View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
Council Meeting Minutes
June 20, 2016
1. Roll Call
Mayor Roe called
the meeting to order at approximately 6:00 p.m. Voting and Seating Order: Willmus,
Laliberte, Etten, McGehee, and Roe. City Manager Patrick Trudgeon and City
Attorney Mark Gaughan were also present.
2. Pledge of
3. Approve Agenda
Trudgeon requested removal of Item 8.f from the Consent Agenda for separate
consideration and a substitute resolution provided as a bench handout.
Willmus moved, Etten
seconded, approval of the agenda as amended.
Laliberte, Etten, McGehee, and Roe.
4. Public Comment
Mayor Roe called
for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items.
Ms. Gadea noted
she had applied for an advisory commission vacancy, but had unfortunately been
out of the country at the time scheduled for interviews. Therefore, Ms. Gadea noted
she had reached out to individual Councilmembers upon her return; and was
appearing tonight before the City Council to make herself available for any
questions of the group. Ms. Gadea stated her continued interest in a position.
welcomed Ms. Gadea and confirmed that she was still interested in a position on
either the Human Rights or Community Engagement Commission; to which Ms. Gadea responded
affirmatively, with her first choice being the Human Rights Commission.
Willmus opined that Ms. Gadea's application was very solid; and asked if she
were not appointed to a vacancy tonight, strongly encouraged her to apply again
for any future vacancies.
Mayor Roe noted
that it was customary for city staff to notify previous candidates of any future
vacancies when they occur; and thanked Ms. Gadea for being present at tonight's
Lajos J. Miho, 2053 Brenner Avenue
reported that he had received notice of code violation for a two-axle trailer
parked at his residence. Mr. Miho noted the trailer had been parked at his
address for some time, and he was just now being notified it was in violation
of city code; but assured the City Council that as a 100% disabled veteran, the
trailer was used for personal versus commercial use.
advised Mr. Miho that he was not alone in receiving such a city code violation
notice, with the characteristics of these trailers falling into the dual axle
category. Mayor Roe advised Mr. Miho that the City Council may revisit that issue
shortly to provide more guidance to staff in regulating these situations.
Willmus suggested suspending further staff action on this type of trailer until
the city had an opportunity to redefine the issue. Councilmember Willmus
reported that he had submitted several questions to staff on how trailers were
classified; and admitted he found dual axle categories questionable as they
related to commercial versus personal uses.
Trudgeon advised that staff would stay any further action on these pending violations
at this time until further City Council direction was given.
and City Manager Communications, Reports, and Announcements
announced upcoming Rosefest activities and events, and availability of free "I
Am Roseville" buttons; and a Youth Commissioner vacancy on the Parks &
Recreation Commission with an application deadline of July 15, 2016.
announced a meeting of the Roseville Economic Development Authority on Tuesday,
June 21, 2016 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers and a brief summary
of the meeting agenda. Mayor Roe announced an upcoming Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT)-hosted open house regarding a proposed I-35W noise wall
that will affect a small portion of Roseville on the west side at one point
adjacent to the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area between County Roads C and D on
the east side of the freeway only. Mayor Roe also announced an upcoming
Playground Build opportunities, the next on July 9, 2016 at Mapleview Park with
supervision for volunteers interested in helping out.
reported on his attendance last week of a portion of the annual League of
Minnesota Cities (LMC) conference in St. Paul, MN; and sessions he attended
focusing on online civic engagement; multi-generational cities and efforts of
communities in revamping their housing stock to accommodate aging in place; and
climate change and green steps efforts. Councilmember Etten reported it was
informative and provided for a good learning and networking opportunity.
As a member of
the Board for the North Suburban Communications Commission, Mayor Roe reported
on negotiations for a settlement with Comcast on their franchise agreement,
stating he was finding the latest progress encouraging; but would share further
details as they became available.
Trudgeon also reported on his one day available to attend the annual LMC
conference, attending a workshop on racial equity in delivery of local
services. Mr. Trudgeon advised that his take away had been that people may not
feel empowered due to language barriers, a lack of trust in government, or due
to long-term problems, with those issues able to be addressed through more
contact in those neighborhoods and familiarity among neighbors and city staff.
Mr. Trudgeon noted the city's Neighborhood Enhancement Program (NEP) as a
successful example of such staff contact and involvement.
Trudgeon presented Mayor Roe with a Green Step City Certificate that had been
given to the city at the LMC conference.
As part of
upcoming Rosefest events, City Manager Trudgeon highlighted the Taste of
Rosefest sponsored in part by the Rotary Club and City of Roseville, its
location and availability of tickets through him, online, at City Hall, at
other locations, or at the event itself.
McGehee asked Councilmember Etten to elaborate on discussions at the LMC
conference on climate change and preparedness by other communities.
Etten advised that the focus was mostly on bigger cities (e.g. Burnsville and
Minneapolis, MN) with those cities taking leadership of climate issues from
their perspective rather than waiting for coordination of national or
international efforts to get things done. Councilmember Etten suggested the
upcoming comprehensive plan process would be a good opportunity for the City of
Roseville to take such an initiative as a starting point.
Donations and Communications
and corrections to draft minutes had been submitted by the City Council prior
to tonight's meeting and those revisions were incorporated into the draft
presented in the Council packet.
Approve June 13, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes
McGehee moved, Etten
seconded, approval of the June 13, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes as
McGehee submitted her suggested changes dated June 20, 2016 via bench handout,
attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Page 2, Lines 6 - 11 (Etten)
spelling of speaker's name: Brad Kolland
Page 3, Line 15 (Laliberte)
Page 10, Lines 16 - 23 (Laliberte)
read "Zero Cleveland Avenue" in all instances
Page 11, Line 19 (Laliberte)
correction: Change "greed" to "agreed'
Page 15, Line 37 (Willmus)
correction: Change "Chair Becker" to 'Chair Newby"
Page 16, Line 1 (Laliberte)
correction: "Delete "in" before "important in a certain area"
Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, McGehee, and Roe.
Approve Consent Agenda
At the request
of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed those items being
considered under the Consent Agenda; and as detailed in specific Requests for
Council Action (RCA) and related attachments, June 20, 2016.
McGehee moved, Etten
seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented and
81763 - 81876
Laliberte, McGehee, Willmus, Etten and Roe.
Approval of 2016-2017 Business and Other License Renewals
McGehee moved, Etten
seconded, approval of annual business and other license renewals as detailed,
dependent on successful background checks.
Approve Business & Other Licenses
McGehee moved, Etten
seconded, approval of business and other licenses and permits for terms as
noted, dependent on successful background checks.
McGehee, Willmus, Etten and Roe.
Approve General Purchases in Excess of $5,000 and Sale of Surplus
moved, Etten seconded, approval of general purchases and contracts for services
as noted in the RCA dated June 20, 2016, and Attachment A entitled, "2016
Capital Improvement Plan Summary," dated May 31, 2016.
Accept Donation from the Roseville Police Foundation
moved, Etten seconded, approval to accept the donation of the Roseville Police
Foundation as detailed.
Laliberte and Etten expressed the city's thanks to this recently-formed
foundation and the initiatives they've already put forth.
