Duluth Values Open Space By Glenn Kreag

Northeast Sustainable Development Partnership A Regional Partnership with the University of Minnesota Duluth Values Open Space

Glenn Kreag

University of Minnesota Sea Grant Program

Publication Number: T 14 Date: January 2002 Executive Summary

Communications Coordinator: Marie Zhuikov This report documents how residents perceive the importance of open spaces in Duluth, Minnesota. Editor: Sharon Moen Duluth is known for its extensive open spaces, particularly their natural ambiance and relation to Information Specialist: Debbie Bowen Lake Superior. The type, nature, and quantity of open spaces contribute significantly to the Graphic Designer: Mike Cousino character and quality of a community, a concept captured locally in the community-wide "2001 & Cover Photo: Dave Hansen Beyond" visioning process (completed in 1997) where participants indicated maintaining Duluth as an "urban wilderness" was a priority.

The data in this report are the result of an 8-page, 20-question survey that reached 955 Duluth residents in 2001. The survey was conducted at the request of the Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) Committee, a subcommittee of the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC). The EAC is appointed by the City of Duluth. The University of Minnesota Sea Grant Program designed the survey with assistance and review from the EAC, the NRI Committee, and the Minnesota Center for Survey Research. The project was funded by the City of Duluth and Minnesota Sea Grant through a grant from the Northeast Minnesota Sustainable Development Partnership. Minnesota Sea Grant 2305 East 5th St. Two types of open space were defined: Natural Open Space - places where the native vegetation Duluth, MN 55812-1445 grows without significant alteration and, Developed Open Space - places where land and vegetation Phone: (218) 726-8106 are altered or controlled. There is a margin of error of ±5% on survey results. 399 completed Fax: (218) 726-6556 surveys were collected. Email: [email protected] www.seagrant.umn.edu Abbreviated Results 1. Natural open spaces are valued – seven of the nine statements presented about the value of Minnesota Sea Grant works with people and natural open spaces received almost unanimous support (94-96%). Two statements received communities to help maintain and enhance support of 89% and 88%. All nine statements received over 50% "Strongly Agree" responses. the environment and economies along Lake The statements are: Superior and Minnesota's inland waters by • (96% support) Views overlooking Lake Superior and the St. Louis River are an important identifying needs, funding research, and part of the character of Duluth and must be protected and managed. translating results. We are part of the Na - • (95% support) Duluth’s natural open spaces must be preserved for future generations tional Sea Grant Program, which supports 30 to enjoy. similar programs in coastal states throughout • (95% support) Natural open spaces are an essential element to the aesthetics (beauty) the United States and Puerto Rico. Min - of Duluth. nesota Sea Grant is funded by the National • (95% support) Natural open spaces – forests, meadows, ponds, wetlands, wooded hillsides Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and and creeks – within the city are defining characteristics of Duluth and make it unique. the University of Minnesota. Natural open spaces throughout the city are important to me whether I use them or not. • (95% support) Small natural open spaces in my neighborhood are important to me The University of Minnesota is an equal whether I use them or not. opportunity educator and employer. • (95% support) Natural open spaces throughout the city are important to me whether I use them or not. • (94% support) Native plant communities (forests, meadows, ponds, wetlands) within the city are important to me. • (89% support) It is important to keep existing open space connections and/or make new connections to create public greenbelts (corridors) throughout Duluth. • (88% support) Forest wildlife (deer, fox, bear, moose, forest birds, etc.) within the city is a defining characteristic of Duluth.

1 2. Developed open spaces are valued – the four statements presented Introduction about the value of developed open space received almost unanimous support (93-97%). All four statements received over 50% responses of "Strongly Agree." The statements are: This report is about the perceived importance of open spaces in • (97% support) Developed open spaces must be preserved for Duluth, Minnesota. It is based on a survey conducted in S future generations to enjoy. 2001 at the request of the Natural Resources Inventory (NRI)

• (94% support) Developed open spaces are important for Committee, a subcommittee of the Environmental Advisory u maintaining the natural character of Duluth. Committee (EAC). The EAC is an appointed committee of the • (93% support) Having developed open spaces throughout the City of Duluth. The NRI needed to document Duluth residents’ m city is important to me whether I use them or not. opinions about open space within the city and additional open • (93% support) Having developed open spaces in my space owned by the city outside the city limits. Open spaces

neighborhood is important to me whether I use them or not. are seen as assets and help define the character and quality m of communities. 3. The amount of open space is about right or more is wanted – respondents thought the amount of natural open space (61%) and the Definitions a amount of developed open space (68%) was about right. A sizeable The NRI committee requested that a distinction be made number felt there was not enough natural open space (32%) or between two categories of open space--natural open space and r developed open space (23%). Few felt there was too much natural developed open space. The following definitions were used to

open space (7%) or developed open space (9%). distinguish the two types of open space: y

4. An open space system is desirable – linking existing open spaces Natural Open Space: Places in which the native vegetation is to create better off-road walking and biking access, helping define left alone to grow without significant alteration. Except for trails, overlooks, etc., there is minimal alteration to the neighborhoods, and helping maintain wildlife corridors is supported a (85%, 31% strong support). This concept was opposed by 15% (4% landscape and, generally, no facilities are provided. There is strong opposition). no minimum or maximum size for natural open spaces and ownership may be public or private. Natural open spaces may n 5. Converting open space to developed land would damage Duluth – if also include lands that have been previously used and have some of Duluth’s natural open spaces were converted into residential , been left to revert to native ecosystems. d commercial, or industrial uses, would the city’s image, character, and appeal be changed? Almost two thirds (63%) felt that the appeal Developed Open Space: Places where land and vegetation are and character would be much less than it is now. Another 21% felt it altered and controlled. They may have facilities and structures would be somewhat less than it is now. Of the remaining 16%, the for specific purposes including parks, picnic and beach areas, I appeal and character would be unchanged for 9%, 4% thought the gardens, sports and recreation areas, golf courses, etc. city would be somewhat better than now, and 3% thought it would be n much better than now. Survey The organization, design, and size of the survey sample were t 6. Open space protection and funding favored – Duluthians indicated developed with the coordination of the Minnesota Center for

they are willing to plan for the protection of open space and are willing Survey Research. This report is based on results of 399 completed r to consider strategies for funding needed to protect and maintain surveys, for a final adjusted response rate of 42%.

those spaces. Residents want an open space plan as part of the o Duluth comprehensive plan (88%). They favor the use of conservation Respondents come from all areas of Duluth. An additional 24 easements or transfer of development rights to protect land from surveys were completed by people residing outside Duluth and d development (84%). Respondents (80%) think the city should are not included in this report. Details about the organization redirect current revenues for open space preservation and mainte - and management of the survey can be found in Appendix A. nance. 70% indicated support for initiating a bond referendum to u raise new money for open space purchase or maintenance. However, To check on whether respondents held different opinions than authorizing a property tax increase for purchase and protection of those who did not respond to the questionnaire, a non-response c open space brought a split response (50% opposition, bias check was conducted. Telephone interviews were conducted 49% support). with 81 non-respondents who answered a select subset of t questions from the survey. The results of this survey showed no significant difference between positive responses and negative 7. Public health and safety are the most important government i functions – respondents rated 12 functions of the local government. responses as compared to the original respondents. The results

Fire protection/emergency services received the highest ranking have possible margin of error of ±5% at a 95% o (94%), followed by police protection/public safety (86%); education confidence level. (79%); and water supply, sanitary and storm sewer (70%). Streets n and roads (56%); parks, playgrounds and recreation areas (56%); li - braries (53%); and natural open space preservation (52%) were viewed as moderately important government functions. Economic and business development (44%); social services (41%); public trans portation (40%); and beautification and aesthetic improvements (38%) ranked as less important government functions. 2 Figure 1 Natural Open Space Values Natural Open Spaces - Values of Duluth Residents The EAC and NRI Committee wished to understand how Duluthians value natural Views overlooking Lake Superior and the St. Louis open space. Residents were asked whether River are an important part of the character of 76 76 20 96 Duluth and must be protected and managed they strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree with a series of value statements. Figure 1 shows that nearly Duluth's natural open spaces must be preserved for future generations to enjoy 70 25 95 all respondents value natural open spaces. Notably, the majority of respon - s dents "Strongly Agree" that open space is Natural open spaces are an essential 69 26 95 valuable (53% to 76% depending on element in the aesthetics (beauty) of Duluth i statement). At the opposite extreme, de - pending on the statement, the "Strongly Natural open spaces - forests, meadows, ponds, wetlands, wooded hillsides, s 68 Disagree" response was selected by 1% to and creeks - within the city are defining 27 95 3% of respondents. characteristics of Duluth and make it unique y Natural open spaces thoughout the city are 95 important to me whether I use them or not 67 28 l

