City Council Workshop
Regular MeetingOakdale, MN · August 23, 2022
Minutes
WORKSHOP MINUTES
OAKDALE CITY COUNCIL
August 23,2022
The City Council held a workshop on Tuesday, August 8, 2022 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley
Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 5:02 PM.
Present: Mayor Paul Reinke
Council Members: Jake Ingebrigtson
Susan Olson
Colleen Swedberg
Kevin Zabel
City Staff Members: Christina Volkers, City Administrator
Katie Robinson, Deputy City Clerk
Jason Zimmerman, Finance Director
Andrew Gitzlaff, Community Development Director
Lori Pulkrabek, Communications Manager
Nick Newton, Police Chief
Kevin Wold, Fire Chief
Jamie Scheffer, Senior Community Development Specialist
Jim Romanik, Public Works Manager
Brian Bachmeier, Interim Engineer
Other: Andy Morcomb, Guest (Council Candidate)
Prior to any presentations and/or discussion, Mayor Reinke reminded the Council, staff and guests
these workshop meetings are for information gathering, question clarifying, and no decision making
will be made as a Council body.
Mayor Reinke began by saying the following presentation is a continuation of the Comprehensive
Plan with Chapter 10 specifically being one of the most critical parts.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER 10 IMPLEMENTATION
Community Development Director Andy Gitzlaff began by stating, this is the seventh (7th ) workshop
session to review the current Comprehensive Plan. After this workshop on the implementation
chapter, the follow up meeting will be to review the comment tracking. He will also be meeting with
the staff Met Council sector representative and provide feedback from that meeting back to Council.
Mr. Gitzlaff started his presentation by reviewing what has already been done for the
implementation process, stating that through a series of Council workshops, staff has provided a
chapter by chapter overview of the Comprehensive Plan and facilitated a discussion with Council
on the policies identifying the appropriate course of action to achieve the project goal, identifying if
anything is missing or inaccurate, and determining whether there are certain policies that should
be prioritized.
He further explained that the implementation chapter is a required component of the
Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council and must include many various parts.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE TWO
Mr. Gitzlaff stated that one important note of the implementation piece is that you are not required
to rezone when your property is reguided (if your property is going from a zone of residential to
commercial or vice versa). However, when new applications come forward that is the appropriate
time to do those rezoning’s.
Mr. Gitzlaff shared and reviewed a handout that explained ten identified needs of the
implementation portion of Chapter 10, along with solutions, tools, circumstances and status of
each. A few needs listed were; housing burden relief, housing rehabilitation for low income
households, apartments for families (3+ bedroom units), affordable housing for people with
disabilities, and affordable housing for seniors.
Council Member Zabel asked who identified the ‘needs’ that are presented in the spreadsheet hand
out. Mr. Gitzlaff replied that the information is derived from the housing chapter.
While reviewing the spreadsheet Council Member Olson asked Mr. Gitzlaff what the definition of
‘affordable’ is as it’s used in the spreadsheet. Mr. Gitzlaff replied that it is based on an area’s
average medium income with 30% of your income deemed toward housing. Council Member Zabel
stated that 30% definition is universal.
Mayor Reinke reiterated that identified need #7 (422 new housing units affordable for 30% AMI,
#8 ( 200 new housing units affordable for 31 to 50% AMI) and #9 (169 new housing units affordable
for 51 – 80% AMI), are established by the Met Council and that is the entity doing this and for us to
be eligible for any type of funding, thus in essence we would have to say yes we are willing to strive
towards this. Mr. Gitzlaff replied yes, this is accurate; the only difference in this information vs.
Metropolitan Council’s information is this split per AMI.
Council Member Olson asked on the specific numbers presented do we have a way of measuring
how we are going to meet those numbers or are we actively trying to meet these numbers?
Mr. Gitzlaff responded stating the numbers originate from regional allocations from Metropolitan
Council and they are numbers we strive to reach by 2040.
While Mr. Gitzlaff continued to reviewed the spreadsheet, Council Member Zabel interjected on
#10 (Tools to address multiple housing needs and improve our housing strategy capacity in
general), He advocates to remove inclusionary housing policy (listed as a tool for this need), as he
feels it’s not an appropriate use for local government. He says it essentially states that you have to
do ‘this’ if you want to build in our city and expressed that it is a barrier for developers. Council
Member Swedberg agreed to have it removed.
Mayor Reinke asked Mr. Gitzlaff to do more research on this topic and bring it back to Council.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE THREE
Council Member Zabel asked for clarification as to what it is that staff wants from Council at the
Workshop on this topic, as there are items that he would like to have more information on or does
not agree with such as the manufactured homes zoning district. Council Member Zabel stated that
if this is included in the Comprehensive Plan it ties the hands of the property owner in his view.
Mayor Reinke replied saying that depends on what the zoning district says and we need clarification
on that.
Another item Council Member Zabel mentioned is the 4D Housing Agreement (this states the City
would consider establishing an agreement with apartments to extend affordability contracts), as he
feels using taxpayers’ funds to buy down rent is not an appropriate use of our resources.
Council Member Olson brought up how the document is referencing TIF as a funding tool and asked
if it should be referenced at all in the event that it may not be used. After a brief discussion it was
agreed upon that yes, the language should stay and TIF would be used if needed as a tool. The
caveat is that its use should be on a case-by-case basis.
Mr. Gitzlaff stated that staff will do some more research on the specific areas of discussion and will
bring the findings back to the group.
TEMPORARY USAGE AGREEMENT AND PEER COMMUNITY RESEARCH
Community Development Director Gitzlaff took a moment to introduce new employee, Senior
Community Specialist, Jamie Scheffer. Ms. Scheffer prepared the material for the Temporary Usage
Agreement and Peer Community Research topic.
Mr. Gitzlaff reminded Council that they had previously directed staff to reach out to peer
communities to better understand practices for temporary usage of City-owned land by private
parties, including if fees or a lease is required and how the fee or lease is calculated if so. In
response to that request, staff reached out to neighboring communities and networks to gather
examples.
