City Council Workshop
Regular MeetingOakdale, MN · December 13, 2022
Minutes
WORKSHOP MINUTES
OAKDALE CITY COUNCIL
December 13, 2022
The City Council held a workshop on Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584
Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 5:00 PM.
Present: Mayor Paul Reinke
Council Members: Jake Ingebrigtson
Susan Olson
Colleen Swedberg
Kevin Zabel
City Staff Members: Christina Volkers, City Administrator
Sara Ludwig, City Clerk
Brian Bachmeier, Interim City Engineer
Andrew Gitzlaff, Community Development Director
Nick Newton, Police Chief
Lori Pulkrabek, Communications Manager
Shannon Reidlinger, Senior Community Development Specialist
Jim Romanik, Public Works Manager
Kevin Wold, Fire Chief
Jason Zimmerman, Finance Director
Other: Andy Morcomb, Council Member-Elect
Shaun Murphy-Lopez, Senior Planner, Toole Design (virtual)
Marge Sagstetter, Oakdale Resident
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.
BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN STAFF UPDATE
Senior Community Development Specialist Shannon Reidlinger began the discussion by introducing
Shaun Murphy-Lopez, Senior Planner at Toole Design, who is joining virtually. She stated that the
purpose of the discussion is to summarize community engagement work that has been completed
thus far and provide next steps on the updated Bike and Pedestrian Plan (the “Plan”). City staff is
requesting feedback from Council on the Plan’s draft goals and strategies. Ms. Reidlinger reminded
Council that these are high-level draft goals that do not have action steps yet.
Mr. Murphy-Lopez provided an overview of the plan development process. He recapped the number
of participants thus far that have participated in various community engagement strategies
including, but not limited to, an open house, pop-up workshops, an online questionnaire, and focus
groups.
He noted the first key takeaway is that more respondents are walking than bicycling, and they mostly
walk and bicycle for exercise, health, and enjoyment.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PAGE TWO
Next, he noted the second key takeaway is that a lack of facilities (paths or sidewalks or extent of
the network) is the largest deterrent preventing respondents from walking or bicycling more.
Lastly, he noted the third key takeaway is that residents prefer separation from traffic, both for
walking and bicycling.
The next part of the discussion focused on the draft goals and strategies to ensure the Community
Engagement Plan is on the right track.
In response to Council Member Ingebrigtson’s question about plans to remove street parking to add
bike lanes, Mr. Murphy-Lopez said the data shows that residents prefer separation. Council Member
Ingebrigtson asked if these responses about preferences are different based on community. Mr.
Murphy-Lopez responded that in suburban areas there is a preference for a pathway network versus
on-street bike lanes like those seen in Minneapolis or St. Paul.
Mayor Reinke asked for clarification on Mr. Murphy-Lopez’s response about removing street
parking. Council Member Zabel opined that the separation referred to in the survey is a curb or
shared-use path versus a bike lane in the street.
Mayor Reinke concurred with Council Member Ingebrigtson’s reluctance to remove street parking
in favor of the addition of a bike lane. Council Member Ingebrigtson added he believes that there is
a reasonable expectation with the purchase of a property is the parking situation will remain the
same.
Mr. Murphy-Lopez explained that there are different degrees of separation which can be a painted
line on a road or a six-inch curb with lawn in-between the road and the path. The Oakdale
respondents are showing favor to the latter form of separation.
Council Member Zabel asked if there were questions for various types of walking paths such as the
one at the Oakdale Nature Preserve or the Hadley Avenue Boulevard. Mr. Murphy-Lopez referenced
the visual preference survey as the closest type of question regarding types of walking paths. He
added that respondents shared discomfort about shared-use paths especially from walkers who
had concerns about sharing paths with bicyclists.
Council Member Olson commented on the number of respondents and asked if there are enough
responses to move forward with the Plan. Mr. Murphy-Lopez pulled up comparative data with other
cities’ response rates. The City of Oakdale is in the middle of the pack when it comes to number of
respondents, percentage-wise. Specifically, the City is at a one percent response rate. After seeing
the comparative data, Council Member Olson was comfortable with the number of respondents.
Council Member Ingebrigtson opined the City is on the lower end of the needed sample size
percentage.
Council Member Swedberg liked the goal about educating the community about walking and
bicycling, and the subsequent strategy to increase community awareness of safety issues. She
would like to have bikers announce themselves as they ride up behind walkers on a shared-use
path.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PAGE THREE
Ms. Reidlinger asked the Council if there are any other comments about the draft goals and
strategies. She noted that the next steps will be to add action steps underneath each of the goals
and strategies.
Mr. Murphy-Lopez explained that next steps are to run the action steps by the department heads to
see what is realistic for the City of Oakdale in terms of cost and staff resources. Once feedback is
received, then they will come back to Council to start fleshing out the action steps. He noted that
when there are fewer action steps they become more realistic for staff to carry out.
Mayor Reinke asked if a snow removal preference for senior housing facilities could be included in
the improve winter maintenance of walking and bicycling facilities strategy. Mr. Murphy-Lopez was
impressed with how the Public Works department cleared the sidewalks and paths with the City of
Oakdale.
He wrapped up the discussion explaining next steps as reviewing and synthesizing the WikiMap and
paper map comments, as well as identifying and prioritizing potential projects that fit within the
goals and strategies.
Ms. Reidlinger asked Council to share any other comments or feedback with her and she will pass
them along to Mr. Murphy-Lopez.
ACTING MAYOR DESIGNATION AND BOARD AND COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS
Mayor Reinke noted that the Gold Line Corridor Management Commission Policy Advisory and
Technical Advisory representative positions are no longer needed.
Council Member-Elect Morcomb was invited to participate as the 2023 Board/Commission Liaison
positions were discussed.
Council Member Zabel selected the Environmental Management Commission Liaison position.
Council Member Ingebrigtson selected the Planning Commission Liaison position.
Council Member Olson selected the Economic Development Commission Liaison position.
Council Member-Elect Morcomb selected the Parks and Recreation Commission Liaison position.