Small natural open spaces in my neighborhood a 29 95 are important to me whether I use them or not 66 n Native plant communities (forests, meadows, ponds, wetlands) within the city are important to me 61 33 94 A It is important to keep existing open space connections and/or make new connections to create public greenbelts (corridors) 54 35 89 thoughout Duluth d Forest wildlife (deer, fox, bear, moose, forest birds, etc.) within the city is a defining 53 35 88 characteristic of Duluth n 0 20 40 60 80 100 a Amount of Open Space Percent Agree In Duluth’s comprehensive planning process, the Strongly agree consultant noted that Duluth has approximately three times the open space that most cities of s comparable size have. Therefore, Duluthians were Figure 2 asked whether they thought the amount of open Amount of Open Space in Duluth t space was "Too Much," "About Right," or "Not 80 Enough." Open space was divided into "natural l open space" and "developed open space" 70 68 categories. As shown in Figure 2, about two-thirds 61 About right u of the respondents thought that the amount of 60 Not enough

open space was "About Right" in both categories. t

n 50 Too much e s However, for natural open spaces, one-third felt c

that there was "Not Enough" while few felt there r e

was "Too Much." For developed open space, almost P 40 e 32 a quarter of the respondents felt there was "Not 30 Enough" with about one-tenth responding there was 23 R "Too Much." 20

With the amount of existing open space in Duluth, 10 7 9 the number desiring more open space might be surprising. However, given the strong value placed 0 on open space (Figure 1), it probably reflects the Natural open space Developed open space importance of open space in the lives of many Duluth residents.

3 Results and Analysis ave 96 100 Yes No 95 95 94 94 92 91 90 90 89 89 88 e? u al V 86 85 84 83 82 al 100 93 92 ntly or occasionally use ntly 87 86 84 son er P aces p reque Don't use or want F Rarely or don't use but want to h to Rarely or don't use but want S 9 ve Gi 6 en p ent O es i t Perc i 4 al r 55 al u e r 3 u at ent 50 Q N gu i 45 F Perc of e r gu 40 t ace p i F 18 S 17 16 15 14 F 12 11 11 en 10 27 10 9 8 en oym 6 6 5 5 j 4 Op n E 0 20 40 60 80 14 13 13 al r u t 8 d an 6 6 4 5 5 Na 2 ces from ces 1 1 1 1 try skiing rty values se rcial areas rcial 0 20 40 60 80 other noise U ch i close to nature close to for bikingfor trails Provides shade Provides prope from busy roads busy from ds beauty the to comme reeks d h W ds to surrounding ds to Muffles traffic and Muffles traffic Preserves minimal ponds A d nt areas nt developme ep hills for traveling on foot traveling for A Provides good buffer Provides e Provides a good place Provides Provides a good place Provides Wetlands Provides walking trails Provides city or neighborhoods Provides nature-based Provides St for cross-coun for Shields residen Shields ects ecosystems natural Lets families and kidsLets be the city or neighborhood Attracts wildlife that I like that wildlife Attracts ecreational opportunitiesrecreational Brings the feel of nature to of nature Brings the feel Prot Wooded lands Wooded oks, view areas oks, River shoreline River Makes less crowded the area ivers and c ivers o Lakes and R Lake Superior and tended meadows ntended U Provides educational opportunities educational Provides Overl t. Louis Louis t. S s i o t ot n ot n t or ep r f o l a c i s y h p e h t s y a w o d 7 1 o d aces. sp ve si en ext l l a al r u at n aces sp ed d ad o t l a r u t a n s er h ot of e h t al ur at N e d ovi r p e h t . e c a p s t a h t e er h T aces sp o wh f o ese h t al r u at n o wh aces sp e c n a h n e or f f o en op of e ak m d e t a r en op oy j en h t o b ch i wh n e p o ed at or p cor n i ace sp at h t ese h t t a h t e. u val en op em h t e l eop p ey h t d an . t en m com e r a w a ed at el r cor e l eop p on al r u at n e c n e s e r p s t n e d n o p s e r o) t g n i t a c i d n i al r u at n en op ways of asked se u at h t s e d u l c n i cs, i et h aest of l a r u t a n f o ave h oyment ose h t e h t es i t i al Qu ve i t osi p y l gh i h y l n e e k s e i t i l a u q o t t wan s t n e d n o p s e R aced l p er h ot e wer ve i egat n ue al V s i h T s i , y l h g i h access ses u m o r f Enj % 3 1 al r u at n t or ep r e r a ven E of er b m u n y o j n e d n a t wan of e on e. u val s t en d esi r t ’ on d paces S . ) 1 ave h e d ovi r p es u val , on i eat ecr r d n a e h T . s e c a l p onal and aces sp . s e c a p s t i f e n e b ey h t y l on ect r i d n i way or ( d an f o s e i t i l a u q , n o i t i d d a se was , s e c r u o s e r n a b r u e h t s n a i h t u l u D y e h t n I s t en m com aces sp ve i act es i t i al u q al son er p s er P s t en d on Resp s an i h t u l Du U en op e s u n e p o d an pen O e h T g on r st at h t e r gu i F ( se u . oy j en se u . al m i n i m Results and Analysis saying had wa nt participa te space, Only 84 %, space. the open of value "Strongly open lead ing walkways, levl s and people in open notable. enj oy be facilities Developed Devl Use opinions nent etc. parks, Developed De vel picnic questions th at expected questions noticeable devloped They of Spirit the spaces spaces: spaces of th e resp ectivel y. of and sports areas, they most The who use. open oped oped th e devloped Of par tici pati on for about fac ilitie s Agre" arr ay are and open open or Mountain results the did par tici pati on frequently Th e Enj more to peop le were are id enti fied , facili ties, space. beaches, the nearly participa te about beach es open attract of natural opposition, 12 Open Op en not spaces spaces hi gh or similar oyment other devl oped specific asked to for types As "Agre" open want who all natural To spaces, ex ist Recreation per centage devloped above those wit h or zoos, golf open major compare respondents are Space Sp ace tend and 10 to paralleling do of space. the occasionally only at for uses natural about with managed nat ural developed course, showed 87 % not of open shor elin es interested gar dens 50 % spaces faci lit ies a to facility. others . compo rarely series have and 11% Area of and the wit h open can still , - is Sport fieldsandfacilities Sport Public access for fishing Spirit Mountain ski area ski Mountain Spirit Beaches andshorelinesBeaches m Having developed spaces open thoughout Childr Developed open spaces are important forDeveloped spaces open are important aintaining thenatural ofDuluth character p and boat launching reserved forreserved future generations to enjoy Lake Superior Zoo Superior Lake Having developed spaces open inmy the city is important to mewhether isimportant the city neighborhood is important to me isimportant neighborhood en's pl D Festival areas eveloped spaces open mustbe Golf coursesGolf Picnic areas Walkwa Bikewa whether Iusethemornot Gardens ay ay areas I ys ys use themornot 04 080 60 40 20 0 5 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 3 Devl 3 4 4 11 13 oped 04 08 100 80 60 40 20 0 15 Devl 21 Open 27 27 29 oped 0 S 34 Fi 54 p 38 gure ace 40 Fi 59 Open 41 Perc 64 43 6 gure 44 8 U 6 se 49 ent S 5 53 pace 54 and Percent 57 58 En Val 64 Rarely ordon'tusebutwantRarely to have Freque Don't useorwantDon't joymen 68 ues 71 73 ntly use oroccasionally Agree Strongly agree 78 39 t 34 84 30 87 29 100 93 93 94 97 Results and Analysis 00 1 88 4 8 0 8 0 8 4 rongly 0 oppose Support/Strongly support Oppose/Strongly oppose Oppose/Strongly 7 s od 0 h et M 6 0 9 on ent 5 4 8 11 Perc em yst S 0 e r gu 4 i ect ot r P 0 ace i F p 9 7 S 2 ace p S e r gu rt Oppose St 9 1 0 en Op i F 6 2 1 en p 2 54 an 1 O Suppo g n 0 i eat r C r s e r s o o s ce t on e ht s u rt g plan m ri

