Mr. City [clears throat] Manager, would you call the role, please? >> Council member Stron >> here. >> Council member Schroeder >> here. >> Council member Grath >> here. >> Council member Bower >> here. >> Mayor Row >> here. Uh and with us at the DES by way of introduction, we have our city attorney Rachel Tierney, who's on my right at the end of the day as always. And our city manager Pat Trean who is on my left at the other end of the DES [clears throat] as always. Uh we have uh various staff and guests who will be uh presenting as agenda items come up and we'll make sure and introduce those folks uh at those times. Uh just a couple of housekeeping items. Uh first of all, if you have a cell phone, we want to make sure that it's silenced or otherwise uh we can assure that it won't be disrupting our meeting this evening. Uh and then I should note uh for folks who are interested in everybody. All right, can you still hear me? Okay. Over the PA. Okay, good. um uh other than the damage to your hearing it just was caused. But um I did want to note that if you want to follow along with the agenda, we have uh individual extra copies of the agenda on the back table by the back door under the big clock uh which are yours to use to follow along with the meeting. Uh we also do have one complete set of all the meeting materials that the council will be considering and that is in a large three- ring binder in the same location. Uh that is for sharing so we'll have to you have to work it out amongst yourselves. Uh but uh we do want to make uh all of the meeting materials available uh to the public as part of uh complying with Minnesota's open meeting law. Uh we will be doing uh more instructions as it relates to public comment as we get into the meeting here. Uh but I think that's enough for now. So we'll go ahead and if if you can stand, please stand if you're able for the pledge of allegiance. >> [snorts] >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [clears throat] [snorts] >> Right. Next on our agenda is approval of tonight's agenda. As an as always, I'll check with staff first. Mr. Tretton, are there any staff initiated changes to tonight's agenda? >> Mr. Mayor staff has no changes to the agenda. >> All right. Uh are there any council requested changes to tonight's agenda? Uh or any consent agenda items that council members would like uh considered separately? Does not appear to be the case. We'll do a quick check with folks here from the public. Uh I just mentioned the consent agenda. That is section 10 at the end of our agenda this evening. It's a number of items such as approving our bills uh and a number of relatively straightforward administrative approvals that are usually taken as a single motion. Items 10 A through uh H I believe it is. Um and if you happen to be here for one of those items and wanted to either make a comment or ask a question about that item, uh this would be the time to let us know so that we can take it up earlier in the meeting instead of making a wait till the very end. Uh so just uh check if you're here for uh any of the items in section 10 which is in the bottom of the front page of the agenda. Uh let us know and we'll make sure and move that up in the agenda so that we can uh hear your comment or uh your question before we uh have to go through the rest of the agenda. Is there anyone here for an item in section 10 this evening? All right. Does not appear to be the case. Uh with that then I think we uh can entertain a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Move. >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved by council member Schroeder, seconded by council member Grath uh to approve the agenda as presented. Any discussion on that motion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. [clears throat] That passes unanimously. We have our agenda for this evening. Uh that brings us then to our first opportunity for public comment. And I should note uh if you you've been here before, you know that we do have the opportunity for public comment on agenda items as they come up. Uh and so if you're here for especially one of the business items in section seven of our agenda, uh we will provide opportunity for public comment on those items at that time when those come up. But this first opportunity is an opportunity we provide at every council meeting for members of the public to speak to either the council about city business that isn't on our agenda this evening uh or uh speak more broadly to the community about uh information that may be of interest to people in the community. We call that general public comment. And so this is that opportunity. If anyone is here this evening to speak on items not on tonight's agenda but related to city business, to other city business or of interest to people in the community, uh this would be the time to do that. And we've got the uh microphones at the table uh for that purpose. So if you're interested to speak under general public comment, uh this would be the time to come up uh for that purpose. We just ask that you introduce yourself uh with your name and either your street or address. We do have a threeminut time limit per speaker which I will try to enforce gently and generously. Uh and also uh please address your comments or questions to the council. >> Thank you. Good evening. My name is Kar Desbande and I represent district 3 of the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Uh by now you might have already heard or seen a letter that our board sent to you maybe in the last couple weeks. Uh I'm here today to speak about a plan that Mandot has to remove a leftbound turn lane from Highway 280 onto Broadway Street Northeast. The this particular turn lane is technically in Lauderdale, but the northern portion is in Roseville. And uh a lot of people in Minneapolis and in particularly in the Northeast neighborhood and also the Minneapolis Park Board have concerns that the removal of this turn lane could not only impact constituents ability to get around the area and get to nearby businesses, but it could also affect our ability at the park board to complete the Minneapolis Grand Rounds. And so I'm here to request that you one potentially consider speaking with MDOT about these plans if you haven't heard of them already and learn about the the details and data of why they are proposing this change and whether or not you agree. I would also ask that you speak with your constituents to see the impacts that it might have on them because I'm sure they probably use that turn lane. Also, uh I'm here representing my constituents. I took office in January after the election of November and I've heard from numerous people that this is a concern for them and you all here in Roseville have a potential impact there. You know, the grand rounds is some is a project that the Minneapolis Park Board has been trying to complete for 143 years. So, we want to make sure that this project is done right and that MDOT hears and considers the concerns that the public has. And lastly, I would say that the Minneapolis parks are a gem of the state and really a re major regional attraction. We get 23 million visitors to our chain of lakes alone, which to put that in perspective is more than every single state park in Minnesota combined. So, we're really a major draw and tourist attraction. We hope that your constituents and the people of Roseville are able to enjoy the grand rounds as we would hope they would be in the coming years as we finish that plan after over a century. So, thank you for your consideration and I appreciate your service. >> Thank you for your comments this evening. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak under general public comment this evening? It does not appear to be the case. Uh that uh being said, then we can proceed with our agenda. We don't have any other items under recognitions and donations or items removed from consent. And so we can proceed into our business items. Uh our first business item this evening is item 7A, which is to consider approving the Willow Pond environmental assessment worksheet uh for that uh dredging project. Uh and I'll turn it over to our public works director uh Jesse Fryhammer to introduce this topic and our guest this evening. >> Uh thank you, mayor and councel. Um so as part of the Willow Pond uh dredging project, uh the city was required to do an EAW or environmental assessment worksheet on that project. So, um, the city hired Kimley Horn to help us through that process. So, with that, I will turn it over to Leila Bungi with, uh, Kimley Horn, and she can kind of explain the process that we went through and, uh, steps going forward. >> Great. Welcome. >> All right. Yeah, thank you. Good evening. Um, >> maybe we can make sure the mic is pointing towards you a little more. There we go. >> All right. Can you hear me now? >> That's better. >> Okay. Uh, yeah. Thank you for having me here tonight. So, I'll walk through just an overview of the EAW process and the findings of fact. um that is being presented tonight for the Willow Pond maintenance project. Um so in this project, the project proposer and the responsible governmental unit is both the city of Roseville. Um so this project was initiated um by the city and I was brought on as a consultant to help prepare the document on behalf of the city. Uh just a quick background on this maintenance project. Um this does involve dredging approximately uh 20,000 cubic yards of sediment from Willow Pond. Um really the purpose of this project is to address the sediment accumulation that has happened over many years, enhance quality of the wildlife habitat in the area, improve the aesthetic value of the storm water pond, and then improve um the function that it's intended to be as a storm water basin. Uh this project does trigger a mandatory EAW category under Minnesota rules subpart 27 um because it is a public waters wetland. Um, so just to back up and explain what an EAW or environmental assessment worksheet is. Uh, this is a meant to be a brief document designed to lay out the facts of the project to determine if additional environmental review is required. The EAW forum consists of 22 questions and it is administered by the environmental quality board. The purpose of the EAW is to inform the public about the project, uh, document any future permitting or approvals that would be needed, identify potential impacts and mitigation strategies to address those impacts. Um, but it is not anything that necessarily proves or denies a project. It really just is a source of information to help guide future steps. So, the EAW topics that were covered um are shown here on this slide. So they range from climate adaption uh to land use cover types, geology, soils, water resources, contamination, uh habitat, endangered and protected species, historic properties, uh visual impact, greenhouse gas analysis, transportation, air and noise, and cumulative potential effects. So the next couple slides, I'll just walk through a high level summary of what the EAW covered within those topic areas. Um in terms of land use, the project does not require any changes to existing land use or zoning classification. Um but a grading and uh filling permit will be obtained. In terms of geology and soils, construction is proposed in the winter time frame to ensure saturated soils are stable during excavation of dredge material. So no permanent impact to that. Uh in terms of water resources, Willow Pond, as I mentioned, is classified as a DNR public water wetland. Um but the dredging work is not anticipated to have any permanent impacts. So just be temporary. [snorts] Uh groundwater, if there are any wells that are encountered during construction, those would be capped and sealed according to um Department of Health regulations. Uh storm water, the purpose of the project is to is to actually improve the uh willow pond's function as a storm water basin and a storm water pollution prevention plan or SWIP will be prepared to prevent any pollution during and after construction. Uh in terms of contamination, uh the dredging will remove 20,000 cubic yards of level two material um that will be coordinated with MPCA on transporting that material to an appropriate landfill. Uh in terms of protected species, uh any invasive species would be controlled on site during construction and disturbed areas would be reestablished using um native and stabilized seed mixes. Uh receding the disturbed grassland and native seed mix is also recommended by the DNR to protect um species and any uh impacts to the rusty patch bumblebee if present. The northern longeared bat uh uses select trees, bridges, and other structures to roost during the day and night. Um so tree clearing must occur between November 1st and March 31st. Uh the city will consider a summer wet dredge to avoid any impacts to the Blandings turtle as well as following the fact sheet during construction. In terms of historic properties, um we did review the shipo database and there are several uh sites nearby but none that would be impacted by this project. Uh visual the judging accumulated sediment um will be an improvement to the aesthetic value of the the visual area. Uh in terms of air, the project could generate temporary dust impacts, but the contractor would follow best management practices to reduce any dust emissions. Uh greenhouse gas emissions. Really this section looked at just construction related. Um so there are some mitigation measures identified to uh minimize that during construction. Uh the project is not anticipated to have any noise impacts but um if the if there is uh need to work out of the city uh construction hours a variance would be [clears throat] requested. Uh terms of transportation, there's no road closures or major traffic impacts that are anticipated during construction and a signage plan would be created um to notify the public of the project. Um, so in terms of the uh comment period summary, there was a 30-day public comment period from March 31st to April 30th. We did not receive any public comments. [snorts] We received three agency comments. Um, one from MPCA that uh stated they didn't have any comments. DNR commented on uh just more coordination that we would occur as part of the uh the future water appropriations permit. And the Met Council um also commented on ensuring that the SWIP the storm water pollution prevention plan um was consistent with the EAW recommendations. Um so to conclude the there is under Minnesota rules um subpart 4410 uh four criteria that you look at to evaluate whether the EAW process did um identify any significant environmental effects that might be addressed with further environmental review. Um according to the four criteria listed here, the project does not have any significant environmental effects. Um so going through that four criteria, the project is a known um project with known impacts and the EAW did address any permits and next steps that would be needed to address those impacts. The EAW did look at pu uh cumulative potential effects from any adjacent projects. um to the extent to which environmental effects can be subject to mitigation by other ongoing public regulatory authority. Um the permit table listed in the AW does list other authority and review would be needed for the project. And then the last criteria um to the extent which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled. Again, this is a known project with known environmental impacts and those have been documented in the EAW. >> Any and I'm happy to answer any questions as well. >> All right. Uh thank you, Miss Monkey. questions from members of the council for staff or the consultant. Uh, council member Grath. >> So, when they're doing the dredging, uh, the material that is dredged, what sort of tests do they do on that? And does that determine where it's delivered to what landfill depending on what they find out? >> Yeah. So, we so we've already done uh testing on it, so we're pretty confident it's all level two. So, that will all have to be taken to a certified land for all that. So, yeah, it's not reusable material. Other questions from the council? >> I did want to clarify that. I thought in one of the comments from one of the agencies, there was some note that in the in the EA in the I think it was in the EAW documentation that some of the samples indicated level one material and others indicated level two. I'm assuming level one is less stringently regulated. And so our our statement about the 20,000 cubic yards of level two was sort of the worst case scenario. >> Correct. Yeah. So we we will when we do the actual project, we'll have testing as we go to do it because obviously one cost a lot less than the other, but we for worst case scenario like like you mentioned, we just assumed it was all two. >> Okay. >> Cuz I think a majority of our samples were two. >> I got it. And that gets to I think Council Member Gra's question. Uh and then I just had a question in terms of thinking about work done either in the winter time or in the summertime with dredging. I know we uh talked about specifically the the Blandings turtle impacts. Are there other uh wildlife impacts of dredging the bottom of of a storm water pond that need to be accounted for in the process or um or are those sort of incidental effects or can you talk a little bit about that? >> Um so that's the only one that was identified in the AW but um >> that's a specific species that's being watched >> but we've done other ponds and that's been our main concern. Obviously, if there's waterfall, they'll probably be displaced, but they can kind of take care of themselves. Um, I know when we did uh dredging at Villa Park a few years ago, we relocated as many uh turtles as we could and documented what kind there were. I think we only found a couple blandings, but there was a lot of painted turtles, as you can imagine. Um, but yeah, so we would work on that. Um, talking with Ryan, we are leaning most contractors have generally told us it'll probably be a summer project, but we're going to bid it both ways. >> Okay. um they're a little concerned it the pond won't freeze in the winter like like we would anticipate which would be a more traditional but that wetland is so big or that the water basin so big. >> Okay. All right. Uh and then just quickly a clarification on the level two. What's what sort of classifies the material as level two versus level one? Um you know there's a number of levels I imagine and >> and just kind of what are the contents or what types of materials or what are just for the public's knowledge. Yeah, it's um generally the contaminants within the material. A lot of it's um uh oil based stuff from um seal coating, driveway, stuff like that that was previously done. So >> So road runoff type things. Okay. >> Council member uh Strong. >> Yes. I wanted to know I know that the adjacent homes have had some flooding issues over the years. What kind of impact if any there would have this would have on that? >> It should have zero impact on flooding. We're we're basically creating more storage for the sediment. Um the the outlet or the water level. We're not adjusting the the outlet for for the >> So potentially improving the >> Not sure. >> I it should not affect hydraulically. >> Okay. >> We're we're we should improve the quality of the pond in terms of we have more storage for the sediment >> and there'll be more water volume in there, but the amount of storage between rains should remain the same. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Other questions from the council? All right. This is I believe we do need to to um provide for public comment on this uh before we uh uh take action on the environmental assessment worksheet. So, we'll check and see if there is anyone from the public who wishes to comment on this uh item this evening before the council considers uh accepting the EAW as uh indicating that there is no significant impact and no need for an environmental impact statement on the project. It does not appear to be the case. We'll go ahead and close the public comment then and move to council consideration. Uh once again, the requested action. Uh let me just make sure I pull it up to make sure I don't uh misspeak is to uh consider approving the Willow Pond environmental assessment worksheet and passing the resolution. Ah, I knew there was a resolution in there somewhere which is uh the attachment in the packet which uh formally adopts the EAW. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved by Council Member Straw, seconded by Council Member Scher uh to adopt the resolution accepting the EAW as described. Uh discussion on the motion. Council Member Straw as the maker of the motion. Uh, thank you for taking the time to go through this and thank you for exploring options on winter versus summer and what works best for the um the area and um the success of the project. >> All right. And council member uh Schroer has the seconder of the motion. >> I'm just really glad that we're going to go ahead and get this done. And I know this has been in the works for a while now. And so, um, you know, if we, you know, adopt this tonight, then they can continue to get this scheduled. So, it's needed. >> Other discussion on the motion? Great. Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That motion passes unanimously. They that EAW is adopted. Thank you, uh, Mr. Fryhammer and Miss Bungi. >> All right. The next item under business items this evening is to uh hold a public hearing and consider a request for a minor plat of an unadressed property located at the southwest corner of Cleveland and Centerpoint Drive North. And we have our city planner Thomas Pashki with us this evening uh to bring this minor plat before the council. Welcome Mr. Pashki. >> Thank you mayor and uh city council. If I could get the overhead that might have to be shut off. [snorts] As you indicated, mayor, this is a uh public hearing for a minor plat for a lot that was created back in, I believe, n 2020 as a part of a different project that was proposed on the property, which is a piece of the uh former Veritas campus. It's at Cleveland and uh Centerpoint Drive. And so the uh proposal is to create uh two lots from the single lot. Both of those lots can form Both of those lots conform to the requirements of the centerpoint plan unit development. You also have uh some information and uh other plan sheets in your packet related to this. Our recommendation is to support the uh or to approve the uh proposed minor uh plat and you have a resolution in your packet uh to that point and then as you indicated this is a public hearing so you have to open it up for public comment before you make your decision. And I conclude my presentation. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Pashky. And can you just uh for the benefit of the public note the lot line between the two lots? >> Yeah, it be right right here. It's the lot line. All right. Using that expensive >> might show up a little better on [laughter] show up a little better on here. This is the existing road which would be relocated. >> I see. All right. Thank you, Mr. Pashk. Are there questions from the council for staff on this proposed uh minor subdivision or minor lot split? Doesn't appear to be the case. Uh we'll go ahead and open it up for public comment then on this proposed lot split. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak uh to this item this evening? Anyone from the public wish to speak to this proposed lat split? All right. Doesn't appear to be the case. Then we'll close the public hearing and move to council consideration. Uh once again, in this case, we do have a resolution uh to uh approve the lot split as outlined. Uh if council so desires, it's been moved. >> Second. Moved by council member Gra, seconded by council member Bower uh to adopt that resolution approving this lot split. Discussion on the motion as the maker of the motion. Council member Gra. >> No, this meets all the requirements of the city and I think it makes sense for the the owners to do that. Make it usable space for them. >> Great. As the second council member Bower, >> uh nothing more to add. >> All right. Other discussion on the motion. All right. Hearing none. Uh I would just note that it is fairly straightforward and uh this is sort of a re-shifting of what was done previously. So hopefully this will get some development happening on the site. Uh with that we've got the motion before us to adopt that resolution approving the minor uh plat. Uh all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously and that is approved. Uh thank you Mr. Pashki. >> All right. That then brings us to a couple of business items that are probably uh the highlights uh for most people here this evening. Um and I will just uh kind of begin as staff is uh coming up. I wanted to provide uh the public a little bit of a road map for these two agenda items as we'll take them up this evening so that uh that can be clear to folks. uh because we have two separate agenda items uh in discussion with uh staff, it seemed to make sense to uh to separate things that way, but to provide for one opportunity for public comments so we don't have to sort of go through the process two times. Uh and so what we'll do, the first agenda item is is primarily to receive the feasibility report that was done uh and ask have council be able to ask questions about that. Um and then we'll proceed then to the consideration of the petition to vacate the right of way and we'll provide an opportunity for public comment on that which will be an opportunity to either make comments about the feasibility study, ask questions about the feasibility study or make comments or ask questions directly about the uh right-of-way vacation uh uh petition which is before the city. Uh so hopefully that makes sense and we'll make sure and accommodate everybody who wishes to speak. Uh but at this point, we'll begin with receiving the um uh feasibility study, and I'll turn it over to parks and recck director uh Matt Johnson to begin that process this evening. >> Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. Uh Mr. Mayor, you did such an eloquent job of summarizing. You took away the bulk of my intro, which is great. Um but of course, as mentioned, this is part of an ongoing conversation that has um revolved around the Aldine Street rightway between Ryan and Roselon Avenue. Um, as you'll recall, as part of that conversation, there was a request from the council u for the parks and recreation commission to review this, particularly as it pertains to relevance to the parks and recreation system master plan as well as the potential ability to do something that's a little non-traditional like we have in some of our other parks such as Cottontail Park. Ultimately, the parks and recreation commission did go out and visit the site as well as had two different meetings where this was discussed. As you might guess, there was uh ample public comment as well as some vibrant discussion uh with the parks and recreation commission and they brought back back uh two recommendations to the council. The first was an acknowledgement that there was relevance to the parks and recreation uh system master plan. And the second was a recommendation to re uh to find somebody to do a feasibility study to determine the environmental impact and aesthetic impact of said uh potentials trail. On January 26, the council commissioned the feasibility study from TKDA, a firm with significant experience in nature-based pathways as well as schematic creation. Um, and uh, the residents specifically requested that we utilize a third-party arborist that was not affiliated with TKDA um, nor city staff member. Ultimately, we partnered with three trees horiculture uh and Jason Johnson to be the certified arborist that contributed all arbor in all tree information to the study and I think that is noted within the study. Um tonight Dana Schumacher who is the senior landscape architect from TKDA is here to summarize their findings as well as answer any questions that you may have. So Dana, I will turn it over to you and you go ahead. >> Okay, I'll try and make this quick. Uh thank you council members and Mr. Mr. Mayor and and Matt for introducing this study. As uh Matt mentioned, I'm with TKDA. I'm a landscape architect there. And I we did uh this feasibility study. We were tasked to see whether we could it if it was possible to build an accessible trail through this rightway uh plot that is only 30 feet wide and a little over 600 feet long and and it has mature majestic oak trees. So that is there a way to build an accessible trail through this system. So we were tasked with that and to come up with one or two options to see if that was feasible. So this study looks at that and summarizes that there there is a way to do it. I mean there is some some um balancing of course as we go through the study. So I was going to explain um basically when you do a feasibility study it starts with a site visit and an analysis and just observation. So, we did meet out there as a group with um the arborist and city staff and walk the site from north to south and south to north and and um I could even though it was um like mid-March and there wasn't a lot of vegetation on the ground or anything, but you could see there was um some signs of wildlife and signs of native plant material on the ground as well. And you could see there was with any right of way some encroachment but you could see also that there was um a lot of potential and opportunity in the space. So we um we took the survey that was provided [clears throat] from the city and the tree survey as well as the topographic and brought it back to our office and after after walking the site and and then studied that grading plan to see if there was a route that might work through that space that would preserve the majority of the oaks. So looking at that site, it there is a bit of um a mound on the north on the north end and then um more of a flat area to the south. So the actual grades to the space are not too much of an issue just at the north end, but to have a for ADA accessibility, we want to have a path that's 5% max um for a slope. So those are some of the the items I guess I could as I go through here. The other things that we looked at in a site analysis is just the historical vegetation and the soils and see what was the historical use. Um and and obviously the the soils show that yes, it was an oak oak openings or oak um area in the past. So that definitely is reason why we have an oak some oaks that are still remaining on the site. the arborist and I we we laid out a path and then I sent that to the arborist to see if there was a way is this a feasible route that would work to save a majority of the oak trees and um I shared an idea that I don't think this would be viable with just just um a a a traditional path like a um just a gravel compacted path through the whole site and we looked at an option that has uh a raised ramp ramp or raised plank area. So, it's like a boardwalk. So, it would not it would be just on top of existing grade. So, there would be no excavation whatsoever. So, that that was an interesting idea for the arborist to contemplate as we looked at the the critical root zones. Um, we'll see that later in on the circles. The >> Are you ready for it now? >> Sure. >> Let's grab that. Yes. This will help a little bit. I I tried to highlight where the the oak trees are the dashed circle areas. Um it's not quite showing up well, but they're you can kind of see where the oak trees are from south. The south end is on the top and the north end is on the bottom is how this reads. And so the trail that we worked out to go through the space where we have the um the critical root zone area of the oak trees, that is the area that we we definitely don't want to impact if we can. And those those are the areas where the the roots are close to the surface. it has the most um um life of the I'm not an arborist, but I'm trusting that you know how how they describe how do how you um protect the oak trees is we want to be able to you know protect as much possible areas as we can. So these raised boardwalk areas sit on top of the ground and would go through the oak trees and then where we don't have oak trees, it transition back to traditional gravel. And the gravel pathways are areas where it's it's not just a traditional gravel path. It's it has a stabilizer that is added to it so that it does actually comply with uh ADA rules so it can be accessible. So that that is the um that that is option one. And so on this plan it shows that it's basically the same um alignment for option one or option two but option one is showing the combination of the boardwalk and the gravel trail. And the only let's see we have 14 oaks total on the on the right of property. the there are of the 14 there were two that would be greatly impacted versus minimally or moderately impacted on the others. So there is it is difficult with a 30- foot wide wide right of way to to not impact them you know at all. But what we're proposing in the in the study is that the construction company or the the arborist that would be involved with with protecting and and and inoculating the trees preconstruction and post and then the very careful narrow construction path that would be taken to build this trail system could you know it could be it is a feasible um option that that could possibly you know create a nice space. So, the thing I guess um as we look at at this space, it's a matter of it's connecting the two streets and it and it sounds like it was a a historical path in the in the past, but this would be a way to provide it all on public property of the right of way. And um let's see, it could be a it could be a place where people could have a connection from from the two streets. It could also be a space where it can allow people um as a landscape architect that we're we're connecting point A and point B, but we're also trying to provide an experience, right? So, it can be something that help people slow down and look up at the trees, look down at the ground and take some time as you move through the space, but it is it's a very small in informal smaller trail. So, it's a matter of trying to show that balance between um trying to have trying to have the human needs satisfied as well as in connection with the nature that we have um on our sites. Let me see. Is there any other >> We can hit go here. >> Sure. >> There you go. >> Oh, yes. And then this is also this is the profile. So, this is you you just saw a plan view. So, looking down on it, this is profile. So, looking sideways at it. So this is showing where where we have oak trees are those more vertical lines stationed through the site and the you can see where we have boardwalk. Those are where we have the those would be where we have the critical root zone of the oak trees and you can see that the connections in between the oak trees are the gravel pathways. Um, and so the two, let's see, oak number 13 and oak number 12 on the top of the the rise on the on the bottom portion there. Those are where those were the two where we were trying to keep under 5% slope. And so those those two would be greatly impacted on this on this layout, but the majority of the oaks are are less so. So, and then as we're coming down on the north end to meet up with Ryan, um, in order to um to to have less impact on the roots of oak number two and one that's off the page and six is also to have um a boulder edge so we can hold up the slope for that walkway. Um and it gives a nice rustic feel I feel for the space as well. Um let's see. Do we want to >> touch on budget quickly? Oh, that's >> that's yeah small. Well, let me um basically the two differences between option one and option two is that uh option one has the boardwalk and gravel trails and option two is just the gravel trails and basically the if we want to provide a pathway that is taking you through a space that you want to see these oak trees that that's the I mean it's a point A point B but it's also experiencing these oak trees. Option one is would be the winner where you have best of both worlds versus option two would be it would connect those two that would you would have that connection but you would possibly have a have a a detrimental effect on the trees. So um let's see there was one more thing I wanted to comment on and I'm blanking but um you um oh I know what it was. Thank you. [laughter] the uh oak trees and the and this trail pathway could potentially um I I've found in my my work when I'm designing these trails that if you have if you show a sense of care for a space that you have a designated trail through a through a park area and you're trying to protect areas that are off of the trail. signage helps, but the trail like a a raised boardwalk or just the gravel designated trail will it's more likely that people would stay on the trail versus making their own path. So, when you have that sense of care, it could um it could people would stay on the trail and then you would have less compaction on the side areas and you could have, you know, those oak trees that we have there, [laughter] we want to have some regeneration and some new oak trees at some point. So those acorns could fall and actually produce new oak trees and that could be, you know, how we continue on that space and have that path through. So >> right, I think that's everything. >> I think we'll open it up for any comments. >> I'll stop talking because I saw Dana here. >> I get passionate. >> Um I I imagine that some of the questions may be tree life related and things like that and I don't know if we have our arborist here, but I'm wondering if we'll be able to answer those questions. Yeah, we the uh the arburous that being in front of the council was not part of his scope of work. Um >> obviously due to trying to keep the price where it was, but um we certainly are able to we had pretty thorough conversations and we have be happy to have those conversations or answer the questions to the extent we're able to. >> Oh yeah. >> All right. Um and just a clarifying question before I open it up to the council. Um so the impacts to the to trees 12 and 13 uh is primarily because in that area at least through part of the area you have to do some some excavation grading to maintain the slope of the pathway and so you can't really put boardwalk in any of that canopy area or root area because of the fact that you've got to do the grading in the part of it anyway. >> Correct. Yeah. With a with a boardwalk it would be even higher or steeper so we can achieve the the 5% or less. >> Got it. Okay. So that's why those those there's not the ability to put the boardwalk in that particular area. >> Yes. Yeah. And we did earlier look at some with a with a steeper like a ramp system. Um that was an earlier look and it was just as much of an impact but we because we would have to have handrail to have that come down. So we could have it higher but then we had the the handrail and footings and that was not a and more expensive. >> Okay. So more substantial posts and things like that. I see. Okay. >> All right. Uh questions from the council. Uh council member Strong. >> So in the presentation as you have how many trees are being recommended that they are removed >> of the oak trees or just in of all the >> just of oak trees as well as just trees in general? >> Sure. Um well the the 12 and 13 that are greatly impacted. We would I I would I mean it's I would say try to keep them and see how they do. I wouldn't remove them immediately, but there all are also I would want to prep this area um you know for any lowhanging branches and there are some like buckthornne and some some some box elders that are leaning pretty hard uh that would be you know a little bit of a a danger. So overall, um I wouldn't recommend that. Well, there's even a dead a dead oak um that is not listed or it's not, you know, it's not changing obviously from from before to after. I would want to probably cut down some of the upper branches so they're not going to fall on someone, but it could still be a roost or something for wildlife would be I would still recommend keeping the trunk. >> Could you go to that grade? Um, not this one, but I think it was the next one. And then looking in 13 at three 313, it already appears that it's already at a fair condition. Um, and even with any work, you're saying it's going to go to a poor to very poor. So, what would be the if we're talking about really not removing any trees, what would be the impact or um of taking out that one tree that is already deemed to be of fair or less quality at this point? >> Why wouldn't you remove it? I'm sorry. >> Why Why would we not remove I mean, why what would be the impact on this overall decision if we took out that one tree? >> The the Okay. the northern oak, the northern pin oak >> 13 >> number 13 that is a a smaller uh circle or or critical root zone on it. Um, why wouldn't you? I mean, I would I guess I would It's alive right now, and I would some sometimes oaks I'm not I'm not the certified arborist, so I'm not going to speak on the specialty of of his tree rating system, but sometimes oaks can survive a lot of of impact. So, I would I'd rather wait and see to before just removing it before the trail. >> Okay. And where is 31 in this process? 31. Maybe it's already been removed because it already says that is very poor or dead. So maybe that's the tree. >> I think that's Yeah, that one was already dead. So we didn't note it on the >> Yeah, it's noted in the tree inventory that we were provided. >> Um Okay. Um, and then I was just wondering if you in making this feasibility study if you were taking into consideration the past regular use of this area or were you considering that there's nothing there now to being used because regularly it was very regularly in use. >> Um, I noted on the survey that there was a an old um a bit of an old piece of trail that was like two feet wide more on the west side. So, when we uh were looking at the the layout, I I used a bit of that section that was on the public property because I didn't want to impact any new area. Um, so I did use a bit of that trail to to design the new space. Mhm. >> So, keeping within that, but then at the moment there is quite a bit of p of in impingement from the area property owners as well as and they're into what we would consider this public this public space right now. >> Encroachment. Correct. Yes. Um I guess I didn't touch on that, but when I was out there for the site analysis and observation, there's some fencing on the north end that that comes into it. Uh and it's a with a sign that says it's certified wildlife habitat. It has some nice nice native plants in there. It looks like it's well cared for, but it is encroaching and there's some other there's some other fencing and some other sheds and um um some storm water utility as well. And then on the south end there's a chain link fence that is also in the right of way. >> Okay. And were you able to make an assessment of what to do with that even though you were not able to get through that space? I think that was we we were given access to it. So we did we did get there. Um I think that >> you ultimately they think that would be a policy decision as to what would be done. Certain elements would have to be moved to accommodate this. >> But the understanding of you know whether every last thing that's in the right of way would be removed I think is ultimately a conversation we would have. >> But but we did we we we were very graciously granted access to the entirety of it. >> Right. Yeah. I should mention some of the trail um where there's some some fence just over a bit. Um we don't have it going right up next to the f the existing fencing. So that could be a potential, you know, where you don't need to move those those fences and you could still have it but have it be grandfathered in for a bit. >> Seems like out of fairness probably have to do one or all or none. So having been a teacher that's not fair. >> Well, it is. Yeah, it's a very narrow. It's 30 ft wide. So, we're trying to The goal is to save as many oak trees as we can and provide the path. But >> other questions? Uh, Council Strong, I want to check you were finished with your questions. Okay. Other questions from other council members? >> I did have a couple of questions if uh maybe this will spur some some others. You never know. Um, so uh actually just one one question. So, are there any number of oak trees that are outside of the rightway that we that we took into account in our analysis at all in terms of if the pathway was going to impact those root zones or anything like that? >> When we when I was out there, yes, with Jason, we looked up. We looked around and saw what was adjacent. We didn't have it on our on on our survey, of course, but we did take note of that. He didn't um do a rating for those, but yeah. And do the does this option one proposal have negative impacts in the gravel areas on any of the root zones of any of the trees outside of the um of the uh right-of-way area? >> I don't I mean I yeah I asked Jason to to comment on that if there were any. I didn't receive any feedback on that. >> Okay. Affirmative. He >> Okay. All right. I just wanted to clarify that. Um I asked the question on the the two trees impacted and certainly the um as you noted the the the tree number I think it was uh number 13 is a much smaller tree with a the smaller root area that's the darker red on that that map and then the the 13 or the excuse me the 12 is the larger of the two. Um, so one of the things I was wondering about with the the proposed boardwalk, um, you know, was mentioned that that during construction that the boardwalk should be put in first and so that that can help, uh, you be used to to for these manual carts or whatever that are bringing in gravel materials and things like that. Um, do we feel that that the boardwalk design is robust enough for that that we shouldn't see any uh immediate harmful impacts to the structure or the life of that boardwalk based on on that use during the construction time? Correct. Yeah, I did check with the with the manufacturer to see and it was a um a 60 pounds per square foot uh weight that would go on there. So, I did verify that with the the the machinery that's in this report that that is acceptable that can handle that weight of those items with the loads on them. So, nothing bigger than that. So, if they're like for example, I know there's comment