Council Member Zabel indicated one of the current council members will attend the Tree Board
meeting in January. Once the new council member is appointed then a discussion can take place
to determine the final liaison position.
Council Member Ingebrigtson was discussed as the Acting Mayor for 2023.
Council Member Zabel asked Communications Manager Lori Pulkrabek if she will continue to serve
as the Cable Commission Representative. She agreed. Council Member Zabel indicated he will
continue to serve as the Alternate.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PAGE FOUR
City Administrator Chris Volkers was asked to continue as the Metro-Inet Board Representative. She
agreed.
Council Member Olson was designated as the Acorn Award Committee Representative.
Council Member Zabel asked about the status of the 3M Drinking Water Settlement Committee.
Ms. Volkers explained that it is a technical committee. She indicated if she is unable to attend then
a member of staff goes in her place. Council Member Zabel said a Council Alternate is not needed
as someone from City staff is always in attendance.
Ms. Volkers noted that there is good representation at the OACC meetings between members of
Council and the City staff who are able to attend.
Mayor Reinke offered to be a resource for any Gold Line discussions or questions based on his
many years serving in that capacity.
2023 PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Ms. Volkers explained that her suggestions for the 2023 legislative agenda are based on
conversations she has had with other administrators in the surrounding metro cities area and
discussions from the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors’ meetings. She indicated all of
the items are important but some take more effort than others. She asked Council which items
need a lobbyist as there is money in the budget for this expense. Ms. Volkers stated the 40th Street
pedestrian bridge is a high priority especially in terms of securing a lobbyist. She continued that the
City of Oakdale should seek state bonding money for this significant project. Her suggestion is to
seek a quote from Fredrikson & Byron.
Mayor Reinke clarified that the 40th Street pedestrian bridge project is strictly for the building of a
pedestrian crossing bridge versus an entirely new bridge. This was confirmed. Council Member
Zabel suggested focusing on the bridge construction as a pedestrian safety issue.
Council Member Zabel suggested asking for dedicated funds for a noise wall along I-694. He was
unsure if it would fall under MnDot or bonding. Ms. Volkers said she would add that to the agenda.
She asked if the language should say, ‘…support funding for…’ Council Member Zabel confirmed.
The next item discussed was the White Bear Lake Water Appropriation Permit Challenge. Ms.
Volkers suggested neighboring cities need to work together to secure a lobbyist for this item. She
added the City’s share would be one third or one fourth of approximately $20,000-$25,000. Council
Member Ingebrigtson noted that the alternative to Ms. Volkers’ suggestion of partnering with other
cities is a lot more expensive.
Ms. Volkers continued the discussion by suggesting securing a lobbyist for the tax-related items
such as the Local Option Sales Tax (L.O.S.T.) Adjustment, the continuation of Local Government Aid,
the recalculation of Municipal State Aid Funding, and the Ambulance Service Costs and Liability.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PAGE FIVE
In response to Council Member Zabel’s question about the use of one lobbyist for all items
discussed, Ms. Volkers said the City would seek out individual firms who specialize in the relevant
areas such as bonding, water, and taxes.
In response to Council Member Olson’s question about Medicare’s ambulance payment rates, Fire
Chief Kevin Wold stated Medicare was in the process of auditing the cost of services when the
pandemic started. He indicated that Finance Director Jason Zimmerman, Accounting Manager Kyle
Stasica, and Chief Wold are going to provide financial data to Medicare to show that the City’s costs
for various services are greater than Medicare’s payments received.
Council Member Zabel asked if there is anything additional to add to the agenda in the areas of
infrastructure or environmental improvements. Ms. Volkers said it is hard to include everything
without a dedicated staff member looking into these items and being full time dedicated to
legislative issues.
Ms. Volkers indicated opioid-related funds have been given to Washington County for disbursement
to cities with a population less than 30,000. She has requested of Washington County that the Fire
Department and Police Department receive funds to have Narcan on-hand for emergency
situations.
In response to Council Member Olson’s question about having Narcan available in the local schools,
Ms. Volkers suggested the schools go to Washington County themselves to seek funding for this
need. Council Member Ingebrigtson noted that this is outside of the Council’s scope. Ms. Volkers
indicated she would be comfortable making this suggestion to the schools.
Ms. Volkers said she would put the 2023 proposed legislative agenda into an RCA for the next
council meeting.
Mayor Reinke asked that any item involving a lobbyist be put at the top of the list.
HYDRAM AVE RAIN GARDEN REQUEST
Ms. Volkers began by stating a rain garden has been requested as part of the Hydram Avenue street
improvement project. There is no budget at this time for the City to contribute to a rain garden, but
there is a possibility to seek out funding if desired. She noted a concern about the rain garden’s
maintenance. Although the homeowner offered to provide ten years of maintenance, the
maintenance of a public property initiative goes against the same current City policy that was
brought up during the raised garden bed discussion at the last workshop.
Council Member Zabel stated he stands by the current policy and is not supportive of the project at
this time. Council Member Ingebrigtson agreed.
Council Member Olson asked for more specific information regarding the 10-year maintenance
obligation that is part of the Washington Conservation District Grant. Interim City Engineer Brian
Bachmeier indicated there are several watershed district grant options with some having a 5-year
maintenance obligation and others a 10-year maintenance obligation.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PAGE SIX
Oakdale resident Marge Sagstetter clarified that this specific grant has a 5-year maintenance
obligation and that is what she committed to, not 10 years. She added that she currently has a rain
garden on her property through a previous Washington County Watershed grant. She asked for
clarity regarding the current City policy that has been discussed. Ms. Sagstetter mentioned she is a
Tree Steward and has been on the Oakdale Tree Board since moving to the City in 2014 so she has
a strong commitment for this type of work.
She stated the rain garden makes sense with the curb cuts included in this street improvement
project.
Council Member Ingebrigtson provided background and context for the current City policy that does
not allow for resident donations on and maintenance of City property. He expressed concern about
unforeseen circumstances that would prevent Ms. Sagstetter from fulfilling the maintenance duties.