u 6 and/o tenan ace nt otecti 31 increa en space r rongly reven servation ement s rend sp y suppo op me St re tax main g ea y

p en cit

and p n ert nt o en space e op stin ace and s 0 op

op an ond refe

lop deve r exi

50 40 30 20 10 60

b f e t n e c r e P curre p s

en sp a o

servati n purcha op ect fer o r s r Create orize c o o f f e purcha maintain s Initiate uth Redir tran U A - - ot n e h t e ar p u S ef r e u val t ou ab r o n i e ar o t gh i h an l p h t wi A or / d an e er h t and % 1 3 e ar ace sp or a d on b h t wi e n i ef d e h t t c e t o r p on i ect ot r p al u eq at h t or f at h t d an asked ace sp a . %) 0 8 ( g n easi cr n I % 4 o t o t t ou ab g; n ki i b . m e syst ee r h t ace sp s t en d on Resp d an ace sp en op ow sh e com s t n e m e s a e s an i h t u l Du eet r st - f of or f e wer n i h t wi es ac sp en op m ace sp . t p e c n o c ea, d i d an se Becau an g n i ect r i ed r y l gh ou r on i at p ci i t ar p s t h g i r on i ect ace. sp g n i d u cl n i s t i ef en b en op s t en d on esp r ked n i l ed t or p p su or f s or d i r cor g n i p el h en op y l on g n i n an l p at h t of g n i at i t i n i e h t e h t a s on i n i op en op d an ot r e yst en op aces. sp an d an h t wi s t l Resu ase ch r u p or f g n ki i h en op P S t or p p su ey h t ce an en t n ai m of ey h t e at l cu r ci asked %) 5 8 ( g n i d ovi r p aces. sp s on i est u q er t et b r ei h t ced i ot n or f et m at t i ab h en op g. n ci an n i f o t e t ea cr e er wh n o i t a v r e s n o c ose p op e: d u cl n i t r o p p u s on i eat cr d an . on i t osi p op es u even r ase ch r u p es cat i d n i , %) 4 8 ( est er t n i eas ar o t . h t u l Du %) 0 7 ( g n i eat cr or f g on r st t n e m p o l e v e d en op o t g n i st exi d an ave h vey r su g, n ki wal e h t axes t er h et wh y t ci d an ace sp f o pace S pace S t or p p su % 5 1 ng g n i s u or f e d ovi r p . on i t osi p op was gh i h ces, r esou r e f i l d l wi or f ace sp ace sp of of e h T o t essed r exp , ed ect ot r p s st exi y l g n o r t s s t i ef en b g n i d ovi r p en op e l i h W pen O Fundi ed ect n con e h T pen O s er n an l P es i t i n u m com ow l al d an en op s l ai r t s; ood h or b gh ei n ese h t g n i n an l p . y t ci em syst e cat i d n i osed p op evel l t can i f i gn si o h w g on r st al ot t of t or p p su n ai t n ai m y t er op r p on i vat eser r p m u d en er en op g n i st exi r e f s n a r t t or p e er h T on i ect ot r p so al g n ci an n i f es: r easu m , ) % 8 8 ( ow h l wel Results and Analysis were damaged respondents remaining important open areas (5 6%); "high" servi ces devlopment rankings (38%). beautification public devlopment be hal f sani tary edu cation pr otecti on/p ubl ic now. city thirds pr otecti on/em ergency consi dered devlopment hi gh, th e Asked fu ncti ons, open for devloping in As Compar Considering Op en Open Gover Duluth, an reduced residential, im port ance would of Another devloped. space space med ium , (55%); in dicat ion (63%) rankings: if transportation resp onden ts par ks, The nmet Sp ace Space and (1 3%). Duluth’ s are if government (7 9%); four resp onden ts ing some be a hi gh open somewhat. presrvation rel ative categories the thought stor m economic portion (14%), (44%); of of libraries 21% much and pl aygroun ds, commercial, or functions of open t respondents large economic pr iori ties proposals of he spaces Fun safet y appeal and t low. and 12 o aesthetic sewr said th e rat ed to les of Duluth's and social I O (40%); space amount fu ncti ons servi ces mportance (53%); Fou r oth er ctions functions. water with and Combined, ther im port ance were the Du lut h’s Duluth's (8 6%); appealing (52%) would had (7 0%). social str ets for and have existing busines fu ncti ons services the and ocurred, or govern ment improvements sup ply , asked said and Dul uth : the of appeal and (9 4%); industrial busines be most as as sugested recr eation open appeal and Just The fewst the natural 84% highly eit her affected than to of open Ap peal (41%); "low" road s would resulting fi re were rat e over nearly space of pol ice of it would use. space is all if be two aesthetic improveme Economic andbusiness 21% Wat Public transportation and r emergency services emergency Natural space open Parks, playgrounds, Fire prot Beautification and Beautification er supply, sanitary and storm sewers St and publicsafety Police prot reets androads ecreation areas Social services Social developme 9% preservation ection and ection Education Libraries D ul ection uth’ 4% nts nt 7 s 04 080 60 40 20 0 A 0 2 ppeal 3% 2 3 3 Importance 4 5 8 (e. 9 9 9 11 g. 13 i 14 f resi d O 19 pen en of ti al, Space 28 Fi G gure comm erci Figu overnment 37 38 is re 40 40 1 41 Perc 42 43 43 0 Con 44 9 al, 46 63% ent in verted 51 52 d F 53 53 u 55 unc ti str ial 56 Duluth's A Duluth's to M U S Much lessthanit is n S u ons omewh omewh se) nchanged uch better thanitisn Devloped 70 at lessth at better thanit is n p 79 peal Would Be: Wouldpeal Medium High L ow 86 Land an itis n ow 94 100 ow ow ow Results and Analysis .2 2 9 2.1 s t 0.7 3.4 3.9 7.6 11.5 5.5 Strongly oppose Strongly Strongly oppose Strongly 4.6 en asem E s t gh ace p S Ri 8.6 on ace p S 13.8 t 1.1 1 14.5 .3 en Op 9 en p 8.6 22.7 O i vat ser 4 en m op 2 3 1 1 1 24.4 on C e r ed op e r ect ot r P 0.5 23.1 h t Devel e r gu 5 42.6 i o t w i F of gu i F 52.8 gu i F 46.2 Devel an 8.8 l 4 41.4 P of ace p a S t n 68.2 er sf an r T en 41.5 38.7 64.1 Op ou m A e eat r C d an bout right enough Not much Too 35.9 35.4 A 59.5 72.3 44.5 38.0 ect ot r Strongly supportStrongly Support Oppose Strongly supportStrongly Support Oppose P 0 0 0

50 40 30 20 10

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 80

50 40 30 20 10 60

t n e c r e P t n e c r e P t n e c r e P 8 y t i c h t Nor ess l et n / k, ar P er h at r k ar P e h t d an k, ar P ween et b 6.8 e h t or n i m f o or f y var , d el f Den 7.6 . ey l al V s, t gh Hei Key y l on y l al er gen on gd on C or r er ot n Key s a e r a s d o o h r o b h g i e n eas ar - b su n ow t Down gan or M West East Central on i t osi p op 6.9 k. ar P " , al r t en C " , wood Ken , y od C of West East Central e ar t i r i p S 9 2 ave h or e h t e, or ef er h T ces en er f f i d oes d ey l or M D, UM / of g, n vi r I d an " , ast E " t n e r e f f i d e, d si l l Hi n gi ar m n col n i L e, d si l l Hi k, ar P s, t gh Hei f i / ace p S ger ar L k ar P t or p p su each 32 s ’ h t u l u D e h T eas ar - b su ces en er f f i d of n i s on i est u q d n E , h t u l Du ast E . on i t osi p op en p ed el ab l 30.4 al r t en C er est L O e h t e h T / e, l l vi h t i m S 1 1 . e c a p s a. at d ew Bayvi er est h C d an ost m of New est W e n i m r e t e d 33.6 / e r s. on i est u q al r u e h t or f y t si en t n i ed d u cl n i o t s, t gh Hei eas r A ub- S n e p o d an gu i ost m key Nat or f eas ar - b su y Gar F h e h t t or p p su e d akesi L o t eas. ar - b su e, d si ver Ri of ut n i at h t t u o b a : s) t en d on esp r ac, L or r er h t u l Du 61.2 ee r h t : s) t en d on esp r : s) t en d on esp r k, ar P s, t gh Hei l al of on i t osi p op ul D d e t c u d n o c u d 62 ow sh l al of s w e i v o t n i own sh l al ween et b t n ou m a, eot On , . st Di se on esp r of ween et b et n %. 0 ±1 A s ood h or b gh ei n s a w of About right enough Not much Too . d an l ood W of s d on F e ar s i n i 59.5 n gi ar m

s er t n Hu d an 7 1 - 1 1 % 0 4 ( s. Bu s t f i sh e h T k, ar P d an ows: l ol f t on m ed i P % 6 2 ( ed p ou gr n i e h t % 4 3 ( t n e r e f f i d

as s i s y l a n a

0

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 t n e c r e d l e h e wer P " . est W " n A ysi nal A ast E e ar , on i d n E al r t en C e, or h S al r t en C , t n oi P est W , t on m r ai F es r gu i F on t Nor s on i at i var eas ar - b su an h t t or p p su y l t can i f i gn si an h t eas ar - b su 0 Results and Analysis

