Roseville council backs petition to remove proposed north-side pathway and mid-block crossings on County Road C

Roseville’s City Council voted 4–1 Monday to support a neighborhood petition asking Ramsey County to drop a proposed 8‑foot bituminous pathway on the north side of County Road C and to delete two planned mid‑block crossings between Western Avenue and Rice Street.

The council’s decision followed a staff presentation from Public Works Director Jesse Fryhammer and City Engineer Jennifer Lowery, a technical review of project goals, and more than a dozen public comments both for and against the pathway and crossings. The council’s motion accepted the petition and asked that staff pursue alternatives including a single, protected crossing near the Matilda intersection and improvements to existing intersection crosswalks to meet ADA standards.

The petitioners and several residents who spoke at the meeting said the pathway and mid‑block crossings would intrude on private property, require utility relocation, and not be used by park visitors who typically cross at existing intersections. Retired civil engineer and neighborhood resident Greg Schrader, who helped collect signatures, said the pathway “would require buying right‑of‑way from residents” and argued the mid‑block crossings “are redundant” because most people cross at the existing intersections near Acorn Park.

City staff presented the county‑led County Road C project as a pavement rehabilitation and lane‑conversion effort that would convert a four‑lane section to a three‑lane cross section (one center left‑turn lane and one travel lane each direction), add bike lanes on the roadway shoulders, provide ADA upgrades and signal changes at Rice Street and Lexington Avenue, and—at this stage—include a proposed 8‑foot multiuse path on the north side between Western and Rice. Fryhammer said the project aims to improve safety by reducing speeds and providing a pedestrian refuge island in the center left lane where mid‑block crossings are located.

Lowery said the pathway segment is listed in the city’s Pathway Master Plan and that the county’s preliminary layout treats the north‑side trail as segment number 5 in the plan. She also told the council the planned construction scheduling aims for a 2026 build year and that the county generally expects municipal partners to fund half the pathway cost under the current cost‑share policy.

Public commenters opposed and supported the pathway. Opponents raised concerns about property impacts, utility poles, snow storage, and whether residents would actually use the mid‑block crossings. Several pointed to the narrow right‑of‑way behind the curb in places and said the pathway would encroach into residents’ yards. Proponents said the conversion to three lanes and a parallel pathway would make crossings safer for slower pedestrians and families, and would improve walkability for schoolchildren and park users; one resident described not feeling safe crossing County Road C while recovering from hip surgery.

Council members pressed staff on practical details: whether parking would be affected (staff said no), how the bike lanes align with the draft bike plan, how stormwater and snow storage would be handled, the likely design of upgraded signals at Rice to allow more efficient east‑west phasing, where poles or utilities might need relocation, and the long‑term timing if the pathway were deferred (the county’s pavement cycle is roughly 15–20 years for mill/overlay projects).

After deliberation, the council’s motion to support the petition passed 4‑1. The motion removed the north‑side pathway and the two mid‑block crossings from the council’s recommendation to Ramsey County while adding a preference that the county and city pursue a protected crossing on the east side of the Matilda intersection and make ADA upgrades and striping improvements at the existing intersection crosswalks.

Mayor Rohe framed the decision as balancing neighborhood concerns and multimodal goals: the council voted to decline the north‑side pathway at this time but asked staff and Ramsey County to pursue targeted safety improvements at intersections and to preserve the roadway lane conversion that reduces through speeds.

What happens next: the County Road C project is county‑led and the county will incorporate city input as it finalizes design. Staff warned that the county retains ultimate authority to install crossings under its jurisdiction, and that declining the pathway now could make it harder to add both sides later without a separate project and additional funding. The county’s preliminary design and funding process will determine whether any portion of the bridge modifications or other phase‑two work can be bundled with the 2026 construction.

Ending: Residents on both sides of the debate said they would continue to engage with city and county staff as the project proceeds through final design and permitting. The council’s decision leaves the lane conversion in place while removing the proposed north‑side pathway and mid‑block crossings from Roseville’s endorsement, but it directed staff to pursue safer, ADA‑compliant crossings at established intersections so residents can reach Acorn Park more safely.