06-10-2024
Council Conference Meeting
June 10, 2024
5:30 PM
Fridley City Hall, 7071 University Avenue N.E.
Agenda
Agenda
1.AI Policy
2.One-Way Conversion and Trail Project Update
3.Islands of Peace Regional Park
Accessibility Notice:
If you need free interpretation or translation assistance, please contact City staff.
Si necesita ayuda de interpretación o traducción gratis, comuníquese con el personal de la ciudad.
Yog tias koj xav tau kev pab txhais lus los sis txhais ntaub ntawv dawb, ces thov tiv tauj rau Lub Nroog cov
neeg ua hauj lwm.
Haddii aad u baahan tahay tarjumaad bilaash ah ama kaalmo tarjumaad, fadlan la xiriir shaqaalaha
Magaalada.
Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any City of
Fridley services, programs or activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons who
require auxiliary aids should contact CityClerk@FridleyMN.govor (763) 572-3450.
1
Jufn!2/
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date:June 10, 2024 Meeting Type:City CouncilConference Meeting
Submitted By:Danielle Herrick, City Manager Intern
Becca Hellegers, Employe Resources Director
Mike Grundman, IT Manager
Title
Approving City of Fridley Interim Ethical Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy
Background
Staff have developed an Interim Ethical Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy to guide City of Fridley
(City) staff and partners on the responsible use of this new technology, ensuring transparency and data
privacy standards are upheld. This Policy will be presented to the Council for review and discussion.
Financial Impact
Attachments and Other Resources
Ethical Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy
Vision Statement
We believe Fridley will be a safe, vibrant, friendly and stable home for families and businesses.
2
Jufn!2/
INTERIM ETHICAL GENERATIVE
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)
POLICY
The City of Fridley (City) has established the Ethical Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy (Policy) to affirm
the City's commitment to responsible and ethical use of publicly availablegenerative AI systems(e.g.,
Copilot, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Midjourney,Dall-E).
The City recognizes the potential benefits of utilizingnew generative AI technologies. The City also
acknowledges the risks and limitations associated with these tools. As generative AI technologies
continue to evolve rapidly, ongoing research is crucial to better understand their functionality,
societal impacts, and potential biases. It is important to treat generative AI technologiesas
sophisticated tools, not as equivalents to human intelligence.
This Policy outlines principles and use proceduresto ensure transparency, fairness, accountability,
and protection of human rights as we utilizegenerative AI. goal is to drive innovation
and efficiency through the use of generative AI while safeguarding employees, partners and the
public.The Policyincludes resources such as a decision matrix, use examples, and third-party
references.
The following ethical use principles establish requirements for City use of publicly available
generative AI systems. These principles aim to ensure responsible generative AI usethat upholds
transparency, accountability, fairness and protection of human rights. All City employees and
departments utilizing generative AI and/or AIsystems in their work must adhere to these ethical use
principles.
Human Control
Generative AI does not replace human decision-making. All outputs from generative AI must
be reviewed and approved by the individual who is using it and who has subject matter
knowledge before any use or distribution of the generated content.
Generative AI is a tool, and the City and userareaccountable for its outcomes.
Ensure AI-generated content does not further perpetuate harms against vulnerable
populations.
Users must be able to explain theirreview process, includingprompts used and modification
made to AI-generated content.
3
Jufn!2/
In case of unintended consequences, the City may take corrective measures.
Data Privacy
Data that includes personally identifying information about people, private/nonpublic data,
and confidential data must be removed before inputting into generative AI.
Users are responsible for ensuring generative AI is used in accordance with the Minnesota
Data Practices Act and applicable state laws pertaining to record retention.
It is forbidden to give generative AI access to any City network or drive.
Transparency
Written language, videos and images produced by generative AI must be labeled, ensuring
consumers are aware of its origin
operations.
Users are responsible for ensuring all AI-generated content is properly labeled before
distribution.
Training and Awareness
City employees using generative AI must undergo training to understand their capabilities and
limitations before use.
City employees using generative AI must review and acknowledge this Policy before use.
Ongoing education and support resources will be provided to ensure employees stay informed
about the latest developments and best practices in generative AI.
Continuous Monitoring
AI is a rapidly changing technology. This Policy will be reviewed on a quarterly basis and
updated as needed to address emerging challenges.
The AI Taskforce, comprising members from the IT department and relevant stakeholders,
may regularly audit generative AI work product for inherent biases, accuracy, and adherence
to the City's AI principles.
Generative AI is used for various reasons like efficiency, automating tasks and brainstorming. When
properly guided by ethical principles, AI can boost human capabilities and address complex
problems. However, misuse of this technology risks amplifying bias, unethical behaviors and other
harms. To help guide appropriate generative AI use, the City recognizes four levels of AI integration
in the creation of work products. Each level is characterized by the degree of generative AI
contribution and the role of human input and revision.
1. Assistant (AI contributes 25% or less)
Generative AI provides support like spell check, sentence structure suggestions, and
brainstorming.
4
Jufn!2/
The user is the primary contributor to the final work product.