Percent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 togyspotSpotOppose Support Strongly support 33.6 Re 20.6 di 31.5 Presrvati rect Ci ty 48 R 56 on Fi evnu 52.2 gure an d es

Percent 15 Main 10 20 30 40 50 0 to 13.6 8.6 togyspotSpotOppose Support Strongly support tenan Op 22 28.3 12 en 21.4 ce Sp 24 Strongly oppose ace Bond an 4.8 1.4 d Referendu Mai 4.3 42.5 48 Central East 49.3 West nta i Fi 45.8 gure Key 9 n Open m 17

to Percent 10 15 20 25 30 35 8.6 20.5 0 5 P Sp 21.4 urc hase togyspotSpotOppose Support Strongly support ace 25 20.3 14.3 Property Strongly oppose 14.4 4.8 8.7 an 7.9 d 5.2 Tax 34.4 P rotect 34 Figu Increas 29.9 re Op 1 en 6 to 2 S 9.7 pace P 31.3 urchase 33 Strongly oppose 15.6 2 0.4 22.7 APPENDIX A y b t sen o t of e on d e ad m ot n n en Gl asked of on a at d e h t a was y b om r f was vey r su r e d n i m e r g n i t vi n i acy r accu ad h g n i cod each e l i f d an of R S C M e wer d an a d an d e d i v o r p g n i n n a l p y ead r al est et r p d an o t n i a Dat ased b g n i ct u d con y b e l ab n ai st u S 6 1 o wh a at d ch i wh y t i n u m om C om r f e. op vel en vey r su y t i c s a w ack b eag Kr ot n or f y t i al u q y t si ver i Un y l al r u oced r p vey r su ked an h t em syst a at d ed n ai t ob e wer a ay M of even el g n i l ai M . e p o l e v n e e h t ed ct u d con R S C M e h t s on si evi r ad h h t i w , on i ect l col e h t , son m r A of on of was n r u et r n en Gl ) 3 ( ed d ovi r p on e l p sam h t u l Du " y b g n i r su en S S P S a sot e n n i M e wer , d car ost p e, r ai n on i est u q vey r su ey h t a at d s al u d vi i d n i , e r i a n n o i t s e u q . ect oj r p o t n r u t e r or n i m cal i t en d i d car ost p e l t i t an was or f al ot t 6 2 ; 3 1 f i . t or ep r om r f e l b si on esp r . ed t i m i l e h t l al ve i t p i escr d A . an m l l Di e h t s d ar d an st e r i a n n o i t s e u q e l p sam l ai m s i h t a Rossan ed t n i r p e h t d an was e h T ed p am st o t n i o t y l e v i s n e t x e s al u d vi i d n i vey r u S . A f o l i r p A t ou was so al y b e h t er t et l vey" r u S s d ol seh ou h vey r su er d n i em r s i h t ect oj r p east h t Nor d e p m a t s al on i t or op r p ap m on . 0 3 f o a e r i t en t sen a at d on i est u q Don om r f a y p o c a was est gh i h or f , t en m u r st n i e h t e h t ed l l i f g n i l ai m of e h t e l b si on esp r a d e k r o w ace sp cover ed t ver con . am ogr r P y b , on i t i d ad e h t , ed n r u et r ay M ace p S was gy o ol od h et m sed evi r of ) 2 ( , a h t u l Du was g n i ct u d con e h T o wh o t n I I I C S A ed l ai m n o i s r e v was s i h T on t I . 1 0 0 2 y t i n u m om C so al om r f n i e h t R S C M d an vey r su en op ) 1 ( was y ead r al en Op , 5 y d a e r l a aw r , essed r d ad - f sel g n i swer an was ege l ol C ses on esp r t sen y b e et l p com 0 5 2 , 1 d e d u l c n i ace p S e h S e h t t f a r d Surveys g n i l ai m a ed st si con c. n I vey; r su n i t an gr es ocedur r P a gn esi ad h o t , d e s s e r d d a - f l e s t af r d e h t , son m r A of . vey r su t ou ab d a h h t u l Du a was g n i t i wr D gn ) 4 ( a es. cod d n a sed u e h t of , an m f Hof t an Gr se u on en on i at n i d coor d r i h t oyed l p em h t u l Du " e r e h t . p i sh r e n t ar P veys r su ey h t s d ol seh ou h . t en m u r st n i o h w n i e m i t ed et l p com g: n owi l ol f a p zi r ei h t d an d n a d an g n si evi r g n i l ai m or f , 1 0 0 2 esi D , t sor p i Z f i vey r su es ocedur r ea S er b em t ep S age r cou en i ect s. ysi al an or f e l p sam Op 0 5 l e n n A P elephone T e h t a Rossan om r f e wer g n i l ai m en t h g ou r h t , 5 1 g n i l i a m ake t o t ng . m or f o t e wer ol t of onnai or f y ve r u S ge ed owl kn s i h T vey r su om r f , g a e r K C ng er t et l , r e t t e l o t e l p sam and 6 1 i l es r u oced r p st r i f g, n i t i ed d secon on si ver con , est et r p t s r i f a ed n r u et r e n Ju y t y r a u r b e F e h t l al ai om d an r i ampl at i uest 1 - S A D e h T M e h T am ogr r P Q n I . f af st n n e l G t en m op Devel Mail eag Kr est et r p ch r esea r ed d u cl n i on i ect l col ve i at r st i n i m d A , or ect r Di on i at p ci i t ar p 's h t u l Du a esot n n i M ay M veys r su cover e h t o t d an e h T ; t en m u r st n i , ager an M ged an ch o t d an vey" r u S ose wh s al u d vi i d n i at m or f em h t c i h ap gr so. On yet r e v o c e h t A i n ou b A s of e b of r o f o t r i e h t n o i t e h t d an e at r as r o of en op n i d an o t e h t t or ep r d l wou om r f en op u m om C n i e h t h t u l “Du d n a y t i C vey r su vey r su aces, sp gh ou r h t d l ou sh en op h t u l u D ace sp of l wel 6 1 ace: p S y t ci d an l at . s n o i t c n u f d e k s a d an cep h om r f g n i d n u f e h t a y t si ver i Un y b ace sp as l ai m l ai m or f on i at m or f n i m a r g o r p t r o p p u s en op e u val ege l ol C h t u l Du e h t aces sp ses vi ad d an l , e c a p s y b es, ssu i o t e v i s n e h e r p m o c se on esp r a a ay M er h gat ed d en - en op a s t n e m e t a t s en op e r e w d an es yp t f o en Op e h t . y t ci er P of cal i n ech t , ed l t i t en t en m op Devel o t as as al r u Nat d e s u am ogr r P f o en op a ey h t R) S C M ( at d an east h t Nor t an Gr n e p o en op y e h t om r f e h t s ' y t i c ew vi oved em r d e d i v o r p t u l Du e b e er wh e d ovi r p ace sp y t i C l e v e l ace sp g n i d n u f ses; u e h t ed et l p com was l al over t n e m n r e v o g ed d n u f f i t ou b A , y l al r u at n al sever o t n i at h t e h t s ou i var or f o t s e i r e s o t e h t L URA T NA ea S t ou ab e h t o s l a o t a , h t o b ege l ol C o t ee t t i m com e h t r i e h t en op en op was e wer h c i h w er h ot , ch Resear n gai l a c o l s al ci i f of al r u at n , p i h s r e n t r a P y b d an ow gr g n i d n u f ed l cal say ch Resear ch Resear om r f ed ct u d con ed ct u d con aces, sp l l i w vey r u S r o F e l ab n ai st u S ace sp s t en d esi r d an h t i w ace sp t en d esi t ou ab or f o t s i h T o t ed ct u d con r o f t an Gr y t ci t u o b a es i t i al u q ed l i p com t ou ab R was was g n i t a d p u ment e v l e w t al r u at n ch i wh ect oj r p en op , oy j en o t vey r u S ow h ed t or ep r s on i t cep er P ke i l ve i er d a esot n n i M en op d e d n u f en op vey r u S vey r u S est eat gr e h t ea S ed d on esp r e wer f o e on al on Regi ) 2 ( of or f e wer d e k s a e h T , e r u t a l s i g e L on s n o i t p o ey h t or f or f so al ee t t i m com e h t s t en d esi r was ey h t ven gi vey r u S vey r u S n o i t a m r o f n i t ef l . d e l l o r t n o c ce. an en t n ai m s on i est u q t ou ab so al t n e m p o l e v e D y t i n u m om C ed op evel d d l wou ” . t or Rep es r ai n on i est Qu y l t n e r r u c s t en d esi r ect sel er h et wh s i anage M r o e r e w ee. t t i m om C t n e m e e r g a s i d at h t d an e h t ses; u t en d Resi e wer ace l p d an o t e wer d an g n agi an m r o e r a ) 1 ( er t en C er t en C er t ap h C ey h T ey h t on i ect l col y t ci c i f i c e p s a esot n n i M h t u l Du ect oj r p east h t Nor D E OP L E V DE g n i eer st e c n a t r o p m i and y e h t y t si ver i Un ses on esp r h t u l Du oss l l ci n cou e ar a t o s e n n i M of ey h t . 