M ASTER PLAN

Presented to the Board of Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Kansas City, Missouri April 26th, 2011

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

R OA NO K E PARK MASTER PLAN
P res ented to the Bo ard o f P arks an d R e c re a tio n C o mmissio n e rs, K a n sa s C ity, Missou r i A p ril 2 6 th , 2 0 1 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Kansas City, Missouri Mayor and City Council
Mark Funkhouser Deb Hermann Bill Skaggs Ed Ford Russ Johnson Melba Curls Sharon Sanders Brooks Beth Gottstein Jan Marcason Cindy Circo Terry Riley Cathy Jolly John A. Sharp Mayor 1st District At Large 1st District 2nd District At Large 2nd District 3rd District At Large 3rd District 4th District At Large 4th District 5th District At Large 5th District 6th District At Large 6th District

Board of Parks and Recreation Commissioners
John Fierro Tyrone Aiken Daniel T. Morton Aggie Stackhaus Ajamu K Webster Mark L McHenry President Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Director

Roanoke Park Master Plan

MAJOR SUPPORTERS OF ROANOKE PARK’S RECLAMATION

Our excellent partners in Kansas City Parks and Recreation Department who are always there with coaching, support, encouragement and resources – especially:
Steve Abbott Patrick Anyanike Dave Burke Mark Bowland Clarence Brown Forest Decker Heidi Downer Bill Fessler Steve Lampone Kevin LaPointe Mark McHenry Dave Parks Rondell Ross Heather Runkel Derone Spears

Park Survey
Curt Watkins Watkins Research Group, Inc.

Charrette Leaders and Support
Browne’s Irish Market Mary Jo Draper Cary Goodman Glenda Goodman Michael Lockwood Kite Singleton Michael Stack Pete Browne Curt Watkins

Advisors
Scott Capstack Caroline Davies, Ph.D. Dr. Richard Gentile Linda Lehrbaum Wendy Sangster Earth Riders Trails Association Director, Environmental Studies - UMKC Professor EmeritusGeology – UMKC Kansas City WildLands Urban Forester, Missouri Department of Conservation

Major Contributors
Pete Browne Chris DeLong John Frick Bill and Ann Howie Randy Moore Andrew Park Joan Riffel

Community Support
The Kessler Society, especially Dona Boley Scott Burnett, Jackson County Legislature Officers James Schriever and Sean Finn with the Community Service workers

Cash Contributions for Crews, Equipment and Supplies
Charlie Becker Pete Browne Andy Dodge John Frick Cary Goodman Craig Hakkio Marilyn Hutchinson Bill Koenigsdorf Randy Moore Art Perry Joan Riffel Marvin Rogers Rik Siro Olo Szylleyko

The Presidents and Board Members of the Homes Associations of:
Coleman Highlands Roanoke Valentine Volker

Supporting Businesses
Pete Browne Chris DeLong Mary Jo Draper Dave Dresnick Cary Goodman Matthew Hufft Miles Krivena Michael Lockwood Kissick Construction DeLong Design Draper Communications Superior Grinding Goodman Architecture Hufft Projects Whole Foods Populous Architects

Other In-Kind Support From
Frank Messer, Kerouac Photography Mary S. Watkins Photography Rm 39 Starbucks at 41st & Main Strasser Hardware

Website: www.roanokeparkkc.org
Pete Browne Chris DeLong Mike Fortunato Dave Musel Curt Watkins

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Approaching 100 Hours in the Honeysuckle
Pete Browne Andy Dodge Dave Foster Nancy Harrington Miles Krivena Peter Meier Rose Middleton Paul Pearce Jim Peters

More Than 100 Hours in the Honeysuckle
Scott Burnett Manny Lopez Frankie Messer Randy Moore Kite Singleton Curt Watkins

Also Seen in the Honeysuckle
Greg Allen George Baggett Dona Boley Bonnie Tom Bott Julie Browne Jodi Brown-Mardhioro Rhonda Burnett Ingrid Bush Scott Bush Doug Deady Forest Decker Chris DeLong Mary Jo Draper Brian Duff John Fiero Patrick Flynn Mike Fortunato Harriet Frazier John Frick Pam Gilford Cary Goodman Glenda Goodman Shannon Hennessy Pam Hoelzel Marilyn Hutchinson Elaine Kabrick Gary Kabrick Paul Kamps Bill Koenigsdorf Joe Lambe Rick Leidig Roberta Vogel-Leutung Michael Lockwood Jim McDonald Mark McHenry Holly Mehl Janet Moss J. Mowbray R. Mowbray Scott Nelson Michael Oliver Andrew Park Sharon Patti Vic Patti Art Perry Peg Prendergast Megha Ramaswamy Joan A. Riffel John Riffle Marvin Rogers Alice Rudolph Heather Runkel Jason Seymour Sheronda Ben Simmons Carolyn Sipp Geo Sipp Rik Siro Steve Sitton Mike Stack Alan Steinlage Sheronda Stonum Tim Stoop Stephanie Tamayo Amato Tamayo Lucy Terry Kelly Thompson Joel Wakham Doris Yonker

Roanoke Park Master Plan

6

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Our Pledge to Roanoke Park . . . . . . . 3 2010 progress in fighting non-native invasive plants . . . . . . . . 28 Replacement native ground cover “green list” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 2011 control plan against non-native invasive plants . . . . . . . . 32 Seeding and planting through April 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 About Roanoke Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

History - Honoring the Past . . . . . . . . . . . 7 A Short History of Roanoke Park . . . 7 Community Support and Engagement . . 35

Detailed History of Roanoke Park . . . 9 George E . Kessler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Master Planning - Planting the Future . . 36 Master Planning process and progress to date . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Roanoke Park in Perspective . . . . . . . . . 13 Roanoke Park’s Significance within the Park System of Kansas City, MO . . . . 13 Roanoke Park’s Importance to its Surrounding Neighborhoods . . . 13 Roanoke Park Aerial View . . . . . . . . 14 Roanoke Park Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2009 State of Roanoke Park . . . . . . . 16 The Park Restoration Effort Begins . 18

Guiding Principles - Charrette . . . . . . . . 37

Charrette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 October 9th, 2010 Master Planning meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Roanoke Park Master Plan Final Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Roanoke Park Neighborhood Survey . . . 19 Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Detailed Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . 20

Roanoke Park Master Plan Design Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Master Plan Alternatives - Examples . . . . 43 Efforts Against Invasive Plants . . . . . . . . 25 Effect of non-native invasive plants on Roanoke Park . . . . . . . . . . 25 Control methods used in Roanoke Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Phasing of Proposed Improvements . . . . 44

Letters of Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Roanoke Park Master Plan

1

2

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Overview
“Honoring the Past and Planting the Future” is the theme of this Roanoke Park Master Plan. Honoring the foresight of a group of visionaries who, in the early 20th Century, arranged for these 38 acres to forever become a public park known as Roanoke Park, and pitching in with neighbors to weed out neglect and decay, and to plant and PLAN for the future. The creators of the park probably anticipated that it would be somehow maintained as a most appreciated place. It hasn’t consistently happened. This Master Plan is to fulfill their intention with a continuing effort to make amends for decades of neglect. The Master Plan will serve to guide and engage, in perpetuity, a cooperative effort between the Parks Department and the park’s nearest neighbors to help with the care of the park so that it becomes and remains a special place of joy and serenity. The purpose of this plan is to record and organize for methodical execution the desires and aspirations of the involved for the benefit of all who wish to use the park more. This is a public-private endeavor and represents the power of individual citizens organizing with the cooperation and support of the City. The project enjoys the good fortune of being in partnership with the Kansas City Parks and Recreation Department. The Parks Department provides counsel, training, encouragement, labor and supplies to augment the grass roots efforts of caring and enthusiastic neighbors. Residents around Roanoke Park initiated this effort in February 2010 with the expressed desire to enrich the value of the park and its contribution to the quality of life of present and future residents of it’s four surrounding neighborhoods: Coleman Highlands, Valentine, Roanoke and Volker. Thanks especially to Pete Browne, Scott Burnett, Chris DeLong, Michael Lockwood, Matthew Hufft and Curt Watkins for compiling this report from the many ideas contributed to this plan by the many survey respondents, charrette participants, knowledgeable professionals and enthusiastic volunteers.
Roanoke Park Master Plan 3

Our Pledge to Roanoke Park
Roanoke Park is an important historical Kansas City asset. Its value is greatest to its closest neighbors. Time and neglect have taken a toll on our neighborhood park. The wooded ravines have lost important trees and the rugged cliffs have become hidden by invasive plants. The park’s beauty has become marred. Comparing old photos with more recent ones confirms that the park is not as enticing as it once was. Even when Kansas City was not in such dire financial straits, city resources for the park have been sparse. Many neighborhood parks are being recognized for their value as neighborhood assets and sanctuaries of peacefulness in urban areas. This trend is sweeping the nation and the globe as neighborhood groups join together to support local parks that have suffered from urban decay and government neglect. Our efforts on behalf of Roanoke Park are a public/ private partnership initiative to honor the history and plant the future of Roanoke Park. We do this for the betterment of our city, and especially the neighborhoods that share Roanoke Park.

4

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

INTRODUCTION

About Roanoke Park
Roanoke Park is one of the original “pods” in Kansas City’s historic Parks and Boulevards system, as designed by George E. Kessler between 1893 and 1920. Roanoke Park was developed between 1906 and 1909 and lies in a wooded ravine surrounded by rocky bluffs. Atop the bluffs sit the historic homes of some of Kansas City’s most beautiful neighborhoods: Coleman Highlands to the north, Roanoke and Valentine to the south and east and Volker to the west. The park is roughly centered south of the intersection of Karnes and Roanoke Boulevards in Kansas City, Missouri. The distinctive rocky bluffs encircling the park are Iola limestone sitting atop Chanute shale. (Kansas City’s famous Bethany Falls limestone lies many feet underground below the park.) According to the park board report of 1907: “This property should be held as a bit of wilderness, which is now its charm, and which would be entirely lost if attempts were made to finely finish any part of this valley... In the old quarry west of Roanoke Ave. and north of 38th St., the very fine spring there should be developed; a pool and a modest water garden.”

While the wading pool of years past is no longer in existence, there is a spring now flowing down the hillside north of Karnes. And while the park has certainly been developed, not all of its wilderness quality has been lost. A wide variety of plants can be found in the park, from trees, shrubs and flowers, to ferns, mosses and lichens covering the rocks. As the park is restored for the future, many more will be planted. Westport-Roanoke Community Center is located in the park at 3601 Roanoke Road, 816-784-5200. “The center, originally opened in 1963, recently underwent a $1.25 million face lift that included an updated pottery room, reception area, bathrooms, new furnace/AC and security system. The center is available to rent for meetings, wedding receptions, birthday parties, family reunions and dinner parties.”1 North of the Community Center is a soccer field, a small basketball goal and a popular sand volleyball court. West of the Community Center is a ball diamond and one of the park’s three playgrounds. Another playground is in the northeast part of the park, east of Karnes Blvd, between Madison and 35th Street. The third playground is (swing set only) on the west side of the park, west of Karnes below Wyoming Street and Roanoke Pkwy. Many asphalt and concrete sidewalks wind through the park. There is at least one cave in the park. You can see where the entrance was walled up at the cliff base across from the tennis courts. The Roanoke Neighborhood website has an excellent page detailing what is known and not known about the cave at www.roanokekc.org/RoanokeParkCaveMystery.html. Roanoke Park covers 37.59 acres and has 1.34 miles of roadway within it2. Additionally, the boulevards of Roanoke Boulevard, Karnes Boulevard and Valentine Road feed into the park.
1

Lying completely within Roanoke Park, the brick paved section of Roanoke Boulevard between Valentine and Karnes is one of the few remaining brick roads in Kansas City and has been designated a historic landmark.