Termination of Planned Unit Development PUD) Agreement 1385,
approved by the Roseville City Council on July 13, 2009
moved, Etten seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11332 (Attachment A) entitled, "A
Resolution Terminating Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement No. 1385, As
Amended, Located at 2167 Lexington Avenue and 1126 Sandhurst Avenue."
9. Consider Items
Removed from Consent
Request by Cities Edge Architects for an Extension to the Final Approval
of Amended Common Interest Community Plat at 2715 Long Lake Road (PF15-005)
At the request
of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed this item as detailed in
the RCA and related attachments, June 20, 2016. Mr. Trudgeon reviewed the
changes, after consultation with City Attorney Gaughan, incorporated into the
revised attachment A, distributed as a bench handout.
moved, Etten seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11333 (Attachment A, as
revised) entitled, "A Resolution Approving a Six Month Extension to the
Rosedale Corporate Plaza Condominium (Condominium No. 266) Modification, A
Common Interest Community (CIC) Plat Approval (PF15-005)."
General Ordinances for Adoption
Private Hydrant & Sump Pump Ordinance Update
Public Works Director Jesse Freihammer reviewed updates for two sections of
Title 8, Public Works of Roseville City Code, Chapter 801 and (Private
Hydrants) and Chapter 802 (Sump Pumps); as detailed in the RCA of today's date.
- Hydrant Ordinance Update
briefly reviewed the proposed ordinance changes related to privately owned
hydrants throughout the city; but advised further refinement was occurring and
staff would return with another version after further vetting.
- Sump Pump Ordinance Update
provided a short presentation related to proposed changes in discharge requirements
for sump pumps, with visual examples, and specific provisions of the
ordinance. Mr. Freihammer noted the intent of the ordinance was to address and
rectify current discharges of sump pumps discharging into the sanitary sewer
system; advising that no policy was in place at this time. Mr. Freihammer
noted that this discharge significantly increased the cost for the city and
utility customers in paying the Metropolitan Council for treatment of this additional
water that should be discharged at alternate points on private property for
infiltration or in the storm sewer system versus the sanitary sewer system.
noted that, during the recent meter installation community-wide had allowed
some inspections of sump pump installations and their discharge points; with
indications that approximately 11% of Roseville residents were discharging
directly into the sanitary sewer system, greatly increasing the overall inflow
and infiltration (I & I) identified for reduction/penalty by the Metropolitan
recommends adopting Chapter 802 ordinance, and establishment by the City
Council of a fee for noncompliance, reviewed by the City as part of their fee
schedule review during the annual budget process.
Willmus sought to call attention to the current ordinance phrasing, as per his
discussion with Public Works Director Culver, and staff's narrative requiring
sump pumps to be terminated "at the property line," and instead suggesting more
clarity in ordinance language to ensure that discharge is terminated short of
the property line to avoid flowing onto an adjacent property.
agreed that the intent is for discharge within the limits of the subject
property making the discharge.
Chapter 801 (hydrants), Councilmember McGehee noted a typographical error:
missing "d" on Item F (line 388); and on page 10, correction of "requires" to
past tense "required."
McGehee asked about creation of a form; with Mr. Freihammer responding that
staff would create a form; and Councilmember McGehee asking that the draft form
be included with the draft ordinance with the next iteration coming before the
Chapter 802 (sump pump), Councilmember McGehee asked that language on page 6, line
245 for "reasonable time" be more specific (also lines 240-241) to allow more
clarity as to an actual time frame, or more flexibility if a problem can't be
corrected during the winter months or for some other reason such as a more
involved connection to the city's sanitary sewer system. Councilmember McGehee
also noted instances (e.g. Item 2, line 252) where the Public Works Director's
title is not consistent and asked that it be corrected throughout the
document. Councilmember McGehee also asked for guidelines for when a waiver
was applicable, or how/when a permanent solution was required, or instances if
and when that waiver went on for perpetuity.
stated that the intent was that a waiver would be granted only for the time
needed to bring the sump pump discharge into compliance.
As part of this
process, Councilmember McGehee asked if the intent was to ultimately correct a
problem versus the comparable current practice of requiring water to run at
some residences institutionalizing the current practice every winter due to the
sanitary sewer pipes not being installed correctly in those locations.
replied that in certain areas of town, it would prove problematic to get rid of
the sump pump discharge, no matter how the property owner and/or city attempted
to do so. Mr. Freihammer noted that this may mean discharge continued to run
onto a public sidewalk unless another infrastructure solution could be found.
Chapter 802 and flushing of private hydrants, Councilmember Willmus asked if
staff had any idea for a fee, or the number of private hydrants throughout the
advised that judging from other communities with such a fee, their costs are
typically $70 to $75 per hydrant.
opined that for some townhome associations, that could prove a significant
financial hit; and asked that consideration of that point be made part of any
future private hydrant ordinance adoption.
advised that staff would look at some of the situations where private hydrants
may be grouped together to suggest a corresponding fee.
As a follow-up,
Mayor Roe noted that those with private hydrants were not required to use city
services for that hydrant flushing, but could use a private service that would
certify that periodic maintenance and service compliance.
Councilmember Willmus' comments, Councilmember Laliberte stated her interest in
what other cities have for multiple private hydrants or if they provided for
any volume considerations at a reduced amount.
Specific to the
townhome association component, Councilmember Etten stated his hope that the
associations had been diligent in checking those private hydrants with some
regularity; opining if he was a resident of such a townhome, he would certainly
want to be assured the fire hydrants were operational. Councilmember Etten
further stated that those residents should expect that by paying their association
dues, they were paying for that knowledge and assurance; and that it should be
considered part of doing business for the association.
the map of hydrant locations (Attachment E), Councilmember Willmus noted those
areas with multiple hydrants and their potential pricing structure, opining
that in some cases it could have considerable impacts on association budgets if
not included in their annual budgets.
Mayor Roe noted
that staff would have recommendations for fees when they bring the ordinance
back to the City Council, for consideration at that time.
advised that staff would get that information from contractors; and clarified
that whether or not hydrants appeared to be or were clustered, a requirement of
state fire code, as well as city code, was that they all be working and flushed
annually at a minimum.
Mayor Roe concurred
with his colleagues on the suggested revisions to Chapter 801 and typographical
corrections and consistency of titles as noted; along with clarifying
"reasonable time" as noted and based on city expectations and what is practical
and feasible. Mayor Roe stated he was less concerned with that latter point
depending on specific situations and without being overly proscriptive. Mayor
Roe stated his bigger concern was with the waiver process, opining that it
lacked what was provided for in other cases, the right to appeal an
administrative action; and asked that staff consider a process to do so at the
City Council level or as offered in other applicable situations.
For the benefit
of the home audience, Mayor Roe reviewed the rationale in these changes to
address current sump pumps discharging into the sanitary sewer system,
requiring treatment by the Metropolitan Council and costing the city and all of
its utility customers for that treatment versus draining into the normal storm
water runoff system or into a resident's private yard. While some of the I
& I may be occurring through leaks, Mayor Roe noted that with the estimated
11% of sump pumps identified that were discharging into the sanitary sewer
system, this was a notable portion that was adding to the city's annual penalty
from the Metropolitan Council for that treatment.
McGehee agreed with Mayor Roe's suggestion for an appeal process; but asked
that guidelines be provided on how decisions are made from a city perspective.
stated that could be defined, but allowances were still necessary for general
situations yet unknown.