1 0 0 2 er h ot d e r e t l a ed swer an o h w a. esot n n i M e v i f se el t en oym j en aces sp e h t , y l l a n i F cal i n ech T a at d e h T s t l esu r om r f 9 9 3 , vey r u S ace, sp e h t y t i n u m om C y t i n u m om C e h t , 5 s t l esu r e h T y t ci e l b a n i a t s u S y or t ven n I e h t or f o t of on i at veget or e r a t ou ab : t ou ab o wh at h t of y b . h t u l Du w e v i t a l e r , y l l a n i F d an d an e h T y b om r f t n e m e e r g a d an s' zen i t ci en op gn esi D est eat gr a esot n n i M a sot e n n i M a esot n n i M d an e h t on i vat eser r p n i on i at gn esi d en op se u d an e vi f o e h t %. 2 4 h t u l Du goal h t u l Du vey r su . t c e j o r p , s r e n n a l p e u val y t si ver i Un ever at wh e h t s al e h t e h t e h t er udy t an gr y t si ver i Un h t u l Du e h T t S y b o G e h T v O e h T on i at m or f n i y b e h t e h T ace sp a. sot e n n i M s. eed n a esot n n i M d e t a e r c h t u l Du ces r Resou ayor m s i h t y t i c , an l p e h t a s t en d on Resp . p i sh er n t ar P e er wh s on i est u q n o i t a t e g e v l e v e l t ou ab h t u l Du t ou ab ace sp s on i est u q ed op evel d e b ace sp ) 3 ( . h t u l u D n o i t i s o p p o k n a r g n i l ai M er b em t ep S ed n r u et r was y b y t i n u m om C s t l Resu APPENDIX A th is Director Unclear qu alit y tr aini ng Ed iti ng of open -end ed resp onse addres Th ird , ensure coder /edi tor creat e mailings. du al Duluth, Appendix Fi rst, case values. program Copies not ent ry After Dat Ed iti ng Edi Managem Staff Super On M was data onto ai th e July t a yet ph ase. const ruct ed, ing li file a resp onse coding at err ors. all ng Entr with Resul ts resp onse data a vi that of cont rol responded. and and the under 5, seion In labels or for separ ate was to and sion sur veys categor ies Procedures the C Quality y a ambiguous addition, paradoxical evaluate tape resolution. the University of codi ng codi ng resp onse recor ded was and final prepared. Data cover Coding and the and the and and when survey to by were ent completed, to it categor y Cleani ng postcard checks supervision Results clean ing fam ili arize Techni cal survey revi ewd were in clud ed was a open -end ed letters Quality creat ed, each the sin gle-an swer commercial resp onse checkd responses of packets were or In of (cont.) Once exami ned file don e Minnesota inappropriate were case identification addition, and and for was in volved tr anscri bed the was Control the coded /edi ted th e and Repor t). a her self du al of by for postcards Technical made were for complete sent qu estion s to questionnaires were examined comp leti on Glenn a valu e data sytem atical ly variables resp onse "ot her- specif y" Dat resp onse. coder /edi tor resp onse the Sea complete to th e prior wit h of directed entry evryone lab els MCSR Kreag response. verb atim numbers use Grant the a file Report. are sur veys th e were to manually with clar ity firm of of of presnted sealing Mailings asign ed, completed were sur vey and Director to Colleg Secon d, th re a the were revi ewd, who who out-of-range and to comp uter the (se matched. qu estion s. th rough out that to sough t, questionnaire rem ove att ended to envelopes key maj or had MCSR in stru ment . a eli min ate Ap pend ix Program conducted computer the identify in th e or entered the th e task. dat a or four a to to in B A-2 constructed Results printed neighborhod Results All area); Questionnaires Compl For Const residents. A2 . who eli min ated surveys report. RES * A E C West Pretest Not FI TA Eli Un Decasd Su Refu Su Statu N TA rea ast ent ral thre F analysis Th e NAL or EI lived m rveys rveys del B BLE PO a in Q14GRP nei LE sal GHBO ructed s etion iverab D on Nine were ated: and and N overal l gh s u STATU hou of N 3 2 1 A2 n retu SE outside A1 lu bor hod , , , ot eigh b the An fr om thes th 5, 7, 4, seh R by thre Technical Technical TO R le r rn not individuals etu H S A resid codes additional 1 8 6 V back ed mai T TE were ol O combining 0, , , t orh resp onse (years S A ariables atus rn th e 9 1 ODS d returned, n L Duluth, variables ames, s OF 14 , 1, l ed variables en od S 16 of EN samp le 1 , = completed t from TH 17 , 2, I N lived N Report). Report. the 2 se ------T um b Com : C 3, 13 , E declined 24 rat e 1 LU Total but Q13 p DU numeric 2 9, , and cover are 8, ers* p were 4, 15 in for DED surveys lete 2 LUTH "An was these 29 0 , sen Duluth); and the presnted AREA 18 , and th e d alysi s The letter 2 constructed: I _ 1, 50 82 15 54 5 9 39 N t to q N 8 , 42 %. - u remaining u 21 25 from response. C reason s 8 7 9 surveys mb returned elimi estion EA were participate other of OM , 0 was (se er D 2 C and ul 5 n H M the n , uth completed ated in constructed two aires U 2 AREA Appendix _ 1 4 7 1 4 3 P are 6, li sted Q15GRP NIT Y Appendix 0% 1% Su map 01% % % 3% 4% 2% ercen by 295 AREA and b-A reas" variables not = in 399 that SU t bel ow 27 the households 4 included 2% by (georaphic RVE Y Duluth (year C survey, A had using individuals of were of in the ben born). the Table in the 547 were this APPENDIX A 2.1 ore 7.3 30 m 28 14.6 $100,000 or 26 5.3 26.7 3.3 23.2 21 99,999 ast 8.9 $ West E Central $80,000 to h t 10.5 s t en d 15 u l 7.9 to 40to 41 or more to 1955to 1940 or earlier ges 79,999 22.1 $ 22.1 27.3 20.3 A $60,000 to Du 3 5 A n A i 4 on Resp e com n I e r Number of respondents 6 A A 25.3 4.6 of Birth year s’ t en d y l 1 ved e r gu 6 59,999 26 to 24to 25 $ i L gu i F to 1965to 1941 $40,000 to i F 25.4 22.9 e r gu e r gu 4 10 i am F i F i F evel L 1956 on Resp 28.4 s ear Y 0 5 10 15 20 25 37.1 ater al ot T $39,999 17.1 ree $20,000 to on i cat to 10 to 25.7 Other 26.5 0 Degree Degree Degree te or GED te 1966 or l 28.4 u d E 29.8 13 College College $20,000 Less than Less fessional Deg fessional Gradua 0 5 5 0