The user must input prompts into the AI system to receive output.
Example: Using generative AI to brainstorm program names and suggest revisions to
sentence structure and spelling.
2. Collaborator (AI contributes 50%)
Generative AI and humans share equal responsibility in generating ideas and
contributing to the final output.
The user must input prompts into the AI system to receive output.
Example: Using generative AI to help write a staff report by uploading your notes and
the report template, then reviewing and editing the AI-generated report.
3. Generator (AI contributes 75%)
Generative AI is the primary creator of the draft output, with minimal human revisions
before finalization.
The user must input prompts into the AI system to receive output.
Example: Using generative AI to render images for new public art, providing direction
to the AI system, but making little to no edits to the AI output.
4. Automator (AI contributes 100%)
Generative AI is the sole creator of final outputs, with little to no human revisions
before release.
The generative AI system is designed to take action without human input (automated
AI input and output).
Requires rigorous review and oversight procedures to ensure accuracy and
compliance with the AI use principles. The City does not currently utilize generative AI
to automate processes.
Example: Staff created an automated translation system where generative AI converts
all City web content into the top languages spoken locally. The AI system posts the
translations to the webpage without review, and staff audit the AI system weekly for
accuracy and adherence to AI use principles.
By understanding these integration levels, you can better evaluate the appropriate use of generative
AI in your work. This ensures proper oversight and review based on the level of AI contribution. If
you have any questions or need further guidance, do not hesitate to reach out to your supervisor or
IT.
This Detailed Use Procedure provides specific best practices and guidelines for City employees using
generative AI in their daily work. It is essential to note that the Detailed Use Procedure should always
5
Jufn!2/
be used in conjunction with the Ethical Use Principles. The Ethical Use Principles serve as the
foundation for responsible generative AI use, while the Detailed Use Procedure provides practical
guidance for day-to-day generative AI use.
Decision making: fact check and review all AI-generated content
While generative AI can rapidly produce content, the information and content might be inaccurate,
outdated, or simply made up. The user inputting the prompt is responsible for verifying that the
information produced by the generative AI system is accurate by independently researching claims
made.
What to look for:
Inaccurate information including links and references to events or facts.
Bias in the positions or information. We must ensure that people are not harmed by these
technologies and consider how they could be portrayed or impacted by the content.
Examples by AI Level:
Assistant Level (AI contributes 25% or less)
DO: DON'T:
A Park and Rec employee utilizes generative AI A Park and Rec employee utilizes generative AI
to quickly populate 10 program names for a to quickly populate 10 program names for a
new summer program. They review all the new summer program. In a rush, they quickly
names on the list and choose one that clearly copy and paste the first generated name
describes the program. without close review. Later, staff realize the
program name is confusing and does not
describe what the program is about.
Collaborator Level (AI contributes 50%)
DO: DON'T:
A Park and Rec employee utilizes generative AI A Park and Rec employee utilizes generative AI
to help draft an announcement post for a new to help draft an announcement post for a new
summer program. They thoroughly review the summer program. Staff do not closely review
post to correct any factual errors, like program the AI-generated post before releasing the
dates and pricing before publishing. details. Staff start receiving calls that the
program dates and pricing are wrong.
Data protection: only public and nonidentifiable data may be fed into AI
Data privacy risks must be minimized when using generative AI. Inputs such as written prompts, voice
prompts, uploaded documents, and City networks synced to a generative AI system could be utilized
by the companies powering these AI systems to train their models. Therefore, it is imperative that
any data containing personally identifiable information (PII), private/nonpublic data and confidential
data be removed before being inputted into the AI system.
6
Jufn!2/
City staff, contractors, and elected officials must adhere to the Minnesota Data Practices Act, which
mandates the protection of government data. This ensures that all data handling complies with legal
standards and maintains the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive information.
It is forbidden to give AI access to any city network or drive.
What to look for:
Names
Home/work addresses
Phone numbers
Email addresses
Socioeconomic details
Specific dates of birth
Private/not public data (defined by the Data Practices Act)
Confidential Data (defined by the Data Practices Act)
Examples by AI Level:
Collaborator Level (AI contributes 50%)
DO: DON'T:
A public health employee wants to use an AI A public health employee wants to use an AI
system to better understand community system to better understand community
medical needs. They prompt AI only medical needs. They upload detailed electronic
aggregated, anonymized data about general health records with patients' names, contact
health statistics for the area. No individual info, medication history and other protected
patient data is included. details without consent, violating the
trust, Data Practices Act and federal law.
Transparency: disclose that AI was used to generate content
Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for the public about what the City
is doing. As generative AI develops, it could become difficult to differentiate between human and AI-
generated content. This is especially true for images and videos. To aid in transparency, users must
reference the use of generative-AI in the footer of the document or imbedded in the image/video.
An exception to this requirement is when generative AI is used at the Assistant level, such as for spell
checking or basic grammar suggestions, as these tools are already widely used and do not significantly
impact the content's creation.