Ms. Sagstetter referenced the current City of Maplewood rain gardens, but was unsure who was
responsible for maintaining them. She added that there is minimal maintenance involved for these
proposed rain gardens after three years.
Mayor Reinke stated there is no question about the value that would be added to the City if a rain
garden were put in on this street, however the concern lies with the maintenance of the City
property. He stated he would be supportive of the rain garden if it were not put on City property. Ms.
Sagstetter said the City looked at putting it on her property, but there is not currently trenching in
place.
Mayor Reinke concluded that the general consensus is a lack of support for this rain garden on City
property at this particular location.
RECESS FOR TRUTH AND TAXATION AND REGULAR MEETING 5:50 PM
WORKSHOP RECONVENED 7:30 PM after the Regular Meeting
COUNCIL TOPICS
Mayor Reinke began by discussing the date and time for the upcoming special Council meeting that
must take place before year-end to approve the last item to implement L.O.S.T. Discussion ensued
about possible dates and times to ensure accommodation for all council members. It was
determined that the special Council meeting would take place on Tuesday, December 20, 2022, at
5:30 PM.
ADJOURNMENT
The workshop was adjourned at 7:35 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Sara Ludwig, City Clerk
Agenda
AGENDA
City Council Workshop
Workshop
December 13, 2022
HADLEY CONFERENCE ROOM
5:00 PM
5:00 PM Bike and Pedestrian Plan Staff Update
5:20 PM Acting Mayor Designation and Board and Commission Assignments
5:30 PM 2023 Proposed Legislative Agenda
5:45 PM Hydram Ave Rain Garden Request
5:55 PM Adjourn for Truth in Taxation and Regular Council Meeting
Continue after Regular Council Meeting
Council Topics
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Shannon Reidlinger, Sr. Community Development Specialist
Date: December 13, 2022
Subject: Bike and Pedestrian Plan Project Update
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize community engagement work completed and next
steps on the updated Bike and Pedestrian Plan (the “Plan”), as well as solicit feedback from the City
Council on the Plan’s draft goals and strategies. Toole Design Group, the consultant for the project, will
present the draft Community Engagement Report and engage City Council in discussion of the Plan’s draft
goals and strategies.
BACKGROUND
Oakdale’s bike and pedestrian system provides an affordable transportation option with recreation and
health benefits. To better connect people and where they live to the region’s growing multimodal
transportation network, Oakdale’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan calls for updating the 1995 Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan (Chapter Three, Goal Four, Policy One). The City contracted with Toole Design in 2019 to
undertake a Bike and Pedestrian Plan update project; due to the pandemic, project work was halted in
2020 with the project only partially complete. Project work relaunched in the spring of 2022. To date, the
project team has completed the following:
• Level of traffic stress analysis
• Bus stop inventory
• Gold Line transit station travel shed maps
• Review of existing bicycle, pedestrian, and transit policies and programs
• Map of destinations
• Map of existing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
• Community Engagement Plan activities described below (presented to City Council at the July 26,
2022 workshop)
SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMPLETED TO DATE
The purpose of community engagement is to enable Oakdale residents and business owners to identify
key themes that will guide recommendations in the updated Bike and Pedestrian Plan. The goals of
community engagement are to provide an open and transparent process, create spaces for listening,
generate inclusive public engagement opportunities, and encourage walking and biking in Oakdale. To
date, community feedback has been collected by:
• Conducting a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis with Oakdale’s
advisory bodies, including:
o The Environmental Management Commission (August 15, 2022)
o The Planning Commission (September 1, 2022)
o The Economic Development Commission (September 7, 2022)
o Parks and Recreation Commission (September 20, 2022)
• Hosting one open house on October 19, 2022 with 16 community participants
• Hosting one pop-up workshop at the Farmers Market on September 28, 2022 with 50 community
participants
• Hosting one pop-up workshop at the Oakdale branch of the library on October 24, 2022 with 9
community participants
• Conducting an online questionnaire and WikiMap (with results from the 2019
questionnaire/WikiMap and 2022 questionnaire/WikiMap jointly analyzed)
The next action step in the Community Engagement Plan is conducting three focus groups. Focus group
meetings are formal meetings with specific interest groups. Attendees are community members who likely
have opinions and valuable information about bicycling and walking, but may not have participated in the
open house or pop-up workshops, or completed the online questionnaire and WikiMap. These meetings
create additional opportunities to gather information and advertise the Plan.
The project team is conducting a focus group with students from Tartan High School on December 9,
2022. Additionally, staff is working to coordinate one focus group with members of the Oakdale Wellness
50+ group and Oakdale Community Walk participants, and one focus group with BIPOC (black,
Indigenous, and people of color) community members.
DRAFT GOALS AND STRATEGIES
By uncovering the issues and ideas from community members with both active and passive interest in
bicycling and walking through soliciting public feedback, recommendations included in the Plan will better
reflect the community’s values and priorities. The results of community engagement activities inform the
draft goals and strategies used to guide delivery of the Plan.
Based on community feedback, the following draft goals and strategies are recommended for the Oakdale
Bike and Pedestrian Plan; prioritization is not implied. The draft outline will be refined based on input
from City staff, the Environmental Management Commission, and the City Council. After the draft outline
is agreed upon, content (including detailed action steps) will be developed under each goal and strategy.
• Goal A: Expand the extent of the pedestrian and bicycle network
o Strategy 1: Build and improve linear facilities
o Strategy 2: Build and improve crossings
o Strategy 3: Prioritize projects that connect important travel destinations
• Goal B: Maintain the Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Network
o Strategy 4: Improve maintenance of crosswalk markings
o Strategy 5: Improve winter maintenance of walking and bicycling facilities
o Strategy 6: Improve routine maintenance of path and sidewalk pavement
• Goal C: Encourage active travel and inform the community about walking and bicycling options
o Strategy 7: Expand destinations within easy walking and bicycling distance of residential
areas
o Strategy 8: Promote the existing walking and bicycling network
o Strategy 9: Increase community awareness of safety issues
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
Staff requests City Council review and offer feedback on the above draft goals and strategies and
attached draft Community Engagement Report.
