 9 _ . t � � � � x ._._ ..._..__ a . w � � J . ... _... . ..._._._.. _. . T._._ � � Q p r � _ ' ^ ry J y� r P m n n N ao uaexnx ^ ry y � � � � � � sq ��„�'��y � i�,e f&��baL' � � � • � ' � � � ' ��"�;.�'". ��- m COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � all locations-weekend traffic ' _ FIpURE 4-7 �, � 7 .: � ' .:::�::::: � - �:::�.:::::.:_ � : �� a< o< � , , 00 ................_..... _ �� a >. E� _� a _ ..............9 �. `i �. � , I I ' w � r � _ � m � a � . � � _ _ � � � � , � � _ � _ r . � � _ � � _- ..,.. �.`i �. G - .........-.....�.._................. �l r . � � ........N.�...... E a W o ��......�...-1 � I ...9 i £ I 9 t a � w _ r _ Ta � � �„� ,o��,�w„� m � _ _ � a . � , � � _ � _ � � . . � _ � ....� . � _ .. . . ..... . .. . _.._ _. _� _ � . � = ._.__..__...._ ._ .._. ..._. _..._..._.._..; _ _ __ � o . � w o . _._. .____.____.._.._._.._._. _ �_ � ¢. .._... ,_................_...._...... 7 c °a :J o .,,, x� � i� � 0 0 I F J - r u . I ......._,........�..�.... 9 i� ; i % m i � J w _ _ �. � _....�....� I �n � N a .e r .o .�bn v .� n � y e x .- n u. s .. n n � � J = �� : W4'�b°c� � 02 � � ..a s � �,} � 2 - � �� 5 " � 9 � e� 4 �'. F i �� ''$&�� 9� .,P"e� � . e_ ,.. dP .� � . � � � - °E �� . �� ,.8 � �� . � � � � � n � ' �s .: � �. � a ��° e,e:. - „ ev , g p a .,�. : ;,, aa ea.e. e.,.,�- ��. W�a 8 �� - � � ee,�e ee.'�, ee e. .�:, ea e s .�.. . s.reFaa.:,.� eR��'��ee se�e. era, d.« .��_ eee.�e � '.��.m COMO PARK MASTER PLAI�� 1 all locations-weekend traffic � FIGURE 4-7 . ' � , .............................y ............................................................o �.a ......�...��.....�,�_...� _ I —... � ............��......��..............._............,,, '° c .... ................. .....^ w � �� w:. .. ..,. ......... .... . x � �:. �" < � .................. x N . � o .......��..............��.......y w .�..... „ _ I ,..9 E y ».... � I 9 _ w s w ' � o 0 0 o n o a e. � - .� a � .. e .� � ... H . I y m a � �n in e � H .. � ......�.....� ^� � I ..................��...........� � I ...�...��.�...�W � a o m . .......�� w c� .� r �_ W ........................................,rv r i ,r x z 2 w a o o �� ... � _ ............ .. ..�.... z o ....,. . y w- o a ...............'.7 o a a ......... `.7 r. x ., � 0 0 � ,� �,.� _.......,_..... ,.....a s E J '_" � wI ................_..g � _ I — 9 I � N _ w � I IN o. m � n ° .. ., 6 N........... y a m ,- .o u� . .� n . ISllV a0 L � .........................�� .,ry � � i. ...............................................� ..,�� .........o .............��...........�..........�...........................................� _� . ��i ._.. _ _ __ _ _ � ..................._.............................._......_.............,.. I _: ._..... I .........................................................,..................................�...........�..........,.. ,� a .....� ' _ .,..,....... ' :I i — ] .�.w ...............��.........�.........�................................................�.......�.........�.......... �u w_ ......................��........��..................,................................................................ :i c � � c �. n . I r .............�........,�..............................,.......................................... W J — . :� F� „�........................_........._...........................................,.,;1 � v . �.� ...........,........_....._......._................_�� .� a o � � I I Yq I J � ' n — � S w _ �._"_ �. _—' .� _— —_..—.. . _ .• a m r .o SLtlJ d � � n . � � °a� ��. � S as� �ya � r :�.-�� ° 5°°' w �� 8 � � � � � �� '� � �� ^�� '�€ ' ��a �� w�� ,, � �ee� � �� a x � $ �° �� a� � � � �,�� " � �� ; � � , �� a �� , �y�� • • ' � � � � � � �� aa s�� a� � et��.��. ��g�a�a�:'��a �' � � �� a ¢ eek�s , COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 , � summary of traffic flow , v ^ L u�i m ^ rai rn � z � �i w � •°_ :°— o�_ � TAB�E 4-2 � _� ' L m��' n6 C uf aD t0 4 O� �O ^ e pp < O �[ m ^ T A1 N � �!1 Af ^ CO O H �I ^ M �'1 N 2 O� O V N 3 e.l 3 O A1 ^- aD t'1 � � Q � O O � O1 T O� O� ffU m m �0 �0 m m � ' � YI O 01 O N � rf � N Y1 ^ ^ ^0 N) ^ f V O � 10 �ff �3� S.�I b a0 O O� Iq Pf �q O 00 f O� f0 , �[ . a0 O� O� O� 01 O� CO f0 a0 O O� O� N W 6 N p � N m Of �O T P�1 O 01 N m N � W ^ O O N f �fl N N W r� 3 �+ � M�n �D ♦ 4! V N N m � O 1� 1� gW O f'1 O N \ O� O O N O� �, ,� ;� ,� � : . � � ,� � e p1Y �L W N V �D Hf �O m m N T �O M /�f ��s C 01 �O 01 �It 1� \ 1� 1+1 O� 01 l� O N G W Q O �"f s O� Z 1/f V �f1 Q P9 �� O C M�I �(f N O� N � 1"1 �O O GO � m M L i�W • • O N \ 01 f11 �O G , � U O�a Mf �(f �O �n 4f Z ♦ Hf O Uf �D R dwv L Y C�_�I ul CD � CO O� a 1� Y O N 1ff N � O « m OD O� Y1 f� \ O 1� V O� a N j H W I Q O 1�`I V O 2 Jf R H/ R M �[f O J N a� � L�I m v �i m N 6 N n„i uNf b a0 O l.l d�x V 10 �O 1+f H1 \ �O �O �O < �O O u. Y�+uf W 2 � Tw � L d�L�I N N ~ 7�Z 4� � V � N CNO \ O„i n � V N b O v N�W I u� rf n �o c Z '+f 'n r� �n m �o > r O � V N�-.M N N N N < N N M � N M � � N L�W I � /�f �O 1� � 2 N N N 1G Q �O � N 3�a0 v NI N b � � � \ ^ n h � N � Z M i"1 �O Af N < 2 1� 1� O Yf n'1 a c jV N n �O e��1 � ON1 � 1[1 n � N O : O CI N 1� • � .a�c� O N N � N � 61 � f r� � � 1�WI O � .� �J �i M N N M N N ^ ^ M M i� N7 �fl Uf l� N N O Q �O 01 C � V-C N . . . y� . . . . . . • �N O � M N �[f � N A � 1�N'f � � � N 3 r a� � � m O 01 n \ m < O Y�f N � 4 YI ^ � f Q m N ^ i(f Ml � N N � 31 d c tv m � �O �o �G �o O A/ n n t� tn O O �G 4 O n'1 M O � O N 1�f N 1 + + � I y N u� 1 1 4 ♦ a E e�: N � � L^ ^ � >T V N a �O O �G O O CO O 4 C ^ e �O Mf 1� �A N nf m Nf m �tf �^�I 1�f �O O N < f �O �(1 f� O �'1 1�r NI ^ O V 01 Y ^ 1� �O N N �czl d� C q , ��+�f aD O N a0 O 1� �G Mf . m ^ m �o . ^f p�I ^ O b ^ �O O Q1 N � N OI 1�'O T �lf �O N n1 �!1 m I� �(1 !� U�I �L �ff < O 1�1 ^ �O �(1 N N N 3i N L N a � O p ^ i \ i i � i i i i i i A � � 1� .W��, ��. �a � .��'.��a'�+�� x� .�x ��"� � r�p.�- � " '�f �y .. �... . � � � . �Y� �° � ,� - c � � � � � � . � et �w��.E �'� .�tl � � �� " �� . .. g � e� � � • • � • �� R Q � � �� t � � : ��`�r � �� a � �� a .��`� ga a� ��, �y z d � ��. �� r.� �;°° ��'��s�� °e� �� s er8A3z ..�.e� � ed.� ,i.��e �W��.� 1 COMO��PARK�� MASTER PLAN � ' Hourly Variations ' This location has the same general shape characteristics a�� ocation #1 , with an early (7-8 a.�m. ) peak and a late afternoon peak, indicating that it, too, is , used by commuters. However, as mentioned previously, much of this may be due to the proximity of the Humane Society and maintenance facilities. Therefore, it is assumed that it is not through traffic which aecounts for these peaks, � but traffic related to these facilities. The �irectional distribution showed more eastbound in the morning and nore west- , bound traffic in the afternoon on both weekdays and weekends, however, the variation was quite small and statistically difficult to r�easure. The peak hour was 187 for weekday and 91 on weekends. Top eight hours average 141 on weekdays and 78 on weekends. � Location #3 Location #3 was difficult to measure due the unusual split of Cor�o and Horton. � Therefore, separate east-west counts were done on both Como f�venue and Horton Avenue. These are referred to as Locations 3a and 3b respectively. Locat:ion #3a (Como Avenue) total weekda volume was 31% o� the total weekda � Y Y volume at Location #1 . The flow at Location #3b (Horton Avenue) was 26% of the volume of Location #1 . The two can be added together since they merge and few � turns from Como �venue onto Horton Avenue occur on the weekdays. Therefore, the total volume of traffic counted can be summed from Locations #3a and 3b -- 10,210 vehicles (5542 and 4668 respectively) . Using the same adjustment factors � previously given, the estimate of the average daily traffic is 8961 , say 9000, vehicles, on the average weekday. The weekend traffic is a more complicated case, due to the fact that people are � often driving through the park for reasons that are different from the weekday commuter and some may be turning from Como Avenue onto Horton Avenue. The total traffic measured at Location #3 on the average weekend day was 9036. The weekday � ,�DT estimate is very close to this weekend total , and again we accept this as the design limit. Hourly Variations � The hourly variation of traffic at Location #3a (Como Avenue) does show the typical � double eeaking of a r�ajor commuter route, albeit a much smaller scale than Location #1 . Except for westbound traffic between 7 and 8 a.m. , the traffic slowly builds until it peaks in the late afternoon. �astbound shov�s a considerably s�naller peak in the late afternoon than would be ex�ected on a typical commuter ' route. ' � . . - • � B 39 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN I 1 ' , Tl�is is possibly due to traffic bound for the St. Paul campus of the University of Minnesota, the industrial area south of Como Avenue and west of Snelling , and Minneapolis bound commuters. The peak a.m. hour was 6% of the total day, and the peak p.m, hour (the peak for the day) was 9% of the total . The directional split is not typical . The �vestbound lanes carry much more traffic � at all times during the day than the eastbound lanes. That 61% of the traffic is westbound, on a daily basis, implies that the route is surprisingly one sided. The westward skew of traffic on Como Avenue rray in part be due to use of the ' roadways around �1cMurray Field for parking. This effectively restricts vehicles from Lexington to a temporary one way and forces the drivers going east to use Horton Avenue. The hourly variations of Location #3b (Horton Avenue) were more ' typical of commuting routes and also emphasize a westward morning peak. The peaks were muc� more pronounced than at #3b, being 11% of the daily total from 7 to 8 a.m. and 13% of the total from 4 to 5 p.m. The directional distribution , was 75% westbound at 7 to 8 a.m. and 62% eastbound at 4 to 5 p.m. These flow characLeristics could be explained by the same comments as in #3a; i .e. , the University of Plinnesota, industry to the southwest of the park, and hlinneapolis commuters, but obviously, Horton Avenue is used for cor��muting more than Como , Avenue. Surprisingly, Como showed a ciecrease 21% from weekday to weekend traffic load, � whereas Horton remained at the same level . !ocation #4 ' Ti�e total flow at Location #4 (�1idway Parkway) is about 3127 or 17% of the traffic at Location #1 during the weekday. The ADT is estimated to be 2744. ' T�e weekend flow of 4270 is 37% higher than the weekday flow. This location is a major entrance for park users to the Zoo, Conservatory, and picnic areas. The flow at Location #4 was 27% of Location #1 on the weekend, and 17% on the ' weekday. Hourly Variations ' The hourly variations at Lccation #4 also confirm that it is primarily a park user route, and rot useu by commuters to any de,c�ree. F. very small peak (5.2% of the day) occurs at the typical veeekday 7 to 8 a.m. rush period, but the bulk of � the traffic u�as detected between 11 a.m. and 8 p.r�. There also is not a clear directional split. A westerly flow does exist in the late afternoon, probably due to people leaving the Zoo. ' The weekend has a aefinite easterly flbw into the park during the morning and a wester ly f low out in t he a fternoon. T he �ea k hour o f easter ly f low is between 1 ' and 2 p.m. , and the peak westerly flow is between 4 and 5 p.m. Park users are usinr� this route at these times. pta�1F'1��1c�e ��i�� .�� ►� • • — • � ��e e. � �� q e. �e .e..�� e ,.�� e. � � � � ee e� , . e .� a.e. e...��.ee ee. A..e. ��. .mb. vm. eee.,e.eea e . � : . _�..F m ee. .e.a�� ea .. ;,,..ee va e g 4o COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 , Location #5 ' Location #5 (Huron Rvenue) although an access route into the park, it serves primarily as the entrance to the golf course lot. �', single counting device here ' detected very low relative volumes, on the ordzr of 2% of the Location #1 volumes during the week. It was about 3% cf the Location #1 flow on the weekend. Hourly Variatibns ' The data was of such a low level that a definite peak could not be determined. , Nowever it was evident many golfers used this access in the r�orning on the week- ends, with 47% of the activity occurring before noon, a much higher percentage than other park entrances. T�e traffic was a fairly steady 20 to 30 vehicles per ' hour on the weekdays and 30 to 40 vehicles per hour on the ��eekend, during the daylight hours. Location #6 � Location #6 (Lexington �'�venue North) has the second highest volume as expected. This was about 74% of Location #1 on the average weekday, and 85% of the average � u�eekend day. The actual �ieekday traffic counted was 6663 northbound and 6842 southbound, a very even 49% and 51% of the total respectively. The total , 13,505, was adjusted to an A�JT of 11 ,851 vehicles. The weekend flow of 13,420 was also very evenly distributed Gs to direction with � no clear cut split again beir�g 49% northbound anu 51% southbound. This access, although about equal on �veekaay and �veekend traffic, was used on weekends pro- � portionately more than other park access routes. This is probably due to regional use of the park and the number of people with oric�ins in subur5s north of St. Paul . Hourly Variations , f�s expecteci, a similar week�ay use to Location #1 ��as observed at Location #6 �Nith the peak morning Girectional c�istribution being very high (77%) southbout�d, , and i�he peak hour in the afternoon (61%) being northi�ound. ;�. park use curve subliminal to the commuter curve, with the northbound late afternoon flow being heavier than southbound also exists. ' Tne peak hour (4 to 5 p.m. ) was about �.5% of the total . The average of the to� eight hours cn the week:�ay �as �19 northbound and 467 southbound, and equal for ' the weekend with 493 and �94 respectively. The co�bined f1o�N averages �vere °59 for �he too eight hour avera;e on ��eek�a��s :1nd 9�6 wee�ends. ' ' �,�� ¢a � �� ,�� a� ��s°�°��t�,�� g �*��e �� ' � �� a� " 96, e. � e � , �� `�Sa�� ; P-a e �r� !R � �. e I � c � �� S � � , � • � � • a �`�� . � � `�"� � � � � � . ��,�� "3�� t , .�.i $ � '�� ' �.� ��.� ��"&c �k� a°°� �� .�� a "�� v b*k �" 4'�R� m�� E .m��.�. ��.��a. „an � °� 2 �=esea.�� m � " � � B 41 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 � ' Location #7 ' Traffic at Location #7 (Lakeview Avenue) was not counted for reasons described in the introduction. From comparisons of counts at Location #6 and the per- centage of turns at East Como Lake Drive and Lexington and the count at Location #8, anly a very few vehicles per hour could not be accounted for, � which presumably exited or entered at Lakeview, which �as three separate entrances. Location #8 � The traffic at Location #8 (East Como Lake Drive) was 34% of the traffic flow at Location #l . The actual count was 6181 total vehicles with 3252 south- t bouncl and 2929 northbound. TEie directional split is thus 47% north and 53% south over the entire day. The average daily traffic was calculated to be 5424 on the weekday. , 'v��ekend traffic was considerably higher than weef�day traffic, probably due to park users �oing around the lake. The actual count was 7637, or 24% higher than the weekday count. , Hourly Variations � The hourly variations for weekdays at Location #8 are virtually the same at Location #6, with a southbound peak in the morning of 77% and a northbound peak in the afternoon of 63%. On the average for the day the directional split was 53% southbound and 47% northbound. ' �leekend flow tended to be heavier in the southerly direction, or clockwise around Lake Como, with the directional split for the day being 57% south and 43% north- � bound. The weekend curve was not typical of the use of the rest of the park. The peak hour of use occurred late in the afternoon. This southbound peak of the day, on the average weekday, occurred from 8 to 9 p.m. , very late in comparison to other park areas. This may be due to evening performances at the Pavilion, ' with people heading towards St. Paul , or a large number of people driving around the lake in the late evening. � Sunday traffic was slightly above that of Saturday, with Sunday 5 to 10 p.m. being 19% above Saturday for the same hours. Acain, Sunday clrives arouna the lake and evening attractions were the contributing factors for this. ' Location #° At Location #9 (West Cor�o Lake Drive) the total flow ��as 32% of Location #1 . The � actual count was 5823 that was adjusted to �110 l�DT. T{�e v��eekend total of G580 was higher than the weekday by 13% and we can assume that number to be critical for �esign. � �� .�,- . � P�ann�ng �t�l t� �� .�a►�— �� Prc��9 � ��i �� +� ��r�� , : e;�� . e�� a : � e � .. �, .�, � � � .. �� :e e .,,.:9 ee.,e.. ��:�. � � :�... � :e;,e,. ee�e. �� : � �� s 42 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ ' The flow to and from Locations #8, #9 and #10 is covered in more detail in ' looking at specific flow changes in this area in Appendix Hourly Variations ' The weekday flow is to the west in the morning and to the east in the afternoon. This apparently is the corresponding point to Como and Horton Avenue on the west � side of the park whose curves showed similar shape and distribution. The west- bound traffic was 77% of the total at 7 to 8 a.m. , while eastbound was 65% of the flow from 4 to 5 p.m. The overall daily average was 46% east and 54% west. � The average of the top eight hours was 417 on the weekday, and these top eight hours were about 53% of the total day's traffic. Comparison between the average weekday and average weekend at Location #9, show ' two very different uses. The weekend traffic showed a very heavily weighted westerly flow with the total day being 60% westerly and 40% easterly with little variation from hour to hour. The implication is that people tend to circumvent � the lake in a clockwise motion, with the driver on the lake side. The maze of islands at the Maryland-Como-Victoria-Wheelock intersection also tends to favor southbound traffic into the westbound lanes of West Como Lake Drive. The traffic at Location #9 is a major commuter route, but has an entirely ' different origin-destination pattern than East Como Lake Drive. At the Maryland- !�lheelock-Como-Victoria intersection (Hail Mary) , the two fairly heavy peak hour � flows cross one another. Location #10 ' Location #10 was complicated by having several branches to choose from at a fairly wide intersection. Gateway Drive and Como Avenue were each measured separately for east and west flow. These are Locations l0a and lOb, respectively. � Location #l0a (Gateway Drive) had 10% of the traffic of Location #1 , on weekdays and 11 .0% on weekends. The total traffic was 1743 for the actual count, for an � ADT of 1530. Location #lOb was 14% of the traffic at Location #1 on the weekday and 13% on the � weekend. The actual weekday count was 2528 adjusted to an ADT of 2219. It was not possible to combine the two counts at Location #10 in the same way as at Location #3, since in that case they were converging upon a point, and in this , case aiverging. Traffic flow is also described in Appendix Nourly Variations � The variations at Location #l0a (Gateway Drive) were surprisingly low, with both the weekday and weekend showing peaks in the late afternoon with no morning peaks, � �� °�a § �au�v°� �g'�� '"��&a �, ,_ � �� a � .��^ �;�qa�t' 9�tm a' �;. �y ; �° � � � s �� q k� � .�°"�.. � �� '� � � ��' � n> �°`- �, �, k°�g e �. : � _ t� . � �� . £s� �a � `.�� l�� • • ' • �'t�� aa�s �� : �� a � �� ;� �t ' � ��°�� „gE yd�� : e� � ��°�� s� � ° � � ��y � a � �� e;k�� .�.�� ,e ,.e�s � e .a��- .. ve ee�,�ro`fi a. s�e96 e ��,�la.� .e�se :�9, �°... .. me�,. ,� ��e, es , B 43 COMO PAR�K MASTER PLAN � 1 � ' therefore concluding it is not a corre�uter route. However at #lOb, Como Avenue, a fairly large (7.5%) westbound peak occurred in the morning and an eastbound ' peak in the afternoon. The «f ternoon directional split was 67% eastbound from 3 to 4 p.m. This may be due in part to school traffic from St. Andrews and cormnuter traffic using Como-Chatsworth-Front as a shortcut to Lexington from East Como Boulevard. � At Location #lOb the weekend directional split was very heavy towards the east (63%) for the daily total . No apparent reason, other than people who would be ' heading home from the park, could account for this. This may be part of the returning flow around the lake which has been intentionally or unintentionally established. tLocation #11 At Location #11 (Chatsworth Street) the flow was 15.4% of the flow at Location #1 , for weekdays and 14.9% on weekends. This route is the only grade separated under- pass for tl�e railroad tracks besides Lexington for the Como Park area. For this reason, it is used as a commuter route, though mainly by local residents since it � does r�ot cross the Pierce Butler Route and Como Avenue. The actual flow measured was 2796 vehicles, adjusted to 2453 ,�DT for weekdays. � Hourly Variations For the same reasons mentioned above, Location #11 is not used as a major park access route. The weekday and weekend traffic is evenly distributed in both , directions. On weekdays, it has the expected southbound morning and northbound evening peaks. On weekends, the usage is 15% below the weekdays. � 4.2 SUMMARY - ROAD TRAFFIC � In choosing the location of tlie cordon traffic counters, it was planned that all vehicles into and out of the park would have been detected. The period of time during which al� locations were counting lasted from Saturday morning to Sunday evening. , From the data, we have been able to determine the relative importance of each route by direction for traffic use. In addition, the alc�ebraic summation of the ' airectional counts should be the amount of traffic accumulated within the cordon at any particular time during the counting period (allowing some errors in machine miscounts) . iWhen this is graphically displayed for a given period of time, charact�ristic fluctuations of traffic flow by hour can be shown. Figure 4-fi shows this fluctu- ation for Sunday, June 3, 1979. Note the difference in magnitude of volume of the , � e � e � e, Plann�ng ��€ ��r �� +��#� �:� � �� ° Proc:�;; ��i �� r�� e ��n� E��r�� : .. � . eeee. �� ee �� . �� e �. e,ee: ee� e,. �� e.e.eee . ;: ae�,. � � � � �� .be , eee.�e. e e e, e.�. e�. e� e: . . ,e .e.'.� �� B �. COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � combi�ation of all traffic flows � FIGURE 4-8 � ' _COhIBINATION OF ALL F40P'S' � _ COMO PARK CORDON COUYT _ . _ __ Sunday, June 3, 1979 6-7 �� _ _ , '-8 �� _ I I '8-9 �� _ 9-1 (�� io-i IIIIIIIIiIIUlllll(i , 11-� Iilllilillllilllll!llfllll � �z-� II11111111111111lIIIIIIIIIIIIIU � 1-2 IIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIJIItIIIIIII PEAx , � �-, niui�niiininiunnimm�iiun accumulation. ]IS1 ' 3-4 ��f�� PEAK � 4-s IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIIflIIIIlI s-6 1111111111flllllllllliiillllll � . 6-� flllllillllllllililllllllt � , '-8 Illllllllilllllllllllit �-9 IIIlIlillllllll1111111111 t 9-i+• iI111ilU�lllllilllll ;oon zooa t oo t000 2n o so o � TU?AL VF4:CLES , � �6 � '.. � . � '. � � ��„�a � .: m '. r t op � � � �� '�"�� r � � ��." � � �� r g a� �#� � � s�� • • ' • �e � � � m ��,�s � � � ��a� �� ^ �'� �.� ��, a�� a�� "sr..b a��e� e�...'� � a , , � ..m e, e.b�� e .�e.e� e• °� ,e ; �, .�.� � �a mee.m� 6Am., 6._. 9� ee..se.6.. �,9 � abe� .,�,.ee9e ,�.� a.e s a6 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � , ' entering and leaving traffic. Inbound movement peaked in the early afternoon and the outbound peaked in the late after•noon. ' This difference between the volume of entering and leaving traffic in a given period of time is the number of vehicles which must either be parked or remain in motion, but not leave the cordon area. Some base number of vehicles will remain in the cordon at all times since it includes a residential area. This is � estimated at about 500 vehicles, or two for every building. As the typical week- end starts, accumulation above this base begins and outbound lags inbound movement. As the day proceeds, the area reaches a peak number of accumulated vehicles, from ' 2 to 3 p.m. As people complete their park visit, outbound traffic gradually grows larger than inbound. In the evening, there may also be an exodus of residents to entertainment sites. ! The general shape of the vehicle accumulation curve for the cordon can be significant. The peak value, less the base number of vehicles, is a measure of the number of park user vehicles, and knowing the average number of users per � vehicle, an estimate of the total number of park users can be made. The total area under the curve is also a measure of the vehicle hours accumulated within the period. Of all the vehicles inside the cordon at any time, the majority ' are probably parked or in parking lots. � 4.3 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF INTERSECTION FLOW The intersections diagrammed in Appendix D are the key intersections in the park. Some were up-dated for this study, but those done previously (by the City of ' St. Paul ) were felt up-to-date enough not to require a recount. Counts were for either the weekday a.m. (7:15 to 8:15) and p.m. (4:15 to 5:15) rush hours, or at vario�as times on the weekend. � A major change in flow is proposed for the Como Avenue-Gateway-Maryland-Victoria intersection, which is discussed in Chapter 3. The changes will place traffic, particularly turning traffic, at definite points in crossing the major street in athe area, East Como Boulevard. The intersection as now designed, has the twelve streets which enter or leave the intersection weave together and unweave over the three-block area, with the exception of Rose (an access to the Como High School � parking lot) and Geranium (an access to an alley between the high school and East Como Boulevard) which carry very little traffic. ' Horton and Lexington is perhaps the key intersection in the park since it is where the major north-south and east-west traffic intersects. It is constricted on the north by and old urban trolley bridge that may in the future be removed. An analysis of the capacity of this intersection to adequately handle the ex- � pected high number of left turns off Lexington (from the north and south) onto Horton is included as Appendix H. � P��t�!!'� � � � $ � �� ` � ��!�� d � ° 9� � 4�.�g��.'� :e 3 s��. �� $ � � � � ..' .,5��9' + . - i . S � � ��. . �,�, . ,. v. e.e ,.��. ..,eemee .'� .eec3 .� ��evm..e e.b°.: �'�. � g� ` B 45 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � • • • ' . • • � - CH;� _"�_ �, r� . .- .- � �� . .- .- V � :� �._ i�7l�� , ` � �', rL4�� • -�� ' � •' ' • � . • ---'�E� !�jj�� +�• . .- � . �� a� �� `'�� ba�..li€��r ?� , . � �'� . ��9t�. ��1�� : . � ; ��, � � �� -� ■ �� ,� . �1�� . . �� " � ,� . ,�� .�� .�� „ �� ig �.LI� �� p�� . 9 �71'w' t W ��'v�� .��,,`�� :�.u:,�..u, � �� :. ro'�� I�� ■�i'"�.''r�+� � .� � '�� _ � /� /I �� '. .��u�a.a �- � ... \� _� � ,� ■�:�► ��' �`.� '��!�i�� , _ �� , �� . . �� ..� ��,� ��:.. . 9�•. � ��► -� � � = :�'"��w��I��,� � .�� .�'_��_��: . . . . � - �� . .a� �, � ` =. ��a� 1�� - � ��I��. ��. ��'� .. �I.�.- - _ :. 1��`.rl�� '� �' �> `��. ; � � � . � �. � � �� .�:� ...��_ � �.��.�,�,_�� o. .. . .. a-s��_ ��-�', a' E l�1��!��"I Q . '' � - � ��It'� c�. :: - ,� Wi��'1 � '�„�� ,�` �. ■l�� .. �� '" "' ��"��-1�� th�� . . A r��-.- i�, � �� '��+ A�I:��`7��.��I�it !i ,�� ""' ��✓ /� � ,� -•-�j� ,��A-i ��,.��—��!!!�!�@1�3 ��C: �n �� ,� � �� - ��`"%�I� ��c��IHi'��1`iu n��'ii1�F73s.��_ kla 111H��1' � � •�W: �� 'au�u-r �'''` y.�i: 5�'4�' �l�l� :'�, � �� "°�� k'r'^ �� ,j�. {�, _ � ' �,...' `_ � "'rr"�" �j �� '� �� sA�li � `W F �,ys��3��J��R� —u��u > ��I��i��1�� - � � .�f �� -i��E�WY��u.•�11Fti1�1� ��bV�� u+ �� `- -�� Ra Eil A� ��9�� a '. � '� �i L 1 t� � ■'-�► i-�1��re �� 1 r .0 , � ' �� i�r�� ,��.��t '�►`��y �� r� ��_ - "'�I� dW�: � � -"�: . '� � �r ,� ,a ►e��-,�� "!�. \��1W _ � m . �� i ��ia,�� tl��.�� \��1�� , ..1 ��.�'� �il� 1�I� _ �. . �rd�� _ — — � — _—_�� s ir�` ''��a��• � � ��:u��h o�� . ��,�,� ��a�v�j�'.=�j �su.��:i''��'.Yi3�� - c�N�r��R ��i�}��t�� `� ■ . ��+u��'t9 ��3�'�'d� ,�E�� ol� � �6.a�r. ��3.c:3!�.''�a �'��1�� ii��u�s �� 1 � ��sc..�u►"�"'�._ "��+� � � ��1�� y�� a,�i� �IF�1 � � �� ' �I �'��,�u,.,,� � �� ,�, � �'�1�1 �i � :� I��I� ct� '�� i � � . � 1r,�� : ■ ��'�:1-13�i� '�u�.. i�►. !y � �. . a I�-�� •� '��W'��,.�`�y.... �, -CT ��J� ��IY��1 \ � ' ��Ir��t�� 4�:s+�aa��5�. ��IL'� ,�`23� . � ,��s!��"?��'' � �� I!�.,A.ir�i��v� �:�' �Y �� rW �,� I aE'.ia�.1 � m, � . .��i��cra�.-�m+1 r..�1��rr�ef ��I��i�,�: � � ��W��:�:� ��W�' �� !a +1i' �.iuu;:w:w � as�r.�c�a�cus��–' �. =�:r..��,_ �'f�ii�1�', �. ��'.�,a��6� �-..�,��fill��' �� 1�1.�Y � �� u.mua�e� �r�u fi � .u��, uv�.wi��.v3� �'" ��•�� a �l��7��n�� I�.:II+M�� n� a/.�f'w�'s:�.1�+ u�uu��iYu ��-� u�3�J�mf �,�'� �L�YLLiWW�Si;t�� , �' � cua�a.�c��-��. �f��'-f: . ��a,�� ,��,�� - �cuiWt� �l! Yl1t2L1.I.�LNki ir"i� Lll7. \ �3,s�� 3�1�1 �a:e �rs��a�:usr�� lir..•,�, �;�. .. � �? �� s�� .� � �' �,ss.�� irs�� ' � S�� ■j 1 ri�iL �c � ��aas ai 1 �ev.0 �uu �e� �� uu i�� g— �� om��t't�a 2u.r �w��a��ii � cui. �_ I�Wdu�iLJ �. -c.�w�.ui �i ��W1� � /,",c,. q I�A��.�� B./L-�i:, � � �� .�s.a�� `��t�`�� . � e.,aH i ��EI2 e'a`"'' �'.