7
Jufn!2/
How to disclose:
Documents: Include a footer stating, "This document was created with the assistance of \[AI
system name and version\] and reviewed for accuracy by \[staff name and title\]."
Images: Embed a small text line in the bottom corner of the image stating, "Image rendered
by \[AI system name\] and reviewed for accuracy by \[staff name and title\]."
Videos: Include a disclaimer at the beginning or end of the video stating, "This video was
created with the assistance of \[AI system name\] and reviewed for accuracy by \[staff name and
title\]."
Examples by AI Level:
Generator Level (AI contributes 75%)
DO: DON'T:
Public Works uses Dall-E to generate an image Public Works uses Dall-E to generate an image
depicting what a proposed development depicting what a proposed development
project could look like near Moore Lake. The project could look like near Moore Lake. The
engineer embeds a small text line on the engineer does not indicate the images were AI-
bottom corner of the image stating, "Image generated. This misleads residents into thinking
rendered by Dall-E \[version\] and reviewed for the images are the final project renderings
accuracy by \[staff name, title\]. This makes it created without community input.
clear to residents these images are only
examples, not final project renderings.
Automator Level (AI contributes 100%)
DO: DON'T:
The City uses ChatGPT-4o to automatically The City uses ChatGPT-4o to automatically
translate all public facing City content into the translate all public facing City content into the
top local languages. All the translations contain top local languages. The translations do not
the disclosure These translations were created indicate AI System ChatGPT was used to
using ChatGPT-4o and reviewed for accuracy by automatically translate the documents. This
\[staff name\] and a contact number on who to leaves residents feeling confused and frustrated
reach to report translation errors. because they were not informed an AI System
was used for the translation.
Other City Policies
Staff must use generative AI and/or AI systems in accordance with all City acceptable conduct and
acceptable use policies. Use of these technologies to create content that is inappropriate,
discriminatory or otherwise harmful to others or the City may result in disciplinary action, up to and
including termination.
8
Jufn!2/
Artificial intelligence (AI): Technologies that are capable of imitating intelligent human behavior and
taking actions to achieve specific goals. AI may include machine learning, natural language
processing, computer vision, predictive analytics, etc.
AI system: A software that uses algorithms, data, computing infrastructure, and policies to generate
content that simulates human intelligence. Examples include large language models like ChatGPT,
Claude, Copilot and Gemini.
AI Integration Level: Describe the degree of contribution AI has in final output:
Assistant - Human is the primary contributor to the final work product, with AI systems
providing support like spell check, sentence structure and brainstorming. Human must input
prompts into AI system to receive output. AI use contributed to 25% or less of the final work
product.
Collaborator - AI and human share joint responsibility in generating ideas and contributing to
the final output. Human must input prompts into AI system to receive output. AI use
contributed to 50% of the final work product.
Generator - AI is the primary creator of the draft output, with slight human revisions before
finalization. Human must input prompts into AI system to receive output. AI use contributed
to 75% of the final work product.
Automator - AI is the sole creator of final outputs, with little to no human revisions before
release. AI system is designed to take action without human input. Automated AI input and
output. AI use contributed to 100% of the final work product.
Generative AI: A class of AI systems that can generate new content such as text, images, audio, and
video that simulates human intelligence using prompts.
Prompts: A specific instruction, question, input provided, or documents uploaded to an AI system,
intended to guide its response or action. Prompts act as cues to the AI, helping it understand the
desired context or objective of the user's request.
Public Data: All government data collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated by a
government entity is public unless classified differently by statute, or temporary classification per
Minnesota Statutes § 13.03, subd. 1.
Data Practices Act: In reference to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 13. Chapter 13 classifies official records and government data and provides rights for
members of the public and data subjects to access data.
Official Records Act: In reference to the Minnesota Statutes § 15.17 which requires government
entities to "make and preserve all records necessary to a full and accurate knowledge of their official
activities.
9
Jufn!2/
If you have questions about the information shared in this Policy, please contact your immediate
supervisor or Employee Resources.
I understand, acknowledge, and agree to the terms of this Policy. Further, I understand, acknowledge,
and agree that violation of this Policy in any capacity may result in disciplinary action, up to and
including termination.
Date: Signature:
10
Jufn!2/
11
Jufn!2/
These are some suggestions on the kinds of uses that could be particularly useful for City uses. By
encouraging responsible experimentation, we are hoping to expand the potential uses while
minimizing risks.
Drafting documents or letters:
Generative AI provides a great opportunity to get started on a memo, letters, and job descriptions.
Note that when creating a prompt for an AI system for this context, it can consider including any
specific format preferences such as essay, bullet points, outline or dialogue. Additionally, you can
request the use of specific keywords or phrases, or technical terms to be included or avoided in the
response. This will help the AI system provide you with a more tailored and efficient response to your
request.
Example: generate guidelines for the use of ChatGPT at the City of Fridley
Example: write a letter requesting support for funding digital equity initiatives in the next
budget session.
Example: you can ask Copilot to generate letters that express points of view specified in the
prompt. This might allow you to understand an issue from different perspectives.