5 0

30 25 20 1 1

30 25 20 15 10 t n e c r e P t n e c r e P Pro HS Less than HS Less 5 0

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 t n e c r e P Grad of Grad Two-yr or Tech. School Tech. or Two-yr 3 - A Post 43 of 40 38 ow el b e r gu i F y t ci n i , h t u l Du g n i p ou gr ee r h t e h t n ow sh c i h ap geogr n i age e h t s i own sh 27 s t ved i l or f s i 26 s t en 24 24 t ou h g ou r h t s year 21 d on en d on ) est W 26% 20 s t en d on esp r West West e com n i ribution by Neighborhoodribution by s’ t en d on esp r d an d an 1 A 17 ood h or b gh ei n 6 Resp Resp Dist 1 ow sh 15 Number of Respondents 14 of 2 A 13 age aver . y vel i ect esp r ) est W e r gu 3 A 12 ows sh 11 11 e r i F 10 y l al on i t or op r p of 40% , al r t en C 9 vey r u S 6 A ral ral Cent d an d an 8 8 gu i on i mat F of 6 6 6 on i t u b i r 2 A 5 5 s’ t en d on esp r , ast E ( e r gu i F or nf 2 e h t I st Di 1 1 , l a r t en C , d n ou ackgr b 0 ed t u b i r st i d of 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 son i ar p com d an s e r gu i F rk on i t u b i r A h t u l Du Park Park Park Park Park was 5 A , ast E ( of y l al t Endion odland East 34% ter Pa ter ers . 1 A o rit Valley st Di rk / UMD Fairmont coln coln Park Point A ral Hillside ral W pi S ral Bus. Dist. Bus. ral East Norton Fond Morgan Morgan Hunt Congdon Congdon ter Pa ter pondent Cent Morley Heights vey r su al on i cat u ed e r gu i F Bayview Heights hes iedmont Heights Piedmont e r gu i F Gary Duluth / New C Lakeside / Les e h T es R . h t u l Du n i eas ar - b su . y vel i ect esp r eas ar - b su . 4 A d an West End / Lin West Downtown / Cent Downtown General Comments on Open Space from Duluth Community Survey Respondents had an opportunity to provide comments at the end of the survey. The comments below are taken directly from the survey without change. Brackets [ ] have words added to clarify the meaning of the comment. The comments have been grouped into general issue or topic categories for ease of understanding.

ISSUE CATEGORY Protect open space; Limit growth / size; Don’t want more development.

1. Keep development in areas such as Miller Hill. Duluth is the spaces. We frequently use Lester Park, Brighton Beach, and Hartley for perfect size and population now. Efforts to make it grow would make it recreational purposes. These open spaces give a rich character less appealing place to live. to Duluth.

2. I’m upset with all the hotel development at Bayfront & Park Point. I 21. Please complete the Superior Hiking Trail through Duluth and think this is a "slap" in Duluth’s face! onward west. Thanks.

3. There should be more [open space]. 22. Open space is Duluth. It’s part of what makes Duluth special.

4. Keep existing space – it is what makes Duluth the beautiful 23. Duluth has done a good job city it is! 24. "The natural beauty of Duluth defines it [the city]. Without it we just 5. I am really sick over construction of Home Depot. The beautiful become another Midwest town. With it, we attract a high quality of

B woods that were once in that spot were destroyed. resident interest[ed] in preserving it, plus a vital tourist industry.

6. It [open space] is being used up too fast. 25. I have lived in several different cities. By now, Duluth is the most beautiful. The reason is the preservation of its natural open spaces. 7. Leave it [open space] alone. X 26. Develop downtown. 8. Need to develop additional open space. Take advantage of decline in

I population to purchase areas. 27 . I think we need MORE small OPEN areas – such as occurs when two or so vacant lots are available on the same block. Such as sufficient for 9. Open spaces plundered while downtown dwindles. small kids to play ball on, or other simple games, without them having to D walk several blocks to a more formal park-like area. Tot Lot type open 10. Growing up in Duluth has been wonderful. I would hate to see the areas. May not need any formal playground equipment but having it

N elimination of open space areas I used as a child. mowed regularly, or having it available for a volunteer group from the neighborhood to sponsor mowing it regularly, would give more usage to 11. Preserve them [open spaces]. kids that may not be able to afford formal activity. Especially – but not E limited to the hillsides – West, Central, East. Yes low income housing is 12. I came to Duluth for work, but I stayed here because of its natural hard to find, but when there is an open area with the 50’ lot available, if beauty and open spaces. If they were compromised, I would most likely P it is kept up even a little – by a group of concerned neighbors – who leave the area. have been told it is ok for the kids to use it – I think this would in many cases be better than cramping a new house into the space.

P 13. I like Duluth the way it is. Worried about nature being ruined by business development. I think we have more than enough stores and 28. I believe the tourist industry is extremely important to Duluth’s shopping malls! economy and if it weren’t for our intricate and beautiful system of parks A and playgrounds, people would not want to come back to this area. Plus, 14. To keep [open space] at the level it is now but not give most people who choose to live here do so because of the amount of na - it to business. ture preserved within the city limits. Thank you for the opportunity to ex - press my feelings. 15. I walk everyday rain or shine in Hawk’s Ridge and Seven Bridges Rd. I need that rejuvenation. It is highly important to me that areas of 29. They [open spaces] are what represents the Duluth area, they’re nature be preserved. what Duluth is known for.

16. Continued commercial development near Lake Superior corridor 30. Nature, all around us, is a gift especially to those who cannot get should be curtailed and a buffer zone should be created. away to the cabin on the lake. Natural open space amongst us keeps us sane. 17. Having grown up in the Twin Cities, the move to Duluth in 1984 has become more and more valuable over time. Over-development of 31. Easy access to open space throughout Duluth is one of the best the metro area has reinforced my decision to remain in Duluth. things about Duluth. It’s why I’ve lived here 19 years. We don’t need more urban development/sprawl. The Miller Mall area is a travesty. 18. Stop building and expanding malls. Utilize center city for com - merce, not open spaces. 32. I have used and continued to use these spaces all of my life. I went strawberry and raspberry picking with my grandmother in upper Oneota 19. Preserve it! [open space] Park in the West End, right under , and in Hartley Field. My family and their dogs and I walk on , , 20. One of the reasons my husband and I moved back to Duluth (from Chester Bowl at least once a week. I love the fact I don’t the Cities) was because of the beauty and accessibility to these open

B-1 ISSUE CATEGORY Protect open space; Limit growth / size; Don’t want more development.

have to drive outside of the city for nature and fresh air. The quality of 49. As the population continues to rise it becomes more and more vital life here is wonderful and extremely important to preserve. in protecting our open space for future generations to come.

33. Leave it. 50. Nature is very important to Duluthians. This is one of the main reasons why people stay here. 34. The ‘naturalness’ of Duluth’s vegetation makes it seem less like a city. 51. When coming into Duluth from any direction it is welcoming. Do not disturb the hills like the city destroyed the lake front with the 35. I love Duluth and all its open space areas. The open spaces add so aquarium and the other things they plan on building. These buildings much to our way of life here. I enjoy being "out there" and hope the block the beautiful view of the lake – that used to be. Save as much as wilder areas will be around for my children. possible for us, our grandchildren, and future generations.