Attachment
Draft Community Engagement Report
2
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
DRAFT Community Engagement Report
December 7, 2022
Key Findings, Engagement Strategies, and Detailed Results
NOT INCLUDED: Focus Groups and Mapping Components
The trails in Oakdale Nature Preserve are a popular place for walking. Image Credit: City of Oakdale
A-1
Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3
Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Strategies for Engaging Oakdale’s Residents ............................................................................................................... 4
Strategy A: Open House, Pop-up Workshops and Online Questionnaires ................................................... 4
Mapping (this section will be updated after focus groups are completed and maps are analyzed)................. 7
Walking Frequency................................................................................................................................................... 9
Walking Deterrants ............................................................................................................................................... 11
Rating Current Conditions................................................................................................................................... 12
Design Preferences for Walking Along Streets ............................................................................................... 13
Bicycling Frequency ................................................................................................................................................ 15
Bicycling Deterrants............................................................................................................................................... 17
Rating Current Conditions................................................................................................................................... 18
Design Preferences for Bicycling Along Streets .............................................................................................. 19
Top Routes/Intersections For Improvement ................................................................................................... 21
Stories About Bicycling or Walking ................................................................................................................... 22
Additional Comments ........................................................................................................................................... 23
Visioning .................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Participant Demographics..................................................................................................................................... 25
Strategy B: City Commissions and City Council ................................................................................................. 28
Strategy C: Focus Groups (this section will be updated after focus groups are analyzed). .............................. 29
A-2
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this community engagement report is to summarize the approach to, and results of,
engaging community members around the Oakdale Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (Plan). The voices of
residents identified key findings for the project team to further analyze and guide recommendations in
the Plan.
Community Engagement Report
Plan Implementation
Community Input Key Findings
Recommendations Strategies
Illustration of Plan development process: community input informs key findings which lead to recommendations and implementation
strategies.
In 2020 and 2022, there were approximately 272 participant interactions that resulted in recorded input
(this amount will go up after Focus Group and Mapping components are included).
A-3
KEY FINDINGS
(this section will be completed after summaries of the Focus Group and Mapping components have been
included)
STRATEGIES FOR ENGAGING OAKDALE’S RESIDENTS
The Oakdale Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan is intended to reflect the vision and goals of the community,
not just those who explicitly identify as a “bicyclist” or “pedestrian.” By also uncovering the issues and
ideas from community members with passive interest in bicycling and walking, the Plan
recommendations will better reflect the community’s values and priorities. For example, while parents
of children may not identify as a bicyclist, they may have a personal interest in a bicycling trail that leads
to local schools for the safety and well-being of
children.
Oftentimes communities have widespread
interest in bicycling and walking, but limited
time to devote to meetings and volunteer
opportunities, making it difficult to gauge public
opinion through conventional public meetings.
Making engagement easy, tailored, and inviting
helps reach people who may care, but are
generally less vocal on a single issue like
bicycling and walking. For these reasons, it was
important for the project team to use a range
of strategies to solicit feedback from
community members. Approximately 16 community members were engaged at an open house, held at
Oakdale Discovery Center on October 19, 2022.
This section summarizes the strategies
used to engage a range of community voices, why the strategies were selected, and the input that was
received.
Strategy A: Open House, Pop-up Workshops and Online Questionnaires
On October 19th the project team solicited input at an open house with 16 participants. The open
house was advertised on Oakdale’s Facebook page. Community members were also linked to the
project website and online questionnaire. An online map was also linked on the project website. Two
pop-up workshops were also held: one at the Farmers’ Market on September 28th with 50 participants
reached and another at the Oakdale Library on October 24th with 9 participants reached.
A-4
A Facebook event advertising the open house.
The online questionnaire and online map were promoted to Oakdale community members between
October 1st and 31st. Excerpts from the questionnaire and map are provided on the following pages. The
questionnaire and map mimicked the format that was used at the open house and pop-up workshop
events. Approximately 68 people took the online questionnaire and __ people completed the online
map. The results of the open house and online questionnaire/map are combined in the following section
to provide a composite snapshot.
During an earlier phase of the project in 2020, which was put on hold due to COVID, a similar online
questionnaire and map were distributed to the community. At that time, 129 people completed the
online questionnaire and __ people completed the online map. Results from 2020 were also combined
in the following section.
Approximately 50 community members were engaged at a pop-up workshop, held at the Oakdale Farmers’ Market on September 28,
2022.
A-5
A screen capture of the online questionnaire showing questions about bicycling and walking in Oakdale.
A-6
A screen capture of the online map that asked for input on routes, destinations, and problems.
MAPPING (THIS SECTION WILL BE UPDATED AFTER FOCUS GROUPS ARE COMPLETED
AND MAPS ARE ANALYZED).
A-7
Participants completed paper maps at the Oakdale Farmers’ Market on September 28, 2022.
A-8
WALKING FREQUENCY
Most respondents (46 percent) reported walking for exercise/health/enjoyment a few times a week,
39 percent reported walking for those purposes at least once a day, 14 percent reported walking a few
times a month or less, and one percent reported never walking for those reasons.
Figure A-1. Frequency with which participants in the Oakdale public engagement activities reported walking for exercise/health/enjoyment
(answered by 195 participants).
A-9
Most respondents (41 percent) reported walking to destinations such as shops, work, recreation,
and church a few times a month or less, 39 percent reported never walking for those purposes, 15
percent reported walking a few times week, and five percent reported walking for those reasons at least
once a day.
Figure A-2. Frequency with which participants in the Oakdale public engagement activities reported walking to destinations such as shops,
work, recreation, and church (answered by 196 participants).
A-10
WALKING DETERRANTS
Residents were asked the following open-ended question about what deters them from walking:
What prevents you from walking more than you do now?
167 people responded and identified a total of 192 unique deterrents (each respondent was allowed to
mention up to 2 deterrents). Figure 9 shows the most common walking deterrents. The three most
common were:
1. Lack of paths/sidewalks (37/192, or 19%)
2. Lack of destinations (24/130, or 13%)
3. Lack of time (24/130, or 13%)
Figure A-3. Bar chart showing walking deterrents.