Example: You can ask generative AI to help you write a more effective version of a
objective of
the prompt\].
DOS:
1. Try to be specific in the prompt. If you give more context, the answer becomes more relevant.
2. Edit and review the content. Regardless of how the content was authored, you and the City will
bear responsibility over its use in the public.
3. Be mindful of potential biases in the AI response. Review content closely for inclusivity
and respect.
:
1. Do not include private/nonpublic, confidential nor personally identifiable information in the
prompt.
2. Do not rely on generative AI to provide accurate answers.
3. Do not rely on someone else to review the AI output for accuracy. The user is responsible for
ensuring and data, statements of fact, etc. produced by the AI system are verified.
Drafting Content In Plain Language
Generative AI can help you write clearer and simpler language. You can use the prompt to indicate
the reading level or audience for a text.
12
Jufn!2/
Example: use an AI System to write a version of the Declaration of Independence of the United
States for a person in elementary school.
Example: use tools such as Grammerly, Wordtune or others to modify a sentence. These tools
often allow you to optimize for the length of the sentence, or the audience.
DOs:
1. Specify in the prompt if you have a specific audience in mind.
2. Try different prompts, or request different versions of the same sentence until you find what works
best.
3. You can pass the output of the text by a readability app that can identify challenging sentences,
as well as the reading level for the text.
DON'TS:
1. Do not include private/nonpublic, confidential nor personally identifiable information in the
prompt.
2. Rely on the AI system using language that is inclusive and respectful.
Drafting Content In Other Languages
Generative AI can help you draft communications in another language. It is not well documented the
extent to which ChatGPT and other models can use other languages, but users report over 50
languages being available for ChatGPT, including some Native American languages.
Example: use ChatGPT to translate these guidelines into Spanish and French, just ask
Example: you can ask generative AI in what language some text is written in, just
language is
DOS:
1. Try different languages. ChatGPT and other AI systems were trained using text from many
languages.
2. You can also ask generative AI to perform similar tasks as the ones in this document in other
languages, such as summarizing text, etc.
DON'TS:
1. Do not include private/nonpublic, confidential nor personally identifiable information in the
prompt.
2. Do not use content generated in a language you do not understand before consulting
LanguageLine. You still need to check for accuracy, bias, etc.
Summarizing Text/Audio
13
Jufn!2/
Generative AI does a great job of summarizing longer pieces of text into summaries. If you have a
few pages that you want to condense into a few bullet points, or you have been struggling with
converting a long set of notes into a paragraph, these tools could be very helpful.
Example: copy notes taken from a meeting to generate a short summary of the meeting.
Example: summarize citizen comments in response to an engagement
Example: write a paragraph summary of a 5-page report.
Example: use the transcript tools in OneNote to transcribe audio into text. You can then
summarize the text further using generative AI. This summarization is included in some of
these tools.
DONTS:
1. Do not include private/nonpublic, confidential nor personally identifiable information in the
prompt: make sure you have deleted that information from your notes or other inputs.
2. If you plan on making a decision based on the summary, you should read the entire document(s)
to make sure you did not miss or miss characterized the original document.
3. Be aware that the resulting summary might have biases as it will tend to present language that is
more frequent in the data used to train the model. You can use changes to the prompt to enhance
the results by suggesting that the result incorporates perspectives from marginalized groups.
Coding/Programming
Generative AI can be great at producing snippets or even help you build more complex components
of code.
Example: write code in Python that extracts tables in a PDF into a Pandas data frame. This can
make it possible for less technical people, including interns and student workers, to get to
work on technical projects.
DOS:
1. Explore new languages and libraries - but you should understand the code and read the
documentation of the relevant components before using it.
2. You might have to adjust parameters, and your environment to make the suggestions from the AI
model work. Generative AI can help you get started, but often you will have to edit before the code
works.
DONTS:
1. Do not include private/nonpublic, confidential or personally identifiable information in the prompt.
As in development best practices: do not include passwords, confidential keys, or other proprietary
information in your code or in the prompts.
2. You should understand what the code is doing before using it in production.
14
Jufn!2/
3. You should understand the use of new libraries and dependencies, and become familiar with
vulnerabilities and other security considerations of using a language or a library.
Images, Audio, and Videos
Generative AI can produce images, audio, and videos based on prompts. This can support the
creation of appealing or insightful communication resources.
Example: make an image in a modern style that encourages a diverse population of residents
to vote.
Example: create a training video that shows residents how to schedule a bulky item pick- up,
by providing the script of the video.
Example: write a jingle or song to remind viewers to switch to 100% renewable energy.
DOS:
1. Visual, audio and video communication can be a powerful tool to communicate with others and
get across a message. Generative AI can empower you to use these tools beyond your artistic skills.
2. Use generative AI as a tool to create drafts or mockups that allow you to communicate more
effectively with graphic designers, videographers, and other creative workers.
3. Contact the Communication Division about the image, audio, or video before publishing or using
it. They have expertise on best practices in accessibility, branding, etc.