�.cu�� e �I vuc. �t uta��,y�.�� ' i��'14�� I.W�SIJ��7��Y��LL4s.611�t� s��kJ�� m�i,il�� . �u.�C . �� y ' e�I �� ,.� �A�■ss��I�I -�=�C� �,_ �� 1 � � ' f��. Yu.LLL�..�G ��y�� r�--� �'I�,�ll� w�� .��s��. �1 �,,;' '- ii�--�51L1'.li'iil��f4111'��0�� ..1'.-, ,��ri] ��Fl ��i� .LL1 o �y��YIiJc�� .�� 1 r��.ia ��I� ...'�� ' �i�� ue ��cw �u ��.u�.. �r.ue�ca�r. ��/�� s �ic�'��'�a- y� GW�+�,y� ��r 1. --'�� I � �S.�li��i�L� .7S��'�� i ��m��C'LJ�Jr.� i�II.Hw��- �-�Q;�� F�� 7�.. y y �'�'i �iwc.uar!!�' ��wam� �ws�oa��eo�irL u �w•�`�.,,_ l(t� �-' � �a�■�� [L..LU � IS:.WI•J�� LLLl��•p.��3j[�d6��!^'(��pj �WA v� �`_��,1 �Ir��,i��5��;�.��-- �.�., ,,�...F° �9�� g,y�`'�,�.�� .�� r �� #��1 �� C. a'u..`�a i��'�`ii 4cr�.i.si�� `4�'�`C��(e j��`��"�`��ai:.y��ei�� ,��i��n��_z�Wy��9�� :� .r ;,,,,��o��,-�� ►-.. � �m � nmorccr��mn � �O� ��y�� s�� I � ,. . �� a'��` �id�,�,, v�a ��,+�� a�v`.�:.`�.�i r��+�.�� a. �? .,q,4 v��w�.y �� :9��7i�uu�a�'\�� 'ia.w��n�� .��ii�Y��..s,�ra�.a�u��'��'''�yT 1�� Q,�,,ap,� �,.� �i'j�'y� ,� 'c� '.`�IiFYw'1L�l�dl��uull�lt��a. , uii117'�7YLt��c--,..�yL,�,#.�3 Q,t .�� .�� 3��' � �i��E a��'�a�� w�� i'a-��w�r�-r��E.uL�i��- L � f�y �� . n � � ��,' i � a�._� 7uL�� cue- �� i� �� '��-a ��.uz� �I _... J.J■��I��LWli�7� �VAI �:u9��I'fu.d.a�7��'�� + �l�'``�'' '' .,��•_ 3:► �:■ u.�t.u��di��.ui ��c�.:i:u �i y�i��u,s ' . � .l�:,;v"' ��i,� `� �' ��9��■�ViYiYJ��\\ �iYi�3�-}��.�.iu:��3•' ��'�i� v^` / �ensi --�■1i9iliW�fd'i��'7��t.��1i'IiliW��- l ../'n � TM^I�i►'��s�� _ _ ♦�� °� � a� ^� ��. � �`4 F�,E,�'°'", lts9�� n E .¢:a�.. °� .,ar � �.�s, f; �, 3 „-e°�` s•m"�e` �':� � � �° �, �� °� ApPendix � ,�� e��- �� . �e�� ;�� • • ' . - � - � . i � 4.4 ORIGIN DESTINATION STUDY - EAST COMO LAKE DRIVE A special origin-destination study was done for East Como Lake Drive commuter traffic. This survey was done on East Como Lake Drive between 7:i5 and � 8:50 a.m. on Friday, June 1 , 1979. Four hundred cards with prepaid postage were distributed, of which 242 or 61% were returned. This was considered a good retu rn. , The results of the survey showed that about 25% of those surveyed were either on the route to use the park, or went out of their way to go through the park. � The majority were commuters. Origins and destinations were also identified and from the Figure 4-9 the fullowing conclusions can be drawn: � . Most origins lie west of Chatsworth Street, and north of the park. . �1ost destinations lie in downtown St. Paul , with a second concentration � near the Capitol complex. The cars averaged 1 .3 people per vehicle and if Fast Como Lake Drive v�as not ' available, they would most likely use Larpehte�:r to Dale, Rice ar I-35E as an alternate route. See Appendix E for sample cards and other da�a concerning the OD survey. � � � ' � � � ' � � � a' g 7 � Q�. ��R��& ��:� '8 � 4 s ��. . � �� c g � �'' 4 � �� - � . . �.. .656F � � &�48 �°d� � �� 2 �P° � �T p�. -°t* �� ; > �. C� 3{&fi � 6 1 _�'� �.�.� { g �� .e�' . ..,e:aeveP,. �'� 'eePee.,e �:d.seee..e�� .��.�e.._. ,,,.r,....��. s .voee.aa.�,m n s 99 o ve.,� �,o w.�e..�,..� � ...��aea,., ��a..��. ,...,,P.., B � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' ' � � � � ' � ' •:r•: ::i+:: ::'�'.:�'��''��'��:;<:��: '.�.��:?��•.•:�:�::':;`:�•••.��::��..�'.'..........:::i;�:::.�.....::�:�::'��:::::;:;::;;:�::�i:;::;;::::::;::::;:::::;:::;::;:::::::;;�:'::::�::��:�:•':::::::;::::'��':�;:::;:;•'::'::::;:.:;:::�'�'��..:�:�;;:::;::::;r::;:::::::::;;.:�::;:::::�:�:::::::::::::;;:;:::::;.:�:::�:�:::;::;::::::::��:;:;:;:::::::::::::`:::::�:�:�::�:�i:;:;::;:::::•....,♦`:`.:::::. _:: ;:::.'' � :�� ': :'�� :�:�:��A��: •r. �' ::�::�:�::::�:�:�5:::�:�;�:�::�::>.. . .::;�:�:�i:�:��::�:�:�:�::�:�:�:�i:�::�: :........:�>:�:�::.�::�::�:�:::�::':�i:�:�::�:�i::�.'•:�:i::�:�::�:�>:�>::::::2::�::•::�i:�:�::�:�i:�::::•::�:�i::::�::��:�:�::�:....::•::�:�:_::•::�<:�':�:�:::2::��:�:::;:;::;:::;� %;:�:;:::;;:>;;:�:::;;::;:::�:�:�::�:�:;�::�:�::�::::�:�::��::;::>:::::;:�:�:::�:�i:�i:�:�::�:<�::�:�::�:�:i:::s:�::�:;�i:�:::�:::�>:�::�::::�:;�::i::::::�::�::;::::::::�::2::::�.`•:�:;�.. ......................... ............................. ....�.�............................ ........................... :•:•.�:::::::::::::::.::�:::::::::::::•:::::......:.............................................................. •:::::::::::::::.��:.:::.�.�•::::.�:::::::::::::::::::::. .�::::.::::.:.�:.:::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ;:��:�:�:�:�::�::�:::2�::�:::�>:�::�:�::::;::::::;:�:�::�:�::�:�:5:�::�:�>:�:5:�5:�:�::�:?�?:�:�i:�::�:�::�.`•:�:;�:�::�:�:::�`:�:�::�:�:�:�::�:�:;�:�::�:�::�:�::�:�::�:�i:�:�::�:%�:�::�:�::�;5::�:�::�:�::�:�:;�:�::�:�::�:�::�5:�:::�::;�::::::�>:�::�::�::?::;::;::�:;�:%�5:{.:�:::�:�i:�::�:�;:�.`•:�:�::�:�i:�:�i:�:`i:�::�:�::�:�i:�::�:�::�:�i:�:�:$:�:�::�:�::�:�::�:�i:�:::::::::::;>;::::.: , � � , � � � 5.0 PARKING SURVEYS � Introduction A physical survey of the existing paricing facilities serving Como Park was per- formed on Saturday, June 2, 1979, to establish a baseline for determining the ' parking requirements for Como Park. The survey time and date were chose�� to represent typical surr�ner weekend conditions before school vacations had begun. The weather on the survey day was fair with a temperature in the high 70's to � low 30's. Park usage on the survey day was judged to be moderately high, but below that observed during peak periods. � 5.1 EXISTING PARK FACILITIES Como Park is served by a combination of about 2200 total spaces at street, curb, � and in off-street parking lots. Parking on-street at the curb is permitted along many of the roads serving the park. The major exceptions are the Como Lake Urives around Lake Como and Lexington Parkway from Horton to Como Avenue. � It is estimated that there are 1183 on-street spaces within Como Park. The location and number are given in Table 5-1 . � There are five major paved parking lots serving Como Park as follows: Lot Capacity � Zoo/Amusement Park 215 spaces Conservatory 216 Swimming Pool 100 � Pavilion 192 Golf Course 60 � Total 783 spaces There are other smaller or unpaved lots at other locations as shown in Figure 5-1 � for a total of 1080 off-street spaces. � 5.2 PARKING UTILIZATION CHARACTERISTICS The results of the parking survey are tabulated in Tables 5-1 and 5-2 with a summary contained in Table 5-3. Appendix F gives detailed information on the � survey. The maximum accumulation at the curb spaces and in the lots occurred from 2 to 3 p.m. , when 54% of the curb spaces were occupied and 52% of the parking lots. � 1 � 8 � :� �4`� � �� ';' � �� t� a��'�� ° �� :�� a�� #�� r�� °�� y �� ( �ss �° g� � �� s �� P�� z" �� s`- � � � a�¢ �� ° � � � � � � ��r �� • • ' • �,� � � t� g �� 8 �,.��4'�� e � �� : , ` �`a�� , ��.� s�� `'a ' � z.�,9w -m �� `�'�'.��a� � `�s � � � �� `� " � mm...etea=.sep.e ., .��,saz.. � +� �. �� ..��:mo�� ,-a � � 2a COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � parkin� lot capacities and locations � FIGURE 5-f � —.�..� � q oodi aoopqo ��pqo�� , � �--�---��1 I UO oaQODOLJ� �O�74an0��1 " / � � N (S^�a000a�qoo ° ��vqp�( 8 ( � ° �� l�.—w. �� ° mOo � � $ �� 4; _ _ o e� O � ' __ � � ��___.�J� I � c—�-�� \�� , a W � �� ° � � i � _ v -_ � Y �. � �`l D :j----. —�W�o = L: p �` p �� ,�y� • ti � p �Pp ��000 V '-__ �� 0 � Q p�o .�__ �...___.. O _" .__ � � OF+� .__.._ � �..\�\o 0 0�� .._ ��`'l.-. �� i ( . ` I l ;� �\ �� o� �� '� �FO 1 °�� j�' � � � � � � � o0 25 � � �e � ..�,, o a >_ � o � oo � • � _ �� 192 1 ° �� 1 o� � I 5 q� o 0 � �'a � I � .� � � � � o g a o �� o \ � a 40 � p � I 0 I/ p p � ��OO��V�� l � o � po° o Ql Q� � C � 0 I �` oa o � �o po�� I ! O Oo� O 0 o a fa�O�� o o ��, p � p � I ,r ° � ° Q � p " a° o �`o � � ° tS � � � � •------• ° o 0 0 ° � o � v o B o v � ❑ 8 � o � o 0 0 0 32 � o � a o 0 0 0 0 ( � _.��—�� E � �Jc NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES SHOWN ADJACENT TO EACH LOT � �� g � �� s a �� ,y t 9 '�� °°es� f 3 & d3 �� } � � .. �. �k�s § "�' � °�$ �� b � � g�g } � � a�� ° i � � � � " '�.8 �' s ff�& s`�. � $��. d�+ 3�a�� . - �, - . � �T.s . ��a�'�'�� e� `°��.� v��s�#�� '�� : Rxs, � a � 8��.�� e,b ,6 ..�,:9 ee8,e:,.�. Aee...., �..,�...,s..m '� e ..ee�,be��„ bae... �, .��faa„a�ee�,A�.� �� e 9ee9.e.. .e..e...� �� =9ee� °'�.,.. .,,.. ee�te:ee�°se e&,ee ar COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � i � Table 5-1 PARKING SURVEY RESULTS ON-STREET PARKING � COMO PARK - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA Survey Performed June 2, 1979 � CAPA- NUMBER OF CARS LOCATIOIy CITY 10 AM 11 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM Arlington 40 33 36 33 30 17 22 � Huron - North of Arlington 50 25 24 20 26 20 17 Midway - Hamline to Horton 56 0 1 22 26 27 27 � Estabrook Dr. - Conservatory to Nason 64 2 15 18 18 14 19 Estabrook Dr. - Nason to Lexington 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 � Nason Place - Kaufman to Estabrook 40 0 0 5 8 5 10 Kaufman - Lexington to Nason 76 4 5 8 10 6 6 � Kaufman - Nason to Conservatory 30 0 12 23 24 30 29 Conservatory Drive 34 0 25 33 34 33 35 Kaufman Dr. - Conservatory thru Zoo 130 13 39 71 81 68 75 � Midway - Horton to Beulah 56 9 9 40 38 47 41 Horton - Beulah to Hamline 30 0 0 17 22 15 17 � Beulah - Horton to Como Ave. 32 0 0 4 7 6 5 Beulah - Midway to Horton 96 8 49 93 96 91 91 � Jessamine - Beulah to Lexington 60 50 58 24 14 17 17 Como Ave. - Lexington to Beulah 155 120 120 124 137 119 114 � Como Blvd. = Horton to Chatsworth 26 9 12 11 10 12 7 Como Blvd. Chatsworth to Van Slyke 32 15 17 16 16 15 17 North of Pavilion 12 8 9 11 11 12 14 � Sterk Road 64 0 1 1 2 1 0 Nussbaumer 36 1 2 8 13 11 14 � Lexington - Jessamine to Como 20 16 14 10 14 15 14 Lexington - Como to Horton 20 6 6 5 5 4 3 � TOTAL 1183 319 454 597 642 585 574 PERCENTAGE OCCUPIED 27% 38% 50% 54% 50% 50% i �� i � �� s �'e �� e. � °z ¢ R �g� �° `�� • • ' • �� e �;� � , s�. . ��.� ' ' s ��, ! ; :: 1�". y ��°.x ., -e. ,e.,eaP .ee.,.te.:��. � . �-. ,e,e.�:aa.e..� ..ee .9ee9e.<: §.mee9aa' .e,. .a�.�:< ee,., �m., e e`! :. e...: ., �,.. �. �.,..o. , a�ee.:a,e.�ee�= ., , .,b,.e.,��— B 5o COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � Table 5-2 � PARKING SURVEY RESULTS OFF-STREET PARKING COMO PARK - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA � Survey Performed June 2, 1979 CAPA- NUMBER OF CARS ' FACILITY CITY 10 AM 11 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM Golf Course Lot 60 75 81 64 51 48 40 � Zoo Lot 215 44 61 121 159 142 136 Conservatory Lot 216 45 84 127 2J2 164 147 � Softball Lot - @ Jessamine 32 42 47 27 17 17 16 Softball - Gravel Lots 100* 32 61 39 15 15 15 � Softball Lot @ Como Ave. 40 17 29 32 41 22 15 � Swimming Pool Lot 100 6 12 9 5 5 5 Lot at Duck Feeding Area 25 13 12 14 12 12 17 � Pavilion Lot 192 78 23 36 41 59 52 Sterk Road Lot 100 1 1 6 2 4 6 , SUB-TOTAL 1080 306 411 484 545 488 449 PERCENTAGE 28% 38% 45% 50% 45% 42% � * i Estimated Capacity � � � i :% � 4" - 5 �4C ��3 C � � 3 3 :P 4� . a"r,�� "�� '� �, �""�'.�� @ � t�� r � �� -� � ��a��.: �� s � @ . �' �� g �� .�� a �� . �� g �� . � �a°P � � � • ' • � � � �� £ �� e,. ' � � ,. ��a '� ° �a � �� .: � : a a �� ° ��. � �� . � �� ,. �„'. ��g � ew C,�� .. �" .�, �,.� �� Qa� � �r es� �� e eW w�. �� er.��„��e � �zq,�.w � B 5i COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � Table 5-3 � PARKING SURVEY RESULTS - SUMMARY COMO PARK - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA � Survey Performed June 2, 1979 , CAPA- NUMBER OF CARS FACILITIES CITY 10 AM 11 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM � Off-Street 1080 306 411 484 545 488 449 On-Street 1183 319 454 597 642 585 594 � TOTAL 2263 625 865 1081 1187 1073 1043 PERCENTAGE 28% 38� 48% 52� 47% 46% ' � , i 1 � i i i ! � �� e � � , � Pl�n�ng� �� ►�� a�� i� I�� .. � � a � . e � � : p vvy @ � : : - 3 ? � � � � � � , ..: -. .: :;�:.: ,. ; e: ; . .. , ,.,,. . .. .e„ .,.. :see_ „e, .do:m ...e e .,o: ..,, °e:9 ,e....,.., ee `�� .e..b.....e, ' � ..9, . .., . .esa. ee„e..e� e �+��. ' B 62 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 � During the survey period, the majority of the park activity occurred at the ' Golf Course, the Zoo/Amusement/Conservatory area, the picnic area and at the McMurray athletic fields. Activity adjacent to Lake Como and the pavilion was much lighter. The swimming pool had not yet opened for the summer, and the few cars observed in this lot were driven by persons using the tennis courts adjacent � to the pool area. A summary of the parking survey results by activity area is presented in Table 5-4. ' At 11 a.m. eight of the twelve softball diamonds at McMurray athletic fields were being used and a total of 335 cars were parked adjacent to the softball diamonds. So many cars were parked along both sides of Como Avenue and on Jessa- � mine Avenue that through traffic, especially on Como Avenue, was impeded. In the picnic area 50-60% of the picnic tables were observed to be in use at the peak period. At that time, Beulah Avenue from Midway to Horton was full with � some parking spillover onto Midway and Horton. The Zoo/Amusement Park area had a maximum parking accumulation of 247 cars and a � 72% occupancy at 2 p.m. The parking lot was never more than 74% occupied so that during the course of the survey there were always parking spaces available at this location. � The Conservatory area, including Rason, Estabrook and Kaufman Drives had a maxi- mum parking accumulation of 296 cars, and a 61% occupancy at 2 p.m. However, the most convenient spaces in the Conservatory parking lot and along Conservatory ' Drive in front of the Conservatory were 95% occupied at 2 p.m. The golf course parking lot was full from 10 a.m. until 1 p.m. with many cars � parked illegally at the entrance and exit to the lot. The adjacent curb spaces on Arlington and on Huron, north of Arlington were also used at or near capacity for most of the morning. ' Activity ad�acent to Lake Como and the pavilion area was much lighter than in the other sections of the park and this is reflected in the parking survey results for this area. No concert or other major activity occurred at the pavilion � during the day of the survey. The pavilion lot had a maximum accumulation of 59 cars or an occupancy of only 31% at 3 p.m. Parking turnover was determined at three of the parking lots and along several i streets adjacent to the Conservatory area. Parking space turnover is obtained by adding the total vehicles counted in a given location during a particular ' period and dividing by the number of parking spaces, resulting in the average number of times that a space was used in a given survey period. The parking turnover figures for the Zoo/Amusement Park/Conservatory area are as follows : ' � � �8�y '�.9*� g � a Eed� �� s�::� �.,�� ^"` � ��o��, a��1��'°�a�,�� R��. � g��;a,. s� � � .;� �'�,.,.� �� a t .�'°-a�� $�g � �x � � � � � � e � • • • ' � �� s �� ° . ��tt � .,°�r�e s�°e�f� o.� � �� m,je � vea� �%..aa�'�&�?�o- m: ..�e � � � °. B � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN , � ' ' Table 5-4 PARKING SURVEY RESULTS BY AREA , COMO PARK - ST. PAUL, h1INNESOTA Survey Performed June 2, 1979 � CAPA- NUMBER OF CARS LOCATION EITY 10 AM 11 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 Ph1 1 . Murray Athletic Field ' A. Lot @ Jessamine 32 42 47 27 17 17 16 B. Gravel Lots 100 32 61 39 15 15 15 ' C. Lot @ Como Avenue 40 17 29 32 41 22 15 D. Jessamine - Beulah to 60 50 58 24 14 17 17 ' Lexington E. Como Ave. - Lexington to 155 120 120 124 137 119 114 Beulah ' F. Lexington - Jessamine to 20 16 14 10 14 15 14 Como G. Lexington - Como to Horton 20 6 6 5 5 4 3 ' SUBTOTAL 427 283 335 261 243 209 194 PERCENTAGE 66% 78% 61% 57% 49% 45% ' 2. Picnic Area A. Midway - Hamline to Horton 56 0 1 22 26 27 27 � B. Beulah - Midway to Horton 96 8 49 93 96 91 91 C. Horton - Hamline to Midway 44 0 0 17 22 15 17 � D. Beulah - Horton to Como 32 0 0 4 7 6 5 SUBTOTAL 228 8 50 136 151 139 140 ' PERCENTAGE 4% 22% 60� 66% 61% 61% 3. Zoo and Amusement Park ' A. Zoo Lot 215 44 61 121 159 142 136 B. Kaufman Drive through Zoo 13�J 12 31 83 90 72 83 ' SUBTOTAL 345 66 92 204 249 214 219 PERCENTAGE 19� 27% 59� 72� 62% 63% ' ;: �,:��°�� e.�, �� a�s��g � ��x��q� � _ �� fi� m � � � �� ; � �� e� � � � � � a,; ��g �� '�� . � � �� • • - • � .s � � - �� 'S ��, - f �� a.� e�� y � a ., ��.e�s�� s��aw "�-,�°�� ,� � � �,$� ,g y ! s�s .+. � ' � bee� e.,a�.aA , e9�° bee e eesa ,,, s s4 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' Table 5-4 (Continued) ' PARKING SURVEY RESULTS BY AREA COMO PARK - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA ' Survey Performed June 2, 1979 CAPA- NUM6ER OF CARS ' LOCATION CITY 10 AM 11 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 4. Conservatory A. Conservatory Lot 216 45 84 127 202 164 147 , B. Conservatory Drive 34 0 25 33 34 33 35 C. Estabrook Drive 88 2 15 18 18 14 19 ' D. Nason Place 40 0 0 5 8 5 10 E. Kaufman Dr. - Nason to 76 4 5 8 10 6 6 ' Lexington F. Kaufman Dr. - Nason to 30 0 12 23 24 30 29 Conservatory ' SUBTOTAL 484 51 141 214 296 252 246 PERCENTAGE 11% 29% 44% 61% 52% 51% ' 5. Golf Course A. Golf Course Lot 60 75 81 64 51 48 40 , B. Arlington 40 33 36 33 30 17 20 C. Huron - N. of Arlington 40 25 24 20 26 20 17 SUBTOTAL 140 133 141 117 107 85 77 � PERCENTAGE 95% 101% 84% 76% 61% 55% � 6. Pavilion A. Pavilion Lot 192 18 23 36 41 59 52 ' B. N. of Pavilion 12 8 9 11 11 12 14 G. Smerk Road 64 0 1 1 2 1 0 D. Smerk Road Lot 100 1 1 6 2 4 6 ' E. Nussbaumer Road 36 1 2 8 13 11 14 SUBTOTAL 404 28 36 62 69 87 86 ' PERCENTArE 7% 9/ 15� 17% 22% 21� � �� a ,�� '��a��a�� a�: � � c�� °��°�F � �� e �� s� � ��"�� $ � � � � ' .�� r �� ffi��$ � ��... �pP � �@ fl� � � � � � . , aro ' � 6 6. . � �* � �"s;� � �� .a �� . � �a u��'��g � � g,�,, �6� s, ° at � R.e *�+'�g � ' �� e,�.?�.: ,:0..s rv,e,u�n�.� e��=.e" ��ee�ee�f ..e t .,eesee;`eae `�. �`s.n+,ee .,r..eeecee. _� ., .r.e.ee. . .„e.s . ee.sme�. . ..,sr.fi°°.�'... ..�6� B ss COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' ` Location Turnover Zoo 1 ot . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.03 � Conservatory lot . . . . . : : 2.63 Kaufman-Aida to Zoo lot . 1 .82 Estabrook Drive . . . . . . . 0.75 Kaufman-Lexington to�Aida . . . 1 .18 � Nason . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.57 A partial parking survey was also performed by the Consultant in the early after- � noon on Mother's Day, May 13, 1979. At that time there was a special bonsai show at the Conservatory which significantly increased the parking accumulation ad- jacent to the Conservatory. A tabulation of the results of that survey from 1 to 2 ' p.m. is presented in Table 5-5. From 1 to 2 p.m. there was considerable congestion along Kaufman Drive and in the Conservatory lot as cars were queuing up waiting for a pl ace to park. , In summary, the parking survey results indicate several identifiable problem areas. The McMurray athletic field area is extremely congested when the softball fields 1 are being used. During the parking survey almost every available curb or lot space was occupied even though only two-thirds of the twelve softball fields were being used. Extensive parking along both sides of Como Avenue impeded the free flow of traffic on this street. � The Zoo/Amusement Park area appears to have adequate parking to meet normal park- ing needs. The Conservatory, however, has a definite need for more parking spaces � during peak periods. The golf course is another activity area that has an identifiable need for addi- tional convenient off-street parking since the parking now spills over into the ' residential areas during peak activity times. However, it should be noted that on weekends the golf activity is primarily an early morning, early afternoon activity, which does not pre-empt residential spaces, particularly along Arling- � ton which only has a small number of houses on it. The picnic area is another area that presently needs more parking, particularly ' off-street parking. Some picnickers now park on Midway Parkway from Hamline to Horton and their parked cars impede through traffic on Midway. Through traffic on Beulah creates a hazardous situation for pedestrians crossing from one side to the other, especially for small children. Beulah Avenue divides the restroom , facility from the picnic area so that there is significant pedestrian activity between the east and west sides of Beulah. ' During the survey it was observed that as many as 20-30 bicycles were parked at the Amusement Park at one time, adjacent to the Zoo parking lot. However, there , � �� :��, s e m .�m � � � s°�� • • - � ��y��,��.a .�;� . � m eve�..� � �� B ss COMO PARK ��MASTER PLAN � ' TABLE 5-5 � SUPPLEMENTARY PARKING SURVEY RESULTS (MAY 12, 1979) � Como Park - St. Paul , Minnesota � Location Capacity No. of Cars % A. Picnic Area � Beulah - Midway to Horton 96 88 92% ' B. Zoo/Amusement Park ' 1 . Zoo Lot 215 175 81% 2. Kaufman - Zoo to Conservatory 130 130 100% Subtotal 345 305 88% � C. Conservatory ' 1 . Conservatory Lot 216 216 100% 2. Conservatory Drive, / Estabrook Drive, Kaufman 234 153 65% Subtotal 450 369 82% ' D. Golf Course L 1 . Golf Course Lot 60 40 67% 2. Arlington 40 30 75% � Subtotal 100 70 70% ' ' ' �� a maeP �� g�� e�� . . . . � � � a�� ° �a. � 6�� ,�� e e e,�: : B 57 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 1 ' � are no bicycle storage racks there, so that the bicycles were arranged randomly. This concentration of bicycles suggests that appropriate storage racks be placed at the Amusement Park area. , During the survey it was also observed that a significant number of motorc cles Y were parked throughout the park. A summary of the number of motorcycles parked , by location is presented in Tabl� 5-6. There was no particular concentration of motorcycles - most were parked at random locations wherever the motorcyclist found a suitable space. The survey results indicate that a designated motor- ' cycle area should be considered for the McMurray athletic field area, at the picnic area, and in the Conservatory lot. Estimated Parking Required - , Based upon the parking survey results and other studies and surveys performed previously by the City of St. Paul and others, an estimate has been made of the � maximum parking accumulation that can be expected at each activity area. In the foregoing analysis a distinction has been made between the peak parking accumulation that occurs only on the one or two busiest days of the year and , the practicai maximum parking accumulation that might normally be expected to occur on several weekend days during the year. 1 . McMurray Athletic Field � The maximum surveyed parking accumulation at the McP�lurray athletic field occurred at 11 a.m. when a total of 335 cars were parked. At , that time eight of the twel ve softbal l fiel ds were in use. For the purposes of this study it has been assumed that a practical maximum accumulation occurs when there are eleven playing fields in use for , an estimated peak parking accumulation of 460 cars as follows: 11 fields/8 x 335 cars = 460 cars � Thus, it is estimated that from a practical standpoint some 400 to 450 parking spaces are required to adequately serve this area at al l but the very peak times when al l twel ve fiel ds would be used � simultaneously. 2. Picnic Area ' The maximum surveyed parking accumulation of 151 cars at the picnic area occurred at 2 p.m. on June 2, 1979. At that time it is esti- mated that 50-60% of the picnic tables were occupied. There are � approximately 170 picnic tables available in this area, including those in the covered pavilion. Assuming that 60% of the picnic ' �� , � � . . . r � �� P � , e ¢ N B � COMO PARK MASTER PLA 1 ' TABLE 5-6 NUMBER OF PARKED MOTORCYCLES BY ACTIVITY AREA � Como Park - St. Paul , Minnesota Survey Performed June 2, 1979 ' Number of Flotorcycles Locatian 10 AM 11 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM 1 . Murray Athletic Field � A. Lot @ Jessamine 3 4 1 2 1 0 B. Gravel Lots 0 0 0 0 2 0 ' C. Lot @ Como Avenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 D. Jessamine-Beulah to Lexington 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. Como Avenue-Lexington to Beulah 2 4 3 4 6 2 ' F. Lexington-Jessamine to Como Ave. 0 0 0 0 0 0 G. Lexington-Como to Horton 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 5 8 � 6 9 � 2. Picnic Area � A. Midway-Hamline to Horton 0 0 0 3 3 5 B. Beulah-Midway to Horton 0 0 0 3 3 5 ' C. Horton-Hamline to Midway 0 0 0 0 0 0 D. Beulah-Horton to Como 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 0 0 0 6 6 10 ' 3. Zoo & Amusement Park A. Zoo Lot 0 1 1 1 0 3 B. Kaufman Drive through Zoo 1 1 1 2 0 0 � Subtotal 1 2 2 3 0 3 4. Conservatory ' A. Conservatory Lot 0 0 0 0 0 10 B. Conservatory Drive 0 1 1 0 0 0 C. Estabrook Drive 0 0 0 0 1 2 � D. Nason Place 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. Kaufman Drive Nason to Lexington 0 1 3 0 1 0 F. Kaufman Drive-Nason to Conservator,ZO 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 0 2 4 0 2 12 � 5.- Golf Course 0 0 0 0 0 0 6. Pavilion t A. Pavilion Lot 0 0 1 2 0 2 B. N of Pavilion 0 0 0 2 0 0 C. Sterk Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 � D. Sterk Road Lot 0 0 1 0 2 1 E. Nussedumer Road 0 2 2 2 3 1 Subtotal 0 2 4 6 5 4 � � �� g�m�� `' � � � � ° � � . . - . � � � � 4�. .ee�`�� a . B � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 1 ' , tables were occupied during the survey, and an occupancy factor of 90%, there wi l l be a pea k parki ng accumul ati on of 225 cars as follows: ' 151 cars x 90% tables occupied/60% occupied = 225 cars 3. Zoo/Amusement/Conservatory Area � The parking requirements for the Zoo and the Conservatory over- lap because the Zoo and Amusement Park users can easily use the ' Conservatory lot. Also many people use more than one of these facilities in a single visit, and when doing the parking surveys, it is impossible to accurately allocate the parked cars to the appropriate area. For these reasons, the three areas have been ' analyzed as a single entity. A comparision of the maximum parking accumulation on June 2, 1979 and on Mother's Day, May 13, 1979, is as follows: , Maximum Surveyed Parkinq Accumulation ' 1 . Saturday 6/2/79 Conservatory 196 cars Zoo/Amusement Park 249 545 cars � 2. Mother's Day 5/13/79 Conservatory 305 cars Zoo/Amusement Park 369 6 4 cars � The 1976 Master Plan for Como Zoo estimates a peak day attendance for the Zoo/Amusement/Conservatory area of 12,000 visitors. This I would result in an estimated peak parking accumulation of 1300 cars as follows: 12,000 visitors, 97%* driving by auto, parking turnover , 2.5*, 3.5* people per car. 12,000 x 0.97/2.5/3.5 = 1300 cars � *Source RBA survey � It is estimated that peak attendance at the Conservatory occurs during the spring flower �show and during the Memorial Day holiday. Officials at the Conservatory estimated that in 1978, during the spring flower show, 75,000 visited the Conservatory in 16 days for � an average of 4,688 visitors per day. ' � ° � aa � t��z eat a� a�g��$�� s �, ¢ �� a � � "' t �� r� �� a ,9,� � �°� ,� ��' �"`� a�` g�� s� � • • ' • � � � � �� '� '��s_ z� ��s� �� a�.� � � � ' ��E� �� a �� 8 �� t � a g ae �� -°� � ��e��a� �3 ��1�� mmP a`°s �`a mR�a �m�� ` ��a�� B so COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 , During the 1978 three day Memorial Day holiday an estimated 20,000 � people visited the Conservatory for an average of 6,670 visitors per day. Assuming a practical peak day attendance somewhere between the two, ' say 5,500 people per day, results in a practical peak parking ac- cumulation at the Conservatory of 610 cars as follows: � 5,500 visitors, 97% arrive by car, parking turnover 2.5, 3.5 people per car. 5,500 visitors x .97/2.5 cars per space/3.5 people per , car = 610 cars ;,. The maximum observed parking accumulation of 305 cars at the Zoo , occurred on Mother's Day, May 13, 1979. For the purposes of this report, a maximum practical parking accumulation at the Zoo/ ' Amusement area of 350 cars will be used. Based on the foregoing discussion it is estimated that approximately 960 cars will be parked in the Zoo/Amusement/Conservatory area � during peak periods. Zoo/Amusement Park Peak Accumulation - 350 cars � Conservatory P2ak Accumulation - 610 cars 960 cars This number falls midway between the estimated peak parking accumula- � tion using the Lambert's data and the peak surveyed parking accumula- tion and for that reason is thought to represent a reasonable estimate of the parking accumulation to be used for design purposes. � In addition to the auto parking, provision should be made to accommodate buses, probably in a separate isolated area and consideration should be , �iven to the handling of added parking on a high peak day. 4. Golf Course The peak surveyed parking accumulation (June 2, 1979) of 110 cars � has been used to determine the number of parking sp�ces required to serve the golf course. � Peak Accumulation Parking Lot 60 cars � Arlington 40 cars Huron (estimated) 10 cars 110 cars ' � . . - . � s s� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN , 1 ' ' S. Pavilion The parking facilities serving the Pavilion were never more than 22% ' full during the June 2, 1979 survey. For the purposes of this report it is assumed that the peak parking requirement in this location occurs during the evening hymn sings. There are approximately 900 � seats available in the Pavilion. Assuming all the seats are occupied, that everyone arrives by car with an average occupancy of 3.0 persons per car results in a peak parking accumulation of 300 cars. ' 900 seats/3.0 people per car = 300 cars 6. Swimming Pool ' Based upon the Consultant' s experience with other similar swimming pools, the 100 space parking area appears adequate for all but one , or two peak summer days. A summary of the estimated peak parking accumulation by area is presented in , Table 5-7. It should be emphasized that in each case the peak parking accur�ula- tion represents the number of cars that are expected to be parked at one time during all but the busiest periods. It is not practical or economical to design for the one or two busiest days of the year, so that for the purposes of this � report the parking facility requirements are based upon the figures contained in Table 5-7. Using these figures to size the parking facilities means that on most days, including weekends, there will be more than adequate parking to � accommodate park users. However, on several we`kends during the summer, the parking facilities serving specific areas will be nearly full , especially in the early afternoon. On one or two we�kends during the year, especially when , there are special exhibits at the Conservatory, not everyone will be able to find a place to park in the lots since the lots will be full . The parking plan should suggest how parking can be handled on such unusual days. 1 , i 1 1 � 'A�� € � � �t � � �a��a� °� ;�9�� e�� e..e.y �. ��' 'e � . �� a�, � , � � , � � � � � �� ` ��s��, � � • ' • � - � � � �� °� a ��g � � a s � � � � � � � � � z��4��. `�a�a�°�� . 