Chapter 802, Mayor Roe noted on page 5 (the paragraph starting at the top of
page 5) the need for more specificity rather than just terminating on private
property in general (e.g. concerns for potential drainage on neighbor or
adjacent property) but termination on private property on which the sump pump
is located. Mayor Roe opined that the language in lines 176 - 178 related to
"rigid discharge lines:" needed more work to make it less technical and more understandable
for the general public.
objection, Mayor Roe directed staff to address those revisions as noted during
tonight's discussion, duly noted by Mr. Freihammer and City Manager Trudgeon,
and return with a revised draft ordinance and fee schedule for future
Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at
approximately 6:52 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 6:53 p.m.
Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission (PWETC)
Joint Meeting with the City Council
welcomed PWETC Commissioners present, including Chair Brian Cihacek; Vice Chair
Sarah Brodt Lenz; and Members Joe Wozniak, John Heimerl and Duane Seigler
briefly summarized the activities and accomplishments of the PWETC since last
meeting with the City Council, as outlined in the RCA of today's date. Chair
Cihacek noted the activities seemed to focus mostly on "water, sewer and solar."
Chair Cihacek also reviewed intended work plan items for the upcoming year; and
then sought questions, concerns and/or feedback from the City Council. The
PWETC listed three questions they had of the City Council and as noted in lines
23 - 30 of the RCA and noted as follows.
some rights-of-way and easement areas too large and do they negatively impact
private lots and potential improvements of private residences?
noted the PWETC's interest in exploring if some existing easement areas or
rights-of-way were too large for the current community or no longer reflected
suggested the PWETC be cautious with that exploration; and as a council member,
stated he would have to look very hard at surrendering or vacating any existing
rights-of-way or easements. Councilmember Willmus opined that no one knew what
the future may hold; and also noted the considerable cost and time-consuming
process in attaining new rights-of-way. Specific to easements, as an example
Councilmember Willmus noted several situations where an easement affected land
locked parcels; and agreed he may give certain situations some consideration.
However, Councilmember Willmus reiterated he would be cautious with those considerations
before the city started surrendering any of them.
Etten agreed with the statements of Councilmember Willmus and the need for
caution. As an example, Councilmember Etten noted problematic areas where
future issues could be created in areas where a sidewalk could be installed in
an easement or right-of-way area. Specific to different widths for
rights-of-way or easements, Councilmember Etten noted the most recent example
south of County Road B, with one property having a different right-of-way width
and allowances needed to find a solution. Councilmember Etten reiterated the
need to take care to not create similar long-term problems.
agreed for the need for caution regarding easements; but if the problem was to
address drainage issues on a private lot without sufficient room, she offered
to consider those situations that were brought forward. Councilmember McGehee
stated that she considered larger rights-of-way as bonus green space throughout
agreed with his colleagues. While noting there was a process in place for a
property owner to ask the city to vacate an easement or right-of-way, Mayor Roe
opined that it made sense to consider any such variances on a case by case
basis versus the city initiating a policy for vacating them.
the Commission discuss other recycling components, such as providing organics
recycling options if curbside pickup isn't a feasible option in our next
noted the PWETC's interest in looking at options for organic recycling by the
stated his interest in looking at ways to provide organic recycling to prevent
it from entering the regular waste stream. Specific to expanding recycling
efforts in the community, Councilmember Etten asked how much is currently done
with the business community or asked if the city was maximizing that
opportunity. Councilmember Etten stated he was aware of considerable interest
by some business owners in recycling, while others were not aware of the
possibility or the process for doing so. As an example, Councilmember Etten
noted the interest shown by area churches and their push to be involved in
recycling, with the city able to provide that option to them.
volunteer work in nursing homes, Councilmember McGehee suggested they should
also be approached and encouraged to do a better job, or at least to get more
excited about recycling at those facilities.
stated her interest in learning more about organics, even though it didn't
receive a high priority on the most recent community survey. Councilmember
Laliberte suggested including regular waste haulers about their interest in
pursuing organic recycling, noting some solid waste collectors used the "blue bag" system that residents could include separately for disposal with their
weekly refuse pick-up. Depending on whether the city went with bi-weekly or
weekly recycling pick-up, Councilmember Laliberte noted that needed to be a
consideration as part of any organic recycling options.
business recycling, Mayor Roe noted a state-wide requirement that may soon be
coming forward, if not already in place.
the City Council want to provide more direction on future discussions regarding
sewer and water services (e.g. lining private sewer services up to some point)?
asked for Council feedback on how to approach this issue.
McGehee questioned if the City Council completed discussions about lining
stubs; but opined in not doing so it left the city with a faulty program.
Councilmember McGehee noted she frequently heard from staff that the biggest
infiltration and/or leakage problem was with those laterals and their
connections to the city main, and therefore opined it didn't seem like a good
idea to reconstruct streets and the mains but not address stubs and laterals at
the same time. At a minimum, Councilmember McGehee stated her preference for
an informational or educational flyer, such as provided for the leaf collection
program options, addressing sewer lining up to the stub. Councilmember McGehee
opined it remained problematic under the current situation without homeowners
being aware of or required to meet city specifications to avoid negative
impacts on the stubs or mains. Organizationally, Councilmember McGehee opined
this was an important consideration for the city to address, since private
citizens were hooking into a municipal system, and the municipality needed to
specify what needed to be done to avoid future negative impacts.
Laliberte noted her interest in the recommendations the PWETC had brought
forward to-date, especially given the community's aging infrastructure.
Councilmember Laliberte stated anything the PWETC could do to help educate the
public and provide guidance to them about their responsibilities would be
Willmus sought clarification, with recent water/sewer revisions, if the city
had required installation of backflow prevention devices.
Director Marc Culver responded that, while unfamiliar with building code
requirements, the city could require the devices, especially in situations with
frequent back-up scenarios. Mr. Culver stated it was rare for the city to
require a back flow preventer installation in a particular home; but noted the
city had recommended it to individuals, and noted the discussions when considering
the warranty program as well.
noted the city included a subsidy for residents to install a back-flow
preventer as part of the recently adopted sewer back-up clean up policy.
From a code
enforcement and building code perspective, Interim Community Development
Director Kari Collins clarified that the building code had for years required a
backflow prevention program, and noted it was included in the city's fee
structure as well. However, Ms. Collins noted the city hadn't been aggressive
in collecting fees for installation until recently, when the city's new Codes
Coordinator had begun reviewing the fee structure and a more up-to-date program
for collecting fees. With any plumbing installation, Ms. Collins noted that
the applicant is required to ensure backflow installation occurs at that time;
and advised that the fee is approximately $35 for that installation, which was
comparable to other metropolitan communities.
At the request
of Councilmember Willmus, Ms. Collins confirmed that the device is required as
part of the International Building Code.
installation of a backflow device and fee is triggered by plumbing work, Mayor
Roe sought clarification as to the amount of that trigger.
Willmus clarified that he was looking at the sewer side, while Ms. Collins was
looking at the code requirements for the water supply side of the equation.
offered to double check, but opined he was not aware of specific requirements
for installation of a backflow preventer on the sanitary sewer side of the
Willmus stated his rationale in the request was as a functionary program to
limit residential and city liability.
McGehee stated it was her understanding that in order to install a backflow
preventer, it was necessary to break up a basement floor; and asked for further
clarification as to how it actually worked.