Kansas City, Missouri website: www.kcmo.org Kansas City, Missouri Parks and Recreation, 2009 Reference Book

2

Roanoke Park Master Plan

5

This cliff in Roanoke Park is beautifully dotted with ferns and strung with vines, here being admired by Curt Watkins.

6

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

HISTORY– HONORING THE PAST

A Short History of Roanoke Park
The area of Roanoke Park was originally a largely undeveloped section of woods between the frontier towns of Kansas City to the north and Westport to the south. As the population increased throughout the 19th century, homes and businesses began to be developed in the area. The South Highlands Land and Improvement Company and other developers saw the value that preserving the wooded ravines of the area could have to adjacent real estate values. In 1892, George E. Kessler was engaged by Kansas City’s newly formed Board of Park Commissioners to design a Park and Boulevard System, including Roanoke Park. His work in Kansas City stands out as one of the early touch stones in the field of landscape architecture. The rolling terrain and wooded bluffs of Roanoke Park were particularly suited to Kessler’s naturalistic style. Land was donated to the city for the purposes of establishing the park beginning in 1901. Other tracts were donated or acquired by the city in subsequent years and the park was developed between 1906 and 1909. According to the park board report of 1907:

“This property should be held as a bit of wilderness, which is now its charm, and which would be entirely lost if attempts were made to finely finish any part of this valley...In the old quarry west of Roanoke Ave. and north of 38th St., the very fine spring there should be developed; a pool and a modest water garden.” It’s value to adjacent residents is recognized no less today, as an asset for social interaction, recreation, exercise and enjoyment of natural beauty. From the 1920 “Souvenir” guide: “The Park and Boulevard System of Kansas City, Missouri, Revision and reprint of 1914 edition, Board of Park Commissioners, 1920, compiled and written by Fred Gabelman.”
Missouri Valley Special Collections, Kansas City, Missouri Public Library.

“PARK AND BOULEVARD SYSTEM HAS MADE KANSAS CITY FAMOUS. ... The principle, which was adopted by Mr. George E. Kessler, Landscape Architect for the Board of Park Commissioners ... was to follow nature as closely as possible, to adapt the planning to the natural conditions.” “KARNES BOULEVARD. This boulevard is a connecting link between Roanoke Park and Penn Valley Park and was named in honor of Mr. J. V. C. Karnes, a Park Commissioner.” “ROANOKE PARK. This park is a beautiful preservation of wooded ravines lines with rugged cliffs, in the western section of the City. It was entirely acquired by deeds of gift from the South Highlands Land and Improvement Company and others, who had caught the spirit of conserving nature’s beauty before it became marred, and of the resulting enhancement in value of nearby property.”

1911 postcard, soon after the park’s creation. The lamp posts destined for the stone pillars at center are not yet installed. Source: Kansas City Parks and Recreation Archives

Roanoke Park Master Plan

7

1907 Map of Roanoke residential district of Kansas City, developed by the Roanoke Investment Company from 1900 to 1920, showing buildings, streets, Roanoke Park, and Norman School. Source: Missouri Valley Special Collections, Kansas City Public Library, Kansas City, Missouri. http://www. kchistory.org/u?/ Sanborn,3

An undated view, at least before 1963, of Roanoke Park by Montgomery Foto Service, probably looking southwest from a point west of Roanoke Blvd across from the current community center. Source: Missouri Valley Special Collections, Kansas City Public Library, Kansas City, Missouri.

8

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

A Detailed History of Roanoke Park
A most authoritative and detailed account of Roanoke Park’s history, from the book A Legacy of Design: An Historical Survey of the Kansas City, Missouri, Parks and Boulevards System, 1893-1940 Janice Lee, David Boutros, Charlotte R. White & Deon Wolfenbarger, 1995 Published by the Kansas City Design Center in cooperation with the Western Historical Manuscript Collection-Kansas City [ISBN 0-9648063-0-4 / hardcover / 296 pp., 410 photographs and maps] Available for sale from UMKC. Order information on this webpage: http://www.umkc.edu/whmckc/ PUBLICATIONS/Legacy/LEGACY.HTM History The Board of Park Commissioners acquired Roanoke Park during 1901 to 1923 in a series of seven gifts totalling 11 tracts of land. The Roanoke Park neighborhood was a prominent residential district containing a rugged strip of land that promised to be difficult to successfully develop. To prevent undesirable growth and protect property values, nearby landowners and developers donated land for the creation of Roanoke Park. The South Highland Land and Improvement Company donated the first and largest two tracts in 1901 and 1905. Grading and sidewalk construction began in 1905. In 1906 the main roadway through the park (then Roanoke Road) was completed. It extended for 0.77 miles from its northern terminus at Karnes Boulevard to Thirty-eighth and Wyoming Streets. Thirty-eighth Street from Mercier Avenue to Wyoming Street was also completed in that year, as well as the entry markers at Madison Avenue and Thirty-sixth Street and at Valentine Road and Roanoke Boulevard, the stone steps and piers at

Roanoke Park, looking south from near Thirtysixth Street, 1921 (Board of Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Kansas City, MO)

Roanoke Parkway and Karnes Boulevard, and most of the stone walls in the park. In 1907 the park entrance at Thirty-sixth and Summit Streets was graded and sodded, shrubs were planted, and stone entrance markers were added. In 1909 and 1911, respectively, H. T. Abernathy, a neighboring property owner, and Mary T. Whiteside donated land for park purposes. Plans and specifications were drawn up for the construction of a brick block pavement on Roanoke Boulevard at Valentine Road in 1918. In 1923 Wyoming Street at Thirty-sixth became park property. One block between Madison Avenue and Summit Street was also condemned for park purposes at a cost of $35,000 and became a park entrance. In 1932 a wading pool was constructed in the southwest corner of the park. The park board approved the final plans and specifications for the Westport-Roanoke Community Center, designed by E.F. Pryor, in 1962. In 1971 the 0.3-mile section of Roanoke Road intersecting the park became park property, and the park board renamed it Roanoke Boulevard. The park board also designated the boulevard an historic landmark that year because it was the sole remaining brick road in the park system. A 1975 master plan for the redevelopment of Roanoke Park included the addition and improvement of playground and picnic equipment,
9

Roanoke Park Master Plan

fencing, curbs, sidewalks, and plantings. In 1978 the brick surface of Roanoke Boulevard was restored with pavers comparable to the originals. Ten years later the boulevard was again restored and was extended southward to Valentine Road. Also in that year, a marker designating Roanoke Boulevard as a landmark was installed at the boulevard’s south end. Integrity Roanoke Park retains its integrity of location and setting, and most of its integrity of design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The park retains the original property boundaries established through donations to the park board from 1901 through 1923. The setting of houses and small estates clustered around the bluffs overlooking the park has not changed since the early 1900s. The design authorship of Roanoke Park is unclear, but it resembles two other parks planned by George Kessler: Penn Valley Park and Hyde Park. The scenic narrow valley and wooded bluffs remain from the original design. Most alterations and additions have been made in the same rough-limestone vernacular design and construction of the original, except for the modern community center building. Roanoke Boulevard has retained its integrity of design, setting, and workmanship. It may retain integrity of material if it can be determined how much of the road was replaced with new brick during the 1978 restoration. Most of the stone steps, retaining walls, and piers are in good condition and retain their integrity of location, setting, design, materials and workmanship. The southernmost marker at Valentine Road and Roanoke Boulevard has lost its integrity of design because it appears to have been altered. The pillar on the west side of Madison Avenue at Thirty-sixth Street lost its integrity of design and workmanship when it was heightened and incorporated into another wall.

Significance Roanoke Park is significant in the area of landscape architecture as an example of the “natural” style of park design. It possesses design characteristics typically associated with the master landscape architect George Kessler: fluid grading, winding drives, diversified plantings massed and intermixed in natural-looking meadows and woodlands, and rough limestone walls, steps, and park entrances. The adaptation of the park’s built features to the rugged terrain reflects the skills of the designer. In community planning, Roanoke Park is significant as an example of a large community park providing focus and a social center for its neighborhood. The park’s history illustrates the integral role of private donors in consolidating the original land gifts. As in Hyde Park, residents and developers controlled and/ or improved the quality of adjacent development in order to protect land values.

10

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

George E . Kessler

employment after being recommended to the railroad’s New York owners by Olmsted, with whom Kessler had been briefly corresponding about how to apply his education in botany, garden design and civil engineering to the new field of landscape architecture. At that time the railroads were engaged in creating destinations just outside cities as an enticement for people to ride the railroad. Merriam Park was a successful venture in this regard, drawing over 20,000 visitors a day at its height two years after Kessler arrived. Building on his work in Merriam Park, Kessler opened a design office in Kansas City and began to take on private commissions. One of these was for Hyde Park. He was hired by the developers, builders of adjacent houses, who thought the development of the ravine into a park would enhance the value of the surrounding properties. His work in Hyde Park was noted by early proponents of the City Beautiful movement in Kansas City: William Rockhill Nelson and August Meyer. After doing private work for these gentlemen and other Kansas City notables, Kessler was engaged by the newly formed Park Board and its president, August Meyer, to begin work on a Parks and Boulevards system. He and Meyer co-wrote the Park Board report of 1893 with Meyer writing the main body and Kessler writing the engineer’s report. In their report Kessler laid out his vision of a park and boulevard system comprising 9.85 miles

Landscape architect George E. Kessler was the creator of Kansas City’s Parks and Boulevard System, of which Roanoke Park is one of the early parts. The field of landscape architecture was in many ways created by Frederick Law Olmsted, designer of New York’s Central Park and many other parks and estates. After Olmsted’s passing, George Kessler was considered one of landscape architecture’s most masterful practitioners. The fame of Kansas City’s Parks & Boulevards system was and is to the credit of the city, and led to Kessler being commissioned to design over two hundred works throughout the country. Not only parks and boulevards, but private estates, universities, city planning and cemeteries. Mr. Kessler came to Kansas City in 1882 to work for the Kansas City, Fort Scott, and Gulf Railway Company, overseeing the development of their “pleasure park,” Merriam Park. He secured this

Hyde Park. Source: Kansas City Parks and Recreation Archives

Roanoke Park Master Plan

11

of boulevards and 323.45 acres of parks. To Kansas City’s credit, the plan was adopted and by 1920 was not only completed but expanded ten-fold, comprising in that year of completed and planned parks and boulevards totalling 3,471 acres and 151 miles. Roanoke Park, developed around 1906-1909, is one part of the expansion of the Parks and Boulevard system taking place after 1893. Kessler moved to St. Louis in 1910 but maintained a relationship with the Kansas City Park Board and Kansas City until his death in 1923. This summary was drawn from material on www. georgekessler.org, a website created and maintained by The Kessler Society of Kansas City. Please see that site for further reading. Kessler Society The Kessler Society is a Kansas City Missouri parks and boulevard citizen support organization named after the creator of Kansas City’s Parks and Boulevard System, landscape architect George E. Kessler. The Society was formed in 1990 and is a 501-c3 organization. Mission:
Map of Kansas City, showing park system prior to the extension of the city limits in 1909. Roanoke Park is at middle left. Source: Kansas City Parks and Recreation Archives

4Educate the public on the historical significance
and value of the parks and boulevard system.