A-11
RATING CURRENT CONDITIONS
Participants in the online questionnaire and community workshops were asked to rank a variety of
current walking conditions in Oakdale on a five-point scale from ‘Excellent’ to ‘Bad.’ Figure A-4 displays
the results of participants who voted for each condition as either ‘Excellent’ or ‘Good’. Approximately
190 people answered this question. The conditions with the most positive ratings were:
1. Terrain for walking (66%)
2. Frequency of curb ramps at intersections (64%)
3. Smoothness of sidewalks/shared use paths (58%)
The conditions with the least positive ratings were:
9. Motorists’ attitudes towards pedestrians (32%)
10. Number of destinations within easy walking distance (29%)
11. Ease of crossing busy streets (29%)
Figure A-4. Summary graph of percentage of respondents who rated each walking condition as 'Excellent' or 'Good'.
A-12
DESIGN PREFERENCES FOR WALKING ALONG STREETS
Community members were asked to rate their comfort level with walking along streets in various types
of pedestrian environments. Participants viewed a photo of each pedestrian environment, and then rated
each on a five-point scale from ‘Very Comfortable’ to ‘Very Uncomfortable’. Figure A-5 shows the
percentage of respondents who ranked each category as either ‘Very Comfortable’ or ‘Comfortable’.
Approximately 195 people answered this question. The three pedestrian environments that received the
most responses for ‘Very Comfortable’ or ‘Comfortable’ were wide sidewalks (94%), residential
sidewalks (89%), and shared use paths (55%). The complete results of the pedestrian environment
rankings and images of each pedestrian facility are shown below.
Figure A-5. Summary graph of percentage of respondents who rated each pedestrian environment as 'Very Comfortable' or 'Comfortable'.
The images below were included in the questionnaire.
Wide sidewalk Residential sidewalk Residential sidewalk Narrow sidewalk
A-13
Paved shoulder Residential road Commercial road
without sidewalk without sidewalk
A-14
BICYCLING FREQUENCY
Seventy percent of respondents reported bicycling each month. The largest share of respondents (36
percent) reported bicycling for exercise/health/enjoyment a few times a month or less, 30 percent
reported never walking for those purposes, 28 percent reported bicycling a few times a week, and six
percent reported bicycling for those reasons at least once a day.
Figure A-6. Frequency with which participants in the Oakdale public engagement activities reported bicycling for exercise/health/enjoyment
(answered by 191 participants).
A-15
51 percent of respondents reporting bicycling to a destination at least once a month, while 49 percent
of respondents reported never bicycling to destinations such as shops, work, recreation, and
church, Of those who bicycled at least once a month, 40 percent reported bicycling for those purposes
a few times a month or less, eight percent reported bicycling a few times week, and three percent
reported bicycling for those reasons at least once a day.
Figure A-7. Frequency with which participants in the Oakdale public engagement activities reported bicycling to destinations such as shops,
work, recreation, and church (answered by 190 participants).
A-16
BICYCLING DETERRANTS
Residents were asked the following open-ended question about what deters them from bicycling:
What prevents you from bicycling more than you do now?
134 people responded and identified a total of 149 unique deterrents (each respondent was allowed to
mention up to 2 deterrents). Figure A-8 shows the most common bicycling deterrents. The three most
common were:
1. Lack of facilities (e.g., paths, lanes) (36/149, or 24%)
2. Safety from motorists (19/149, or 13%)
3. Weather (18/149, or 12%)
Figure A-8. Bar chart showing bicycling deterrents.
A-17
RATING CURRENT CONDITIONS
Participants in the online questionnaire and community workshops were asked to rank a variety of
current bicycling conditions in Oakdale on a five-point scale from ‘Excellent’ to ‘Bad.’ Figure A-9 displays
the results of participants who voted for each condition as either ‘Excellent’ or ‘Good’. Approximately
171 people answered this question. The conditions with the most positive ratings were:
1. Frequency of curb ramps at intersections (56%)
2. Scenery/interesting locations to see while biking (56%)
3. Location/placement of curb ramps at intersections (54%)
The conditions with the least positive ratings were:
9. Motorists’ attitudes towards bicyclists (32%)
10. Ease of crossing busy streets (30%)
11. Extent of sidewalk/shared use path network (28%)
Figure A-9. Summary graph of percentage of respondents who rated each bicycling condition as 'Excellent' or 'Good'.
A-18
DESIGN PREFERENCES FOR BICYCLING ALONG STREETS
Community members were asked to rate their comfort level with bicycling along streets in various types
of bicycling environments. Participants viewed a photo of each bicycling environment, and then rated
each on a five-point scale from ‘Very Comfortable’ to ‘Very Uncomfortable’. Figure A-10 shows the
percentage of respondents who ranked each category as either ‘Very Comfortable’ or ‘Comfortable’.
Approximately 195 people answered this question. The three bicycling environments that received the
most responses for ‘Very Comfortable’ or ‘Comfortable’ were separated bicycle lanes at street level
(71%), buffered bicycle lanes (56%), and shared use paths (49%). The complete results of the bicycling
environment rankings and images of each bicycle facility are shown below.
Figure A-10. Summary graph of percentage of respondents who rated each bicycling environment as 'Very Comfortable' or 'Comfortable'.
The images below were included in the questionnaire.
Separated bicycle lane Buffered bicycle lane Shared use path Shared lane marking
at street level on a quiet street
A-19
Standard bicycle Shared lane marking on a Highway shoulder
lane busy street
A-20
TOP ROUTES/INTERSECTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Respondents were asked the following question and then encouraged to answer with an open-ended
written text response:
Imagine you had a magic wand and could instantly change one route and one intersection in our community to
improve them for bicycling and walking. Which ones would you select?
54 respondents submitted 58 ideas shown in Figure A-11 (ideas mentioned by only one respondent
were not included in the chart). Highway 120/Century Avenue was the top priority in 12 out of 58 ideas
(or 21%), while Hadley Avenue and Ideal Avenue were the top priorities in 6 out of 58 ideas (or 10%
each).