4. Engaging with members of community organizations that represent groups that might be
referenced or impacted by this content. Getting their perspective, in a respectful way, can help you
identify when content might be hurtful, discriminatory, or misinterpreted.
DONTS:
1. Do not include private/nonpublic, confidential nor personally identifiable information in the
prompt. Make sure you have deleted that information from your notes or other inputs. Some
examples could include license plates, etc.
Particularly, those who have not provided their consent.
2. Do not assume outputs of the generative AI will not be offensive or harmful towards people.
3. Do not publish AI generated images, audio, video without indicating in the output the AI was used.
4. Do not publish visual, audio and video communication created with AI use without ensuring the
content a
Examples were modified using the City of Boston Interim Guidelines Policy (City of Boston, 2023)
15
Jufn!2/
You can contact IT to learn more about generative AI. The AI taskforce has compiled third-party
generative AI Use guides for training purposes. Please note the City is not responsible for content on
third-party websites.
League of Minnesota Cities:
LMC Minnesota Cities: Jan-Feb 2024
Cities and Artificial Intelligence (AI): What You Should Know
ChatGPT: What Mayors and Managers Must Know
Fall Forum: Artificial Intelligence (must sign in using Memberlearn)
Harvard University Information Technology
AI Use Cases: Text
AI Use Cases: Image generation
16
Jufn!3/
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: June 10, 2023 Meeting Type: City Council Conference Meeting
Submitted By: James Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Brandon Brodhag, Assistant City Engineer
Title
University One-Way Conversion and Trail Project Update
Background
Public Works Department staff will present an update to the One-Way Conversion and Trail Project
rd
planned to begin in the 3 Quarter of 2024. No action by the Council is requested, but feedback is
welcome.
Financial Impact
None.
Recommendation
Discuss items presented.
Focus on Fridley Strategic Alignment
Vibrant Neighborhoods & Places Community Identity & Relationship Building
Financial Stability & Commercial Prosperity Public Safety & Environmental Stewardship
X Organizational Excellence
Attachments and Other Resources
None
Vision Statement
We believe Fridley will be a safe, vibrant, friendly and stable home for families and businesses.
17
Jufn!3/
MEMORANDUM
Public Works Department
Streets • Parks • Water • Sewer • Stormwater • Fleet • Facilities • Forestry•Engineering
Date:6/24/2021PW21-025
To:Wally Wysopal, City Manager
From:James Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Brandon Brodhag, Civil Engineer
RE:Neighborhood Meeting on University Avenue West Service Road ConversionProject
th
Between 67Avenue& Rice Creek Terrace
nd
On June22at 5:30 PM, a Neighborhood Meetingwas held for the proposed University Avenue
th
WestService Road Conversion Projectbetween 67Avenue& Rice Creek Terrace(see attached
th
project map). Notice of this meeting was sent toproperties on the 67Avenue, Plaza Curve,
and Rice Creek Terrace.
Sixty(60)notices for the Neighborhood Meeting were mailed to residents and property owners.
Thirteen(13) attendees signed in at the Neighborhood Meeting and others present included
Mayor Lund, Councilmember Bolkcom, Councilmember Ostwald and staff(see attached sign in
sheet).Prior to the meeting staff only received one phone call from a resident that lived in the
neighborhood and said resident was present at the meeting.
Staff beganthe meeting with discussion with a short review of the project that included a brief
summary of the prior neighborhood meeting held in April of this year.Staff talked about the
revisions of project including the geometric changes at both ends of the one-way conversions to
allow for better availability for vehicles needing to turn around and accessibility to driveways
along the Service Road. After staff completed their presentationon the project, staff openedthe
conversation to questions from the meeting attendees.
Staff responded to questions regarding the project, including:
1.A resident asked about the driveway along the Service Road being able to back up with
the one-way configuration.Staff responded that the design of the concrete curb and
gutter on the east side of the one-way likely will be constructed assurmountable curb to
allow for those backing out of the lone driveway will be able to drive over the curb and
partially use the trail area if need be.
2.A question about how the plowing configuration for the neighborhood will work with
the one-way street. Staff replied that they didn’t immediately know other than the streets
18
Jufn!3/
could be plowed. Staff confirmed with operations that there would be an adjustment to
plowing routes for the neighborhood and concluded that snow distribution could be
equally divided between street sides.
3. A concern was raised about the loss of parking along the Service Road for the adjacent
property owners. Staff responded that there are adjacent streets that allow for additional
parking and that the existing road configuration doesn’t have the width to allow for a
dedicated parking lane. Staff confirmed parking for approximately 16 spaces on two
blocks would be lost, which would have to be moved to roughly 200’ along the two-way
front streets for any events where this is required.
4. There was a concern on who would be using the trail and the resident stated that there
was a higher chance for criminal activity. Staff replied that generally throughout the City
there tends be less crime in the areas where there are trails because of higher volumes of
people travelling through the neighborhood to have eyes on properties. Staff referenced
the West Moore Lake Drive Trail project and stated that those residents had similar
concerns of having a trail in the neighborhood but after construction staff had received
many complimentary comments about the trail from property owners in the area.
