Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
Meeting Name: City Council Agenda status: Final-revised
Meeting date/time: 4/14/2021 3:30 PM Minutes status: Final  
Meeting location: Council Chambers - 3rd Floor
Please see the meeting guidelines due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Published agenda: Agenda Agenda Published minutes: Minutes Minutes  
Meeting video:  
Attachments:
File #Ver.Agenda #TypeTitleActionResultAction DetailsVideo
CO 21-34 11Communications & Receive/FileMayor's Emergency Executive Orders 21-15.Received and Filed  Action details Not available
RES 21-457 13ResolutionApproving the City’s cost of providing Property Clean services during February 16 to 25, 2021, and setting date of Legislative Hearing for May 18, 2021 and City Council public hearing for July 7, 2021 to consider and levy the assessments against individual properties. (File No. J2118A, Assessment No. 218527)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-510 14ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Arlington Avenue from East Shore Dr. to White Bear. (File No. MO1900, Assessment No. 195501)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-524 15ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Downtown project area. (Project No. MO2008, Assessment No. 205500)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-526 16ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Eustis Street. (Project No. MO2001, Assessment No. 205501)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-528 17ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Mississippi River Boulevard. (Project No. MO2005, Assessment No. 205503)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-531 18ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Territorial Avenue. (Project No. MO2006, Assessment No. 205504)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-533 19ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Cromwell Avenue. (Project No. MO2009, Assessment No. 205506)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-535 110ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Suburban Avenue. (Project No. MO2010, Assessment No. 205507)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-537 111ResolutionApproving assessment costs and setting date of City Council public hearing to ratify the assessment for the 2020 Street Maintenance Service Program-Mill and Overlay: Downtown (Delayed from 2019). (Project No. MO2011, Assessment No. 205508)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-560 112ResolutionSupporting the request for federal funding to develop a training and jobs program to support the planting and maintenance needs of the overall emerald ash borer management program.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-561 113ResolutionSupporting the City’s request for federal funding for dredging in the Mississippi River.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-562 114ResolutionSupporting the request for federal funds to purchase 600 portable radios for sworn officers who respond to Saint Paul and mutual-aid community public safety needs.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-565 215ResolutionApproving the Settlement in Arman v. City of Saint Paul.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-569 116ResolutionApproving amendments to the CERT Joint Powers Agreement.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-571 117ResolutionAuthorizing the City of Saint Paul to enter into a joint powers agreement to operate a HUD Section 3 Compliance Program on behalf of the Counties of Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Washington and Anoka, and the Public Housing Authority in Minneapolis.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-473 119ResolutionEstablishing the rates of pay for the Animal Services Officer I-III series in EG 01, AFSCME, in Grades 028, 032, and 035, respectively. (Laid over from April 7)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-486 120ResolutionChanging the rate of pay for Heavy Equipment Operator-Water and abolishing the classification of Revolving Power Equipment Operator. (Laid over from April 7)AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-449 12ResolutionConsenting to the sale of General Obligation Library Refunding Bonds, Series 2021D to be issued by the Saint Paul Public Library Agency for the refunding of prior bonds and levying a tax for the payment thereof.Adopted As AmendedPass Action details Video Video
RES 21-572 118ResolutionDeclaring April 2021 as Fair Housing Month in Saint Paul.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
SR 21-68 1 Staff ReportStaff Report from City Attorney Lindsey Olson regarding Just Deeds.Received and Filed  Action details Not available
RES 21-632 1 ResolutionMemorializing a decision of the City Council to deny an appeal by Alatus, LLC from a planning commission decision denying a site plan application for a new mixed use development located at 411 and 417 Lexington Parkway North.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-636 1 ResolutionAffirming the Extension of Declaration of Local Emergency issued April 12, 2021 by Mayor Melvin Carter III.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-629 1 ResolutionAuthorizing the Fire Department to enter into a joint powers agreement with the State of Minnesota Department of Health to provide emergency medical standby services for the FEMA vaccination site at the Minnesota State Fairgrounds.AdoptedPass Action details Not available
RES 21-594 121ResolutionAmending the City's Adopted Legislative Agenda for the 2021 Legislative Session.Adopted As AmendedPass Action details Video Video