7 k .,.r efl �"�":. s s 2 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' TABLE 5-7 ' SUMMARY ' ESTIMATED PEAK PARKING ACCUMULATION BY ACTIVITY AREA ' COMO PARK ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA ' 1 . Murray Athletic Field , 460 cars 2. Picnic Area 225 cars , 3. Zoo/Amusement/Conservatory 1000 cars 4. Golf Course ' 110 cars 5. Pavilion 300 cars 6. Swimming Pool � 100 cars TOTAL 2195 cars � � � � i 1 �ae � � � e se� i �s. e � � � . ¢ 1 . . . _ . B 63 ' COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' ' � ' ' 1 � , , , ' , •:•.:�: ::ti i •:rs: .�_:. ft:: :�:�!� ./Y} }ij{i ;::ti{: �'�i:;: :'��..��.•••........•..��...•�:.i...��..�:;'�'%�.•.•......�:'�'��......;:;�:�..•�..........•••.:�..'�:�'{��..•��:.'.��'>��'�.��.•••••••':::y�'.�..';';';;:y:.,.:�::y>::}�'��::�.�}r�•..•...•........>:}..:;�;�..'�:>........•titi�.:�y$:��t��.�..'..y$'r:!;t:::'::y??+��,�'��t:�r:v'�r::�:•:�,$$��;;•yii��'��?��:{ ::i:% •:�•.t:•,•.;%:;;t�;: ;:;�;;:;:::::':�3:'•:�::;�:t:�:�:S:�:�. i i �4ti•J:•t:Y�••l:r.{�.:•}!:•::•}. y�ti�: :•�'�"•,••• i•�•�••••�,••••• {..�IYi�I�� •.��}�!:i iY:'•:`:�i::i l:•:S]:.:::.::.....��i....}:�•��•..,.}�;?%�:{?i i;i:.!, �<��:.. ::�� :.:��„�.......:.::..:;:::::::::::::::::>::::::::.:.>:.:::.::::.:::��::.:::.::.::.:�::::::.:. .......................................................... . . . _ ................................................. ... .... ............................. ..........:::_::.. �:�� ................................. . ........................... � � � � � t 6.0 PARK USERS SURVEYS ' Survey Data ' The Como Park traffic study deals specifically with auto traffic and related impacts and problems. Since problems of one mode of transportataon can be caused by or affect other modes, this part of the overall study evaluated park users, use relationships and modal use. The study also attempted to assess , users' perceived needs and reactions towards the park. Park user data was evaluated from surveys obtained from the Metropolitan Council . ' A winter use survey was conducted over the period from December, 1977 to March, 1978. A separate survey of downhill skiers was conducted during the same period. A summer use survey was conducted over a period of June to September of 1978. � The survey data consisted of an extensive file of computer printouts. The fol- lowing discussion summarizes the survey results. For the reader who is interested in additional survey responses, a tabular presentation of responses is included ' in Technical� Appendix G. Additional data which was available and evaluated includes St. Paul Bicycle Count ' Data Interim Report and Bike Report. Both studies were conducted by the City of St. Paul . The former was done in May, 1975, the latter in July of 1977. � This study also surveyed over 700 users on Saturday, June 2, 1979 primarily to assist with parking studies. Surveys were conducted through a joint effort of City personnel and the consultant. � 6.1 WINTER USE SURVEY � General The winter use survey was conducted over a three rrwnth period. Three separate ' sub-areas were surveyed, the Lake area, Conservatory, and the Zoo. The surveys were conducted on both weekends and weekdays throughout the period with a total of 131 respondents in the Lake area, 143 at the Conservatory, and 177 at the Zoo. P.pproximately three-fourths of the surveys in the Conservatory and Zoo areas ' were conducted on weekends while 82% of the Lake area surveys were conducted during weekdays. As one might expect, the Lake area shows a larger response rate by users who 1 ive close to the area than the other two areas due to the dis- � proportionate weekday share. The reverse is true of the Conservatory and Zoo areas since weekend visitors likely would travel farther than would weekday visitors. ' � e� ��"�� _ ��,� ' � . �. �� • • - • � �„��e � ,�: � ek� ��y. �� s sa COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 ' Arrival and Departure Times ' The predominant arrival periods for the Conservatory are from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ' with a slight lull from 11 a.m. to 12 Noon. The same pattern holds for the Zoo visitors although the arrival period extends until 5 p.m. Both areas show a rather constant and consistent arrival pattern with little significant peaking. The Lake area respondents tend to a.rrive between 12 Noon and 6 p.m. with some � tapering off towards 6 p.m. The arrival pattern again illustrates rather steady arrivals with a slightly heavier arrival rate between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. Departures pick up approximately an hour later than the peak arrival time, ' indicating a stay of about one hour in the Conservatory. The same pattern holds true for the Zoo with departures peaking between 4 and 5 p.m. The departure pattern in the Lake area, like the arrival pattern, is somewhat later � than the other two areas. Again no significant peaking occurs with heavy de- partures starting between 12 Noon and 1 p.m. and extending until 6 p.m. No departures were recorded after 8 p.m. for any of the areas. ' The great majority of visitors in all three areas stayed between one-half and one hour. Very few in any area stayecl longer than two hours. Nearly 50% of the ' visitors to the Lake area stayed only one-half hour. The primary means of transportation to each of the areas is by car. Ninety- � four percent of Conservatory and 95% of the Zoo visitors surveyed said that they had arrived by auto. In addition, 1% of the Conservatory visitors and 2% of the Zoo visitors were dropped off by auto. The Lake users' predominant mode also was auto. Sixty-four percent arrived by � car with an additional 31% dropped off by autos. This may indicate that a large share of winter Lake users are younger than 16. ' Onay 1% of each user group arrived by public bus to each of the areas and only 6 respondents out of 451 (total of the three area groups) walked to the park. User Profile ' Most Conservatory and Zoo visitors surveyed were visiting in a family group. ' However, the majority of Lake users (56%) , came to the lake alone. The largest age group of users in all three areas are young adults aged 20-34, � with the 35-59 year old users being the second largest group. Only a few respondents indicated their most important reason for visiting Como. The main activity participated in for both Conservatory (69%) and Zoo (66%) ' visitors was nature study, while Lake users were predominantly engaged in walking � � � � � � � � , � � � �� f��l'�� . �� ±� �� l�rc�� . . - . � � �� u e °� �� - ��' , . & z e '_ ��. °- : � _e : �, . e+. e . ��. s : ,e:. . ,:, �;e .e . . � . g e. . oy. . ..: ae,: . .e...' .. .se.�,se. .9e��m. ee e.��.ee, ,e�..: . .ee�: .,�s . _°�� ,. ��- �.,k�� e � B ss COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' � or jogging activities (86%) . The reasons listed for a satisfactary experience tend to be unique to the main activity. Interestingly, the majority of the Lake users (43�') cited weather as being the factor which contributed most to a satisfying experience. When asked to cite a reason why their visit was less ' satisfying, the majority did not cite any. Very few users in each area were not satisfied with the roads or parking conditions. ' ��_—� �ased on winter survey data, conflicts between commuters and park users are far ' iess likely during the morning rush hour than during the evening rush hour. The number of roads or parking spaces available do not appear to be major factors which detract from the winter park users' experience. These may, however, be perceived as "givens" in an urban setting where nothing can be done about them. � The opportunity to participate in a specific activity or activities are much more important user generators than the immediate proximity of the park to respondents' , residences. This is borne out by the response to the main reason for visiting the park and by the overwhelming majority who use autos to get to the park. � 6.� DOWNHILL SKIING SUR`✓EY General � The survey, conducted over a three month period, included a very limited sam le p with 37 respondents selected at random. There was no differentiation between � weekday or weekend users although surveys were conducted over both time periods. A general note is that the limited sample allows limited analys�is since each respondent accounts for 3% (2.7% actual ) of any response. � Transportation Related Surve Items Two periods of the day are heavy arrival periods. Forty-nine percent of the re- ' spondents arrived between 12-3:00 p.m. and 35�� arrived between 6-8:00 p.m. The distinct break in time periods may suggest that the 12-3:00 p.m. arrivals are weekend users while the group in the later time period may have been weekday ' users. The heaviest departure periods tend to coincide with this assumption. Again 49% leave between 4-8:00 p.m. (weekends?) and 30% leave between 6-8:00 p.m. (weekdays?) . The average length of stay was generally between one and one-half � to two and one-half hours with over 50% of the respondents indicating this length of stay. This, however, could vary considerably and cannot be used as an effec- tive tool in determining turnover since neither weather nor snow conditions are reported. Either condition would have an impact on the length of stay. , � � �_ �� a�� e � �° �a �� ~°°�� '� � 9 �., �:�� "s� � � � �� e � � �� — • � '� �.. � ' � , a � e �� .,, �� . ; �'� � �n� � e �� eae:.�� a ��._' � , ; �°��eeE.�� .9 �� a R da� �.. � B s� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 ' The dominant means o�' transportation was automobile. Sixty-five percent either � drove or rode. Ar� additional 22% were dropped off by auto. One person (3%) arrived by bus while il% reported walking to the area. An effort to determine the perceived adequacy of �he parking offered the following responses: ' Adequacy of the Parking Lot Blank (no answer) 3% � Didn't use it that day 35% More than adequate 13% Adequate 46% � Less than adequate 3% 100% Surrmary of Results F.rom Downhill Skiing Survey � For the most part, t;he arrival and departure patterns would probably remain about the same regardless of �:he size of the survey sample. One would expect the ' 1 ength of stay to be mor� towards the two to two and one-hal f hour area. The dominant means of transportation most likely will remain auto. This may � indicate that a high�r percentage of users come from intermediate distances where auto is the prefer°red mode, rather than the immediate neighborhood area where walking would be convenient. � The adequacy of the parking lot cannot be fairly assessed with this survey since weather and snow cond-i�ions were not recorded. Each affect the size of the crowd and also may affect the perceived adequacy of the parking lot. It would also be , useful to survey organized user groups regarding their mode of travel , where they are parked, and adequacy of parking. , S.3 S191lRfVI�F� l��E� �lJ�3V�`Y General ' The summer surveys were conducted from June through September in 1978. The park was divided into three areas as depicted on Figure 6-1 . They are: the Picnic ' Area (I) , the area east of the Conservatory (II) , and the Lake Area (III) . Both weekend and weekday users were surveyed, however, their responses are combined. The responses �hus favor more of an average day and do not allow for analysis � of problems during a peal: suri�ner weekend. Surveys conducted in Areas I , II , and III included 129, 85, and 93 users in each of the respective areas. As a generai ruie the responses of users in Areas I and II were similar while � Area III differs considerably in many respects. g �"��, � c s a x��$s�� "�mz�� '�z°� � � 96e a� � � �ae �..�: ' � , a� ��°�^��"��a �� r �� a� ° �� `� ��B � s � `� � � �� °� �� $ � � � � ' � � �� m..� � , � �� '�� • • � • �� a� a� �a ��a� �,s ��'�� " ��a � �a ��e� �°^^„�� a �z sa a��c� ��9�� s$ s ��`� � ..� »�,°� � ��"9�,e �� `��°� � a�,�� s �.9�a��ee. e� e.. �..P�.�� eeE. e�.sa, B sa COMO PARK MASTER PLAN �� 1 � como park sub areas � , � +� c a� •� � , `" � � °� � `� o FIGURE 6-1 0 0 � zs � � � c � � •r O i '- N � � � •� r- N r i rCf � +� C O S. N O > rtS N � f0 •r �1-� � Q)•r $.. O� N �LL (��I-- C) \\ N > N E LL � � � i-� S-. a L •r- S- �0 � • O O� S�r RS C �0 � > ' Qa. �' O � r- C.) C L �•� +� rtf•� � +� S. � r- O 41 E �G N E �6� � � � Q U U U U f0 N d �-•r � •i- �y (n --�� 1__.� r- •r•r •rN �•r � •r r � � �M C4- N N �, . \ Z C C r L C CJ C �•r t U U N•r N N � \ Q U U� Q L U (n C r t C � �CS Q N t ��.X � O W W •r•r � W �O •r (iS N•r- U �C O r- W � U � RS fCS O � � ddd � Ja00 ►- J (n� 7 a� ►-� NC3JSL� o W Q Q � Q > � .�I m r N M C.� d' LI� l0 I� 00 al O r C� N M Gt LL7 lfl 1� � '•��•':.':.'lr�:.'•'�::. � ',i' N N r r— N r r—r— r—r— r— LAK E �r . . O l.. .;;�:i:.�:;ii:.:.�:.��• � 1 ' , . . ' . '..i:;.':..• ';1 ic,'�►•'::.�i•'�:��•'i��r• ,�. EPS� o�:::::�:::::::::::::::::.:::::::::��::��J::::::':�:::::�::::::.:. � ��. :;:::::;:::::; ��r��:: ;!� :..:�:::�:::::�:::::::�::�:�:�::�:�::�::�:�:::::�:::�:��::::��:::��:�:::��::::::�::�:::::.::.::...:... C : �L.._JL.�1�. . . �::�:::::::::��:�:::�:::::'::::::::::::::� '�i 1 � � �:�::�:::�::::�::::�::�::�:::��::::::::::�� ,,I E� ::�,�::�:::::�::�::�::::�:::�::::�::�::::.. � 0 0 D. �:��:�:::::::::::::::::�::::::::�� ',� � AT W U S OR ��:':��:�::��:�:��:�::�:�:�:�::��:��::�:::::�:�;::�:��. � �;:�:::::�:::�:�:�::�::::��::�:�:�:��:��:��::�:��:��:�:��::��:��:�::�. .. .. . .. � a �o . ::�:::::�:::::::::::�:��:��::� � �� ::o� � o ,':, ... .. . , p° � � . '� OMO.LAK ��` � ♦.I � JL`JL o � �.��.:�::�:� :::::::::.�::��::::::.:.�.��.:� � � �---� I.± oa � �� Q �� ;. ,� il � �. .. 0 � �.. :�.: � �, � � � � � �� . � , �--� ;: � e ,. ,o l�0 / �` \�0�� oo � •. .;r,• LEXINGTO PAR(WA f , �> o �oq ',;�,^ _ �� o ::��:..:�.::�:�: . Q {�� o\ . .. :. �'��'' � o M ,. o � o •� :��"'�::�:>�•.:�::'�:�.��:`•:�� .: . , �ai / I p � . �' :�::��:'�: •:>.: ��:.'.:��•.':'�.' a w' � '.;•.0::`°'o•••:•f: '•:•:'`�.`.;``:�;`• :r:�r.�•��'•�..'':'' 0 Z'. / � � _a>o : .Cs"�:�: ::.:r'�'..;.., o J ao � ° II 6'I � (� O 1L �� , ••. : .; :;•... ..,�•..;�..�;•'•:�,:�;:..�•;'.'•;•'•�.;'.•, ':�'� ''''''.• Q. u' 8 � -/ �' i•:7;r•,:•,. �, . � �. F:� � i 8 P/ / � "•'FS'�.••. ...'•'�,L[•.'..,'•''•r'•'•?''•' • '•t• •''';�f'•�• O � ��-J . i /o / O / . . . . •. 0,.,. � W� . J •:::�G�' •4•::• F= �: �p ;-----_ � �. b� � .�`.::;::�:::?::`:`:`�.•..`:}:;:;:`.;.::••:: w ,. , —�o�� , � � �� `�' ��:'4C�f.:.:.::.....:....:...:...: .:.:. .:. . J ' � � � ,I � / , � . ..:,�;• .:..:::..:.:•.:..'.: _ •' � \ \ � 1 , ' �;�/ 9 � .;•.••�'.:qr a • I � � �� O b o •��'••:'• o �� ::�::m:::�::�� } � � o a O I � o �., o • a� � ;�, � � �� _ /` ,/o o a ''r•r . .,•.,••.,•.• � O .'. �) �% �y o° o �O , ��,�f..�. � ::::'r: ::'�'.�:•::r' � .�l (� f p N o ,.;.;:.::':':'::::�jti,:; • v � �: � 8 � - � � ::::::�::::�:::::::>::<.:. �� ,; i ; :.�:: ��: �n :::::::::::::::::::::::�::::::::::�:�,::..�: o o .. J� ::::�::::::::::::::::.:::::: :. � .� V Q .. ....'.':.'.'.'.'.i'�: .' J � 1 :::::`:�::::::::::�:�::::::::::�::: � ] .�... �o �I . � HAMLINE AVENU �Innn�`� ��+��1 it ' I � _ m �� °�� s�� '��" �"`t�� #�� , �'� � • • - � �,��a�� 1 B ss COMO PARK � MASTER PLAN ■ ' Transportation Related Survey Items ' Area I heaviest arrival time is bet��eEn i0 �.iii. and 3 p.m. It then tapers off from 3 to 4 p.m. and picks up ugain sii�htly from 5 to 6 p.m. This is not ' surprising since the main activity in this area is picnicking. The heaviest arrival period of Area II is from 12 to 2 p.m. with 1 to 2 p.m. being the heaviest one-hour period. The survey results indicate that arrival activity ' in Area II starts about two hours later than Area I and runs slightly later. Peak arrival periods of Area III are concentrated in mid-day (11 to 3) and from 7 to 8 p.m. ' Departures tend to be heaviest in Area I from Z to 7 and from 8 to 9 p.m. Ti�e peak departure period occurs from 3 to 5. Departures in Area II tend to be somewhat sporadic with heavy activity occurring during three periods from 2 to � 3 p.m. , 4 to 5 p.m. and from 6 to 8 p.m. Area III departures are concentrated in early afternoon from 1 to 4 p.m. Al1 of the areas tend to receive a fairly significant turnover throughout most of the day. � Users of Area I tend to stay somewhat longer than users of other areas. The largest number stay from two to four hours while the majority of Area II users ' tend to stay 1-1/2 to 3 hours. Visitors in Area III stay for a considerably shorter period of time with 66% of all respondents indicating a visit of less than 1-1/2 hours. The overwhelming majority of summer visitors in Areas I (90%) and II (91%) � arrive by car. An almost insignificant number (2%) arrived by public transit or walked to either area. Although 57% of the Area III respondents arrived by ' car, a large proportion used bikes• (17%) or walked (21%) . This would indicate that users of Area III tend to come more from the immediate area than do users in Areas I and II. This is supported by responses of inetropolitan area users ' which indicated that users of Areas I and II travel farther than users of Area III. Nearly 60% of the visitors traveled more than six miles to Areas I and II. Area III respondents, however, indicated that 77% lived within five miles and that very few (4%) visitors came from more than 10 miles. The regional and out- � state visitor is attracted to Areas I and II due to the unique nature of the Zoo and Conservatory. Autos would be expected in greater numbers near these areas and driver confusion and disorientation may be somewhat more common due to the , regional or out-state visitors' lack of familiarity with the park. User Profile � Most of the users in Areas I and II visit the park with family and friends, while 48% of Area III users visit the park alone. Elementary school classes were the single largest type of organized groups which � visited the park. Their activities were fairly well confined to Areas I , II , and the Zoo. ' �� , � �� e �° �s A4 � 3�� .ra� s s x , �� ! �„��s�I � � �� r � �� '� � " Y�� 9 � � �� , � � � �c �. ��" Yt` ��.,ts � � • • • 4� � �� s* � � � � �� a �� ' .q� � � ee.�e, a� aa.�� a.��' P��9 e e�a,�ti�,a e9we.�e;. .e=_�,. —°'� ve �. na�esmt.�ae.. j �� B ss COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 t � ' The respondents of Area I were primarily in the 20-59 year 'age 'group, with a significant number of seniors and teenagers. Area II had a high concentration of 20-34 year olds representing 63% of survey respondents in that area. Note , that the number of seniors was very low in this area. Nearly half of Area III users were 20-34 year olds with a fairly balanced proportion of teenagers, 35-59 year olds, and seniors. The small percentage of youngsters may be exaggerated by survey bias. Surveys were less likely to be conducted of children, therefore, , they are not represented in true proportion. When asked the main reason for choosing Como Park, the survey respondents from � Areas I and II most often mentioned that they liked the facilities. The second most common response was that it was close or convenient. Visitors of both areas also indicated that they liked the Zoo. Area III users overwhelmingly stated � (64%) that the primary reason for visiting was that the park is close or convenient. Twenty-six percent indicated that their primary reason for visiting Como Park that day was because they liked the facilities. � When asked why Como is a good place to visit, many of the respondents gave rr�re than one answer. However, the major factor in all three areas was the recrea- tional facilities and programs which are available. Interestingly, the proximity ' of the park was not often mentioned. A significant number of users of Areas I and II again stated that the Zoo was the major reason why Como is a good place to visit. T his substantiates the use relationship between Areas I and II and the � Zoo while a very weak relationship exists between Area III and the Zoo. Generally, users of Areas I and II were not concerned with bike or pedestrian pathways. Users of Area III , however, indicated that the pathway systems were ' important to a significant number of them (33%) and that they enjoyed the lake or being near the lake. � When asked to cite something which could be done to improve the park, a large number of respondents had no comment. Of those who did respond, Zoo related im- provements were most often cited by users of Areas I and II . Users of Area III ' most often cited the pathways and lakeshore improvements. Road related items were cited only by Area III users (4%) . Additional parking needs were mentioned by very few of those surveyed. � The last item extracted from the survey indicates that the majority of users surveyed view Como Park as their favorite place to participate in the activity they were engaged in on the day of the survey. This would indicate that the , majority of users of all areas could be expected to be repeat visitors. , � � �� '�� ;� � � � �� p. ,�� e�� '� �� : ° �, °�; s �a:� r a�,� �� , �e�� e�;�°� s�� e�„� � e � m ve� 7�.�,e�� a�°:k � �. e.e � � . P �e ee ' � �s . �� , a � .� �� ,..5� � � � ' � � � �� ;0.&4 'ae.�� `� �,�e � °� �_ �`� �. �s� 6- �s � �" ,9 . �" �°a aa .- ' .. _�_ �,.�,.�.��eaa�,s .a.�....��. � �� B7� COMO PARK �MASTER PLAN � � Summary of Results of Sumner Use Survey , Some major considerations arose out of the summer user surveys : . The primary mode of transportation to the park is via auto, , regardless of which area is visited. . Many more vi si tors to the Lake area use bi kes or wal k to the ' park than in any other area. . llsers of the lake shore tend to be from the local neighborhoods � while other areas are frequented by users from outside the immediate neighborhood. . Commuter traffic and park users present little conflict during , the morning rush hour while park use is fairly heavy during evening rush hour and some conflicts could be expected. . Many of the Zoo/Conservatory visitors are from the greater � metropolitan area or outstate, and they may have orientation problems due to unfamiliarity with the park. ' . Most users like the recreation facilities and programs which the park provides, and feel that they are generally well maintained. � 6.4 BICYCLE SURVEY �� Bicyclists in substantial numbers use Como Park. This activity has been surveyed and facilities hav been provided with additional facilities being planned. � Appendix B presents pertinent planning and survey data. Major points of the planning and survey which should be taken into consideration include: . Como Park, as a whole, is the largest single attraction for ' bicyclists in the City of St. Paul . . The great majority of bicyclists are riding for recreational ' purposes or for exercise. . Most bicyclists would prefer to ride on a separated pathway ' than on a roadway. . Both automobiles and pedestrians present sources of conflict for bicyclists. ' � � a ; �,; 'i � � � • • - • � B 71 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ! ` � , . Bicyclists at Como Park are nearly equally bala�ced in terms of age and sex with 42% under the age of 18 and 49� 18 or older. � 6.5 JUNE 2,1979 PARK USER SURVEY � An on-site par� user survey was also conducted by Ralph Burke Associates with assistance from City personnel . The user survey was coordinated with the June 2, � 1979 parking survey discussed earlier representing a typical early summer Saturday. Interviewers were stationed at major access points near the Zoo, Conservatory and Amusement Park. Another interviewer canvassed the picnic, lake, pavilion, and open space areas. The interviewers utilized a questionnaire and interviewed one � individual in each arriving party. In addition, survey questionnaires were located at the golf course clubhouse for golfers to fill out on a voluntary basis. � The purpose of the survey was to evaluate user patterns and characteristics. Park users were questioned in each area regarding their: � . mode of transportation to the park . parking location . number of people in the party � : length of stay primary activity of the visit . other activities in which they participated � The survey, although conducted for one day, produced a large sample with over 700 responses. The survey helped to reinforce previously discussed survey informa- ' tion regarding the strength of area use relationships rather than presenting significant new data. Among the items which were reinforced are: . The vast majority of park users arrive by auto. � . Only 16 of 722 respondents wal ked to the park, most of these were surveyed near the pavilion. ! . The Zoo/Conservatory/Amusement Park area is the most heavily used with strong interaction among the separate sub-areas. i . Only 18 of 722 arrived by public transportation. . 16 of 722 arrived by bicycle and most of those surveyed were � near the lake. � � e�� .e e�t � s� #T �e � ��s'�� °9 � � ��.�e� s � �°� �� • • • e�� a ,�� g �'. °'C%'�„$�ge�e�� . �0 & 1 B 72 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 � . The majority of the respondents estimated their length � of stay to be about two hours. . Nearly 40% of the respon�ents parked on the street rather � than in lots. Kaufman Drive (55% of time) was the primary response when the street was specified. . Arrivals are light until about 10 a.m. From 10 a.r�, to 2 p.m. � is the heaviest arrival time, tapering off over the next two hours. Very light arrival activity occurred after 4 p.m. � 6.6 CONCLUSIONS � Use Relationships The results of the surveys indicate several strong use relationships that should � enter into alternatives clevelopment. Among these are: . The Zoo/Conservatory/Amusement Park area has a strong pedestrian � relationship to the picnic and open space areas to the south and east. . The Lake/Pavilion area, in many ways, functions as a separate � yet integral part of the park. - Lake area users tend to confine their activities to � the lake area with weak links to other use areas. - The area tends to have very mobile activities (i .e. , , driving for pleasure, bicycling, jogging, hiking, etc. ) compared to other use areas. - Users of this area tend not to be in groups which may � indicate that they desire a de�ree of solitude or privacy to a greater extent than other nark users. - Users in this area tend to turn over much more rapidly, i catching a brief respite, and then moving on. . Two areas, although a part of the park, have little movement or , relationship to other parts of the park. These are the golf course and McD1urray field. - Users of these areas tend to vi si t the park for that � particular activity only and, generally, do not utilize other park areas during their visit. ' ' s # z e 1 :m . �'�. .m,: � �� @P :. '��' �� °a° � � � � � � � �� ,. - - � . � � � �� 6 . ��. £ �� : '�. . � . . � ' .�. � �. . ,e. ; . �:° a s�aee�si, � ,ee.� - ,e°°- e.� �� , � � , e "_., a,e.�.� ,_ '- .... .'e. e. �e.e.e�� ,vm,. .e.,e . ,e9e.9e. e... . , , �.._, � -z . . .,e . ,e.�� ,...e=.