Mr. Gitzlaff presented the following examples of fees charged;
o Land leased for farmland- taxed for farming use- charged slightly more than taxes
costed
o City park parking lot- leased to business for employee parking for 15 years-
unexpectedly hit with commercial tax rate “because this was a long-term lease for a
for-profit entity”
o City buildings- leased to state of MN- maintained non-profit tax status- charged area
average combined with state average rate paid for leases
o City buildings- leasing to a non-profit (keeping non-profit tax status), and charging
lower average commercial rates due to low demand.
o City/Economic Development Authority property- used license agreements- charged
a minimal fee of $1 or less but used language to protect city (insurance and
indemnity) and the property (no storing of contaminants on site, site restoration)
He also highlighted a few best practices identified by staff, such as;
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE FOUR
• If a lease were desired, potential tax implications from the parcel use becoming
commercial in nature, versus non-taxable government use would need to be further
explored.
• As is done currently, continue to include insurance and indemnification language to protect
the City.
• As is done currently, continue to protect the site with language about storing to original
condition and collecting an escrow.
Staff requested Council to review the research findings and discuss whether a fee is appropriate
going forward.
Mayor Reinke stated he does not need to see a fee involved if the usage is under one year and
there is some type of agreement of no contaminants, abide by said rules, etc.
Council Member Ingebrigtson asked how will the City determine who can and who cannot use land
for temporary use.
Council Member Zabel stated, the bigger question is what currently guides this practice? Is it an
internal policy, an ordinance or something else?
Mayor Reinke stated that although unspoken, his assumption was that it is land to be used for an
adjacent activity (adjacent to the requester’s project location). City Administrator Volkers agreed
with that statement and said it would be project based.
Council Member Ingebrigtson expressed that the point is someone is profiting from the use of City
property for free and he does not feel that is fair to the residents. Ms. Volkers asked him, do you
consider that the project happening thus the request for use of city property would benefit the City
in the long run through property taxes resulting from the new project, etc.? Council Member
Ingebrigtson reiterated that letting a private entity use City or Government property for free while
they are profiting from it, does not make sense to him.
Council Member Zabel stated he is comfortable with the process the City currently uses, however,
something has to guide that. The request presented talks about private parties, would it be a
different situation it it’s a private entity doing a project for MnDOT (a government agency)? He
expressed that some parameters need to be set to guide the process.
City Administrator Volkers recapped that what she is hearing from the group is there is no interest
in charging a fee (from most members of Council), however, there needs to be criteria in place to
guide this process and once that happens it can be brought back for review. Council Members
Olson and Swedberg confirmed, yes.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE FIVE
TIME WITH THE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER
Communications Manager Lori Pulkrabek addressed the group and noted the addition of the new
position of Communications Specialist held now by Sara Quinnell (Ms. Quinnell was not in
attendance).
A few project updates from Ms. Pulkrabek were the redesign of the printed newsletter, which is
currently in the works and should be distributed in the third week of September, and the redesign
of the City of Oakdale website.
The redesigned website currently has a planned launch in September 2022. A new URL address of
oakdalemn.gov will launch in the fall after the redesign is complete. Following the URL change, a
second phase will include the transition of all employee email addresses to
firstname.lastname@oakdalemn.gov which is a much-simplified email address for all. It was noted
that all mail/website inquiries using the current URL - ci.oakdale.mn.us - would forward to the new
URL for an extended period of time.
Mayor Reinke asked Ms. Pulkrabek if the redesigned website will have a municipal government
ordinance page. City Administrator Volkers explained that an outside service is hoped to be hired
to maintain an ordinance page that is accurate and up-to-date going forward.
Another update Ms. Pulkrabek shared is about the L.O.S.T. (Local Options Sales Tax). There are
now fact sheets available for residents and businesses. Communications is also working on a
designated web page that will have more detailed information. She will also be scheduling a
listening session for the public to provide the opportunity for discussion and feedback.
Ms. Pulkrabek also provided an update about her presentation with Mayor Reinke and City
Administrator Volkers and Finance Director Zimmerman to the Oakdale Area Chamber of Commerce
(OACC) Board of Directors on Thursday, August 18, 2022. The OACC Board voted unanimously in
favor of supporting the L.O.S.T. and will be writing a letter of support in that regard.
Council Member Olson asked Ms. Pulkrabek what the guidelines are as far as replying to social
media request/comments. Ms. Pulkrabek explained that Communications will reply to
inquiries/comments/concerns as soon as they have factual information to share and explained it
may take a little bit of time to communicate with other City staff to obtain the information needed
for a factual response.
City Administrator Volkers reminded the group that the City currently has a social media policy and
that it will be updated to allow for room to remove comments under certain conditions such as
personal attacks.
Council Member Zabel mentioned that he believes that since it’s a government channel, the City
may not have the ability to remove items unless it’s of a threatening nature. Ms. Volkers will meet
with Legal to confirm restrictions on this matter.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE SIX
REPLACEMENT OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AT EBERLE PARK
Public Works Manager Jim Romanik began his presentation with a brief overview stating that the
staff, city Commissions and some Council members have suggested some playground equipment
in select parks be replaced due to age; as much of the identified equipment was originally installed
in 1995. He also reminded the City Council that during the 2022 CIP discussions regarding parks,
the Council asked staff to find opportunities to fund playground equipment – hence why we are
discussing this today.
As part of the 2023-2027 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), there were five parks proposed for
playground equipment replacement. However, Eberle Park, located at 3888 Hadley Avenue North,
has also been identified for the replacement of playground equipment possibly in 2022 but has not
been noted nor has funding planned in the CIP.
Mr. Romanik noted the current Park Fund would not have enough funds to cover the entire cost of
the Eberle Park project, and Ms. Volkers suggested the possibility of using the Charitable Gambling
Fund to cover the remainder of the expense. Mr. Romanik then asked Council for feedback and
direction for this park project as he would like to bring this back to the Parks Commission in
September for their support, then back to a Council meeting in October.
Council Member Ingebrigtson asked why don’t we treat this project like we would a streets project
with a longer-term goal and timeline?
Council Member Zabel states it feels like it’s a start to a very long-term process as to where all of
the playgrounds are coming up with needs for replacement and maintenance. He would rather see
the City pause and get a process in place to evaluate things such as condition and / or use so when
decisions are made to change/replace, then it’s based on something. For example; other cities
have “Park Management Plans”. This would better serve Oakdale long-term.
Council Member Olson stated her concern was that if the City is replacing equipment with the same
equipment, the current neighborhood demographics might not want the same equipment. Council
Member Swedberg agreed with this and stated more things should be considered when making
these changes besides the age of the equipment.