For general information,
Mayor Roe clarified that most sewer lines had a by-pass connection without
going through the backflow preventer, allowing for clean-out, as part of common
Willmus clarified that he was talking about new construction situations or for
major replacement of laterals between a home and street; and noted he was not
advocating forcing all residents to install a backflow device.
lateral lining, Mayor Roe noted previous discussions had indicated the main work
and lateral work required two different contractors and processes. Under those
circumstances, Mayor Roe noted the need for policies determined accordingly and
how they interfaced with each other. Mayor Roe stated it didn't want to
preclude residents from going to a private contractor, but to get standards in
place if not already available, so private contractors were aware of the City
of Roseville's standards for lining connections at the main.
Accessibility and Service Levels - Review of A Line Operations
noted his interest in enhancing east/west connections across the city to
provide needed transportation from the north/south transit options allowing
them to reach jobs, shop or move more freely. Councilmember Etten noted his
understanding that there was a thirty-minute interval for buses scheduled along
the Rice Street corridor, which he considered too long and a poor service level
for such a major thoroughfare. Councilmember Etten suggested as part of the
comprehensive plan update, Metro Transit be asked for potential solutions or
agreed with the east/west transit needs; and agreed that the Rice Street
corridor was identified as an important segment and more frequent bus service
than half hour intervals was needed.
McGehee stated her continuing interested in solar options for the City campus.
Bike Path Planning and Connections
the recent community survey and questions about pathway connections and safe
routes to schools, Councilmember McGehee noted resident interest in pursuing
those connections to businesses and parent interest in their children safely
connecting to schools. Councilmember McGehee noted there were segments far
from the High School that were being considered for connection, but not some
obvious once close to the High School; and with no immediate plans for
connections or any plan in place for some of those segments.
pathways, Councilmember Laliberte opined that it was important to look at any
connections or segments if and when they become possible.
Mayor Roe noted
that in the last Pathway Master Plan rankings, not meaning the PWETC's
rankings, now in 2016 a review of those ratings and scores was needed to see if
they still made sense from today's use of pathways. Mayor Roe opined that
would be a worthwhile effort to look at when ranking, using the Master Plan
criteria to see if it still made sense for the city today.
Willmus noted the PWETC's predecessors lacked a consistent basis for scoring
projects, creating some situations where residents became quite concerned. As
an example, Councilmember Willmus noted the rationale in the city stepping
forward with widening County Road B west of Cleveland avenue. Councilmember
Willmus spoke in support of a review and refreshing of the original Master Plan
Disposal Outreach and Education Flyer
leaf flyer, Councilmember Laliberte suggested highlighting the private option
for "Leaf Vacuum Roseville Minnesota" since it was the most similar to the
city's former program. While most of the options have been available to
residents for years, Councilmember Laliberte reiterated her interest in
highlighting that particular program.
As mentioned by
Councilmember Laliberte, Councilmember Willmus agreed with the private option
for "Leaf Vacuum Roseville Minnesota," but also noted the need to be more
proactive in encouraging residents to mulch leaves on site or for delivery to
the city's compost site. Councilmember Willmus advised this was something he
had started about ten years ago, and opined it provided a wonderful option, and
suggested calling more attention to that option as well.
Feedback / City Council Charge to PWETC
reviewed the PWETC's informational February 2016 meeting and quest speaker on
sewer lining including the pros and cons; and duly noted the City Council's
request for the PWETC to review and analyze the two very different bidding
processes and contactors for lateral versus main lining; and how options could
make lateral lining work for the city and residents.
duly noted the City Council's request for the PWETC to identify how to educate
about the elimination of the city's leaf pick-up system, including information
on mulching and the city's compost site.
curbside collection of organics, Chair Cihacek noted the PWETC had held
preliminary discussions with current recycling contractor Eureka, and opined
there was good information available to proceed with recommendations to the
City Council, depending on the results of the current contract RFP for
Chair Cihacek duly noted the City Council's charge that the PWETC look into
business recycling programs and opportunities for them to participate.
pedestrian infrastructure, pathways and other transit issues, Chair Cihacek
advised that the PWETC would pick up and re-examine ranking for connections as
part of their part of the comprehensive plan's transportation chapter, both
existing needs and looking ahead to future needs.
many of the things discussed tonight, Chair Cihacek advised that the PWETC were
working on most of them and would continue to do so to bring recommendations
tonight's discussion on easements and rights-of-way, Chair Cihacek stated it
wasn't often transparent to citizens why their rights-of-way and easements were
not consistent from one property to another. Chair Cihacek noted the need for
review of actual right-of-way maps and the need to identify the rationale in
preserving easements or rights-of-way, whether for a specific purpose or for a
"just in case" scenario. Chair Cihacek opined that educational portion is important
and part of the transparency efforts of local government; and advised toward
that effort, the PWETC would address the issue and provide justification for
differentials in various areas. Chair Cihacek noted the concern in some cases
was that with fifty or more years of history, residents needed to understand
the benefits and costs; especially in light of future development issues.
Willmus agreed it was important to define the impact of those easements and
rights-of-way for a property or homeowner, especially if they were seeking to
expand for a higher use of their property. However, Councilmember Willmus
noted there was a variance process in place by which a property owner had some
recourse depending on the situation; and again noted the need for a case by
case analysis. Councilmember Willmus reiterated his concern about vacating an
existing right-of-way already attained without knowing clearly what potential
future issues may arise.
agreed it was necessary to be thoughtful about those situations.
McGehee asked that the PWETC's review of easements and rights-of-way include a
review of variables in their size from property to property when adjacent
versus variables throughout the community.
confirmed it was the PWETC's concern more with variability between lots, as
some were hard to explain and often there were inconsistencies within a given
McGehee noted the city's sealcoating program had been on hold for two years due
to delamination issues; and sought an update on the situation.
Director Marc Culver advised that research was ongoing with the delamination
issue locally and across the state. While being a firm believer in the benefit
of sealcoating, Mr. Culver advised that he was still not comfortable in restarting
the sealcoating program until more research is available regarding the interaction
between the sealcoat oil and pavement wear coat layer.
leaf pick-up flyer, Councilmember Laliberte asked what the schedule was for planned
advised that limited distribution had been made available to some extent in a
preliminary way last year; but the intent was to include the flyer with utility
bills in June, July and August, obviously with revisions as addressed during
tonight's meeting, and as a follow-up. Mr. Culver noted a brief article was
scheduled for the August City News newsletter, with a more extensive
newsletter article intended in early fall, including information on mulching.
Mayor Roe asked
that staff work with the Communications Department staff to make the flyer more
eye-catching. Mayor Roe also suggested production of a short video, that could
be run before or after City Council and/or advisory commission meetings, such
as the "Friday video" concept.
thanked the PWETC for their great work, and their attendance tonight and the
Public Hearings and Action Consideration
Continue Discussions on the 2017 Budget
Trudgeon briefly reviewed the 2017 budget cycle and process as a reminder;
noting the City Manager recommended budget was scheduled for presentation in
July. Mr. Trudgeon noted the detailed information provided in tonight's RCA
and attachments included supplemental information as previously requested by
the City Council to provide a greater understanding of the city's financial
picture and potential budget impacts.