�'a, ex.ee e..:. ■ B 73 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � � , Significant Transportation Relationships � The bicycle survey conducted by the City substantiated the importance of Como Park as a major attraction in the City's overall bike system. Both winter and surr�ner surveys substantiated the fact that nearly all of the park users arrive by car. One exception is that for summer users of the Lake area, bicycle and � pedestrian modes of transportation play a significant part. From the combined survey results, several general statements can be made. � . Very few park users utilize public transportation to get to the park. � . The greatest area of potential conflict between modes of travel and activity is near the lake. This is due to the relatively high mix of bicycles, pedestrians, and autas in a tightly re- stricted space. Further, nearby residents walk into the park � and thus must cross relatively heavily traveled roadways. . Few park users (either winter or summer) perceive a problem with � the road or parking system as it exists today when compared to other park problems. . A fairly large proportion of park users are elderly which may ! point out a need for shallower grades on pathway systems, at grade crossings, and parking areas conveniently located to activity modes. � . Pathway users indicate that they like the relationship to the lake. � . Park user/commuter traffic conflicts a.re rearly non-existent in the mornings but are likely to occur in the afternoons. � i 1 ! 1 � � �� . �� „��6 �e � e�� g �e� ��a�� a `�� i � � �� e a eae �� b �� " _ � ��m ef � � g3 -. � 9 � � � � ' • , ��,��„�� m�°��3� 9� � �.�s � �� `� t r � '�e.�$ ��°��b e�` e,�,�e �@� a�€� g� �� eq,. e .- aet�..��e e m.e �„:. e,, vme� „ �e.° B 74 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � , � � � � � , � � � , � � >':':��:?�':'..`:>:>�i.�:.:.�'�`:��:.;>��..:?:';:>�:.��:'��: ....... :i�:`z�:;_��::>�:��;il:;:::�>:�`:�:::�:�>:�:�>:�:�:;�:::�:��::::�:::;:�:�>:�:�:�:��`�:`�:`�:�s'`;�:�:::�>:��:��:>s:<�:��»�:��::�'�'�::�:;:::'�:;'::'.:::�'::;::�'� :��:::��::�:z��:::�::.3,::::�:; ':::�:�:::::::;:::::::�::�::::�:�::�:�:�:�:::�i:�::i:�::�::i:�:�:�:::�:�:�i:�:�::�:�:::>:�:��:��::::�:�:::�i:�;i:�:�i�:;;�:;:;:��:':�>�:::�::�i:�:�i:�`:�<�::;:i;'�':;`•::;:;��:`:;:;:�::;��::: . . .. . :;::»::�::;:�:i:::i:�::�i:�:�:�::�i:�:i:�:�:�>i:�:�>:::»::•::•:::.>:•:::•::•»::�:•:::::::::::::.�:::::::::::::................. . �:: :.....:.::�::::::.�::::::....::::::::::::::::::::.....:::::::::::::::::::::...:::::::::::::::::. . . .; . .;...;...,:• •.>:•:•:.;.. .;;. ..;:••.;•:..;;�,:... :;...,_..:....,;.;•.: :•::•::•>:.>:•>:.;:•::::::: :•::•::<.::•::•>:•>:•::•>:�>::::. ::::'":':;:;:;:::;;;:':;��:•.��. 'i ::; ::: �.: :; : :: �;, .::•.. ':;i:;:,�:'�•. •':� ;;:; • .;'� . ;;: : ;; :'� ;; . ;:;: :�::;::;:�;:��:�:�.`•>''''��::��i'� :'::�::��:::�:��:�:i��::��::'•�:s: �. �� , ':�:�::i:�::�i:�:::::i::i:�:�<:�:�i:�:�:::�:�:;::::�:;:::�:�:�:�:s::�:;:�:�:�>:�:s:�i`:�::�:�:::�:�:�::�::�:�:�:��::�::::; ..... 1YM�!'... �:�::�:�:�:�:�i::�::::::;:;:;:s:�:�:�::s:�:::i:�:�i:::�:�>:::::�i:::i:�::::�::�ii:�i:�:�:::�::�>::::�i:•::•>:«.::•::�. .... �� . .. . ::. :::::::.�:............::::::::::.............::::::::::::............::::::::.:�.........:.;�::::::.::.�:.....��!:.::::...............:.:��..ti�. ::.. .: :::::::::::.:�:::::•:. .::::::::::::::•:::::::.: ... ,,,,,.,.�.,.,,�......:::...............:::::::•:::::................ :�:�:�:�5:�::�:�:�s:�:::�:�::�:�:�i:��:�::�:��:�::�:�::;:;:;:;�:::;:::�:�:;:�:�:�:�::::::�:�:�:�i:�:�:�>i:�:�::�:�:;:;:;:;::s:�::;�:�:�:�i>::3:��:�:�::�:�:�::�::;�:�:�:s::�:::�i:�:�s:�:�i:�:�:�:�:::::i:�:�::�:�:�:�:•'•�:::�:<�:�ii:•`:�:�:�i:�::::::�i:�::�:�::�i:�:�i:;•'•`:�:::�i:�:�i:;:;:;::�:�:�::�;'.`•:�:::�:�i:�:2�:�5:�i:;�:�i::;:;::�:::�5:�::�:�>:�s:::�::�i:�:::=:�i:�::�::�s::�:�:�:�:�:�:�::�::�: � � ' ' 7.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ' An extended process of evaluating alternative layouts was accomplished for selection of the major roadway system. As developed with the Park Planning Committee, the park plan is to incorporate a major north-south roadway and a 1 major east-west roadway. The procedure followed was to first seek acceptance of a location for these roadway "corridors" - a generalized routing without specific traffic direction design details. After a corridor plan was accepted, � it was then planned in detail , and the secondary roads and parking were prepared. The later work with secondary roads and parking was closely coordinated with City plans for renovation of the Park. � 7.1 FIRST PROPOSALS FOR CORRIDOR AND REVIEW ' To establish a c�rid of possible roadways, four corridors and four entry or exit points to the park were identified for each direction, and on each side of the park, as shown in Figure 7-1 . These corridors did not necessarily identify an ' 2xisting route, but if an existing route closely followed the corridor, that route was used. � The four north-south corridors shown were thus: 1 ) an extension of Lexington Avenue directly through the park, 2) a route generally following Churchill Street and Sterk Road, 3) a route along West Como Lake Drive and the existing Lexington Avenue, and 4) a route along the existing East Como Lake Drive. ' The four east and west corridors shown were: 5) following the Jessamine Avenue right-af-way, 6) along Como A,venue, 7) along Horton Avenue and �) along Easta- ' brook Drive to Midway Parkway. 6Jhile other corri�ors for which no existing route existed were feasible and could hold forth some advantages over the present arrangement, it was considered that the high capital costs involved for new con- ' struction would put them out of consideration. North-south corridor choice number one (an extension of Lexington Avenue) and the east-west corridor, choice number four (following Jessamine Avenue) were included for discussion purposes, although they would fall into this category. ' The entry-exit points (labeled alphabetically) for the park cordon line are also identified by existing streets. While the impacts for this traffic include ' an area much larger than the one within the cordon line and such impacts were considered, no actual road planning outside the cordon line is included. ' The south entry-exit points are located at A) Lexington Avenue, 6) Oxford Street, C) Chatsworth Street, D1 ) Victoria Street and D2) Como Avenue. The north entry- exit points are identical except for Dl ) Milton Street and D2) Victoria Street. � ' � �," ��. ��i ��. �° �� "•��°. �;��. �� . � �y°��y��,a 6 � ��'� � � �' a � ` �a' , � ��&�,a ��p�€ ��;a� � � � � � ��g� ��s � °� � � �ee�"� m� � • • • �� : � � � �� g � � � �aa � � �� e�� 3� �� °� � �� 6 �� m �� °� " a a� �A��- �"� '��'`�, � � a � � � �� '�x�� ' „�; S zee.ee. ��;ea � e e �� :�, .r..'� ��e. � � ' �� a �s ,� � �� ff �,��f � �� s� �� f z � � "�_� � ee.... e � =e9e '� � B �s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � • • 1 • I I . � / , , ��5�"��s�1d��.t'.'. . � 'i�` ��-� �. � �� _ .� :�,_ : : �� E�:�;, � � w�� ' \� ��\��' -�iv.rilR�\\\W"'LV:1.�'�►�1�� 1�L�1�L , �i: t��i `�� '�-�+..��<:,F�.��ri��1��\��,\Z.�\� , �t�� vw�.`LV'�ta., .��►��.aa�.-t�s�,,w-��.•:..�0oaqti.. '�� :� �� -�.� _ '�\ . �?" ,I , � .`\�\� I`� fj}k/ ,��t� ;. ■ ,�� :1l� /l , � � ��i 1 \�\,� `� ,':i�J� ,�?'� \ � r ♦J�! �v� � �{ ,4i,l� ��,. �� . �1,� � Gi��i.�� " �.� �� 1 � ' � t': �' �� 0vo,; _� �� , `��;'y`'� %��1�,�,:��`,��. ; � � i �� y,`0�� E�`��j � �' � � � �.y . ,�;.: S °`�►�'" _��ti\R�� erv � �,� $ . ��' q v��"`�� +�.�� w-.� � ��A� ��.R.i;��`��i:�1�'L��r`� \ .• ■ 1 �� <, �\� ��,, � .q5 �� .1j� ��' �E Z � ''!� � \\ ♦ / a � � � \O � �� •' `!�:��a`'�`%�+�,'��a��'�;' :'1� \�ai�►��J`1\`. O i �i�!`�i� �@��►��'��.�, � . . . t�7�� { � 4�`��.��`O. � �Y „ � ' �� I�1�B� : . , 4�i \ �a�_ O � `�a�. l�1 �, :.L'C'i�`'�M!`L`+.��.0\V�!\�:� :�'a�:i�s:\'a'1�.`a�:a'va � � �a�'�w�e.�!\.�\l.�.��a�i�\\\\�.+�,x�..�a._a��t� ��`��yi�1.� . 1 ��a��.��\.ti.�i� �___�LL��L �_ _ '� � ° ' - --- � ' � 2p� �;� �1�14}�� tf � ��Ui � � ? I I �r?R �, ��.,,�. iIl ' � ' � . i � � � �� `�� '�" . #�°` �i�F. � i � � � � � �`��` °� $ � ��ra � �a x �� '� � �r � � .� ��x��t��s �„� ��,�,f � �� a s '- a �� . �� e � � �� , � E� a:e� APPendix � � ��s � ��e� B � �� ° � �� ' "�"' � � +�"�� a � � � „ , , � a �� , ��A� � et, sm� � � e�� . ��+�� _�� •.�� va ��'� � � � � � � � � � ' � For the east-west directions, the entry-exit points differ since Lake Como pre- vents a more direct route. On the east side of the park entry-exit points were identified as A) Jessamine Avenue, B) Como Avenue-Gateway Drive, C) Maryland- ' West Como Lake Drive, and D) Arlington-Kaufman Drive. On the west side, entry- exit points are A) Jessamine, B1 ) Como Avenue, B2) Horton Avenue, C) Midway Parkway and D) Arlington Avenue. � Consideration of the combination of all possible entry-exit points with all corridors would result in a large number of possibilities. Therefore, the park was divided into three sections identified as A (west and northwest), B , (northeast) , and C (southeast and south) to correspond to the three neighbor- hood traffic subcorrmittees , and alternatives were developed to discuss with � each neighborhood. The chance that two conflicting corridors would be selected was possible, and in fact did happen, but this was more easily solved than to try to analyze all possible alternatives with each of the subcommittees. �` The possible alternatives were then developed for each sub-area and presented to a each of the three subcommittees. In all , about ��0 combinations were discussed. Comments were solicited on any combination which the subcommittee members felt � were desirable, or undesirable. Often two opposing views were brought up. A primary consideration for all of the subcorr�nittees was that entry or exit , points from the park not be directed at residential streets that clo not now carry a heavy traffic load. This effectively eliminated all but entry-exit point A for north-south travel and all but point A or B an the west side for east-west travel . The east side of the park had possibilities of either B or C � as an entry-exit point. A second consideration of the subcommittees was that traffic in the park be dis- ' couraged by increasing the travel time. Signing and circuitous routes were mentioned as possible methods. This should have the overall affect of slightly increasing vehicle miles of travel in the park, while decr�asing the total num- � ber of vehicles. Obviously, a careful balance must be established so as to not deter traffic in the park to the point where it is forced into the residential areas in large numbers. The best alternatives as selected by each of the sub committees were then compared and any conflicts between them resolved. ' Subcommittee A considered the East-West Alternative Corridor B2 as the most desirable. This is along existing Horton Avenue. A second choice alternative � was Corridor Bl along Como Avenue. Subcommittee B considered the best north- south Alternative to be Corridor B1 along Sterk Road within the Park, but to exit on Lexington Avenue, Corridor A, with better pedestrian/bicycle safety measures. Subcommittee C considered two alternatives, Corridor 62 Gateway Drive, ' and Corridor C, West Como Lake Drive, to have about equal weight. In addition, a one-way system around the Lake was discussed. , , �, �� e � � ��.�_ �a ��a�a �''�� '� � �� a � � � � � � � � �. � �� .�6 �� s �� e:� �� °� � �� g `�� - �� ° � � • • - � � � % � �� 7 g � �,�,.��5��r�� e� � �" ` � �.: � �"„��&��'`; „� a��mm; � � P�� €�� b ��w°s,�^ 9:m P ; e , .e ,e� . .. ^ ..... .e e e � � a e P -'P m �s s � .a e ,r 9e�adse.,me4m.,� �a S� B �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 , 7.2 SECOND ALTERNATIVES PROPOSAL AND REVIEW These six alternatives, along with combinations of them, were analyzed further ' by Ralph Burke Associates for compatibility with the total system and exterior roads, and the relative advantages and disadvantages noted. From this analysis a plan was prepared which proposed one solution for corridors in all areas of , the park except the south/southeast - Area C. Three alternatives were proposed in Area C, as shown on Figure 7-2. The three subcommittees then met as one group to consider the three alternatives. � A major emphasis from the meeting was greater consideration of one-way solutions in the southeast area. From an evening's discussion, the Consultant offered to ' consider the many comments and present revised alternatives later at an additional meeting, which showed a one-way plan. 7.3 THIRD ALTERNATIVES PROPOSAL AND REVIEW � At a second meeting of the three subcommittees as one group, �alph Burke Asso- � ciates presented the three alternatives shown in Figure 7-3. Note that these alternatives are a two-way street system throughout (Plan A) and two versions of degrees of one-way street usage on Plans B and C in the southeast area. � �Jote that Figure 7-3 includes estimates of traffic volume for the peak hour. These estimates were an important part of the subcommittee considerations and their derivation is briefly described. ' At the second meeting of the subcommittees (as one group, to consider the alter- natives of Figure 7-3) - the Consultant presented an evaluation of the alternatives. ' Several comments should be made to assist in understanding of the evaluation. . The impacts of the alternatives were considered to be of major ' concern to three aroups - the nearby communities, the park users, and the commuter-type vehicular traffic. For example, regarding the nearby communities, there is a negative impact from the � vehicular traffic, and a positive impact from use of the park. The economic impact - cost - is of lesser importance but should be considered. ' . The impacts can be assessed in a relative sense, but it is difficult to put this in numerical terms. A simple plus or � minus rating system was used with seven degrees of comparison: ' ' � �� a � �� '�� `� � �� e� � �g�� e �� _ � �� s m � , � �� e-°6 a � �aa�� a�e � a .�,, , . . . . � � 6 a � � � � � a � � ��' �� ' �a �� `�� e . �� e�� 6a �s�e., � B 78 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � third review - corridor alternatives ' FIGURE 7-3 �� ;� ' ^ OT£T OE9 �, � � �r J� �� , �60, . , o =°`: � � '°'�`.- r '�" � �c �� 2� n' � ^ � � � � �. I � I � �i; r� , � ( I.� 1 �: i./ rJ��%i�',�. �S9:OTvr.;- � /� �'�'��.,' � .° � �/� � - �EZ ` ,�� Z-�� ,�o'.�� .08LT = U 00£T � ` �: .a\ , a. � tp09t 1 � '�� 1 `Fi� ..�{, p. O I � �:�� / �!��`� � `n'�` I' io ,�� c.=�vr„� i!'�(i��{��' ��v � o� r-I r �� ?I��i;Z'' � °�j 'n .� ��`:�� .yy�;r �v �' � '` ��,y°,t 4, '� � er , �' ^a �f� 0 1 � � � � a� � ��f, C �1 �� 4I :y � r � � '''—�n �/ , o �' , I � __� �� D � • c ,� .� c �� C� �' ' � ! k ° C� � h �d� a '.�, ',�� a� � o � �� ' 008 0£9 �� 099 OTS ' �' ' , �� 0 t G58 �— ' 0�Z i �� I .; J� -�- � �o o s' s -�� o °�� ' 22� � �n='. �n = �r �_ � N 1 � �� . v . CZ 0 S�Z � ' ��,� OzOT V� y ' � � q•�J � `�J �, ! / i ' o r , l; , �%��o�� '°`�d� � ��' ^ ��`lj��=',:�-°=OZST�O�:� o 0£Z.T° �'%� ' o� rJ � OSZT . 555T � t OO�T c �� c�� _ - ' °' �y�' �i�•089T ' '� o��:�F ,y,irv O T- u � „ • �r--�;,-?r� I cV '\ r y I' % �t i�I�� ' ' r /�� Vi �`, � �(� ` :s%� 00 7 p � • ,� r.j j �, /. � . /F � N �``� f / �, J�.,� P �r� . ry �! -� •t' �t� ,\ N �I — _r'�� •�r ��,G6 y, r .o,� � � N :f'\�" o,� . �l � � M � e T9r,e �i1 00 I. :; � :�Py �i �� _. .`.`\�_ F:�.� � "�. C � O ' ��1 � '�':��/ t � � _ �� W7 _i l F°:'�./ � td 4 i. � O �� n�� o o ,, =!p�� o ` �;I. �� ' d, # � . C� "� ._��• � � � � r � � � \ y \I!~ ' . ' �Q 008 � '08i� � � 09i , . d99 � OTS' �� ' � �� a� �6� ��3�� , �s � • • - • Q �� ;.. � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � second review -corridor alternatives � FK3URE 7-2 , ' � � �� QQ ' o ' / o 0 � � C C � , r _+ M _ � � J c I � J L � LJ ��p ' � : � o � � � O i F:�j,I - �L�J O . ' � r;;��'�'�° _ � � o � . ,• d �� °�'ro�;�r �_; �o e� � ;o 1�� i ''��I� e ��• ,' � QE S , / � } -—_" .! ;' �� '��/'"• � J ,' "`N�� 'd/ �'%; ! � � =� �_-�.�� o ; a C � ��-i� f;!� e '` D , J � o �cu o ,�_�.. � _.� , �� v`�' �a o � � � N � � �. � � � �� „ � °�� ° � � �� °�� a �� n �� g�e� � ��a��a#j xa �� S� � � "' ��a �7 � �� e�� ' �'��$�� 1 � ? �� 'g� � �P�2 ' .e�°€ . R9s 3� ��a�i� x � �g� � rg p� � '� • • ' • 8 �'A $ �� . � B �� °�d�r� �'� • � .s.y .� ��'.��'°$� @ u,g�� u�� S �� $�'� �d, �� g � rd �.�. � E�E e ee�$�a'�� . : %:�� k"�'��,��8�t.�`'�r-.F�� '� � � , sa�o a�"f ��T �'�x� �{�F@� � .g.�@� ,��"�� x� S?� �.`ae � ,.�� a�5 ar� ee$� ;� � ,�e $t� ;� "°�e� `"�se.xa . ,. �. . .�. � � .e,e,..e. ee eeFe.. . ..e� ., e� . _. :. °,: e:a .eH...e...e9 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' ' Table 7-1 is a summary of the evaluation factors used in each alternative assess- ment. rHigh positive impact: +++ Moderate positive impact: ++ ' Positive impact: + Negligible impact: 0 Low negative impact. Moderate negative impact: -- , Nigh negative impact: --- At the end of the second meeting of the subcorr�ni�tees as one group, those present ' were asked to indicate their preference for first and second choice of Plans A, 6, and C (Figure 7-3). The results are tabulated in Table 7-2. The results were inconclusive as to a convincing majority for one plan, as all three plans re- ' ceived support. The results of the meeting of the subcommittees and the alternatives of Figure 7-3 were then presented to the Park Planning Committee. The Consultants also , presented their conclusion. Based on the subcommittee discussions, the results of the preference ballot, and in consideration of the objectives (Chapter 2) the Consultant concluded: , Plan B should be accepted as the Master Plan, subject to a test of the plan which is to be about one year duration. The Consultant � pointed out that Plan B reasonably protected community interests but also permitted achieving substantial improvements to use of the park in the Como Lake area - these were key objectives of the Park Planning Committee. , The Park Planning Committee concurred with the Consultant's conclusion to the extent of proceedi ng wi th the the preparati on of a more detai 1 ed pl an and by , putting great emphasis on the one-year test period, and the- monitoring of the results of the one-year test period. The Committee requested the City to author- ize the Consultant to recommend a program for monitoring the test results. ' The key feature to be observed as to negative impact, from the recommended plan, is the extent of diversion of eastbound or westbound traffic (depending on the one-way pair direction) around the park. Front Street is the street which requires , the closest observation as it apparently will receive much of the diverted traffic. However, the purpose of the rather lengthy test period of one year, is to encourage drivers to routinely seek and use alternate routes; these may not result in the , level of use of Front Street which the Consultant has indicated is a maximum. ' � �� ° �,° ��,�� a �� z � s��a° � �� rA�� ° � � � �� ,� � �� s �� ' � � � � , . � � �� ar g ^�°" ��. ��#� : �� ' • � t �"� �� . �� c �� S, � � � �� °'" �p� �$ �,g 't �. n r � k s k� , 3 �� , � .� °m e � �� a°e a � f�"�� 9 a��±�'�a e� r �` ��&r ''� � a� � ' �� s a g�� ..e.�` ee.e.e. a�.ve .9 e s e_ ee,� s ,a 9e.,� �� :..ve.se � � .s .a.,�smi � ee. F ..�9�va� 6 B 81 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' TABLE 7-1 � EVALUATION FACTORS ' RLTERNATIVE A - ALL TWO-WAY TRAFFIC Comnents ImpdCts ' 1. Impact on Community Traffic Level - West Hamline higher (from Horton to Midway) - ' Northeast As today p Southeast Higher on Front (shortcut eliminated) - Access to Park -West Almost as today - Northeast As today p � Southeast Improved (less traffic on Como-Van Slyke) + 2. Impact on Park Users Areas - Zoo, Conservatory, � Picnic Access improved + Como Lake Improved, more space south of lake, pavilion area + McMurray Improved parking, access restricted 0 3. Impact on Road Users ' East-West Traffic Forced on one route, shortcut eliminated - North-South Traffic Better than today + ' Lakeside Traffic Increased traffic south side - Community Traffic Improved + 4. Cost to Public (Southeast area) High capital cost - 1 . ' , ' ' ' , �' e � �� "` '` �� +s�� ag��sa� �g � s�� K � ��,��"�$�C�. a �� . . `�. �� z ,� �.� � �x -.��,��,fla�a e. �� a ��r��gg��m` � � �� a �aaw � `�`' �� z J� � � ��. � �a � � � • ' • ;�" �� tP -.. .,�� "� � y�� . "��: �� e °�S � � ,�� ,$g��g R x ,�., . � a ,g§ � &"A�. � aP: ;� �sG S �� zi' y� 8 .a�;'°� �� 3� : S �:. �. �$ �P $ � 6� �� ,..a� � "�' �w�' � �� .,a t�� P�,6,z�YB„e��6��.,�.e.. ;9„�a �; g� ..e,.,ea�.,eee. ^: �e�s°a:�� s e €„-re„,n�„-�: ...,.,, .e . vsF.e e rr.a=° �'"� ...t�en.�v�a e<< ��va..e. �.:� � d�s-. ee.. . e4.�e.m ' 6 s2 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' , TABLE 7-1 EVALUATION FACTORS , ALTERNATIVE C - ONE-WAY PAIRS ' Comments Impacts 1. lmpact on Community Traffic Level - West About same as today 0 , Northeast Some increase (on Hoyt and other streets) ___ Southeast Greater increase Access to Park - West Almost as today 0 Northeast Improved ++ � Southeast Much improved +++ 2. Impact on Park Users ' Areas - Zoo, Conservatory, Picnic Access improved + Como Lake Improved, more space pavilion area & room bike path, +++ lower traffic McMurray Improved parking, reduced access - ' 3. Impact on Road Users __- East-West Traffic 565-675 peak hour vehicles displaced North-South Traffic Increased traffic - ' Lakeside Traffic Eastbound, northbound and westbound diverted --_ Comnunity Traffic Reduced access in East 4. Cost to Public Low 0 , , , , , , , ' � • • - • 1 B � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � TABLE 7-1 ' EVALUATION FACTORS ALTERNATIVE 6 - ONE-WAY PAIRS I Comments Im acts ' l. Impact on Comnunity Traffic Level - West About same as today p Northeast Some increase (on Hoyt) _ ' Southeast Some increase (on Front) __ Access to Park - West Amost as today p Northeast Improved ++ ' Southeast Improved ++ 2. Impact on Park Users Areas - Zoo, Conservatory, Picnic Access improved + , Conm Lake Improved, more space pavilion area & room bike path ++ McMurray Improved parking, reduced access - 3. Impact on Road Users , East-West Traffic 410-465 peak hour vehicles displaced -- North-South Traffic Increased traffic _ Lakeside Traffic Eastbound and Plorthbound traffic diverted -- Community Traffic Reduced access in S.E. and East -- ' 4. Cost to Public Very low cost + ' ' ' , ' , � � �� ° �g � s =�� a E �� ,E��}��s � � �,�,� ��s ��,aR j� ��t� ��°��' "P � � � s � P � g , � �� t m��:�a *��gs � � .��.��. ��a � � �� .�' a �� g � � � ,,,.� 'x �..��g� � � � �a��b, � � • � � � �� ,�� a a�� ' � �m ��° � . �a � °� �� ,r�� !a ��a 4�� g� t � �° �� e � � ��e,aP� � �°�a�� A�� ,?��'�� & e��'�;,��° ��a b� e , �evme, seP �_= me a�.-.� e ��s�� a��s� ..,�� ,83. . °�°° 96. � �.e,.;ee ,,,.'�, � .e��mm� � � �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � , TABI.E 7-2 RESULTS OF ALTERNATIVE PREFERENCE SURVEY ' (68 ballots submitted) , Traffic Flow No Choice A B C Answer ' Neighborhood Area A lst 75% - 25% 0% (5.9% of Total ) 2nd 75% 25% ' Neighborhood Area B lst 50% 36% 4% 10% (32.4% of Total ) 2nd 14% 23% 9% 46%� ' � Neighborhood Area C lst 24% 21% 48% 7% (61 .8% of Total ) 2nd 5% 40% 17% 38% � Overall lst 35% 25% 32% 8% 2nd 7% 37% 13% 43% � � , ' ' � � _ � � �� te � �� k �� °�� x� �� e �x �� a � � � ; �� ` as ' �3d �s�� at�� - �a� ,�€ a� �� • • '. .� � �� e � t �� a � �p `�� S� �� g' ,� �� s a e �� w� � 3 � ee�� e.�� es�� P��em� �� B 8s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � 7.4 LOCATION OF SEGONDARY ROADS AND PARKING SPACES The location of these facilities is of somewhat less concern to the nearby com- ' munities. The key requirements of the communities as derived from the meetings and questionnaires are: . Midway Parkway should not be dead-ended in the park. It can ' be a local street for access to parking, but should permit traffic to flow through to Lexington Avenue. ' . Como Avenue between Hamline and Lexington can be dead-ended if needed. , . Jessamine Avenue between Hamline and Lexington should be kept open on the basis described above for Midway. . Beulah Street can be closed or dead-ended. ' . Kaufman Street can be closed, dead-ended, or used for , parking. . Reckless "circling" around Lake Como during late night hours ' should be discouraged through planning and design, where practical . . Parking should be expanded and organized to handle parking � needs inside the park. This would be particularly pertinent at Hamline and Midway Parkway (Zoo and ball field parking) and at Arlington, Huron and Chelsea (golf course parking). � . The natural beauty of the lake and its many special features should be preserved free of construction or change to the extent feasible. � The location of both secondary roads and parking is very much a part of use of the park. Therefore, the recommended plan has been developed in consultation ' with the City of St Paul Park Department which is planning the circulation within park areas. ' 7.5 ELEMENTS OF A TEST PERIOD MONITORING PROGRAM The monitoring program should consist of four major phases: , 1 . A measurement program to determine traffic levels on all affected streets before any changes are made. The measurements would be � made with automatic traffic counters supplemented by turning counts � � ��d� �:�� afa �� 0 � k d @ �� d. �� a� �s.��- a¢ . �. � ��"r a � . e s� �� °� � X_� � �+ ��. � �. e � �. °��°� � �' R � � � � � � p � ��m � � �� ` �a�� a � �s��a��a�� r� � a� � �g� �� ,� m �a' t� ,��°�� s�� ' � �� P �� a'�,� � a' � `�` ..e,a4 � r g°,: � .r e'�zw� e. °�"'_�`&,.�� e �� .�..a.�. g� re.e k e �6' �S � � e: '�. evee�e ,a*�. �� . e -, , e e ....e.... e ..� 9ee9ee. .., �e..,...' .._e_9.,e„.:° �..,e.., B ss COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 ' , at selected intersections. The measurements must be planned to deri ve data whi ch can be compared to the resu 1 ts wi th the new one- ' way system in operation. 2. Installation and construction of the test one-way system. Before the installation starts, there should be extensive publication of ' the plan in the communities affected by the traffic flow changes (both residents along or near the routes and commuter-type users). As the installation progresses and changes in traffic flow are ready � to be accomplished, further notification should be made with il- lustrations of changes. After the test installation is complete and traffic has begun adjusting, the Planning Committee should meet ' to discuss the results. Further meetings should be held during the test period. Adjustments in the test may be warranted from these meetings. Further, the progress of the test may mean some spot measurements should be taken to quantify questionable results or ' situations. � 3. A second measurement program started some months after the test � system is in full operation. The timing for these measurements should be determined from observation of how the traffic flow is settling into a normal pattern, but also timed to be made during ' the time when there is substantial use of the park. The measure- ments should be consistent with the pre-test measurements as to locations, time periods, techniques, etc. , to permit valid compari- son to be made. ' 4. Analysis of the "before" and "after" measurements. Hopefully the comparisons and analysis will permit drawing a firm conclusion , regarding the adequacy of the test one-way system. Public meetings will again be needed to present the results and recommendations. , 7.6 SUBSEQUENT REVISIONS The corr�nittee adopted the plan with four clauses, and a fifth added later. They � are briefly: l . A trial implementation period. ' 2. An evaluation procedure for the trial . 3. An assessment of the impacts of rerouted traffic on surrounding � community. , , � � ,; : , ��+� ..'s �.: �� ,�° e.e e. � � : ' � � ¢ �� e ° � � e �� ''� � � � � � ��e ��, �.. �� e�$ � � �� • • • w.�'�� `� �� a s 87 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' 4. An assessment of a two-way alternative if the one-ways prove ' impractical . 5. A review by fire and police departments. ' The plan was reviewed by both the district fire department and police officials and the citywide fire and police officials. Concerns were expressed by the ' fire officials about access to houses along the lake, especially those on East Como Boulevard. The police departments were generally in concurrence with the proposed changes. Due to the fire department's concerns, it was decided that if one-way traffic flow along the lake is initiated, the East Como Lake Drive ' sliould be one-way north, thus changing the lakeshore road circulation from a clockwise to counterclockwise flow, the overall impacts were considered about the same for either configuration. This plan was formally adopted by the ' Committee in July, 1980. Chapter 3 presents the analysis of the selected plan as adopted by the committee. � ' , , � � � ' � ' �� „� �� ` �� ,�" �°�`� �� g � ae �e��a �� s ��, � � � • �.` � `��e "H$�3gT��9'&��P�S�Y'�� . g � �� ss+°see�, � � .. . v �"�� s�s ss a��9 ��e�,e� ��.f - : ..a.ee��e ��°.�s= '.z ��g� ..�� s�� erem . ' e v : ,.� °,':...e e.m ,... ,.�,�ee�,ee ea� m .e ae...a., ee �,e ...�,.9,.ee. .eee�m.,e, e . .... . B � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' � ' ' ' H TTLE AND REMOTE S U 1 PARKING STUDY � , NOVEMBER 1980 � � � r � � � � I RALPH BURKE ASSOCIATES � 5200 WEST 73rd STREET 7871 MA MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA ' � � TABLE F 0 CONTENTS � ' 1 . A CONCEPTUAL TROLLEY SYSTEM � Introduction and Background Fare Collection and Payment � Vehicle Equipment Analysis of System Operating Characteristics Operational Specifics rPassenger Carrying Capabilities Improvements in Capacity � Calculating Capacity � 2. APPLICATION TO THE SITE Impacts of the Trolley on Traffic ' Impacts of Grades Impacts of Curves � Impacts of Sidings and Loops Electrical Power System Maintenance Facilities and Practices � Insurance Permits During Construction � Permits for Operation � 3. PARKING DEMAND FOR REMOTE LOTS Estimate of Overflow Parked Vehicles � Parking Spatial Accumulation Parking Spatial Accumulation Hourly Distribution of Parking � Summary � �� r �� a� ��. � � � �'g� �� r� � � e � �� x � �€ �� s � �� e,,� � �� : � �� . ,e,�� ' � • • • � v ;� � �� '�� °� �� .