Mayor Reinke asked Mr. Romanik if the equipment at Eberle Park is currently hazardous or
dangerous. Mr. Romanik replied that no it is not currently hazardous; however, it becomes
increasingly difficult to obtain replacement parts the older the equipment gets.
Mayor Reinke asked Council, if it is their intention to say yes, it is ok to replace this and evaluate
the replacement of equipment on a regular basis and figure out a process to do so. This was not
fully answered by Council Members.
City Administrator Volkers replied stated it is on the ‘to do’ list to visit each park, research and
evaluate each park needs based on demographics and other criteria, however, for now it’s more of
an immediate need to start replacing the equipment in various parks.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE SEVEN
She agreed that having a program for park rehabilitation is a great idea, but there is currently no
staff available to do this. She also shared a couple options as to how we could get a program started;
one being the City could hire a consultant (not preferred), or hire an intern possibly from Master’s
program – such as a park Engineer for the spring, summer and fall and provide them with criteria
to evaluate, or lastly, the City could do one park and then build a program for future replacement
projects. Mayor Reinke agrees with the Master’s intern option.
Council Member Zabel said there needs to be a process first. Also, referring to Council Member
Olson’s point of type of equipment, it would benefit the City to research ‘modern’ parks as well.
City Administrator Volkers reminded Council this was a direction they wanted the Parks Commission
to take (replacement of equipment) and now that staff has brought back these recommendations
on what needs to be done, Council is offering alternative intent. Staff is responding to the previous
request and if the intent has changed, then we understand. Council Member Olson supported this
recollection and thanked staff for following through on council’s previous request. Ms. Volkers
stated she would research other City’s park plans and come up with some examples for Council to
review at a future meeting.
Council Member Swedberg thanked the Parks Commission for working on this and bringing forth
their recommendations.
WILLOWBROOKE OPEN SPACE TRAILS NETWORK
Community Development Director Gitzlaff began his presentation with a brief overview of the trails
project.
He reminded Council that back on June 30, 2021 the City executed a Master Planned Unit
Development Agreement with White Star Farms, LLC and U.S. Home Corporation (Lennar) for the
public improvements within the Willowbrooke development and that the City is obligated to
construct, at its sole expense, and maintain the entire public trail and sidewalk system within the
open space. (All other sidewalks/trails as part of the development will be constructed by the
developer(s) at their sole expense and maintained by their Home Owners Association).
Mr. Gitzlaff then noted that the previous approved plans for Willowbrooke included an extensive
conceptual trail network through the open space and recently staff, in consultation with the
developer Lennar, have come up with a proposal to reduce the total number of trail segments to a
more manageable amount. He explained by doing so it would eliminate some of the redundancies
within the trail and sidewalk network and maintenance costs.
Mr. Gitzlaff shared a handout that mapped out the development highlighting the proposed changes
and noted some of the reason for elimination in certain areas such as too many trails near/around
a house, cost effective funding for maintenance, and to alleviate confusion of whether it is for public
use or private use.
Council Member Ingebrigtson expressed to Mr. Gitzlaff that he/staff did a very good job with the
map and highlighting the areas of the proposal.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE EIGHT
Mayor Reinke agreed and asked the group as a whole if they agree with the proposed changes
located south of 40th Street, in which all replied, yes. The trail network north of 40th Street will be
reviewed and revised with Council input concurrent with development.
COUNCIL TOPICS
Council Member Swedberg brought up the topic of the new proposed contract for a School Liaison
for the 2022 – 2023 ISD 622 school year.
Mayor Reinke stated that Community Service Officer Bill Fetsch does a nice job as a school liaison;
however, it is unreasonable to have him doing Tartan and several other schools. He expressed that
it is very inappropriate that the school board did not fund for one additional liaison especially with
the building additions to the school that are currently happening.
Council Member Zabel stated that he spoke to a school board member and they had no idea and
never received a request from the City of Oakdale to add staff. City Administrator Volkers confirmed
that the district administrative staff did receive the request, not school board elected officials.
Mayor Reinke made a note to rephrase his previous comment to acknowledge the possibility that
the school board wasn’t aware of our request although school administration was aware, so he
suggested that Council consider saying yes to this proposed $74,000 contract for this school year
and make it very clear that going forward it has to be changed.
Council Member Zabel disagreed with waiting until the next contract to make changes and stated if
the issue is pushed down the road, the school board will not do anything about it. He suggested to
change the agreement to reflect a termination date of 12/31/22 as this would give them four
months to make the changes and /or add staff, he also noted they do currently have the funds to
hire another position.
Council Member Olson said maybe the Superintendent does not agree it is a critical need and the
Council cannot force the school district to do this. Council Member Olson would not agree to end
the contract on 12/31/22. She strongly stated that the school liaison position cannot be taken
away from those students. Council Member Zabel replied stating that by putting a shorter deadline
on the contract, which is basically holding their feet to the fire and forcing them to decide. He also
pointed out that it is the same thing if we keep the contract through May - they have to decide at
that time anyway.
Council Member Ingebrigtson said that Council Member Zabel is 100% correct and that the issue
has been kicked down the road for the past four years and nothing has happened. It is time for
Council to make it clear to them that something has to change or they need to take care of their
staffing requirements from somewhere other than the City of Oakdale.
Council Member Swedberg asked if we proceeded with a 12/31/2022 deadline and the school
district did not add another SRO by then, then in January would Officer Fetsch be pulled from this
position. Council Member Zabel replied yes.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE NINE
Council Member Swedberg reminded Council Member Zabel that if that happened, the City would
have to absorb the salary of that position and that was not planned for in the budget. Council
Member Swedberg clarified that is why she suggests waiting until this contract is complete.
Mayor Reinke interjected stating he would not support a deadline of 12/31/2022.
Council Member Zabel asked what would be the difference in saying they have to figure something
out by December or May. Council Member Olson replied, “Who are we to say they have to do this
because it’s what we want them to do?” Council Member Zabel replied because their infractions
would spill out into our neighborhoods, streets and parks. Council Member Olson agreed, but
reiterated that the Council cannot force them to decide.
Council Member Ingebrigtson responded then why don’t we just not provide the officer at all?