Director Chris Miller referenced and displayed several charts from the RCA
(page 1) showing 2016 current and 2017 projected impact items for a typical
single-family home in Roseville. Mr. Miller advised that these were intended
as an advanced look as per the City Council's request, and included impacts to
the tax levy as well as utility rates; but clarified that it did not include
any Roseville Economic Development Authority (REDA) as that information was yet
to be determined.
noted the overall projected average single family residential cost increase all-inclusive
at this time was 5.3%; but clarified that remained a working number based on
details available to-date, with more vetting needed as the year and additional
data proceeded. Mr. Miller noted Attachments A and B provided more detail on
these projections; and asked for general feedback from the City Council at this
time as to whether or not staff was hitting the mark, off target, or if more
information was needed. Mr. Miller noted that the more information staff had
available, the better feedback they could provide to ensure alignment for the
City Manager recommended budget with City Council goals and objectives. Mr.
Miller noted there were seven different topics or impacts identified, and
offered to elaborate on any at the direction of the City Council.
Department - Assistant City Manager Position (page 2)
asked if funding for that position was to be combined with some other funds and
Trudgeon responded that this was the intent, as an incremental increase from
repurposing the current position formerly held by Ms. Collins to an Assistant
City Manager position. Mr. Trudgeon advised that he would like to continue
refining that position, its duties and additional responsibilities.
asked it the transportation dollars included hiring a consultant to review that
portion of the plan.
Trudgeon confirmed that was the intent.
would be a one-time expenditure, Councilmember Etten spoke in support of using
one-time funding versus tacking the expenditure onto a $30,000 levy increase;
suggesting reserves may be a perfect use for that.
noted the inclusion of funding for the transportation component, but not other
components that are known to need review and updating.
clarification, City Manager Trudgeon noted those other components will be
funded through their specific funds (e.g. enterprise and other funds not
necessarily from tax-supported funds); while the transportation component didn't
have a specific or designated fund.
Department Transition to Full-Time Firefighters
McGehee requested a better understanding of short- and long-term impacts for
this transition, clarified by Mayor Roe to consist of an alternative to
accelerate that transition versus the current planned approach.
Department Mental Health Liaison Officer
McGehee expressed curiosity about this officer position versus mental health
crisis training for all officers.
City Manager Trudgeon stated that, obviously, the full-time officer was
intended as available in the field to deal with mental health issues for those
the department served; and to serve as a liaison for the community in directing
them to appropriate resources. Mr. Trudgeon advised that as far as crisis
intervention training (CIT), additional training dollars would be needed to get
a certain number of officers up-to-date in that training. Mr. Trudgeon
clarified that these were two different and distinct situations.
McGehee noted that a full-time mental health liaison officer may not be
available 24/7 nor was it specified that the officer live in Roseville; and
therefore she opined it may be more effective for the city and staff to have
appropriate training for a larger number of officers to guarantee that a
minimum of one full-trained officer was available for each shift.
Trudgeon noted this would require additional resources toward that training
Mayor Roe noted
that was an interesting perspective.
Etten stated he would like to look at ways to achieve that broader training or
to review all options to provide that service; and to define how that officer
impacts the whole department on a 24/7 basis for those needing mental health
Laliberte expressed her understanding and support for the concept of a
dedicated officer. Councilmember Laliberte noted her hope that this would
allow that officer to follow a particular person throughout the process to
better mental health, not just to open and close an incident, but to provide
continuity to follow-up to make sure the person received the help they needed.
However, Councilmember Laliberte also noted that it was also her understanding
that the city was already training and doing more than was required for CIT
training. Councilmember Laliberte stated her preference would be for what more
could be done regarding the number of officers per shift if not available
today, not in place of, but by providing that CIT training to more officers.
McGehee stated her concern in turning the Police Department into social
workers; and opined she didn't think officers should be following up on
specific individuals, such as whether or not they're taking their medication.
While that may prevent a subsequent issue, Councilmember McGehee stated that
was not the role of the police department in today's world, including HIPPA concerns.
Laliberte stated she agreed with Councilmember McGehee's comments, that
officers not provide social services. However, in the nature of today's world,
Councilmember Laliberte noted the need for officers to do more than currently
able to do with mental health calls. Councilmember Laliberte noted this had
been proven already, and when staff is able to follow a situation through it
avoided future situations. Councilmember Laliberte suggested such a program we
modeled after those prior efforts (e.g. domestic disputes or domestic violence
McGehee opined there seemed to be an overlap of the fire and administration
departments based on the Alzheimer's and Dementia efforts, and suggested
coordination of the medical disposal system.
Safety and Loss Control - Risk Management
Etten sought cost savings that may be available by moving this training from
one department to another.
Finance Director Miller clarified that the only change had been coordination of
the program from one department to another. Mr. Miller advised that the additional
training dollars were being requested to involve an increase in training and
awareness for all employees (e.g. hazardous materials, work place injuries,
etc.) and involving a number of areas not currently being addressed and needing
additional resources to address those areas currently lacking attention.
As noted by
Councilmember Etten, Finance Director Miller confirmed that this would be new
money to do additional work with city staff.
Process Next Steps
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller noted the City Manager's recommended
budget would be presented in July; with public hearings scheduled to follow
prior to adoption of the Preliminary Budget and Tax Levy in September. Mr.
Miller noted additional subsequent public comment opportunities would be
available in October and November as the City Council continued to review utility
rates and as tax impact statements are mailed out by Ramsey County. With that
additional public comment and additional information provided by staff as the
year proceeds, Mr. Miller noted that would better inform the 2017 budget before
final adoption in December. However, Mr. Miller reiterated that tonight's
discussion and presentation of the City Manager recommended budget at the July
work session were only one month away; and reiterated staff's desire for
additional feedback sooner rather than later.
Improvement Program (CIP)
Mayor Roe noted
the need to include CIP projections as part of the City Manager recommended budget
information, especially water and sewer fund CIP. Mayor Roe noted that this
may not need to be a detailed discussion or involve rates at that point, but
noted the need for the whole picture.
Director Miller advised that Attachment B provided that detail as known today,
including estimated financial gaps for each category within that nine page
thanked staff for that information; and asked that from his perspective, he
would find it helpful when a graph was provided, and especially when shown as a
negative trend in the CIP schedule, a comparison graph also be included applying
previously recommended solutions or current recommendations coming forward as
part of the City Manager recommended budget, clearly outlining those comparisons.
Mayor Roe opined that would be helpful for the public benefit as well to show
what the City Council and city staff was doing to resolve issues.
opined it was fair to note that the chart (page 1) didn't yet reflect any
savings that may be available from the 2016 budget, with this just providing a
look at the projected net increases.
corrected that perception by stating that the chart did provide a representation
of net changes, including any factors and/or changes able to be identified up
to this point.
McGehee sought clarification on how an increase in assessment or appraisal of a
residence would impact individual homeowners relative to the median home value
throughout the city, especially when it had gone up rather significantly.