on on tree maintenance. So, um, you know, using a crane or something, it's seems like a a majority of the oaks are on the on the south or the north and just a couple in the middle that could possibly be achieved that way. >> Okay. Um, and then uh the the so the supports for the boardwalk that are sort of not dug into the ground, they're sitting on the ground or those those are galvanized. Is that uh got a pretty good life to it or is that uh you know I know galvanized isn't stainless steel so it it can corrode over time but >> yeah I did I did get some feedback just recently from the vendor and I think the boardwalk system itself was 25 years the planks as long as you were to treat them maybe every 5 years or so if they're not in full sun they could last quite a while and the pan and feet he was or the footings the the whatever the the feet and post um he says is that they've they're 50 plus they've reused those several times um on reused them on on different projects the same the same base. >> Okay. >> And we're not in w we're not in sitting water on this either. So I think >> it could last a while. >> Right. And then um one of the things that was I think brought up in some of the earlier questions was some of the existing um encroachments into the right of way things like uh the chain fence and other fences and uh I believe also a portion at least of the gravel driveway on the the southwestern property is slightly encroaching into the rightway but it is clearly you know fairly significantly into the root zone of of some of those trees on the south end. uh did the arborist uh or can you talk to some of the impacts of some of those existing uh activities in the right ofway in terms of how that may have impacted the root zones [clears throat] of those trees? >> I remember him commenting on number 51 and 52 that he felt those were probably more of a shared um right by the gravel drive >> that those might be more of a shared root system going on with those two and that they're they're kind of twins or together. So what is impacting 51 might be impacting 52. So yeah, he did say that those were were impacted out already by that by that gravel driveway as well as we weren't sure what kind of mower might be I mean it's a mowed area if it's a riding mower or reg you know push mower that that could potentially be causing some impact too. >> Okay. And as far as like the fence post holes or things like that, I know we talked about not wanting to put holes in for footings for the boardwalk. And so I'm just curious if that if that's something that's already sort of having some impact on um >> it was flagged when we toured it. Um but I think there was, you know, it's difficult to speculate given it's an existing condition. So, um I think it was noted um ranging from several of those encroachments or even things that were occurring on the private side was flagged as that may be causing impacts already. But when it's an existing condition, you know, we we asked arborists to see into the future, >> that's a little more scientific theoretically than seeing into the past and understanding that. But um certainly is a conversation that has been had several times over um without a ton of clarity as to you know because it is an existing condition. Okay. All right. Uh, and then this is, uh, going a little bit offsite. Uh, so I happen to have a park in my neighborhood that has a pathway through it, uh, that has a lot of oak trees in it, which is the Reservoir Woods pathway as you go east of Victoria Street. Um, and certainly that was installed, I think, over 20 maybe 30 years ago as a uh as a batuminous 8 foot wide pathway. Uh, it looked I checked again today, it looks fairly much like a lot of that is in the root zone of the uh of those oak trees. And I'm not saying that those oak trees are like doing great or super healthy, but I wondered if the city had some sense of of has that been looked at over time or the impacts of that pathway on those oak trees and if you have any thoughts as that. >> Uh I think this I can't speak to the specifics of that pathway. Sure, maybe the park system, >> but but I think in generally speaking um there have certainly been many many examples where um particularly the further back you go where um root zones have been impinged upon and we've seen trees live. I would also say conversely, we've had opposite uh we had a prominent tree at Cedar Home that they worked very hard to protect. Uh we thought it was fine and then four years later the tree failed. So I I think my from a staff side the biggest caution would be it's all an inexact science. Um but I will say that that you see a number of particularly the older paths uh the older parks where pathways were essentially cut through wilderness zones and many of those trees did survive. The challenge is and this is essentially what Jason stated is you don't know which one will and which one won't and you don't know which impact might be. So, um, you I think there was a very thorough analysis done of it starts here. We think this will happen. The reality is we're we're using science, but there's no guarantee of any of those ratings. And so, um, we have worked quite hard to try to avoid root zones, but we certainly have passed through them previously with and again, the further back you go, I think the less of a concern it probably was when you talk about like reservoir woods. >> Sure. And uh just to that, I think it sounded like in the in the feasibility study, there was some discussion about some mitigation efforts to correct to to try to inoculate trees and things like that before and after and and over time. And so, um it sounds like that's been something that's been thought about as far as how to how to potentially address that if if this pathway were to be put through. >> Correct. And I think another example where we uh those oaks at Autumn Grove Park uh there's significant impacts both within and without the root zones at Autumn Grove Park. And um overall they've done quite well. We have one that's not doing so hot just due to age. But um you know we have seen areas where when you put a lot of TLC in you can really give them a better chance of survival by doing that. Um but it's not again not exact. >> Great. Thank you. Uh were there other questions from uh council members on the feasibility study? Council member Bower. >> So [clears throat] if trees 12 and 13 do fail, would they need to be removed uh as part for safety reasons as part of this trail? >> Absolutely. I I mean yeah those uh both would need to be and and uh one of them is quite large. So yes >> and that cost isn't factored into this uh option one estimator. Correct. Um, >> I believe removal was not of that with the thought of waiting to to see. Yep. >> Thank you. >> Great. >> Uh, Council Member Strong, >> I'm just wondering what is to say that tree 12 or 13, especially 13, given that it already had a fair rating, wouldn't fail anyway in the next 5 years. So I mean to say that it's solely responsible based on this particular thing obviously there's a dead tree in this right away already and you know given the age of the trees um how many more years of life do we have the trees that are there? I don't know the aging of the trees in that area. Well, um I mean >> I I I think the that was the intention of the rating system was that um to provide the best estimate of that, but again it is inexact. Um he did go through and >> analyze each one which is why you got the starting rate. >> Um but trees are living things. >> Yep. >> So >> lightning is real. >> Yep. >> Are there other questions from council members? All right. If that's the case, then we appreciate the presentation of the study. Uh I would stand by for potential questions as we get into the right-of-way discussion that maybe folks haven't thought of uh yet or that come from members of the public. Uh but I do want to then uh uh presuming that's all right with the council. We can proceed to the next agenda item then. Uh we don't have to take action to receive the report. We have done that as a result of having this discussion this evening. Uh so next will be to uh take up the we have a specific petition from residents uh to vacate the right of way uh that has been described here this evening. And so that is something that the city will have to act upon in one fashion or another because we have the petition uh to the city for that purpose. Uh and so that would be the next step of this process. Uh, and I'll turn it over to our public public works director, Jesse Fryhammer, again to introduce the right-of-way vacation uh, process uh, for our consideration this evening. >> Uh, thank you, mayor and councel. Um, so we do have a petition um, for the vacation of this rightaway. So, just a little background, we did um the city originally considered this vacation at the June 16th, 2025 meeting um as a city initiated vacation and then at the July 21st, 2025, it was petition driven. Um this is for 30 ft of rightway um is dedicated in the Mid Oaks Plat. So, um the Mid Oaks Plat is all the property to the east of that of the of the West Red Line. Um, so if if it is vacated, it would go back to those property owners in the Mid Oaks Plat edition. Um, if we did vacate this right away, um, we do have utilities, um, both overhead and adjacent. We have some underground, so we would request, uh, utility easement be retained, so there will still be some sort of, uh, ownership by the city. Um, this is, uh, just an existing conditions survey as well as just documenting what the rightway is. So, the area in red is what, um, would be vacated. Um just a little um summary. Um I know the previous uh council item detailed on the feasibility report. Just a few other little things to add which we had in the previous staff report. Just wanted to carry that forward was um the Aldine pathway um would provide a quarter mile connection. Um without the connection there is it's about is about uh 1,900 more feet or about 3.3 times farther to use Fair View. um or about 2,700 feet, which is about five times further to use via Snelling. Um I know that's been brought up a few times. Um based on the pathway master plan scoring, the preference points are 14. It is not directly in the pathway master plan as a pathway master plan segment, but it is a constellation link, which is why it was scored when we did that back in the the day. Um just a little more context on that. Um like I said, it is shown uh in the in the trails and parks constellation map, and we did carry that forward. Um but it was not a a pathway master plan segment as I mentioned. Um so the requested action tonight um uh we'd have to open a public hearing um consider approval of a resolution approving the rightway vacation of a portion of Aldine Raaway that is located between the properties. I'm not going to read them all. Uh but basically uh in Mid Oaks um this would be a three-fifth vote is required since it is petitioned. When it was city driven it was a four-fifth vote. Um then a utility easement would be retained. Um if this action is taken, no pathway could be installed. Um an alternative action is consider a motion to approve retaining the rightway. Um and designate a public pathway and to update the pathway master plan or certainly could be some other alternative action related to that. Um and then if a vacation is not approved, no other and no other motion is made or approved, the status of vacation will remain as is. >> The status of the right of >> the status of the rightway would remain as is. Yep. So, so with that I can open up to any questions related to the vacation process. >> All right. Uh, thank you. Uh, Mr. Fryhammer. Are there questions from the council related to the uh, and once again this is a resident petition vacation process, not a city initiated at this point? Uh, council member Strong. >> So, if this were to be vacated back to these property owners, um, would we be able to place limits on when and how trees and other um, areas could be removed from this uh, rightway currently? We would have no ability. The city currently has no ability to do that. So it would go back to them. We would The only time the city would get involved with the tree removals that impacted our utility. >> So if we, for example, needed to get access to our storm sewer, that'd be the only time we would get involved. >> So there be no protection of these trees if that was to be granted. >> Any and all trees could be removed at any time by the owners. >> Correct. I I would say that's also kind of currently the state. So we even though it is right away, it's unimproved rightway. We do not generally since it's unimproved residents are responsible for maintaining those areas. So So it's kind of both ways. >> Um and if it's not granted um can the adjacent land owners be required to remove the encroaching fences and driveways? Certainly, if if we decide to if we just city decides to keep that, we can certainly look into potentially removing encroachments. >> Okay. Um, yeah, I think that's all I have right now. >> All right. Other questions from council members? Council member Groth, >> just a clarification, I keep hearing giving property back to the owners. This was never their property, was it? Wasn't this a rightway that was platted in 1938? Yeah, it was platted but but the underlying the underlying property owner is um the adjacent the the people who dedicated in the plat. So if it's >> if the city sees no use for the rightway, then it goes back to the previous property owners which would be in the plat. Yep. If it goes back to them. >> So but we did not buy the rightway. It was dedicated to us in a plat >> and that was a requirement of that platty. >> Yes. They there was a planned to put all dine in and then for whatever reason they never dedicated the west half and the city went a different route. similar to what we did on other vacation other parcels. >> And just to be clear, we're obviously there may have been some ownership changes since the original plat. Correct. The successorial owners would be the >> the ones who would reacquire or reacquire rights to the property, full rights >> under that. Other questions? Uh, council member Schroeder. >> Um, there was one thing and this might be for our attorney. Um I had saw in here that the um the property owners along here had put together a legal document to protect the trees. Do you and they were going to give it to the attorney to look at. Is that something you had looked at? >> Uh I I didn't look at that in detail. Um what I can say is that there was some discussion with Pat and the mayor. Um questions about whether or not there could be some sort of a conservation easement. um you can't simply give yourselves a con conservation easement, vacate and give yourself an easement. And so um you could certainly enter into an agreement with the property owners. They could give you a conservation easement. Those are fairly complicated documents. Um and so that's a it's a possibility if they wanted to give that to the city, but you don't have the ability to require it as part of this action. Can I follow up on that since I had asked all those all those questions about this? Uh so what we have in the packet is not necessarily a legal document in the sense that it it it's not signed by the city or anything like that. The the mechanism sounds like it would be the conservation easement approach or some other agreement. >> Mayor, I think it would be I'm as you know and one of my colleagues does your real estate work. I don't want to step on her toes, but yes, you need to enter into some kind of a legal document, a legal agreement between um the the property owners in the city. The city does have the ability only certain entities can hold a conservation ement. The city can um but the and the property owners can voluntarily give it to you, but you cannot require it of them as part of this action. So, uh, just from a process point of view, if the property owners are willing to enter into such an agreement and the city is willing to work out an agreement with property owners, um, would tableabling action on the right-of-way vacation until we have at least an attempt at a at coming to an agreement and potentially be able to bring one back to the council or bring back the result that there was not an ability to come to an agreement. is would that be considered something where we're somehow coercing that agreement to happen uh simply by tangling until we [clears throat] find out what can happen and maybe I worded that incorrectly but uh >> I I think I followed your full hypothes I I I think that would kind of be in the eye of the beholder. >> Okay. All right. theoretically, I guess, because everybody's volunteer voluntarily entering into those discussions and we're just theoretically allowing it to happen. That's what I was trying to think about in a way that you wouldn't be perceived as trying to strongarm something to get the vacation. >> But if they brought it forward, what you're saying, would we take >> That's what I'm wondering. Yeah. Because I don't think we can approve something this evening because we don't have anything to approve this evening, right? And so if we gave ourselves more time to figure that out, that's what I was thinking. And I'm not presuming any action by the city council one way or the other. I'm just trying to understand options that may be before the city council member Strong. >> So in your hypothetical world, adding another hypothetical, what if one of the uh land adjacent land owners chose not to participate? >> Again, Council Member Strong, you don't have the ability to force them to enter into a conservation easement. So if someone out of these adjacent land owners land owners chose um either now or in the future a future homeowner of one of these could they after it's done is that done? >> It it is an easement. It would be recorded against the property. >> Okay. So but at this time if one of those land owners chose not to participate then they'd have to it's not really a is it all or nothing? >> It would only apply to the properties which any property owner that wants to give you a conservation easement that you want to accept would be effective on that property. >> And just confirming that if any uh any of this property was to go into a conservation easement, it would um no longer be available for public thoroughfare. >> We're getting pretty far into the weeds about what an conservation [clears throat] easement is. Um, and the limited experience I have with conservation easements, they're fairly detailed and can outline things like what activities would be permitted within the conservation easement area. I I I I really shouldn't advise you more than that because I could be wrong and somebody >> it it does seem I remember from the information you shared with with city manager Treasure and I before the meeting that a conservation easement could not be used as a mechanism to build a trail, for instance, a public trail. because the city has to have an interest in the property for purposes of a trail as I understand it. So if one wanted to build a trail, one ought to perhaps keep the right of way either as right of way or a trail right ofway or something that is trail related perhaps. >> So mayor you have a lot of questions to unpack there. I'm just going to start with [clears throat] I I can't I can't say for sure whether it is possible to have a conservation easement and allow a trail to go through it. I I believe that such a document could exist, but again, I'm beyond my depth on that. >> Um >> I'm just going to stop at that. If you want me to answer any of the other questions, just >> No, that's fine. That's fine. >> I just follow up. I would just like to say given the information that we've been shared, I I don't think we could make that assumption that there'd be any interest. We've had uh substantial writings and information. >> That's why we have testimony. >> Yeah. And we've had substantial testimony and and written uh comments um and substantial funding put into this to make sure that this doesn't happen. So, I can't imagine that that would speak to a public thorough affair. >> Right. Uh other questions, Council Member Grath. So, I I do need clarification on the tree situation. It seems like everyone's in an agreement. No one wants these trees to go away. That's that's one place we can agree on. But right now, you're saying that with that being a right of way, the the city has no ability to stop people from cutting the trees down. >> Well, so we usually don't get that request. So maybe maybe I should take So we we a lot of times get requests to take down trees cuz they're hazardous or whatnot, >> right? >> We defer that back to the property owners because is not improved right away. Um since they are the underlying property owners, we only will go remove trees if they're a problem. Um we don't really, like I said, proactively manage unimproved rightway. So if someone wanted to go in there, we're not actively we don't take a tree inventory of these trees. it's it's outside of our ones [snorts] along Woodhill or Civic or County C. So, if someone did it, theoretically, they'd have to ask us to do it. Um, but we don't really actively manage that right away. Similar to what we do with all the trees that parks maintains um along other ones. So, legally, yes, they're probably required to ask us that, but like I said, we will defer back to since it's unimproved right away. If they ask us to remove a tree um because they want to, we will say it's since there's no need from a public perspective to remove it, we don't remove it. But we would allow them if they wanted to if that if that makes sense. Well, like like but if that's really more said related more to hazardous trees, I guess we've never really had the request for >> Yeah, I understand that for a hazardous tree or something, >> but we've never had that request for someone just wants to remove a a tree. We don't have a lot of these rightaways, but the ones that come up like that, we do. We we treat them only from the utility perspective why we need to remove it. We will we will remove for example in this corridor we would remove the tree if it was impacting us are getting access to our sanitary sewer system properly or we had to dig it up for drainage or something like that. Right. >> So, just on that topic, it seems to me uh there was some consequence in in my area of the city for a a resident who removed some trees from a stormwater pond property uh to improve their view of the pond. Yes, they they had to uh they had to do some restitution city. That was a little more clear because it was on city property, not right away. But yes, there was >> uh it was very clear that they were uh removing it for a different purpose. >> Right. Okay. That may not be relevant to this discussion, but it came to mind. >> Other questions for staff? And just to clarify on the utility easement remaining over this right away, I know we've got the power poles on the east edge for the most part and then most of our utilities as a city are uh past the west edge but may need access. >> Correct. So the I'm going to get them backwards. There's a sanitary sewer and a storm sewer line both going up west of this parcel which we've got an an easement from the one property owner. still working