Mayor Reinke interrupted stating the monies are committed on both sides for 9 months with the
current proposal and he is hopeful Council will take the attitude that the students will be served at
minimal through the current proposal and by our comments tonight we will make it clear that their
actions are unacceptable and they need to make a change. Mayor Reinke also suggested to the
group that he and /or members of Council should attend a future school board meeting.
Council Member Ingebrigtson stated the elected body of Oakdale is not responsible for the schools
or the students while they are in the schools. This is the school board’s responsibility.
Mayor Reinke asked Council Member Ingebrigtson if there is a significant issue at a school do we
have any responsibility. Council Member Ingebrigtson replied, no, we are not the school board and
we don’t set the policies for the school district at all. Mayor Reinke replied that that position is very
black and white in dealing with a gray issue and that is ok, as all do not need to agree. Mayor
Reinke suggested that we will take a vote at Council and be done with it because we are not making
decisions here in the workshop.
Council Member Olson stated she would never do that to the kids. She currently has a niece in ISD
622 and would never put her at risk. Council Member Ingebrigtson replied to that statement saying
he also has kids in the ISD 622 and will make it known that neither the Superintendent nor the
school board have done anything to collaborate with the City Council.
Mayor Reinke asked the Chief of Police if a 911 call comes in for Skyview and Officer Fetsch is at
Tartan, who will show up at Skyview? The Chief responded that a police officer will show up and
Officer Fetsch as soon as he is able.
Council Member Ingebrigtson replied stating the school district is straining our resources and we
need to tell them they need to act.
Mayor Reinke is surprised the school board does not know about this issue per Council Member
Zabel’s comment. Council Member Olson stated she does not believe they do not know about it.
Council Member Ingebrigtson strongly agreed with Council Member Olson’s statement.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE TEN
City Administrator Volkers asked Mayor Reinke if he still plans to attend a school board meeting.
Mayor Reinke replied yes to that and invites any of the Council to attend as well. He then asked
Ms. Volkers to prepare a letter to the Superintendent.
Council Member Olson asked if two letters can be prepared one letter from administrator to
administrator and then a second letter from elected official to elected official. Ms. Volkers replied
yes that is what she will do.
Council Member Ingebrigtson stated that he would like his signature on the elected letter. It was
then decided that that letter would be signed by all of Council and the Mayor.
City Administrator Volkers asked Council Member Swedberg to clarify where she stood on this issue
and she replied that she will support the current proposed contract but it will have to change after
this year.
Council Member Olson shared that the Superintendent is very unresponsive in general so maybe
discussing this letter on camera at the Council meeting will help push the issue.
Council Member Zabel said he feels it is not effective to stretch one personnel across several
schools. Mayor Reinke then asked Council Member Zabel if he would support having the school
liaison officer at just the high school to which Council Member Zabel stated he would agree to that
but that is not what the agreement states.
Mayor Reinke then moved the conversation to other Council topics.
Council Member Zabel noted that the COVID forgiveness loans are coming due one year from next
month and asked what is staff’s plan to notify the business? City Administrator Volkers replied that
the businesses have already being notified. He also brought up the water main break that the City
experienced on Tuesday, August 23, 2022 and asked if there was any discussion as to reimbursing
residents for that short period of time. City Administrator Volkers replied yes, there was a discussion
and it was found that it is so minimal, per resident, as the fee is based on thousands of gallons and
residents only used an extra 50 gallons approximately to flush their lines out thus a reimbursement
was not recommended.
Mayor Reinke asked Council Member Zabel if he would be ok with having Ms. Volkers and Finance
Director Jason Zimmerman, get back to the group with information as to whether there is a means
to do process a reimbursement. Council Member Zabel replied yes.
Council Member Ingebrigtson stated, to the City Administrator’s point, it would literally come out to
pennies back to the resident.
Mayor Reinke’s update was in regard to the recent report/update of the development activities in
the City which he feels was nicely done and said he cannot imagine all the work that is currently out
there including the detail in the conversations, the processes and the work that all city staff
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 23, 2022
PAGE ELEVEN
including building Inspections, does including all this development work is on top of all the roof
inspection requests that have come in. Mayor Reinke shared he thinks it’s very cool and there is
also a sensitivity to all of this, which is to request council give the staff a break if there is a need
that can wait.
Council Member Ingebrigtson asked if he stated that Oakdale would be built out by the end of this
decade is reasonable to say. City Administrator Volkers and Community Development Director
Gitzlaff both stated, yes that is a reasonable statement.
ADJOURNMENT
The workshop was adjourned at 6:54pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Katie Robinson
Deputy City Clerk
Agenda
AGENDA
City Council Workshop
Workshop
August 23, 2022
Hadley Conference Room
Amended
5:00 PM Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10 Implementation
5:30 PM Temporary Usage Agreement and Peer Community Research
5:45 PM Time with the Communications Manager
6:00 PM Replacement of Playground Equipment at Eberle Park
6:15 PM Willowbrooke Open Space Trails Network
6:40 PM Council Topics
6:55 PM Recess for Regular Meeting
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Andrew Gitzlaff, Community Development Director
Date: August 23, 2022
Subject: Comprehensive Plan Implementation Chapter 10 Discussion
BACKGROUND
Through a series of Council workshops, staff has been providing a chapter by chapter overview of the
Comprehensive Plan and facilitating a discussion with Council on the following:
• Are the policies identifying the appropriate course of action to achieve the goal?
• Is anything missing, inaccurate or in need of further evaluation?
• Are there some policies that should be prioritized?
Chapters are sent out with the agenda packet for review in advance. Staff is tracking language changes
that will be made as part of a future Comprehensive Plan amendment. See attached comment tracker
form for reference.
The Introduction and the Land Use Chapters were discussed at the February 8, 2022 and February 22,
2022 Council workshops. The Housing and Neighborhoods Chapters were discussed at the April 29,
2022 Special Council workshop. The Transportation Chapter was discussed at the April 26, 2022 Council
workshop. At that meeting, the discussion began on the Economic Development Chapter and was tabled
until the May 24, 2022 Council workshop to complete the discussion. The Water Resources Chapter was
discussed at the June 28, 2022 Council workshop. The Parks and Trails and Resilience Chapters were
discussed at the August 8, 2022 Council workshop.