5. A resident was questioning why the City was wanting to build a trail on the west side of
Trunk Highway 47 when there already is a trail on the east side. Staff stated that the
point of having a trail on the west side of Trunk Highway 47 was to make connections to
the existing trail system without having to cross Trunk Highway 47, which has been
labeled as a barrier based off feedback received at prior meetings and events.
6. A resident expressed concern for the neighborhood only having one access to the
nd
neighborhood at Mississippi Street and 2Street.Staff explained that this project didn’t
have any impact on the access to and from the neighborhood to Mississippi Street. Staff
explained that Mississippi Street is in Anoka County’s Jurisdiction and it would be up to
them if a change was needed.
7. Residents asked how the proposed one-way project was allowed to happen given the
legal description in Rice Creek Plat Addition didn’t state that a trail could be constructed
in the Right-of-Way nor could access be taken away with turning the street into a one-
way. Staff responded that they looked into this with the City Attorney and he opined
that the City has the authority to construct alternative transportation modes throughout
its Right-of-Way and remove a travel lane for vehicles as long as reasonable access
remains unhindered.
8. A resident gave their opinion that a better solution would be to keep the existing
geometrics the same and to delineate the street with pavement markings for the trail.
19
Jufn!3/
Staff explained that current street width wouldn’t allow for two-way traffic plus space for
an on-road trail and that from previous feedback received at meetings and events that a
majority of residents prefer to have vertical separation from vehicle traffic when biking
and walking on the trail. It is notable this would be an inexpensive retrofit; however,
surveys have indicated a grade-separated path is often preferred by the public.
9. Residents were concerned for the safety of the neighborhood regarding kids and pets
possibly crossing over the trail and alternative buffer without a fence onto Trunk
Highway 47. A resident stated that the neighborhood is getting younger with more
young families moving into the neighborhood. Staff responded that the eventual full
growth of plantings (estimated 3 years) will be visual and hard barrier between Trunk
Highway 47 and the neighborhood as shown in the graphic included with the meeting
invitation. Staff explained that the fence isn’t a safety measure for vehicles and that it
wouldn’t stop a car from crossing through or stop a pedestrian from jumping over it.
10. A resident asked what the emergency of getting this project completed now. Staff
responded that this project was part of the approved Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) by
City Council to be constructed now. Staff explained that when the Trunk Highway 47
Fencing and Landscaping project was constructed last year, they had worked out with
MnDOT that these 3 segments for the current project with alternative buffers were going
to be constructed the following year.
11. A question about the aesthetics of landscaping looking better than the fence with
additional maintenance. Staff responded that Public Works would be taking care of the
maintenance of landscaping and that it will be easier for them than the fence since they
won’t have to work around the fence (i.e., weed whipping, mowing, etc.).
12. A resident claimed that if the City is worried about traffic, why they would allow the
redevelopment of Holly Center to apartments. Staff replied that this project had nothing
to do with the redevelopment of Holly Center. Staff stated that other City departments
worked closely with the property owners for the redevelopment and did so in the best
interests of the City.
13. A resident stated that they feel railroaded by the project and that the project is a done
deal already. Staff responded that this project has been discussed since 2018 and
discussed that all of these elements for the project had been discussed at the four TH 47
& TH 65 corridor meetings in 2019 and that there were two previous Neighborhood
Meetings specifically for their neighborhood. The Neighborhood Meeting in 2019, there
wasn’t a single resident that showed up to the meeting.
20
Jufn!3/
14.A resident asked why the fence wasinstalled near Rice Creek for the wildlife crossing but
not in front of houses that may have children or pets. Staff replied that there is a higher
chance of wildlife crossing near Rice Creek with a greater probability of causing an
accident on Trunk Highway 47, so the fence was replaced near Rice Creek.
15. A question of the possibility of having some sort of temporary barrier until the plantings
grow to more of an established barrier. Staff replied that they would evaluate the
possibility of adding a temporary barrier during the seasons while the plantings mature.
16. A resident asked for the meeting minutes from the prior meetings. Staff apologized for
th
not sending an email to this resident earlier when they showed up at the April 26City
Council Meeting asking for those minutes and said that they would send an email this
week to the resident. This information was forwarded the day after the onsite meeting.
Staff will incorporate concerns and comments towards completion of a Feasibility Report to the
City Council for items discussed. Staff anticipates delivering the Feasibility Report and project
recommendation in mid-July.
JPK/BJB
Attachments
21
Jufn!3/
0
100
SCALE IN FEET
R
I
C
E
C
R
E
E
K
T
E
R
R
A
C
E
N
E
EXISTING
AA
PLANTINGS
PLAZA CURVE NE
AREA
AVAILABLE
FOR
ADDITIONAL
LANDSCAPING
BUFFER
AA
UNIVERSITY AVENUE SERVICE ROAD CHANGES - 67TH AVENUE TO RICE CREEK TERRACE
22
Jufn!3/
23
Jufn!3/
MEMORANDUM
Public Works Department
Streets ¤ Parks ¤ Water ¤ Sewer ¤ Stormwater ¤ Fleet ¤ Facilities ¤ Forestry ¤ Engineering
Date: 3/26/21 PW21-011
To: Walter T. Wysopal, City Manager
From: James Kosluchar, Director of Public Works and Engineering
Brandon Brodhag, Project Engineer
Re: University Avenue Frontage Road One-Way Conversion Project
In 2019, the City undertook a community visioning effort for Trunk Highways 47 & 65 and
received recommendations to improve safety and image along the corridors after a series of
community engagement meetings with MnDOT personnel, City staff and Fridley residents.
