The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026-02-23 City Council Workshop Packet AGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP 6:15 P.M. Monday, February 23, 2026 City Hall, Council Chambers Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 13D.02, one or more councilmembers may be participating remotely A. CALL TO ORDER B. ROLL CALL C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Battle Creek-St. Croix River Regional Trail Long Range Plan 2. Street Assessment Rate Discussion F. ADJOURNMENT RULES OF CIVILITY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND OUR COMMUNITY Following are rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings - elected officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone’s opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Council meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these principles: Speak only for yourself, not for other council members or citizens - unless specifically tasked by your colleagues to speak for the group or for citizens in the form of a petition. Show respect during comments and/or discussions, listen actively and do not interrupt or talk amongst each other. Be respectful of the process, keeping order and decorum. Do not be critical of council members, staff or others in public. Be respectful of each other’s time keeping remarks brief, to the point and non-repetitive. THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK E1 CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT Meeting Date February 23, 2026 REPORT TO: Michael Sable, City Manager REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Public Works Director Audra Robbins, Parks and Natural Resources Manager PRESENTER: Steven Love, Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: Battle Creek-St. Croix River Regional Trail Long Range Plan Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Summary: Washington County is developing a long-range planning document that will guide the future development of a paved multi-use trail called the Battle Creek - St Croix River Regional Trail (BC- StCR Regional Trail). The BC-StCR Regional Trail Plan will provide guidance on future trail alignment; the location, development, and operation of trail facilities; and opportunities to protect and enhance natural and cultural resources within the proposed corridor. Staff from Washington County will present on the overall planning process and are looking for feedback from the City Council on their findings and next steps for the plan. Recommended Action: No action is required. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: n/a Strategic Plan Relevance: SafetyExpand accessibility and mobility for all residents Sustainability Cultivate a connected, engaged community Development Invest in people and placemaking Background: The future BC-StCR Regional Trail will be a 13 Mile east-west multiuse trail that will run through Woodbury, Afton, and Maplewood, connecting trail users to the Central Greenway, St Croix Valley Regional Trails, and Battle Creek Regional Park. Workshop Packet Page Number 1 of 31 E1 As part of the planning process, a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was formed that included staff from the surrounding communities, including the City of Maplewood and Ramsey County. The goal for this committee is to collaborate on a shared vision of a future east-west multi-use regional trail. By documenting project engagement, technical analysis, and conceptual recommendations, this plan prepares the project for future stages, including funding, design, and construction. Once the plan is supported by local agencies and approved by the Metropolitan Council, the trail becomes eligible for regional funding. The final draft is anticipated to be ready for consideration in spring 2026. Attachments: 1.Battle Creek-St. Croix River Regional Trail Long Range Plan Presentation Workshop Packet Page Number 2 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķ tƩĻƭĻƓƷğƷźƚƓʹ ЋΉЊЋΉЋЏ Battle Creek to St. Croix River Regional Trail Long Range Plan Workshop Packet Page Number 3 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 2 Agenda 1.Welcome2.Project Background3.Trail Segment Evaluation Overview4.Next Steps Workshop Packet Page Number 4 of 31 E, Attachment 1 3 Project Background Workshop Packet Page Number 5 of 31 E, Attachment 1 4 Guidance on future alignment,development, managementEligible for fundingEngagement with partners and public Long Range Plans¤¤¤ ͻƩĻĻ ƷƩǒƓƉƭͼ ƚƩ δŷźŭŷǞğǤƭδ ƚŅ ƭǤƭƷĻƒStandard: 10 ft wide paved trail, with10 ft bufferQuality signage and amenities Regional Trail Long Range Plans Regional Trails¤¤¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 6 of 31 E, Attachment 1 55 Public Open to Construction ¤coordination,likely in phases Construction FinalizedesignFormalizefunding andagreements Final Design¤¤ stakeholderschallenges,refine designsand costs {ƷğƉĻŷƚƌķĻƩ 9ƓŭğŭĻƒĻƓƷ Feasibility Study / Preliminary Design ΘwĻĻƓŭğŭĻΘƚƩƉ ƷŷƩƚǒŭŷ level conceptfor additionalstudy Long Range Plan Θ5ĻǝĻƌƚƦ ŷźŭŷΏΘLķĻƓƷźŅǤ ğƩĻğƭ Vision Community Regional Trail Project Timeline Workshop Packet Page Number 7 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 6 : County line : St Croix River/Downtown Afton WestEast ¤¤ ~13-mile West-East Arterial TrailLink between Maplewood/Ramsey County -> Woodbury -> AftonBuild on existing plans/studies Corridor Background Workshop Packet Page Number 8 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 7 Meetings PUBLIC City & Town Popup TablesOpen