� a ��,�� v� ,,�.a. ��#�� ,�� COMO �PARK MASTER PLAN � , LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ' , FIGURE 1 One Trolley - Uni-Directional FIGURE 2 Two Trolleys - Bi-Directional � FIGURE 3 Three Trolleys - Bi-Directional FIGURE 3A Three Trolleys - Uni-Directional FIGURE 4 Four Trolleys - Uni-Directional ! FIGURE 5 Southwesterly Track Corridor FIGURE 6 Easterly Track Corridor � FIGURE 7 Siding at Picnic Stop FIGURE 8 Estimated Peak Parking Accumulation � by Activity Area FIGURE 9 Parking Accumulation and Incidence of � Occurrence TABLE 1 Capacity Ranges ' TABLE 2 Capacity (in one direction) TABLE 3 Minimum and Maximum Waiting Times � For Next Trolley TABLE 4 Capacity Rankings of Track Types TABLE 5 Minimum Radii for Curves, Three Car Types , TABLE 6 Standard Radii of Curved Trolley Switches and Track Accessories TABLE 7 Suggested Super Elevations for Trolley r Trackage TABLE 8 Cleaning Schedule � TABLE 9 Estimated Peak Parking Acc_umulation TABLE 10 Annual Parking Totals by Season � TABLE 11 Parking Use by Time of Year TABLE 12 Parking Survey Results by Area TABLE 13 Summary - Hourly Distribution - � Zoo/Conservatory � � � � � � �, �p� � a � �� ''�� 'I�,�€�� __ . �� M�� _ � �� p � e.: �� . � � - • c � �, � s�� , f�� a��,� _ �� s� °�� ' e ee i ;; e. e..��, e- i'r .a:e a e � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � ' Each of the methods have some drawbacks. Payment of exact fare, (probably the most common fare payemnt now in use on major transit systems in the U. S. ) , requires the park user to have anticipated the fare and have exact ' change. Problems can result in having an irrate park user being asked to leave the vehicle if he does not have the correct fare, consequently slowing down the overall smooth operation of the system. Some type of safe depository , for the fares must be considered and the fares recorded. If the fare can be paid on the trolley and change obtained, the problem of ' irrate customers with out exact change is eliminated. But additional problems are brought in. Security would then need to be provided for the cash and drivers and fares not put in a secure locked fare box. This system has gener- ally been abandoned in inauguties for security reasons. � An honor system (used widely in Europe) requires that the p�atlron purchase a ticket elsewhere and have it in his (or her) possesion while on the trolley. ' This eliminates the entering congestion usually associated with pay-as-you- get-on (or off) fares , but must involve either a very honest populace or inspectors which board at random points and check for tickets. Those who can � not produce a valid ticket would be fined and put off the trolley. European systems generally experience about a 2% "cheat" factor with inspectors. Most intercity passenger trains in the U. S. operated on this system at one time. � A variation of the honor system might be adopted that allows people who are using the park to obtain a "free" ticket to ride the trolley while attempting to discourage uncontrolled riding by non-users of the park. This may require ' a city ordinance and has some obvious public relations drawbacks in trying to establish just who is a "park user" and who is riding the trolley illegally. In addition many park users may rightfully feel entitled to a free ride since ' the trolley is city owned and a necessity in getting from a remote parking area to the center of the park, if walking several thousand feet is not possible. ' Fare Collection The collection of the fares is another area in which several options are � available. The following methods should be considered: . The trolley operator collects the fares , � . A conductor collects the fares , . A fare box is used, t . Honor system, or ' . No fare is collected. s 6 '�. � �&R$ k �a��*.� & e re �g 9 � � ' ,y�y � . S� x .., ' � �+, F° &�°�,�. �� . � � $ 3Ah .. ffi�y �+r�.: #— :- & �;. e. re -�� . �s • • ' • Ee.. g : . ,e � .�; ' .� . r '� ��w �� a � �� a � �g e,eA. . �� ..,...e,,.�.: . ,....�::. ,, e. ...,o-�. .,e .e�°sm .., =a "::'°e e ....mmee. ee: .:� �,p Asee:.s:: fe. � � 9 eesea�e �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � 1.0 A CONCEPTUAL TROLLEY SYSTEM Introduction & Background ' The Como Park advisory committee has proposed that a light rail trolley system be studied as a solution for providing a transit link between parking areas , located on the periphery of the park and the central core. These parking patrons would primarily be overflow from the close-in lots or deck and thereby eliminate the need for larger parking facilities in areas where intensive ac- ' tivity takes pTace. The Department of Community Services has commissioned this study to develop a conceptual operating pattern for the vehicles and a proposed schedule of , departures , which it is felt will accommodate the parking patrons and other occasional riders of the system. The study is also to analyze impacts of the system on the core area of the park, and provide an itemization of the permits , and licenses needed before the system can carry passengers. The City of St. Paul has identified the vehicles which they feel could be available in the near future for this system. They are classic design trolley , cars which operate on narrow gauge track and are similar to the streetcars which once served on the Como-Harriet corridor. Car Number 1300 has been restored and today is operated by the Minnesota Transportation Museum in � Minneapolis between Lake Calhoun and Lake Harriet. Similar systems exist in Yakima, Washington and Detroit, Michigan. More sophisticated high capacity light rail transit systems are in use throughout the U.S. and the world. ' Fare Collection & Fare Payment ' Several methods of collecting and paying fares for the trolley system should be considered. The various methods discussed below have been used on existing systems. The financial analysis of the revenue flow is not included. ' Fare Payment The fare payment can be accomplished by several means. The following methods ' should be considered. . Pay exact fare in cash upon entering trolley, � . Pay fare and obtain change upon entering trolley, . Pay for tickets elsewhere (honor system) , � . Obtain free passes elsewhere, or � . No Fare is required. , ee � � se ; ' : i - �q� ,e �� - �'�.� 9 �� , , °e� K e� �� $�+ 9 �� . �,.�� f � F' 8 9 � d'�' � 8 � � � � , e� � � ��:` �� ... �� d�:: re . �. : S,..i. . . . � � � � � c � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � Each of these methods al so have some probl ems , except for "no fare �ul 1 ected". If the trolley operator is expected to collect fares, delays can occur in the , schedule by requiring the operator to essentially handle two jobs. Since only one entrance can be used, each passenger must enter in single file to complete the transaction. Safety problems may arise from distractions to the operator from his primary duties, and there are security and fidelity � problems associated with carrying large amounts of cash. This implies extra security personnel and extra accounting and administration of the receipts. If exact change is required, some problems diminish, but none are eliminated � except the carrying of large amounts of cash for change. tJsing a conductor is the traditional way of collecting cash fares on a trolley, and would help speed up operations and schedules. However, this � doubles labor (or volunteer time) and increases other costs on the trolley. A conductor may eliminate the need for security personnel , since the driver is also aboard, but problems in handling money still exist. Rides given � to friends or resold tickets can easily make or break the system. The use of some type of secure box can eliminate need for the conductor and � some security. A fare box may be either the automatic type which will record fares, or a simple lock box to discourage thefts. The mechanical fare collection boxes available require experienced maintenance personnel and are , expensive to obtain and maintain. The simple lock box may be an option worth considering if money is to be carried on the vehicle. The honor system requires an occassional check by security personnel , and a � booth or roving ticket seller in the area where peopie will buy tickets. This is perhaps the system that should be tried first if fares must be charged, in conjunction with free passes to park users given out to encourage � ridership in the early stages. However, the number of personnel invalued their training and overhead, may be prohibitive for such a small system. The "no-fare" concept is attractive for several reasons: 1) both on and off , movements of patrons on the trolley are considerably speeded up, 2) security and fidelity for the personnel collecting fares cease to be a problem, and 3) administrative costs and wages paid to a whole host of people from ac- � counting to maintenance staff is eliminated. In short, unless the fares to be collected are substantial or large amounts of volunteer help is available, it is generally not worth the cost to collect fares. A 10¢ fare in this case � would probably loose money. A 50� fare would probably break even for the collection system if employee theft is not a problem. ' V-ehicle Equipment The cars are two axle, four-wheeled trolleys with two 25 hp General Electric ' Type 5A electric motors for propulsion. They operate on a track width of e , � � � � e� q $ bme e �� "�� z e e � �. � � �ee9 � �e . � 9 � �� @ � : ��; e.._ � s�a �� 9 � � �; e . e �� ; .�� ee.,. : �,e:,;��eea.., . ��. � , �r�a � 3 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 � 900mm (35.45 inches) , which is narrower than standard rail gauge of 56.5 � inches. The vehicles have a Brill type, semi-convertible body design, which allows the windows to be raised or lowered depending on the weather. The frame is wooden with a canvas top. The cars seat 27 with an additional 17 � standees possible. No heaters are presently in the cars. The maximum speed for these cars in the park will probably range around � 10 miles per hour between stops. The approximate length of the track is 7000 feet with 4 stops being planned. Analysis of System Operating Characteristics � For the analysis of the basic system it is assumed that of the four stops there are two major ones , and twa minor ones. The time allowed at each stop � will vary with the number of passengers getting on or off, and the two major stops are expected to require about 4 minutes each and the two minor ones about 2-1/2 minutes each. The assumed location of the four stops, from the � south going north is: McMurray Field (major stop) , picnic grounds (minor stop) , Zoo/Conservatory (major stop) , and Lakeside (minor stop) . The 10 mph operating top speed is only possible between stops where no large � numbers of people are expected to be crossing the tracks. A slightly lower speed of 8 mph is assumed in areas where crowds may be present, near a road crossing or on curves. The assumed average speed is 9 mph, or 800 fpm (feet ' per minute). Thus the assumed TTT (total travel time) is: � (stopping time) 4 + 2. 5 � 4 + 2.5 + 7000 (running time) 800 + ' (delay time)* 1 .75 = 23.5 minutes *Miscellaneous delays in crossing streets or turning around at loops. ` The identified corridor has only one track for most of its length. This is � desirable for aesthetical reasons to keep the amount of land for tracks near park buildings and stops at a minumum, and to reduce costs. Since the system will serve mainly to provide transit for overflow parking patrons and to move park visitors within the park, and not the focus of the park, its impacts � should be kept to a minimum. With only a single track, operations in two directions are restricted to areas � where a sliding is provided. In addition, a shortened loop for trips between the core area of the park and Lakeside or McMurray field and the core area ' ; ° � � ;��!'�,t'�� a..°: ,. �°.Ps ,:�: �� e �� a � � �� a � '�� ,�� ,'�� t'lC�+C��' �T�� "� �� g � � ' • � � : , � ��e �� .. s . � � � �,... , - ve ,.s. ..,e=. ,es.e o,: �.. .ee.�� . , ee.,Pa .":_e , . _" e. .,r . .�ve .._... �..��a� 1 °� � � � za � � ' .er., , c 4 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � should be provided for. Retracing the entire route with each trip would not be desirable under all conditions. 1 The sidings or loops should ideally be located in areas which are isolated from Park roadways, and also where they would cause as little disruption as possible to pedestrian and non-motorized vehicular flows. On the other hand, � the central or midpoint siding may be incorporated as an attractive rail orientated small part of the park with facilities that are compatible to it. The relocated picnic pavilion could be the centerpiece on a block of land which emphasizes the trolley's role in the park. For example, a design for ' the pavilion which would make it appear to be an old-fashioned trolley station would be compatible and complementary to the trolley. � �erational Specifics The number of people transported will be directly proportional to the number of , cars. Several possible combinations were considered and the following al- ternatives determined to be the most feasible operating systems. These are graphically displayed in space-time Figures 1 through 4. The elapsed time of trolley movement is shown reading across the graph on the horizontal . The ' position of the trolley along the track can be read from the schematic of the track system on the left vertical axis. ' Figure 1 shows a single trolley operating on the track with normal turn-around. Figure 2 displays a system where two trolleys operate on a bi-directional schedule which serves the entire park. Each trolley would leave the McMurray ' field parking or, simultaneously, the Lakeside area, meet at a midpoint on separate tracks near the picnic stop, and switch back to the main line where they would proceed on to the end of the line. This same confiquration could also operate with three trolleys. This would involve one trolley in one ' direction and two trolleys in the other direction (if close enough headways could be attained to allow the opposing flow of traffic to meet both trolleys at the area where dual tracks exist) . Figure 3 shows such a system. The ' time between departures of different vehicles headed in the same direction would be about 23.5 minutes maximum on the main line track in either case. A different configuration, Figure 3A, also shows three trolleys operating in ' a pattern in which two interconnected loops are used. Figure 4 shows a system similar to 3A where two trolleys are operated between the Picnic Area and the Lakeside, and two more between the McMurray Field parking ' and the Picnic Area. The maximum wait is decreased a few minutes and capacity is increased. Variations on this configuration are possible, with two trolleys on one loop, and one on the other (Figure 3A) or one on each (not shown) . ' From this analysis it appears that four trolleys are about the maximum number of vehicles that could safely operate on this track layout, without substantially increased trackage. In Figure 4, the McMurray Field to Picnic Area trolley ' �'�a��w��w� ��e s"�. �a%�:�,�a��'�� :.� .�� a . °�� b�a � '. � g�� = t e� ��.. � �£f �.a �� t� �a :�� ,��"� "� $a � � .,,*�� e� o-�a � a�� a� � � � � �� ' � � • • • e.�„s � e�. � � c 5 MO PARK MASTER PLAN CO � � (or trolleys) could not take people directly to the Zoo entrance. It would, � however, be able to drop people going to the Zoo within about 850 feet of the proposed new entrance plaza should they choose to walk. The wait, for those wanting to continue on a trolley to the Zoo, would be less than 10 minutes, t assuming that those last off the south loop trolley were waiting for the north loop trolley to arrive, as might be expected for elderly park users. In Figure 3A and 4, note that the total travel time is slightly more than � that of the first three figures. This is due to time lost in turning at the midpoint, rather than continuing straight through after the Picnic Area stop. When four vehicles are on the track simultaneously, and headways are close, , with two inter-connecting loops, a signal systems indicating that a trolley heading in the opposite direction is on the main line track would be necessary for safety's sake. This system would be similar in design to the presence de- � tectors of actuated traffic signals now in common use at many roadway inter- sections. A two-way radio communications system would also be desirable to coordinate schedules and stops and facilitate speedy repairs or breakdown ' notification in case of problems, as well as plainly displayed schedules of the number of vehicles in operation and their headways. Passenger Carrying Capabilities , The trolleys have a seated capacity of 27 and room for 17 standees, for a total of 44. Assuming that most vehicles would have a practical capacity of about ' 90% of this number, 40 occupants would be considered a full vehicle during peak time. TABLE I ' CAPACITY RANGES No. Vehicles Seated Full Seated & Standing ' 1 0 to 27 28 to 40 2* 0 to 54 55 to 80 ' 3* 0 to 81 82 to 120 ' 4* 0 to 108 109 to 160 *If the passenger demand dropped below 82, the seated capacity of three ' vehicles , two vehicles should be substitued with standees, and similarly, 3 vehicles substituted for 4 vehicles should demand drop below 110. ' 1 a �°9 9 � ��.�� s,��°�; I��s�+°�. ... ��i�� . �� °�E�;^��- ��u,°- ��,�� ° �,.-. ��.�� ^'� ��er a� ��e g ya;� � • � � ' 0� �0� cs COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 1 � � Improvements in Capacit � The situation is greatly simplified if all vehicles have identical operating characteristics. If a particular trolley has different speed or acceleration characteristics than others, the situation becomes somewhat more complicated in locating sidings. Trolleys operating in opposite directions , can meet and pass one another only at sidings , otherwise a collision could occur. It is also desirable that trains meet at sidings (or loops) at scheduled times so that one trolley would not have to be backed onto a siding to allow another � to pass. Some reduction in travel time can be made by reducing station time if equal reductions are made in both directions. It is desirable to have a "buffer" available in case of minor delays encountered in route. �` � � � � � � � � � � � � C 7 � ` one trolle u i- ' ' y n d�rect�onai � ��E , ' I � �r I ' I , - ; I � I , � � i� � � i i � , � ,�' i I I i I � i � i i i _ � I ! � � � � � i� I I ' � I � ' � � � � ! , ,. � � � W Q ; �� .. E � I o ° Iw I � o i�. � , � !i � j Iw ¢ �� I ; � I�g lO � �� I I I J � , ' I ' i ' � I � , � W i � i� I � I I � I � � I ' � � 2 ¢ � � � I IS � a I a � - �) � � i ~I �� i j i i � � < ' ' , U � �e � � � � � � � I � � i � � " i ' I `� � , ' , � I � � � ; i i j � � �.o � i ' ` j ; � I I ' � I i � � � � i � � ' I j= � i �1 I � � �a: I � � I T � � i � i � I � i� ! I I I � I I I I i v�p I � �`� : � ; C� e � h � g 'g E ic ° � �o ' � t^ �I I � � � r'"'� � � f� �� n� � __ _-'�____�� `—�„�.��,'---- _____- � �_" �I - r--- --� � Q � W ~� h-�G' �� > �o t�C � �. .l .el J �� W I I �'ti J j� �.� ` y � � 0� 4� u � � � V �C . �� e � �� F � '. ' . ' ��"". ' .. ��I�� " �� a � . �: a 9ae„ ,. � � 6 ee e . 4e e: s ' � _� e� �e � . , : e „ ., .. , � e . e...-.e e. .e.eee ee ...,. e: .. .�.,. e ,eee.� e.,:, ...,,:,,��ee .:eee, e..,�e.e. evae � � - � c s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � two trolle s bi-dir , y ect�onal � z � .� � s � � � �° i � � _ t� � � i I � a 6 pd�' � � I I � `'�'+y. � � I , � , � � � � � � � 1 � � � � : � � ' , ' �� i � ' ; ! I "� I I � � a � i I � � I I � � � '� � I � � i � r�.- o � , ,. I _ i (� W IQ � ; i,� � � i� a ,�.y � IO Q I .. I � . . . 3 � � � I � � ' _� I I i � _� I i ! I i -� N ' � � W � ' �5 Y ' I I 'I rr. '• � Q � I I .t"�M, � . . � W � � I `.�� i �i .. .. �� I 1 � �,,� � &�or..,� , ; ; � ' ; ' ' ,� � i�� ; � � j�� I �' i ' � I I I � I �'$Mr+, ,� i � ° � � i i� , , ' � � = I g , _ �.. I �i �' ; I � � a� _ — a I � � _ • _ � I ' ; _� � �Mr' .�' � � I ' > ;�- � � j � i, _ �l�� d I I .i �, ' '. _'� � � � a 8 �a : �{ �a h � P �a 'f� o �n C > � �`' � 1--f' �° � ' � ^ � II � � � a� �;� � � �a W�_W � �; ��== =U=�_—''�'r"�c � p �II J � � '3�' , iI ° a Q � � � � � 6` `� �P � �a � � � �G � � � � �.a - � � �€�� '� �s a� � $r� ��g�� e� �..�� ` � � � k�� ' � 1 � � ` x �� $ � �� q � �r � � � � �� a�� ' �� '.,d e � % �. �� 8 � �S� � g � � � � a % 3m .. ��4 k§ r" � '� *� �a"a$�, '� �4 F � � s '�E� 6 � e�� 8�� .: $ - ��. �. sk a � � ��g e�a� � �� a s,-�. g'�;. e�.wee.be� A ,e9e ; 9ee..em.,e .�..�.ma ,�..; ebe96, e �.se s,e.e3 P,.e�.�' a ��.,:� .�P�.: R� �se ,s'b� �� a; � � .... ee . e .ee. ..,e . ..,a�a. ee.�_.�a�...oe e .., ,e.�.e ,� ..e,. e..: E�e ,w ab es, a.�: c s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � three trolleys bi-directional Fra�s � � � -��"' � � � �� i i � � ,� �. E I h I � �� } c I � � ' i � W /M,. � � N W Q � i � � � � � � �� I I J j ,�M .� I'P I i�� y. i � � � �� r•� � j �� ¢ I ' � �,,�.r. -';" i � W � o a `,�,, i i � � I � � O I ` � ��„ .�� I � � ! � U ° � � � , � I M � I I I � err"-' I� � I � � I � '� � i I I � I � � � i ` � r+//I � I I � > s� ' � .t' � �' i � � ' I i I ' I I I 0 1�' 1 � , vyp I �� ': K � t,, ; � �h � � � �� ` � I I __ I � r_ I � I �_ = __,�_I I J� � t- =- ��-�' V ., o ae� !0 p�o �I� V � � � I � ' � ^^ � � � � � `� v . .. „e, .� . . � , g ',.d� .�� ,., :. . V��M e.� �� va � y� j � � � � '��. 1t��: • � � • � �� l� "e �� 'a� � 8- .. �. ; �� ,t �, �. ,., „.e: _. <_ .. .e x e . e . � :,: ..: e � •� ff�4 i a�9'�.. �.," ,_ �.- � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � �hree trotieys ur�-d'u�ectional � �Fl�URE 9A � � I3 `� � I I M.ry �. a � ,�` I � ��Y`� � � i � � � � �� , � ; . I , i i � ' � � , � � � � � � I \ I } � ^ � ^��a � ��` �' � � < I ' � i �o . � � o i J I ; `�� W IO ' I . W ! i �� I i � ' �� t I ; t�, � i �W � Y - ' T— ' i � � ,�;� � � a � ; � wW c. �• � � i � � o I �. I � c � � � I U , I � � I � I � � , � j N � �,�v✓� , i ' a- i I � � � I .;A„�»� � j � a �' � � I i �oM� i IE � 0 i�t � I I I i ,��', h � � ``_� a I � � � � ' ^S� ± � p �i : � �4 � `. � p �K a � � � � � � � � � J , � �- _---,--=_- �_- =--=_= � � � � � � � � I ° � � � �� `� � ` � � I � � � � � � e v � a , ,. . .. ��^ �ee �� i 8a�a a�,F ��, e '� &�� p�" ��i �� P�" 3�� s� �� . � �� r � �„ E�` +�,�"' � � 3 ��a ;X ; � �!� � e� �z � � • � ' • 2 s� � �� s ae :� q��s��a$g k��i p�. i a �A � A� � �� ¢� �a � � � � 11 CC�MO PARK MASTER PLAN � � four trolle s uni-directional y � F�auRF a � � � � �` �. i -� � ° � I i N � I � ` � I � '�+r `'�w` � � �� i � ' t � �, I � j ' � ,�,,,�, ! � � 1 � I � '�I : W < N � � t"'v I ��''- �� {ll � � � I �i ` i I �o ~ J � i ? �I 1 �` � � � � � ��,� � LL � i } �� , � � � .. , � ' I ;-' u. � �� i I � i � � i �� " ! t N r W � ►r � � � $ �. . • � � I ; � Y � � �� j � �; � � � t i�:�� I I � �,� � � %� � � � � O I � � I � Q U i , � I � '� d'"� � � � � ,.e°1 '� � I I � i I � ' �� a�' ; � I � .��'"� ° ' j � � � - _ , � ' i '� � � � i I I '� , ' � � '°"�~' ' � i f, � � � �OMM' � � � E � � "Z i � I j I � 1 ° � � ; � M�� i � � � I I �o � �r" i � i ' a I 1I � � �_ I�, I 1 � 4 ��- I � � I � � i � 0 I � y � O g� . � t � , q �l � a � �� w � � � =— — � ==" � I �-= =_=_— � �� I � �_W o I �e � _-=rlp � ��II � � $ $� �I � � � � � � � `° ` V ; e � � �� +� - �: �MA'� d Y ° e. e� . � a;. s % ",s, ;�� v: ; � �� x fl ;.°.- ,. ;3 .. '', � �:' z ;1R � • � � , '�. '. . . . �e, . e.: �..,,, ° ...: $ � ��. r ,. . ,... .. : ...., .e; � -R .. , ...: .,e: . .., r ee , r,.e' .. .:': bs„ - . .. . .... ...,e: .:.. ,... .e.. ee,. . „ .e.,:� .. ESff- 3� � ...e ..e....:. ... ...: .. .. . � .'�.e °°.,, e,e.. . .,.a,ee� :..e.a.,��. ,ae... ,e�� . ,va _ ��2 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � Calculating Capacity � The capacity is simply the inverse of time headway (see Figures 1 to 4) . This � time headway for trolleys in any one direction is the sum of the time for a trolley to operate in one direction from one siding to the next, plus the time for a trolley running between the same sidings in the opposite direction, plus allowance for clearance time or station stops for the trolley running � in the opposite direction to pass, plus any known miscellaneous delays. The capacity is the inverse of this sum (ir� one direct,ion) and in equation form this is : � C - � _ TA + TB + TC + TD Where C = capacity in one direction � Tq= running time between sidings northbound (i .e. one direction) � TB= running time between sidings southbound (i .e. other direction) T�= clearance times between trolleys ` Tp= miscellaneous delays (if known) For example, on Figure 2, the times are: � TA= 1/2 ��800�- 4.375 mins. � T6= 1/2 (�800)= 4.375 mins. � T�= (4 + 2.5 + 4 + 2.5) = 13mins. T = 1 .7 mins. � D Total =23.5 mins. 23. 5 mins./vehicle = 0.39 hrs./vehicle i �•�� 0.39 - 2•6 vehicles/hour � � � � � � � �� , a � �� a ��a�� a�- � �� s�� `�y� &�� ; $ �� .6- � � �� : °�� a �� e �ps � �� ' • � : � �� %, � �� ° � � ` � �� '�.�� .�,s, �`�,�� '�� `�� eb e,s �� .�.We9`�. .e.e., ,� e e.ee.e3.. . e... - s. . � �..� ,�, � �,�� e. � � � ��3 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � TABLE 2 � CAPACITY ( In one Direction) Average Waiting Time Hourly Passenger Capacity No. of Vehicles Between Departures (at 40 pass./vehicle) � 1 47.0 mins. 51 � 2 23. 5 mins. 102 3* 15.7 mins. 153 � 4** 13.0 mins. 184 *For trolleys running tamdem in one direction, single in opposite - 15.7 is � average time only. Two trolleys would arrive and depart within 10 mins **For trolleys running tandem in two directions, with return at midpoint loop- ' 13.0 is average time only. Two trolleys would arrive and depart within 10 mins. � TABLE 3 � MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM WAITING TIMES FOR NEXT TROLLEY (in one direction) � (Assume prospective passenger just misses trolley which has left) No. of Vehicles Maximum Wait Minimum Wait � 1 47.0 mins. 47.0 mins. � 2 23.5 mins. 19,5 mins. 3 23.5 mins. 0.0 mins.* � 3A 23.5 mins. 3.0 mins . 4 19.0 mins. 2.0 mins. � *A waiting time of 0.0 is realized because the close spacing of two cars would require that both be at the major stops at the same time. The lead � car would not have departed before the following car had arrived. f � A � � r �� : �� `�� y �. ��a ��°��°��,�,�as� z»� � x� ��,e � °�� en ��;� _ � ��^ a �' ��. �t"� �a'��,°: , � .,.. a.�� 8 � 4 i �s s: sE �� 1� fre $� �� .P -`a .e . -. e e„� �� y��"�`*� : �. � � � �� e ��e esa; �� ea ..9ee. .e., r, . ee.c e , e e - � e.,e�. .er.-e.,.�a. .m .e,A.� � g c 14 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � Table 2 presents a sumnary of passenger carrying capacity for the various � combinations of trolleys in the figures , and Table 3 presents the maximum and minimum waiting times that could be expected under normal conditions for � trolley patrons. The formula reveals a very important characteristic of the capacity of single track, bi-directional systems. The capacity is inversely proportional to � the times required to operate between adjacent sidings. If it is necessary to increase the number of trolleys in operation, this can be done by de- creasing the running time (and p�rhaps the clearance times, although this � raises safety questions) of trolleys. The following table (from an analysrs* of delays on a railraod line with various track configurations) gives relative capacity rankings of track types : � TABLE 4 CAPACITY RANKINGS OF TRACK TYPES* � Single direction, double track Bi-directional , double track , Bi-directional , double track, alternating passing 2/3 double track, single running 2/3 double track, bi-directional � 1J2 double track, bi-directional 1/3 double track, bi-directional Sidings every 8.8 minutes , bi-directional 1/3 double track, single running � Sidings every 15 minutes, bi-directional � Impacts of the Trolley on Traffic � The overall impact of the trolley, from a purely park-wide perspective would be positive. The ability to tie together the various parts of the park from � the McMurray sport fields to the Zoo/Conservatory and the Lakeside by a convenient and unique mode of transportation would enhance the use of the park. Only about 1 ,000 streetcars remain in the entire United States. � In 1925 there were over 63,000 on 40,000 miles of track. Many cities have decided to upgrade or re-institute light rail transit and this system could be part of a trend for the Twin Cities. Detroit's system of trolleys carries � 1000 passengers per day on vehicles similar to those planned for Como Park. *From "Parametric Analysis of Railway Line Capacity" PB247-181 , USTIS � ° - �.`.�., Y , Y .E _ �� Tp � � � R "�s3$'� $ � 8 �� 8� � �� 8�� e�. � t v p - : 3�k' d i �?s �4`�� _ d d ��8� � � &� �¢��: � � � � .:g � . _ R� § .. � �� 8 � . ... � e � se. . .eva-o ee...,e'� ee3e... - .eea.e. _^°'�. e� ee_° a�.