Ord 21-12 122OrdinanceGranting the application of Hovda Properties LLC to rezone property at 1219 Saint Clair Avenue from B1 local business to T3 traditional neighborhood and amending Chapter 60 of the Legislative Code pertaining to the zoning map.Laid Over to Second Reading  Action details Video Video
RES PH 21-49 123Resolution-Public HearingFinal Order approving the reconstruction of streets in the 2021 Saint Paul Streets Program. (Project 19233, Assessment 215200)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RES PH 21-87 124Resolution-Public HearingAuthorizing application and acceptance of a grant from the State of Minnesota to predesign and design the Playwrights’ Center facility in an amount up to $850,000; amending the 2021 City budget upon acceptance of said grant; and approving and authorizing execution of a State Grant Agreement and other necessary documents in connection therewith (District 12, Ward 4).AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RES PH 21-90 125Resolution-Public HearingAuthorizing a Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development application for Minnesota Investment Funds in an amount up to $600,000 on behalf of Kalera, Inc. and authorizing execution of a State Grant Agreement.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RES PH 21-91 126Resolution-Public HearingApproving the establishment of the Ford Site Housing Tax Increment Financing District #1 in the Ford Site Redevelopment Project Area and approving a Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor (District 15, Ward 3).AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RES PH 21-92 127Resolution-Public HearingApproving the establishment of the Ford Site Housing Tax Increment Financing District #2 in the Ford Site Redevelopment Project Area and approving a Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor (District 15, Ward 3).AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RES PH 21-93 128Resolution-Public HearingAuthorizing the Department of Human Rights and Equal Economic Opportunity to shift a portion of remaining funds for Minority Business Development and Retention (MBDR) from the MBDR Special Fund to the MBDR General Fund account.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
Ord 21-11 129OrdinanceGranting the application of 1164 W 7th, LLC (previously Miley H R Separate Prop Trust) to rezone property at 1164 Seventh Street West from RT2 townhouse residential to RM2 multiple-family residential and amending Chapter 60 of the Legislative Code pertaining to the zoning map.Continue Public HearingPass Action details Not available
RLH AR 20-93 2 Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding services during February 2020. (File No. J2010B, Assessment No. 208109)Continue Public HearingPass Action details Not available
RLH AR 20-94 2 Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Towing of Abandoned Vehicle service during October 2019 at 814 MANOMIN AVENUE. (File No. J2004V, Assessment No. 208004)Continue Public HearingPass Action details Not available
RLH TA 21-160 230Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 998 ARMSTRONG AVENUE (File No. CRT2106, Assessment No. 218205)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH FCO 21-31 231Resolution LH Fire C of O OR Correction OrderAppeal of Dustin Fronk to a Correction Notice-Reinspection Complaint at 594 BRUNSON STREET.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-141 232Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1150 CENTRAL AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2106B, Assessment No. 218105)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH AR 21-29 233Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Removal of Diseased Tree(s) services during August 2020 at 1052 CHARLES AVENUE. (File No. 2102T, Assessment No. 219001)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-172 234Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 731 DELAWARE AVENUE. (File No. CRT2106, Assessment No. 218205)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH SAO 21-25 237Resolution LH Summary Abatement OrderMaking finding on the appealed nuisance abatement ordered for 741 FLANDRAU STREET in Council File RLH SAO 21-14.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH SAO 21-23 238Resolution LH Summary Abatement OrderAppeal of Abdulaziz Osman to a Summary Abatement Order at 408 GROTTO STREET NORTH.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-148 239Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 756 JACKSON STREET. (File No. CRT2106, Assessment No. 218205)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-185 240Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealDeleting the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 410 LAUREL AVENUE. (File No. CRT2106, Assessment No. 218025)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-140 241Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 755 MINNEHAHA AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2106E, Assessment No. 218305)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-145 242Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1033 REANEY AVENUE. (File No. VB2106, Assessment No. 218805)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-164 243Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1746 SIMS AVENUE. (File No. J2106E, Assessment No. 218305) (Public hearing continued to July 14, 2021)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-193 144Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealAmending Council File RLH AR 20-86 to delete the assessment for Graffiti Removal services during January 4 to February 26, 2020 at 1630 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2006P, Assessment No. 208405)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH VBR 21-16 246Resolution LH Vacant Building RegistrationAppeal of Jeanine R. Post, personal representative for the Estate of Mark Danielson, to a Vacant Building Registration Notice at 956 WESTERN AVENUE NORTH.