MnDOT and the City have been coordinating work on Trunk Highway 47 to improve the image
after the community meetings and recommendations. The City and MnDOT have established
segments where fencing will be replaced, and others where alternative buffers could be
established; see the attached map excerpted from a presentation to the City Council for a
disposition of these buffers. Note that those that are marked in black have potential for
alternative buffers (i.e., no fencing).
The fence removal and buffers are in place insofar as the University Avenue Fencing and
Landscaping project funded by MnDOT that was completed last year. The alternative buffers
placed on the west side of University have doubled plantings from what was envisioned as
additional funding was made available through the CityÔs in-kind work. A short segment of
fencing was replaced on the west side of University Avenue north of Rice Creek Terrace, as this
was agreed to with MnDOT (shown in green in the map) as a wildlife control.
In addition to what is currently planted, the City may provide additional plantings, and is
planning to provide space for a shared-use path and additional buffer space under the
University Avenue Frontage Road One-Way Conversion Project. This project is planned to
include 1) road closure from 67th to 68th Avenue on the east frontage road remnant, 2) one-
way conversion on the west frontage road remnant from Holly Center to Rice Creek Terrace, and
3) one-way conversion on the west frontage road from Star Lane to Mercury Drive. The
th
conversion would allow future fulfillment of an eventual trail connection from 57 Avenue to
th
Avenue on the west side of University Avenue, in accordance with the CityÔs Active
69
Transportation Plan.
24
Jufn!3/
The improvements of the first two segments are included in the attached presentation and are
contemplated in the Capital Investment Plan for 2021 along with the third segment south of
Mississippi Street. None of these plans include fencing installation. These are currently under
preliminary design after open house meetings and a presentation to the Planning Commission
in 2019.
Finally, the attached typical section is illustrative of the plan for the one-way conversion on the
west frontage road remnant from Holly Center to Rice Creek Terrace, which was the subject of a
concern for lack of fencing this past week.
Staff have tentatively scheduled the following informational meetings onsite and plans to mail
notices next week for the first of these meetings. In the case of inclement weather, the meetings
will be held at the Council Chambers.
1.University West Frontage Road north of Mississippi Street: April 20, 6:00 PM
2.University West Frontage Road south of Mississippi Street: April 27, 6:00 PM
3.University East Frontage Road north of Mississippi Street: May 4, 6:00 PM
We will provide copies of letters when sent out; we plan to notice those properties who received
prior open house notices.
JPK/jk
attachments
25
Jufn!3/
26
Jufn!3/
27
Jufn!3/
Project Map
-Locations
between
th
&67
th
between66
28
Jufn!3/
Neighborhood Meetings
Staff held three Neighborhood Meetings, one for each segment for the adjacent
neighborhoods
thth
University Ave East Service Road between 66& 67Ave ÏAugust 13
9 attendees with no strong opposition to the traffic changes
th
University Ave West Service Road between Rice Creek Terrace & 67Ave ÏSeptember 10
5 attendees that only included City staff and Councilmember Bolkcom
29
Jufn!3/
Project Map
30
Jufn!3/
thth
66Ave/UniversityAveEastServiceRdConceptforTurnaroundat67Ave/UniversityAveEastServiceRd
Proposed Concept
31
Jufn!3/
Project Map
32
Jufn!3/
Existing Conditions
33
Jufn!3/
Proposed Concept
34
Jufn!3/
Buffer alternatives for landscaping, berming, and swales
Traffic Counts do not support need and maintenance
Reduce pavement in accordance with CityÔs Local Water Management
Why are we proposing these traffic changes?
35
R/W
EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION
R/W
R/W
EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION
R/W
Jufn!4/
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date:June 10, 2024 Meeting Type:City CouncilConference Meeting
Submitted By:Walter Wysopal, City Manager
Title
Islands of Peace Regional Park
Background
,we will have a discussion regarding the Islands of PeaceRegional
Park (Islands of Peace). The purpose of our discussion on Monday is to gain a better understanding of
the arrangements for which Islands of Peace exists and the conditions which prompt our need to act.
Iamlooking for guidance not a decision.
Vision Statement
We believe Fridley will be a safe, vibrant, friendly and stable home for families and businesses.