4Support the maintenance, improvement and
expansion of the parks and boulevard system.

4Serve as a citizen advisory group to the Board
of Parks and Recreation Commissioners, and as a forum for public participation.

4Sponsor parks and boulevard
improvement programs.
Sources: www.kcsociety.georgekessler.org and www.georgekessler.org

12

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

ROANOKE PARK IN PERSPECTIVE

Roanoke Park’s Significance within the Parks and Boulevard System of Kansas City, MO
In 1990 the survey Landscape Architectural/ Historic Survey of Parks & Boulevards, 1893-1940 was completed by the following entities:

Roanoke Park’s Importance to its Surrounding Neighborhoods
From its earliest days, Roanoke Park and the Parks and Boulevard system as a whole was intended to increase the property values of adjacent properties and to attract future residents and businesses. George Kessler wrote in 1917, “The object of boulevard construction is two-fold; to provide agreeable driveways, and by giving certain special advantages and a handsome appearance to such avenues, to make the abutting land, and the land near them, especially sought after for residence purposes, and thereby to enhance the value of such lands.”1 August Meyer wrote “A community must attract with more than just tax concessions and columns of figures.” The value of Roanoke Park to its surrounding neighborhoods is recognized no less today. In addition to positively affecting property values in the area, it’s intangible values are inestimable. Roanoke Park provides for its users a space for exercise, social interaction, discovery, appreciation of nature and art. A space for quiet reflection, escape, or simply to play. One participant of the October 9th Charrette referred to it as the “lungs” of our neighborhood.
1

4 Board of Parks & Recreation
Commissioners, KCMO

4 Missouri Department of Natural
Resources with funds from Department of Interior, National Park Service

4 Tourbier & Walmsle, Inc., Architectural
& Art Historical Research

4 Theis Doolittle Associates
The Survey concluded of Kansas City’s parks and boulevard system as a whole: “The system itself warrants special recognition and is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places as a Designed Historic Landscape significance for its landscape architecture and as the work of a master.” Specifically in regards to Roanoke Park, the survey found that Roanoke Park, Karnes Boulevard, and Valentine Boulevard are 4 stars, the highest rating. They are exceptionally significant. Landscapes in this category should be treated with the greatest priority, and may even be designated for extra special attention. Opportunities through planning and management should emphasize preservation and restoration. Necessary changes and additions should be most sympathetically considered.

“The Kansas City Park System and Its Effect on the City Plan,” George Kessler in Good Roads, New York, June 2, 1917.

Roanoke Neighborhood stone pillar and sign. Source: www.roanokekc.org

Roanoke Park Master Plan

13

Roanoke Park Aerial View

Aerial view of Roanoke Park, with approximate park boundaries highlighted. The park’s boundaries follow the natural topography of the area, with the park property in a natural depression ranging between 10 to 70 feet below the surrounding residential areas. The lowest point in the park is at the intersection of Roanoke and Karnes Boulevards.

14

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Roanoke Park Map

Roanoke Park lies west of Southwest Trafficway and north of 39th Street in Kansas City, Missouri. It’s borders are shared by the neighborhoods of Coleman Highlands, Valentine, Roanoke and Volker.

Roanoke Park Master Plan

15

2009 State of Roanoke Park
Overgrowth, neglect and deferred maintenance were allowed to accumulate within Roanoke Park for many years. While the Westport-Roanoke Community Center recently received an extensive and successful renovation, other areas of the park were in need of similar attention. The main overgrowth of vegetation afflicting Roanoke Park was the non-native invasive shrub honeysuckle, Lonicera maackii, spreading wintercreeper, Euonymus fortunei, and Ailanthus trees. These plants combined to crowd out native ground covers, impairing the health of the park’s existing trees and reducing seedling establishment. Other non-native invasive species in the park include garlic mustard, multiflora rose, and the usual array of turf-grass weeds. The overgrowth of vegetation, crowding and in some cases obscuring walkways, also contributed to reduced personal safety within the park. Some illegal dumping has been observed in the park, of yard waste, trash and pet waste. This is seen more often in areas of dense overgrowth. Deferred maintenance and re-design needs within the park include:

Positive aspects of Roanoke Park in 2009 included it’s unique topography, curving roads and sidewalks, historic brick road, excellent community center and mostly modern playgrounds. Many large and attractive trees still exist within the woods of Roanoke Park. Despite the effect of invasive species, a variety of native plants can be found within the park. Positive aspects include:

4The historic character of a 100+ year old park 4Rare green space in an urban environment 4Unique rocky outcroppings and bluffs
- NOT your every day park!

4Old and stately trees including cottonwoods
and chinquapin oaks

4Excellent community center 4Unique and historic brick road 4Social center for four neighborhoods

4The baseball diamond has a rusting and dilapidated
chain-link backstop, no bases, and a dirt infield that doesn’t drain water

4Water drainage in general is not well addressed 4Sidewalks are not complete enough to provide
equal access to all surrounding neighborhoods

Roanoke Park’s bluffs and cliffs are home to a variety of native ferns.

4Iron and steel railings are in need of paint 4Formerly mowed areas have been overtaken
by honeysuckle

4Cracked and broken masonry catch basins along
Roanoke Drive allow storm water to drain into park

16

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Looking north at the intersection of Roanoke Parkway and Karnes Boulevard. In 2009 the stone pillars no longer have the decorative lamp posts seen in the 1921 photograph. 1921 Source: Kansas City Parks and Recreation Archives, P-R3-021

Below: Looking north-northeast at the curve of Madison Avenue just west of Southwest Trafficway. The rock wall on the inside of the curve is taller now. The low rock wall at right is broken down and hidden behind the bush honeysuckle growing at right.

1909 Source: Mrs. Sam Ray postcard collection (SC58), Missouri Valley Special Collections, Kansas City Public Library, Kansas City, Missouri. http://www.kchistory.org/u?/Mrs,1134

Roanoke Park Master Plan

17

The park restoration effort begins . . .
This project was preceded by years of a few devotees walking through Roanoke Park, staying mostly on the few improved surfaces and familiar paths. Many more drove through the park, catching only quick glimpses of the surroundings. A few were en route to the Westport Roanoke Community Center; many more were speedily passing though on their way to somewhere else. Kite Singleton in an early Roanoke Park clearing effort Most all admired the thick green seen in all directions. Few explored areas off the “paths.” Architect Kite Singleton realized there was much more dimension hidden by the overgrowth of Roanoke Park. In February, 2010, Kite arranged to bring some facts of plant life to light with the help of the Kansas City Parks and Recreation Department. Parks and Recreation staff met Kite in the park for a lesson on the true nature of most of the green (nonnative invasive bush honeysuckle) and training on its eradication. Cutting of bush honeysuckle began with only a few of the enlightened. Most were squeamish and had severe reservations about removing any thing “green” regardless of its origins or impact. Throughout 2010 more and more workers appeared on Saturday mornings as the facts about the invasive and pervasive nature of bush honeysuckle started to gain ground in conversation, emails and neighborhood meetings. At first the motivation was to remove the honeysuckle to give indigenous plants (which honeysuckle is not) a chance to make deserved appearances. As cutting continued the additional character of the park was revealed. Long hidden bluffs and rugged outcroppings began to show. Prospective hiking trails and vistas began to suggest themselves. The park could again after decades of neglect become an inviting place to walk, explore, play and provide green relief for urban dwellers’ busy and hectic midtown lives. As cutting was underway Roanoke’s Miles Krivena called a meeting to explore what might be realized by mere citizens – stakeholders, taking the lead to enhance the long neglected Roanoke Park. This meeting was attended by Cary and Glenda Goodman, Stephanie Tamayo, Rick Leidig, Mary Jo Draper and Curt Watkins. A special guest was Dona Boley who had begun a similar effort in Gillham and Hyde Park in 2007. All four nearby neighborhoods: Coleman Highlands, Roanoke, Valentine and Volker, were represented at this initial exploratory discussion. With bumps and gurgles it has led to a public-private coalition between the Parks and Recreation Department of Kansas City, Missouri, and private citizens finding time in their own busy lives to get involved, motivated by the desire to improve the quality of midtown living for all of the neighborhoods adjacent the park. This Master Plan Document describes the park’s history, recent background, reclamation from invasive plants, and process leading up to the Master Plan that has become not only a plan but an expectation to be realized!

18

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

ROANOKE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY

211 people from surrounding neighborhoods took a survey regarding Roanoke Park on surveymonkey.com during the 38 days it was available between June 5 and July 18, 2010.

trails carved through the woods as well as more improved walk surfaces in the park—with illumination from warm lighting, not those buzzing blue high intensity lights. Some small, formal garden areas would contrast nicely with and accentuate a mostly natural park. Here and there, plots of native grasses, too. Several see public art in the park (with surveillance systems to safeguard, spot despoilers or litterers). Reforesting with significant and appropriate plantings is desired to honor the park’s history (and prevent invasive growths from overwhelming the park, again). A program for a well-defined and administered memorial plantings program is favored. There is good support for a dues paying “Friends of the Park” type organization.

Summary of findings from the survey about Roanoke Park .
Interpretive comments from analysis of the multiple choice questions and open comments. Chances are if you ask a resident of Coleman Highlands, Roanoke, Valentine or Volker how they feel about Roanoke Park they will say that the park is an especially valued feature with lots of unrealized potential to enhance both the lifestyle and property value of those living nearby.

The overwhelming feeling from most every quarter is that the park needs to provide well for our chilEvents are more favored than sports with the overdren. More developed active areas with playgrounds whelming favorite being Dance in the Park! Next amidst undeveloped, yet wellgroomed pastoral open areas for picnics, pick-up 30 .9% Roanoke games, strolling on the 18 .0% Valentine lawns and romping Coleman Highlands about. It seems that kids of all ages would enjoy a water feature to play in or simply for watching and listening.
2 .2% Other

Valentine
20 .8% Volker 28 .1% Coleman Highlands

Roanoke

Neatness counts! After a great playground the most requested fixtures to have are more trash receptacles with dispensers for litter and pick-up-after-pet bags along with a campaign encouraging everyone to help pickup after the thoughtless. As the efforts of volunteers begin to show craggy bluffs, many envision themselves enjoying

Volker

The survey’s 211 participants resided in: Roanoke: 30.9%, Coleman Highlands: 28.1%, Volker: 20.8%, Valentine: 18%, and West Plaza: 2.2%

Roanoke Park Master Plan

19

are regular music events. Interest is in a great variety of music from chamber and chorales to blues, jazz and folk. These events are designed for the enjoyment of those who choose to come. Amplification, if any, needs to be very light for the enjoyment of an

immediately present small group; not beyond. (It’s a big NO to rock fests for the hordes!) Roanoke Park would be a fun place to celebrate holidays and cultural events, too.