�g, e .a�ee '` 3.�ve .,, .:. .,,e ,e..e. , � � S 9 �t� _a.k�� ; � � � � � � � c � COMO PARI� MASTER PLAN � � 2.0 APPLICATION TO THE SITE � Moving people from one area to another by rail will probably not assume the proportions it once enjoyed in Como Park, but it would certainly not impact ' the overall operation of the park in a negative way. Some aspects of the operation will need particular care and planning. The proposed system has at-grade crossings of two major streets - Como Avenue � (near Beulah) and at Lexington Parkway (near Kaufman) . This will necessarily cause some traffic disruptions and some type of signal or warning device to alert motorists of the tracks and when the traffic must stop for a trolley � crossing. With a maximum of four vehicles operating at one time in two inter-connecting loops , crossings would be about 8 or 9 per hour and not frequent enough to cause a queue of autos to form. Al1 foreseeable delays to � either vehicle would be negligible. It would be desirable, however, that the trolleys not be operated during the two hours from 4PM to 6PM if at all possible to further reduce conflicts , but this need not be mandatory if parking lots are full . Probably more important to auto traffic would be � strict attention to eliminating the "bumpiness" of the rail crossings to alleviate possible traffic delays due to uneven road surface. � Impacts of Grades , Grades for the trolleys should be kept as gradual as possible. The maximum � desirable grades would be 10% (with an absolute limit of 11%) . The common desirable grade for railroads is 0.6%. Care must be taken to provide maximum traction by keeping the rails clear of dead leaves in the fall and ice and snow in the winter and early spring. The loss of traction is a primary concern � for safe operation of the trolleys. The proper mating of wheels , and correct track installation are also factors in providing adequate traction. � The track corridor, as identified by park personnel , follows the alignment of Beulah Road (to be abandoned) north of Como Avenue from McMurray field to the picnic area. This is displayed on a topographic photo of the park in two � portions, Figures 5 and 6. Curves and grades are shown in areas that have abrupt changes in elevation. The effects of gradients on vehicle performance are straight forward and relatively easy to calculate and adjust for. � Impacts of Curves Curvature can very drastically affect safe operation and also contribute to � costly damage to the trolley trucks. For trolleys with single axle trucks (of the type proposed for Como Park) , curvature should be limited to a minimum of 36 feet. Should the park decide that a larger trolley (such as � the double axle truck cars previously used in this area) may be purchased or obtained, consideration should be given for establishing larger radius curves. Table 5 gives desirable minimum radii for three common types of cars. � e . _ � � � : � � ¢ � �� R � �'; ;��: � �� . , � � ' . . - . � � �� : � �a ,g �, � � � ' ee:. . .,. ee �°�� s.'�� e •.e va..,se; ,eeee . :� e,,...e��-. ea. ... 1e=� . ��f ��es � � � :& a�. ,� 6� ee e�.' �e . � e a` COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � southwesterly track corridor � FK3URE 5 �� /"�a:� .�` 9�.�"�_\ � ��f Q � '` , �;� �I� � �fi' �� s �,,.,�.:.-� � *� � � a: � . � � �� r � � � - , . - .� � � . � �� • _._...-- � � � '�� . _ . , � � � �`� � � ,� � � � ��.� � � -�l , � �� ,� � ,sr�e� � w � � � ° � `' �� ,,,� - { � � �r�, � � � „-� _t� � �� ,� ��`' � � I �� : �. �� 1 °� � ��' � , � � �� 'II � ...�,y3�s3 ��!r 1 �' ,�� _� � ��& ' �� I�� ^ a ,��'°` 4\��,.d �� I , �t � i � ; � �� I�' �'II � ,i � . s � S � I ,� � ��z � � �� ° -� � q«�< � �f� �� 'f�� "J+F�t''wk,�y �� : � � V��Q �c�h . J,aS�a � ..:�I� �A �a.. �°.. -,�� '+: � . � � �` I I T �.'.��I ��K � � � � t-'' � "i, ��" o d�� I� � ° �� r ��,�,�M1 �" � � � � n' I� �a�� <., �� '� � � .„ � , � � . . � . � . � �� I�.. . �'w,�j ° % ,. �� `s .'iI ,�* « `�� - � � �,�; �, � � _ A . . . � � , �� -_--�` � �.v � � , , � , �� -�. �.__�__ _,..� Y � , - ,� �� f e- �•�� ,__- -�.— ,�' � "`'I �� r� •�� i ��;�p ; `f...,.,�-�'k" # �-, h ;� # . , �.�- � ii � � �� f �� ' �/�'�1 �`�` � �/�e�/ � ";� �. ,+. �: , .. �,�.� �� , i�� fr �'.� I i' ..1�,`>�-� �'., y �y �1 I z �I �II� � �, `:/'�-= f i l>��"".` .� � �� (� % �� / \' \ � / '�_ � - - � ,� . . � � � �; `-.�� . � � �� /?/` ..� ` . /�j�• N�y �_.`-'` �l �M { �� k ��/'!/ � � *' i. { _ , .� _ � `'� �.�:,y�✓,! �� _ �:..:.� #� " �E -"� �r , , � � ,, � � �� .�.�� /�K�� '��y��..aY.''� �j� �._. . f /j �. '.. ' � . .� �'Z,J.�% '� ,E"�� ..�`.� �� Y. � . .. . — � ,« + ' � , � ,� .�,,.��° � , / - ...._ �. �,—.,, , � � r�e �-� ��. - '. .: ,r �� I,. , . � � � d' �, �- ��„ 7 � '��..s./ � "^x.' _ 1r '.k•+�i+-1 �� 6 � � i�./'��-- t �6 a`��t��`y�'�B 1 � � .�k �I �J i•� �. — �_ #�, ��} s � {M� } f � ' ��,. � .a � �� — �� '�� #',__l....� r �. �'-�_l� � �� j. %:� ``� �_� .r ��//�/'� `��!�/� . }1� "�?� �t�,. { �..- d' f Ft f�� 4/ � ^y/J 1, 4 �� k . ��p � � � �� P ,/ � .�, E � '} � � - < . / � � ��j,� ��",�I� � +�� . � .! a � M...."� �i � �I �.� � a e nr i . � � -�,__� �,� '� t' � _ , . , � � 1 � ' ��,` `��'�� ` '�'�,M " � � ;r � :)�r '\ti . '� � �i a ,�' � �� , �, y. �� ' " �. �,i.� i,�I,'� f+/�� _+ l ;�, ';�' �'s�'$' `'� ;s�•'�., '� � I� � �'K J � '�� +SSw, a{�.F,y`, o y ...^BaMR:..�� tl .,� '.3°� � I I� I I� ( ,�^:'�`��-� � q � 1� � . ,. �•��, � ��.- �.��. �,.t � 1�'I . �V'� � � �\�'-� . � o � a �I � r��' ��r-- it � � � i� - � � �tii i � � , - � , � � � , � �;; ,>�,:-,� �. 'i `�rR S.�...r�� .��`` 1 . . �. w i� '".t:«.� ��.. ��.� _�-"r �`�-��,�',', �� ;.... �� , I�I .s � �� _ �` `� W � ��a .� � � �� I ( � --- '� �� . •�', � Fi 7�' r` \�. ` �-` II . �x . � .:►'=. rM' o�"- ,�,t�--.�--`�—.:__ � .• _-., m -- j � �� , � .� I .,: . + --��- � E� 4. # � `,` • ��; \ �. G r - \ , 31 '� � i ( �'� � Y-'"`"��"'" �� ,,:;:�,,�. �� '. _ f '�; ;� � � �•. � i - -�= � ,'.� � 6� � �„g�,� R �' �� "�� `��"&9 �° �` � '� .�- k 8 � �.. �e �,m °�� e:� " .� d ��4 �' `i� g &&a . � � 6-, '' Y a�'&' e�._YpB.g� g . ' � � � � � � � �d � �� a � � •:, �. � ' E.. p�: a;� �.� �.d s�� &,�F,.�9� �� R q�� d � ��°� a € � �� r �� a� � �s � r e � r � 4�:� ��P&�P�„ '�� . � M P MA AN � CO O ARK STER PL � ' . . • • • � - � « � � f, �, ' . �*�� I� � i . �III I �� , IIII�i ��1 .-- - � � ` � � �� r � / ur°' ,_i-- ..I dy I aV �.� S !i _ j.t. 'y. � I � J � ^S. III� ./i'/ �. ��.. ', � �i�� , �. y "''ti+t��- # �'� ;",.f�� ' ir�� ,�, ,!� ;ay s�:: �.� , y � ; �� .,, � �, � �,�, �,�� N�''' � * �� k ' � �:��* f��"'' �� '`�C� � � �� '_-.�� '� ,� i � � �y �. ;� ��, ,t,r 1�i , �' :�� , ��1��L��jj��!.,"'�.."�°�,, ��- '�' �,`:�j � a�l 1�P � . , ��'�'� �, �;,�►-� �. , 1(�� ` _ s ^ !. �� ' . ' ' �. ��- �� t ..�, i'�'�� .�• '�:� � ;N � ' � � , r a..t�. ;� ,r�''J , • �;�< �: , s � � s:.., 1�� , � ¢ ° :�� ,� '' '' �. ��`' �`' ',- � ' ,a `� ',�'' �" � �� '�. �' �y ,��rl� /w � . ��f,R'�r ,r�7` �� ,v r:� s �� ,��;y,+oi5�� , ' � I �.�. � .t �'�( ¢� ,.I / �'.. ��Xt *�� R. / I � 6 � 'L4 ��,,III r��l % . .� ��.c" �".� � s;tt>�� :,.t`'�� ,* � .,� �� . 4 � � i�'�. �jry�� ,�+• ��, ' ♦;r 7�� .. .t€� ' � ,�X�.� /.(�,Mpl'INI,' �� ,� � 4°` �,' ,� i7(!l�.. � y� a �+'�/�/"�,. �� `y/ � i.k��,l�'- .� `y.✓+' �*��. , � ! � ��''` tp� � /� � t uu, , - ' ` ��,,� .;�E� '�� ''�a � -��" �A �i` � 1� -� �� r ��r �,� . • �� ''��/' '�? �'�. . � . �' �. •11 �. �j r/,- ! �i �'// � .�^ ��itt`�'l � /��,,c� t. � !�� • ,� // � a� '� '#�` .,�" � ,,. �� .�� ., .. ,�. � �� . r`� � �'�� l ''ti:. ,..�.. �1�� q �_ a' . i 7' � ,, s • ;l .��.� � '' `� y�> �►--+ � � _� �. ��s>y� 'f :;�, Jw �4 , .r��f ' �(� ,�� '' ��,•� , /� �,�� r�.�,��b �" ��'� �� i'� ~I( � �(�,�t� v � � \,,� ��y � �.�d �.. �:'ti: 1 . ."��' , � i� �.:�.�� . t.` / ��' �� r �� r ,��' � �� '� �/ �,' � .0 '. k�� . r �.� .. :tr! � '� / /' �� ` � � 1i '�, " f �� ! ` � r, �� ` � �-,— ,, •�'�,�r- �G �' � '� f s��% ,.�/ , .� u� - ,. � � ,, ' �.•.�.�-� � ,'��e i „�, � ,�; ( � �--. �,- �. '�� . ,o,;r.,. �s ,�,'` �. �'��. �7� .�.' �' _ � � 1 .�,, ��,�.. :� "' ��A��;,��; �.,��`. ", - � "'� ``��.� _.�_ ��`'/'�_.�� ` � � -- •✓ , . =�'` ,/,4. � . ��*�',� 3 �'ry -- �. ,F' -• � - ,st y . � '�►�3'i�,�j,-: _� �~�,,�,...�. . � � \ ��i '.�, � r h •: � � � °`� ° Appendix ' • �.�. � " m�m � � ' ' ' ' � � ` � TABLE 5 � MINIMUM RADII FOR CURVES- THREE CAR TYPES Trolley Type Minimum Curves in feet (meters) � Single axle trucks 36' (llm) � 40-foot car, double axle truck 65' (20m) 50-foot car, double axle truck 78' (23.77m) , Source: R. L. Olson, MN Trans. Museum Many switches and other track accessories only come in particular radii . � Should any additional trackage be added within the park in addition to the first track contemplated, the following standard radii are offered for curved trolley switches. � TABLE 6 STANDARD RADII OF CURVED TROLLEY SWITCHES AND TRACK ACCESSORIES � Feet Meters 36 11 m. � 40 12. 19 m. � 45 13.72 m. 50 15.24 m. � 60 18.29 m. 70 21 .34 m. ` 80 24.38 m. , 90 27.43 m. Source: R. L. Olson, MN Trans Museum � Different vehicles and different drivers may operate at different speeds on a curve, so that no single value for super elevation of the track would be sufficient. The interac�ions of the forces encountered by the trolley as it � changes direction are quite complicated, but is basically a centrifugal force that tends to overturn the vehicle and cause discomfort to the passengers. The following table gives suggested super-elevation of the tracks for an � �� g�� 'F�� ,� g � � � a � �� . �� , $ � $ � � � �� fr .+ . ��@� �� t� '�. � '� � � ��'�� • � ' • � � € � � �� a �� a �� s� �� ; �a��# �� r�eees Qa�� ° �� es a96...a,..,a... ;� ,..ee 9.�be �a9ew ee.....'�. ne..e �e.a e,e.e.,a.. .,,,e .ma�� e=� �,�se. .. . �3 . ,a � me..�- �� ea�m �e,e b�s�e.� �� c�s COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � siding at picnic �top ''��ow �;�,r � ;- „�- � q r ` �" '�. ,� . � � � . X �' r)� ,;�' `��\ ,�: 'k �. 2a9.3 r*�,.•� � 248.5 .Y I{• �� , `��\� " J`' < W 0 �/ . i` •/•1 zae.z }!�' � Q f.. •' � x ':� . �Y'.v'�� W � i � � � i x � p ��, , �' � • � W C'3 � �� r� � � . � aZ -' � . � . p. J zae.e � Q Q x r "` > �` �,/ 4�,� , V/p� �� zo�.a � - -y "/��; i � x F, i /� � , / ,r � � f� ' l- f �s � �•r � �' � , 2 ' � u <;' -��- , .`i�: �. ,�r"��k - �.. � �l. ",1 a � � � � 248.� �►, ; " � - -� '.f�.,.� � .� .� \ � �� ' � � 4 24Z1 x _ � � ' � a , zos� x a f � � �` O i ° � � ~ ! . 1�'�� z45.9i , t �� zas.z °� " '� � x , � � t �- zos.s m' U � � I '; x•,, m �r Z � �� t U Z I �i�' O � x � `; w Q _ z a � � �%S.O � � (� Q � � H fn oa0 ' �a5.� � Q \ � x Ow �1� �\ m i � . � ��2.3 ' .. Y \ 2�0 � � "`� y«� '�� . � 237 2 'i7 ,. -- ..�:?:::....�N-:::..., . . " ' R t* .. . . - ��°�,s�.e��°�a� �4 �$ �a��°� '�,:` % ��f.� � �a c="�"��. � - � t ,�� °��'� $ �s � ^ �'$�a �� " �.�� e,�5 �m:° m � � �� a � � s`�' • • ' • �� s � � � a 4� �a ��°� pz� �� o � � �� , � �' �� , �� a9 °� �+�� e . e.. e.,,.e e.� ^`. ee....°e e..�°,�° �� , e � �� m� �� '�e � � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN i � average speed around a curve of constant radius. The introduction of the � maximum super-elevation is also accomplished gradually on a particular curve. TABLE 7 � Suggested Super-Elevation for Trolley Trackage Curve Super- � Radius Elevation S eed 40' (12. 19m) 6.2" (157.5mm) 10 mph (16.1 kph) � 50' (15.24m) 5.0" (127.Omm) 10 mph (16.1 kph) 60' (18.29m) 4.2" (106.7mm) 10 mph (16.1 kph) 90' (27.43m) 2.8" ( 7] , lmm) 10 mph (16.1 kph) � 120' (36. 58m) 2.1 " ( 53.3mm) 10 mph (16.1 kph) 150' (45. 72m) 1 .7" ( 43.2mm) 10 mph (16.1 kph) � 200' (60.96m) 1 .2" ( 30. 5mm) 10 mph (16. 1 kph) � 200' (60.96m) 5.0" (127.Omm) 20 mph (32.2 kph) 41�0' (121 .92m) 0.6" ( 15.2mm) 10 mph (16. 1 kph) 400' (121 .92m) 2. 5" ( 63.5mm) 20 mph (32.2 kph) 400' (121 .92m) 5.4" (137.2mm) 30 mph (48.3 kph) � 800' (243.84m) 0.3" ( 7.6mm) 10 mph (16.1 kph) 800' (243.84m) 1 .2" ( 30. 5mm) 20 mph (32.2 kph) 800' (243.84m) 2.8" ( 71 . 1mm) 30 mph (48.3 kph) � 800' (243.84m) 5.0" (127.Omm) 40 mph (64.4 kph) Impacts of Sidings and Loops � The system should have two loops : one at each terminus of the main track and the previously mentioned picnic area siding. The space requirements for a loop turn-around are approximately 100' by 100' . The turn radius � suggested is the minimum of 36' . Should larger cars be purchased in the future, turntables instead of loops could be used, or temporarily the cars could be run backwards. � Initially a Y turn-around was suggested for the southern end of the track. A loop is much faster since it does not require the operator to leave the � trolley to reorient the trolley power pick-up wheel to back it up, and it is doubtful that dual controls are available at both ends of the trolley. Adequate space is available near the public restrooms at the southeast corner of McMurray Field. � The siding area shown on Figure 7 should be designed with at least 65 foot � radius curves to allow a larger car to negotiate them. This would require an area about 150' by 550' . A long straight section is desirable near stops or crossings to give operators a clear view of any pedestrians or � vehicles on the tracks. q � - �:. 9Y;� �' .. e } $ � @B P ��" "� � f S I'$�A� S �. �� , d - ;be ... � g g �`y18,¢ k,t �, e S i 6 f ; �a e � p � 8 # $d . � � $ s ��, . 9 8 t �. g� '� � 9 d6$`" �� P � 8 R& e, � � a : . s y.: �° 9e: ^ .;, .: e. e � 6 $� � czo COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � maintenance practices of particular shops are given in references 1 and 2 at the end of this study. � A consistent problem for old trolleys is how to obtain spare parts for the mechanical and electrical systems. Some parts "can be made by any skilled blacksmith" but one should keep in mind the rising hourly costs of quality machine work. Some parts, such as gears , may have to be custom made, as � they are no longer being manufactured. A complete overhaul of the trucks could run into tens of thousands of dollars. Some new parts may also need to be added, such as hand brakes and "dead man" devices, at no small cost. � � Insurance (Provided by City) . Liability insurance on passengers if injured. � . Comprehensive insurance on vehicle. . Liability insurance for other vehicles involved in accidents. � Permits During Construction � . Obtain permit to close city street. . Notify City fire department that street will be closed. � . Notify police department that street will be closed. . Obtain permit for construction of crossing. � . Notify above d�partments when road is open. � Permits for Operation . Notify MnDot railroad commiss�on intent to cross county road. � . Present proposed crossing configuration and number of crossings/day. If needed: ` . Obtain from Public Works permission to use street for track. � � � ��'t��' ; �±��' ��° , ��e ' +� � � �� _ ` � � � • • � °'��N�� e ;, ; ,: . e e , va, : e. .�,e ' „ .,. , �. , �. ., e e. .veae�mee sa�9,e e9ee ,,, e�eE, � ; ee.eea e eee' c 23 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � �lectrical Power System � An overhead collector wire would be simply suspended from poles. New 410 trolley wire is available from Anaconda Copper. Construction is not � particularly saphisticated, with used woodpoles and brackets available locally or from companies that still produce new equipment (Ohio Brass is one) . There are local members of the Minnesota Tranportation Museum who could provide advice if it is needed. � The power system conversion from three phase alternative current to direct current for the Lake Harriet Streetcar is accomplished by a relatively small � unit located in the Linden Hills carbarn. It was constructed with volunteer effort and surplus parts from several sources. A similar system would be adequate for Como Park. � Maintenance Facilities and Practices A carbarn where preventive maintenance can be regularly done is necessary. � The logical location would be in the Park maintenance shops ar� in the southwest corner of the park (also convenient�y near the Como facility of Burlington Northern where the Minnesota Transportation Museum rents space � and is currently restoring an old steam drive locomotive from Como Park) . The building should contain facilities for routine truck maintenance, interior and exterior repairs, systematic cleaning. The following schedule was � followed by the Twin City Rapid Transit Company. TABLE 8 CLEANING SCHEDULE � . Every 9 days floors scrubbed, outside scrubbea � . Every 70 days thorough interior and exterior cleaning with particular attention to hidden corners. � . Every 18 months - overhaul , or rehabilitation of seat cushions, windo►�s , steps, gates, etc. At the end of each loop, a quick walk-around by the operator is required � (time has been allowed for this in the figures showing proposed schedules) . Minor electrical and mechanical problems could be detected and taken care � of at once. Each car shauld be thoroughly inspected for wheel and brake defects every other day. Lubrication and servicing would take place on a sr.heduled basis as determined by equipment specifications. Rather detailed � � °,':e€ae ��.es e �at s �,. g� �,� e � �„�� ;F � � P�a� �� a �,��. �"�' . a� &�� a a �� ¢�� d�� #� � .� 9 R.� '� a� F �. �� { ��.8 .$ �� m � � � �` � .�� °t ra � � n° � � � � � � Y * �f �� ° � �� • • ' • � �� €«� �� ,, �� :� � .� � a q � W� : P , � -.& �� 8' - �d g�_ g . � �.- �a�� o y �a�a �z a $ �� t d ya�� ,�a t��'#� � �3 ��ar� �m � `��s�s�� °��a a�Ar ��°�"�#�� `� , T s Y, � �§W e�3� s� e I,.3 �,�3` � �A C 22 �0 � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � TABLE 9 ESTIMATED PEAK PARKI(JG ACCUMULATION* � BY ACTIVITY AREA COP10 PARK ST. PAUL, t�1INNESOTA � Surplus Deficit � _ Demand Design + _ 1 . Mct•iurray Rthletic Field �bi�cars 576 116 2. Picnic Area/Open Fields - 225 cars 411 186 - � 3. Zoo/Amusement/Cons� ��r_,r 1000 cars 450 - 550 � 4. Golf Course/Skiin� '1 cars 80 - 30 5. Pavilion/Lakeside . cars 244 - 56 � �. Sw�mming Pool/Tennis �00 cars 100 - - TOTALS 2]95 cars 1861 +302 -636 � Net Deficit -334 � *Uoes not include buses � It is estimated that most bus usage is by school children and will be during the week, not on the weekends. These buses can first drop off their passengers, sav at the Zoo, and then can be accommodated at lots near the picnic grounds which are proposed for overflow weekend park users. The surplus available � in these lots will very rarely be required on the weekday. � � � � e 3 � " �: � � � , e � �� e �i .��: �� ,, $ : ��'� : � � � � � � � , �� e re �..e ;:�n��e , � � • . . . �. e e � � & � � � .,e e.e.e. ,ee e.�ee e mee e. o.,erAee �9�, :.e e�.��e� .se��. a. e.ne. aa.�,. ee�P eee,e. e c 2� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � 3.0 PARKING DEMANp FOR REMOTE LOTS The Como Park Master Plan Traffic and Parking Study developed an estimated � peak parking accumulation by activity area. These totals are presented in Table 9 and Figure 8. The proposed parking available in each area is ob- tained from the preliminary Como Park Plan of July 9, 1980. The net deficit � expected is 409 spaces on the peak day of the year. It is not economically feasible to park the peak day capacity of cars, nor is it aesthetically de- sirable to have large amounts of paved areas near the core area of the park. � From various studies, the following assumptions of the distribution of yearly attendance was used to determine parking space demands. These estimated demands are displayed in Table 9. While these estimates are eneralized, the � 9 y give an approximation of the typical day-to-day use of facilities. Bus parking was not included in the analysis, nor was any attempt made to determine exactly when in the year � these days would occur, although most likely the majority of the peak days fall between May and September. The occasional winter peak day could occur for a Winter Carnival event or on one of the days when the conservatory has � a show. Long-range goals of the Zoo Master Plan and Conservatory Master Plan have stressed the design of more year-round and inside exhibits which would tend to further spread out the peak days. The two horizontal bars on Figure 9 show proposed parking capacities of 1 ) the entire park, and 2) areas l , 2 and 3 � from Table 9. The park-wide design capacity would be adequate for 98% of the year's parking � demand. The capacity of areas 1 , 2, and 3, shown on Figure g, could handle about 95% of the year's parking, but note that now the 5% of the year not covered is about one-half of the Spring-Summer weekends . � Estimate of Overflow of Parked Vehicles The curve in Figure 9 very nearly approaches a natural log curve of the � form in y = ax + c. If we ignore the constant (i .e. assume that zero cars are in the park on the lowest use day of the year) then the formula is ap- proximated as: ln y = .02108x, for this curve of estimated demand, where � y = number of parked cars and x = day of the year. To get the number of parked vehicles we can integrate this to: ,� Jy = a eaX + C. again ignoring the constant, we get � ry _ � � � �e .02108x � � .o2�os � � �� s � �� . � , � �� ' �° ' � � � a � '�� a� � � �� :� � �� 9 d � .�� a �s g t � � : a�� a��^�'�e. � a g � �.�a � • • ' • ° � ➢` iae � A� �� . �s �� 4� s,�s�a� &fi+�& ��.�F�� o �� _ 9'ee. &e n��:� 9g� m� .�.� �s�Pn e�faR��e' � c 24 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � parking accumulation and incidence of occurrence � FIGURE 9 � 2600 � PEAK PARKIN(3 DEMAND 2200 ��w�� 2000 � PARK WIDE DESIGN PARKING CAPACITY I I II I IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiII IIIIIIII I IIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIII1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111ttIHii11111111lllllillllfilllllllll , 1600 AREAS 1,283 DESIGN PARKIN(3 CAPACITY o IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIItIIIIFIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHilllllll11111111111111111111111111111111 Z � � � �, ,000 z Y K � a d � 0 � 600 � � � N W � , 0 20 2eo z 200 �so �2o eo �o 0 � � � w� W �-'W 2' p.' � � f 2' w f Q W Q �2 W Q ' . �N Q S f N W f-N W ��-- H N�yJ �O W �"' �T Y Z OY NQ ZY Y InZT Q V1Q Z t WO Q 1 W W 1 �LL C7�G LL 3 (�Y O 31 Y O Z 3 Q 3 Y O ZWO �W J W .-�d' JW �3 22 O �3 V 4 3 O� �O J W 3° . � a O� O d N ti .- O Q 3 00 N C.7 N Vl Q. li ct FIGURE 9 PARKING ACCUMULATION AND INCIDF.NCF. OF OCCURRF.NCE � � � � �eP�� ' �� & �� "�� s ° � ��- �_� ��v� s� ��a �:e ; _ � �, m�� °� fi � �� t f� � � a.e� _��ts ��a � � • • �a� ��'� � *' �� a� � p�g� � g�� ,��e�� P � °°� � �!� � � c 2� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � estimated peak parking, accumuiations � FI(3URE 8 � _JUUUL.JI-JU� _ �..- '_'._J I. � �� 11 �� I � � - 8 � � � � �� ' a �.�JL p�° ° o � �:' o.o a-� � p 0 ��- ' a � o�� I -: - �a'e- ' 1L0° �.� O ' l .� � %�-°'� �''=_—��°=4 � ° ° o •o L a , � �\o --�.��:�� o--_�i_� � . o _ _ • � . .�� ,a� � . 0�� ,p do o c�� • ,.•�.• �q - � . \ � � :•' '�� \� � O � `ro \ / �...� ` � � � a� " o • � � �0 •��' ;� � e � �a . a i . � o + 7 0 • �� 0� $ # • o � � 0 ♦ • � •. . �� • A o � ; �� o � �d �] • • � . � . �•.�� AR. • .ti. ��.�...�y� � /� � N�� J � 1 L C J ■ � . . � : �� : i . . . . � � _ . , : _ . , - .�.� o o ,,Q : � p'�7 t � � �. i, � . � ;,� � '� � ' `� � ( e ' � , � ' o o A o ° ° . � � 0 � AREA 1 O . .. �o � . _ �.;: � � - 1 11 � --__ � , -- . �- �---- -- - . . .�_.___ _ - - *�co�oo�+ couNT aTAT1ONa � g �� p e pp �� e �� a � � �� °� � � � �� P �� 4 � � �� ' a d° � r �,�. tP�� . � � ;�,: � �8a�� '�' �, � �E�S� : � • • � • � �� s�'� �� $�� ,� �� ,�� s��a��,. .�*e, va .�� .,��e �� Qs..�� a �m. �e� �� p�.s,.��sa a� sP � 6 �. �� ° , � � � � s e � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � � Therefore, we can estimate the peak number of vehicles which would be in the park during any part of the year by knowing the rankin of those days. For example, the top 7 days (days 365 to 358) of the year �2% of total ) would ' have a total of: � 365 � ( 02108x365) _ ( .02108x35B) y = .02108 (e ' e ) 358 � _ (2195-1894) .02108 = 14,261 . (or an average peak of 2037 per day) � Since we could have parked 1786 (from the design of July 9, 1980) we could assume that during these 7 days, about 250 vehicles on the average had no � place to park at the peak hour each day. From Table 9, (on the peak day of the year we had previously determined about 400 vehicles would have no place to park at the peak hour) . We can also estimate the total number of � cars using the park by taking the ratio parking turnover from the Master Plan Parking Survey. This was given as 2.5 to get: 14,261 x 2.5 = 35,653 total cars � If 250 each day left during the peak hour because there were no parking spaces, or 1750 in the top 7 days, this equals about 5% of the total . A few � more would leave in hours preceding and following the peak hour, but con- siderably less than 250. Table 10 gives a summary of the total number of cars using the park during the periods shown on Figure 9. � TABLE 10 APJNUAL PARKING TOTALS BY SEASON � Days of Year Total Cars % of Year Total 34 Spring-Summer weekends 133,158 51% � 86 Spring-Summer weekdays 106,406 41% 70 Fall -Winter weekends 16,010 6% � 175 Fall-Winter weekdays 4,743 2% 365 TOTAL 260,317 100% � Parking Spatial Distribution The distribution of parking within the park is, however, the key to proper management of the overflow. Table li shows the parking use estimated by � time of the year for each area of the park. The most critical deficiencies e $ �� , � �R�an�l� � � �� ` � �� ,A�� `� . � � . � . . 6 �� • � $ 4 � �� °"' c•��:� .... : e . � �YE .�$� g .� ��F� �w $ � � . �� . .. :;� •� - y � . P $.,°$ti $ e 6 - . .�.,^; .e�.. ...:e.�.se.... �,. e�� . .e...�e.. . '%:...°ie �,.e_s_ .�.. `° , s�Fe.a, a.�.. e va �28 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � TABLE 11 � PARKING USE BY TIME OF YEAR � Capacity = 576� Capacity = 4112 Capacity = 4503 � Deficit (-) Deficit (-) Deficit -) Demand Surplus (+) Demand Surplus (+) Demand Sur lus + Peak Summer Use ^ � Holidays, etc. 460 +116 225 +186 1000 -550 Typical Spring- Summer Weekend � (60% of peak) 276 +300 135 +276 600 -150 Typical Spring- Summer Weekday � (30% of peak) 138 +q38 68 +343 300 +�50 Fall-Winter Weekend (10% of peak) 46 +530 23 +3gg 100 +350 , Fall-Winter Weekday (5% of peak) 23 +553 11 +400 50 +400 � 4. Golf Course/Skiing 5. Pavilion/Lakeside 6. Swimming Pool/Tennis Capacity = 80 Capacity = 244 Capacity = 100 Deficit ) Deficit -) Deficit � Demand Sur lus + Demand Surplus �+) Demand Sur lus +� Peak Summer Use Holidays, etc. 110 _3p 300 -56 100 0 � Typical Spring- Summer Weekend (60% of peak) 66 +�q 180 +64 60 +40 Typical Spring- � Summer Weekday (30% of peak) 33 +47 90 +154 30 +70 Fall-Winter � Weekend (10% of peak) 11 +69 30 +214 10 +90 Fall-Winter � Weekday (5% of peak) 6 +74 �5 +229 5 +95 Notes: � � Of the 576 spaces available at McMurray field, 325 are easily accessible to the proposed transit system. 2. Of the 411 spaces available near the picnic area stops, 301 are within 700 feet of the proposed stop. 3. Of the 450 spaces available, 400 would be in the proposed parking deck. � � � � �F�� r°��a� ��a��s� ��w o �� t -a �� p �r P� r� ��+�� y� �� m �� . �$� � ��_ � s � ��*e ��.. � � �'� � �. 1 �� '� �a� a �� , �3.� � °,� • • � • � °e� � e �. a a .t ��. ��°�t� � '�'` �.§��'� ' �� e ��. a� �� e��. 9e. s e a��A' a � x�� ffi��$ ,%� �° �t� �a��"� e.., e . ..,e� _ �-:, .., �. � . e . .. --�„es: �,x� .�.: � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 � � TABLE 12 PARKING SURVEY RESULTS � BY AREA COMO PARK-ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA SURVEY PERfORMED JUNE 2, 1979 � NUMBER OF CARS LOCATION CAPACITY lOAM 11AM 1PM 2PM 3PM 4PM � 1. McMurray Athletic Fie1d A. Lot at Jessamine 32 42 47 27 17 17 16 B. Gravel Lots 100 32 61 39 15 15 15 C. Lot at Como Avenue 40 17 29 32 41 22 15 � D. Jessamine-Beulah to 60 50 58 24 14 17 17 Lexington E. Como Ave.