At the August 23, 2022 Council workshop, staff will lead a facilitated discussion with Council on the
Implementation Chapter (10), which is the final chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The implementation
Chapter is a required component of the Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council and must
include the following:
• Describe all public programs, fiscal devices, and other actions that your community will use to
implement your plan. The Oakdale Comprehensive Plan describes the following:
1. Capital Improvement Plan
2. Small Area Plan
3. Functional Planning
4. Neighborhood Preservation and enhancement Initiative (NPEI)
5. Building Codes
6. Property Maintenance Codes
7. Fiscal Devices
8. Official Controls
• Official City controls including locally adopted ordinances, policies, design guidelines, fiscal tools,
and other regulations that direct, guide, and assist in development decisions and help to
implement your plan cannot be in conflict with policy direction in the Comprehensive Plan as
outlined in MN Statute 473.865.
• Define a timeline as to when actions will be taken to implement each required element of your
comprehensive plan.
• Include your local zoning map and zoning category descriptions. Identify what changes are needed
to ensure zoning is not in conflict with your new land use plan and consistent with regional system
plans and policies.
• The implementation chapter must also include a Housing Implementation Plan that describes the
public programs, fiscal devices, and other specific actions that could be used to meet the existing
and projected housing needs identified in the Housing Chapter. The Housing Implementation Plan
in the Oakdale Comprehensive Plan includes 10 identified needs, solutions, tools and
circumstances.
At the workshop, staff will provide an overview of the implementation chapter and a status update for
each of the identified needs within the Housing Implementation Plan and will discuss with Council if any
changes to the tools, solutions or circumstances should be pursued. Future Council workshops will focus
on reviewing the comment tracker and proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment language prior to
initiating the Comprehensive Plan amendment process.
Attachments
Comment Tracker
Implementation Chapter 10 of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Comprehensive Plan City Council Comment Tracker
Date Received Chapter Comment Recommended Action
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Concerned about the preciseness of some of the Revise statement to say
Workshop Land Use policy statements in the Comprehensive Plan “consider an annual
including Goal 2 Policy 4 establishing an annual EDA levy along with the
EDA levy to fund predevelopment and other funding
rehabilitation activities. mechanisms”.
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Council emphasized that the words that are used Noted.
Workshop Land Use are important.
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Council wanted more information on the specific Consider updated the
Workshop Land Use parcels listed under Goal 1 Policy 1 and more list of sites based on
clarity on the Council’s role in preparing needs / interest from
redevelopment plans considering many of these landowners, add more
properties are privately owned. clarity to the City’s role
in preparing
redevelopment plans.
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Council expressed a concern about references to Add more clarity in
Workshop Land Use public financing and how it creates a perception Comprehensive Plan to
that the City will provide public financing for where, when, how and
every project without additional evaluation of the why public financing
merits. Staff noted that the Comprehensive Plan would and would not be
is not the last word. It provides overall guidance considered.
but the City Council can direct staff to conduct
additional study and craft more specific policies
and programs to better define and interpret the
current Council’s position.
2-22-22 Chapter 2 – Our current TIF policy doesn’t separate Review the Baker Tilly
Workshop Land Use residential and commercial and is outdated. TIF Summary and
Council would like to see a comparison and update the City’s TIF
contrast of how it is now and recommendations Policy as a separate
from staff for how it could be improved. effort and reference the
updated TIF Policy in
the Comprehensive
Plan.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – There are a lot of other subsidies such as Consider noting other
Workshop Housing Section 8 vouchers and mortgage assistance programs in the
programs that are not captured as publicly Housing Chapter and
subsided housing units in the existing local their contribution
condition chart. towards meeting the
City’s affordable
housing goals.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – The Comprehensive Plan Area Median Income Reference current AMI
Workshop Housing (AMI) numbers listed in the plan are outdated. but do not include a
specific number
because it does not
change every year.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – Desire to take a closer look at the Neighborhood Staff will review the
Workshop Housing Preservation and Enhancement Initiative’s NPEI, the process for
Housing Rehabilitation Strategic Framework approval and discuss
(NPEI). with Council if changes
should be made to
better reflect the Comp
Plan and the current
Council’s thinking.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – What does it mean to develop plans under Goal Consider adding clarity
Workshop Housing 1 Policy 2? to the type of plans
referenced (finance
plan, management
plan).
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – What happens if you do not meet the Ensure the
Workshop Housing Metropolitan Council requirements? Ultimately it Comprehensive Plan
could end up in legal challenges or the City may remains legally
become ineligible to receive future grants under defensible, not in
the Livable Communities Act. conflict with regional
plan and fulfills our
requirements to be
eligible for funding.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – How was the 791 units of affordable housing No change since the
Workshop Housing established? Staff clarified these numbers number is established
came directly from Metropolitan Council based by the Metropolitan
on a regional allocation formula. The Council.
Metropolitan Council does not require a City to
meet this number. The Metropolitan Council
does require (through review of the land use
plan conformity) that there is sufficient land use
and allowable densities programmed within the
City so that these units can feasibly be built. The
Metropolitan Council also will make sure that the
City has identified tools (within the housing
chapter) that could be used to accomplish the
goal.
3-29-22 Chapter 9 – There are multiple references to the City’s Remove references to
Workshop Neighborhoods emergency home rehabilitation loan program. this particular program
if discontinued by the
City and references
other active program
partnerships
3-29-22 Chapter 9 – City Council provided direction to consider Staff will work on
Workshop Neighborhoods adopting MN State Statutes 65A.50 Trust or adopting as a separate
Escrow Accounts: Insured Real Estate Property effort from the
Fire or Explosion Loss Proceeds into the City Comprehensive Plan
Code
3-29-22 Chapter 9 – How will our progress be tracked to meeting the Additional detail is
Workshop Neighborhoods adopted goals? provided in the
implementation chapter
which will be discussed
at a future workshop.
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 2 – Some of the policies seem outside the For additional clarity,
Workshop Transportation City’s ability to control such as burying suggest using words
powerlines along Highway 120 such as coordinating
with, advocating or
supporting the work of
others.