Roanoke Park Survey in Detail Do you feel that Roanoke Park should be mostly devoted to “passive” or “active” recreation?
Passive recreation emphasizes the open-space aspect of a park and involves a low level of development, including picnic areas and trails. Active recreation is that which requires intensive development and often involves cooperative or team activity, including playgrounds, ball fields, etc.

5.8%

12.1%

Predominately Passive Somewhat more passive About half active, half passive Somewhat more active Predominantly Active No Opinion 1.5%

14.1%

18.4%

48.1%

“Passive” recreation is favored over “active,” but a mix enjoys wide support

20

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

More improved surface paths ths

52.8%

22.3%

11.7% %

8.6% 4.6 %

What FEATURES would you LIKE or NOT LIKE to make the park experience better?
More parking areas around park ark

14.6%

Strong desire
18.6%

21.1%

20.6%

25.1%

Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations
More trash barrels throughout park ark Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations ons Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations ons Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations ons Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations ons Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations ons Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations ons Drastic thinning around major trees and rock formations ons

Somewhat appealing, a secondary choice Don’t care one way or other
7.5% % % 7.5% % 7.5% % 7.5% % 7.5% % 7.5% % 7.5% 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 14%
Plots of native grasses ses

Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits
65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 65.3% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 20.2% 20.2% 20.2% 20.2% 20.2% 20.2% 20.2% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 20.6% 20.6% 20.6% 20.6% 20.6% 20.6% 20.6% 11.7% % 11.7% % 11.7% % 11.7% % 11.7% % 11.7% % 11.7% %

38% 38% 38% 38% 38% 38% 38%

22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22%

18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5%

47%

27.7%

11.9% %

7.4% 5.9% 4% %

Only if most want it Strong objection
37.3% 24.9% 24.8% 10% % 3

Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits xits Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits xits Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits xits Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits xits Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits xits Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits xits Trash barrels & trash bags at main entries/exits xits

5.9% 4.5 2 9% 4 5 % 5.9% 4.5 2 9% 4 5 % 5.9% 4.5 2 9% 4 5 % 5.9% 4.5 2 9% 4 5 % 5.9% 4.5 2 9% 4 5 % 5.9% 4.5 2 9% 4 5 % 5.9% 4.5 2 9% 4 5 %
Reforestation on

Reforestation
30.5% 30% 27% 8.5% 4 %

The whole park in a natural but well-groomed state
The whole park in a natural but well groomed state ate The whole park in a natural but well groomed state ate The whole park in a natural but well groomed state ate The whole park in a natural but well groomed state ate The whole park in a natural but well groomed state ate The whole park in a natural but well groomed state ate The whole park in a natural but well groomed state ate

5.9% 3 3.4 9% % 5.9% 3 3.4 9% % 5.9% 3 3.4 9% % 5.9% 3 3.4 9% % 5.9% 3 3.4 9% % 5.9% 3 3.4 9% % 5.9% 3 3.4 9% % 8.6% % 8.6% % 8.6% % 8.6% % 8.6% % 8.6% % 8.6% % 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6

More improved surface paths ths More improved surface paths ths More improved surface paths ths More improved surface paths ths More improved surface paths ths More improved surface paths ths More improved surface paths ths

More improved surface paths 52.8%
52.8% 52.8% 52.8% 52.8% 52.8% 52.8%

Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings
23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 28.4% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 18.8% 18.8% 18.8% 18.8% 18.8% 18.8% 18.8% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 17.6% 17.6% 17.6% 17.6% 17.6% 17.6% 17.6% 16.8% 16.8% 16.8% 16.8% 16.8% 16.8% 16.8% 11.3% % 11.3% % 11.3% % 11.3% % 11.3% % 11.3% % 11.3% % 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 9.3% 8.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.4% 8.8% % 8.8% % 8.8% % 8.8% % 8.8% % 8.8% % 8.8% % 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9

Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings ngs Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings ngs Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings ngs Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings ngs Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings ngs Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings ngs

More parking areas around park ark More parking areas around park ark More parking areas around park ark More parking areas around park ark More parking areas around park ark More parking areas around park ark More parking areas around park ark

More parking areas around park
14.6% 14.6% 14.6% 14.6% 14.6% 14.6% 14.6% 18.6% 18.6% 18.6% 18.6% 18.6% 18.6% 18.6% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1%

Formal garden area to contrast with the mostly natural settings ngs

25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 25.1% 11.9% % 11.9% % 11.9% % 11.9% % 11.9% % 11.9% % 11.9% % 24.8% 24.8% 24.8% 24.8% 24.8% 24.8% 24.8% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27%

Water feature for viewing
28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 51.5% 51.5% 51.5% 51.5% 51.5% 51.5% 51.5% 27.2% 27.2% 27.2% 27.2% 27.2% 27.2% 27.2%

Water feature for viewing ng Water feature for viewing ng Water feature for viewing ng Water feature for viewing ng Water feature for viewing ng Water feature for viewing ng Water feature for viewing ng

More trash barrels throughout park ark More trash barrels throughout park ark More trash barrels throughout park ark More trash barrels throughout park ark More trash barrels throughout park ark More trash barrels throughout park ark More trash barrels throughout park ark

More trash barrels throughout park

27.7% 27.7% 27.7% 27.7% 27.7% 27.7% 27.7%

7.4% 5.9% 4% % 7.4% 5.9% 4% % 7.4% 5.9% 4% % 7.4% 5.9% 4% % 7.4% 5.9% 4% % 7.4% 5.9% 4% % 7.4% 5.9% 4% % 10% % 10% % 10% % 10% % 10% % 10% % 10% % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Lighted walking areas

Lighted walking areas eas Lighted walking areas eas Lighted walking areas eas Lighted walking areas eas Lighted walking areas eas Lighted walking areas eas Lighted walking areas eas

Plots of native grasses ses Plots of native grasses ses Plots of native grasses ses Plots of native grasses ses Plots of native grasses ses Plots of native grasses ses Plots of native grasses ses

Plots of native grasses

37.3% 37.3% 37.3% 37.3% 37.3% 37.3% 37.3%

24.9% 24.9% 24.9% 24.9% 24.9% 24.9% 24.9% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30%

Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions ons Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions ons Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions ons Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions ons Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions ons Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions ons Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions ons

Surveillance Cameras to detect dumping /infractions 43.3% 27.1% 14.8% 10.3% 4.4 %
43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 43.3% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 14.8% 14.8% 14.8% 14.8% 14.8% 14.8% 10.3% % 10.3% % 10.3% % 10.3% % 10.3% % 10.3% % 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4

Reforestation on Reforestation on Reforestation on Reforestation on Reforestation on Reforestation on Reforestation on

Most desired FEATURES:

30.5% 30.5% 30.5% 30.5% 30.5% 30.5% 30.5%

8.5% % 8.5% % 8.5% % 8.5% % 8.5% % 8.5% % 8.5% %

Areas developed for picnic gatherings ngs Areas developed for picnic gatherings ngs Areas developed for picnic gatherings ngs Areas developed for picnic gatherings ngs Areas developed for picnic gatherings ngs Areas developed for picnic gatherings ngs Areas developed for picnic gatherings ngs

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

51.7% Areas for picnic gatherings 51.7% 51.7% 51.7% 51.7% 51.7% 51.7%

27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 17.3% 17.3% 17.3% 17.3% 17.3% 17.3% 17.3%

11.8% % 11.8% % 11.8% % 11.8% % 11.8% % 11.8% % 11.8% % 13.3% 13.3% 13.3% 13.3% 13.3% 13.3% 13.3%

6.9 .9 9 6.9 .9 9 6.9 .9 9 6.9 .9 9 6.9 .9 9 6.9 .9 9 6.9 .9 9

2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4

The whole park in a natural but well-groomed state; More trash barrels; More improved surface paths and lighted walking areas; Areas developed for picnic gatherings; Public art in Roanoke Park; Surveillance cameras to detect dumping/infractions Least desired FEATURES: More parking areas around park; Off-leash dog area

Public art in Roanoke Park. ark. Public art in Roanoke Park. ark. Public art in Roanoke Park. ark. Public art in Roanoke Park. ark. Public art in Roanoke Park. ark. Public art in Roanoke Park. ark. Public art in Roanoke Park. ark.

44.8% Public art 44.8% in Roanoke Park 44.8% 44.8% 44.8% 44.8% 44.8%

9.9% % 9.9% % 9.9% % 9.9% % 9.9% % 9.9% % 9.9% % 26.4% 26.4% 26.4% 26.4% 26.4% 26.4% 26.4%

Off-leash dog area rea Off-leash dog area rea Off-leash dog area rea Off-leash dog area rea Off-leash dog area rea Off-leash dog area rea Off-leash dog area rea

27.4% 15.7% 27.4% 15.7% Off-leash dog area 27.4% 15.7% 27.4% 27.4% 27.4% 15.7% 15.7% 15.7%

27.4%

15.7%

13.2% 13.2% 13.2% 13.2% 13.2% 13.2% 13.2%

Roanoke Park Master Plan

21

Soccer cer

24.7%

28.8%

22.7%

17.2%

6.6%

What ACTIVITIES would you WANT or NOT WANT in Roanoke Park?
Skate Board area rea

8% %

16.1%

Strong desire
16.6%

26.6%

32.7%

Water feature for playing
Water feature for playing g Water feature for playing g Water feature for playing g Water feature for playing g Water feature for playing g Water feature for playing g Water feature for playing g Water feature for playing g

Somewhat appealing, a secondary choice
12.5% % 12.5% % 12.5% % 12.5% % 12.5% % 12.5% % 12.5% % 12.5% % 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 21.7% 21.7% 21.7% 21.7% 21.7% 21.7% 21.7% 21.7% 32% 32% 32% 32% 32% 32% 32% 32% 22.7% 22.7% 22.7% 22.7% 22.7% 22.7% 22.7% 22.7% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 18.5% 26.9% 26.9% 26.9% 26.9% 26.9% 26.9% 26.9% 26.9% 17.7% 17.7% 17.7% 17.7% 17.7% 17.7% 17.7% 17.7% 17.2% 17.2% 17.2% 17.2% 17.2% 17.2% 17.2% 17.2% 32.7% 32.7% 32.7% 32.7% 32.7% 32.7% 32.7% 32.7% 9% % 9% % 9% % 9% % 9% % 9% % 9% % 9% % 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 13% 13% 13% 13% 13% 13% 13% 13% 6.4 .4 4 6.4 .4 4 6.4 .4 4 6.4 .4 4 6.4 .4 4 6.4 .4 4 6.4 .4 4 6.4 .4 4 8.1 1 8.1 1 8.1 1 8.1 1 8.1 1 8.1 1 8.1 1 8.1 1 6.5 .5 5 6.5 .5 5 6.5 .5 5 6.5 .5 5 6.5 .5 5 6.5 .5 5 6.5 .5 5 6.5 .5 5