Director Miller, in the staff report (page 4, lines 111-117) noted Ramsey
County's annual report on projections for the following calendar year (dated
March of 2016). Mr. Miller further clarified that in Attachment A (lines 114 -
116), the overall tax base for homes, apartments and/or commercial properties as
a whole were projected to increase about 5.1%. While that information may
change, Mr. Miller advised that the median valued home in Roseville at this time
was projected to increase by 4.8%, thereby leading to a percentage increase to
the City levy impacting single-family homeowners roughly by that same percentage
or close to it. Mr. Miller noted the sense of impacts would depend on the levy
decisions made by the City Council. While staff can provide "what if"
scenarios such as that provided on the bottom of page 1 of the RCA projected at
this time based on a levy increase of 5.3%, Mr. Miller noted this percentage
and dollar impact would change as the City Council defined their preferred levy
amount, and if Ramsey County's tax base impacts changed.
In an effort to
add to the explanation for the benefit of residents and the complicated
procedure, Mayor Roe reviewed how respective tax levies worked for each taxing
jurisdiction setting the amount they wanted in collect, including the city. At
that point, Mayor Roe noted Ramsey County divided that total amount among all
properties proportionally according to their relative taxable values throughout
the overall city. Because the average single family home's value has gone up
by about the same percentage as the overall value of all properties in the
city, the average home's proportion of the total tax bill would stay the same,
so any percentage increase in the levy would translate to a comparable
percentage increase in the average home's City tax bill.
Willmus requested updated information on the city's various tax increment
financing districts. Councilmember Willmus also requested a tracking of
reallocation of the Public Works Maintenance Facility/City Hall bond funds as
that debt service was scheduled to come off the books, and the amount of the
levy currently allocated to that. City Manager Trudgeon duly noted these requests.
Specific to tax
increment financing districts, Finance Director Miller clarified that their decertification
had already been factored into the Ramsey County tax base numbers for 2017.
Mr. Miller noted some of the information being sought was included on
Attachment B (page 7), and the CIP memo noting where those funds were intended
for repurposing when they came off line in the future.
Mayor Roe noted
this included in 2019 potential repurposing of the skating center bond; and also
the portion of the City Hall bond levy allotted for CIP funding.
Director Miller identified those bond funds refinanced to take advantage of
lower rates; and while still significant, it remained contingent on future City
Council to annually revisit CIP funding.
Mayor Roe noted
decertification of Tax Increment Financing District No. 13 last year, creating
an unexpected one-time revenue source of approximately $800,000 for the city;
with recommendations that approximately $500,000 be allocated toward the CIP
for facilities. Mayor Roe noted the need for the City Council to have a future
discussion on how to allocate the remaining $300,000 for its best use; and
asked if staff had any particular recommendations not yet articulated in this
Trudgeon reminded the Councilthat approximately $150,000 of those funds had
been targeted for the extension of Terrace Drive improvements.
Business Items (Action Items)
Business Items - Presentations/Discussions
Request to Apply for Federal Funds for the Expansion of Snelling
Director Marc Culver briefly reviewed the request as detailed in the RCA for
the city's application for federal funds for expansion of Snelling Avenue.
Etten noted the staff report mentioned not receiving any financial assistance
from the State of MN and asked why not.
advised this determination was partly based on conversations with MnDOT staff;
noting that their long-term transportation improvement plan did not even show
Snelling Avenue as a conditional project within it, and was clearly not on the
state's radar screen. Mr. Culver noted that MnDOT was focusing any available
funding on preservation efforts, and without any available money anticipated
they planned no additional road dollars or projects.
McGehee noted repeated discussion she'd heard over the last year, as well as
her personal study of traffic flow along Snelling Avenue and projections
compared with other metropolitan roads. Councilmember McGehee opined that not
much had changed despite the dire consequences and projections; while in some
cases, Snelling Avenue traffic was proving less than projected. Councilmember
McGehee asked staff to gather that information together for future review by
the City Council.
noted some of the reasons for that reduction on Snelling Avenue depending on
area roadway improvements (I-694 at Snelling and I-35E improvements), opining
that it was difficult to say the actual amount of traffic utilizing Snelling normally
without factoring in those other construction projects and detours. Mr. Culver
noted that part of the transportation portion of the comprehensive plan update
would include Metropolitan Council modeling regionally without that construction
element figured in for a more normal picture.
McGehee opined that she didn't believe the Metropolitan Council's desire for
the city was more than a wish; and should not be an imperative directive.
clarified that the Metropolitan Council was not projecting specific traffic
levels, but their traffic model system was used as a tool to study the area
roadway needs as part of the plan update.
Willmus asked if there was any benefit between proceeding with this project or
expediting the A-line.
Based on his
conversations to-date with Kimley Horn, Public Works Director Culver noted that
easing congestion with an additional lane would improve A line operations if
expanded north of Rosedale Center; with a potential desire to shore-up shoulder
lanes for buses to skip signal cuing.
Willmus asked how to determine the point of termination or decide on that
responded that it depended on how far north beyond Lydia Avenue was indicated
so people didn't tend to merge before the Lydia Avenue signal. However, Mr.
Culver noted that may get close to the Hamline Avenue intersection and
interactions with that signal as well.
Mayor Roe noted that these federal dollars were sent to the State of MN and
administered by the Metropolitan Council for municipalities and other entities
to apply for.
Callaghan, Lydia Avenue
questioned what benefit there would be to Roseville; opining that the benefit
would be for those traveling through Roseville. With locating this expansion
in the Twin Lakes area, while tax increment financing (TIF) was already
subsidizing development even though it didn't appear to be developing fast, Mr.
Callaghan questioned what would happen if the TIF didn't come in within the next
twenty years and who would pay the city's portion of the project. Mr. Callaghan
noted there while looking to upgrade a state jurisdiction highway such as
Snelling Avenue based on a few years of traffic that may look bad in spite of
projections that were proving inaccurate; and suggested the need to look at
other streets in Roseville (e.g. Fairview Avenue) that have had this congestion
problem for over ten years, but nothing was done or any planning in place to
address that situation. Mr. Callaghan stated he could not figure out that
rationale beyond increasing the value of Twin Lakes properties resulting in
them being the only beneficiaries of this suggested improvement. Mr. Callaghan
opined that many of the great things proposed to happen through use of TIF over
the last thirty years had not come to fruition; and those TIF districts coming
off line haven't made up for what they'd cost the city during those years. Mr.
Callaghan questioned why this was even being considered while plans were
underway for an additional two lanes on I-35W; and opined it didn't appear the
problem had been thought out very well.
In response to
some of Mr. Callaghan's questions and statements, Mayor Roe clarified that the
city was not looking to fund the local portion of the improvement through TIF
funds, but through developer fees similar to those charged for the Cleveland
Director Culver agreed, noting that it would be part of future development
costs and mitigating costs to support redevelopment of a site, by use of those
dollars for improving traffic capacity in the area. At the request of Mayor
Roe as to the process for determining those dollars (e.g. Chapter 429 assessments),
Mr. Culver advised that the funds were usually negotiated as a mitigation fee
with a developer whether recognized as part of an environmental worksheet
review or an independent traffic study; and addressing increased traffic
impacts in the area and how to mitigate those impacts.
Mayor Roe noted
then that this process would be different than the process that created
difficulties several years ago related to trip count fees, which was abandoned
in favor of the Chapter 429 assessment process.
Trudgeon agreed, noting that the city now had in place a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) process based on particular developments and negotiated
opportunities to discuss mitigation efforts with both parties reaching an agreement;
and creating a voluntary understanding by all parties.