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 3 – Policy 5 states support for jurisdictional Consider removing
Workshop Transportation roadway transfers, Council discussed whether entirely or adding
we really wanted to support future jurisdictional additional explanation
transfers. It is unclear what the benefit would be that the transfer must
to the City for taking on the additional roadway be in the financial
responsibilities. interests of the City and
to the benefits of
residents
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 4. Consider adding a policy to support the Consider adding this
Workshop Transportation addition of a pedestrian walkway adjacent to the policy to the
40th Street bridge over I-694 improving access Comprehensive Plan.
from existing neighborhoods on the west side to Having this policy in
the Willowbrooke neighborhood on the east side place will help support
future funding requests
at the state and federal
level
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 5. Question about the City’s role in Policy Statement 3
Workshop Transportation collaborating with Metro Transit. Clarification could better specify
was provided that Metro Transit operates the that Metro Transit is the
regional system but the City can provide input on service provider
where routes can go
4-26-22 Chapter 7 – Goal 2. Question about whether this should be Unless causing harm
Workshop Economic two separate Goals, one focused on jobs and suggest leaving as one
Development other on quality of life Goal recognizing that
these Goals were the
result of a public
engagement process,
the policies under the
Goal could be better
aligned.
4-26-22 Chapter 7 – Goal 1 – Concern about the term Living Wage Consider adjusting the
Workshop Economic and how it might be misinterpreted as the city Goal to remove the
Development supporting a mandatory minimum wage word shall and replace
with encourage or use
an alternative term
other than living wage.
4-26-22 Chapter 7 – Policy 3 – ensuring adequate supply of land for Consider updating to
Workshop Economic new and expanding commercial and industrial reflect current realities
Development development may be out dated with the limited
amount of land remaining in the City
4-26-22 Chapter 7 - Policy 1 – Question about if the City really want Consider updating to
Workshop Economic to be spending a lot of resources attracting reflect current priorities
Development specific businesses?
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2 – Policy 2 concern with the phrase Suggest adding
Workshop Economic “provide financing options” general consensus specification to clarify
Development from Council that we do not want to be in the that the City will not be
business of being a financial lender but are open a lender but will explore
to being a funding conduit in certain other conduit financing
circumstances options
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2- Additional clarity needed between Clarify in the text that
Workshop Economic purpose of Policy 1 and Policy 2 Policy 1 focuses on
Development resources that others
provide and Policy 2
focuses on resources
potentially provided by
the City
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2 – Policy 4 consensus remove reference to Remove the word
Workshop Economic affordable daycare because the City has no affordable
Development control over affordability of daycare
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2 – use of the word shall for this goal is not Consider alterative
Workshop Economic appropriate since the City does not have direct word such as
Development control over the outcomes encourage, softening
language for other
goals and policies
should also be
considered
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 4 – Policy 2 concern that the Oakdale First Revisit the Oakdale
Workshop Economic Policy is actually enforceable by the City or if it First Policy as part of a
Development places too much burden on employers separate discussion
with Council
6-28-22 Chapter 4 – Goal 1 (Water Supply) – Policy 1 what is included Staff provided a
Workshop Water in a wellhead protection plan? summary, no changes
Resources requested
6-28-22 Chapter 4 – Goal 1 (Water Supply) – Policy 2 why do we only Staff clarified that those
Workshop Water reference MN Dept. of Public Health standards? standards are the most
Resources restrictive, no changes
requested
6-28-22 Chapter 4 – Goal 3 (Water Supply) – Policy 2 some concern Continue to evaluate
Workshop Water that utility rate differential is not great enough to utility billing rate
Resources encourage conservation structure
7-28-22 Chapter 5 – Goal 1 Policy 3 – discussion on feasibility of park Suggest rephrasing to
Workshop Parks and development remove word
Trails acquisition – work with
property owner to
“develop” the defunct
par 3 golf course into a
passive “public” park
7-28-22 Chapter 5 – Goal 2 – Policy 2 – should open space be open Not consensus to
Workshop Parks and to all pedestrian and bicyclists or should some change policy, could
Trails be limited to walking only? further explore in Bike
and Ped Plan
7-28-22 Chapter 5 – Goal 1 – questions about how well the State and Consider changing
Workshop Resilience the City is doing at meeting GHG goals and “shall” to “strive to”
concern expressed about the use of word shall
because the City has influence but not have
direct control over outcomes
7-28-22 Chapter 5 – Goal 1 Policy 4 – concern about requiring zoning Suggest changing to
Workshop Resilience standards for renewable energy technologies, standards and
guidelines may be more appropriate in some guidelines
situations
7-28-22 Chapter 5 – Gola 2 – Policy 8 – concern that the City is not Suggest changing
Workshop Resilience meeting this policy because the City does not language from support
fund the installation or maintain any community to encourage
gardens
_
CHAPTER 10 - IMPLEMENTATION
Public Programs, Fiscal Devices redevelopment is desired. residents and local institutions
and Other Actions: to take certain actions to
3. Functional Planning: A influence the trajectory of
1. Capital Improvement Plan functional plan is a plan for a neighborhood quality in the
(CIP): A capital improvements single topic and connects with direction of preservation and
program is an itemized program related Comprehensive Plan enhancement, while at the
setting forth the schedule and subject areas. Examples include same time preventing and
detail of specific contemplated a bike and pedestrian plan, responding to undesirable
public improvements by mass transit plan, housing or change or decline.
fiscal year, together with their parks and open space plan.
estimated cost, the justification 5. Building Codes: The
for each improvement, the 4. Neighborhood Preservation purpose of the Building Code
impact that such improvements and Enhancement Initiative is to establish minimum
will have on the current (NPEI): The NPEI is an action requirements to safeguard
operating budget of the City, oriented strategic framework the public health, safety,
and other information as may that focuses the City’s attention and general welfare through
be relevant. See Appendix A: on the areas within the City’s structural strength, means
Capital Improvements Plan. control that are most influential of egress facilities, stability,
in preserving and enhancing sanitation, adequate light
2. Small Area Planning: A neighborhood quality. These and ventilation, energy
small area plan is a short-range include neighborhood: (1) conservation, and safety to
multi-topic plan for sub-areas housing stock, (2) amenities life and property from fire and
of the City. Small area plans and disamenities, and (3) social other hazards attributed to
are prepared for areas with capital. The City’s role within the the built environment, and to
specific challenges, or where strategic framework is to work provide safety to firefighters and
rapid change or development or together with neighborhood emergency responders during
ZONING DISTRICT DESCRIPTIONS
Zoning District Description
R-1 Very Low Density Residential Single-family detached dwelling units, minimum lot area 15,000 SF.
R-2 Low Density Residential Single-family detached dwelling units, minimum lot area 9,600 SF.
R-3 Low Density Residential Single-family and two-family detached dwelling units, min. lot area 9,600/12,000 SF.