Houses Online Engagement ENGAGEMENT TAC County Staff City/Townships Parks Commission State/Fed Agencies KEY STAKEHOLDERS PMT Parks Planning Consultant Engineering PROJECT LEADERSHIP Stakeholder Engagement Workshop Packet Page Number 9 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 8 Approval Process ΘCźƓğƌ 5ƩğŅƷ ε źƓƷĻƩ Α{ƦƩźƓŭ 2026 Development & Plan Drafting ΘwƚǒƷĻ Summer -Fall & Data Collection Θ9ƓŭğŭĻƒĻƓƷ Spring -Summer Site Analysis ΘźƭźƚƓźƓŭ ε źƓƷĻƩ Α{ƦƩźƓŭ 2025 Long-Range Plan Timeline Workshop Packet Page Number 10 of 31 E, Attachment 1 Open House (April)Gold Line OpeningBelwin Bison Festival Fun Run 5kAfton Strawberry FestivalWoodbury Juneteenth ¤¤¤¤¤ Public PopupsOnline SurveyCommission engagementAgency staff engagement Engagement Opportunities¤¤¤¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 11 of 31 E, Attachment 1 Future projects synergyProperty and engineering restrictionsDestinations to highlight ¤¤¤ Identified key opportunities and challengesLocal expertise Commission/Staff Engagements:¤¤ Crossings of major roadwaysPersonal safetyOpportunity to experience natureTrail separated from vehicle traffic ¤¤¤¤ Excitement for the trailTraffic separation, safe crossingsConcerns about cost, impact to roads andprivate landFactors in Trail Use -highest rated: Engagement Takeaways Pop-up Comment Themes:¤¤¤Survey Findings:¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 12 of 31 E, Attachment 1 11 Trail Segment Evaluation Overview Workshop Packet Page Number 13 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 12 tion Step 4: Route Recommenda Recommendation scoring Evaluation evaluation Step 3: Segment Updated/refined Segments evaluation identified for Step 2: Initial Plotting ğƌƌͼ Step 1: Exploration ͻ{ƦğŭŷĻƷƷź ğƷ ƷŷĻ Evaluation Process Workshop Packet Page Number 14 of 31 E, Attachment 1 13 Introduction to Evaluation Workshop Packet Page Number 15 of 31 E, Attachment 1 14 Trail segment #s in the charts correspondto segments shown in mapEach segment scored 1-4 onperformance measures tied to GoalsNot prescriptive{ǒƦƦƌĻƒĻƓƷĻķ ĬǤ ͻĬƚƚƷƭ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ ŭƩƚǒƓķͼ 9ǝğƌǒğƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷźƓǒĻķͶ How to read the charts and maps:¤¤Evaluation Scores = just a guide¤¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 16 of 31 E, Attachment 1 15 Route Alternatives Draft Workshop Packet Page Number 17 of 31 E, Attachment 1 16 South Alternative B Intersections/crossings better. Elevation challenges.Proximity to population and services in downtown Afton.Mostly existing but requires City road designation. Historically challenging east corridor.South Woodbury. Downtown Afton as destination.Connection to local parks. Scenic views along route.Parallel to city road and county road. South Alternative A CR 16 & CR 18. Challenging intersections/crossings. Elevation challenges.Proximity to population and services in denser city areas and downtown Afton.Mostly existing and all within County ROW. Historically challenging east corridor.Central and south Woodbury. Downtown Afton as destination.Connection to local parks. Scenic views along route.Parallel to county roads. -94 corridor. -94 North Alternative Mostly CR 16, with potential opportunities. Challenging intersections./crossings.Proximity to population and services in denser city areas and along IMostly existing and most within County ROW. MnDOT as cooperative partner.Central Woodbury. Belwin Conservancy as potential destination.Connection to local parks. Belwin Conservancy potential collaboration.Parallel to county road. Proximity to I {ǒƒƒğƩǤ ğĬƌĻ ΑtƩƚƆĻĭƷ Dƚğƌƭ Goal Area Safety and AccessibilityEquity and InclusionImplementationConnectivityNatural Resources and ResiliencyHigh Quality Trail Experience Workshop Packet Page Number 18 of 31 E, Attachment 1 17 Next Steps Workshop Packet Page Number 19 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 18 1.Letters of Support2.Washington County Board3.Metropolitan Council Key Steps Remaining:1.Refine segments based on agency input2.Finalize Route Recommendation3.Open House4.Long Range Plan approvals Next Steps Workshop Packet Page Number 20 of 31 E1, Attachment 1 Planner II 651-430-4332 Andrea Rehm andrea.rehm@washingtoncountymn.gov Questions? 651-430-4303 Senior Planner Connor Schaefer connor.schaefer@washingtoncountymn.gov Workshop Packet Page Number 21 of 31 E2 CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT Meeting Date February 23, 2026 REPORT TO: Michael Sable, City Manager REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Public Works Director PRESENTER:Steven Love, Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: Street Assessment Rate Discussion Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Summary: The City must comply with Minnesota State Statute 429 when using special assessments for public improvement projects, including requirements that assessments do not exceed property benefit and that total assessments equal at least 20% of eligible project costs. Assessment rates have remained unchanged since 2009, but construction costs have increased significantly, making it increasingly difficult to meet the 20% threshold on some projects. City staff’s presentation will cover assessment rate requirements, history of assessment rates compared to construction cost, and next steps. Staff is looking for feedback from the City Council on street assessments and proposed next steps. Recommended Action: No action is required. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: NA Strategic Plan Relevance: SafetyMaintain and enhance infrastructure and environmental systems Sustainability Development Maintaining the City’s street and utility infrastructure directly impacts the quality of life for those who live, work, and visit the City. Assessments are one of the funding sources that help the City deliver street improvement projects. Background: To use special assessments for public improvement projects, the City must comply with Minnesota State Statute 429. This statute establishes two key requirements related to assessment rates. Workshop Packet Page Number 22 of 31 E2 1. The City may not assess a property for more than the benefit received. Each year, the City retains an independent appraiser to determine the benefit of a project to affected properties. That benefit amount is then compared to the maximum assessment rate established annually by the City Council. The assessment rate applied to a project is the lesser of the appraised benefit or the Council-adopted maximum rate. 2. The total assessments collected for a project must equal at least 20% of the City’s eligible project costs. Eligible costs exclude funding for sewer, water, state aid, and grant contributions. Cost History The last increase to assessment rates occurred in 2009, when the rate for full reconstruction projects increased from $6,000 to $6,600 per property. While assessment rates have remained unchanged since 2010, construction costs have continued to rise significantly. In 2010, full reconstruction projects were estimated at approximately $1,772,000 per mile. By 2025, that estimate has increased to approximately $4,500,000 per mile. Additional factors that impact the City’s ability to meet the 20% threshold include project scope and the number of assessable properties. For example, the 2025 CIP street improvement project included Prosperity Road, which has a substantial segment of roadway adjacent to Wakefield Park. This reduces the number of assessable properties by approximately half, thereby reducing the total assessment revenue available for the project and making compliance with the 20% threshold more challenging. To help meet the 20% threshold while minimizing the financial impact on property owners, staff modified the structure of CIP projects beginning in 2024. Prior to 2024, the City typically had two separate projects, a reconstruction project and a reclamation project. In 2024, these two projects were combined into a single capital improvement project with designated Area A and Area B components. This structure allowed the City to leverage the higher assessment-to-cost ratio of the reclamation project to support overall compliance with the 20% threshold. However, as project costs continue to increase, some future Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects may become difficult to deliver at current assessment rates while still meeting the 20% threshold. Staff recommend that, as part of the preparation of the 2027-2031 CIP, staff conduct a comprehensive review of proposed project assessment rates. The goal of the review will be to determine assessment rates that meet the 20% threshold while minimizing financial impacts to property owners. The review will include estimating future project costs, evaluating assessment rates relative to the 20% threshold for each project, developing recommendations for future assessment rates, and having the recommendations reviewed by an independent appraiser to ensure the recommended rates do not exceed the benefit to the property. The results of this review will be brought back to the City Council for consideration and direction. Attachments: 1. Street Assessment Rates Presentation Workshop Packet Page Number 23 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 Street Assessment Rates Review City Council WorkshopFebruary 23, 2026 Workshop Packet Page Number 24 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 Street Improvement Projects 135 miles of city streetsVast storm and sewer networkImpact on quality of life ¤¤¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 25 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 Council sets maximum rateIndependent appraisalAssessment rate is the lesser of the two ¤¤¤ ~êŲňđƜŗŗċЪŹ϶¡ŵŗąđŹŹ ¤ State Statute 429 Assessments Requirement #1 Workshop Packet Page Number 26 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 State Statute 429 Assessments Requirement #2 Workshop Packet Page Number 27 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 History $6,000 to $6,600 per property ¤ Last increase: 2009Full reconstruction rateNo changes since 20102010 -$1.77 million per mile2025 -$4.5 million per mile ¤¤¤¤¤ Assessment Rate HistoryFull Reconstruction cost ¤¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 28 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 Assessment Rate Challenges Pressure on 20% threshold ¤ Increased construction costs ¤ Direct challenges ¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 29 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 Assessment Rate Challenges More issues Higher project costsPressure on 20% thresholdFewer propertiesReduced total assessmentsPressure on 20% threshold ¤¤¤¤¤¤ Number of properties Project scope ¤ ¤ Situational challenges ¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 30 of 31 E2, Attachment 1 No rate change at this timeUpdate project cost estimatesReview rates for 20% thresholdDevelop options ¤¤¤¤ 2026 CIP project recommendation2027-2031 CIP ¤¤ Workshop Packet Page Number 31 of 31