Figure A-11. Column chart showing the top route or intersection for instant change in Oakdale.
A-21
STORIES ABOUT BICYCLING OR WALKING
Community members were asked the following question and then encouraged to answer with an open-
ended written text response:
Tell us why you want Oakdale to be bike- or walk-friendly. Share about the people in your life who would benefit
from more bicycling and walking routes.
49 people submitted stories with 69 themes, which are summarized in Figure A-12. Only themes
mentioned by two or more respondents were included. The most popular themes were:
1. Safety (12/69, or 17%)
2. Kids (10/69, or 14%)
3. Health (9/69, or 13%)
Figure A-12. Column chart showing the most popular themes in residents’ stories about why bicycling or walking is personally important.
A-22
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
98 residents submitted additional comments to be considered for the Plan. The question prompt was the following:
Is there anything else you would like to tell us regarding your experience walking or biking in Oakdale?
Each comment was assigned general topics corresponding to their content. 107 topics were submitted. Only topics
mentioned by two or more respondents were included in Figure A-12. The following five topics were the most
mentioned in the additional comments:
1. Desire more bike/pedestrian facilities (19/107, or 18%)
2. Appreciate existing facilities (12/107, or 11%)
3. Safety from bicyclists (8/107, or 7%)
4. Supportive of bicycling/walking investments (7/107, or 7%)
5. Desire more bicycle regulation (6/107, or 6%)
Figure A-12. Column chart of additional comments by topic.
A-23
VISIONING
Residents were asked to provide three words to describe what they hope biking and walking will look and feel like
in Oakdale in the future. 51 people responded with 130 words. Figure A-13 shows the most common visionary
words chosen by the individuals. Only words mentioned by two or more respondents were included in the chart.
The community most said they wanted Oakdale to be:
1. Safe (28/130, or 22%)
2. Accessible (7/130, or 5%)
3. Connected (6/130, or 5%)
Figure A-13. Column chart of visioning words.
A-24
PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHICS
The following section describes demographic characteristics of both in-person and online public engagement
participants. 62% of participants were female and 38% were male, as shown in Figure A-14. In the 2010 census, 52%
of Oakdale residents were female and 48% were male. 93% of participants were white, as shown in Figure A-15. In
the 2010 census, 81% of Oakdale residents were White, 8% Asian, 6% Black, and 4% Hispanic.
Figure A-14. Gender of participants in the Oakdale Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan public engagement activities.
A-25
Figure A-15. Race of participants in the Oakdale Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.
The most participants (34%) were between the ages of 55 and 64 followed by the ages of 35 and 44, as shown in
Figure A-16. In the 2010 Census, 24% of residents were under the age of 18, 9% between 18 and 24, 26% were
A-26
from 25 to 44, 29% from 45 to 64, and 11% 65 years of age or older. 15% of respondents identified as having a
disability, as shown in Figure A-17.
Figure A-16. Age of participants in the Oakdale Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan public engagement activities.
Figure A-17. Disability status of participants.
A-27
Strategy B: City Commissions and City Council
In the summer of 2022, several City commissions met to learn about and give input on the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Plan. The commissions included:
• Environmental Management Commission
• Economic Development Commission
• Parks Commission
• Planning Commission
Toole Design and City of Oakdale Community Development staff facilitated the meetings with a focus on four key
pieces of information: strengths (what are you proud of?), weaknesses (what things drive you nuts?), opportunities
(are there organizations doing work, or upcoming projects we should know about?), and threats (what are the external
forces that will make it difficult to make Oakdale more friendly for bicycling and walking?).
Commission members individually brainstormed ideas under each category, and then worked as a group to
categorize them. Each person then voted on the top area in each category. Results included:
Category Sub-categories (votes)
Strengths Existing trails/paths (13), Trail maintenance (4), Wide streets/shoulders (2)
Weaknesses Routes & lanes (6), Lack of sidewalks (3), Paths (3), Safety/crosswalks (2), Bike/road sharing (2),
No rest stops (2), Lack of path amenities (2)
Opportunities Development (7), Collaborations (5), Marketing (5), Street furniture (3), Lighting (3),
Crosswalks (2)
Threats Traffic (7), E-bike safety (4), Poorly planned multi-use scenarios (4), Political will (3)
City Council input will be included in this section.
A-28
Strategy C: Focus Groups (this section will be updated after focus groups are analyzed).
Focus groups will be chosen based on underrepresented demographics described earlier.
A-29
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Christina Volkers, City Administrator
Date: December 13, 2022
Subject: Acting Mayor Designation and Board and Commission Assignments
BACKGROUND
Bi-annually, the City Council selects among its members, those to serve as liaisons for the City’s five
advisory bodies. Liaisons serve as a source of communication between the City Council and the
advisory body. When called upon at an advisory body meeting, the respective liaisons can provide an
update on relevant actions and/or discussions from the recent City Council meeting. At City Council
meetings, liaisons may choose to provide a brief update on actions and/or discussions from the recent
advisory body meeting. The commission liaisons were designated last year for 2022.
In addition, Section 2-15 of the Code of Ordinances dictates that at the first meeting of the year, the City
Council shall designate one of its members to serve as Acting Mayor. Discussion will be held as to the
appointment of the Acting Mayor for 2023.
Attachment
Oakdale City Council Board/Commission Liaisons and Acting Mayor and Other Assignments
Oakdale City Council
BOARD/COMMISSION LIAISONS and ACTING MAYOR
Board and Commission 2022 2023
Appointment Appointments
Economic Development Olson
Commission Liaison
Meet 1 Wednesday of each month
st
February, March, May, June, August,
September, November, December.
5:15 PM
Environmental Management Zabel
Commission Liaison
Meet 3rd Monday of each month
7 PM
No meeting December
Parks and Recreation Ingebrigtson
Commission Liaison
Meet 3rd Tuesday of each month
7 PM
No meetings January and December
Planning Commission Liaison Swedberg
Meet 1st Thursday of each month
7 PM
Tree Board Liaison Reinke
Meet 3rd Tuesday in January,
March, June, September.