R-4 Mid Density Residential All uses in R-3 district, as well as townhouses and buildings with 3 to 8 units.
R-5 High Density Residential All uses in R-4 district, as well as multi-family townhouses, apartments.
R-6 Manufactured Homes Medium density manufactured homes, minimum area 20 acres.
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial Local centers for convenient retail or service outlets, intended for neighborhood use and
not entire community.
C-2 Community Commercial Retail and service outlets at a community scale, served by collector or arterial streets.
I-O Industrial Office Light manufacturing, office, research, and warehousing.
G-I General Industrial Light and heavy manufacturing, large-scale warehousing, and truck terminals.
PUD Planned Unit Development One or more principal uses or structures, minimum lot size 5 acres or larger.
Wetland District Preservation and maintenance of City’s wetlands and water bodies.
Tower District Construction and maintenance of radio and television antenna and towers.
Limited Business District High quality office and professional services, office park.
Gateway District Landmark office, conference, medical or hotel uses with high visibility.
Source: City of Oakdale
70 Implementation
emergency operations. The code applies
statewide for the construction, reconstruction, ZONING MAP
alteration, and repair of buildings and other
structures of the type governed by the code.
6. Property Maintenance Code: The purpose
of the Property Maintenance Code is to
ensure the public health, safety and welfare
insofar as they are affected by the continued
occupancy and maintenance of structures
and premises. The code applies to all existing
residential and nonresidential structures and
all existing premises and constitute minimum
requirements and standards for premises,
structures, equipment, and facilities for
light, ventilation, space heating, sanitation,
protection from the elements, life safety,
safety from fire and other hazards, and for
safe sanitary maintenance.
7. Fiscal Devices: Fiscal devices include
all forms allowed under Minnesota State
Statutes 469.001 to 469.047, and 469.090
to 469.108.
8. Official Controls: Official controls means
ordinances and regulations that control the
physical development of a city and implement
the goals of the comprehensive plan. Official
controls include zoning and subdivision
ordinances, building codes, property
maintenance and nuisance codes and official
maps.
Community Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
Limited Business
Gateway
General Industrial
Industrial/Office
PUD
R1 Very Low Density Residential
R2 Low Density Residential
R3 Low Density Residential
R4 Middle Density Residential
R5 High Density Residential
R6 Mobile Home District
ROW
I
Tower
Wetland
Updated June 1st, 2018
Implementation 71
HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION
Identified Need Solutions Tools Circumstance
1. Housing cost burden Affordable first Local Funding Resources: Ongoing program available through participating
relief time homebuyer Minnesota City Participation lenders upon application by qualified borrowers
mortgages Program
Increase availability Local Funding Resources: City could partner with TRCLT on development
of land trust homes Consolidated RFP application proposals for single-family homes
Foreclosure Effective referrals Ongoing maintenance of resource list to
prevention & continue the ability to refer residents to qualified
mortgage counseling counseling programs
2. Housing Low interest rehab Community Fix Up Fund, Ongoing programs available upon application by
rehabilitation for low loans Emergency Loan Fund, HIA Loans qualified borrowers
income households
Volunteer/Nonprofit Effective referrals Ongoing maintenance of resource list to
assistance with continue the ability to refer residents to any
maintenance applicable housing programs outside the scope
of City programs and services
3. Apartments for Facilitate the Density bonus for developments The City will explore the possibility of using
families (3 or more development that include 3+ bedroom units a density bonus to support the creation of
bedroom units) of additional apartments for larger families in areas guided
apartments for larger for high density residential
families
Guide land for higher-density See the future land use plan in this
residential development comprehensive plan, pg. 19
Local Funding Resources: LCDA, Upon request by a qualified developer, the City
Consolidated RFP, CDBG/HOME would consider sponsoring an application to the
LCDA, Consolidated RFP, and/or CDBG/HOME
programs for multi-family rental proposals with
units suitable for large families, and in areas
guided for high density residential
4. Affordable housing Facilitate the Local Funding Resources: Upon request by a qualified developer, the
for people with development of Consolidated RFP, CDBG/HOME, City would strongly consider sponsoring an
disabilities affordable supportive TIF, Tax abatement application to the Consolidated RFP, and/or
housing CDBG/HOME programs for affordable housing
proposals with units suitable for people with
disabilities. TIF and tax abatement may also be
considered as supplemental resources in these
cases.
5. Affordable housing Facilitate the Local Funding Resources: Upon request by a qualified developer, the City
for seniors development of Consolidated RFP, CDBG/HOME, would consider sponsoring an application to
affordable senior TIF, Tax abatement the Consolidated RFP, and/or CDBG/HOME
housing programs for affordable housing proposals with
units suitable for seniors. TIF and tax abatement
may also be considered as supplemental
resources in these cases.
6. Preservation of Re-establish 4D Housing Agreement The City would consider establishing a
existing affordable affordability 4D agreement with apartments to extend
apartments contracts affordability contracts
Low-interest rehab Housing Bonds The City would consider issuing bonds to support
loans the rehabilitation of affordable apartments in
cases where affordability contracts will be
re-established or extended
72 Implementation
HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION (CONT.)
Identified Need Solutions Tools Circumstance
7. 422 new housing Facilitate the Guide land at densities that See the future land use chapter and projected
units affordable for development of support affordable housing housing needs section of the housing chapter of
30% AMI affordable housing this comprehensive plan
Local Funding Resources: TIF Development agreement following site plan
assistance to developer, tax approval
abatement, Consolidated RFP,
LCDA, tax credits
Site assembly As opportunities arise in areas guided and
zoned for residential development; pursued only
when the opportunity aligns with established
comprehensive plan or small area plan goals.
8. 200 new housing Facilitate the Guide land at densities that See the future land use chapter and projected
units affordable for development of support affordable housing housing needs section of the housing chapter of
31 to 50% AMI affordable housing this comprehensive plan
Local Funding Resources: TIF Development agreement following site plan
assistance to developer, tax approval
abatement, Consolidated RFP,
LCDA, tax credits
Site assembly As opportunities arise in areas guided and
zoned for residential development; pursued only
when the opportunity aligns with established
comprehensive plan or small area plan goals.