-Lexington to 155 120 120 124 137, 119 114 Beulah � F. Lexington-Jessamine to 20 16 14 10 14 15 14 Como Avenue G. Lexington-Como Avenue to 20 6 6 5 5 4 3 Horton � SUBTOTAL 427 283 335 261 243 209 194 PERCENTAGE 66X 78X 61X 57X 49X 45X � 2. Picnic Area I A. Midway-Hamline to Horton 56 0 1 22 26 27 27 I B. Beulah-Midway to Horton 96 8 49 93 96 91 91 � C. Horton-Hamline to Midway 44 0 0 17 22 15 17 D. Beulah-Horton to Como 32 0 0 4 7 6 5 SUBTOTAL 228 8 50 136 151 139 140 � PERCENTAGE 47 22% 60ti 66� 61% 61X 3. Zoo 6 Amusement Park � A. Zoo Lot 215 44 61 121 159 142 136 B. Kaufman Drive-Through Zoo 130 12 31 83 90 72 83 � SUBTOTAL 345 66 92 204 249 214 219 PERCENTAGE 19� 27% 59% 72% 62X 63X � � � � �'°� ' ;�`�� ' �;��r�� " a =� s�� e �� e��}�'" �.A `�� K �� .. a ��,e� ��°�°�� Q. � �' � � � • • • : � e � ' 2 ° ,� ��4�' a�� „�,e..,�, ' � �, A COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ��t 1 , are noted near the core of the park, particularly the Zoo/Conservatory area. � The peak demand is estimated as 1000 vehicles, while the area has a capacity of only 450, leaving a deficit of 550. The picnic area has a capacity of � 411 , and an estimated demand of 225, leaving 186 surplus spaces. Since the amusement area has been moved into this area, some of this surplus will be absorbed by families going primarily to the amusement rides , but other over- � flow is expected to absorb the remaining spaces. The 550 overflow minus 186 leaves 364 stil� looking for space. The McMurray fields parking has an estimated peak demand of 460 with a capacity of 576, leaving 116. Note that about 300 vehicles remain unable to find parkin� who were headed to the Zoo/Conservatory � area. This would theoretically occur only on the peak day of the year and could not rationally be used as a requirement to provide parking for these vehicles. The next period of the year, typical spring-summer weekends , � however, have similar overflow problems. What is critical is the fact that even during typical spring-summer weekends a deficit of 150 is felt in the Zoo/Conservatory area. The picnic and McMurray field areas have surpluses � of 326 and 296 respectively for this period of the year. It is here that a Transit Service is needed to provide remote parking for these summer weekends. Some problems exist which cannot be accounted for. Of the 251 spaces avail- � abie at McMurray field, only 325 are easily accessible to the proposed transit system. It would thus be desirable for overflow of the Zoo to be directed � to these spaces , rather than let parkers hunt for space only to find out it does not have transit access. A similar problem is experienced in the picnic area. Of the total of 411 spaces , 205 are relatively close to the � Zoo, and about 300 are within 700 feet of the proposed picnic stop, so the first overflow wave of the Zoo/Conservatory destined parkers would naturally tend toward the closest spaces. A rational diversion system of incoming park uses to transit available parking is a must, if the system is to be � efficient. A second fa�tor, which could tend to alleviate the above problems is a � difference in the typical hourly uses of the different areas of the park. Hourly Distribution of Parking From the June 2, 1979 survey, an hourly distribution of parking was measured � and is presented in Table 12. The table indicates that on this particular day (assumed to be a typical weekend) the McMurray fields parking and golf � course began filling first, followed by the Zoo/Amusement and Picnic area. The peak hour for McMurray field and golf course parking was 10 to 11 a.m. , while the Zoo/Amusements and picnic peaked from 1 to 2 p.m. The Conservatory � lagged behind the Zoo somewhat, but still had a peak fram 1 to 2 p.m. The pavilion had the latest peak, from 2 to 3 p.m. , but the study was terminated at 5 p.m. � � �� s�� a�e a 6 ��a ��. a � � �� r�.W �e�mr � a� �� a ��: r � � . . . . a�a � P � �ee � _ COMO PARK MASTER PLAN # C 30 ' ' ' TABLE 12 PARKING SURVEY RESULTS � BY AREA COMO PARK-ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE 2, 1979 � NUMBER �F CARS LOCATION CAPACZTY lOAM 11AM 1PM 2PM 3PM 4PM 7 Facilities , Off—Street 1.080 306 411 484 545 488 449 On—Street 1.183 319 454 597 642 585 594 � TOTAL 2,263 625 865 1,083 1,187 1,073 1,043 PERCENTAGE 28X 38Z 48X 52X 47X 46X i 1 � 1 1 1 � 1 1 1 �� E �" �� , �� °,�m��sx��` �� r ° �`� � A�'�� _� r�°a � -: ' �� s �� s� �s�. � • • • � 3� ��`�� '� ?�.z r a, ��,x�_� .. �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � ' TABLE 12 , PARKING SURVEY RESULTS BY AREA � COMO PARK-ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE 2, 1979 NUMBER OF CARS LOCATION CAPACITY lOAM 11AM 1PM 2PM 3PM 4PM � 4. Conaervatory A. Conservatory Lat 216 45 84 127 202 164 147 � B. Conservatory Drive 34 0 25 33 34 33 35 C. Estabrook Drive 88 2 15 18 18 14 19 D. Nason Place 40 0 0 S 8 5 10 ' E. Kaufman Drive-Nason to 76 4 5 8 10 6 6 Lexington F. Kaufman Drive-Nason to Conaervatory 30 0 12 23 24 30 29 SUBTOTAL 484 51 141 214 296 252 246 � PERCENTAGE lIX 29X 44X 61X 52X 51X � 5. Golf Course A. Golf Course Lot 60 75 81 64 51 48 40 � B. Arlington 40 33 36 33 30 17 20 C. Huron-N. of Arlington 40 25 24 20 26 20 17 SUBTOTAL 140 133 141 I17 107 85 77 � PERCENTAGE 95X lO1X 84X 76X 61X 55X 6. Pavilion � A. Pavilion Lot 192 18 23 36 41 59 52 B. N. of Pavilion 12 8 9 11 11 12 14 � C. Smerk Road 64 0 1 1 2 1 0 D. Smerk Road Lot 100 1 1 6 2 4 6 E. Nussbaumer Road 36 1 2 8 13 11 14 SUBTOTAL 404 28 36 62 69 87 86 � PERCENTAGE 7% 9X 15X 17X 22X 21X � � � ��; �e, ,.R �� • • - • � �� COMO PARK MASTER PLAN r ' , R�FERENCES; , 1. The Electric Railways of Minnesota, itussell L. Olson, published by Minnesota Transportation Museum., 1976. � 2. The Aspen Trolley Study by NII�IDC, for the Aspen Street Railway � Company and the City of Aspen, Colorado, 1980. , 3. Tansit and the Times, Stephen A. Kieffer, published by 1�ain City Rapid Transit Company, 1958. r4. "Light Rail Transit", St. Paul Planning Division Staff Working Paper 78-SWP-02, October 1978. � ;. "Transportation U.S.A.", Volume 2, Number 1, Fall, 1975, pp 6 - 11 � n �� _ 6. Mass Transit Volume IV, No. 2, February 1977, pp 12 20. � 7. "Parametric Analysis of Ra.ilway Line Capacity" PB247-181, USTIS � � � � ' � ��f ��#M �'4 � a F� ��n �$� �*° e' � �� e �" az� ��e e A �� `�� °�t �� 9� �e��.�v � � a��g�a"��»� , e �� ' � g° g ��v� gme, �,��m: � � ' • � � �� s�'�� ,�� .� � �k�. se � a o�#�� e a � � , ee� �#.. ��Y ��;� ��.� �'�k� �#�-: a e, � � � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � � r A summary of the hourly distribution for the canbined total of the Zoo/ ' Amusement and Conservatory area is shown in Table 13. The proposed parking near the Zoo includes a 400 space parking deck. From the data in Table 13 � we can conclude that the proposed 400 space deck would be full by 1 p.m. with overflow forced into other lots after that until at least 4 p.m. The number of vehicles in the overflow lots would be approximately the sum of the total number, of cars less 405 (parking deck plus 50 surface spaces) at � 90% capacity. If we assume about 3.5 people per car, during the afternoon about 960 people � will need transportation to the core area of the park. The proposed transit system is capable of handling this load. TABLE 13 � SUMMARY - HOURLY DISTRIBUTION - Z00/AMUSEMENT/CONSERVATORY People in � Hour Zoo/Amusement/Conservatory Overflow* OVerflow Vehicles�* 10 a.m. 117 vehicles -- � 11 a.m. 233 vehicles -- 1 p.m. 418 vehicles 13 46 2 p.m. 545 vehicles 140 490 3 p.m. 466 vehicles 61 214 � 4 p.m. 465 vehicles 60 210 *Overflow occurs when 90% of 450 reached. � **Assume 3.5 people per vehicle. SUMMARY While the tw4 parts of this .study, the proposed trolley and parking deck, were � , initially separate items, it is clear that they are closely dependent on one another. An analysis of the July 10, 1980 park plan shows serious deficiencies , in parking capacity around the Zoo/Conservatory during the summer. lJhile the 450 spaces offered in the core will provide adequate parking for about three- fourths of the year, all Spring-Summer weekends will have an overflow of people � seeking a place to park, creating an intolerable situation for much of the summer. With remote parking available that is accessible to a trolley which will allow � the visitor to get to and from the Zoo/Conservatory core area of the park, this overflow can be accommodated on all but about 2% of the year. Thus, it is im- portant that the two proposals should be treated as complementary parts of an � overall program to handle visitor parking within Como Park and that each, on its own, may not mesh into an overall plan without problems which were not covered in this study. � �� : a � �a� �� ' �= s� � �' �«� '�� i�+�� ' �� "�•' , e e a �:�� e ��, '� � • • ' • � �� - € ��g'"� °� a i�� e ? � &`�� e s k � ` e se� �Se{ f�� .,�' ;� , ,��a�� : s�e..., d , : .ee,., : �.. 9e. � .m , ..„be ena.ma,b , e.e,. .,:e.... ; ■ � � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN ■ � ' 3�•c,•�� y'qO� "m�� ' CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM � To: Bob Broughtan � From: Peter White Date: p�1�.y 13, 1g81 � Re: McP•Zurray Field Expansion for Pa.rking , We have estimated the cost to acquire par-t of the Burlington Northern Right-of ti•day along side Mch2urray Field between Lexington and Hamline, at �255,000. This includes an estimate of the land value and of the � relocation of the Railroad's mmmunication lines. This estima.te is based on the limited information available and is for budget purposes only. � P47:dm � � � ' � � � ' �� a�� "a �, �.�� a�� g ��9° �� m� � �` � • • - • � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN D 1 ' � ' � � � ' � ' � � � ' � � � � ��`�"z `� �` "� �� '� i� ° ��£k'%E�° �$�� #, �� °�' ��,�� „ °� s aa� � �g a m� °�& -.� k � fe: � e.& °��+ �' � ^�g � � s E � ,�' t � $ �q . �g, � k„^�� "k � "�=s �. � a� �, . ��"� �� y"� �� H;� � � • • • � � � � � �`' � � ° @ a � e . � � � � � , �' . ��:. .;. , � � �.�mo.e.aA�g..i� ., �` � COMO PARK MASTER PLAN 1 , Z3 W O �O G C � 'G 7 N �G : rr x m o O 7 N n ro N r u+ro N M O m � � G � N 7c �'4 N d N r'I 7 M �C < rt N � 1 I t I 1 o x o N �x 7� ?7 ' \N � 7 a N�r�(D (D (D lJ� N(D N N f'�"I �c w�w � r a� o m O'�'4 ►' O 0 N tn G M m N r�irn K f�D E � N �7L'N r•K p G 3 m , N Ul R fr ft G YI N SL R N N � � 7 ��O O 1��0 fr�'t t/ N ''f f*fD m � � n a r.�m r.� 7 0 �r� m e� a oo � 7 r•K a --'O � G (D G W N r•3 M (D A� fD � S N W )c'r'1 G T R F+•fD K'G �'C �G U1 (D fD 7 't h�• O' 't h�� oa �o otrar u, o ' a � o o �•aaE Vm o.a �a � m on n f•� o o n°v° x mro oM ono a � 7�C N �W m c�D r"r N w w E '1 N O w •C r r• < F D r� �T (D M N N � � N ��-n „ � � N IJ F+ (n • • `^ r r � � r r 7�--' r �o ao � rn u+ a w n> N n� N o �o w .i C I�J C .� m tn a w t� r n> N o �o ao � �H � M � o � � � � � � � I � � � � � � � O r• ti1 � I � 1� I I I � � � 1 � � w ',t7 + r �o m � m �n a w n� � r r r �o m �r � ro ao � m u+ �s w n> r r r r �o w g � o c.� r o q 7 m q ro r o y� �o ri ro 3 3 � c � 3 � � 'Jtl N t+� r m r r r r r ra r t i � i ^�vi m r r r n� r n> r i z tn c � N W J O J Ut �D O N 01 F' W F� I � 1 1. IO G 10 W VI N 01 1-� U1 O U� W O� h' N 1 IO G � � � C I 1 M '{ N n K m oI r r r r r m � r � r r r � i i i I w o n� �a �o u+ ao N u� n� m n� r n� t I m N N W OC W N lJ� lJi \O U� 1-' N I-' 1 1 1 I /i ai 00 Oi N tl0 OP tlV dP OP W OP dP W I !P tlP tlP tlP i tlP OP tlP tlV tlP tl0 tlP OP OP !P M H , C7� r r N i i i ��n ao r r z v� ' lJ�1-' �P Qi O �D CD N� m 1" N� f' I �"' h'� i I t/� I O C U�I N 10 01 �O 10 67 �I O O� �P N N h' I O G Q CY M �'�S � N f9 tu r a o � r � r � � � ra o r r � ni r ra �r v� � n� r �o 00 �o �.+ o. r i ►� r i � o� I w r+ o n� r � r r �o o t� � tn n> n� r l en r� a.av sn sa sa a rv .r r a ar ao r en rn an ec eo r ea sn a eo ua en ev ea ev ea � i r N � z tn �o r r r r r i z u� � 4�i W 1 A 00 l7� �I A W 1� 10 W OD lJ� �I 1� 1 Y IO C W O A l7� N W W Ir N N 01 J �O 1 IO C Q Q � q rS n fD !J a w ' o i r r r i N or r r r r r i N O W I A \p (J1 �1 A �P N O W 10 V1 J F�' I d IP M O 1" A U1 N �✓ � N N W O� J O I tlP N 4V 7A En tl0 OP Ao A p IP OP tl0 � tlP A° alo � I M do OP tlp do 00 tl0 OP M f OV tlP OP A� I H , ' � � 3 � K " � � � � �o Or Iw H q M Y 4 p $ G Q 7 fA fD �O M < W O M N M 17 fp a W O W M [�7 � tt W O N r•N O�N E 9 d :D�o G r+ O w rr N O 7r N H m�O r y K M W ID Or 7 C� M ID < ►+ C 70 � o.7 w Q a G.W r• n vi 7e � p M a] G N� S rt~�G �33 SO � O'O M Kr5 � � RN N tn � r a �o ra a o sr• o c � � � � � i m KQN < 9 wrNN n xt W O �C r•E N G� 1� N < ►rnin Ef+WrO Wfn7'N R7 �' Oi�p 9a�tn NRrTf+> � 7Kry � N� OMW M K �+0 G 7rrt •• ID rG ID G W N rc 1p r... � p �woh g ~5a t~i i � oN o �< � r•~ r.r.Q'o� �'� WOr• A� wO. orr� r+� � „ O.O � 1 rr n T�K Y p < O N y �O m o C 5 rr� \O W a A r ID � O W�'1 F�E 1 ff S M K d� 0� W G 1 M W N W �C N tn . Or tY fDO.fD W NO c mm Wto n r �o m � rmar n ow m wm � N r N h� a ry N y fp y re(p M 7 �o W �c'W K M E S �M G 't m S 4 a m m W'p •• N < 'O m M m 'tJ M 1�••• ta A N � rf ID N N • O �'f O G 7i0 O � NOy Kf+W O ID07o►a �c � w wr mG GOO 7 O r+ LL n o • M ri g w ry g�q o N G m 7' 3 �O r r1 m N 47 ey,rn N K E N W ,T G.1'r G W N R7 fD fr(D ID • N '< N I • N•v+ k O O'O O N G P r7 O r�.-.N O W O N � N rt • N rt tn 7H � mm� M amH �'a ar.i. �p , • •• g N fDr�i�wwm m tn0 M f�D M W 'o H M N M U1 1-I O M M O O• N ff fD .• h{ • G � W N O< K N 0+ N N• F r* oN O oo E W w ON Qa rC 7 ID n < w< 5we- croN a rs aw m rro m wr r� x �os Mm w rsM � aN a i o mv � �u . rr •c n p a r 5 r* S� m o a rr. o.7' 7 w ro't1 m M a n to r•< K r�D'rr M w g M 9 N 7H m N tr M • W N O � wN N w fD nw � m w ron��D � a � � oa < �ro°g � r a M �.°ii �v a � 7 O � ry •• y I h( 01 17 O N•G O ry (D M C ID ID O O M C� �N � N�+ � o n w� N �q7 9 N �3 n>fn K ►+N N n M C.W �+ S O n 7 N ry O •• W Oi w• F•�M rt •• G M 5 O rr ID N 7 7 1-��1--< oo'� o . .. � F+M O l!�O b'1+• N N W �5 � O n O� N V• •• O 7 fD � O R N �fD W a�0 (D S O� O O O`-'F1 G �1 Q T' fD W p1 �+• N N (D oro m• , w o o. � ro • a .. orrn �n 90 � � m m ' cw v �*E � ro ror o omc m am gg nn w �+� � �*� � o m or* av u� a wwa • rr n � '� �' O r� • � � H n'O O �n rr G t C•C c rt oo i m �o g �w m ro •� ri y� o tr' m rr rt n �t G •• �'t rr •• Ou fD 7 fD O 't O�O ha M ID '.Y < C'O tn m rS o F+w N• o•• N h�� 0.�� •• o m G Y 7c'G N N F fD O O O � O O t7' p+ N � O • O N IL W�y a a 1 Q CJ'''f CL(D o 1--� C F��f*�. O'O �'i iT fD N ID N N W '6'O N . W O `G rr CL O • h N M W •C N {1 O � v�r m • ] Q Kvn � i £ ro ro � r� mu, < am � N �.3 [�.y�r m . x a maaM • < �-n n na Ema 8 h wrco g wn ri mr mSm a o �n o n �� a� �o mc n �.c N (D M M 01 C N � � ] 0 ' � f'r N a a rr �'t 1� r• � �p � O (D . H N y� ;Y '�+ n � m wa o � '�O 'FO u�i N W 7 N O A tA m O T t�N 9 � N O � rn w 7C N r5 � rt U� r N p� rt � � � N J K �o O � 7 � 1 1 I I I I I I 1 � ro 3 rr H W m ►�H O O O rr H w r.�9 G tr y rr y tn�p y w r y �r r r+ N O N•7 r1 r•O ? 7 5' M O v� G n S? rr N rf 7 O n E O 7 5 N ID W N N ID W lD fD 1 O�N Q' fD rf fD {L�M ID W 7 fD 0 � rt Iw rr N m W Ip Y O M 9 p�p B wwC p W ID rt W N `C w N � W � m 1-� IA r'f W Cl (D M 1P O H W �O 8 Ul W f0 70 ',D' N fD R7 F��0 M fD f''(D FS �c c oro • am < o a $.m a� 3 fC m r • rn ry M 7 p.N n rt H G u� m w ron n a m c � m w m w m n •• x ...a m .+a m w m ., o � n m wm O O M rsm w n Wm rownw � rfo. � 3S M rr ' D M 1D S 47 ►i W K • tr r�O r F� 0 r M N O F-�O r•< O £ r. W W N W 01� W Wry M M O W O .`7 M �h'•M M W 9 (D M< r-'fT F�� C f'�7 f� IT ID C7 W M W'J' R M `-'C H li W W N W S N H R� � Pn ��G O �M "J' G�".1 !+ � p! PS �n .7 ~ P�W W y Y•W �f*fT S 7'G �O�[i S fn 7 t7 9 R N?O 0 rr� mw n � H � o w�v mfAO tKO �v a w � a �r rr �rmo � n c � 7 M (D O G a w W rr m fD�O t!w i-+rr N rf rr w ti m R7 � CY N W r+ +M'O iC R�'1 w w q H W'G M 7 8 7 E 4n O W N N N W • i"t M W W O IE O1�'1 N '3 ri W ID fD V• r'4 fr • F�G • W N R N K C N N M O N Q rt W N rt N K N N G�'O r O N w ID n i+r+N O 0� W Gi r•9 m W � 7'r* ?w a 't r �"� W 'J' N N O `J W fr (f � ID 7t'G N G N 1� 0� rt f'r P. W fD rr n�a�0 7 �D x E r H a w rr N � ro rr �m�c m m m � N • M lD N W ►� `C O 7' N O O n�m N In rt ui r� � N tJ�N fT r 8 r rv F+1-1 W .-. f1 • hn op M R O fT 5 M N(D !� F'��'C 7 W `J N 1-'W f'r• 'J O 7' � M £ rrrrD n % atf p < �M r•• R OOH 07 m ] Y V• O • W f� R W M N M A fD eP fD < • tS G �T G rT C 'S < ff lo N O O G fp D N S ff`"N N �o N M fl ry � 0� � (D F'' S !+ rA 1* 0� O� 't N N f� f+O a N W O �n C!'K O'W � • �f* W O O W �4 N fD `G tlP N • /-�'J • (D (D r' rr �n O M rr!I\ rt W O fD 7 h � � 'O r N h�a K r+ M 7 O. N rt (I C O cr W O r• fD rn r.Q a G r• 7 �'O 'O �o rt m �, o r cn rr ' rr B o a m � m � � � � K n� o �a n n �n a� � W � .�+ M 'D w\ C n LL�U rr < W 'O rr K G w �r w a to o � a r,, m �m �o o a r• N CT N r r• 'D 5 7 M K M 7 M M £ � tn rt 7 O �C r O N 7 rr a aow a Kwa o or*�rK a� mK �a wo M a c � b ac � o an �• a rr X' n rr'O w N et o' rn m w r•o tn ro m (D �c ro m R � K ►'• rr G (D N 7 J O G � tn n R � E W M 17 O S Cf 7 .dn'y N O N N O G �'• C N O 7 N o o fD n rt �'t � ►� � ro ro rn a n rr w O r tn �o •< rr rt r n i �' m , �3nans a3sn �i�Nno� Nvinodoa�w i 1 � � � � � �� m � � �, �.., � , � , , � .., � , � M e N ,-1 � M O� I 1 1 I I M N 1 I 1 � 1 1 I 1 M � ro � � � � � I i ai Z e N .�i a �la v�i ZI a i i I i i '� A CI w M t!1 I I �O 1 I I 1 1 N� x ' � � � � �m � � m w M OP V' O N �-d V'O M OPI .i rl �O N 1 ( 1 N�I IA 1 W 1 j m I N 1 ~ � � � � IO M � I 1 1 C M N I I ro '{ � o � N � m m a a a a" ' , i ^� A � O c� c n m rf kn v�1 Z I r � �n N 1 1 i � y �I 'i I �o I 1 b I t rf fA Z .N r1 N �OD � 1 N I 1 1 1 �O , dP eP tl0 OP a0 � M tlP I t!1 1� c r'f I� dP tlP OP M M tl► C� ul N �-i 1 • pW M W I 01 N N '-1 .�1 M 1 iG N C I .i N M1� rl N N f�1 1� I N a y m ' p1 N N � � � '� C7 N . g �{� � tR �i ,I � o a ° ai z° � n M .��i i �,W, a �n � w .r .� v � a y [ i � c�v i i � i � � N � r'n zl � p y L,�I y IL ' a � . d � s � a � > �n � � >, b ro'� � ro ++ � w •� u o v o � o� c°� .� w Q a a � �c'�i U .� C G•.i C G. n7 N O O ��.I �.i 1�•.1 � •� m N 3 O •�+ ro s. � C C ?�G •.� 4 C O a M e� u°�o a a a�i w v s •.+ ..+ � o a e a o+ .c .c ro o .� y � n a o x �r d y w •,� o v c ro w w w a a o��.°+ a�w y cAi ai 6 a � "� � z tl1 a a�ar • m a • v a d m a+ °a � � � �a e � w.+ o 0 0 .. o �'� •a o � �o a .i.e w o sa x� Y x•.+ � c� H a 3 a a � H o z N w u w v", c"� � a m o" ° v o � a a a a e r � � aP aa eo aw ar aM W op alr M do enIsP OP 00 CO M N � N en I T f"f v a O N N .-1 1 M 1 N .�1 I I v 10 M M I O� P 1 N .i O �"� N .� N N .-1 I I I I IO F-� U1 .-1 I N N ry r.i �..� .�1 M p ro p v; � y�j L�j � aD .i t� �x a n � y O pp ..1 N aD 01 N N .�1 1 M I N .-1 I I V��'1 7 O v1 �O I N O 1"1 7 N ZI � �N c�l � 1 I I IO� UI T+I �1 .i 1 N� N , M sn I U1 CD � N OD � OD t0 �+f OD N i i rl i �O I� M OOI � V V� I N IO N b b ro � w � � ,� N N " a" a � � I ' p O c n o n r o r u1 r'1 n eV 1 t .� I �n If1 � O r t+f M I RI tfl 7 (A 2I .� •� .� I I 1 lao ul Z I n 1 Im tA ' so s r r w r s s • s s w w w w nIw s s a au s�en ro YI e�'1 1!1 1/1 � O� ..1 '1 ry �O CD ul N rl N N N10 N '0 rl � N f`1 N •�II.A N � m F N v � ,�'� .+ s s I H Qa A o� �n v N .� A + �M J OI V f� f� f�l N O� T V m O P P1 e� N Pf f�f P� 7 p � N E N Z .� .-1 .�1 .� .� .�1 �� tA 41 ZI 'i i� � O C a a0 m m W W a E � •�i a hNi ' O • W N 10 M W 1� a! 41 a0 M O1 M W N � N y � � ',i0 •.1 M M • LI y M 7 11 J LI J S.1 y 41 7 W O GI U � C E ., .e � s+ � o y o ti o y o ti o 0 0 0 .+ •+ �e � a e s a z u N s .c ,°c 'a � 'a � 'a c° .e �°c 'a ,°e �c � y � �°+ .e � ap� b ° �e �x ro ��.1 O .\i .a � cr N � M � � in u'�i �o e r m O � � � U W W � � � � ' • � • �^ E a : " � ' N ar ao a► a s ry I w • N M r w a ►+ I 1 .� N I 1 .i � I- t .� I ao � M C c0 I I 1 .i rl m n1 N N M R 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 m ' M 1� 1 � 1 M RI q M N M 1.1 " a 'd m e► a � s e. eo sn er e. aa ,p M t0 7 A r V V 1 1 u) I� I 1 0� t�f I 7 JJI I M Ir aI M A • M M 0.i K �O fA T. V� 1 1 .�I I i I � tJl N 1 U1 N �+1 N N1 tl ! 1A 0D O � .i 1 N .d ri W .L� W N �r C � � � � � a � � � � V�C N • s eo an so s a. i-I n I I 1 1 I I 1 I r7 C� irf .i I I en .-� 1 .�I cV 1 1 .r p� itl 1 I 1 t 1 ao , u H � a a a G r s s w r s w sr s e a o ►, a � u, �n ao N a r ev �o �n i � i d o� ov ev w w w s r r y r�a u� N er .� i i � M �.i I •�I � �f .i •i .i I 1 � � 14 �0 '� � . N tlP A� �i� � � "1 ' 10 y bl o � i i � v � i i 1 oi� � • H a o� � i � � � � � � m ^� n ~ro e. . eo a. a� ev �G N 'J f!1 �! r0 f: �'1 I N u'1 M I I r�1 I I 1 �fl � � �� 1 I I I 1 1 � a a ' W I M W N A CI s av ao en sr s > r] E O ��p nf .� M M m � i N � �• i � O �y I ro w s sa er an �C i� Sy n i � � � i � W' t!! N N N Pf N /�'1 N I 1 I 1 �f.] E � .� V� rl .-1 1 t I I �M � � �E H 4 a ' 3 � ,kN �� w r�i X U b+ C '0 �N 9�1 .7 m �E � un1 E U .-pi b+ � ~ � O at a�i �p q GI A N� O �� a O C � 3 al .0 R ►+ �0 ..� .a .0 m �� a0 �l \ O � N N O� U ?G �tl .�I N N JJ .�I L \ O� O� N .0 41 YI !T b� H C R W GI fZ OG U 04 N +1 U C C 1i lT N W C 4 c c -" -" m a .e �o e a ap°a� x ..�i e ,e u a°'r ..'�i n� �.�i m s �o+ e c � a wz° 88 � $ aa� u � �� a asc"'na > v'imw" v� tix' a�'a ' O �-1 N � � rl OP � �OI 1 1 I .-1 �1 T7I M ov en aW W� aa da en an ea N C, I I I .-1 1 M L'„ 1 1 N I ,.� ,..� ,..r 1 rn u1 ,,,,� N v1 �D 1 N N M N f 1 I � � N a" � � a o � � ' %o �•.�I � i � V N a e� e. s �n � �. � �. w d �. ar m ro � i i o .� � v .i i m i i i ni �n rn .� o n rn i f/l� I I m 1 I I r/ .1 1 , Cy .� 1� C. V� aa dv ao ae s en en ev ep ep da f+CI 'r .r .� � � R! cV 1 I-1 rl �-V N n '-I I .� 1 I � I I N .-1 1 1 p N �'I N 1 "'� 1 I 1 1 1 1 O b ro p � ro u a sv. a '� a a c �+ . � n� cl . �7 �•�+I �+ i •r i i N y .� ar • w m ao ea s sr r so a� �C Ul� 1 1 1 U N� �-I �!1 N � � a0 N m n r'1 .�1 I I 1 1 1 � I 1 1 I I a � a °i g r� , �-zi 'r I c I i p i i i a. ar s • • s a t� N U' M CI M 1 � N � m �1 N I I 1 1 1 1 N 8 ro �C a w x � M y M A R�i N G a0 N j I 1 * ' s r �r s �r • ar • Z �I M � y�I ' aD 1'1 n NO � u1 �n N 1 i i i 1 i N O � b� M 1 D .� O m \ �t a� m a i i �t C C m .i N m a0 M .� m s+ p O m .+!,C .+�! � f� �) O N 4 �.�i � .�C b 3 m O O +�+ �0 U W p 'C q a0 A 7 �C O d.� .eC .�Y M ai G rJ 1� D, N +� 3 N m U O N W\ O .1 c Q 4L w w ,r 3 M�+ +� A q O ' o N W a c� a \�� pZ a ro .� fa w a� N W U�o a �.+e '� o �u �aA+ 'O�. 3 W a Z al m 01 N a� tT N Y O tll C O�G a .b .� 41 01 m 1r O ti 3a CI U d! A Sa O� lT � a uo z ti"� a a � � a m � c''i ia ° a"� a a a�' u �°i �z a° � S' a °' �'� �� a 'E4 � 1 ' a d m � . O � N Ih 1� `C) C d'O f.' L.0 y 'O .-1 O � tT � �O N v,�C w •.� N N N O �1 U C b N C S� ai•�1 � r,7 O �tl �l N?C 0 W d itl •.i O ?i ev Y � i0 'q H� , •�+.1 Cr t v•� � - � 41 >. 4 A N ro ro .� R N O� � v ro�+ u.�+ o,+ o� .-� m ro u m o a a >,�w v� a ro•a a a,.� � a� m c N p1 O E�v u o o • N.c x � w w m•.� o a ro o m • ro vo a ro •-�•.� ar O .0 N Cl T N • •.1 •./ 71 .C.11 C N N•.i • Ol N ++ 1� • VI i+ 4 Ul 7 N 'O b t N . N T7 ii O 3� O+ C a+ U1 N 4 C 11 N �tl C N O C O C • N yJ yr a .p � b p�y [ O•.1 G1 d Cl N U > O•�+ G +� 0.L O••i +i �+ C tT N O 'O N N N•.1 W'O N v W 6 O�� 1+•� +� �a•� a+�•�� •� 4 N G) C O f1 Cl ai N �.+C m C.0 L � 'U+��1.0 N N.�b+ U O O'O••1 Id N i� 7 H 1� W O�� d M G G N td 7 .N•.1 O) N U 7+ 1� W G l. N • ro a � ��d 11 U •�I 1� 11 m•.i O C.i•.1 � I.i rtf 1� C U O L T Y1 41 U••� Ul N S� W Ul E N N.0 N p N+�+� Cw•a • v ro b p,0 C �0 ••+ N U G H�O > 8 U N� O b U s+ cl ^ ?� >,O m.a.� �w N N C •� N Gl 'C7 a� 4 m a+�O N ro� O •�i 7 m N s. �o N s� 4•�•�•.+ a w m C N: 'C.0 ta C C N ro ro v � ,a o d u '0 0l.i 3� 'O O }+ O O+�y U.i O•� O 4+ N+i af •�+ O•�+ > O tr+S+ U A q �.A N � e u v N +� ++ ro m ro ro a+ •-� b+ ro p u s� c s� o •.+ s+ a •-+ ►+ 3 ++ � � �a�w > > Ol y w•.Ei N N G.0�.i W O O H N a > N J� S C L4 N L i� Gl 11 �0 oc ��+ s� u s� s.�rC O N+� � S+ [a NE % •�+ RC roro y O rofjv++ 0 0 -ro al v t+ o u rtt E ro E � �n O) w b+o N +i.0 c >� ; H N �, �, m v, o w �a w a H,�v �•� 0 6 a+ a o++ w o a�,-+ � C C U N'O N O tn O N +�.� � A b+ N U G 4 'O 71 W S+ N p�+� O O C v .0 t� i0 N C /tl G1 O G ro ro 1q •1 O •'1 W O N � o c�� o o,c o ox .� �� v � x s�-.+ 3 e � �'.x o�o ro a++x•.+ w ro•., 7 c,m�•.� rn o N � o >. ro a�, ro v x s,�o o ro � v, a� �o•a m .� m c • v�o ro s� N .a w � N d ro y d o w.-�a+ �n 3��+ c c.c v a� ro•.+ N .-+ d o w o ro w a o � a v, ro .-� m m a� o s� c� ro �o u � u 3+� w +� ++ s� o �+ cu v•.� •.� o ro s+ a w o ar o •ar a L m rro � v �+ v ro ro ro .ci++ x N v .�.e d �n o .e.it 6 ,� m s� � o o ��.� u.o u, .� > .a d > �+ ro b s, x E �a+ w E d a+ oa+ •-� � o oro �nem v•.� � � ov ro �+ N •� m rowrov 000ar a v > NmmN Nwv �+� .cs� .c �, �+ v wo as,-�.r t.n .a waw.c �.� s+ u 3 cn C +�++ y ?�.0+� N 7 N O O N a� A .Y A +� O 4 O++ +� N+� �L Ol N O la N ro ro C.SG S-i 1� C U C N N �O Ul O G7 11 H O N •.1 � U O O N t t L b rt� C! O b N��w v U O an ul N N W.0 s+ C O b Sa O d► N ae N � u+G 7 +�+ E w� 3 0. 3 u.-� 9 3 O C7 O U �o ro.� R1 O+� W O w O�p, � .1 A v �a � � � 1 I I I I I 1 b� +� >. C •^1 J..� f� •.I � •� N� O � > ro C� l/ f.1 ?�N l.�1 U O O .0•.� 3a 3a '�++� 3+� O O U R1 W W ' G W C C �-Ei G O �n 07 Oar 1/1•'1 N 1� N�.i �d+� R! N N �C �11 d m w ro o a�•-� a v� x a � �+ > i • N 41- N ?� 'D O N � ` N ?� '� N y 4 , [ �,.i y �O N N C�� :il G 41 N Ul 7 .-/ UJ UJ > {1 O u7 in -� i0 O O N t t N N 11 �',� 4 ?� �^I O'O �.a�.+ 7 G �U •-1.1 •.1�►E 3 H� S+ �Q N � N w a� N N -> > �^� m �> 'L7 O U'b �. C N.=C rt m E t H G ai �0 ro w a • • o u•-� ++ a� v a � �.x �+ E W ai •a •A ul c N •� 4 y C O•� � cn tn CL b�o E �+ ro; � OJ �+1�'O ^y� 41 t0'O 7 S� 1. +� E v� 7 C cn G /� O �-7�. X O� N 4 • l+O N l�� fA O 7 7 �.1 r0 �tl N�•�'O L �.! n M11 W 1� O O Gl O � 7 �+N S-1.0 O .1-i Ul W N • UI fJ ll > N �tl C a G U W O 1� L 4 N O .0 �-i LI,-• l� � �.1 N O � •"� .,,� . y .. q�n S� H O 1� • �+� t >.G O na C �4 s� E U--,.1 N H v m�� i ro ro,� ro E �.� N rn a� ,�� ,� >,�a ro ro v v �,.� O uf.-� C u i o N a ra • m o �� o��+��+�n •.� �,vi � cn.. t w � ro o �ou,�.c v > v a •-+u c � o s �-- �n .orn �n� �c v s � • .c+� o o•i ro-- �o �+x > ro N •.+ �., E �+.. c o > .� a+ o .c .c a� v ro�c r.c >, cn> v >��+�o a�M -� u .� m r� u y a E 3 t+ w w.-� i w r.+ � • �cf c c s+ c a m .i .+ .� roro ., owgro oa N o �+ vu+ a•-� vo oaro � �ou �om3v roNBN ov.� o �, >y �oyx� o a� cv �, 6 o d m 4 >w o m u, u.c �.w v •.+ o ��+ m ro N w c v., .c m a�+ O O G O 3 iC �a w N.ti S+ F E +i b+ +i•a >.N,� t rn x ao a� N•.� m 4 ta •.i Y� N S-i W .G �tl 7 N 0 �•� ?�C �d 4•.i d ro+�-- ro v O N > r W A T••r N s+ H N a.i D • O.G 4 N rtf O .+ O+ O >�-+X C �� N O N�•� � � v E >,C ro �o�o •.+o .t ai w o+�.r m C +� o ro ro a c -- �� N ,., r �O� O G t+a+ C 4 sa o E ��,N w��+ ro N .i ro o w - u .a a�a+ o o m y >.d o w • +� s, •++ ro 4 x > w a, �, •�+ o �. >,N�w ro � � ,�w c �.,+w �o�n � o a� a m o m N � v .� a� � Nu ,-, ro oo, � aa+ d�c1 a o ro o x v�++ w row ro v 3��s o v ro wa u �u+�o ,� N �d N N•.i C.i.� N C 9'O •� �n•.� a� UI ul CL m 1.i+� +�•-�++ v b N a+ N O � 4 Cl N .0 ••1 b O N G > N I > id l-� ?� N G'a O N•� 4� S� U m ?��O O a� N n S �tl Ol U E 7 C O !� �V N E rl b N �O b +� C O Ul�n O >� O � N a./ C fi > Nn a� rtf O w u C ro N �d� v u i+ m�.� u >,roy ++ o ci. v >, v�.. ro d � 1� L .�i.i /A J� G) 'O N 4) 4 O t N .0 CT W N U Ol E N E N C'•�A F1 � .-1 I� y d �N N L N G)O Ul •.i 7I iJ > Cl N O C N �•.1 dV �,n \ fA B'O 01•.i �+LI N Gl C JJ 1�.1C •• Gl C) N G! 1� 3 '�1� fA 1/ Ol E C a� �'J N C w L J.,�O C vi �d G > �3 O •� � O N w b c� ,C.0 S t+ .0.0 W C b O �s rtl O 7 s+.0 O w b U��+ ,..� s� mro f� mqw N EUGLrttr+.a E++ Nro F�u+ Hs+ � NE' U V ro�+HUO <^. ro� N \ N 7••� �+ N i� ?� ` Ol tll W.-. .i f� .�1 C W ?� �+O'O N I � 1 I I I I � � N � 7� 'O C fL.Y � cn > w m A X �0 >.N 4+ a � � .c s�. a�i y� 3 � �+ C w C •�+ V1 —� N b N 3 N.0 • E y O � a�'O � N G1 C 7 ii N C1 U] C i� •.i N � �L N VI • C U � Cl N � r�i 01 W 1! W f.I 1� fl. a � N •a m y ?� u O •�+ O O �'^� a a wC 1+ 0 CyN� i0 b L .0 m CL 6U 4: �0 C/ O1 w 01 tll U.X 4 � N 11 W O! N ••1 � ti � x •.� v v •.� ro rn �a a e ..�i u z �I� e�+ vrov v c s� a a e o ro ro � o �v c� a c 3 v N d m O w d u ro � U � mU) Z,� 3 ro.•�-- C7 4 G .7 Gc7 SE �a E6 ' � M M N ' M M M M N w / • • r M w w M O �D �! O O �O V O 4p rI w tlr • r I q ♦ N �-1 N O q � U1 O 01 �(1 W m M. r-I N �t� . ni CI 'i 6 .� .� v .� 4 � � � i ' � t! h V.�+f O�I �+f � �'1 O I e+1 N N �"f N .1 ..-1 O� N � �f1 O� Mi N M O� OO 00 • M N OP tlP � 1-1 N O� Cp O N O N O1 � O N N N N O ! V1 O O1 y � y � A,' t"1 U1 e+1 M N rl K'� iC � .� �o .-� � A a 7 u, v n o� �n y �, r, .v, U] f/1 N N r-1 �) m Vl V d I CD N M M ' W eP tlD M A� A� M • �o ro m u� ..� �o o ro a� ..� I o v y N N N N O y � �fl O N ao an a+ en s sr O t� .� � .1 2 � r-i N V� .-i M •�i E iQ 1 G 7 � 7 �o cr t� v� a� 7 rf �o I a � Z� fA O M e+1 t+1 N t+1 � W �O �O � N U W a a w ° v" a a� � a �°, 'o z " � o b a�i V � + v�i �; .�-� ro a m a'[+ d D. � +� x x w a� � i i ro � a a .� rn a w m ar ' c7 o in o v ri ,� o O y 7 N W m a! a a � �+ N ., .+ oa � z ti ti �a v� E a a � � m .. ., ., H M N � 1-1 M M F-1 Fi M m ro ro v eo w ov s a a. N e. w s w N s > eo ao w e. � Q � � O� � N N 1 I I a n � N N I 1 I S.I .-1 M M W 1 N I �(1 1 , 0. � y � V1 fA N N M N � i-1 � M M � N C Gl N C y.� yv sY av s� er • dr aD M O LI d► M • • M aiC M 1{ 01 M • • A O N A � O �d �O N O� N �O rl �O rl 1(1 A'i � rl 01 10 �O r� N A'i IA CD CD 1�1 'i rl N O 1 r1 N �-1 O I a' N .�1 I rl v1 .� a�,+ tA Gf V�1 f 1 N '�. £ "' v � � a a aN a ►� N ro m ro a s w v m m U N a► M M dV M !r • M 0► S.1 M M M M a1/ W 00 M • M • M M � /C �C �O V� V O� CD C1 V rl �f1 Q'. m N OD Y Y1 N N V N �O N rl 11 I �"� � Q: .0 N .d .-1 r-1 � P'1 Nf .�1 �I N •- N O N E N W f/1 � E S � W a0 � ~f!� � � y s� Cy G � .�I W' W � o w m �O a .°+ ii � e v+ o �n o �n o � m '� �n o u► o � s+ a L m m ++ +�+ a�i a �" W �.f O .d N N �"f f'1 V t E m 1� O .-1 N N P'1 + �y C ,!L O Ng J� L' ',a � z EI fi .r � � � � i � tn .�I O .a I � � � D � O .k � id U � A 7 M -.i 1 .d �O .�1 �O .d �D .�1 M .� 1 .-1 b .-1 �O O O �0 X H �n v .� .� N N in M + G x �n �o .� .-� a a r� U U O s! a: ul 3 U O wi r �n � ..� ..1 .�1 ES ' ' a � ' „ u,.� �� o � F o a c �•�i� o smi� a[i�.�i H �+y e•.� Y m ro � ,� N a� w �tl ��.�i x 47 H .� 6 N 7 B •�s� U•� A W N N ti .-� A H.�1 N.0 tl! i0 01. +� A •.1 D 1� 1a .i N N O.i N'O-• tll � N C�r .? N ro ar w o++� .-1 w W N G N •.1 w .�i > N t0•.� C.�1 �A GI �0 s��-+ H o u a+t 3�+ >.� o v c.o, o a++ a o ro ro N g o 7 �e u ar a • � N 3 W N b+ C m R 0 ai•.i Gl •.i �•.a•.� v 3� 7 ?i •.� 0 N .0 -. U �tl �0 �t••� tl1 N•.1•.1 4 d•.i U N LL•'1 U �N C L u1 aJ .-1�O 1� U H r/a� N.14 C N CI m C .0 �0'0 C.0 01 LL b�f�•.a N 'O m +� -•� "�i..�b N C � N p U W� �0 O 1+ H G O >, rt+�+i > ro O+�4+ �A O N O� 7 U 4 �o � a >,o•�+ •� ro a> > u o •.+ a+ai E �. b' Tl y � N w o m o o d �o f+ l+ 3 1+ 1+ C ro �a ?� �ri u G C C s �i+ m .� w roc e v �,�+ o oum vwa+� N,��vo, o •-� v m�ero ,+ ,+ av � ov v•.+ •.� • N .a u tT�.+^0 w ro A u C •�+ v-^+ 3 > m G.0 a �0 A.0 >,� .0 � L H N� C N G1 �tl C M N N N �V 7 rl U JJ •.i L . aT �tl L A C1 ++ ,q n N 1� M N ea fr A O O�ai� ro R N m N••i 1a U N••�•�•'1 a�+ •�+ •��.y N i� O O y C N .