36. Preservation is of utmost importance. 52. Let us please think of our wildlife. How about their space?

37. Would be a shame to lose them in the name of progress. 53. Saving open spaces from development should be #1 concern. People have to change to save the land, not land change to save people. "Live 38. Keep it! I know many people who come to this area specifically for simply so others may simply live." "We have not inherited the land from the natural beauty. I was one of them! I use these areas as much as our forefathers, we are ‘borrowing’ it from our children." time allows and would be disappointed to see them taken over for development of business and/or homes. 54. Open space is a very important part of our community and we need to maintain what we have so that it will be here for all generations to A 39. I think that open space is Duluth’s greatest asset and should be come and we need to consider the natural wildlife that lives in these preserved at all costs. Our future and quality of life depends on how we open spaces.

act now. I am from the East Coast and have watched areas pulverized by P urban sprawl. We all need to have a vision of what we want to live with 55. It’s nice to have a park system we can tell others about. and how we can preserve the earth for future generations. 56. I have always been one to enjoy our parks, walkways, etc. I love the P 40. Tourism is an important part of Duluth’s economy. I moved here fact that just minutes away from my home I have several options of

because of the beauty of Lake Superior and have met many others who places to take my family for a "nature" experience. E feel the same way. I have a child and would like him to experience plants, flowers, trees, bugs, birds, and other animals. It brings him 57. Keep it green! much joy and understanding about our world and our place in it. N 58. We need to constantly ask ourselves "is this project in the best 41. I think Duluth is a beautiful city and a wonderful place to grow up interest of the environment?" I believe we need to borrow the concept of D in. The parks and open spaces make it unique. "7 generations" from the Native American community.

42. I think leaving the areas to nature, with little public help, would 59. Don’t try to be like a "big" city. Be Duluth! That’s why we live here I benefit most. Money for these projects could be used elsewhere. and that’s why the tourists come here. Green is good! X 43. I do not want to become Minneapolis – all buildings and people – 60. Under careful conservation the beauty, integrity, and uniqueness is no grass. Duluth is beautiful because of its water and green. We can’t unsurpassed. The trails, the parks, and the public access to enjoy the lose it. I hate the Cities. outdoors is of utmost importance in my choice to have a residence in the Duluth area.

44. Please do everything to preserve. I’ve lived in many cities where B the only way to enjoy nature or sites was to drive miles and miles. Here 61. That they are beautiful and that is why I like it here. we’re in walking distance to all sorts of beauty. 62. Duluth is a breather, a relaxer, and a peaceful area where you can 45. As a "new" resident of this city I have to say the sole reason for my be in an uncluttered environment just minutes from the front door no moving to Duluth was its natural beauty. I used to live in Rockford, IL, matter where you live in the city. Each area is unique – Enger Park, a city at one time respected for its natural/agricultural beauty. It is now walk the waterfront, Munger Trail, Hartley, Canal Park, zoo, etc. where an overly developed nightmare of suburbia and strip malls as well as else can you find so very many fun places – Spirit Mt. in winter – a redundant merchants. This is why I left and why I would also leave place for all seasons. Guard it – take your time in planning each phase. Duluth if its city planner chose a similar path of development. You’ve done a wonderful job. Thank you so very much. I’m always in However, I believe in Duluth and will not leave without a "fight" on awe of Duluth when I take friends and relatives around. My family from behalf of its legacy of natural resources. Scotland couldn’t rave more. They say Duluth is a city hidden in the hills. Friends from Canada ask, "why is it kept 46. The natural beauty of the area keeps me connected to Duluth. such a secret?"

47. The open spaces in Duluth are much more valuable than City 63. It is nice for me to see woodlands and wetlands, fields, and Planning or City Council realize. They are very valuable for streams throughout the city. I really think that there is too much economic/aesthetic reasons, plus environmental protection. unneeded building going on. We don’t need any more malls, high-priced housing developments, golf courses, etc. I realize that we need businesses 48. Cities with more concrete than chlorophyll bother me. and such, however, we also need natural open spaces to ease our souls.

B-2 ISSUE CATEGORY Protect open space; Limit growth / size; Don’t want more development.

64. Open space is important for the preservation of foliage and fauna 69. I am more concerned in the preservation of natural open throughout the area. Without it, hundreds of species that thrive today space than parks. I have 3 young children and what I wish for could become endangered or extinct. The effort to maintain these them is to be able to grow and appreciate the value of nature. I areas is commendable. would hope that this would help keep young adults and young families living in Duluth. Don’t over-develop the City of Duluth. 65. Open spaces in Duluth are a valuable resource. They allow us to Work to improve the old structures, not create more. connect with nature. Give us a place to recreate. A place to meet and gather with friends and families. Open spaces are used to educate. 70. We need to keep Duluth natural next to the lake. It should They make our neighborhoods a more beautiful and comfortable place be as natural/open space as possible! to live. In general, they improve the quality of life for those who live in Duluth. Open spaces also provide us with a way to protect and 71. It is a very important characteristic of Duluth and must be conserve ecosystems located here. preserved and maintained.

66. It attracts visitors to Duluth! 72. Don’t make Duluth another Twin Cities or St. Cloud!

67. We need it [open space]! 73. The open spaces, mostly creeks and streams, make Duluth unique. When down in these [creek] beds all you see are trees. 68. I would like to see an open space system for hiking and biking This is awesome. trails throughout Duluth. B X ISSUE CATEGORY Balanced growth I

1. Need a balance. There’s a reason we have trouble getting people to 7. More youth and children’s playgrounds in every neighborhood.

D move to Duluth, not a progressive area. Opposition to all new Less taverns! ideas/projects – freeway to golf course. Sad. 8. We need to develop businesses and economics in our area to keep

N 2. Too much disagreement, always lawsuits. our population growing. But we must keep our city’s natural open space areas always in mind while developing. 3. We need to consider major green and open spaces, but unless we E concentrate on improving our business climate and slow-to-approve 9. It’s a delicate balance – open space is a luxury. Duluth is in great commercial development, Duluth will be all green and open space! need of development. I support preserving "some" open space and de -

P veloping others. I think Duluth is special because of the lake…and 4. It is just fine the way it is. We don’t need anymore. If people want to LAKEWALK. I believe we need more controlled natural be close to nature they can go out to the country. Why do tree huggers spaces (developed). P live in the city anyway? 10. We are relatively new to Duluth and have enjoyed the open spaces and creations that they afford. However, we do worry about the

A 5. I also understand the growth of our economy and the need for further business/residential development. I hope we can find a balance that economic future of Duluth. will please everyone. 11. Duluth needs to be sure of its overall priorities when creating long 6. I feel that there should be an equal balance of natural spaces left and short range visions for itself. Open/developed garden path spaces untouched and developed nature spaces for all different kinds of people are great and I find them personally critical to my enjoyment of living to enjoy and use. The city must be careful not to take away too many in town. However, without super schools and neighborhoods that have a open spaces to bring more business to Duluth but still bring business great sense of community, the rest is just window dressing. and people to our wonderful city.

B-3 ISSUE CATEGORY Need more growth

1. I am sick of Duluth holding back business development because 5. Maybe more focus should be made on attracting industry to Duluth. of a tree. What good are parks, schools, etc. if our families have to leave here to seek employment. Their taxes are lost so fewer people have to pay more 2. The area around Duluth has large amounts of open space. The areas for services. within the city should be available for development as the need arises 6. I love Duluth. It’s beautiful. But I can’t stay because there are no jobs 3. We need more commercial development and less politics for scientists like myself. So, development would keep me here but get rid of open space. Irony. 4. I would gladly give up my picnic space if it meant better and more jobs. When I tire of urban development I can retire to a small community. 7. I would like to see more development in Duluth so there is a viable Right now I’d be happy to be a part of Duluth’s anticipated growth. economic future for my kids.

ISSUE CATEGORY Lack of environmental sensitivity; Issues of open space maintenance

1. Living on Park Point I can see that it’s a fragile environment. People 9. Plant more trees for scenic beauty. and developers don’t have any sense of care about it, trample over it, A plow it up, cut down trees and shove more people in a small place and 10. Please install a safety rail near the lake walk from the western bridge leave trash all over. Makes me really cranky. to Leif Erickson Park for prevention of falls onto the stones and railroad

track. P 2. I like open space but when you come to Duluth and see it, it just looks really bad and not clean so you need to fix that first and then 11. A committee needs to look at areas that need attention or maybe I would like to live in Duluth, but right now I don’t like it be - improvement (eye sores). I don’t want these to be included in a P cause it is not clean and all the roads need help. So try to do that first protection plan and left as (untouched messes). and then talk about open space. E 12. Don’t screw it up. 3. Keep it clean. 13. I would call Miller Creek green space almost a total failure. Amongst N 4. Hilltop view of city and lake is very beautiful, but tall shrubs and the traffic and concrete. Don’t want to see that replicated in other parts trees are obscuring much of it. of the city. D

5. Maintain golf courses better. 14. Duluth is a beautiful city. But it takes a lot of work to keep it up.

Hopefully the City of Duluth can keep this up. I 6. I am deeply concerned over loss of wetlands and over development of

Central Entrance Corridor bringing in more consumer businesses that do 15. The golf courses could use improvements, especially Enger Park. X not offer jobs that include benefits and livable wage. We are exploiting the land for commercialism when the population of the city and 16. The only concern that I have, as a mother of young children, is that surrounding communities remain static and do not justify the "need" for some of our community parks (Good Fellowship and Fond du Lac) aren’t more consumer options. The downtown area dwindles and offices are always kept up. Good Fellowship is better, but Fond du Lac has broken

empty, waiting for business – but near sighted individuals allow the equipment. I’ve heard, but not seen, that other parks like this need more B open spaces to be plundered. maintaining.