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH AR 21-24 247Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Collection of Vacant Building Registration fees billed during July 16 to October 19, 2020. (File No. VB2106, Assessment No. 218805)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH AR 21-25 248Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Securing and/or Emergency Boarding services during November 2020. (File No. J2106B, Assessment No. 218105)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH AR 21-26 249Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Demolition services from November 2020 (C.D.B.G. Funds). (File No. J2103C, Assessment No. 212002)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH AR 21-27 250Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Collection of Fire Certificate of Occupancy fees billed during September 15 to October 22, 2020. (File No. CRT2106, Assessment No. 218205)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH AR 21-28 251Resolution LH Assessment RollRatifying the assessments for Excessive Use of Inspection or Abatement services billed during September 22 to October 21, 2020. (File No. J2106E, Assessment No. 218305)AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
RLH SAO 21-24 235Resolution LH Summary Abatement OrderAppeal of James & Connie Supple to a Summary Abatement Order at 616 DESNOYER AVENUE.Adopted As AmendedPass Action details Video Video
RLH RR 21-32 136Resolution LH Substantial Abatement OrderMaking finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for 134 ELIZABETH STREET EAST in Council File RLH RR 20-13.Continue Public HearingPass Action details Video Video
RLH TA 21-196 245Resolution LH Tax Assessment AppealRatifying the Appealed Special Tax Assessment for property at 1800 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST. (File No. J2106B, Assessment No. 218105) (Amend to File No. J2106B1, Assessment No. 218112)ReferredPass Action details Video Video
File #Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
RES PH 21-49 4/15/2021 12:31 AMChris and Maren Hilton Against We would like to voice our opposition to this project. We believe that the project outlined by the city doesn't make the best use of our natural resources . Why build two sidewalks on either side of the street when there is a central median that would accommodate a single sidewalk? The plan outlined by the Edg***be Preservation Group would preserve trees, the character of the neighborhood, and maintain lower costs for the city, while reducing pavement. We want to believe we live in a city where the opinion of residents is taken into account. We believe that Edg***be Road in its current state with mature trees and ample green space, is a treasure that should be protected. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 9:58 PMCynthia Rosenblatt Ross   Mr. TOLBERT MISSTATES THE INVOLVEMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WITH RESIDENTS. We HAVE BEEN TURNED DIWN AT EVERY TURN. ADDITIONALLY, THERE IS A PERFECTLY GOOD BOULEVARD FOR A SUDEWALK AT A KESSER COST AND WHICH HAS BEEN USED AS A WALKWAY FOR YEARS. +2 -2 2
RES 21-572 4/14/2021 8:55 PMFerdinand Peters   Those covenants were declared unconstitutional some time ago so no need to worry about them having any legal effect in 2021. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 8:51 PMFerdinand Peters Against I am shocked that the project engineer on this project, who refused to work openly with the Edg***be neighbors even after CM Tolbert directed him to do so. There is still time to do what is right for the neighborhood, for Saint Paul taxpayers (saving money on the project), and to preserve the natural resources of this special neighborhood. Furthermore, the legal issues of encroachments on private property must result in a delay in the current unwise plan. My high regard for the members of this council and their commitment to the neighborhoods of this grand city, I hope, will not be shattered today. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 8:50 PMFerdinand Peters Against I am shocked that the project engineer on this project, who refused to work openly with the Edg***be neighbors even after CM Tolbert directed him to do so. There is still time to do what is right for the neighborhood, for Saint Paul taxpayers (saving money on the project), and to preserve the natural resources of this special neighborhood. Furthermore, the legal issues of encroachments on private property must result in a delay in the current unwise plan. My high regard for the members of this council and their commitment to the neighborhoods of this grand city, I hope, will not be shattered today. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 8:50 PMFerdinand Peters Against I am shocked that the project engineer on this project, who refused to work openly with the Edg***be neighbors even after CM Tolbert directed him to do so. There is still time to do what is right for the neighborhood, for Saint Paul taxpayers (saving money on the project), and to preserve the natural resources of this special neighborhood. Furthermore, the legal issues of encroachments on private property must result in a delay in the current unwise plan. My high regard for the members of this council and their commitment to the neighborhoods of this grand city, I hope, will not be shattered today. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 5:10 PMJoe Sarakaitis Against As an Edg***be resident, I am shocked & dismayed at the City's unwillingness to listen & engage with the stakeholders on Edg***be that will be most affected by the current plans. Over the past 9 months, we have worked with a well-respected landscape architect, to come up with various solutions/proposals, that the residents consider to be superior to the City's "cookie cutter" approach. These proposals showed benefits that included: minimizing tree loss, less new concrete, traffic calming, etc. Furthermore, one proposal, a beautiful sidewalk/promenade down the middle of the boulevard, offered a solution that likely would have cost significantly less than putting in 2 sidewalks (one on each side). Virtually everyone that we discussed these ideas with, neighbors, Transportation Committee, etc., agreed that our proposed solutions were better options. Unfortunately, the City has been an unwilling partner in this process, and it's very frustrating to say the least. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 3:53 PMJack Hoeschler Against The Griggs Scheffer Part II process has been the exact opposite of effective and good faith communication, cooperation and compromise with affected property owners. These owners (both Edg***be Road and Edg***be Place) have spent thousands of dollars trying unsuccessfully to work professionally with city staff. The Council must go beyond platitudes about open meetings and communications and listening to the constituents and actually instruct the staff to honestly engage with and embrace outside input and alternative ideas--especially when those third party ideas are backed up with professional analysis and content. Fix the system. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 4:32 AMMark Wingerd Against The Edg***be Preservation Group consists of nearly 100% of the residents that live on Edg***be Road between Scheffer and Hamline Avenues. We are unanimously opposed to the city's plan for our neighborhood. Here is a link to our initial petition: https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/petition-to-oppose-sidewalks-on-edg***be-road We believe that the city's plan will destroy over 50 trees and much of the neighborhood's landscaping. Our group has hired a landscape architect who has developed acceptable alternative plans which include sidewalks. Our plans have been endorsed by the Highland District Council, the forestry and parks departments. Our plans will preserve green space, save trees, and calm traffic. We have asked the city engineers to provide us with their plans and they have refused to provide us with this information. We would like to have some input on the future of our neighborhood. At this point nobody representing the city is willing to listen to the residents!!! +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 1:40 AMElaine Johnson Against We have lived in our home on Edg***be Road for 30 years. It is a beautiful, tree-lined boulevard that has been a jewel for the City of St. Paul for over 100 years. A sidewalk has never been asked for or proposed by residents for a reason; it is not necessary. The removal of mature trees would be a public disservice. Not sharing what the plans are with citizens is poor public policy. Please do not go through with this project. Thank you. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 12:37 AMChris Pensinger Against The loss of numerous mature trees is unacceptable. There must be a reasonable way to accommodate both sidewalks while preserving the beauty of the parkway. The Edg***be neighborhood has proposed several options and I urge the City Council to consider them in good faith to minimize the loss of trees. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/14/2021 12:06 AMPeter Kelly Against • The city’s plan entails removing a multitude of trees, hedges and shrubs, does nothing to slow traffic or improve the environment • We have engaged a highly respected landscape architect who has done several projects similar to this. We have given an alternative proposal to the city which will improve the water shed, calm traffic, preserve trees and maintain the park-like nature of this unique neighborhood. None of these are in the city’s plan. • The Highland District Council enthusiastically endorsed our plan over the city’s, commenting that the one size-fits-all approach of the city was inappropriate here. • We feel that the city’s plan will devalue our homes and the neighborhood in general. • Our recommendations are simple and easy to incorporate We are asking that this Council listen to its constituency. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 10:22 PMPaul & Jennifer Dzubnar Against I oppose the Griggs-Scheffer sidewalk and street project as currently designed by the City of St. Paul, as it removes many mature trees, decreases overall green space and degrades the overall beauty of our neighborhood. However, I fully support the sidewalk and street project design proposed by the Edg***be Preservation Group (EPG). Its plan is designed by a licensed landscape architect, is fully supported by the Highland District Council, conserves mature trees, provides traffic calming, costs less and preserves the beautiful character of the Edg***be neighborhood. As a resident living here, it is disappointing to see the City's unwillingness to apply the inputs provided by the residents of Edg***be Road, especially since EPG's proposed plan achieves the City's overall objectives of reconstructing the streets and installing sidewalks. +2 -2 2
