Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident urges South Saint Paul to implement 2040 comprehensive plan historic-preservation goals

5605891 · August 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A resident urged the South Saint Paul City Council to follow policies in the city’s 2040 comprehensive plan that call for identifying and protecting historic buildings and places, saying a recent council vote blocked a task force to study preservation.

Mark Westfall, a South Saint Paul resident, told the City Council on Aug. 18 that the city should implement language in the 2040 comprehensive plan calling for historic preservation.

Westfall quoted several passages from the plan, saying Chapter 4-94 recognizes “historic buildings and places that help to frame the character of the community” and that Chapter 3-33 contains “Goal 4.3, protect significant historic places and architectural properties.” He urged the council to review policies he cited — Policy 4.3 0.1 through 4.3 0.6 — and to develop “an open and fair process for the community to be actively engaged” in identifying and preserving historical properties.

The resident referenced a recent council motion to create a task force on historic preservation that he said failed in a 2-5 vote. He said five current council members had previously vetted and approved the 2040 plan and asked the council to hold itself accountable to those adopted policies. Westfall concluded by asking the council to ensure the historic-preservation plan is developed and incorporated into relevant city planning, zoning, housing and parks decisions.

The remarks came during the meeting’s citizen comment period and were not followed by formal council action. Mayor Francis and members of the council did not take a vote on the request during the Aug. 18 meeting.