7. Neighborhoods should help maintain parks, etc. They would be 17. How about upgrading Skyline Parkway signs and Skyline/Snively valued more if residents had an active role. Community service options Road itself? for maintenance. Taxing is not the answer. We have beautiful spaces and citizens need the responsibilities that go with ownership! 18. Putnam [Portland] Square – 10th East & 4th Street – was, has been, and is still an ugly space. Tourists may never see it but Duluthians have 8. Organized groups should be encouraged to adopt natural open had to look at it for too many years as a park that cries "lower class." spaces, and do annual garbage cleanup, i.e., Boy Scouts/Girl Scouts, churches, youth groups, etc. At least perimeters and trails where 19. How about launching a "Beautify your property and Duluth" garbage collects. I do not encourage signage that will identify who has campaign? With before and after pictures? adopted the open space (sign pollution). But businesses can donate gift certificates or "rewards" to groups as incentives or "thank yous," i.e., fast food places donating basic meals or gift certificates for food and drinks on the day of clean up.

B-4 ISSUE CATEGORY Other open space management issues

1. The open spaces need to be advertised more. Many people who visit 14. I grew up in the Brainerd/Baxter area. Going back breaks my heart the area or live here do not know of all the various places within the when I see the incredible development that has happened. Besides city for recreational purposes. nothing green, you cannot go anywhere without a car. I walk to work along College St. where there is no grass median between the street and 2. Continue bay walk all the way to the fishing pier under the sidewalk. Besides being semi-dangerous, I can reach out and touch cars Blatnik Bridge. going 40 miles per hour. It doesn’t allow for any trees along the street and while this not necessarily green space in regards to the purpose of 3. The city has done a beautiful job with the lake front. Would like to your survey, ‘tree-lined’ streets make an incredible difference in the see a bridge (pedestrian) across from Bayfront Park to that first slip quality of a neighborhood. UMD keeps growing parking lots along its and a walk way all the way down to that small "park" area by the perimeter. This summer they will be cutting down trees along Junction remains of the old bridge to Superior. [Ave.] for another lot and filling in a low-lying wet area. They never listen to us at the neighborhood meeting: that this type of growth is not the 4. It is hard to find open space – everything is already a neat best. Maybe they would listen to you. organized open space. 15. Even though Hartley Field is a natural open space, it would be nice 5. A Frisbee golf course would be cool. if there were some bathroom facilities available. When school children are there for a long period of time it is a problem. Many of them can only 6. Need more police patrols. go so long between bathroom visits. B

7. Why are all the community programs held in Chester? It is the least 16. I think the head of parks and recreation has done a bad job. accessible park in the city. There are several that are on the bus line. 17. I would like to see a sidewalk for public use around such areas as 8. I agree they should be protected and "managed," but in what way? If

X golf courses, as traffic is busy and many people walk or hike around that means restrictions of use or limits on the land for the public use these areas. In bigger cities this idea has proved beneficial for all then I would disagree because it’s the freedom to explore and feeling outdoor enthusiastic individuals. I the land is actually natural – NOT expensive and man-made. 18. It should be created in areas accessible to all income levels. I am

D 9. Duluth needs to capitalize on the snowmobile industry through especially interested in open spaces for low income families so they can trails, etc. Where do our license fees go? have nature and recreational opportunities which are free of charge.

N 10. Take care of what we have and do not develop more until our 19. Would like to see an extension of the lake walk to Lester River (and current open spaces are well maintained. Monitor use of public areas beyond?) using rail corridors. Strongly oppose further development of and prioritize funds to improve most used areas.

E Hartley Field (i.e., putting in road through park). Oppose Spirit Mountain golf development. 11. Would like to see more camping opportunities in city like Endion

P Point and Gary/Fond du Lac, and fishing piers. No more soccer 20. Don’t let dogs walk on board walk. Is for people to walk, not dogs fields needed. and their poop!

P 12. Needs to be better marked – hiking trails in Chester Bowl, etc.

A 13. We need to get all of Skyline roadways fixed and open to the public. I feel it will show tourists the true beauty of Duluth – the balance between open spaces and developed spaces equally.

B-5 ISSUE CATEGORY Political issues

1. It seems as though no matter what the public has voted for in recent 8. If this city is truly committed to protecting natural and developed open years to preserve natural beauty in Duluth, City Council, the Mayor, spaces – and maybe even expanding them – then we need laws and Planning Commission find ways to do what they want. People are regulations that cannot be reinterpreted or changed. Officials like Mayor very discouraged. Doty and other city groups who are concerned with economic development think open space is the demon seed of this city. I think they have done 2. Concerned about political influence – how mayor and city council many unethical things in this town to serve their own agendas – Doty and handle improvements [developments] and how special interests play [to] his minions cannot and should not be trusted. We need laws to protect favor a few over the many as far as usage and profits are concerned. these spaces. A lot of past citizens fought for them, donated and paid for them, and we should feel honored to have them. Go to other parts of the 3. Good luck in keeping green space. The dollar controls it all. Look at U.S.A. – Duluth is a rare jewel. Maybe if Doty and some of the other ya - Home Depot, etc. We need stronger laws to keep open space before hoos in this town who have power had ever stepped outside of Duluth for it’s too late. part of their lives, maybe they would see what they are willing to destroy. 4. Build golf course and safe harbor. 9. Keep as much as possible. 5. The city council will not cooperate with the will of the majority of Duluth residents, e. g., Miller Hill Mall development and the Spirit Mt. 10. Maybe have a couple "Duluth Master Plan for 2020" meetings golf development. in a park? A 6. Do not let anyone take what we have now and what is in the works 11. The State Legislature has been able to override the vote of Duluth for the future. citizens in matters such as the McQuade Rd. marina, the freeway, our

highway 53 malls, and most recently the Spirit Mt. golf course. I feel P 7. I do not support the Spirit Mt. golf course in any way, shape, or form. our mayor and city councilors need to do all they possibly can to let the The McQuade public access should be scaled back, but should be built. citizens’ wishes win out over those of the Legislature members, especially concerning open space. P E N ISSUE CATEGORY Miscellaneous D 1. I would like to see the roads that run along Tischer Creek (St. Marie 8. Open space is important but it is also relative. I live in an area with St. entrance – runs parallel to Hawthorne Rd.) preserved. Driving through enough space, even though it is neither open nor developed. What ruins there when I lived in that area revived my spirits on a busy day. It was my space is living on a nearly undeveloped street that serves as a shortcut I exhilarating to go from city to country in seconds. Please take the gates for traffic to the mall and other commercial stores and businesses. This

down and maintain those roads. traffic is not local, but rather from the easterly Duluth neighborhoods. My X space and our community safety is compromised. 2. More time and money must be spent to improve the condition of city streets. The potholes are horrible. These streets must be resurfaced, not 9. Something needs to be done to control/destroy army worms. The open just filled in with asphalt patches. spaces cannot even be enjoyed with them destroying all of the leaves. B They ruin our much-awaited summers for many residents and tourists. 3. A great place to have a family! 10. Natural open space may be part of the long-standing problem with 4. Big business type things bring pollution of all kinds. Duluth. "Multi-use recreation areas" would be a much better name/use. An analogy may be perhaps compared to not taking care of the streets/roads 5. I just love Duluth – period. in Duluth for so long that they are now on the historic register! (The "grated" and "scored" streets with the horse rings – a few are 6. There should be no smoking. great – but!) Many roads/streets in Duluth have NEVER been redone – nor gutters or "parks". Natural is not always better. 7. I feel that Morgan Park needs new housing. It will add to beautifying our community. It will allow more families to move here.

B-6 Superior Science for You