-�W �+ E �"��-+ x ro y o+�'O a N N t+ N+i ro�+ N U U a� w v vvu x•.+ cro �cTw � �w �+ x m r, m�.�+ ro � au � omE ° s.�+ >.m a� a� v w u v o .e+� o. a ro a� w �, •.� a d �o ybm > ro �a�o s. rn �. c ma • a s+�+ .a �s,+ dro m m e ro u, r s, w •a..�•.+ w a e a •.+ �n v t ��+v a+ ar H-•r w•�+ m•� m d •.+ •w ar a� a� a+� �C a u �L•� ro o N t m,G b+ Gl C �r 3+►i �O 3 > m 1�.-i N D D rr N .0 4 >u � Cl N N O a�.r W•-� O�N ++-� >,+� N N ro E •� E�S++�•� �-+A U b•� 7 � LL�+ +� C ui N 3 N L a N tl1 b p t +�••+'O t ro O� N U++�-1 .1 � � u+ C �.+ m�.� G N C�Y % N 8 �+ �� U 4 N b�N ?� N U �W A b'O E O •� �o u �-� o a� a�•.+ v s+a+ b O++ ro > o a s+ s+ .a ro •�+ oww�o a c c 3 c 8 c .i�w a 3 c m o o ro�•.+ •�++� c.++ •.+a ro ro a v o b �o++•-� �0 C N N • O N 1�1� G)w C .t � N L N N i0 Y e C ?�N O � •� H Ol ,C O N N y C m N C .-1 O lT•.a Ol U p d.G .-� C•.� b+••� O! N E.0 N tT N Cl N N 1�.a N u m'O 1+ F+ E �11 GI N d O N C a�a� �0 E S�.0 �•.�1 S� C t0 > N O U > W a7 �.N•a ..,,, s c v v--c b s+•.+ �,ro m•.+ o b a a •.� e u �n u m s+ s+ N ro .c a c roo ms� o ,+� o��+ wya+ d+� � o cb++ �, �n rn � a d � row mu •.+ � �-1 ' �J C •.i< �.N•.i N•.1 1r•.1 •.i •.1 C, N�1.� R7 N Gl b+GI N 01 tll N N 41 •.1 O'0 J".. ai O+�-+.0 O �-tn N N O fa W ro U W TJ �V O O•� C•�+.0 O G L N C .X .G N O+ W ar Cl vl C N 0�U '6 G! l� N W O 3+ .0 C 6 U� > �tl J�1� 'n iJ o ro ti r+ tll M 1J q', H Ol 7•.i .0 O '•i �.1 N N N i0 •n O Cl N L•.i W •.1 •.1 1�.0 LI �tl C �I Z•.� � 1� E Y �0 t 0 J�11 �A Gl �O w .0 sJ N N Y tT'.� N 'b N i� O Gl W �11•.i 1-1 L rl t+ N - ro C w C t E N +� C 1+ N . � U C•�•� • C �0 d1 +i • m �+b N b�N rt s+ ro� .a N O ro�H H N O•� N b+N • � •ti ai rr q N W r� p W .� W Tl b N Tf > C t �.Q G Ol'O 6 M11 J.� Gl w'O w.0 f� C t O X U b�N � N L M N .0 rl C N N 11 N•.1 � �.��+ u N i+ c l+ U �0.0 O c E o •�+� O ro U �0 C�-1 tT•-� C N N r+ N a� ro ai 1.� ro �.-1 C 0! C U'O O 47 N'^� • N+� O N J� �l N C •-� �'1 C J� O U A L H N U rt 01 m N fr�.+ N��+ 'p a.9 U N Y N .0 �.U •� .0 O G C�G N•� G W••i a� b�+ @ Cl O W C >er vN o aa mwFa >,wrn�o uNro • N wa+ vu o•.�r+ maew N�owar o a fL Aros+r+ .. a� Emxv om �•�sro c rov.aa•.+ t•.�tw •.. mrow•.� � varowwu dax �.eyn u 3 - ., a� ,. x s+ c u, a a�o �o w w a•.� > H a++ w a a t a aa ir a•.�w a o w c�•.+ w �n,+ m�- � � � i � i i i i i i , e r U � I ,a.� .-�i ro N C a N� b� , � .I � ayi 4U) 9 S/ UI icL '� a'y � o a�i u � rnN °> •�a H �a£ w E � � L m � a�+ 'J T7 tn N 1� C A1 Cl C W 'O C �.1 l.� N Gl dl N �•.i Ul �T •r-1 I-1 N O 'O M{� Ol O N i� C ?C J.� •.1�.r N N 'O M O N �1 N • •� GI ,�i� ro ro !r i0 C � �n C Cl en Gl �tl J� Gl ttl l�h-1 N�-1.�1 N Gl N t Q1 I.i O@ N 4 f0 U.-1 1] i-1 itl � N m i0 M itl•.i d 3 N't7 11 i� U Gl U E E al rn+�.rn E • N N 7.H .-� N U O O �•�� A C > +�+ @ O u1 s+ W 71 X N • s+ M N N�a M i0 W,G'O N ro N O O'Ct N O 1+ 7 o a �E N �x ro Ow+ �. u �w LL W C N 8 U NZ u w f+ '0 O�N N rl O t+ N �N Y O G! �O ++N �-+ C tT L LL C N � N U �0 41 iJ 4 iJ M�! N•.i 1� I-i N ! N O C �-+ ro C b O •^� a U N eo 6 N N •� U N C.-1 tT .G O� N o1.-i M G O ., -� ycm m m �+ u�v•a dro .c� vroNd ar +� o rEara e , wvw ,c w a� �Ca�os. 3v ++tu robw w �vwo v E � o a a v++ v t .+ a s+ �a+ ro•.+ c � a •�a+ y ro o N N t a� G C a�C 01 s�+ d m i0 ro .i .0 ul.0 ro t u �+ +�., e w a ++ .+ �� s+ m o w a w v ro ro �,.+ w ro fa O•'1 3 C +� s C••� tll C M O 4 1� ?�w e L N N N M N ro C •�+ N•.r N W O N G�.i �O W� ai O C N U O� a� s� • w • C. dn N i� N N L N'0 N G Q W 4) A+� •.i �G l� C N H p.�. N O�N•.i N••i C G C �0 i� 0�tll q ?1 M� m 9.0 N 2 J.i'O C GI 3�-1 � an a��O m N N > W N M1f N N@ �.1.��0 tA M••1 U d w ro a ro �o 71 oD O C ••+ N 'O 'C M N N al 41 41 W A X J tll..i N C�W L1 C N.a O�v C W �tl > pJ,'O Cp pG• �0 N 1+ M D 41 0 8 oC� M O +� �v N 11 C.LI Oi O'O 01 C.U N tll W O O N 01 tll d O�N W rl O C JC W N N~ G N �+W 7�, 7 N ul N C itl••1 �O 4 Y C L N O N•.� t N W 6 N F� N N C W O O O�L W • W 71 F�G G� C!ai U ?�'O N U H .�'•� w v ro U O 3'C �+ C M V N M M•d• a� N 'O J� C.�1 G N M i0 • W > N 4.� C O�••� b� r��.1 W C Sr ,Wq l� C X'O �0 N q O p�W H h�?C C!11 N W O N � aY C �+NO� 41 .C3 � G yR3� q 7w "roro�.�i�a^'iuw +iJ.�1W N•-ro1LQr-rol MU E C N A '�O�•�[�i-.NI��.NCI VN 7 W ro W U W � [ Gl W Y ul� 01 GCl A �-�i'U � W�L N � �n '�.•{ O�� O �dqC �O �.f�i � N �� N�~-1 Na�i C.��iNCIkCNO .�Ca�+L 4� O+�+ V �a v� •�+ d FL w tT b b� M tT � �'CI ►r C!•�+ o f+ tT 41 0! N O ro T•-� •�i C m ai C t t W M W O \41 \m IA tT.-1 O.CI lT�C >•.i•.1 .�1 N W C J.1 T C i0 N � a+ N I O M O ai W .� > .�1 ul N N M� a M O O'O�4++ar N N �0 O••� C C N N •a�O L 4 M C O M W 41 A U 01 O sa.� W O� U D M.0 'O N•.� N b+••� N C 7�•yi a+ �q4q @ 7p � 7o � �C �W MN � 7 V+�iM � 61X 3yib �A A� MO� �C > SO�A1C0 W� KC �L41�.� H+� E�aA�M+�W A E.30� DMSO� 40 N ►vi � 6 ' 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I e�a O �g 4 7 r G w O U CL � M � rn O rn G 0 U a ! a�-,`" o ° a o ° '° m a r c� o 0 E � O+H a �•�i-U A a N N � Jc�.E F � a M E7 � , ' P'1 I 1 I I O o� a .-1 00 aD N �O aV I � olsl 1 1 I I 1-�1 .-1 .-1 .-1 .�1 .-1 1 I I O e��D O N N I 1 O K�1 N N �� Xlev s an an sol an XI a� a°� a � ° N a a . � , , , , � � � � � � � m � � �. i ZI I I 1 I r-1 N r-1 .�1 N N I 1 � z� N N N tlP I I O 1 1 O aP O U1 V' �'1 , f'1 I .d a0 N N N m t�1 N aD .-1 I � "'� � ^� aY 1 �I .i '-1 .� N I pl Qlin rn N rn .�) uf OI N I I 1� N N M .1 I-i O� N • i!1 I rl V' �-1 N � �!1 �"1 O� d' N 1 I I � �I I �-�1 N N N I-1 N M .�1 1 .-I O 1� �O u1 �fl .Z� r-1 N � �i a � ao N o N s� I 1 o O O O wlv ao ao r� o.P .r i i u, �o in rn ao rn �..� �v i i i i o a� a +.� .-� v N ai i � .� .� � .i .i .a i i .� ro c� � b N f.�i ea eo an na ao ea w � fC N v r r r� M w O O! N �"f N '-1 r-/ 01 U1 ' N .d I 1 1� "1 N Of �O 1� Ifl (`1 I 1 N G Z C tA C QI I I N N .-1 N N r-1 1 I 1 1 I �"1 O O O OIO O� O v fY. U� I I � O U E U Z cV �O c � • . H 5, C 4 N • • y �1 a�•.i .0 7 s� N O N >. T7 4 s+l o .a cr o V m �E o .G :+ a � C .-i c a. a � ao rn .-� .� .r .� e� ri v in �c r m rn 'r 2 E v N .0 .0 E O 0 •�+ v • 7 � W O I 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 � t W •� N \ .X" O 1y .� E •� CP O 0 'S 1� OD O� O d N .i N f�1 V' tA t0 t� OD 01 ►7 E fA�-1 '-1 .-1 .-1 N U C7 K �0 1-1 S1 Sa .-1 .�I '-1 W W O b� 3 3 3 N � � � �� N H E � 4 N O O X � �.-�i °,m oroco w'� `� m ,� ° ^ � o•� c� m w ro o w.: E c a a . � 3 u >Y w m N 1� 7 H N ro ro a � uro w„ •.. -v y o w w � mv � � w 7 C Y.A N.X H a1 � 1�+� U � � I I M O O� .-1 r i0 O u7 1 O U1 N G N 3�L f-1 • O �tl C N e0 I I I N '-1 '-1 .�i .-1 .-I I O a.+ s+ N i N � 3 � 7 7 d O O N N �b�O ^� �77 ro u�+ o 0 0 o c m w •.� a�•.+ x e� a c � vmcs� w .eva �n tn � N �a ro w •�+ o v M+ v rn a s+ o � s+ • w d o a ro v m a -rn rn rn m a� ro ro x N�-� s� �-� o � � i Q �u �n e �v .., r, �o � .a t W •.1 N y S� y G 1� .1C .�1 1+ O �' Z I 1 I N N � N N .-1 I rv1 N u �.i A'q A ro O� '�+ m w N sa ro E al- ll .a u N c1 G.a .a �O C Iy N C ro N Cl. � :n G ri t* ul O O O O f+ Y O t1 � ,G�a� 7 C �tl dl U L �tl N O N C �.1 lT N U C � ^p..� •.� �. t� •.d � 7 �tl �.0 C t � C N � �tl N A N �0 L L� ,�,C •.i 1J •,�1 iJ E ro ro � 7 N 1� N f.i �tl a� +� TJ�•i N .G C �' p+ a� s+ N ?�O.0 ro O c ; O N u O E I oa C UI rJ O �C .0 L f. L U >t O O1 i� 4 �. a° .� m d' .-1 �-1 �"� N I� N .-1 1 I O �u .c E u rn o •�+ ro �+ u c t ro �n a � �+ •-� �-+ � .1 .� •� i � o os+ 3 rou, u �, �ocw 4 .+ c � v y ol � T�O �U'C7 I� �1� Gf.�G tn N O N O f. 4 O .0 E N d O N N••1 >,N��i C U al�� N+� � N �O O O� +� O+.X w N >.1 �� G 4�+ •� rJ O +� O .� in �n o o n ,-� o .-r ,� i i r � C U N C� • N i0""� >1� X O �tl �0 J-� 1-� J� Z .� N N N N N r1 N 1 I (� itl C 1A b�UI �'d H Ul N 4 U 1� .,� v 4 .-1 N O1•�i+� �6'O N .-1 7� N i0 m 1' � C X '� Cl .T 1� N 61 .-1 N N 7 N Ul CL N N O ••1 N Iy > tT�0 Y O O tT N O N.y � � a 1� b�rJ O ro >.N U S s+ 0 3 C++ • �O 4 •� y u a a� b > N a� N b E O U N tn Ul M a C ro t+ '� W u� E ro t+ (0.-� N •� N�O >� O ro o N � .-� N L.� N N N.� 'O�w O O G 4 4 a�,C � 'O � N Ul �r.G�ri LL Ol W •.i 4a N O J-� N�•1 L U �p 4 �.� ?�N Ol U O ul C QI 4 n. J� t N '� •� m t ro o� .G o � a� y ro o s+ N [ N 7 w a�..�w 't7 £� F E ro E N 6•� I]. N U rt GL �-+1] t O O > O C �+ O O ( I ea N U L W I �"f m �'1 ul c0 N O I I I 1 O I I I 1 I I I ? �� ; I rl rl .-1 .-1 N � 1 � I 1 � !Y. N t� 4 � � >\ C7 N 4 r N I 7� C O 1 �1 �O W N �O N v I I 1 I �"� lL' tn\ p Z N ,-1 N N r'� .r I I I I �t' !�1 "r� V .� w � a N C � � > � N � C � N 3.1 O r� N r1 Q a � O� .�i �-i r� .� N M d' �A �D f� W .%�G ro a a a O I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I � 1 I w � E 4 S m rn � .ri � � c� � � in �o r N N C '�.' M a a � u 3 .: ' E8 � � ' m � �0 T u1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 N rf t�1 c u1 v N Ul an a► A' er ea en da �-7 1 1 I 1 I ( 1 7 XI �I �-1 I I I �O N e� � V� N ro .-� .o i � � i a � o en av ea w an so en w en ao ae o ca aw w a+ aa ac ea aa ao N r'1 O t(1 a r-1 .� .-1 .i ifl 1 I O m v o in c� � rn r M .1 e� v i i i i i i �n •-� i i O .� .a i .i i i i � I i N � ' �-1 4� �+ O D. � VI �U H � E s: ao ,a ea an en dn ev r � o � � � �, � � � .� .� � , � � U7 N �O I I I I N � C � � ul U uf s�, ao ea oa ao av eo a N y �(7 �f1 .-1 .-1 �O N I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 I I F U1 N Nf '-1 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 � � cA O `t U � fn N N � G H � C1. H .i N H SJ UI �r-1 � �O 41 � v� o v -+ o N c�°i v ro a�i rn .; m w > U > t�i >,-.c �.Ci E N s�i �O � N 3 � O '�O G[7 •� N Y U N Z Sa 7 Sa 0. vl G 'O O 0. N O! C X N L� G U O � 3./ N N W L 5 N a� O n .� Q N S." O cL 3 �� ro 3 >, N W +� O ro ro O �C �-7 '`'�n" � � V N U ro 0� � I � 2 ,� c .� m E E u 3 O N rn .� �-+ � cn rn � o � >+� •-� •�+ o +� ro a N a ro �, � �o „ o e o ro b ro o v d z c �a u �n o �a c w w a ��+ m � a ,� o 0 0 0 o ro v o o u o �.� s, u �n a� a •�+ � v .c .c �+ m N w � L OJ N G N U UI �tl U J.� Ul t Tl .�C .i." �' {n Z N V E C. W "f N i,' N � �+ r, x ,n v o a� a+ o d u ro •.+ ++ $ .. s+ i c7 a a �-�i V N m z u � 3 3 d a c7 3 a � � r �O ao ro w � N a� � I I I I � I I I � � x ro �� ar an er r aa .7I �+ i I i i i I rn r n n aw I v' .� '-1 v I O c I 1 1 I I I 1fl N �O r'1 I O � �I � X N a �o ao m aa s d sr o v 'r .� �n i .� c �n a .� .r s � in � i i z ao v � r1 � O N n � � � � �-1 � � N .� aP aV 00 M •^� N I �D I O� �D .y 1 1 I I si :; I �D 1 rl 1 1 1 � U e^ �d e0 V1 N .d � N P m I c� [ OI r+ o O N Z I �o N � 1 �I � � Y N I oD �O .r N N I � I I I � 7. > i-1 S� � q N W C G� i ea an da ao Z E O � I O� .i .d �O I I 1 1 I o a U ` �o N i i i i i N a L°O I rn � � � •i °o E �, m m °a > I '1 ¢ "o � •� � y 4 a L a, c rn � m N > � ro �.Gi � U Trl Y�f N fV .i fVI 7' , � N UI U 'S." C , � a+ C O f+ � •.+ � N W C � U � V N U 3 T b+ N G N � O � 4 fD N C C ,�C •.d y �-.� �.i Y N 1� aJ 1� •.i +i tA 'O �d A 'O O +� t+ ti+ Z C 7 •�+ •� 3 N X b� �O W O N L U�.1 L Cl �y' N �+ N N N L .-1 O� N 01 � O a�'x � G N S� 7 .�" m Z � y ,> Q � h H N � ++ o � m �o ro w �n a c.4 wF a u � E8 � ' ;, � , Y� �� s N� a� s � o o a N M .��] r1 � � v � � e� � �e N r x I b) a i i i a m .� � N N v .� a � s O s s O s ar eo w aa NI atI N�I N I 1 N 1 I N) N n NI � N N � N � C� 1 1 1 1 E N y M � M y 4 O � O L � � y +i b .i �r m '0 � a a o > „ ,. s s r > > (�y M 00 I M r/ r k7 41 M 0� � r�i V' �T OD N y+ N q � .�i .y �O P1 ; V y N 1� N r-I N �f1 � N C C � C C� � O O � � � U � UI � � � z = o � �+ ,� x � y� E � � � � u�i e��+ ap a , F E N ? � � S M � 0� � N � � � � W � O� aI X p y a�+ �E 7 > .�i w a� �o a � � m �4 s e � � �y U M OG O ,d aCi p U U 4 O� � Gl �,� W a! m LL a1 v W N A O O 01 Co �yN d 0Y1 xN R7' GI • 'O 7 N N (a-� >,� y E�0 U t47 r�+ U t0 H 3 3 6 �t af S N E 0� w Ea" E y � W � p .�I . M ' M . . . r�l "'� � _ r+�`1.� C:iS .�iT�7'".� ....«?�.�� ......r.��Ol ! � �,' ... �._.__� �__.__ �� I SUORREi►S— !q?$ P9�RK STUO�� Y„Y: `'�� // ' \ 1. Lakeside ?avilion � � 2. Picnic Pavilion � '"•.�^d 3. Restr�oms �� 4. Ha:� �aterfalls �_ �OLF , �'�, 5. Gates ajar y� "�.:a:+"CL�D H4USE � '• 6. Schiffaan fourtair. � "� � � � ,� / � \� 7. �danheincr itai:u.,ar.� �:, , �.='�� l L�goon `�,� E. Schiller t•lonument _,� ,'�d� �� 9. Lil ond ��l ��n•- � -�` � {t 10. N�on�ey Island -.., l�s'�A 7 0�y� � �j 1 vil n 11. Larry ho merker P.l'G'.: 1�,"` `�'� ° � �'- � :2. Picr.ic 4a�nc �00 P i L) ��,{� :N �_�' i3. Baseball field Q 5 � 14. Tennis Courts :�2y �' - � ' : ��. /�� '� '�.' � ; 15. Joyce �tir;cr fir^- ��-` .. . ..��usemen�-�iid�d , ��: �1° •��•� � •1, �� R R ;. ptace -,_llia`�j�`"' • .+PKG " `�' aTi `` �� J..� � ` ,�� 15. Ibsen Statue � �c�wz }/ s• 7 . /"' � � � 11. Food •P ny y� �J � �o� °;� \� ef't�: L K E ,. 0 td `�; -----bicycle path---�- i � \ 4�'� � irac �� . O;;� � � oi., .• � (T) 9U5 STOP: 1 :,�•,�,c.�lL�� .1 � 1, � � Wa fowl ` '\, � . icni Area L� _ 'A �Q 'Park�i �,, '�,'.P Pres ve 1' -� �� 3� 3 .7 ��Office 1 �. �,� '� ''' � ,.r:_..:�...�,a..�:.._.._:../�r,,...\' �J � (i ,/,.+' .� � ;' :nueM:1i �ruS flv^UTE'SA-6,. ��.:,<,,, .�� s ,� ,f ' � . ...y,. •\ � / ��..... "r0 F�`'�rf�j! �� `, ) 4 . ,� ,; � � i . , --�.� . � � P� y ; , \��. .��i�' � 5� 'irnin o s \�'.."' `•�_ � . `\�' ,�1� �� ` �.h � �-�- � / � 0 i rd ''�^.-r...._ti �.��-.r...,t Sanc[uary CouLl l�:yul�' ----"="�i�- �.^�« C�� \ }� •��4 � Ptci•turray A:hietic Field �� ; � Avenu� :Cif1'�� ,i: r.. � � � . � `( t„i:n Pound ��„� ._._.._._._'�1 `" .-- G,.`' '—'�.-'°'-. = h0 tiIK: R!DING ON Z00 WAIYS � -•-- -----�-�'-aeK�p"�0"—"—""—"''�� NO D0�5 CN Z00 GROUNOS � ��•`•_•• � �— 't0 DC35 �R_°£ :N ?IIRK r � � ' STATUES - MONUMENTS - DONATIONS - MEMORIALS A. 1896 Schiffman Fountain Donation/Dr. Rudolph Schiffman ' 6. 1900 Commercial Club Fountain Donation/Commercial Club � C. �901 Shepley Fountain Donation/Louis Shepley D. 1904 Gates Ajar Monument/Designed by Fred Nussbaumer - � Legend says started in T894 E. 1906 Mannheimer Memorial Donation/Memorail Designed by Cass Gilbert � F. 1907 Ibsen Monument Donation/Norwegian Nordcap Lodge Designed by Fjelde a Scandanavian � Sculpturer G. 1907 Schiller Monument Donation/German Societies of St. Paul - � Designed by Carl Marr, Ignatius Tashner H. 1923 Pergola and Granite Frog Donation/From Fred Crosby , I. 1926 Statue "Indian Boy and Donation/Thomas Cochran Jr. His Dog" Designed by Paul Manship � J. 1929 Como Golf Course/lst 9 Donation/Como Men's Golf Assoc. holes Flag Pole and Plaque mark donation � K. 1930's Points of Compass Monument/Designed by George Nason, Supt. of Parks L. 1932 Plaque dedicating Grove Donation/G.A.R. � M. 1932 George Washington Plaque Unknown � N. 1933 Como Gates Monument/Stone from old Court House - Cornerstone from Court House in Gates � �. 1933 Stone Bench Donation/G.A.R. - near lily pond P. 1936 Arboretum/Joyce Kilmer ponation/Joyce Kilmer Post - American Fireplace Legion ' Q. 1937 Midway Gates Monument/Donation - Stone from Crosby Estate ' ,��&�a a� � � � s �. ��'+� ��"#�} �� . ,,. ,:a g n ��. � � ,.e��, a�,; '� P� '� 9s� �� . � � � _ ti se �,�� a� � t ;a .�� • • ' .• � - �� „ � �� °��.� a C s'„„�k ��a � r� ��.�! � d a��t g��,� °;""�� '� aa � e�� e �e� � p.��a e e �� e:� _ � . s�� a ��s�3��;�a��., ��;� � s� s , �,$�� ` i�`,��.g�a��e,,,�ss�,�� se.�... e', � � � �� F� COMO PARK� MASTER PLAN 1 � ' � R. 1940 Larry Ho Monument Memorail � S. 1941 Lange Memorial/Bird Memorial/Plaque designed by Student Sanctuary at Monroe T. 1948 Stone Bench Memorial/Donated by Municipal Hiking � Club in memory of P.F.C. Charles Kuhlman � U. 1958 Carnes Memorail Donation/Memorial Designed by Bernard Edmonds � V. 1958 Crab Apple Plantings Conation/Kiwanis Club W. 1965 Submariners Memorial Memorial/W.W. II Sub Vets � X. 1967 Hamms Waterfall Memorial/Donation Y. 1967 McKnight Gardens Donation/Mr. & Mrs. W. L. McKnight ' � , � ' ' , � �� e�� a � �3� � � � �� • • ' • a�� . � � ��0��' � e$��`�:�0� F 2 COMO PARK MASTER PLAN � 1 . / � � � � � b � � � AGENDA OF THE COUNCIL June 8th� 1981 Albert B. Olson, City Clerk � 7:30 P.M. Council C'hambers I. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 . Heaxing to consider the Como Park Master Plan. Action Taken , . .� ,. . � � -�1 . ,, �. l�.��T'�.� GI7.`Y OF �SAINT PAUL � . OFFICE OF THE MAYOR a ., • � �n�mu , � �u t�n u e � ,�� w 347 CITY HALL SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 dEORGE LATIMER (612) 298-4323 MAYOR May 4, 1981 Mr. Ron Maddox, President Saint Paul City Council 704 City Hall Building Dear Council President Maddox: On March 27, 1981 , the Planning Commission approved the Como Park Master Plan, which established the scope of the renovation r.equired for Como Park. This plan helped to identify the problems of the existing park and will ensure the continued enjoyment of this regional park by the people of our City as well as the Metropolitan Area for years to come. I am writing today to propose adoption of the Como Park Master Plan which details the plans for Como Park and will serve as the guide for the park's rehabilitation. I am hereby transmitting two resolutions which I have prepared for City Council consideration. One resolution is for the approval and adoption of the Como .Park Master Plan. The second resolution authorizes 'the implementation of the proposed roadway changes for a one year monitoring �peri od. Como Park is one of our City's major assets and I urge your favorable action in this matter. Sincerely, �-v��-�.�� George 'Latimer � Mayor cc: City Council Members A1 Olson, City Clerk Thomas J. Kelley ( ,� , , , � l , , May 11, 1981 Albert B. Olson, City Clerk 3� City Hall St. Paul, Minnesota Dear �].: Please be notified that I have called a special meeting of the City Council for Monday, June 8th, 1981 at 7:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers to consider the Como Park Master Plan. ouncil Fresident We, the undersigned Councilmen, do hereby waive written notice requirements for a special meeting of the City Council on Monday, June 8th, 1981 at 7:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, for reasons state a ove. � � ; , . � . • ; . , _ _ - , , . � : . , � ' � �.. - _ . � < - " { � ��,:�� _ rc , ` _ - "�V ? �' � � .f - - . � . � , . ; - _ ` ' . �, � ' ` , �, , , . � � � - �. ; _ . , , '� -- � _ � ,, ; , �Y ?, 1.981 . '' �' ; , . . ; . . , ! l�fr. �amas Kelley - - - " Director of Community Services , ' Sth Flaor, City Hall . :, - ,: , � � Attention; fi+lr. Robert Piram ^`� ' : � . . . . ' I ', � . . . ' - . . . , � . . ' _ . . . . . . ' . �\\ � ' . Desr Sir; , � ' � ' ; � , � _ , The City Council �iLl hold a public hearing on June Sth,, � `� . '� 196i at 7:3� P,M. ir� the City Council Chambers to consider ' � � `r aPprovai of the �Como Park Master P1an as epproved by the - . . . Planning Co�,aission. - ' ,. . • , Very t,ruly youre, , � , . : � , ti `� - � � � i � , % _ Al Olson :,- - �- City L"lerk _ '_ - _ • :;r . � a. . i , AHO=la � ; cc e Meyoz I.�ti�r � . ' � _. , , _,. � ,- Planning Co�oeel�sioa , Xsi.ghborbwc�d coatact; Diatrict 10 _ . ' , - _ - ' , _ \ - � _ , • � � � %, - . . . , , - � , , _ . , ., � . : ' � , ' - � ` � : � _ , �=; ' , . , -� � _�� , � f ,>• � ' � �-� � �,� '.�` � � i ! f ' The Como Park Master P1an has been approved and transmitted by the Mayor and Planning Commission to the City Council. TY�e matter will be formally before the City Council on Tuesday. I intend to have the master plan referred to the City Development Committee at that time, however, due to certain time-line problems and the necessity for a full scale public hearing, I would like to recommend� at this time, that we schedule a public hearing for Monday, June 8, 7: 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers to hear comments and act on the master plan. � -----_..._�._.._�..__...,,�...�.��._.-�...��__._......__,�...,.�.....�___....______ ._..._.__, .�..�....:,.� ._ _,_ ,�.....�. ...��.__.�.,..._.._.., .�._. - . . , �,, '' , ,� ''`1.� 993 E. Como Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55103 June 8, 1981 Mr. Ron Maddox, Council President and Members of the City Council Re: COMO PARK PLAN Dear Council Members: I urge you to vote favorably on the Como Park Plan on June 8, 1981. I have observed the planning process of the Como Park Committee for the past 22 years and have been a member of the Traffic Subcommittee. This plan, if adopted, will not only enhance the natural beauty and attractiveness of Como Park, but it will also increase the user's enjoyment and most importantly, their safety. Sincerely yours, Edward J. Warn EJW:ag f �r`� '� ' � ' •. �� j �n 'i i...' 1 CHAIRMAN - Finance, Personnel �� o �� and Management � VICE CHAIRMAN - Q� � �r Policy and Planning ' "�' MEMBER- DISTRICT 3 , Law Library BOARD OF RAMSEY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS eoard of Trustees SUITE 316 CITY HALL and COURT HOUSE Arts&Science Phone: 298-4145 Council June 8, 1981 To: Ron Maddox, President, City Council Members of the City Council Dear President Maddox and Honorable Members of the Saint Paul City Council : Due to a previous commitment which I have tried to resolve ever since being in- formed of the hearing on the Como Park Plan, I will not be able to attend the meeting which you have scheduled for 7:30 P.M. tonight, June 8, 1981 , regarding said plan. As a County Commissioner representing all the areas surrounding Como Park, I took it upon myself, as an interested citizen and because of my position, to attend several of the Como Park Planning Commission meetings and all of the ' Traffic Subcorrenittee meetings. I must say that the members of the Como Park Planning Commission are to be congratulated for their diligent work and related good attendance in helping to devise the overall plan. The consultants hired by the City of Saint Paul also should be congratulated for their forthright presentations to the citizens who attended so many meetings in the community. I do have some concerns, however, not only as it related to Como Park Planning, but also the roles the governments must play, especially at the local level because of the cutbacks at the Federal and State levels. The plan calls for expenditures of 172 million dollars of citizens ' tax money be it local , state, or metropolitan funds and does not take into consideration the cost of upgrading and improving our beautiful conservatory which is in vital need of remodeling or the cost of the Como Zoo. As you know, millions have already been spent on Como Zoo and are not included in this plan. The plan does not co- ordinate at all with the impact of Energy Park which is going to generate traffic in and around the Park because of hundreds of new residential units and several businesses. District 46 which is a combination of inembers from Districts 6, 10 and 12 has done a wonderful job as it relates to Energy Park and has, however, on several occasions expressed concern that there is no coordination between their planning and the Como Park Plan. The City has set up another committee for the redesign of Lexington Avenue which is not coordinated with either Energy Park in relationship to District 46, or the Como Park Planning Corrrxnnission. It is because of this fragmentation that it makes it very difficult to know exactly what the impact is going to be in and around Como Park and in the overall impact on the beautiful residential area surrounding the Park. We know from the plan itself that traffic is going to increase on Front and Lex- ington without knowing the impacts of Energy Park. We also know that Lexington south bound in the morning is going to be substantially increased, and East Como O � �y�� • ' ° � ' , . ✓"9 � . � !` i�� ! . � To: Ron Maddox, President City Council Page 2 Members of the City Council June 8, 1981 Boulevard will have a substantial increase in the rush hour evening traffic because of the one way system. The fiscal impact by the redesign of Lexington Avenue is unknown because it includes building a culvert at the lagoon and the redesign of one green and one tee on the golf course. This in itself probably needs a change in the State law which prohibits the taking of green areas for road purposes in Como Park. At the present time a tremendous amount of parking is had on the streets that are in existence, and all such parking will be eliminated 6y concentrating it in areas that are presently green open space. The asphalt in itself I am afraid will change the character of the Park and the relocation of Lexington Avenue I am afraid may inGrease the necessity of more police to patrol the area adjacent to the pavilion because they will not be able to view the parking area as they patrol along Lexington Avenue. Fiscally I am not sure if we are really making the best use of government dollars because the capital outlay with the things that are really needed such as the pavilion at the lake and the conservatory are not included in the overall master plan. I would also just like to point out that the subcommittees have never had an opportunity to review this plan after it was changed from a one way going south on East Como Lake Boulevard to a one way going north on East Como Lake Bouleyard, or the corresponding opposite directions at the south end of the lake. The whole purpose for the subcommittees was to look at what impact the change of traffic would have in that particular neighborhood. The plan itself was delivered only last week on May 30th, and even the Como Park Planning Commission have not reviewed the final document, but the staff of the Corr�nunity Services Department is proceeding with the original time deadline and maybe Council action at this point is somewhat premature. Again, I want to reiterate that the planning process for the most part gives citizens an opportunity to be heard and the staff of the Como Park Planning Commission and the consultants did an excellent job in formulating the overall plan, although I have some difficulty with particular facets of the plan as mentioned above. Very truly yours, �• F , �� John T. Finley Ramsey County Corr�niss oner JTF/fg . '. • -��! G � �, �,� �-`� �� INTERNATIONAL DIAMOND CORPORATION FULL SERVICE IMPORT BROKERS June 3, 1981 Mr. Ron Maddox JuN 5 t1�� 704 City Hall St. Paul, MN 55102 Cpt71VE1F.MAN Dear Mr. Maddox: RON MA�D�X The purpose of this letter is to offer our strong and enthusiastic support for the proposed Como Park plan to be voted on at the June 8, 1981 City Council meeting. As eight year residents of 1281 West Como Blvd. , which is on the lake near the Lexington traffic circle, it has been our horror to witness numerous severe traffic accidents and even deaths in the area in front of our house, as well as around the entire lake. Most have been a direct result of unsafe and irresponsible driving with some even involving pedestrians. We realize it is impossible to eliminate such driving completely, however we feel the present street arrangement actually encourag�es speed, and the proximity of bikers and pedestrians creates a continually dangerous situation. The current proposal appears to deal with this problem in an extremely intelligent and creative manner, which is one of the reasons for our overwhelming support. Additiorially, however, is the positive effect the proposal will have on the entire park. One of the things we enjoy so much about our location is observing the constant activity of families and individuals using and enjoying the area. We feel the plan will greatly enhance and encourage the efficient use of the entire park for everyone, including ourselves. At the same time many of the present annoyances caused by a few inconsiderate people will be significantly reduced or eliminated. It is for these reasons that we respectfully urge you to approve the compl�te Como Park plan in its present form. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, �� he James D. Ehrenkrook family JDE/j j JAMES D. EHRENKROOK, District Manager 121 WEST FRANKLIN AVENUE / MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55404 / 612-874-1625 INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS •SAN AAFAEL,CALIFORNIA Offices in Antwerp,Belgium and Principal U.S. Cities � ' �, ` ., ' � ,�� / �'`'-1 �.. 993 E. Como Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55103 June 8, 1981 Mr. Ron Maddox, Council President and Members of the City Council Re: COMO PARK PLAN Dear Council Members: I urge you to vote favorably on the Como Park Plan on June 8, 1981. I have observed the planning process of the Como Park Committee for the past 212 years and have been a member of the Traffic Subcommittee. This plan, if adopted, will not only enhance the natural beauty and attractiveness of Como Park, but it will also increase the user's enjoyment and most importantly, their safety. Sincerely yours, Edward J. Warn EJW:ag ,��'` , f ,�° , s<. ' � �,, 1 CITY •F S1INT P1UL —�:.s.�a OF�`ICE �F TFIE CITY COIINCIL ■��ee�eaose !��nlOOBi �4 0 RON MADDOX //''�� KARL NEID, JR. Councilman / I �;� Legislative Aide l..Sr% I COMO PARK HEARING �s� June 8, 1981 15 minutes - staff presentation: Bob Bob Broughton .....,._._,__._...__.. ...,,. (Questions f Council sh e held until conclusion of testimon Pr ation shall be comprehensive) 30 minutes - opponents (Bob Modex and Mike Fritz are in opposition but have not called in.) ` �`� 30 minutes - proponents �� f�-?---�"" John Heggarty - Chair of Committee . /� � `��`�/ Terry Huntrod� Keith Wietecki " Dick Miller v Liz Olson V Arlene Schuneman - Como�3ocents / Bernice Flowers Strane � � Jim Ehren-Krook Resident � ` CITY HALL SEVENTH FLOOR � SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/298-4475 �O