Mayor Roe asked
how reasonable it was or how confident the city was to expect negotiated development
fees would cover the city's match.
Director Culver responded that this application process would allow the city
ample opportunities to still decline to approve a project before expending
significant dollars beyond consultant costs. Mr. Culver expressed staff's confidence
in the ability to raise those matching funds, using the former WalMart Development
as a similarly sized example to address interchange costs.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Mr. Culver confirmed that if the city could not achieve the local
match, there were several steps before getting to the final commitment that
would allow the city to step back.
Laliberte asked staff to define how far and wide these development mitigation
fees could apply.
responded that the entire Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area would benefit from this
improvement and would also help with capacity on County Road C and other area
roadways, especially between Fairview and Snelling Avenues.
to deny support of this requested application for federal funds.
Mayor Roe declared the motion failed due to lack of a second.
Etten moved, Willmus
seconded, authorizing staff to apply for federal funds for improvements to
Snelling Avenue between County Road B-2 and Lydia Avenue and authorizing staff
to expend an amount not to exceed $10,144 to hire Kimley Horn and Associates to
prepare (conduct necessary modeling and concept refinement for application) and
submit a federal aid application for improvements to Snelling Avenue between
County Road B-2 and Lydia Avenue.
Etten spoke in support of the motion; stating he saw an existing problem with
moving traffic from Twin Lakes to this area; opining that he found such cross
traffic had a big impact on Roseville residents. Councilmember Etten admitted
that he chose at times not to attempt getting across of Snelling Avenue or
going north on it due to traffic congestion. Councilmember Etten stated the city's
goal was to improve traffic in the area; but noted that not only impacted some
residents going to Arden Hills or elsewhere beyond Roseville, but also directly
impacted Roseville and its residents using Snelling Avenue in different ways,
making this project more than relevant to its citizens.
Willmus agreed with the comments of Councilmember Etten and the application of
dollars to at least look at this as a step in the right direction.
Councilmember Willmus agreed this project would serve direct benefit to Roseville
property owners and the ability to carry some traffic often carried by other
north/south corridors. Councilmember Willmus expressed interest in submitting
the application to see how some of the elements might come together; and therefore
spoke in support of the motion.
McGehee spoke in opposition to the motion; opining this was another example of
an abuse of public money. Councilmember McGehee noted a considerable amount of
public dollars had already been expended in extension of Twin Lakes Parkway and
for changes along Terrace Drive and County Road C-2, negatively impacting the
community's use of those roads. Councilmember McGehee stated she had heard
from residents along both sides of Snelling Avenue using Terrace and Lincoln
Drives and their inability to use their community streets due to pass-through
traffic impacts on them as city taxpayers. For the city to take it upon itself
to attempt changing a state road with city taxpayer funds on the chance it
would be returned through some sort of scheme, whether a PUD or other option,
Councilmember McGehee opined was very flimsy. Councilmember McGehee further
noted that the goal of future transit options were intended to be multi-modal
as had been requested by Roseville residents; and the focus should be on
providing a safe way to get across Snelling Avenue. Councilmember McGehee
stated she saw this happen over and over, expenditure of staff time, public
dollars and consultant fees, that even though promised as preliminary with an option
to pull back, never came forward based on the rationale that initial authorization
had been granted. Councilmember McGehee agreed with the comments of Mr.
Callaghan that there was no benefit of this project to Roseville residents, especially
for those living in that immediate area who try to use their city's amenities
in competition with those traveling through the community from Highway 36 or
I-35. While these efforts may succeed in facilitating moving that traffic
north to Arden Hills and the University of Northwestern, Councilmember McGehee
opined it was of no benefit to residents living here or making it any easier
for them to get around, as well as not taking the multi-modal aspect into account.
McGehee further opined that there were many other things the city could be
doing to address transportation issues, including the status and future of its
pavement management program; pathway maintenance and repair; and additional
work on city streets and intersections that residents have indicated are
insufficient. In addition, Councilmember McGehee noted resident requests for
pathway connections for safe walking and biking to area schools; and additional
extension of the A line all the way to TCAAP versus encouraging any more regional
vehicular traffic for Roseville residents to deal with.
Laliberte noted there were arguments on both sides; and stated she didn't yet
know what the improvements on I-35W would do to alleviate Snelling Avenue
congestion. While understanding and agreeing it was not the city's
responsibility to expand Snelling Avenue, Councilmember Laliberte also agreed
there were many other things in the community to spend money on or to address
funding gaps. Councilmember Laliberte noted these federal funds would be spent
somewhere, and she had heard from those serving on the state transportation
board that many communities didn't even request available funds for improvements,
and opined it was important to pay attention to available funding options.
Councilmember Laliberte opined that congestion did affect Roseville, whether
residents or pass-through traffic, and everyone's time and quality of life when
stuck in this congestion. If there is an ability to mitigate a lot of fees
between now and 2021, additionally to her 3.5 years of advocacy for extension
of the A line, Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of doing so.
Councilmember Laliberte opined there was no need to wait for expansion of
TCAAP, but stated service should be extended u to County Road E to service
residents and busses along County Road C and Lydia, Bethel University and the
University of Northwestern as well. Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support
of continuing to find the right people to talk to make these improvements a
reality sooner rather than later.
Avenue is a state highway, at the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Public
Works Director Culver confirmed that MnDOT would be responsible for
some concerns, Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the motion, with
options over the next six years for additional mitigation and funding, opining
that application for federal funding was a good step now.
Mayor Roe spoke
in support of the motion, noting that while staff's presentation focused on the
expansion facilitating north/south movements, it also facilitated shorter green
light time to move people on three lanes versus two, benefiting Roseville
residents traveling by bicycle, as pedestrians, or by vehicle to get across Snelling
Avenue through that additional capacity to move through signal light cycles.
Mayor Roe noted this would be especially helpful for pedestrians in allocating
more time for their crossing from the east/west.
opined that the perception that the cost of this would be all borne by
Roseville taxpayers was misplaced, since 80% of the funding would be through
federal funds; and while no one disputed that a portion of those Federal funds would
be Roseville tax dollars, it would be a very small drop in the bucket. Mayor
Roe stated his agreement in using the money as stated, given the lack of those
federal dollars used in this part of the region to-date; and the ability of the
city to use this tool to resolve a complex issue that was not even on MnDOT's
plan given their higher priorities and limited funds to work with. Mayor Roe
spoke in support of making application and taking time to do it well with
assistance from Kimley Horn, recognizing the ability to back out if necessary.
Mayor Roe agreed it wasn't a bad thing to assist regional traffic as well as
McGehee noted that one of the worst intersections right now was at County Road
B and Snelling Avenue, which had resulted in multiple deaths, and asked where
this City Council, the Public Works Department, and city staff stood right now
on being multi-modal. Rather than seeking ways to allow residents in
additional housing units on one side from reaching amenities on the other side,
Councilmember McGehee opined the best that staff and the City Council could accomplish
was to build more roads. Councilmember McGehee stated she would like to see
the city accomplish what it frequently talked about: getting people from Point
A to Point B to allow them to access buses and use amenities without risking
their lives due to right turn lane traffic leaving them unable to negotiate
their way across Snelling Avenue no matter how much green light time is
Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, and Roe.