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 6:50 PMLester McDonald & Suzy Peterson Against Have been a resident on Edg***be for over 14 years. Sidewalks would decrease our lot even more. We also have an easement on 1 side which if changed would definitely sue the city over this. The cost is also a frivolous expense that is not needed. There is a beautiful boulevard down our street where residents walk safely and daily. The loss of trees with this proposed project is also very concerning. The historical nature of this area also raises additional concerns. Behind our home is a historical home. I believe such sites must remain unchanged as well. In terms of sidewalks raising our home values. I think we all can laugh at that. Would only cost the average homeowner over $20,000 to be put in. I think we all pay enough taxes without that additional ***essment. We are a united neighborhood. Please leave our home alone. Sidewalks are not needed. Thank You. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 5:55 PMSteve Mooney Against Secret plans. Secret formula to ***ess property owners differently. Each neighbor has a different cost that's based on what? I've reached out for an explanation on ***essment and was told by 2 people that the head ***essor would respond to me. It's been over a month and no response. Asking Council Chris Tolbert to represent us and he hides behind the city planners which it is not their job. Mature trees runoff. The lack of a good faith effort on the city council to help preserve the trees and aesthetics of the area at a lower cost is disturbing. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 4:35 PMGail Ward & John Smith Against As 30+ year homeowners on Edg***be Road, we oppose the project as proposed by the city. The Public Works Dept. has apparently taken a "cookie-cutter" approach to the rebuilding of Edg***be Road and the installation of sidewalks. We say "apparently" because Public Works has failed to share their final plans with Edg***be residents. The approach taken will result in the loss of many mature trees and the destruction of the park like setting on Edg***be Road. It will undoubtedly result in a loss in property values. Proposals have been made for more fiscally and environmentally friendly alternatives. These alternatives have been dismissed without discussion. Not only will the residential area of Edg***be Road be compromised, but Highland Park will also suffer. Valuable trees and green space will be eliminated and replaced with concrete. Why is more concrete being added to Highland Park? Please delay this project and study the alternatives before Edg***be Road is permanently scarred. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 3:48 PMCynthia Rosenblatt Ross Against As a long time resident of Edg***be Road, I must voice my opposition to the proposed (rather, imposed-- as the City has refused to release its plans) "improvements" involved in the Scheffer-Griggs project. Without entertaining the involvement of its residents, ignoring the less costly and more environmental-friendly proposals of a certified landscape architect and the recommendations of the Highland District Council, this undisclosed project is being railroaded ahead. Many questions remain and better alternatives exist for a beautiful and inviting neighborhood without encroaching on the rolling lawns and mature trees that have graced this area for generations. In this time of economic despair and racial unrest, certainly there are more pressing needs for the City's resources than the digging up an old and venerable neighborhood. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 2:36 PMKirsten Ramsay Against I object to the Griggs-Scheffer project as proposed by the city. There are many alternative options that would preserve green space, protect mature trees and lower the cost of the project. People drive, walk and bike this street because of it's beauty and park-like feel. Some of these trees have been here for hundreds of years. Please do not ruin this street for ALL the residents in St. Paul that enjoy what it is. We are tax-paying citizens who have tried to voice our opinions to no success. Where are the city’s plans? Why aren’t these being shared? Please consider an alternate option. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 2:24 PMRichard Ramsay Against I am opposed to the Griggs-Scheffer project as currently proposed. It is my opinion that adding sidewalks as proposed will take away from the park-like setting the residents of St. Paul enjoy when driving, walking and biking down Edg***be. Countless mature trees will be lost that the residents of St. Paul enjoy for their beauty and shade. I will lose a 200+ year-old Elm tree in addition to other mature trees. We have hired a landscape architect that has proposed many alternate options that would allow Edg***be to retain its beauty, minimize the concrete, maximize green space and even lower the cost of the project. Public works has ignored our requests and failed to be open in sharing their plans with us or our landscape architect. Councilmember Chris Tolbert has urged them to share their plans and work with us and our architect on alternate and lower-cost plans. Public works have completely ignored these requests. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 1:34 PMPeter & Karla Myers Against We urge the City Council to delay the Griggs-Scheffer paving project on Edg***be Road until a good-faith effort is made to consider the alternative designs proposed by the Edg***be Preservation ***ociation. We have already proposed these reasonable options but they have been dismissed. They would provide traffic calming, preserve trees, facilitate the installation of sidewalks, and maintain the scenic beauty of the street. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/13/2021 12:51 AM  Against We have determined that the Edg***be Place owners are able to provide title insurance for the city for the road as built so that there should be no problem correcting the easement to allow the road to be built as before. +1 -1 1
RES PH 21-49 4/12/2021 10:29 PMJack Hoeschler Against How can the Council approve and authorize a major street reconstruction project without even looking at the plans? How can you expect reasonable public involvement and commentary without being willing to disclose the plans? Why is Griggs Scheffer II being kept secret even as it is being authorized? +3 -3 1