to get it, which cuz we always thought we had wider right away. Um, but if for example, if the storm sewer had to get replaced and dug up in the future, we would need the utility easement on our side of the parcel to get access to that uh storm sewer because I think it's a 48 in storm sewer. So, a rather larger one. It's not very buried very deep, but it would take a little bit more room to excavate. >> Holes have width to them. >> Y Okay. >> All right. All right. Any other questions from the council? I think that is all the questions that I had here. Oh, I did note um so Mr. Trean had answered a number of questions uh that were in an email from a resident and I don't know if it makes sense to take a moment to provide some of that information uh to the public who may not have been in the email chain there. Uh there were a lot of questions that may relate to some of the things that either we've been talking about or uh some maintenance questions or things like that. I don't know, Mr. Tre, if you want to just go through those. >> Well, there's 10 questions. Do you want me to read them all or? >> Uh I don't if you can maybe summarize the questions and the answers. >> Yeah. And this is a bench handout and it's it's available. >> Yeah, it's available. Um so the uh first question um uh whether or not the path if it was built under either option would it be for pedestrians only? Um we uh our answer is we would not restrict it from cyclist. Um and it is the pathway is wider than the required 3 ft for an 88 mountain bike path. Um, if no bikes were allowed, how would the city communicate no biking restriction? If such a restriction were needed, we would install signage. However, it's very unlikely we'd be able to effectively and timely enforce that. Just from the practicality standpoint, how would the city enforce a no biking restriction? Uh, once again, we would not practically uh police this if it's any incursions on private property. Um there's other methods what the uh private property owners can do such as signage and fencing. Um would the path if it was built under either option be closed for snow or ice season? Um and similar to natural trails elsewhere, the pathway would not be closed but would not be maintained. So it would not be plowed. U for the initial cost of regarding the installing a sidewalk at the south end >> or crosswalk, >> I'm sorry, a crosswalk at the south end on Roselon. Uh we estimate that would be about $5,500 which would include an ADA ramp on the south side of the street and crosswalk blocks and signage. Um there's a similar crosswalk on Rose Lawn east of Snelling at Simpson which has similar traffic volumes just for reference point. Do we believe that the uh cost estimates provided by TKDA is accurate for either option for the trail and we do believe the cost estimates are as accurate they can be at this stage that obviously the final cost is going to be depending on a lot of things. It could be more, it could be less. If there's any scope change, if the pricing materials change, if there's unexpected delays in constructing that, etc. Um, uh, number seven was how would city staff or contractors access the power lines and other pulled utilities? Um, the answer is for the overhead utilities, we'd have limited ability. I'm sorry, I'm trying to read this response here and fly here. Um I think the question was really about um let me read the question. It's a multi question. With a path, how would city staff or contractors access the power lines or other pulled utilities? This includes to periodically clear trees, branches, and brush. Would a path either option allow for staff to access the space to do the needed work without damaging the trees further? Our answer is all trees and utility easements are at some risk of being damaged. to maintain utilities for overhead utilities. We have limited ability to regulate trees and the utility easement or rightway talking about the uh utilities for power for instance if they are doing maintenance to trim trees and to make clearance for the power lines. Either pathway option will likely make the damage risk less as there will be better access. The next question is that there is a 16 and a half foot sewer easement from the rightway west into the properties at 1705 Roselon and 1706 Ryan. But my understanding is that there would also be a sewer easement to the east as well. If so, how would the city staff or contractors across or I'm sorry access the sewer if needed particularly at the corner where all the sewage that runs from all the Roselon houses uh from Fair View to the rightway turns north. Note that the critical manhole seems to be very close to the boardwalk and the boardwalk path option. Our response is installing a pathway would not make the utility work harder for the city. We would use our easement machine in this area for routine maintenance. We have numerous improvements in similar rightaways or easements already such as fences, pathways, and retaining walls that we already work around. Depending on the type of work, the pathway could actually help prevent damage to trees by providing better access. regards to maintenance, the ongoing maintenance cost for the path under either either option. Uh as with any city parcel, an active pathway would require some greater attention such as mowing and natural resource management. And speaking with vendors, the boardwalk would have a lifespan of about 20 years. Uh it's estimated so it would be about $50,000 for every 20 years uh to replace that. an annual maintenance largely the natural resources and repacking of the soils the gravel I mean uh perhaps $3,000 to $7,000 annually and then finally what would the plan and cost be for tree maintenance in that space uh with many trees in danger of decline there will be tree loss some trees when close to death may be strategically removed others may fall adding damage to nearby trees structures in the path how will city staff or contractor access those trees and related damage spots via the path either option without inflicting more damage. The precon response is the pre-construction growth regulator treatments are already captured in the report under probable costs as treat inoculants estimated at $3,000. These treatments could be reapplied post construction. Post construction insect treatment costs are estimated to be $200 to $350 per tree. on access. The tree care industry is well accustomed to working with difficult to access trees where significant removal work cranes would be a very effective option for the number of larger trees. Routine maintenance such as inspections, treatments, and some pruning could be carried out relatively easily once the boardwalk is in place. That said, while the work can certainly be completed, the limited access will likely make cost a larger factor in getting that work done. >> Right. Thank you, Mr. Trojan. All right. Uh if there are no further questions from the council, then I think this is an opportunity then to uh open it up for public comment. Uh and we'll just uh quickly summarize the rules of the road again on public comment. Um we do have uh by council rule a three-minute time limit per speaker uh which I will as always try to enforce gently but uh and as well generously. But we do want to make sure everybody does get a chance to speak. So uh certainly if if people are uh excessively exceeding the limit I I will have to uh ask people to complete their comments. Uh once again if when you come up to speak if you can address your comments or questions to the council uh if we have questions from members of the public we will accumulate those and then try to provide answers once everybody has had a chance to speak. Uh everybody gets one opportunity to speak on this. Uh so uh be sure to uh take advantage of that opportunity uh if you so choose. Um, and once again, you can say a fair amount in three minutes. Uh, so, uh, don't be too overly concerned about the time limit. Uh, and certainly if you're not able to finish your thoughts and you do have something in writing, you can give it to Mr. Trojan who can make copies available to the council for the record. Um, also, uh, please state your name at the beginning of your comments, uh, and your street or address, uh, whichever you prefer. If you have a name that might not be obvious to us to spell, um you can after you're finished with your comments, step off to the side and there is a clipboard you can just write your name. There may be blanks for address and things like that, but the primary thing is the name spelling. Uh just so we make sure and have that right for the record. Um we do have the two microphones and the two chairs. Um and so uh to keep things moving fairly quickly, uh what we can do is while one person is speaking, uh the next person who may want to speak can certainly have a seat at the other chair and be prepared to begin speaking uh as soon as possible after the previous speaker. Uh and if you want to be sort of on deck, uh there are certainly open seats in the front row that can be used for that purpose to be able to uh access the table and the microphones a little more quickly if you want to be the next speaker. Uh I believe those are all the the items that we typically uh talk about in terms of public comment. Uh and if uh if I forgot some and those issues come up, we'll we'll provide some general reminders at those points. Uh but once again, this is an opportunity to speak either to questions or comments on the feasibility study and or the petition for the vacation of the rightway. Um so with that, I'll uh be quiet now and open it up for public comment uh from members of the public. Good evening, Mayor Ro and council members. My name is Mindy Ericson and I live on Mid Oaks Lane. In June 2025, the city presented the first accessible path feasibility study, a design with an extreme environmental cost. Alarmed, we underlying property owners immediately filed a resident initiated petition to vacate the easement. From our perspective, we who have cared for the amazing oak trees for decades, we are on the front line of loss from development of the ease easements urban forest. Each killed tree costs wildlife, beauty, shade, and hits our property values. The May 2026 2026 study only confirms our fears. The consultant makes the questionable claim that the design preserves the majority of heritage trees. The arborist, however, notes that every single oak tree would be distinctly less healthy 5 years after construction. Would even one of the dozen century old trees survive 10 years post construction? Not evaluated. Smaller trees mostly killed. Plus, construction could introduce and spread oakwilt to and through our neighborhood. We are a limited number of people, so we gauged broader support for vacating the easement. The broader support, pages 308 to 320 in the packet has blown us away. First, we got about 40 supporters, ourselves, plus some friends. Then, we got a 100 supporters, then 200, 400. And as of tonight, support tops 740 people from 600 Roseville homes. More than 90 supporters are from our neighborhood. Many neighborhoods are converts away from supporting path shortcut development. Their tree conservation value outweighing a small convenience. This issue clearly touched a raw nerve across Roseville in this political and fiscal climate in this election year. In addition to 740 people signing the online support form, we received hundreds of emails asking the city to stop wasteful spending on unnecessary paths. Stop environmental destruction. Stop making decisions outside of citywide prioritization processes. stop giving preference to the politically well-connected and special interests. Hundreds of emails express the overwhelming sentiment that overworked city staff already struggle to maintain current paths and green space, that taxes are too high and increasing too fast, and that it is reasonable to walk or bike at most an extra quarter mile to an existing city path. My one voice makes a clear request for 740 people from 600 Roseville homes. Vote for tree preservation. Once path development invisibly kills the oaks, we will never get them back. Please vote to vacate the rightway easement. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> May I go? May I ask questions? >> You may ask a question. And I that was the one thing I forgot during the uh instructions is is that this is not a um what's the word I'm looking for? It's not it's not a performance. And so we're not looking for applause or jeers or or any kind of response from the audience. So if we can just respectfully listen to the speakers uh and then proceed to the next speaker. Um so you're fine. >> So I'd like to relay my time. Just >> your time hasn't even started [laughter] yet. Um and you can ask questions, you can make comments or whatever you want to do. You have to introduce yourself first. >> Oh, I'm sorry. My name is Thomas Fitz Simmons and I live at 1205 Burke Avenue and uh I was just the question I have is have any of you had taken the time to actually go and look at this forest? >> Okay. So, you realize that it's not much wider than this room. And on the one end, you've got Roseline Avenue. And if you build a trail through there, you're going to have probably kids on bikes going out that trail. And I think it it poses a danger. And on each side of that, it's got streets that they can ride their bikes on. Um, and as far as uh the expenses that just you put out, it seems really ridiculous. I mean, it's it's not a park, a runway through park like Central Park. It's simply trees that that like Mindy said, they've been taking care of them. Uh, Councilman Member Straan as a result of they can just go in there and cut anything down they want. Seems to imply no, that's not the way it is. In fact, Mindy had to cut down a tree that was dying. Called the city, they said, "No way. we're not going to we have we we don't do that. So she spent her own money taking down that tree. These people take care of that place and if there is a small path through it, but it's you wouldn't be feel like you're walking through a path in council in [clears throat] Central Park. You'd be walking down a path about this big with the trees on that side, trees on that side. It it makes no sense to me. No, no sense whatsoever. So, I would hopefully wish that you would not spend another dime on of taxpayer money to do this. That's all I've got. >> Thank you for your comment. >> Thank you. >> Hello and welcome. >> Hello, I'm council members. Um, my name is Kevin Watson. I live at 2001 Aldine Street, just a couple doors down from the uh trail head here. Um, so I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak and thank you for giving this issue the resources it deserves. It's important to me and I know it's important to a lot of my neighbors. Uh, I'd respectfully ask that you retain the public rightway and preserve the opportunity to build a trail connection from Aldine to Roseline. Uh, I understand this is a difficult decision. The neighbors who border the corridor have concerns about the costs and the impacts to the trees and those concerns deserve consideration. Um, however, the city's own analysis uh with that option one found that a trail could be constructed with minimal impact to the oak trees. Uh, in addition, your uh city council predecessors and your parks commissioners uh recognize and acknowledge that this strip of land had value to the parks and trail system. Uh the role of the council is often to make decisions that serve the broader community. Uh not just the interests of those immediately adjacent to a property. Every year Roseville invests in property that may not directly benefit me. Yet I'd support you and support them uh to make uh this community stronger and more connected. Uh what makes this decision unique is the permanence. Uh if this rightway is vacated, it's gone forever. Uh the beautiful trees no longer become a public asset to be enjoyed by all residents. Uh future councils and future residents will never have the opportunity to create this connection. Once that public land becomes private, there's no getting it back. Uh this is not just a decision about today. It's a decision about the future. The farm fields to the south of Roseline may not be they may be open today. Uh but history shows that that land ch that land changes. The nearby golf course is likely to become a neighborhood shortly and someday uh these fields will likely be developed as well. When that happens, people will need connections uh between the neighborhoods, the parks, the schools, the destinations. Uh specifically, this trail would afford a safer and more pleasant path for children to get to school at Brimhall and back home. Uh not just for the future neighborhoods, but for the Mid Oaks neighborhood as well today. Uh hundreds of residents could benefit from this trail today, but thousands may rely on it in the future. Uh this is a moment in time when you have the opportunity to preserve a public asset for generations to come. I'd urge you to think beyond today's circumstances and return this right retain this right away uh and build a trail for the future of Roseville. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Hello and welcome. >> Can I move the microphone? >> You may. [laughter] It's pretty good where it is. >> You have a sign that says Yeah. >> do not touch it. >> Yeah. I I think the the issue becomes if the microphone is too close to your mouth, your T's and P's start to make funny sounds. So, just be aware of that. >> Okay. Uh, thank you. My name is Karen Schaefer. I live at 2100 Fairview Avenue in Roseville. I've been a Roseville resident since 1975. And as luck would have it, I I did serve on Roseville's original non-motorized pathways committee. I I don't know how I got appointed to that, but I did. And it was interesting and instructive because of course at that time there was no uh non-motorized pathway system. That was the beginning. It was in the very early 80s something like that. And I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed vacation for Aldine Street. I recommend that the right of way be vacated according to the petition. In my view, there is no public purpose for any proposed use. According to the city staff, um, as I've seen in writing, I've had no personal communications. There's no uh public purpose in terms of the roadway system. That was the original looks like the original idea when that plat was approved. Uh um the owner of the land who obtained the plat was required of course to give the city a rightway in return for approval of the plat. There is seems to be no park purpose because I I have not seen or heard of any proposal that this become a park. And in my view, there is no pathway purpose for this ride of way because a seasonal shortcut in this location satisfies no identified pathway criteria meriting public expenditure as described in the city's pathway plan. The seasonal shortcut of course has a private purpose, but the city in my view is limited to expending taxpayer dollars only for projects that have a public purpose. Um, a back of the envelope calculation shows the per person cost to construct this project using the numbers in the um consultant report. Assuming seven months, it's o open for seven months a year, 30 days a month, five people a day for 10 years. $1143 a pop. And that doesn't include the the rest of the proposed construction costs, you know, design and such, maintenance or other improvements such as public safety improvements where the seasonal shortcut would meet Rose Lawn Avenue. Doesn't include anything for annual maintenance or annual treatments to slow the inevitable decay of the urban canopy at that location. >> You're at about three and a half minutes. if you can wrap up your thoughts. >> Oh, I'm sorry. The only professional action is to vacate the right of way. The statute plainly authorizes the city to do it. Doing this is ordinary, common, and routine for Minnesota cities. Retention of the pri of the rightway provides no public good. It maintains some city liability for whatever happens there. vacation will have the benefit of retaining the existing tree canopy and prudently managing municipal liability. Thank you very much. >> Hello and welcome. [clears throat] >> Good evening. Thank you, Miro, city council members, city staff, and everyone here tonight for being here, for listening, and for giving us the opportunity to speak. >> Can you introduce yourself? >> Oh, sorry. >> I know you're nervous. >> Actually, that was my next sentence, but yeah, thank you for the reminder. My name is Ann Lahi, and I live at 90 Mid Oaks Lane with my husband and our three children. Since the path was closed last summer, we have really missed it. Tomorrow is the last day of school at Brim Hall and it is also our our son's last day of elementary school. [clears throat] Normally, I would suggest we walk home together, surrounded by the community of fellow walkers and neighbors we came to know during his fifth grade year. But without the path, walking to school has largely disappeared from our family's routine. We walked once this year, taking Fairview Avenue in the fall. It wasn't the same. Not even close. After that, the kids never ask to walk again. That may that may sound like a small thing, but to me, it represents something bigger. The path is more than a shortcut. It is a safe, familiar connection that encourages children and adults to walk, explore their neighborhood, and stay connected to friends and neighbors. One of our daughter's closest friends lives only a few houses away as the crow flies north. Yet, now we have to drive her there because the safe route between our neighborhoods is gone. For our family, the closure of the path has changed not only how we get from place to place, but how we experience our community. When I hear concerns about the trees, I I understand them. I love the trees, too. We all do. But I also think about the children, families, and neighbors. The trees matter, and so do the people who have used and will use the path in the decades to come. As we consider the future of this space, I believe we can value and care for both. That is why I support option one from the feasibility study. To me, it represents reasonable a reasonable middle ground, one that protects the trees while preserving an important and safe community connection. This past winter reminded us how much we depend on our neighbors. When children walk through a neighborhood, they're seen, known, and looked out for. And when I imagine our daughter skipping down the path to visit her friend, I know my wonderful neighbors will notice her and that gives me peace of mind. It takes a village. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Hello and welcome. >> Uh good evening, council. I'm Eleanor Johnson. I live at 2009 Aline Street. Um I have some images laid out here for the overhead camera. >> Can I have the overhead camera? >> Here we go. >> Oh, here we go. Perfect. may take a moment for them to get focused or we may have to do some focusing here. There we go. >> Uh thank you for giving us this opportunity to speak about this. Uh um so some of my ma neighbors I know would like to make a path uh part make the path part of that property owner's yard so that the city does not cut down the trees there. Uh but there's no evidence that once they have the extra land as part of their yard that they would keep the trees there. um in street view from 2007 which is this top one to 2025 you can see that there have they've cut down a lot of trees. So historically there it is very likely that they will continue to cut down those trees once they have the ability to do so. Uh which moots their uh tree argument. Um, however, I'm aware that this debate is not really about the trees, but about seeding the right of way. Uh, I'm currently a student at the University of Minnesota, and this path is important for my commute to school, and it makes it more enjoyable, uh, faster, um, better in every possible way. Um, and I know for Brimhal students, it would be very similar. Um I guess another back of the envelope estimate here. If I save five minutes a day for both for one semester I gain 400 minutes which is almost six hours that I would save in time. Um so think um this path is very important to my mobility. Uh and thank you for your time. >> Thank you for your comments. Hello and welcome. >> Hi, my name is Linda Lang. Can you hear that? Yeah. >> You can't hear yourself. Um I did submit uh written um comments, but I wanted to add some other things um and come back to the comments if there's still time. So, I'm trying to set myself up to time myself and I'm failing. Okay. So, >> yeah, I can't keep track though. So, anyway, I wanted to share with you um there is a world-renowned arborist. His name is Peter Wol Wool Leen and he wrote the book The Hidden Life of Trees. It's very small. You can get it at Barnes & Noble. It was a worldwide bestseller and also on the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the W uh Washington Post. And in it, he explains from his over 50 years of running forests in Germany that uh trees communicate with each other, especially species. So these oak trees communicate with themselves in this, you know, 1800t square area. And if there's oak quilt, they try to help each other. If there's um a diseased tree or a dying tree, they send uh sugar to the to the dying tree, but they can only do so much because there's only so many of them. And they are also getting um communicating with the trees in the neighbors yards. So the neighbors yards trees are impacted by any decimation of these trees. It's a community. Okay. So I want to get that idea across. You can't just talk about picking off one tree or two trees. You don't know when that's going to collapse the whole thing. Next point, the path um there was a point made that uh the path could be supported uh or protected the trees could be protected because uh the elevated path could support 60 pounds per square foot. Well, I weigh [clears throat] 150. So, if I sped my feet out, there's roughly 60 lbs. a little bit more on each foot. Okay. But you have a wheelbarrow and you put that wheelbarrow and you put 400 lb and you you've got 400 lb per [clears throat] square foot. So I don't see how using a wheelbarrow on a path is going to help you at all. Um it's 35 it's 30t wide. Once you build that path that's no guarantee that that's where people are going to walk. They're going to walk where they're going to walk. if it's flatter or shadier or warmer or wetter, they're going to walk where they're going to walk. And worse off, if there's bicycles now, these electric bikes, you can't hear them. So, you don't know that they're coming up behind you. And this is a societal problem. Um, we built our house in 1985 and we had two large mature elms which we lost within six years. And we had two large maples that we hired an arborist and we told them they work with us to this day over 40 years later. It's the sun. We said we are going to do anything to save these trees. They're in the front yard. They're the air conditioning system for the house. Um you can drive by um I live on Burke Avenue and you can see that we were su successful but the definition of success was high because the tree closest to the boulevard took a lot of damage. the damage doesn't show up right away. I would mention that that you're talking about mediating between um this the property owners and the city. Those would be the two parties that are in clear clear um interest with this that the city could hire a neutral mediator. They're free from the Bureau of Mediation Services. This is a city government. The state of Minnesota runs the Bureau of Mediation Services. They're full of people that professionally mediate these issues all the time. So, where am I on my three minutes? >> You are about uh 15 seconds to four minutes. >> 15 seconds. No, you're over >> over. Okay, let me just give you the punch line from from my written statements. Trees have proven positive environmental impacts. I know that you want to save the trees. What I'm trying to tell you is that it's community and it's really hard to save them from development that you're talking about. period. And the second point, it's in here that um this kind of development is not a legacy to be proud of. We need to walk more. We need to be outside more. And um you know, uh making a path is not not a good long-term plan. So, thank you for listening. >> Thank you. Anyone else from the public? >> Uh, yeah, that might help with spelling of your name. >> Hello and welcome. >> Hello. Touch, can you hear me? >> We can hear you. >> Okay. Okay. First of all, I have to just say thank you. It has been quite a journey this past year for all of us and I >> Can you introduce yourself? >> I'm sorry. My name is Cindy Gallagher and I live at 20009 Hershel. >> Thank you. So, I was I wrote something and then I decided, oh, I'm not going to say that, but here I am. So, I'll try to remember what I wrote. Um, so I've been passing through there for 36 years. So, I've watched the evolution of the trees, the beautiful oak trees, and um, the landscape has changed. Nothing is static in this world. We live in a dynamic landscape. So there has been so much addressed about taking care to preserve these trees and [clears throat] I totally respect that. I am not an arborist but I do have a degree in horiculture and a graduate degree in plant physiology. So I so I have some knowledge and I have experience. So what I want to talk about is something that nobody has addressed and that's the understory. >> [clears throat] >> So, at the south end, um, at Mindy and, um, Tim's yard, they've done an absolutely beautiful job of taking care of the trees. They've put in a beautiful habitat for butterflies and bees and everything and they are to be commended and they water. Okay? So, those trees are cared for. And as you travel north, it's a lot of blank space. And then you hit about well definitely the first and second house from Ryan. There's really dense understory. That's where the mound is. And the problem with understory in big trees is a competition for nutrients and water. So when you talk about foot impact, wheelbarrow impact, bicycle impact, that is minor compared to when there's when a large tree can't get water or nutrients. So understories are really smart. Um, our most common invasive species vis is buckthornne and they have very extensive root systems and they are really good at mining um water at that upper those upper surfaces. The large trees do have a pretty extensive lateral root system but it's deeper. So what happens is the understory preferentially will take the water nutrients at a time of drought. And we have had we are in a cycle in this climate of of repeated droughts. And last year there was a deluge and I know that in the Mid Oaks neighborhood there were a couple trees that fell over. And the reason that happens is because the root systems of the big trees have these little they're called feeder root and they also are anchoring and when they're when they are deprived of nutrients and water they die. So if there's no feeder roots and all that empty space fills with water the trees lose its anchoring ability. Okay. So why do I bring this up is because at the north end there has been no evidence of concern in that in that way. I've never seen the trees watered. I've never seen clear any clearing of the understory. It's only gotten more massive. And that's what things like buckthornne do. I'm at three minutes. So >> okay, >> you're at almost four minutes. >> Okay. I'm sorry. I'm done. I just want to say that I hope I really hope that this path happens because it is the future to connect neighborhoods and thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Yeah. [clears throat] >> Hello and welcome. >> Thank you. Hello. My name is Mike Perneal. I live at 10:15 Shrier Avenue West Roseville. Uh, I live over by uh Dan Row by by uh uh Reservoir Woods and so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I learned about this and um Reservoir Woods, Villa Park, Central Park are are there for the public good. This is a project that's going to cost $120,000 of my money for to benefit a small handful of people who just want a shortcut. It has not been identified in any public Roseville uh um study that it is wanted or necessary. And I would urge you to be fiscally prudent and um and you initially moved to vacate it [laughter] and then and then I sort of sparked this reaction and I think you were on the right path initially. The city has no use for this anymore. So that's my my comment. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Good evening. My name is Linda Stron and I live at 1988 Wheeler Street. Um very close to the Aline Path. Uh for 25 years, my family, my children, and now my grandchildren exempt last year for the last year. We have used the path throughout all four seasons and I'd like to talk about neighborhood and community because when this started when you brought the vacation toward to this when the city council brought it along there was a quick um uh uh I'm sorry I I have my comments here and I'm forgetting them but there was a um um I lost the bird. So, I'll start over. [clears throat] I see that the pathway is really a small but a vital connection to our neighborhood. Uh it's beautiful. It's a beautiful segment of the neighborhood. And the neighbor, myself and the surrounding neighbors use the path as an integral piece of of who we are. And it's not just a few people using a shortcut. Uh the children and families who live in we've already heard from one or two who live in Mid Oaks have a safer way to send their kids a safer and a quicker way to send their kids to and from Brim Hall. It's something that is part of the infrastructure and identity of their neighborhood and it connects the pieces of the neighborhoods together. Um, the potential vacation of the rightway represents a significant loss to public access and a community amenity that many children and families use, not just a few of them. Um, by privatizing it, you're taking a longus public resource and uh giving it to the benefit of a small number of individuals. And I understand that they want to take care of the trees and they've done a great job. That's a beautiful grove to walk through and the the uh number one option for the pathway sounds lovely. Now, if they're keeping the grove of trees for the good of the public, that's wonderful. But if they close it off and the the school children and the neighborhood children have no way to access that beautiful grove of trees, it will be there. But it will just be for some people instead of keeping it. And you know, uh, like some people have said, things don't stay the same. They change. And maybe in a hundred years there will be younger beautiful oak trees there or there may be a an entirely different species. We can't really control all of that. When I grew up in Minneapolis, the elm the elm tree canopy over the streets that I lived on were fabulous and beautiful and there was no way anyone could stop the elm tree dise the Dutch elm tree disease that took all of those out. Um today we have more um better science that helps. I mean, we've saved some ash trees, but the ash bore has de decimated many ash trees. And you know, that's something we can't control. The other thing I want to talk about and I want to really u uh really let you know that um this action risks um the city council here um making a um making a history that's going to impact what they say is what you say is your commitment to welcoming all of our residents. Um, so I looked at the Roseville plan values you have in the circle at the front and I see three that are impacted by getting rid of the um public access by and those three things are community equity and safety. the safety of our children. The equity to wrap up. I'm on the last the equity for Does everybody get to enjoy these trees in this canopy? And uh the community. This is about the neighborhood in the community. And when we did a a a quick uh question when it first started, we had a hundred people in our neighborhood >> find that we wanted that. So, thank you for your patience and my letting me speak. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments this evening. >> Hello and welcome. >> Good evening. I'm Sherry Mandorf. I live at 87 Mid Oaks Lane. Council members, the decision before us is about the public good and the priorities we make for our community. As far as the public good goes, the city has held this easement for 80 years with no clear articulation of public benefit beyond a road I think everyone acknowledges will never be built. and no prioritization of use that benefits the general public. The city's envision Roseville page online declares that Roseville prioritiz prioritizes environmental conservation and sustainability. Construction of a path down this easement runs counter to that priority. I'm not going to read extensively here, but the trail feasibility study on page five calls out that it should be noted that any path construction within the critical root zone of the existing oats oaks, regardless of the construction method employed, represents a likely compromise of tree health and preservation standards. It goes on to say, "Proceeding with path construction through these areas is likely to adversely affect the long-term health of the trees." >> Thank you for hearing my comments. >> Thank you for your comments. >> I'm sorry. >> No need to apologize. >> Take your time. >> Um, good evening. I'm Olivia G. I live at 2021 Hershel Street. You've seen me a few times before and I just want to say thank you mayor Row, thank you council members Grath, Bower, Shrader Strong, thank you Mr. Trean, thank you Miss Tney. You've heard a lot from all of us for a hard year and um so I will make my points as simply as I can. My husband Donald and I live on the corner of Hersel and Shrier in the Woodside neighborhood. We moved here in 1993 so that our son could attend Roseville's excellent public schools and when he grew up we stayed here for the community that has become our home. We believe in Roseville and we appreciate all that Roseville has to offer us. Um, I have walked down and I have walked the Aldine ride ofway path since 1993 many many times a week throughout the year until we and everyone who didn't own property abuing it the path were denied access last spring. I am here this evening to advocate for creating an accessible path as delineated in option one of the TKDA feasibility study you commissioned and to ask you not to vacate the role. I will keep this simple. Thank you for having the professional feasibility study conducted. I am very grateful that you listened to Roseville residents and the parks and recreation commission recommendation and chose to seek their expert advice. The feasibility study offers two options for creating an accessible path through the road that causes the least possible damage to heritage oaks. As we've heard, option one includes raised board rocks over critical RIT zones to best protect the trees. This option would impact two oak trees, greatly impact only two oak trees, while option two would impact 14 oak trees according to the study. Now, we've heard other people with other viewpoints. I'm listening to the experts here and trusting their advice, but I ask you to go with option one. Number two, in terms of the row, please do not vacate the Aldine rightway. Once the land is gone, the city cannot get it back. And the row is important both as a pathway and a small urban forest. The path is more than a walkway. It is a connector of neighborhoods and people, adults and children, now and in years to come. vacating it and effectively siloing us into discrete separate neighborhoods will negatively impact our interconnections and the future of our city. This past winter, with all we endured together during Operation Metro Surge, it was made very clear to me that as a city and community, we need to remain in purposeful communication and proximity to one another. Finally, putting the path aside and looking only at protecting the existing oak trees. The only way the city can truly ensure their safety now and into the future is to maintain city ownership of the row. If the land becomes private, land owners can do whatever they would like with their trees. Thank you for representing the city and for giving all of those residents a way to speak. >> Thank you for your comments. Good evening, Mayor Row and council members. [clears throat] My name is Donald G. I live at the same place that Olivia does, and I want to just share a few thoughts with you. I don't want to rehash a lot of things we've talked about, but I I'll say that in spring of 2025, we all received the notice saying that there was going to be vacation of a number of different pieces of land. And most of those pieces of land, as I recall, were like strips of grass along sidewalks in our neighborhood and other neighborhoods. And then there was the Aldine road, the Aldine path. And I think we would all agree that what we learned is the Aldine path is in many ways very different from those other strips. I don't think you've had too many people coming here for the last couple of years and talking so passionately on both sides and all sides of these issues around those other rights of way. Um what I would though say though is that in a lot of ways I think that they're more similar than they might look. The sidewalks are not as beautiful as that path was, but what they really all do is they provide connection. Connection for people, connection for neighborhoods, connection for the larger community. And so what I would just ask you to think about, I I will say I love trees. And if you came and looked at our lot, we probably have as many trees if not more on our lot than almost any lot you would see in the city of Roseill. I don't even like cutting a branch off of trees in our yard. But what I would say is that I think there's two questions for you to please think about and one is definitely and I 100% agree. How do we protect those trees and how do we protect the whole nature of that area? But at the same time, I would ask, how do we protect and and connect and build on connection between people, neighborhoods, and communities? Because I will tell you, as Olivia said, we've walked on that path thousands of times. And we know many people that have done that, too. And it has served that purpose. I'll quickly close by saying that um a couple weeks ago we were invited to Brim Hall School for a thank you in celebration of people who stood out on the streets um during Operation Retro Surge and tried to protect and look out for children and families during that terrible time. And what I want to share with you is that the principal, the school principal told us that the number one thing the children told them that that that our work had accomplished was it showed the children that we cared about them. And so as we're thinking about this issue and we're thinking about money and we're thinking about trees, I want to also put back the question, how do we show our children that we care about them? And I don't know that this has to be a mutually exclusive thing. I think that we can protect trees. I think that we can respect people's rights as owners of property and I think we can somehow figure out a way to allow people to walk through that area that has meant a lot to a whole lot of people. Thank you very much for all of your work on this. Thank you for your comments. >> Hi, I'm Sarah Quinn at uh 89 Mid Oaks Lane. I am one of the underlying property owners of the Aldine rightway. Um, one thing you don't know is I'm a master gardener through the U of M extension program and I've been a volunteer for Ramsey County for the last five years. The trees have always been at the forefront of our petition to vacate the row. I'd like to address the impact a path could have on the trees in the road based on information in the feasibility study. TKDA recommends option one because it preserves the majority of heritage oaks oak trees with minimal to moderate impact. They also note that option one puts two oaks and two black cherry trees at great risk. But what the study fails to point out is that all but one tree will decline in health. You can find this information on the tree inventory sheet, but it is not summarized anywhere in the study. Almost every tree on this spreadsheet has a decline in health due to path option one installation. There is only one tree that doesn't decline and it's a witch hazel tree. There are also more than 12 trees killed that aren't rated on here because of their small size, but they will be removed to build a path. I walked it along this path, and these numbered trees are all under the path, so they are no doubt going to die. And I didn't count the ash trees because I know you guys don't value them much. Um section 3.31 critical root zone production of this study states any path construction within the critical root zone of the existing oaks regardless of the construction employed represents a likely compromise of tree health and preservation standards. Even a single pass from heavy equipment within the CRZ can initiate a cycle of long-term decline. Proceeding with path construction through these areas is likely to adversely affect the long-term health of the trees. These three quotes leave no doubt that there will be a decline in tree health. Yet TKDA still recommend going forward with option one instead of a no build option which they didn't even consider. The post construction oak tree care section recommends arborous monitoring, but even the study recognizes care will be difficult as it states in section 4. The raised pathway further restricts equipment access within the site which will affect ongoing tree care activities including routine pruning, watering and treatment applications. I along with the underlying property owners of the row have formally promised to protect these oak trees through a tree conservation if you vacate the row. I know you guys are exploring that but we've brought it up. The small urban forest of trees located in the row has ecological value far bel be beyond our small neighborhood. Over 740 people from about 600 Roseville residences agree that these trees have value and have signed our position asking you to vacate the Aldine rightway. Please listen to these constituents and vote to vacate the row. Thank you. >> Your comments. Hello and welcome. >> Hi, I'm Janet Risinger. I live at 1797 Shrier Avenue. Um I am a long-term resident of the neighborhood. Uh since 19 uh let's see 91. I guess I um am not here to um say that I'm for or against only that if the pathway is created that it I'm requesting that it be posted to have the same type of signage that a a park would have that would tell people to that it would be closed at dusk so that we can respect the neighborhood um in that way so that we and maybe um just be respectful to the people that are living on that space. That's all. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Hello and welcome. >> Good evening. >> My name is Claire Talon Ruin and I live at 20 Mid Oaks Lane and I stand for the trees and I also stand for the path. The good news is that the city of Roseville has received a proposal from TKDA planning firm, option one of which would preserve heritage oaks while creating a meandering boardwalk among them. Thank you to the city for caring enough for commissioning this study. It is a big deal. While those of us who love the path have never asked for any upgrades to it, we just want to walk back there. It is hopeful to learn that there is a way to make the path official. It's disappointing that many of the people living in the wider community who may or may not have ever seen this small greenway have been misled by being told that the second option was the only one offered. I received a flyer at my door with this information and was alarmed. It would be alarming if it was the whole truth. The second option proposed does damage to 14 trees and none of us want that. Those of us who are in favor of the path are motivated by the quiet beauty, the deep shade and the peace. We love trees. We believe that if this path is preserved by the city, the long-term health of the trees is secure. Folks unfamiliar with this small path, I hope it stays in the hands of the people because then they too can visit. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this item this evening? And once again, feel free to queue up in the front row seats if you are willing to do that. Good evening, Mayor Row and and council members and city staff as well. I won't move that. Uh my name is Tim Brown. I uh am one of the underlying property owners on Mid Oaks [clears throat] Lane. Um the forestry study in the in the feasibility study is was really well done. And some of the other speakers have mentioned some of the key points here. The and really illustrate the sensitivity of those oaks and that if they do a construction project in here, regardless of the amount of care they take, we're going to have trees that are damaged or degraded. that's going to open the door to potential oak wilt. And um our trees, unfortunately, they didn't include um our the trees in our lots that have drip zones that go into the rightway. And those indicate when they overlap the other trees drip lines that the roots are in connection. So, so, so my fear is that these trees are damaged and we open the door to oak wilt, thereby transferring oak wilt into our trees on our lots and these trees are we have lovely oak stands in our neighborhood, hence the name Mid Oaks. And and we could see an epidemic of oakill travel through the neighborhood. And so, so I I would love to go around and talk to everyone in a neighborhood and ask, "Does this concern you? The fact that we could start a sort of an epidemic of oakwelt?" I was quite alarmed when I put the pieces together from the study and realized that that's a real possibility. Um and and the question I heard from the city council to initiate the study early on was um is there ACA compliant path through the rightway that would avoid loss of trees? And the arborist was pretty clear the answer is no. And and um so we're going to have degradation if we go in there and run a construction project. not just the rightway, but I'm going to contend that there's a possibility that we spread oakwilt beyond the boundaries of the of the rightway. Um, we have a lot of skin in this game. Um, the US adjacent owners and everybody in Mid Oaks Lane, losing the oaks um would decrease their property character, our the crop, our property value and enjoyment. Um, pardon the pun, but for for us, this isn't a walk in the park. This is literally a threat to our homes, of which the oak trees are very important part for us at least, and I think most of our neighbors um we're we're we're always together talking about oak trees. I mean, they're they're central to our enjoyment of our property. One of the city's uh stated benefits for the vacating the um unused rightaway is that it clarifies the rights and responsibilities within the zone avoiding confusion and disagreements over the right of way how the rightway should be maintained. The conflict here is just that we have we we have different opinions on how this should be managed and it's it see feels like a stalemate. Everybody's very committed to their idea and and of course the the trail as a lot of people said doesn't fit any master plans or any of the city's own standards without the ADA which is what really expands the simple uh dirt path that's there now. Anyway, um I I' I'd ask you guys to consider the redundant function of the trail. It's not essential. There are other trails. There are other oak canopies that you can visit in the city that are just as beautiful versus the potential uh enormous cost if if we open the door to Oakwell from that construction project. Please vacate the rightway. Thanks a lot for your hard work on this too. >> All right. Thank you. Next. Hello and welcome. >> Uh well, thank you uh very much for your attention to this uh matter. I know it's been a long haul for everybody on this. Uh my name is Dan Gallagher. I live at 20009 Hersel Street. Uh and I'm here to ask you not to vacate the land. I very much think we need to uh create this path and I think you need to hear that. Um there are a number of reasons I say that. I've heard it said tonight that this trail serves no public uh purpose. I think that's um impossible to understand. This trail is used extremely commonly. It is not a seasonal path. Many of us use it year round. And as you heard from a previous speaker, uh that this provides a uh very very important way for people to get from one part of the neighborhood to another. So this is a community building uh uh issue for us. Uh secondly, there's been so much talk about the trees. Uh I don't think that uh the people who are talking almost as if the trail is built that it condemns the entire area to a wasteland. Uh it is been exaggerated in my opinion. I've read the report. Uh option one, which is obviously the preferred option, would uh minimize the damage to the area and only impact a couple trees in any potentially significant ways. And so uh the the advantage of having the city in uh taking care of that area is that we would have arborists that could uh uh monitor the area. Uh trees can be planted so that as old trees get uh to the end of their life, new trees will be coming on board. So I don't think that's really the major issue. The the tree issue I think is a bit of a red herring in my opinion. So I would very much like to advocate for building the path for protection of that area. That is clearly the best way to protect it is to have it in the hands of the city. And I'll end with that. So thank you very much. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Hi. >> Hello and welcome. >> Thank you. Hi. My name is Rachel Brown. I live at 1705 Roselon Avenue West, right next to the Aldine right ofway. I am here in tonight in support of the petition to vacate that roadway easement, turning the land back to the underlying um six underlying properties and putting an end to this process. It appears that there are two other options that some of you may be considering. But for the first, if you are fiscally responsible with our tax dollars a and if you care about the trees, the recommended solution of a boardwalk path is not an option. Please explain to us how a highmaintenance, hard to construct boardwalk trail that will not be maintained in the winter, does not meet your own bike path criteria for mixed use by pedestrian and pedestrians and bikers. um is where you want to spend an extraordinary amount of tax dollars. 125,000 to build, 3 to 7,000 annually to maintain, and 50,000 every 20 years to restore. Please explain to us how a drop in tree health rating for 21 of the 22 trees studied, leaving six in poor health and two dead, is okay with you. Maybe 70 residents, a small number who want a path say yes, but over 700 said no. The second one, and this is if you don't go with the pathway, if you take the city's policies and procedures seriously, and I'm quoting someone up there, and believe in upholding accessibility laws, what people call as the ASIS option, not vacating and not making a path is also not an option. On October 27th, Mayor Row said, and I quote, "Ultimately, government should only have property for the purpose it was intended for, and that if the government does not any longer need that purpose, then rightfully the property should be returned to the property owners, and that is a policy and procedure the city takes very seriously." End quote. If you consider a no vacake, no path option tonight, please explain to us how the city can hold a rightaway for no purpose and let a small group of residents, the path proponents, make a non-accessible shortcut for themselves between all of 6 and 1/2 ft high privacy fences that will go up all along the right of way without any engineering or arborist expertise, without funds for maintenance, including for when the Trees are damaged by erosion and by foot and bike traffic over tree roots. Vote to vacate is the only option before you that's financially responsible, legal, and just plain common sense. It's time to return the property rights back to the underlying property owners. Please vote to vacate the right of way tonight. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. And remember, we can uh if people are daring enough to do it, they can queue up at the other microphone when somebody is speaking. No pressure or anything. Hello, welcome. >> Thank you. Good evening. I'm Joe Pribble. I live at 1738 Skiilman Avenue West. Uh dear Mayor Row and council members, thank you for all the consideration you've devoted to this matter over the past year and more. What initially appeared to be a straightforward vacation process has proven to involve important questions about public land use, neighborhood connectivity, accessibility, environmental stewardship, and the long-term interests of the community. I appreciate your thorough and methodical approach and listening to all of us as you make a decision regarding the Aldine Rightway. Thank you. I respectfully ask that you vote once again not to vacate the Aldine right away and that the city move forward with path option one recommended by the trail feasibility study. Over the course of this process, a few central facts have become clear. This rightway is not unused land that serves no public interest. Rather, it is a long-standing pedestrian connection that has served generations of neighbors and continues to hold value today. The parks and recreation commission recognized that the value of the Aldine right of way recognized the value of it when it concluded that it provides quote residents access to parks and other recreation spaces or serves as a valuable recreational amenity in and of itself. They recommended that the trail feasibility study be undertaken and that study identified path option one as it quote preserves the majority of the heritage oak trees with minimal to moderate impact while also providing an accessible route through the site. I want to emphasize that this never has been a choice between people who value trees and people who do not. The question has been how to balance multiple public interests. Path option one appears to do that exactly. By helpful comparison, as has been pointed out, option two from the study describes a scenario for a path that predicts the kind of dire situation for the trees we'd all like to and can avoid. One thing that I think needs more mention is that the trees in the rightway have lived and thrived in in an area where utilities have been managed for decades. They've shown resilience. Many of us have built our lives and families in this community making use of the system of rightaways in our neighborhood of which the Aldine rightaway is a part. This system of rights ofway is a defining characteristic of our neighborhood. Without the Aldine right away, there will be missing link in that system. One that is the gateway to destinations both inside and outside of Roseville. This link stands to become an even more important to become more important as a neighborly connection between cities uh such as Falcon Heights as it's poised to undertake major development only a mile west on Rose Lawn. Thus, the rightway is a link connecting public benefit from the past and present to and for future generations. Through conversations during this process, I've come to better understand concerns of neighbors along the right of way regarding privacy, noise, safety, costs, and of course, the welfare of the trees. These concerns deserve consideration, and I believe the feasibility study is of value is that it helped identify a way forward that addresses many concerns while preserving the public benefits that the corridor provides. Should the council decide to retain the right of way and proceed with building a new path, I support cooperation with our neighbors along the rightway to minimize concerns that they that they have. I'm also willing to get my hands dirty, just as I did a few years ago by volunteering with others, to plant trees and other plants at Midland Gardens Park, a park, by the way, that is not closest to me, nor one that I use frequently. Occasionally, I'm there and I cut through on the path that's there. But I'm glad that the city has invested in that park so that residents over that way can enjoy that public space. Ultimately, the Aldine right ofway has demonstrated public use that has recognized value. A feasible path option exists that accounts for accessibility and environmental stewardship and maintaining the right of right of way preserves opportunities and choices for future generations that appears would be difficult or impossible to recover if the land is vacated. I believe it a wise investment to maintain this right of way as a public space and move ahead with path option one. Thank you very much for all of the thoughtful consideration and due diligence you've given to this. It is appreciated. >> Thank you for coming. >> Hello and welcome. >> My name is Daniel Talon Ruin. I live at 20 Mid Oaks Lane in Roseville. My wife Claire and I live at the opposite side of the right of way. For the past few council meetings dealing with this issue, I've spoken about the importance of us neighbors finding ways to hear each other out to find some common ground. Unfortunately, we've been been unable to do that, but we have done our best to remain friendly and civil as this democratic process continues. So, I want to thank you uh the council, our city staff, and the members of the parks and recck commission for your patient and careful work on this difficult issue. Like many of the people in favor of the path, I was very pleased to see the seven positive votes from the commission with one abstension that the Aldine right of way has value for our system of connecting paths. I was also appreciative of their recommendation for the feasibility study and your approval for that to take place. Now that we have the results of the study, I feel option one is a good compromise solution. our values of tree and plant protections, accessibility, safety for our children, community connectivity, and long-term stewardship of public land. They all overlap in option one. Of course, it's still a compromise. It's not uh all of us neighbors will not be completely satisfied no matter what you decide to do. As a city council, you rose to the occasion during Operation Metro Surge. showed us neighbors the importance of nurturing relationships for times we need them most. So for my part, regardless of the decision made tonight, I'll do my best to remain friendly, open, and willing to work on various issues with all my neighbors around the right of way. Again, thank you for bringing us to a compromised solution and for hearing everyone out tonight. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Hello and welcome. >> Hi. Hi. My name is Kathleen Bard. I live at 1860 Skilman Avenue West. I'm I've never used this path. Um I was shown it. It's absolutely gorgeous. And I understand people have been using it for many years. And as a taxpayer, I don't understand why we have to spend a whole bunch of money to put a path through there. There seems to be a problem at one end of the path with one of the residents over there not allowing people through. And I think maybe that could be worked out. But to go and spend all this money on that path to me is just a waste. We have our taxes are so high. We're just being taxed out of our homes. And so I think you could take that money, give it back to us taxpayers, and we'd be very happy. And then just get these people to work out their differences and just let people use the path. But I just I just don't see any reason to be spend spending taxpayer money on this path. So that's all I have to say. I hope you're able to work this out without it costing taxpayer money. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Hello and welcome. >> Hello. Uh my name is Steph Ashen Brunner. I live on Hershel Street about a block north of the uh Shrier end of the um the right ofway and um I I keep thinking about how much we've learned over this whole um process and I you know I was part of the um neighborhood group that got the initial petition signed with the 98 signatures in favor. Um, you know, that was long before we realized, hey, there's half half of the land that we thought was available to us is no longer a city property. Um, and then I I see that, you know, the the side um against the path is, you know, they they did their uh petition again, you know, they that was uh all signed before the uh TKDA report. Um, I think as we're we're learning more and more that option one seems like a reasonable compromise, um, I know, uh, that not everybody will be happy and maybe not all trees, um, stand the same chance of survival, but I I do think that it has a beneficial impact on our neighborhood. It creates walkability in the neighborhood. It makes, you know, a a beautiful 15minute walk on a busy day a possibility instead of a 45 minute walk if if we take Fair View or Snelling. So, um I'll keep it short, but thank you so much for your uh consideration of this and I certainly don't envy your your having to make a decision, but thank you. >> Thank you for your comments and for your sympathy. [laughter] Hello and welcome. >> Thank you. I'm Michelle Pribble. Live at 1738 Skilman Avenue West, just a couple blocks away from the Aldine Rightway. Um, could I possibly get the overhead? >> You may have to switch chairs for that to happen, but there's kind of a light spot on the table where that uh >> there. >> See, there we go. >> Little further. >> Excuse me. Okay. >> Probably can't read it very well. Um but I wanted I wanted to share this um take us back if I may six years for a moment um to co um because it it's I think it's a good illustration of why um this this shortcut path um is so important to our neighborhood. There are other shortcut paths in our neighborhood that are paved sidewalks. This is one of them. And during COVID, those shortcut paths became ways to offer support for each other as a community. When our kids weren't going to school, when we weren't going to work, when we were sort of isolated in our homes, this was a way to support our community. Um these were a couple of pictures that I took um March 2020. One that says, "Take care of each other with hearts." And the other one says, "Someone is on your side and no one is alone. Um, so I I I just wanted to bring that up because I think that people who don't live in the neighborhood might not understand the importance of these multiple shortcuts that exist already in our neighborhood. They're tree covered green spaces that create a welcome respit for pedestrians from traffic since they're otherwise not sidewalks in our neighborhood. We've used those paths to walk to school, walk our dogs, visit neighbors, go for a run, walk with small children in strollers. I just can't say how important these seemingly small shortcuts are to our neighborhood, including the Aldine right ofway. Um, and we've missed walking this path. Um, for the past several months, there have been comments about how few people might use this Aldine rightway path. The other shortcuts through our neighborhood um that our sidewalks are are used by people to walk to Brimhall. And if I use the example of how many people would use this same Aldine rightway to walk to Brim Hall, it would be a similar number of people as the as the other shortcuts that we already have existing that the city has invested in over time. So I I just want to conclude with saying I I really appreciate the city council um taking the time over the past several months to consider options for a path through the Aldine rightway. Um, in Roseville's right-of-way vacation information handout, I noticed it states that the city will only consider vacation of property or easements in which there is no public use currently or planned in the future. For many decades, there has been a public use for the Aldine rightway as a shared path, and I hope the city council will continue to support that important public use for this space and support option one from the trail feasibility study. This trail option both preserves oak trees in the right of way and provides an accessible pedestrian route from Aldine to Rose Lawn. We don't need to choose between saving trees and providing an accessible path. We can do both. Please support this option as a legacy for the f future of our community and a continuation of that pedestrian path network that makes our neighborhood so special. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Hello and welcome. Hi, my name is Katie Walker and I live at 2766 Cohen uh Circle in Roseville. Um while [clears throat] my husband and I reside in the northeast corner of Roseville, some distance from this proposed development, you might argue that I have no standing regarding this issue. However, the entire Roseville community has standing because we pay taxes and the costs um both environmental and financial uh are a burden for all of us. I listen to all the uh the um arguments and I'm kind of torn because I understand where everybody is coming from. Um but I believe that the um the development of the path would destroy um some of the environment. [cough and clears throat] The um area is considered a certified wild wildlife habitat. There would be damage not only to the trees but to wildlife in the area. While residents of the wildlife habitat do not pay taxes, they benefit the community in other ways. For example, urban wildlife supports the local ecosystem by aiding in pollination and seed dispersal. Trees and vegetation help filter air pollutants and manage storm runoff runoff. Thriving local wildlife and vibrant green spaces add to property values and aesthetics. To my neighbors who live in the area of the right away, how fortunate you are to have this precious space in your neighborhood. Um damaging it would would not be a legacy. It would take it away from the children in the area. Yes, they'd have a shortcut to walk through, but would it what kind of shortcut would it be if the trees are gone or if they're damaged? If the wildlife isn't there? If you can't show your child the the deer and the other wildlife in the area. Cherish it while you can. That's all I've got to say. Thank you for your comments. Additional public comment on this matter this evening. Good evening. My name is Frank Stron. I live on Trier Avenue. Pardon [clears throat] me. Um, [snorts] and forgive me, my comments may be a little disjointed because I wasn't planning on speaking. I'm speaking extemporaneously. Um, recently I saw my doctor and I was told that I should be careful breathing, eating, sleeping, moving as all of those things could seriously degrade my health. Um, and that's all I'm going to say about the trees. Um moving away from that, there are costs to uh vacating the rightway that no one has spoken of. They don't reach to the level of of uh putting a pathway through, but they are different things, but there is still a cost and uh the city will pay those costs. The property owners will get the benefit. That's just one thing to think about. Um, give me one second. I told you I'd be a little disjointed here. [snorts] Um, it it was brought up that the the city should be should periodically review what property it holds and give back those that it doesn't have a use for. Um the city started this periodic review of uh of easements uh I believe last year in 2025 and [snorts] tried to give back some easements and some neighbors said no we don't want you to cancel that easement that I know that happened at at least one pathway easement. Uh easements are part of the city's tools to manage things around the city. And this is this right of way has been used for 70 years as a pathway. It's it's a it's at this point a public good and I I think we should continue to keep it. Um, I will I support you not vacating this rightway and moving forward. I would support option one, but that's a different discussion for a different day. Today, I think we need to focus on the question at hand, and I I urge you to to not vacate this right away. Thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you for your comments. Anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this item this evening? All right, I'm going to close the opportunity for public comment and thank everybody for their participation uh not only at this meeting uh but in uh uh at least a couple of previous meetings and other outreach efforts that have been undertaken throughout this process. Uh we do appreciate that. It certainly makes difficult decision-m at least a little bit easier because we're not doing it in a vacuum. Um, I believe there may be I don't I didn't really note any questions from speakers that necessarily stood out as as requiring answers and I apologize. Uh, maybe council members can help me there. Uh, it seemed like it was mostly sort of comments pro and con and um discussion about the issues. So, council, please uh let me know if I'm missing questions, but I didn't see any. But I there may be questions that council members have for staff. So, staff should stand by. [clears throat] >> All right. So, once again, we have the question before us uh to consider the petition. Oh, Mr. Treasure, >> there was one thing I needed to read. >> Oh, all right. >> about the affidavit uh for the public hearing. >> Got it. >> Yeah. Yep. >> Uh we got forgot about that. So, I just need to mention that publish and le legal mail notices have been provided for this public hearing. Legal notices appeared in the city's legal newspaper, the Pioneer Press, on May 25th and June 1st, 2026. Mailed notices were sent on May 28th, 2026, and affidavit of publishing and mailing are available in the office of the city engineer just to make us official, >> right? And to that I will add that we did receive a number of uh email or written communications uh most of which are in the materials available this evening and any of which were not able to get in will be made a part of the official record uh uh subsequent to the meeting here. Um so I want to look and see what we've got uh in the information as to the requested action. It does not appear that there is a specific resolution. That's kind of what I was looking for. There is. >> Yep. Yep. >> Oh, it's the first attachment. I scrolled right past it, >> tell you. Yeah. >> All right. So, we do have a resolution. This this resolution, the draft resolution, uh would be a resolution, I believe, to vacate the right of way um largely based on the uh the information that was in the packet back in June of last year. Um other action would be to adopt uh a motion not uh adopting this resolution which would be not to vacate the right of way. Um and any uh other action that the council feels appropriate to take uh if that is the pathway that uh I'm sorry that was going to happen [laughter] that that the council wishes to take on this matter this evening. Um first of all I I did want to just check a couple of things with staff. Um the first of which is I don't remember in our previous discussions if we had identified any kind of funding source for construction of the pathway and if anybody can refresh me on that I would appreciate it. U if if nothing was identified that's that's fine but I just wanted to clarify in case something was >> uh I don't believe we have discussed funding. Um certainly uh I know we uh don't have a real large funding source for pathways. Um, in our pathway fund, we only have $50,000 a year set aside for that. So, that would have to be something that would be built up over a period of time, but certainly if it's looked at from a parks level, that would have to be something discussed out of the parks budget potentially as well or combination, >> something related to either either park dedication or park uh capital funds or something along those lines or some combinations. >> I don't know if Mr. Johnson wishes to reclaim his funds. And I certainly don't expect you guys to work it out this evening. >> Yeah. Well, [laughter] no, we're just going to negotiate here. Um, entertainment of the public. >> I I think that uh just to reiterate what uh Director Fryhammer said, we didn't we haven't identified a funding source uh at this point in the game. I think park dedication, we would want to look for look legally to make sure this would be applicable to that because those are dedicated for very specific reasons. Um, but we also do in our capital improvement plan have uh park pathway dollars that again would need to be built up over time, but um could be potentially an option in some way, shape, or form. >> Got it. Right. Thank you for helping clarify that. >> Um, other questions from the council, Council Member Strong. >> I I don't think I have I guess um for Mr. Um Johnson, just there's been a lot of questions about people outside of this area. Um I'm just kind of wondering about our park spending or even our public works spending. Um you know, as far as equity, you know, who gets to make a decision about the park in an specific area if a specific park maybe gets amenities versus another park? you know, kind of wondering about if we're looking at this from park point of view. >> That that's a a pretty detailed question because um obviously all taxpayers can provide feedback. Now, um it will depend on how that park fits in our master plan. So, we have neighborhood parks, we have community parks, we have sectorbased parks, and our outreach is usually built upon that. So, if it's a smaller neighborhood park, we will target that neighborhood. doesn't mean they're the only ones that get say, but it does mean those are the ones we want to make sure we hear from because they're the most likely users. If we were doing a comprehensive redesign of Central Park, we would ensure that the entire community was heavily involved in that. So, unfortunately, there isn't maybe a onetoone analogous, but but that's a I'm not being intentionally evasive. It's just a complicated question, >> right? So normally this would be more specific to the area but it has grown a bit outside of its scope at this point. Scope scope creep I think maybe >> I I wouldn't want to speak to that because I don't know that we have predetermined you know what the appropriate we don't have this identified for an area necessarily. Um >> okay thank you. >> All right. Any other questions from the council? >> I do have a question about this tree preservation or environmental easement. Is [clears throat] there some >> conservation easement concept? >> Conservation easement. My understanding then would be if it were to all happen. I realize this is the series of hypotheticals, but the folks would give it back to the city so then they wouldn't have to pay taxes on it, but then they don't have to share with the neighbors or how does this work? >> Council members, um, council member Strong, if we want to talk about specifics of of conservation easements, we should do it at another time. I I understand that that's on the on the topic today, but it's not it's not a a real simple process. I think there are a lot of different options available to you. What they are exactly I I'm I'm not prepared to say right now. >> Okay. >> Right. But just maybe [clears throat] a general clarification. So, uh, rights of way are, um, dedicated to the city and the adjacent property owners don't have ownership rights and they aren't paying property taxes usually on those. Uh, for instance, the street in front of your house, a portion of that right of way is sort of in your yard, but you're not necessarily the owner of it, and you're not paying property taxes on that um, as your property, as I understand, rights of way, per se. That's my understanding. That's correct. >> Okay. >> That's Yeah, you don't typically pay that. Typically, if we vacate right away and we retain the easement, you will pay some sort of property tax on that. I don't know how they would look at a conservation easement. That would be an additional easement on top of that. >> I was thinking about say a utility easement. Yeah. >> Maintain a right of way and maintain a utility easement for access to utilities, maintenance, and things like that. the property owner has ownership of that property and they're paying their taxes on it and is calculated however it's calculated >> and I and I guess I don't know what this particular area is. It's it's a right-of-way easement. >> It it's platted right away. >> Okay. Right. So just once again talking generally you know specifically on a conservation easement but uh we don't necessarily have the answers here but the concept of easements is not necessarily that that um the property goes to the city necessarily. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Okay. Hopefully that helps answer the question council member Strong in some fashion. >> Super clear. >> Okay. All right. Great. I think that may have come to the end of the questions if council members unless others. So once again, we've got the question before us either to propose to adopt the resolution vacating uh the Aldine Street right ofway uh as outlined or uh some other action. >> I would move to v um support the vacating of the right way. >> All right. >> I would like to oppose. Well, actually, we have we have a motion. >> We don't have a second yet, as I understand it. I didn't hear if there was a second. >> Second or move to amend the motion to be have it be done as a roll call vote. >> Uh I think that doesn't necessarily have to be part of the motion. I think that would be a motion, a procedural motion that would be subsequent to having a motion on the table, which we don't have yet because we don't have a second. >> All right. All right. So, we have a motion to um adopt the resolution vacating the right of way. Uh discussion on that motion. >> Uh yes. Well, um >> as the maker of the motion, >> a couple of things. Um I' I've said all along the trees were really really a big thing. Um we really after looking at the study, [snorts] the trees will be impacted putting a pathway through. So, um I guess that's that's been my priority. And and another piece is obligating the taxpayers to pay for this for um a smaller group of people to use it. You know, 120 just put it in and all the costs associated with it. It we've heard people talk about that and we've had over 700 people against this. And my question would be at what point do we listen to our residents? How many do they have to come forward and say we want or don't want something that we will actually listen to them? So 700 seems like a lot of people are over 700 on that. And just because we can build doesn't mean we should build. Um again, you know, it this was not um part of the whole process and our tax um our budget is really tight and for us to spend money in an area that we weren't planning for it. It it shows that we're not taking our budgeting seriously. I mean, this this is something that um you know, again, we're trying to find places to save money and and not tax the people in Rosenmore than we need to. And this was not something that we actually need to have. And and again, it's um it's only used part of the year for most people because of the winter. It's not going to be kept up. And there's other ways to get around that neighborhood, not just this this, you know, shortcut. So, it's not that people can't actually get around. And at this point coming through, it can be dangerous um without having, you know, when you come out that one end, it just, you know, there's no crosswalk, there's nothing there. So, that can be a safety issue on top of it. So, all those pieces put together, I guess, um that's why I would support this. >> Right. And I asked the second, Council Member Bower, >> I would echo that number of those points as well. Uh tree preservation was always my big concern. Uh seeing the arburous reports and the degration of all the trees in the area along with some of the removal of some of them is definitely concerning. Um noted here also is that destruction could spread and harm other trees. That's also very concerning. And echoing the fiscal side of things, we are stressing already uh on the budget upcoming budget. Um, and for the dollars that we're talking about right now, um, it's very difficult to, uh, solve that when we're looking to try to make cuts elsewhere on the budget for something like this. I think it's important for us to listen to, uh, all residents and those that are, you know, adjacent to this uh, shortcut as well as uh, those in the neighborhood as well as those in the broader Rosa area. As noted, there's been over 740, even more once we add in the other emails that we've gotten. I think that speaks very loudly to um what the residents of Roseville want. >> May >> and I move to uh perform this as a roll call vote. >> Right. I would say that be that motion would be relevant at we when we get to the point of the vote, we're still in discussion of the motion. So fair enough, >> keep a hold on that. >> All right. Discussion on the motion. Council member Strong. >> Um I think that we need to be really honest here though. the people who um will have the right of way will see their property value increase. They mentioned countless times that having the trees lost would decrease their property value and acquiring this piece increases their property value. If I were to take a 5% the the homes that are adjacent that would um increase in value currently their taxable value ranges from $450,000 to 400 uh to $575,000. That means that each of those homes would um increase in value if it were 5% fully between 23 and $30,000 per home. Um, so I just think it's really important that we realize that doing something um, a rightaway doesn't commit us to a path or how we're paying for the path. But I think it's really important. We've heard from some people saying it's there's nobody uses this. But then the same person has come by and said there's going to be hundreds of people every day walking by my door and I'm not going to be safe. It definitely speaks of a nimi where you don't want it in your backyard because you're afraid of the people who might be near you when there are many other places that have pathways that walk along you. Um, while taxes are important, taxes don't are while trees are important, trees don't vote. People vote and the people are the people who got us here. The people are the ones who elected us. And we should be reporting to the people, not to the tree. As we were told um by the young lady, Miss Johnson um about the dynamic aspect of the neighborhood, it is changing all the time. And if we're working as a community, we we possess the ability to make dynamic changes as a community. If we're working and we're now allowing those folks to do whatever they like, which apparently they feel quite entitled to, then we have now decided that we've absconded our responsibility. We don't have any choices anymore. So, I just think that the people have been providing false information. I had a friend who was here and I texted her and I saw that her name was on the list of people who opposed and you know what she said? It sounds like we were sold a Bell of Goods and she left. This is someone I've known for 25 years. This is someone I trust, but I haven't talked to recently. I had no idea that she had signed on it. I think that we are not being we're being very disingenuous. If you don't want it in your backyard because you don't want people walking by your backyard, that's what you really should say. Trees, yes, they're important. Again, trees don't vote. Trees don't pay taxes. We should all be working on this together. And I I think it's Yes, we do need to find ways to pay for it. And yes, we would need to find ways to But by considering this motion tonight, we're not committing to the path. We could put it on the path use for the future, but by giving it back, we never get it back. And these people gain and they gain. And that's why they're spending tons of money to put door hangers all over the city. All over the city and trying to tell people incorrect information so that they can get the weight and the result that they want. And they may get it. And I asked if they get it, then are we able to put limits on when they can take down the trees? They can do whatever they want then because that land is theirs. We have no more options. All >> right. Other discussion on the motion. Council member Grath. >> As many of you have said, this is not a fun position to be in. Um but thank you all for your your comments. They were all very heartfelt and I really appreciate them. I appreciate the input. Um there's a lot of passion on both sides here for me. Uh when we vote, if we vote to turn the right ofway over to the owners, that is final. This is going to be it. Then then we're finished. This this land is gone. There's no option for a pathway in the future. There's no options in the future for this connectivity. Uh we have talked about connectivity since I've been on the council. Connectivity of neighborhoods, the ability to walk different places. Uh rightways are for transportation, but walking is a means of transportation also. So I do not support vacating this rightway because it is a final and we we have not got a plan here that works for everybody. the n the numbers on those petitions um that are sent out. You know, there are ways to do petitions that are statistically valid and not and if you're giving information that's one-sided on it and it's a petition, it doesn't work from a statistical point of view. So, um I appreciate all the work everyone's done, but I will not support the vacation. >> All right. Uh I guess that brings it to me. Um, so I will echo the thanks that have been expressed to everybody who's participated in this process. Um, I think as a decision maker uh for the city, you know, I I can say for sure I've learned a lot through this process. Um, probably uh, you know, the biggest thing was, oh, oh my goodness, people actually use this this right of way or some portions that weren't on the right of way. uh that I you know having been uh involved in local government in this community as long as I have had not realized um and shame on me for that. Um but interestingly you know I certainly have uh as as some of you may know been in the neighborhoods when I've been out uh either going to block parties or campaigning or whatever. And so um you know I I should have maybe kept my eyes open a little better. Uh but you know so that was the first thing that we learned. I think we learned that a lot of people who use the the the connection are very passionate about it. Uh because certainly within a short amount of time of the vacation notice going out originally last spring. Uh there was uh you know a petition with uh 98 signatures and 62 households. Um and I'm I'm not sure how many if any of those may have changed. I think I've heard anecdotally of of a couple. But the point being is that I think making plans and putting together um master plans and these sorts of things, it it it works up to a point and I would say that just because something isn't on a master plan doesn't mean it it shouldn't be considered and doesn't have validity. Um and it's difficult because certainly, you know, the the rating has been expressed in our system isn't terribly high for this connection. Um, but I also get very concerned about removing um, something that has been used by a significant number of people in the neighborhood um, for a connection. Um, because I think we are about trying to make sure that there are connections available to people to get about the city. Um, and uh, so I I that that weighs in the decision-making. I completely understand the concern about the oak trees. Um, and I I've been back and forth on this quite a bit through this process. Um, and I would say even coming into this meeting, I wasn't uh for sure sure where I might be coming down on this. And so, uh, once again, hearing from people has been helpful to that process. Uh, you know, being able to ask questions about the study, being able to understand better, um, you know, implications uh, has been helpful. And I can't say with certainty that if we uh if we don't vacate the right of way and we plan for a pathway and we construct a pathway that there won't be impacts on oak trees. I can't say that if we um vacate the right of way that there won't be impacts on oak trees. I mean I noted during the questions and answers with staff that there are existing property owner uh activities that are similar or comparable to some of the things that we've that we've you know considered as part of potentially putting a pathway in. those are having active impacts on the oak trees at this time. Um, and so and those and the people that did that, I want to be clear, are not doing it to be malicious to the oak trees. I believe they love those trees and they want to make sure they're preserved. Um, but impacts are happening. Um, and so I'm weighing all of this and I'm I'm, you know, I'm going back and forth and and ultimately I think it does come down to the ability to preserve a connection that has been a valuable part of the community over time. Um, and I think it was said well that this is a reasonable compromise. Um, and my hope and expectation is that the city will use uh every bit of diligence in a process uh uh to consider putting in a pathway and to construct a pathway uh that is conscious of uh those impacts to the to the trees in the area. Um I think this is as has been stated unique. um the the the the other pathways in the neighborhood um make that neighborhood unique, but they also don't have as much of the of the sort of the wild aspect or the the natural aspect that this does. And so this isn't one of those. It's not sort of just a strip between two houses that has some some grass in it. This is, you know, significant natural area. So it has uh benefit to the community and and I believe should be maintained. Uh and so I I will be opposing the oppos the resolution to vacate the right of way. Uh is there further discussion on the motion at this time? All right. Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion uh to adopt the resolution to vacate the right of way in response to the the resident petition signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oh, actually this would be the time if you want to move for the uh necessary. >> Okay. All right. Um, thank you for catching that. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed? No. Nay. >> Uh, that motion fails uh 3 to2 with Council Member Straw Grath and myself in opposition. Um, I would say it's probably appropriate at this point uh to have a follow-up motion as it relates to uh staff has kind of asked for some direction as it relates to the pathway. And I believe uh the requested action was to provide direction uh to uh consider um designating it as a a pathway corridor uh and to take some action to get it into the planning process if I understand it correctly. Is that correct? >> Is there moved? >> All right. >> Second. It's been moved by council member Strong and second by council member Grath to provide the guidance to uh staff to initiate processes to get this into a pathway planning process. >> May we also make a decision or make a recommendation about um removing the impediments along the current pathway >> encroachment? I I don't know that I would uh be prepared to include that in the in the action this evening. >> Okay. just that there is one fence that well several fences that make it impossible at this time. >> Um so we have the motion before us uh to direct planning for a pathway. Um just as just to address the the fence issue from my own point of view or the encroachment issue. I'm not so concerned about uh telling people they they can't encroach. We've worked with residents throughout the years on various uh cases to develop agreements and understandings related to encroachments onto city uh right ofway or easements. And so I think we can we can work through those issues. And I think certainly the work that has been done by residents along that corridor to create natural habitat and things like that. I'm not necessarily ready to say, you know, we want to we want to force people to take out fences and things like that at this time from my perspective. I don't know if there's any uh objection to to not going further on that at this time. All right. We've got the motion then before us to to make the direction to staff as outlined in terms of the next steps related to the pathway. Staff is comfortable with that. >> What's this a start? There's going to be a lot of work, >> right? Absolutely. That gives us the direction to >> All right. And I think the clear uh uh preference is option one. I think we should probably make that clear. We're not talking about option two at all in that. >> All right. Maker and seconder the motion. Okay with that. >> Okay. >> All right. Discussion on the motion as the maker of the motion. Council member St. >> Nothing further. >> Right. [cough] Gra is the second. >> I know this isn't the answer. Some people wanted it, but it is the answer other people wanted. And I do believe in connectivity as I said before of neighborhoods. Um this is the first step. It's still a process. Everyone should have input in this. And I don't think any of you should go away just because this is proceeding this way. We need we need the support and the help of everyone in the community to make this work. Thank you. >> Other discussion? Uh, Council Member Schroeder, >> you know, and again, uh, spending this kind of money seems to be um not not prudent and even though we people say they want to hear from the community, we heard from the community and I can see why people might get a little discouraged about it. So, um, yeah, spending the money again is is is I think it's a poor time to do it and to obligate us to pay more money [clears throat and cough] on something that, um, we're just adding, we keep adding to things to the budget and it just [clears throat] um, I think it's not financially um, prudent. >> Great. Other discussion, Council Member Power, >> I echo everyone. Thank you everyone for being part of this process. Um, I really do hope you're become part of the budgeting process, which greatly affects uh your taxes and uh figure out where we're going to find the funds for if this does pass with the um first option because right as of right now there isn't the money for it. >> Other discussion on the motion? I guess that would be me. Um you know, just as to the to the financial side of it. Uh uh well, first of all, take a step back to the input from the community. I mean, there are actually something along the lines of 12,000 households in the community, and we definitely have not heard from a majority of those. I can't even speculate as to whether it's a statistically significant uh representation of the community. Um, I don't know how the 700 some people who've provided those responses heard about this. Um, I don't know how uh they got their information and what they did to research it and anything about that. Um I I understand the process to petition for the pathway and and don't want to overweigh that either because I understand that there is certainly um um you know the potential for feedback and involvement from people across the community. Probably the only statistically valid way to do it would be to ask a question about it in our upcoming community survey. Um but uh you know once again we do projects across the city that have local impacts. I was just uh today actually taking a look at um a connection between uh Western Avenue and Tamarak Park in Roseville and there's a very fairly small number of homes uh that uh that potentially will use that connection and um you know probably cost you know 100,000 150,000 something like that. I'm trying to remember the numbers. Um, and so this is not this is not something cities don't do to on a fairly routine basis to provide access. And so I I'm concerned about, you know, using the budget discussion as a reason not to do things because we do things all the time that cost a fair amount of money and and have local impacts. And what we're doing is we're providing a network in the community that that that serves everybody ultimately. Um, and I think if I did the math at $120,000 uh at 12,000 households in Roseville, it's something like $10 per household uh for the project. But anyway, that being be that as it may, um, we will work through the process and we'll figure out how we move forward. Um, other discussion on the motion hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. I >> That motion I believe passed three to zero or excuse me 3 to one. That's all the votes I heard. >> Did you see? >> Were there two? Were there two nays? Okay. I'm sorry I didn't. Okay. Three to three to two. So, it passes three to two with council members Bower and Schroer in opposition. >> All right. >> I believe that concludes this item this evening. Uh once again, thanks to everyone. Why don't we take about a fiveminut break here? Well, started. I know. Hi, we're back from our short break uh to take up uh the next business item on our agenda which is item 7E and that is to consider approval of a purchase agreement with the Rosville VFW Post for a [clears throat] portion of their property. I'll turn it over to city manager Trean to bring this item before the city council. >> Thank you uh Mr. Mayor. Uh, as you know, uh, members of the council, uh, the city and the Roseville VFW, Post 7555, have been discussing the purchase of a westerly portion of their parking lot, uh, for use as part of our civic campus master plan. The property that will be purchased would be used for storm water management purposes related to the overall project, then will eventually serve as a shared parking space uh, for the city and the VFW. Uh based on the direction uh the city council gave me at the April 6 close session, I did present uh the VFW an offer to purchase, I'm happy to report on May 19th, the VFW membership um agreed to that offer, which uh they would sell the western 30,960 uh square feet of the property and the amount for the amount of 400,000. That's shown in this exhibit here uh this red area. And maybe just to better illustrate what we're actually buying, it will be this area over that existing parking lot. Uh this cross-hatched area is area that would be retained by the VFW. Uh but we would enter into a shared parking agreement. Uh so uh this offer is contingent on a couple things. One, that the VFW will provide a storm water easement at no additional cost u covering the entire BFW parking lot. Uh the city will then reconstruct the parking lot uh due to the storm water improvements that will be necessary for the overall project uh including the portion uh remaining in the VFW and reconstruct um uh a new parking lot containing about 150 parking spaces that will be uh jointly used by the city and the BFW. That's also subject to a couple conditions. the we have an existing joint use agreement that will be uh no longer in place, but we'll create a new uh joint use agreement uh talking about how the parking spaces will be used uh and have cross access easements ac across the different properties and also language on how we um resolve disputes and how overall parking is managed and special events. The the agreement uh that we'll bring forward at a later date will also cover the uh reconstruction of the current parking lot. Uh I would mention that uh once again as part of our offer uh we offer that we would construct that um 100% on our cost. However, we would enter into an agreement where uh future maintenance costs everything from short-term to long-term would be shared 50/50 between the city and the BFW. Then finally uh we will need to resubdivide u this property to get it into our ownership. And we'll also have some land use approvals uh down the road here as well regarding reszoning of the property and comprehensive plan amendments on that. The last thing I would want to mention uh this purchase price of $400,000 uh and check in with our bond council. We are able to use our sales tax proceeds to pay 100% of this acquisition cost. I would also mention although it's not uh relevant to tonight necessarily uh we would be able to use sales tax dollars to reconstruct the entire parking lot uh as well as any impacts to veterans park and also uh on a cost share basis uh pay for the storm water infrastructure that's in the ground some of it would benefit the licensed passport center dance studio so there will be a parata share on that that's still TBD u but that will be shared so uh for the majority of this work we'll be able to use sales tax dollars and I did include the memo from Mary in the packet. Uh otherwise, um just as an aside on the sales tax, actually I got new numbers today for March and we have received uh $4.6 million in sales tax revenue since July of 2025. So this was a much better month than the last couple months. So that was that was that was helpful to see. So we certainly have the dollars on hand here to make this purchase. So with that, I would pause uh and answer any questions. As I mentioned, the VFW uh did accept this and they're excited to go to the next steps working with us on those agreements. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Treasure. Are there questions for staff on the uh purchase agreement? Uh Council Member Schroeder. >> Yes. Uh how much will the reconstructing of the parking lot cost? I >> think it was about 5600,000. I'll have Jesse answer that better than I can. I don't have it exactly, but I I think the overall parking lot was about a million and it's split 50/50. So, but we'll have that number for you next week when we present. >> We're going to pay for it 100% in this agreement. >> Correct. >> So, it'll be construction. >> Yeah, it's it's roughly a million dollars. Um, we can certainly get you the exact number when we present next week and then um as as uh city manager mentioned, the the breakout of where that in the buckets will be clearly shown when we go through a detailed estimate next week. And when would you estimate we would be doing the parking lot? >> Um, it'll probably done in phases, but sometime next summer. [laughter] >> Well, that's Yeah. >> So, um, but yeah, so the they'll be constructing the building. Um, but there'll be some portion of the parking lot will be there, but we have to work out with the agreement or with the uh the VFW shared parking, temporary parking for the construction because obviously that parking lot's in use um every day. So, they'll it'll probably be a phased phase project. It could potentially roll into phase two, so we'll have to figure that out, but at minimum a good chunk of the lot will be built next year. >> Okay. Thank you. Just to clarify too, does that cost that you just talked about include any of the storm water costs or is that just the parking? >> Storm water is is set aside there. They're still in schematic design, so that hasn't detailed, but they're they have a budget set aside for storm water, which is both for the licensed passport center and for the maintenance operations center, which both will probably be a portion of both will be underground. >> Got it. >> Underneath the parking. >> Okay. I just wanted to clarify the what was included in that. >> Yep. Yeah. The parking lot cost is its own separate line item. So, we'll we'll have a detailed more breakdown next week for for the council. >> All right. Thank you. All right. Other questions for staff. All right. We'll check if there's anyone from the public who wishes to speak to this item [laughter] this evening. [snorts] >> Does not appear to be the case. Uh is there a motion from the council? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. It has been moved and moved by Council Member Grath, second by Council Member Bower to uh approve the purchase agreement uh that is in the packet for this uh portion of the property owned by the VFW Post. Uh discussion of the motion as the maker of the motion, Council Member Grath. >> Oh, this feels like my day job reading purchase agreement, >> but um no, I thought it was well written. I was really pleased to see all the things that were addressed in there. All my questions were answered as far as, you know, who pays for what and what the easements would and sort of what the process would work. So, I I feel it's a very good opportunity for us. >> All right. And as the secondary, council member Bower. >> Yeah. I just [clears throat] like to um you know, thank uh staff for all the work they did try to make this happen when trying to acquire something like this part of a larger project that is not easily done. So, I really appreciate the work that staff put into this to find a agreement. Um and also thank you to BFW as well for um giving us this opportunity to move forward with our maintenance operations center. >> Right. Other discussion on the motion. Council member Shorter. >> Yeah, I wanted to echo that that this was a long process getting this this where it's at and so appreciate all the work our city manager and our attorneys did and the staff to get us in to get us to this point. And I'm very pleased that you um can get this paid by the sales tax. That was one of my questions I had asked our city manager about trying to make sure you know that could be uh done in that that well. So, I was really pleased to hear about that as well. Thank you. >> All right. Other discussion on the motion hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously and that uh purchase agreement is uh approved by the council. Uh that concludes our business items this evening. We do have uh three sets of meeting minutes from our May 11th uh council and EDA meetings and the May 18th council meeting. Uh council members have received uh drafts of those and provided feedback and updated drafts are before the council this evening. >> Split those please. >> All right. I was just going to ask that as well as were there any other changes or corrections beyond what was uh presented to us this evening? >> Hearing none. Uh is there a motion for the May 11th minutes? >> So moved. Second. >> All right. It's been moved by uh council member Schwarter, second by council member Stron to approve those minutes, both the EDA and council minutes presumably. Yes. >> Uh discussion on that motion hearing. None. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed abstensions. That passes 5 to zero. Uh and then eyes to the May 18th minutes for the council meeting. >> Move approval. >> Second. >> It's been moved by council gra seconded by council member Bower to approve the May 18th council minutes. Uh any uh discussion on that motion? All right. Uh uh all those in favor of approval signify by saying I. >> I opposed. Uh abstensions. >> I Yes. >> All right. That uh counts. Uh so that passes four to zero with council member Straw and abstaining. >> That uh concludes consideration of the minutes. Then that brings us to our consent agenda. No items were removed. I'll turn it over to Mr. Trean to bring those items before the council this evening. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, agenda item 10A approves payments in the amount of $2,153,697.86. Item 10B approves an expenditure for centerline painting of city streets and uh for uh the squad uh computer replacements for the police department. Agenda item 10 C approves numerous annual business licenses including 24 cigarette tobacco products licenses, four age restricted cigarette tobacco licenses, two private gas pump licenses, 16 uh gas station licenses, 23 massage therapist establishment licenses, and four veterinary examination licenses. I would note um there was a bench handout. There's one more additional massage therapist added to that. So that's at your desk here tonight. So it's instead of 22 from the original packet, it's 23. Agenda item 10D approves a transfer of a massage establishment license at 1736 Lexington for Yun Wellness LLC from Exun Yunian to her husband Ryan Marston. Item 10E approves entering into a grant agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety to receive uh $50,000 in the Pathways to Policing Grant. This grant will allow the city to financially assist two police officer candidates with tuition, salary, and other educational expenses associated with completing skills training to be eligible to become a Minnesota licensed police officer. This is a great program. We've successfully used this program to recruit and retain our officers uh for the police department since 2019. Item 10F approves entering into a grant agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety to continue funding for the Roseville Police Department's autotheft prevention officer for another three years. A total of $39,000 is being granted. Uh item 10G approves the renewal of a short-term rental license for 1885 Shady Beach Avenue. And item 10H approves a new short-term rental license for 2809 Arona Street. And that is the consent agenda. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Tre. Is there a motion on the consent items this evening? >> Second. >> It's been moved by Council Member Grath, second by Council Member Bower to approve the consent items. Discussion on that motion hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those items are approved. Uh that brings us then to the future agenda review. Mr. Trejan, >> I will be brief as given the lateness of the hour. Do have a meeting next uh Monday. Um as mentioned we will be receiving um presentation and considering approval of the concept plans for the civic campus. So a lot more detail. We also have a meeting joint meeting I should say with joint uh with the finance commission. Uh we also uh want to have our finance director present the popular financial report a new document uh that he's bringing forward. We'll also receive an update in Autumn Grove playground project and there's a possibility of an abatement uh on Asbury Street. We have no other meetings in June. Our next scheduled meeting is July 6th, which we'll have on uh on the agenda the leaf site closure. Bring that back for discussion. Uh as well as uh trying to wrap up the approval of the climate equity action uh plan. >> Oh gosh, another fun one. >> All right. Yes, we're going to have a fun summer, folks. So there's there's more coming. Uh and then I have all these >> spread them out one per month. Thank you. >> That's all I have. >> All right. And then uh we should note that on June uh 22nd is the Rosefest parade. >> Uh so that will be an opportunity to recover from these other meetings. >> Uh are there any questions for the city manager on the future agenda or council member initiated items for future agenda? >> I'd just like to call out the Junth celebration which is co-hosted by the city on Saturday from 11 to 3 at Central Park. >> Right. We have a new partner this year with the uh is it the Minnesota Black Chamber? Yeah. Minnesota Black Chamber of Commerce. I've seen a number of their activities in support and promotion of this. So, I appreciate that and look forward to seeing uh everybody there this uh June 13th on Saturday at 11 to three, I think it is. >> Yeah. >> And I know I'm glad there's something at Valley Park because I don't know where that is. >> Wow. [laughter] >> June 17th. You'll know. >> Get to know your park so you get to know. >> I think you will be discovering that part of >> And I can't wait to see the mayor dress up like a superhero. >> Oh. >> Oh. because it's superhero. >> Wow. I didn't know that part. Didn't know that was on this. I didn't know that was on this. >> I'm pretty sure uh council member Bower and Schroer put that in there in the in the mayor [laughter] thing. >> Uh-huh. Okay. >> You were gone. >> I think the acting mayor had may have to fill in on that one. >> Yeah. One of my duties, huh? [laughter] >> There you go. You didn't read the fine print. >> All right. >> But seriously, folks, >> motion to adjurnn. Seriously. >> Thank you, Council Member Stan. >> It's been moved by Council Member Strong, second by Council Gra to. There is no discussion or commiting on a motion to adjurnn. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. We are journed at 9:30 p.m. Thank you everyone.