Works Director Marc Culver and Assistant Public Works Director Jesse Freihammer
briefly presented pursuing some of these staff-recommended connections as
detailed in the RCA and as initiated by the City Council in April of 2016. Mr.
Culver advised that the recommendations were based on some of the segments
missing from the Parks & Recreation Master Plan that could be completed at
a low cost while offering a big impact; and displayed the map showing those
shorter segments with high pedestrian use and located near parks and schools,
or transit connections, or frequently requested by the public. While there
were higher priorities listed in the Master Plan, Mr. Culver reported that they
would cost well over $1 million to complete.
part of the presentation, Mr. Freihammer noted each project segment and its
estimated cost (lines 13 - 40). Mr. Freihammer advised that some would need
Ramsey County approval and need to meet their construction standards.
Etten thanked staff for identifying these connections; and offering ways to
accomplish completion of the segments. With those adjacent to Ramsey County
roads, Councilmember Etten asked staff if the city could expect any cost participation
from the county toward their construction.
Culver noted there was a possibility; since Ramsey County stated a program last
year for annual application for cities to seek funds for pathways adjacent to
county roads. However, Mr. Culver advised that Roseville wouldn't learn until
March or April of 2017 if Ramsey County chose to participate or not.
McGehee reviewed various segments of the displayed map and segments identified
that would more safely move children to schools versus trails within existing
Etten clarified that in his conversations with Parks & Recreation Director
Lonnie Brokke, the park segments on the list were included as they provided
handicapped accessibility for parks and playgrounds not currently available;
and to get people from neighborhood streets to the main playground area, with
neither park identified having parking lots available.
discussion ensued, with the consensus being the benefit of getting a crossing
point at Shryer Avenue and Lexington Avenue - preferably with Ramsey County
participation - and possible elimination of segment 6 in conjunction with that
Roe noted that, while pathways on both sides of a street didn't always prove
popular, a sidewalk on the north side of County Road B between Dale Street and
Sandhurst would serve to remove a huge barrier for residents of the Palisades
Apartment buildings to connect to transit across County Road B, and asked that
segment be taken into consideration as part of this process.
to the number of driveways involved, a retaining wall, fire hydrant, and utility
relocates, Mr. Freihammer estimated that short connection would cost approximately
the segment identified as Section 6, Mr. Culver noted the most challenging
issue was from a right-of-way perspective; with the sidewalk going in front of
many residential yards, requiring an additional easement to install the
sidewalk; including some impacts to trees, vegetation, etc. Mr. Culver opined
this was one of the more challenging segments identified to-date.
the seven identified segments having a projected cost of $626,000, and only
$600,000 identified with a revenue source, Councilmember Willmus asked staff
for their ideas on a source for the additional $26,000.
Culver stated staff's priority list was as shown in the RCA, with the exception
of Section 6. Mr. Culver advised that these costs were rough estimates with contingencies
built in; and anticipated better numbers could be found to deliver all or a
majority of the segments within the $600,000 budget.
two segments identified in the Park Master Plan, Councilmember Laliberte asked
of the seven segments listed, what ranking did they have compared with the
Master Plan segments identified previously.
& Recreation Director Brokke stated that the two identified at parks were
identified in the Master Plan as highest priorities; with staff continuing to
work with the community on how to better define those priorities. Mr. Brokke
assured Councilmembers that the park Master Plan was consistent with all of
these segments as proposed; with the highest documented segment that at
Lexington Avenue (sections 4, 5 and 6).
the segment at Lexington Avenue and Shryer Avenue, Mr. Culver advised that he
would need to look into that more closely to evaluate the actual crossing and
how the streets lined up as an intersection. Mr. Culver noted it was still
considered a legal crosswalk with drivers legally required to stop for pedestrians.
However, Mr. Culver offered to talk to Ramsey County about installation of a
more significant crosswalk, perhaps with flashing lights as well as a marked
crosswalk. Mr. Culver noted it would be the city's responsibility to maintain
the lights; but advised that amenity was usually required as a crossing feature
for those crossings considered more at risk due to the volume of traffic, such
as found on Lexington Avenue.
McGehee asked if solar-powered lights at crossing were less expensive initially
and for maintenance.
Culver advised that the initial cost was less as there was no conduit required
to power the signs; and if LED lights, the initial cost was more but the maintenance
costs were also lower.
objection Mayor Roe asked that staff have these discussions with Ramsey County
as to how this may work out; and if bond funds were required to leverage
funding, offered his support to do so if that allowed a quicker resolution,
with Ramsey County support and participation, for enhancement at the Shryer and
moved, Etten seconded, authorizing staff to develop plans for the proposed
seven selected sidewalk segments as indicated; and directed staff to return
with more refined costs for each segment.
Etten spoke as a big fan of Mayor Roe's requested segment connecting Palisades
Apartments, noting the number of people this would facilitate and connecting
hundreds of people to transit, gas/convenience stores, area parks, and also to
Central Park; and offering numerous benefits. Councilmember Etten further
spoke in support of Ramsey County's participation and as firmer numbers are
available, sought assurance that sections 1 and 2 will be accomplished; and
depending on further discussion with neighborhoods around those parks and more
refined numbers based on those discussions, he still supported keeping section
6. Councilmember Etten noted the embarrassment when a sidewalk makes no connection
and requires a rational explanation of why it was installed versus the need to
finish things off to make complete connections.
Laliberte agreed with adding the Lexington Avenue and Shryer Avenue connection
as part of the discussion with the Ramsey County Public Works Department.
Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, McGehee, and Roe.
Appoint Member to the Community Engagement Commission and to the
Human Rights Commission
McGehee moved, Laliberte
seconded, appointment of Peter Sparby to the Community Engagement Commission
for a term ending March 31, 2018.
Mayor Roe spoke
in support of and noted his impression with Ms. Gadea and her resume; opining
they met the needs of the CEC well; and thought she would fit best given her
background. However, Mayor Roe deferred to the will of the City Council.
Laliberte agreed with the qualifications of Ms. Gadea and encouraged her to
reapply for a future vacancy.
Willmus moved, Laliberte
seconded, appointment of John Eichenlaub to the Human Rights Commission for a
term ending March 31, 2019.
noted areas of Mr. Eichenlaub's application that caught his attention specific
to suggestions for inclusive and diverse language and publications to reach a
broader audience with city communications.
Laliberte agreed with the good points made; and noted Mr. Eichenlaub's
enthusiasm and apparent care for the community and how that could be reflected
on this welcoming commission.
McGehee agreed to defer to her colleagues on this appointment.
Etten agreed with Councilmember McGehee in not opposing the majority; and
agreed that while Ms. Gadea would be an excellent representative for the city,
so would Mr. Eichenlaub's dedication. Councilmember Etten encouraged Ms. Gadea
to reapply sooner rather than later for the next vacancy that became available.
concurred with his colleagues; and again noted that each candidate brought
great things to the table, and provided their own skill set.
City Manager Future Agenda Review
Trudgeon provided a preview of upcoming agenda items.
included inclusion of senior housing options and planned unit developments on
July 18 (Laliberte); procedure for consideration a new Acorn Road Subdivision
to replace the current application still pending, and formal withdrawal of that
current application (Willmus).
Gaughan advised that withdrawal of the pending subdivision application would be
appropriate as a condition of the new subdivision application.
Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
Etten moved, Laliberte
seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 9:18 p.m.