38
Jufn!4/
As you know, the City owns the property that comprises Islands of Peace. A portion of the park was
donated to the City by the Islands of Peace Foundation, which was a nonprofit organization. Its mission
was to create a park that was handicapped accessible. The building on the property was developed
jointly by the Foundation and the City. A portion of the Park was donated to the City in 1980 as the
Foundation ceased operations. The City agreed to continue the mission of serving handicapped
persons. But, before the City could ever begin to fulfill that mission, the City transferred the obligations
to the County through a JPA for the purpose of creating a Regional Park.
The JPA requires the County provide handicapped programing in the building. The programming can
be fulfilled by a third party who could lease the building. The County leases the building to the
Minnesota Recreation and Park association who uses it for their general office. They do not currently
and have never provided handicapped programing. The City has the right to approve the lease of the
building and did so in 1992 to MRPA. However, since then, the County has reauthorized the lease
several times without City consent. Many improvements were also made to the building and property
without prior approval of the City as required. City staff considers these actions to be violations of the
JPA.
The County manages the property through a JPA and under the policy guidance of the Met Council,
making the County responsible for its development. While this is similar to the recently dissolved Locke
Park arrangement, it is inherently different in that by entering into the JPA, the City intended to help
create a Regional Park. In the case of Locke Park, we only intended to make property available for a trail
in exchange for certain improvements to the Park.
There are many questions to be discussed including why did we get involved in the JPA in the first
place? Should the City gain JPA compliance? And, is it worth the effort?
The record is clear the City was involved in the JPA to help create the Regional Park by leveraging its
resources. We should consider our intentionality that helping to create the Islands of Peace Regional
Park obligates us morally to do our part to continue the Regional Park status. So, we can either fix the
JPA or get out of it.
To fix the JPA would require us to put the County on notice of the violations. The remedy would be to
provide the programing and remove the MRPA from the building. However, the City would continue to
be in a monitoring position to assure compliance. And, when it comes to improvements, the County
would most likely use state bond proceeds to make the improvements. As such, we would have to grant
a permanent easement to the County or end up in the same situation we had with Locke Park. In the
end, the City would own the property, have no control over it, and become legally liable for the
improvements.
Another option is to terminate the JPA and take over the regional park. But, doing so on our own would
be difficult and almost impossible. Firstly, we would need to gain Implementing Agency status. You will
recall our effort to get this for Locke Park was a bust. Without Implementing Agency status, we could
not fulfill the obligation we made to create a Regional Park. The grandfathering theory we used in
Locke Park does not apply here, as that dealt with grants and this situation addresses authority for
regional status. In 1982 when the City entered into the JPA, cities were not eligible for regional status.
Vision Statement
We believe Fridley will be a safe, vibrant, friendly and stable home for families and businesses.
39
Jufn!4/
Therefore, dissolving the JPA would only mandate the City to acquire Implementing Agency status
through legislative change.
Prior to considering implementing agency status, the City should have a vision for the park. Other than
to support the Regional Park Master Plan, we have none. Furthermore, it would need to be consistent
with the Regional Master Plan for the Park so any changes would require amending the Master Plan.
According to Mike Maher, programing the Park would be limited to the things currently being done, a
passive nature area with some access to water. Elevation changes are steep, creating a significant barrier
to usage. Also, we are in the midst of the Park Improvement Plan (PIP), and we recently added Locke
Park to the mix. Our resources are very thin and adding new responsibilities could jeopardize our
success with the PIP.
n space. While there has
been some interest over the last 15 years to redevelop the multifamily housing areas east of the park,
no land conversion of the park was proposed. There was interest in increasing access to the River, and
moving the Regional Trail from East River Road to be closer to the River.
The way in which Islands of Peace is established with City ownership and County management places
the City at a disadvantage. As property owners, we have no control over the land due to the Regional
Park Status. However, any improvements made with state grants places a liability on the City as much as
the County. Even things we are to have influence over such as the building rental and park
improvements have proven to be problematic. And, the primary focus of City involvement from the
beginning--handicapped accessible programing--has gone unanswered.
In preliminary discussion with County Park staff, I expressed the possibility of selling the property to the
as very favorable. The County would pursue the Met Council
Acquisition Opportunity Fund, which is a first come, first served process depending upon available
funding. There is also a 25% local match. Typically, appraisals are conducted by both the seller and
buyer as a starting point for negotiations. Met Council policy does not finance anything over 10% of
the market value.
Pat Maghrak did a quick analysis of the property value. The Girl Scout camp just north of this site sold in
2016 for $3,415,000 and included 22.04 acres or 960,062 sq ft, along with a structure valued at
$268,300. That concludes to a land per sq ft value of $3.28 per sq ft. We own three parcels. Applying the
Girl Scout camp rate, Islands of Peace could conservatively fetch $600,000. Proceeds would, according
to our policy, be placed in the Community Investment Fund for uses such as park improvements for
handicapped persons.
Going forward with the intent of disposing of the property may take some time, as the Met Council
funds are first come, first served. In the meantime, extending the MRPA lease would be advisable, as
they are not even aware of the requirement to provide handicapped accessible portograms.
Attachments
None
Vision Statement
We believe Fridley will be a safe, vibrant, friendly and stable home for families and businesses.
40