Volleyball

39% 39% 39% 39% 39% 39% 39% 39%

21.5% 21.5% 21.5% 21.5% 21.5% 21.5% 21.5% 21.5% 30.2% 30.2% 30.2% 30.2% 30.2% 30.2% 30.2% 30.2% 30.3% 30.3% 30.3% 30.3% 30.3% 30.3% 30.3% 30.3% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 16.6% 16.6% 16.6% 16.6% 16.6% 16.6% 16.6% 16.6%

Don’t care one way or other
Playgrounds for children ren

66%

18.5%

9% %

5 1.5

Only if most want it
2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Volleyball ball Volleyball ball Volleyball ball Volleyball ball Volleyball ball Volleyball ball Volleyball ball Volleyball ball

Tennis

32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 36.9% 36.9% 36.9% 36.9% 36.9% 36.9% 36.9% 36.9%

Strong objection
33.1% 28.6% 26.9% 6.3% 5.1 3% %

Music, other (described below) ow)

Music, Jazz/Blues
41.9% 33.8% 17.7% 3.5 3.5 3

Tennis nis Tennis nis Tennis nis Tennis nis Tennis nis Tennis nis Tennis nis Tennis nis

Music, Jazz/Blues ues

Tai Chi Tai Chi Tai Chi Tai Chi Tai Chi Tai Chi Tai Chi Tai Chi

Tai Chi 24%
24% 24% 24% 24% 24% 24% 24%

Music, contemporary/robust t Music, contemporary/robust t Music, contemporary/robust t Music, contemporary/robust t Music, contemporary/robust t Music, contemporary/robust t Music, contemporary/robust t

2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

Music, contemporary/robust
21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 21.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 31.1% 23.7% 23.7% 23.7% 23.7% 23.7% 23.7% 23.7% 23.7% 11.5% % 11.5% % 11.5% % 11.5% % 11.5% % 11.5% % 11.5% % 11.5% % 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 23.5% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% 31.8% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 25.7% 25.7% 25.7% 25.7% 25.7% 25.7% 25.7% 25.7% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 15.4% 12.6% 12.6% 12.6% 12.6% 12.6% 12.6% 12.6% 12.6% 5.1 1 5.1 1 5.1 1 5.1 1 5.1 1 5.1 1 5.1 1 5.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Soccer cer Soccer cer Soccer cer Soccer cer Soccer cer Soccer cer Soccer cer Soccer cer

24.7% Soccer 24.7% 24.7% 24.7% 24.7% 24.7% 24.7% 24.7% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1%

6.6% 6.6% 6.6% 6.6% 6.6% 6.6% 6.6% 6.6%

Music, contemporary/robust t

Music, Chorales/Chamber
33.7% 33.7% 33.7% 33.7% 33.7% 33.7% 33.7% 33.7% 36.7% 36.7% 36.7% 36.7% 36.7% 36.7% 36.7% 36.7% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1% 24.1%

Music, Chorales/Chamber ber Music, Chorales/Chamber ber Music, Chorales/Chamber ber Music, Chorales/Chamber ber Music, Chorales/Chamber ber Music, Chorales/Chamber ber Music, Chorales/Chamber ber

Skate Board area rea Skate Board area rea Skate Board area rea Skate Board area rea Skate Board area rea Skate Board area rea Skate Board area rea Skate Board area rea

Skate Board area

8% % 8% % 8% % 8% % 8% % 8% % 8% % 8% %

Music, Chorales/Chamber ber

Horseshoes
23.1% 23.1% 23.1% 23.1% 23.1% 23.1% 23.1% 23.1% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2%

Horseshoes oes Horseshoes oes Horseshoes oes Horseshoes oes Horseshoes oes Horseshoes oes Horseshoes oes

Playgrounds for children ren Playgrounds for children ren Playgrounds for children ren Playgrounds for children ren Playgrounds for children ren Playgrounds for children ren Playgrounds for children ren Playgrounds for children ren

Playgrounds for children

66% 66% 66% 66% 66% 66% 66% 66%

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1

Horseshoes oes

5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6

Holiday events nts Holiday events nts Holiday events nts Holiday events nts Holiday events nts Holiday events nts Holiday events nts

Holiday events (ie 4th of July, etc) 32.2% 28.7%

Music, other (described below) ow) Music, other (described below) ow) Music, other (described below) ow) Music, other (described below) ow) Music, other (described below) ow) Music, other (described below) ow) Music, other (described below) ow) Music, other (described below) ow)

Music, other (described below)
41.9% 41.9% 41.9% 41.9% 41.9% 41.9% 41.9% 41.9% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8%

33.1% 33.1% 33.1% 33.1% 33.1% 33.1% 33.1% 33.1%

28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 28.6%

6.3% 3% % 6.3% 3% % 6.3% 3% % 6.3% 3% % 6.3% 3% % 6.3% 3% % 6.3% 3% % 6.3% 3% %

Holiday events nts

6.4% 6.9% 4% % 6.4% 6.9% 4% % 6.4% 6.9% 4% % 6.4% 6.9% 4% % 6.4% 6.9% 4% % 6.4% 6.9% 4% % 6.4% 6.9% 4% % 6.4% 6.9% 4% % 20.7% 20.7% 20.7% 20.7% 20.7% 20.7% 20.7% 20.7% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 16% 16% 16% 16% 16% 16% 16% 16% 4.4 4.4 4 4.4 4.4 4 4.4 4.4 4 4.4 4.4 4 4.4 4.4 4 4.4 4.4 4 4.4 4.4 4 4.4 4.4 4 5% % 5% % 5% % 5% % 5% % 5% % 5% % 5% % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Dance in Park ark Dance in Park ark Dance in Park ark Dance in Park ark Dance in Park ark Dance in Park ark Dance in Park ark

49.3% Dance in Park 49.3% 49.3% 49.3% 49.3% 49.3% 49.3% 49.3%

Music, Jazz/Blues ues Music, Jazz/Blues ues Music, Jazz/Blues ues Music, Jazz/Blues ues Music, Jazz/Blues ues Music, Jazz/Blues ues Music, Jazz/Blues ues Music, Jazz/Blues ues

Most desired ACTIVITIES:

3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5

Dance in Park ark

24.6% 24.6% 24.6% 24.6% 24.6% 24.6% 24.6% 24.6% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 32.2% 29.4% 29.4% 29.4% 29.4% 29.4% 29.4% 29.4% 29.4% 24% 24% 24% 24% 24% 24% 24% 24%

Cultural Festivals vals Cultural Festivals vals Cultural Festivals vals Cultural Festivals vals Cultural Festivals vals Cultural Festivals vals Cultural Festivals vals Cultural Festivals vals

42.2% 42.2% Cultural Festivals 42.2% 42.2% 42.2% 42.2% 42.2% 42.2%

Playgrounds for children; Dance in the Park; Cultural Festivals; Music, Jazz/Blues; Tennis; Volleyball Least desired ACTIVITIES: Skate board area; Music, contemporary/robust (ie Rock Festival)

4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5

Basketball ball Basketball ball Basketball ball Basketball ball Basketball ball Basketball ball Basketball ball Basketball ball

25.9% 25.9% Basketball 25.9% 25.9% 25.9% 25.9% 25.9%

25.9%

17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 17.8% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26%

9.1% 9.1% 9.1% 9.1% 9.1% 9.1% 9.1% 9.1% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 9.5%

Baseball ball Baseball ball Baseball ball Baseball ball Baseball ball Baseball ball Baseball ball Baseball ball

Baseball

24.5% 24.5% 24.5% 24.5% 24.5% 24.5% 24.5% 24.5%

22

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Survey participants rated their willingness to PARTICIPATE in changing Roanoke Park
I would participate in park conservancy type activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month.
39.8% 35.8% 24.4%

Yes I see myself doing this Uhmmm possibly, need to know more A keen idea for someone else, but not me

pe activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month. nth.

pe activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month. nth.

ups to help shepherd along projects that especially interest me.

pe activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month. nth.

pe activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month. nth.

24.4% 39.8% 35.8% I would meet from time to time in smaller groups 43.1% 38.6% especially 18.3% to help shepherd along projects that 24.4% 39.8% 35.8% 24.4% 39.8% 35.8% interest me. 39.8% 43.1% 14.9% 39.8% 43.1% 43.1% 42.8% 35.8% 38.6% 35.8% 38.6% 38.6% 24.4% 18.3% 42.3% 24.4% 18.3% 18.3%

pe activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month. nth.

ups to help shepherd along projects that especially interest me.

Support exists for a park conservancy organization and/or small groups with targeted projects . Support exists for any fund raising being directed toward Master Plan implementation . Survey comments affirmed the Parks and Recreation Department’s overall responsibility but supported a role for neighborhood groups and volunteers .

dopt a small section of the park, improve it and be its caretakers. ers. pe activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month. nth.

ups to help shepherd along projects that especially interest me.

ups to help shepherd along projects that especially interest me.

ups to help shepherd along projects that especially interest me.

dopt a small section of the park, improve it and be its caretakers. ers.

I and a friend or two would adopt a small section of 43.1% 38.6% 18.3% 14.9% 42.3% the park, improve42.8% be its caretakers. it and
19% 14.9% 14.9% 14.9% 19% 14.9% 19% 19% 19% 43.1% 39.8% 47% 42.8% 42.8% 42.8% 47% 42.8% 47% 47% 47% 38.6% 35.8% 34% 18.3% 24.4% 42.3% 42.3% 42.3% 34%

research and help reforest the park ark ups to help shepherd along projects that especially interest me. pe activities and show up with gloves for two hours each month. nth. dopt a small section of the park, improve it and be its caretakers. ers.

dopt a small section of the park, improve it and be its caretakers. ers.

dopt a small section of the park, improve it and be its caretakers. ers. research and help reforest the park ark

It would be fun to research and help reforest the park.
43.9% 43.1% 42.9% 38.6% 13.2% 42.3% 34% 18.3% 34% 34%

join a Friends of Roanoke Park Conservancy and pay dues ues dopt a small section of the park, improve it and be its caretakers. ers. ups to help shepherd along projects that especially interest me. research and help reforest the park ark research and help reforest the park ark

research and help reforest the park ark join a Friends of Roanoke Park Conservancy and pay dues ues

dy have or will join the battle against the pervasive honeysuckle! kle! research and help reforest the park ark dopt a small section of the park, improve it and be its caretakers. ers. join a Friends of Roanoke Park Conservancy and pay dues ues join a Friends of Roanoke Park Conservancy and pay dues ues

I would join a Friends33.3%Roanoke Park Conservancy of 27.9% 38.8% 19% 34% 14.9% 42.8%47% 42.3% 43.9% 42.9% 13.2% 43.9% 42.9% 13.2% and pay modest annual dues.
27.9% 43.9% 33.3% 47% 33.3% 33.3% 42.9% 57.4% 42.9% 38.8% 34% 38.8% 38.8% 13.2% 13.2%

43.9%

42.9%

13.2%

join a Friends of Roanoke Park Conservancy and pay dues ues

dy have or will join the battle against the pervasive honeysuckle! kle!

participate in developing the Master Plan lan join a Friends of Roanoke Park Conservancy and pay dues ues research and help reforest the park ark dy have or will join the battle against the pervasive honeysuckle! kle!

dy have or will join the battle against the pervasive honeysuckle! kle!

dy have or will join the battle against the pervasive honeysuckle! kle! participate in developing the Master Plan lan

I already have or will join the battle against the 27.9% 33.3% 38.8% pervasive honeysuckle! 15.8% 26.7% 57.4%
27.9% 43.9% 15.8% 26.7% 15.8% 26.7% 15.8% 26.7% 33.3% 38.8% 42.9% 57.4% 57.4% 57.4% 13.2%

15.8% 43.9%26.7% 19% 27.9% 27.9%

dy have or will join the battle against the pervasive honeysuckle! kle! join a Friends of Roanoke Park Conservancy and pay dues ues participate in developing the Master Plan lan participate in developing the Master Plan lan

participate in developing the Master Plan lan

participate in developing the Master Plan lan dy have or will join the battle against the pervasive honeysuckle! kle!