5:30 PM
Acting Mayor Swedberg
1
12/13/22 Council Workshop Meeting Revised XX/XX/22
Oakdale
OTHER ASSIGNMENTS
Other 2022 2023
Appointments Appointments
Cable Commission Representative: Representative:
Lori Pulkrabek
Alternate: Alternate:
Zabel
Gold Line Corridor Policy: Policy:
Management Commission Reinke Zabel
Policy Advisory
Technical Advisory Alternate: Alternate:
Ingebrigtson
Technical: Technical:
Jim Romanik Jim Romanik
Contracted Engineer Contracted/Employee Engineer
Alternate: Alternate:
Andrew Gitzlaff Andrew Gitzlaff
Metro-Inet Board Volkers Volkers
Acorn Award Committee Swedberg
OACC EDA: Reinke, EDA/Council Members: Zabel,
Ingebrigtson, Olson, Ingebrigtson, Morcomb, Olson
Swedberg, Zabel
Volkers Volkers
Wold Wold
CD Representative Gitzlaff
Newton
Pulkrabek
3M Drinking Water Volkers Volkers
Settlement Committee
Alternate: Alternate:
2
12/13/22 Council Workshop Meeting Revised XX/XX/22
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Christina M. Volkers, City Administrator
Date: December 9, 2022
Subject: 2023 Proposed Legislative Agenda
BACKGROUND
Each year it is good practice for each city to set their own specific legislative agenda. The 2023
Minnesota Legislative Session will convene January 3, 2023. The proposed 2023 legislative priorities
are a continuation of existing initiatives essential to Oakdale’s prosperity and long-term goals, and new
opportunities related to the growth and development in Oakdale. The elements of the proposed
legislative agenda are not in priority order and are not considered competing objectives. Some of the
issues are intended to be pursued through specific bills, and others will be pursued as opportunities
arise as the session progresses.
PRIORITY
Local Option Sales Tax Adjustment (L.O.S.T.) The City of Oakdale sought an adjustment to our collection
amounts and time allowed for imposition/collection during the 2022 MN Legislative session through an
“adjustment bill” introduced. The legislature ended the session without dealing with this bill and M.S.
297A.99 doesn’t explicitly address such a situation. The city was authorized to impose a sales tax in
2021, but since then the economy has changed significantly and now the city is not able to extend time
or increase the amount needed due to inflation and cost increases. While we cannot and should not
attempt action that would circumvent voter decisions, cities do need flexibility to exceed the L.O.S.T.
monetary cap that was on the ballot if cities can show that that extra amount and/or time needed to
collect is due to unforeseen or unexpected costs like inflation. The L.O.S.T. statutory language already
includes open-ended language, such as "costs associated with interest or cost to issue the debt." These
are flexible, moving targets already, so building in an inflationary clause may be possible. The City of
Oakdale would attempt to get assistance on this initiative from the League of MN Cities, Metro Cities,
and the Association of MN Counties.
PRIORITY
40th Street Pedestrian Bridge. Construction of a bridge over 40th Street would provide enhanced bike
and pedestrian travel for Oakdale. It is proposed that we seek state bonding money for this significant
project.
PRIORITY
Water Quality and Sustainability - White Bear Lake Water Appropriation Permit Challenge. As has been
discussed at several council workshops with a comprehensive discussion at the January 25, 2022
workshop, it is imperative to Oakdale’s future water management that the City continue our challenge
to the restrictive permits in place.
PRIORITY
Support statewide efforts for Public Safety duty disability management and mitigation. There has been
a serious increase in PTSD claims and duty disability claims in recent years and the trend is not
sustainable from a financial and resource perspective. Oakdale remains supportive of our public safety
staff to include their physical and mental health needs. Many groups have engaged in conversations on
1
improving the process for all and Oakdale should continue to be involved and support efforts in this
regard.
PRIORITY
Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases. It is in local governments best interest to secure sales tax
exemption for purchases of goods and services made by cities.
PRIORITY
Ambulance Service Costs and Liability. Oakdale should support legislation that would require Medicare
to set ambulance payment rates to cover the cost of providing service for transport and non-transport
care of patients, require adequate reimbursement for ambulance providers, require Medicare to
reimburse 911 ambulance transports regardless of medical necessity, and make it easier for providers
to file claims by eliminating Medicare’s processing system.
PRIORITY
Municipal State Aid Funding. Oakdale, like many municipal communities, struggles to fund major
roadway projects, creating costly delays and decreased motorist safety. Request the Municipal State
Aid (MSA) formula and funding levels be reviewed as the current system is not sufficient to keep up with
growing demands for maintenance, coupled with expanding MSA roadway systems in growing
communities.
PRIORITY
Local Government Aid (LGA). For Oakdale, 2022 was the final year for receipt of any LGA and thus over
$250,000 was lost in our 2023 budget. Oakdale should advocate and participate in this initiative led
by the League of MN Cities and advocate strongly for restoration/enhancement of LGA for cities
generally and Oakdale specifically.
PRIORITY
Restrictions on Local Government Budgets. For local management and control, it is important that
cities maintain autonomy in deciding the appropriate level of local taxation and services. Oakdale
should strongly oppose levy limits, reverse referenda, super majority requirements for levy, and
valuation freezes, or other restrictions on local government budgeting and taxing processes.
PRIORITY
Truth-in-Taxation Process. Evaluate the effectiveness of the summary budget information
requirement. The summary budget information requirement enacted under the 2021 omnibus tax bill
should be evaluated for effectiveness and value to taxpayers. The requirement should be converted to a
suggested option and cities should be able to substitute their established local process and format to
explain their proposed budget to taxpayers.
PRIORITY
Minnesota Cities Initiatives. Support legislative activity of the League of Minnesota Cities and Metro
Cities, consistent with local plans and studies. Membership in the Metro Cities and the League of
Minnesota Cities provides Oakdale the ability to benefit from advocacy on broad issues affecting cities
(like Local Government Aid), while also pursuing a strategic legislative agenda specific to Oakdale’s
unique needs and goals. Other opportunities may arise during the session that align with the City’s
Comprehensive and Strategic Plans and priorities.