9. 169 new housing Facilitate the Guide land at densities that See the future land use chapter and projected
units affordable for development of support affordable housing housing needs section of the housing chapter of
51 to 80% AMI affordable housing this comprehensive plan
Local Funding Resources: TIF Development agreement following site plan
assistance to developer, tax approval.
abatement, Consolidated RFP,
LCDA, CDBG/HOME, tax credits
Site assembly As opportunities arise in areas guided and
zoned for residential development; pursued only
when the opportunity aligns with established
comprehensive plan or small area plan goals.
10. Tools to address Ongoing policymaker Participation in Housing Related The Mayor of Oakdale will continue to participate
multiple housing education Organizations: Regional Council of or designate an appropriate representative
needs and improve Mayors to actively engage in the Urban Land Institute
our housing strategy Minnesota’s Regional Council of Mayors group
capacity in general
Ongoing staff Participation in Housing Staff will continue to be an active member of the
education Related Organizations: Housing Housing Collaborative Institute
Collaborative Institute
Ensure local fair Fair Housing Policy Develop a policy by 2020
housing practice
Leverage resources Inclusionary Housing Policy Explore development of an inclusionary or
mixed-income housing policy by 2020
GROW Fund The GROW Fund will not be considered by the
City to meet any needs.
Preservation and Emergency Loan Fund Ongoing home repair loan program available
enhancement of upon application by qualified borrowers.
manufactured home
R6-Manufactured Homes zoning Existing district currently helps preserve
communities
district the Twenty Nine Pines manufactured home
community.
Statutory authority Use of the Oakdale Economic As needs arise; to renew or revise existing
to conduct economic Development Authority housing programs; to create TIF districts
development activity,
including housing
development and
redevelopment
Maintain the safety Rental licensing and inspection All homes for rent must be licensed and
and quality of homes program inspected annually
for rent
Implementation 73
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jamie Scheffer, Senior Community Development Specialist
Date: August 23, 2022
Subject: Temporary Usage Agreements and Peer Community Research
BACKGROUND
Council directed staff to reach out to peer communities to better understand practices for temporary
usage of City-owned land by private parties, including if fees or a lease is required and how the fee or
lease is calculated. In response, staff has reached out to neighboring communities and networks to
gather examples.
• 15 government staff were contacted and provided examples from current or past positions with
local government entities
• Several individuals/entities responded that they have allowed temporary usage of their city-
owned land with no fee. One of these individuals stated that this was because the contractor
was working on a highway project that the city was a part of.
• Examples of fees charged
o Land leased for farmland- taxed for farming use- charged slightly more than taxes costed
o City park parking lot- leased to business for employee parking for 15 years- unexpectedly
hit with commercial tax rate “because this was a long-term lease for a for-profit entity”
o City buildings- leased to state of MN- maintained non-profit tax status- charged area
average combined with state average rate paid for leases
o City buildings- leasing to a non-profit (keeping non-profit tax status), and charging lower
average commercial rates due to low demand.
o City/Economic Development Authority property- used license agreements- charged a
minimal fee of $1 or less but used language to protect city (insurance and indemnity) and
the property (no storing of contaminants on site, site restoration)
Staff identified the following best practices.
• If a lease is desired, potential tax implications from the parcel use becoming commercial in
nature, versus non-taxable government use would need to be further explored.
• As is done currently, continue to include insurance and indemnification language to protect the
City.
• As is done currently, continue to protect the site with language about storing to original condition
and collecting an escrow.
• Consider adding language disallowing contaminants to be stored on site.
• As is done currently, continue to recoup staff and legal costs to prepare the temporary use
agreement.
COUNCIL DIRECTION
Council should review the research findings and discuss whether a lease is appropriate going forward.
If a lease is desired, potential tax implications from the parcel use becoming commercial in nature,
versus non-taxable government use would need to be further explored.
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To Mayor and City Council
From Lori Pulkabek, Communications Manager
Date August 23, 2022
Subject Time with the Communications Manager
Discussion will be held with the Communications Manager to discuss items of interest and current
happenings in City wide communications.
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jim Romanik, Public Works Manager
Date: August 23, 2022
Subject: Replacement of Playground Equipment at Eberle Park
BACKGROUND
The City Council suggested that some playground equipment in select parks be replaced due to age; as
much of the identified equipment was originally installed in 1995. As part of the 2023-2027 Capital
Improvement Program (CIP), the following playground equipment has been identified for replacement;
Tilsen Park playground equipment in 2023, Tanners Lake Park (2024), Oakdale Park (2025), Northdale
Park (2026), and Guthrie Park (2027).
Eberle Park, located at 3888 Hadley Avenue North, has also been identified for the replacement of
playground equipment. However, it has not been noted or funding planned in the CIP. City
Administrator, Christina Volkers is suggesting the use of funds from the Charitable Gambling Fund for
this Eberle Park playground equipment replacement project in 2022.
Cost to replace playground equipment at Eberle Park, including installation, is estimated at $120,000.
The Parks Fund currently does not have enough monies available for this project, it would be requested
that cost come from the Charitable Gambling Fund. If Council recommends to move forward with this
project, it could be presented to the Parks Commission at the September meeting for their feedback,
and brought back to Council at an October meeting.
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
Staff is seeking general input from Council regarding the replacement of playground equipment, and use
of the Charitable Gambling Fund for new playground equipment at Eberle Park.
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Andrew Gitzlaff, Community Development Director
Date: August 23, 2022
Subject: Willowbrooke Open Space Trails Network
BACKGROUND
On June 30, 2021 the City of Oakdale executed a Master Planned Unit Development Agreement with
White Star Farms, LLC and U.S. Home Corporation (Lennar) for the public improvements within
Willowbrooke. The City is obligated to construct, at its sole expense, and maintain the entire public trail
and sidewalk system within the open space. All other trails and sidewalk will be constructed by the
developer(s) at their sole expense and maintained by their Home Owners Association.
The previous approved plans for Willowbrooke included an extensive conceptual trail network through
the open space. Staff, in consultation with the developer Lennar is proposing to reduce the total
number of trail segments to a more manageable amount. This would also eliminate some of the
redundancies within the trail and sidewalk network that is being built by the developer City and County
along adjacent roadways without comprising the overall intent to provide access to the parks and open
space in Willowbrooke.
COUNCIL DIRECTION
Council should provide intent through feedback on the proposed modifications to the open space trail
system that the City will be obligated to construct and maintain.
Get email alerts for Oakdale
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.