I want to participate in developing the Master Plan 26.7% 57.4% 38.8% 27.9% 33.3% by15.8% one of 3–5 representing my neighborhood being & commit to 12–18 hours or so to meetings spread over the next 12 months to brainstorm and plan.
15.8% 26.7% 57.4%

participate in developing the Master Plan lan

Roanoke Park Master Plan

23

24

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

EFFORTS AGAINST INVASIVE PLANTS

Effect of non-native invasive plants on Roanoke Park
To the untrained eye Roanoke Park may have appeared exceptionally verdant in the years before 2010. However not all that is green is good. The park was suffering from a major infestation of nonnative invasive plants, specifically shrub honeysuckle, Ailanthus trees and Euonymus wintercreeper. Shrub honeysuckle* Lonicera maackii, is native to Asia and was imported to our area as a landscape plant valued for it’s fragrant spring honeysuckle blooms, fall red berries and utility as a screen. Birds eat the berries and spread the plant far from its original planting locations. Roanoke Park is not alone in suffering from an infestation; a majority of metro area green spaces are lined with ever growing thickets of shrub honeysuckle. Control efforts are being undertaken in Hyde Park and Gillham Park and in parts of Swope Park and other properties where Kansas City Wildlands volunteers are at work. Homeowners and property owners are encouraged to remove this and any other non-native invasive species from their properties if at all possible. Shrub honeysuckle is detailed further in an excellent publication from the Missouri Department of Conservation: Curse of the Bush Honeysuckles!

A park volunteer works to clear a thicket of shrub honeysuckle and Ailanthus.

Identification and control measures are discussed and many suitable landscape alternatives are shown. What’s so bad about shrub honeysuckle? Left unchecked, this plant has the capacity to produce a monoculture, meaning large stands or thickets where nearly the only plant growing is shrub honeysuckle. This was taking place at the edges of wooded areas within Roanoke Park. It kills the native vegetation, depriving native insect and animal life of their homes and food sources. It manages this with a combination of a long growing season (it leafs out earlier than native plants and stays green longer) and allelopathy (it exudes biochemicals into the soil that inhibit the germination of seeds and growth of competing plants). While the berries are eaten by birds, they provide less energy than native berries. Without the pests, diseases and fungi of it’s native territory to keep it in check, shrub honeysuckle is able to run wild. Research has shown that native tree seedlings are unable to get started within a shrub honeysuckle stand. With no young seedlings to take their place, as older trees die the area is eventually taken over by shrub honeysuckle.

Overgrowth crowding the edge of Roanoke Boulevard

Roanoke Park Master Plan

25

Shrub honeysuckle’s effect on Roanoke Park Shrub honeysuckle has been a main contributor to the general overgrowth affecting the Park and obscuring the original design of the Park. As it’s grown up at the edge of the mowed areas it has obscured the hillsides and views of the rocky bluffs lining the Park. We could no longer see one of the Park’s unique natural features! The honeysuckle contributed to the overgrowth by serving as a trellis for wild grape vines which have grown over the honeysuckle and up into the trees. As the native vegetation has been greatly reduced, so have sightings of spring wildflowers, butterflies and hummingbirds. In areas where honeysuckle stands have been removed, the effectiveness with which honeysuckle kills everything beneath it is apparent.
*Synonyms are Amur Honeysuckle, and Red Rum Honeysuckle. Morrow’s Honeysuckle, Lonicera morrowii and Tatarian Honeysuckle, Lonicera tatarica are also from Asia and similarly invasive. The term “shrub honeysuckle” is preferred over “bush honeysuckle” to avoid any possible confusion with two native species, Diervilla lonicera “northern bush honeysuckle” and Diervilla sessilifolia “southern bush honeysuckle.” Neither of these U.S. native species however, is native to Missouri.

Ailanthus trees and wintercreeper Ailanthus trees, Ailanthus altissima, are known by the common names Tree of Heaven, “ghetto palm” for its eagerness in blighted areas and “stink tree” for its foul smelling blooms. Its Chinese name translates to “malodorous tree.” It is also the tree in A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. In the novel the tree continues growing despite all efforts to kill it. Such tenacity is an uplifting metaphor in the novel but a nuisance in Roanoke Park. Ailanthus trees also uses allelopathy to out-compete neighboring trees and plants and can grow quickly, reaching large size in 25 years. But the branches of Ailanthus are brittle and they rarely live longer than 50 years. There were numerous Ailanthus trees growing in the park prior to the clearing efforts beginning in 2010, stealing space from more favored and longer lived native trees. The compound leaves of Ailanthus can be confused with native smooth sumac and black walnut. Wintercreeper, Euonymus fortunei, is a woody evergreen vine native to Asia. It is widely planted as a ground cover but often establishing itself as a volunteer invader in gardens, yards and parks. Wintercreeper will not bloom and produce seeds until it grows up a tree or structure. In Roanoke Park it was discovered widely blanketing many of the bluffs and hillsides behind the screening banks of shrub honeysuckle, and growing up the trunks of many trees. Wintercreeper has been identified by a task force of the Missouri Botanical Garden as a “Category A”* exotic pest plant, known to be spreading into native plant areas and crowding out native species in our region. Wintercreeper spreads both vegetatively and by animal and water dispersed seeds. Because of its known invasive tendencies and difficult to control dispersal mechanisms naturalists recommend against planting this plant. Other plants on the Missouri Botanical Garden’s Category A exotics list that exist in Roanoke Park include Multiflora Rose, Garlic Mustard, Japanese Honeysuckle and of course, Shrub Honeysuckle.
*Source: http://www.mobot.org/mobot/research/mepp/categoryA.shtml

Invasive wintercreeper blanketing a hillside north of Karnes Boulevard in Roanoke Park.

26

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Control methods used against invasive plants in Roanoke Park
On the advice of the Kansas City Missouri Parks and Recreation Department, the Missouri Department of Conservation and Kansas City Wildlands, the following control methods have been employed against invasive plants in Roanoke Park. Shrub honeysuckle has very shallow roots so seedlings and smaller plants may be effectively removed by simply pulling or levering them out of the ground. The larger plants making up the bulk of Roanoke Park’s infestation require cutting and herbicide to keep the plant from re-sprouting. Cut stump treatment with the herbicide Tordon, applied in a ring to the cut surface of the target plant immediately after cutting, has been used against shrub honeysuckle and Ailanthus trees. This is most effectively used from mid summer through winter and less effective in spring. Wintercreeper has being attacked with 2% solution of glyphosate (RoundUp) applied to the leaves of actively growing vines in the fall. In the springtime a cut stump treatment using a 20-25% solution of glyphosate (RoundUp) is recommended on the woody stems of wintercreeper where it is found to be growing up trees. Keeping it from growing up trees will prevent any new seed production. The springtime

cut stump treatment is done after the last killing frost date, April 1. The fall foliar treatment is done before the first killing frost date, October 15. Garlic Mustard, Alliaria petiolata, is best attacked by pulling the bolting second year plants from the ground before they have a chance to produce seed, from spring to mid-summer. The plants are able to produce seed even after being pulled from the ground so they should be handled as follows: Removed plants should be bagged in black plastic trash bags and left to bake in the sun for a week or longer, then disposed with household or municipal waste. The heat of the sun accumulates in the black bag, greatly reducing the volume to be disposed of and completely killing the plants and any seed present. Organized “garlic mustard pulls” may be held to keep garlic mustard from becoming a problem in Roanoke Park.

Roanoke Park Master Plan

27

2010 progress in fighting non-native invasive plants
The Parks Department has been a valuable ally in neighborhood efforts against invasive plants. Parks department staff has provided advice and technical assistance and crews have quickly removed the brush piles generated by volunteer efforts and graded / seeded areas reclaimed for turf grass. Over 1,900 volunteer hours have been logged in the eradication of invasive plants in Roanoke Park and the progress shows on the ground. Areas that had

Areas of Roanoke Park in which major clearing and treating of shrub honeysuckle took place in 2010. Areas where wintercreeper was treated in the fall of 2010.

28

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

been completely obscured by honeysuckle bushes are now open and ready for further restoration: in the replanting of native plants, repair of walls or building of a hiking/biking/ nature path.

4Officers Jim Schriever and Scott Finn begin bringing Community Service workers in July to help the volunteers.

4August 20, 2010 - Meeting in Park with Forest
Decker, Kansas City Parks Dept. Forester, to discuss grooming and grass seeding of cleared flat areas. Reaching out to MO Dept. of Conservation and Kansas City Wildlands recommended for sloped areas. Also attending were parks department employees Dave Parks, Clarence Brown and Derone Spears lending their expertise. About a half dozen neighborhood park advocates in attendance.

4February 2010 - Volker neighbor Kite Singleton fired
the first shot in the Roanoke Honeysuckle wars and Roanoke neighbor Miles Krivena enlisted himself in the fight. Kite arranges for training in identifying, cutting and killing of bush honeysuckle.

4September, 2010 - Locally sourced Solomon’s
Seal roots and Red Columbine seeds planted

4February-March, 2011 - Locally collected native
seeds, primarily River Oats, planted in former honeysuckle areas with the guidance of Bill Fessler, leader of the Kansas City Parks and Recreation Department Conservation Corps.

4June 2010 - Surrogate Volunteer Program established by anonymous donor who sponsored 5 landscapers for a day’s work. Since the program’s inception, five other neighbors have stepped forth to sponsor a work force to join with the volunteers.

4July 14, 2010 - Meeting with
Parks landscape architect to consider ground covers for reclaimed lands in park. Six battle experienced honeysuckle warriors joined the walk to investigate flat and sloped surfaces that had been taken back for occupation by us; not the honeysuckle aliens.

4July 18, 2010 - Roanoker
passes the hat raising over $600 to acquire new, HD weed whacker and assorted tools to aid in clearing weeds and light growth. This walking path across from the tennis courts had been crowded by honeysuckle bushes, feeling dark and unsafe. It is now more enjoyable and usable after the overgrowth was reduced.