For more local government legislative priorities, please see:
•Municipal Legislative Commission https://www.mlcmn.org/advocacy
2
•League Of Minnesota Cities https://www.lmc.org/advocacy/legislative-policies/current-legislative-
policies-priorities/legislative-priorities/
•Metro Cities https://www.metrocitiesmn.org/legislative-policies
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council consider the proposed legislative priorities for 2023 as noted, edit and
enhance as appropriate, and consider engaging lobbyist(s) to move these initiatives forward through the
2023 legislative process.
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
Discussion and direction/intent on the City of Oakdale’s 2023 proposed legislative agenda and
priorities.
3
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Brian Bachmeier, Consulting City Engineer
Date: December 13, 2022
Subject: Rain Garden
BACKGROUND
The rehabilitation of Hydram Avenue between 15th Street and 17th Street is included in the 2023 Street
Improvement Program. A resident adjacent to the project, Marge Sagstetter, has requested that the City
consider including a rain garden as part of the project improvements to enhance the surface water
treatment. The Sagstetter’s property is not conducive to locating a rain garden on their property, however
there is a City outlot adjacent to their property that could accommodate a rain garden.
There are no watershed district requirements that the project include additional surface water treatment
as the project does not increase the imperious area or involve major excavation. The watershed does have
a grant program for projects that provide treatment above the minimum requirements.
The Resiliency Chapter of the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan does include a goal to promote water
infiltration techniques such as rain gardens and pervious pavers to replenish groundwater resources.
The estimated cost to grade the rain garden is $8,650, and an additional $1,000 for landscaping. The
potential grant from the Valley Branch Watershed District may be $1,000 to $5,000. It was suggested that
the Surface Water Management Fund could cover the remainder of the cost, but after reviewing the status
of the 2022 budget, it doesn’t appear that will be an option. If so directed by Council, staff could reanalyze
the ending 2022 budget to see if funds become available. Another suggested funding source is CIP funds
allocated for cleaning out ponds to improve water quality, although CIP projects must be larger scale per
policy. The grant agreement does include a 10-year maintenance obligation, which the Sagstetter’s are
willing to fulfill.
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
Staff is looking for direction from the City Council on three issues:
1
• Should a rain garden be constructed on City property?
• Should the City pay for the construction cost of the rain garden?
• Should the City apply for the grant with the abutting property owner providing the maintenance?
Attachments
Rain Garden Request from Marge Sagstetter
Washington Conservation District Rain Garden Grants
Rain Garden Examples
2
From: Marge Sagstetter
To: Brian Bachmeier
Cc: Angie Hong
Subject: Oakdale Road Improvements
Date: Thursday, November 3, 2022 8:31:09 PM
Hi, Brian.
My husband, Steve, and I received your Oct 28. 2022 letter regarding a feasibility
report for road improvements in Oakdale. I understand from Angie Hong (copied) at
the Washington Conservation District that in many other cities, road improvement projects are a
perfect opportunity to add in curb cut raingardens to reduce runoff. I would like to
request that this be considered within the feasibility study.
Our community next door, the City of Maplewood, has made a strong effort to install
rain gardens where there is homeowner/property owner interest. Maplewood Mall is
a prime example of what can be done, and the area just north of 3M Center has many
lovely rain gardens. What a positive environmental message this would send to
Oakdale residents!
We live at 1625 Hydram Ave No and our property backs up to a drainage pond.
Under the Adopt a Storm Drain program, I officially "adopted" the drain directly in front
of my house (along with some others). . https://mn.adopt-a-drain.org/dashboard I am
also a Master Gardener with a keen environmental interest. I would LOVE to have a
rain garden on our property adjacent to one of those drains!
Another way we are working to improve water quality: we received a Washington
County watershed grant about 5-6 years ago to install a native buffer garden in our
back yard adjacent to city property. The justification was primarily phosphorus
reduction flowing into that storm water pond. We also installed a French drain/dry
creek system to improve water management in our yard. We are already doing our
part as citizens and would love to brag about what Oakdale is doing to improve water
quality as well!
Please consider this request and give me a call if you'd like to discuss this further or
come see what we are doing to help the environment on our little 1/4 acre property.
Thanks you for requesting input, Brian. I look forward to viewing the online
presentation nex week and learning about the preliminary findings.
Sincerely,
Marge Sagstetter
1625 Hydram Ave. N
Oakdale
651-770-8767
Marge
"Kind hearts are the garden,
Kind thoughts are the roots,
Kind words are the blossoms,
Kind deeds are the fruits." By John Ruskin
From: Lori Tella
To: Brian Bachmeier
Cc: cjludemann@comcast.net; sagstettermom@gmail.com
Subject: Hydram Ave Rain Garden Project
Date: Thursday, November 17, 2022 12:29:30 PM
Attachments: Homeowner packet Rain Gardens.pdf
Hi there,
It was so nice to meet everyone and hear about your ideas for a Rain Garden.
VBWD grant programs can be found here: Best Management Practices (BMP) Grant Program
(vbwd.org). The Stewardship grant pays $2500/lb of TP removal up to $5000. We will need to find
out the drainage area to determine the award amount. In my quick assessment it looked like closer
to 1 lb of phosphorous would be removed, so on the lower end of the award. I would welcome a
second opinion though Brian, if your team has time to take a look at the drainage area. There is also
a Community Grant that might be a good fit. I will send a quick check-in to the Valley Branch
administrator to get their thoughts on the project and what grant program makes the most sense to
apply for. From there we can finalize a concept plan and fill out an application.
In the meantime- I have attached some curb-cut rain garden photos and a guide with some fun plant
info. Please let me know if you have questions.
Thanks!
Lori Tella
Landscape Restoration Specialist
Office: 651.330.8220 ext. 36
Cell: 636.579.9432
Email: ltella@mnwcd.org
Washington Conservation District
455 Hayward Ave N.
Oakdale, MN 55128
Get email alerts for Oakdale
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.