Roanoke Park Master Plan

29

Replacement native ground cover “green list”
As is visible in the park after cutting back the shrub honeysuckle, nothing grows beneath it. And where wintercreeper is allowed to run wild, nothing grows but wintercreeper. The topic of appropriate ground covers for Roanoke Park is a lively one. It’s difficult to tell exactly what was growing beneath the trees in the old photographs but as we restore Roanoke Park to the slice of “unmarred nature” it once was, a wide variety of native ground covers will certainly have a place. The flatter mowable areas reclaimed from shrub honeysuckle are being graded and seeded with turf grass by the Parks Department. But on the hillsides and bluffs encircling the park, native plants are preferred for their variety, drought tolerance, and ability to sustain local birds, insects and animals. The following is a list of NATIVE ground covers that may have been growing here in years past and if we plant them, will again. A number of them are already here if you know where to look. Most of the list below is native to Jackson County, or at least Missouri. Most are perennials. This list does not include native trees and larger shrubs to be considered separately. Future fund raising may be directed toward the purchase of live plants or seeds of the following species. “Local ecotype” specimens are preferred.

Spring Ephemerals Snow Trillium - Trillium nivale Wake Robin / Toadshade - Trillium sessile Mayapple - Podophyllum peltatum Dutchman’s Breeches - Dicentra cucullaria Trout Lily - Erythronium albidum Largeflower Bellwort - Uvullaria grandifolia Bloodroot - Sanguinaria canadensis Soloman’s Seal - Polygonatum biflorum Sunny Areas - misc . Cleft Phlox Phlox bifida Three-Leaved Stonecrop Sedum ternatum Purple American Cleft Phlox - Phlox bifida Source: Chris Evans, River to Stonecrop, aka River CWMA, Bugwood.org Widow’s Cross Sedum pulchellum Rose Verbena - Verbena canadensis Purple Poppy Mallow - Callirhoe involucrata Pussytoes - Antennaria plantaginifolia Calamint - Calamintha arkansana Bigfruit Evening Primrose - Oenothera macrocarpa Fremont’s Leather Flower - Clematis fremontii Shady Areas - misc . Wild Ginger - Asarum canadense Roundleaf Groundsel - Packera obovata Running Strawberry Bush - Euonymus obovatus Native Coral Bells / Alumroot - Huechera americana Virginia Knotweed / Jumpseed - Polygonum virginianum Goldenseal - Hydrastis canadensis Blue-Eyed Mary - Collinsia verna

Wake Robin - Trillium sessile

Roundleaf Groundsel Packera obovata

30

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Vines Virginia Creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia Canada Moonseed Menispermum canadense American Hog Peanut Amphicarpaea Bracteata Native Morning Glories - Ipomoea pandurata & Ipomoea lacunosa Native Honeysuckle Lonicera semperverins & Lonicera flava

ON the rocks Purple Cliffbrake Fern - Pellaea atropurpurea Smooth Cliffbrake Fern - Pellaea glabella Blackstem Spleenwort - Asplenium resiliens Red Columbine - Aquilegia canadensis Grasses & Sedges, Shade: Pennsylvania sedge - Carex pennsylvanica White-tinged sedge - Carex albicans var. albicans River Oats - Chasmanthium latifolium James’ Sedge - Carex jamesii Beak Grass - Diarrhena obovata Gray’s Sedge - Carex grayi Grasses & Sedges, Sun: Prairie Junegrass Koeleria macrantha Buffalo Grass Bouteloua dactyloides Blue Grama Bouteloua gracilis Sideoats Grama Bouteloua curtipendula Virginia Wildrye Little Bluestem Elymus virginicus Schizachyrium scoparium Canada Wildrye Elymus canadensis Silky Wildrye Elymus villosus Prairie Dropseed - Sporobolus heterolepis Little Bluestem - Schizachyrium scoparium Poverty Oatgrass - Danthonia spicata Yellow-Fruited Fox Sedge - Carex annectans Palm Sedge - Carex muskingumensis Spreading and requiring larger areas: Clustered Field Sedge - Carex praegracilis Riverbank Tussock Sedge - Carex emoryi

Virginia Creeper in fall Parthenocissus quinquifolia

Low shrubs: Coralberry - Symphocarpos orbiculata Fragrant Sumac - Rhus aromatica New Jersey Tea - Ceanothus americanus White Baneberry - Actea pachypoda Native Violets Blue Violet - Viola sororia Missouri Violet - Viola missouriensis Yellow Violet - Viola pubescens Bird’s Foot Violet - Viola pedanta Prairie Violet - Viola pedatifida Small Ferns Maidenhair Fern Adiantum pedantum Spinulose Shield Fern Dryopteris carthusiana Walking Fern Asplenium rhisophyllum Christmas Fern Polystichum acrostichoides Ebony Spleenwort Asplenium platyneuron

Cliffbrake fern in Roanoke Park amid unidentified ferns

For descriptions and notes on all of these species, see www.roanokeparkkc.org/plans/planting-the-future

Roanoke Park Master Plan

31

2011 control plan against non-native invasive plants
In 2011 more areas of heavy shrub honeysuckle infestation will be cut and treated in the same manner as 2010. Attention will be paid to the areas cut in 2010 to monitor all cut stumps for re-sprouting. Shrub honeysuckle and Ailanthus that is found to be re-sprouting will be again cut and treated with Tordon. Small honeysuckle seedlings and plants will be pulled from the ground wherever practical. Areas of wintercreeper will be spring treated using the cut stump method only where it is found to be growing up trees. In the fall of 2011 the

wintercreeper vining along the ground will be attacked with foliar herbicide treatment as noted in the earlier Control Methods section. Focus will shift in 2011 to planting native ground covers and grasses in areas reclaimed from honeysuckle and wintercreeper, both to control erosion, and contribute to the aesthetic appeal and wildlife supporting capacity of the park. A management plan for future control of non-native invasive plants will be developed for use after 2011 in Roanoke Park. The plan may be overseen by a future park conservancy organization and involve dividing the park into areas monitored by volunteers.

Areas of shrub honeysuckle to be cut and treated in 2011. Areas of wintercreeper to be treated in 2011.

32

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Seeding and planting through April 2011
C Red Columbine Aquilegia canadensis ~1500 seeds Po Roundleaf Ragwort Packera obovata 9 large plugs transplanted, 1,000 seeds Persimmon Diospyros virginiana 20 seeds Partridge Pea Chamaechrista fasciculata ~100 seeds Purple Poppy Mallow Callirhoe involucrata 300 seeds*

ELG Elmleaf Goldenrod Solidago ulmifolia 2 ounces = 260,000 seeds Lc Cardinal Flower Lobelia cardinalis 100 seeds* Jacob’s Ladder Polemonium reptans 100 seeds*

P

Cf

JL

Ci

FGO Fall Glade Onion Allium stellatum 100 seeds* JS Jumpseed Polygonum virginianum 1 ounce = ~3,500 seeds Prairie Dropseed Sporobulus heterolepsis 4 ounces = ~62,000 seeds River Oats Chasmanthium latifolium 4 pounds = ~128,000 seeds Solomon’s Seal Polygonatum biflorum ~25 tubers Woodland Sunflower Helianthus hirsutus ~320 seeds Wildrye Virginia & Silky

PD

RO

SS

WS

WR

Quantities noted with * purchased online. All other seeds collected locally. All quantities are totals for park.

Roanoke Park Master Plan

33

Above volunteer hours spreadsheet does not include the workers on Earth Day, 2011

34

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND ENGAGEMENT

Roanoke Park’s neighbors come together
The vision of a restored and re-invigorated Roanoke Park has been inspiring to a large number and wide variety of park neighbors. Since the effort began in the spring of 2010, the involvement has continued to grow as is shown by the facts and figures on this page.

$35,784 in value to the Park from 1,927 total hours of volunteer labor (2009 valuation, http://www .independentsector .org/ volunteer_time) $41,048 in donated professional services and cash donations have funded the survey, website, tools, gas, sponsoring work crews, food and water $76,832 in total value to Roanoke Park

4 28 people attended “Walk in the Park #1” 4 43 people attended “Walk in the Park #2” 4 211 people took the neighborhood survey 4 349 people get regular email updates 4 94 people have volunteered time, money
or materials to the Park restoration or Master Planning efforts

4 72 people have helped cut honeysuckle 4 20 people have been very active
honeysuckle warriors

4 22 people have participated in some Park
effort other than cutting honeysuckle

4 38 people attended the Master Planning
Charrette

4 58 people attended Earth Day 2011
in Roanoke Park to help drag brush, remove trash and pull weeds, logging 168 volunteer hours

4 10 people: average number of
volunteers per Saturday

4 589 hours of volunteer labor has been logged
in planning, organization, website and tasks OTHER than cutting shrub honeysuckle

4 1,170 hours of volunteer labor has been
logged in cutting shrub honeysuckle

Roanoke Park Master Plan

35

MASTER PLANNING - PLANTING THE FUTURE

Master Planning process and progress to date

4March 2010 - Miles Krivena convenes meeting
with reps from 4 neighborhoods and Dona Boley to gauge area interest. All in attendance recognize the importance of the park as a community asset with the potential to positively impact area lifestyles and property values. Resolved to lay out orderly plan leading to publication of a Master Plan for the Park in the Spring, 2011. 9 attended.

4PIAC request made for more sidewalk
south of the playground on 36th St.

4April 17, 2010 - “Walk in the Park #1.” Dona
Boley, a champion of parks and the leader of the Gillham Park Improvement Project (GRIP) guided a group through Gillham Park to see what had been done. 28 attended.

4June – July, 2010 - Residents of Valentine, Volker,
Coleman Highlands and Roanoke are invited to take a survey about a vision for Roanoke Park including features, fixtures and amenities wanted or not wanted. The survey was completed by 211 neighborhood residents. It was designed to inform the discussions leading to the Master Plan for Roanoke Park.

4August 11, 2010 - Meeting with architect Cary Goodman to refine charrette process and review progress to date.

4August, 2010 - Three PIAC requests made:
1. Fix water drainage problem that leaves a portion of sidewalk perpetually slick from a moss covering. It is a safety hazard. 2. Create walking trails through woods.

4May Day, 2010 - “Walk in the Park #2.” Dona
Boley presented the history of the Kesslerdesigned Kansas City Parks & Boulevard System before leading a Roanoke Park walk to contemplate what might be done. 43 attended.

3. Reforestation of park with historically significant and regionally appropriate trees.

4August 30, 2010 - Roll out of Park Survey Results
and expanded version of www.RoanokeParkKC.org

4October 9, 2010 - Charrette held at the WestportRoanoke Community Center, with walking excursions throughout the Park. 38 attended.

4May, 2010 - An afternoon in the Missouri Valley
Room searching out historic photos and documents about Roanoke Park for use as background in neighborhood meetings and on a proposed website.

4October 21, 2010 - Facilitator’s Notes on
Charrette released on www.roanokeparkkc.org.

4May 14, 2010 - Meeting to plan “charrette”
(day-long planning meeting) in the fall as key step to fleshing out the Master Plan.

4November 22, 2010 - Initial draft of Master
Plan Concept produced by Michael Lockwood of Populous Architects and posted on roanokeparkkc.org. Comments accepted via email.

4June 10, 2010 - Meeting at Parks and Rec offices
to engage parks department, articulate the vision of an in-perpetuity private/public park project. Deal struck deal for brush pickup. Attended by 3 from Roanoke Park, 8 from Parks and Rec.

4March / April, 2011 - This Master
Plan Document created.

36

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

GUIDING PRINCIPLES – CHARRETTE

4 Honor Kessler’s City Beautiful Vision 4 Restore the park to its former grandeur 4 Respect history while embracing the future 4 Maintain ecological, geological
and environmental balance

4 Enhance the quality of life and value
of adjoining neighborhoods

4 Encourage the use of the park by
creating a secure environment

4 Maintain park improvements
Guiding Principles used to begin the Charrette
Local architect Cary Goodman lived in Roanoke for 37 years and was at the very first meeting in February, 2010, to contemplate a vision of private citizens adopting this historic park. He inspired those interested in Roanoke Park with a vision was for a thoughtful reclamation that could inure to the benefit of its nearby neighbors, honor the park’s history and enhance our midtown urban lifestyles with a green space in which to happily gather. He provided the Guiding Principles which guided the Charrette held on October 9th, 2010. Sadly, Cary passed away December 14th, 2010 but his Guiding Principles are still being followed. The last four points at right were added at the October 9th, 2010 charrette.
and attractiveness

4 Support (and expand) the use of
Westport-Roanoke Community Center

4 Maximize the opportunity for both
public and private donor support

4 Expand the park’s beauty by engaging of
all the senses; smell, touch, sight, hearing

4 Emphasis on Serving Surrounding
Neighborhoods (vs. Entire City)

4 Self Sustaining / Low Maintenance 4 Spark Neighborhood Sense of Ownership 4 Invite Business Participation/Support

Roanoke Park Master Plan

37

CHARRETTE

October 9th, 2010, Master Planning Meeting
On October 9, 2010, the biggest investment in thought about Roanoke Park since the days of George Kessler occurred. Thirty-eight individuals gave their day in the charrette stage of a new Master Plan for Roanoke Park. The consensus of the group is that it was an amazing experience with exciting results! Included in the 38 people who convened to “honor the past and plant the future” of Roanoke Park were: The 7-1/2 hour charrette:
1. Began with a review of Kessler’s plan and the history of Roanoke Park, 2. Then, a presentation of the summer 2010 Survey Results used to inform the charrette, 3. Dividing into 3 teams to walk assigned sectors, 4. The brainstorming discussion that makes for a great charrette - lots of discussion, 5. And finally coming together in one drawing for the interpretation by architects.

41 forester from MO Dept of Conservation, 41 professional artist who lent his perspective as a
team leader,

41 naturalist who, after research, has begun to help us
plant appropriate indigenous plants in some of the areas previously dominated by foreign invasives,

42 professional discussion facilitators, 42 degreed landscape architects, 42 highly regarded architects who are now
interpreting the inputs from the charrette into a first draft design proposal,

42 professional photographers to document the
proceedings that are now being prepared for the website,

43 people from Kansas City, Missouri Parks
and Recreation, including the Director and Deputy Director.

Mary Jo Draper served as the Facilitator for the event. After a review of the history of Roanoke Park, she presented the results of the neighborhood survey conducted over the preceding summer. The Guiding Principles listed at the beginning of this document were presented and discussion amongst the group began, with a few points added to the Principles. Charrette participants expressed these initial thoughts regarding the character of the park:

4Maintain current character 4Natural, well groomed 4Rethink planting 4Concern about clearing – impact on wildlife 4Experiment with different sections, see what works 4Maintain diverse wildlife 4Group agreed to this principal: The park should be
an urban woodland, and we should let the experts decide how best to make that happen.

38

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Team park walks and discussion sessions The charrette participants were broken into three teams with each given a defined area of the park to explore and focus their discussions on. Each team walked their section of the park, took notes and began discussing positive aspects of the park, maintenance needs and Master Plan ideas. After completing their walks the teams used tracing paper and aerial photography of the park to get their ideas down onto paper with the aim of presenting their recommendations to the larger group. Detailed notes on each team’s drawing and recommendations may be found by viewing the Facilitator’s Notes at http://www.scribd.com/doc/39791000/ Facilitator-s-Notes-From-Roanoke-Park-Charrette.

Common themes and group comments on all drawings Dona Boley spent time with each team and assessed common themes she heard in all discussions:

4Connections to surrounding neighborhoods 4Water/drainage problems 4Activities 4Keeping vistas 4Neighborhood park, not regional 4Consolidate active sports at community center
After the team drawings were presented the charrette participants made the following comments:

4Take out current tennis courts, make open sports area 4Deal with water/drainage issues 42-loop walking trail, standard width 4Loop for jogging 4Views from community center should connect to park 4Auto gateways should be standard 4Slow traffic at Wyoming and Karnes and elsewhere 4Trim trees to increase visibility in Wyoming area 4Hiking paths to hug bluffs 4Connect park to Benton Home 4Bike path to downtown 4Hydrologist needs to assess water issues 4Benches

Roanoke Park Master Plan

39

Executive Summary Drawing A consensus drawing was produced representing the work (200+ people hours) of all three teams. Popular goals were improved drainage leading to rain gardens, adding hiking trails, enhancing and maintaining natural character, improving neighborhood access, and traffic calming.

Kudos and Thank You To:

4Cary Goodman, who suggested and organized the charrette. 4Mary Jo Draper, who facilitated the morning. 4The staff of the Westport Roanoke Community Center, especially Sheronda, Michael and Steven. 4Curt Watkins-invitations and announcements. 4And, also all of you who likewise gave the
day to help enhance the urban experience of living in midtown Kansas City! Kelly Thompson . Carolyn Sipp . Ben Simmons . Wendy Sangster . Heather Runkel . Eric Rogers . Jim Peters . Paul Pearce . Andrew Park . Mike Oliver . Scott Nelson . Randy Moore . Rose Middleton . Frankie Messer . Mark McHenry . Jim McDonald . Steve Lampone . Michael Lockwood . Pam Hoelzel . Nancy Harrington . Necia Gamby . John Frick . Andy Dodge . Chris DeLong . Eric Bubb . Pete Browne . Jodi Brown-Marchioro . Greg Allen

40

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

THE FINAL CONCEPT...

Roanoke Park Master Plan

41

ROANOKE PARK MASTER PLAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES

Connectivity
Connectivity to the park from the surrounding neighborhoods

Lighting

4Illuminate Bluffs in SW corner of Karnes and Roanoke 4Elegant street lighting along Karnes and Roanoke 4Path lighting (low level lighting – 42” and below)
Playgrounds

4Vehicular Gateways 4Pedestrian Gateways 4Staircases
Connectivity within the park

4Locations good – updates needed 4Water spray-mist/play area
Rain Garden

4Sidewalks – closing the loops 4Hiking Path – connecting with nature –
educational opportunities

4Crosswalks – safe and secure road crossings
Roads
Karnes Boulevard

4Opportunity to showcase on-site water collection 4Water run-off control
View Corridors

4Various Methods for traffic slowing
- Bike Paths - Road Narrowing - Road surface change at crosswalks (brick pavers)

4Quiet places to view the park from within the park
Signage

Roanoke Boulevard

4Location with view informative vista features
(bluff age, natural springs, seepage areas, etc)

4Could be closed for community events 4Historic Street should be celebrated
Sports District

4Educational
- Plants - History

4Consolidation of “active” amenities to a
central location

4Move tennis courts to allow for other uses (larger
playground and rain garden)

4Utilize existing parking 4Develop organized activities with community center

42

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

MASTER PLAN ALTERNATIVES - EXAMPLES

Master Plan Concept
The Master Plan shown in this document is conceptual in nature. While it accurately depicts the wishes of those involved in the Survey and master planning Charrette, it is not intended to serve as accurate construction plans. The exact placement of details shown in the plan will change over time as more neighborhood feedback is received, engineering studies are conducted and expert advice is obtained. Included on this page are examples of possible alternative approaches to two master plan areas: the trails and the rain garden north of the Sports District. Hiking / Biking / Nature Trail Alternatives Local trail building expert Scott Capstack of Earth Riders Trails Association met park advocates and Parks Department personnel in Roanoke Park on March 11, 2011. While he was excited to begin

designing trails in Roanoke Park, he suggested alternative routing and street crossings from those shown on the master plan drawing. ERTA will prepare their own plan showing the exact routing of the trail, indicate it on the ground with flagging and seek approval from the Parks Department with multiple walk throughs and discussions. Their intention is to begin a starter loop in 2011 that would feature a high trail / low trail loop in the area between Roanoke Boulevard and Roanoke Drive. Rain Garden Alternatives The rain garden shown on the plan represents only one of as many as five possible areas where a rain garden would be helpful to control runoff. The rain garden at that location may not be as large as shown. The other possible areas for rain gardens identified on the day of the Charrette are noted below.

Possible alternative / additional locations for rain gardens shown with blue lines. Strong community support exists for keeping the sand volleyball court in its current location adjacent Karnes Boulevard. This area may be considered conceptually part of the “sports district” as shown in green above.

Roanoke Park Master Plan

43

PHASING OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

Phase 1

Phase 3

4 Sidewalks – connectivity to park
from surrounding neighborhoods

4 Sidewalks - within the park 4 Crosswalks 4 Hiking / Biking / Nature Paths - Phase 1 4 Illuminate bluffs in SW corner of Karnes
Boulevard and Roanoke Boulevard

4 Vehicular and Pedestrian gateways 4 Traffic calming on Karnes Boulevard 4 Signage 4 Plantings, reforestation, lawns
Phase 4

4 Plantings, reforestation, lawns
Phase 2

4 Street Lighting and pathway lighting 4 Storm sewer improvement and rain garden 4 Plantings, reforestation, lawns
Phase 5

4 Stairway improvements 4 Playground improvements 4 Public art 4 Plantings, reforestation, lawns

4 Sports district 4 Plantings, reforestation, lawns

44

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

LETTERS OF SUPPORT

Roanoke Park Master Plan

45

Letters of Support, continued

46

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Roanoke Park Master Plan

47

Letters of Support, continued

Coleman Highlands Neighborhood Association
Ryan Long - President 3101 Coleman Rd. Kansas City, Missouri 64111

April 6, 2011

Mark McHenry, Director Kansas City Parks & Recreation 4600 E. 63rd Street Kansas City, Missouri 64130 Dear Mark, At its February meeting, the Board of Directors of the Coleman Highlands Neighborhood Association voted to endorse the Roanoke Park Plan. The potential benefits to our neighborhood and to our city are already apparent, thanks to the volunteers that worked so hard last year to remove the invasive honeysuckle. We believe implementation of the master plan will not only restore Roanoke Park to its former glory, but will transform it into a wonderful 21st century amenity, further setting the urban core apart as the best place to live. Thank you for your support and participation in working with the neighborhoods to restore and improve Roanoke Park. Sincerely,

Ryan Long President, Coleman Highlands Neighborhood Association

48

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Roanoke Park Master Plan

49

Letters of Support, continued

50

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Roanoke Park Master Plan

51

Letters of Support, continued

52

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Roanoke Park Master Plan

53

Letters of Support, continued

54

Roanoke Park, Kansas City, Missouri

Roanoke Park Master Plan

55