Good evening, everybody. We're going tocall this meeting to order. And our firstagenda item this evening is the open forum.So, the open forum is an opportunity for anyone to address the commission on anitem that is not on the agenda and not an application form coming to thecommission at a future date. Is there anyone in the audience who'dlike to address the planning commission on an item that's not on the agenda andnot an application will be coming to the commission at a future date? I don't see anybody. Last call.Okay, we'll move on to adopting the final agenda.Uh, let's see. Commissioners, our next item is adopting the final agenda. CouldI have a motion to adopt the final agenda?>> So moved. >> Thank you, Commissioner CommissionerAlister. Can I get a second? >> I'll second.>> Commissioner Ring, thank you. All those in favor?>> Aye. >> Any opposed?Motion carries. The next item is 4.1 to approve theplanning commission meeting minutes of June 2nd.Could I get a motion to approve the minutes?>> I just said before we go there, I did not see the minutes attached as part ofthe packet. Were they distributed separately becauseI may have missed them, but I didn't see them.>> Let me check the agenda. Yeah, you are correct. They were notattached. So, why don't we table that item to our next meeting and then wewill have those attached for you. >> Let's do that. Thank you.>> Do you I mean, they're are they substantial or could we pull them up andread through them? Um, you'd like to table them?>> I'd like to table them just so everyone has time to read and absorb them.>> Fine, thank you. We'll table we'll table thatuh minute approval 4.1 to next time.Next item for discussion is item 4.2 to consider a final plan and conditionaluse permit for the Hotel Victoria. >> Chair, do do you mind if we go back andtake a motion and get a second and a vote on tabling?>> Oh, sure. Yeah, yeah. So, I would like a motion to table the minutes.>> So moved. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Can I get asecond? >> Second.>> And a second. All those in favor? >> Aye.>> Aye. >> Any opposed?Thank you. So, we've uh tabled them correctly this round.Uh moving on to the uh considering the the final plat and conditional use foruh permit for Hotel Victoria. Uh after a staff presentation, we'llgive the applicant an opportunity to speak and then open the public hearingfor those in the chambers that wish to speak on the request.So, uh Brian McCann, please give us a staff presentation.>> Absolutely. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. Tonight, we are lookingat a final plat and a conditional use permit request for Hotel Victoria. Uhtypically, you wouldn't see a final plat or hold a public hearing on a finalplat, but you're seeing that tonight because they have an additionalconditional use permit request. Um So, typically, we are reviewing the finaldetails of the development here. It typically goes straight to council, butwe need your guys um review first for this request. So, umwe are looking again at a final plat and a conditional use permit for sharedparking agreement for five parking spaces. Uh the location and existingconditions of the request, it's at 7929 Victoria Drive, which is a singleparcel, which currently occupies the Winchester and Rye building with somevacant green space to the north where the hotel would go. It is surrounded bystreets on all sides, as you can see in the image on the left. It also is withinclose proximity to the Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail and within 1,000 ft ofSteiger Lake. And is approximately 50% impervious as it stands today.And then just as a quick refresher of what the project is for everyone, theyare proposing a 46-unit [clears throat] boutique hotel with various amenities,including covered parking for 41 parking stalls,a fitness center for the occupants as well as a lobby and breakfast bar andmultiple meeting rooms and spaces. They did add some changes since the last timethat the planning commission reviewed this based on requests by city council.They've added some on-street parking modifications to the north side ofSteiger Lake Lane, but they are keeping the changes to Randy's Way the same.There's also a building overhang encroachment here as well as someportion of the balconies here that require an encroachment agreement to beapproved by the city council. So, here is the final plat. It's prettysimple. Lot two would consist of Winchester and Rye. Lot one would be thehotel site and then a single outlot here consisting of public sidewalk andportions of parking spaces here. Looking at the landscaping and treepreservation, they are exempt from our open spaceminimum planting requirements. They typically would requireboulevard trees planted every 35 feet. City staff and the applicant have beenworking on this and due to the urban nature of this area, wedon't anticipate any boulevard trees being necessary besides the one thatthey're showing here. And then just highlighting the changesto the north side of Steiger Lake Lane that you're seeing here. They'recurrently about six parallel parking stalls within thisarea. They have decided to incorporate a retaining wall here with a sidewalkextension and angled parking spaces to help them get to a net zero of on-streetparking. Before you may recall, they weredown four spaces on their previous plan with some umparking space removals on Steiger Lake Lane. This is the way to get those fourstalls back. So, here meets our on-street parking, but the reason thatthey are requesting the uh conditional use permit tonight forthe five shared parking spaces is because they are required to have 46parking spaces per our code. They only have 41 in their underground parkinggarage. So, that shared parking request is forfive spaces. The spaces that made the most sense uh to staff are the fiveparallel stalls directly on the south side of Steiger Lake Lane right in frontof the hotel here. Other than that, uh the projectbasically remains the same from what you had seen last time. They're stillexpanding Randy's Way to 20 ft wide on the east side, and all these parkingareas remain the same. Uh except for they did add one stall righthere in front of the building that should be noted.Um so, yes, here is uh exhibit highlighting those five spaces forconsideration by the planning commission tonight. We believe that all five ofthese spaces in the shared parking agreement would meet our generalconditional use permit requirements. So, with that, we did properly noticethe public hearing in the June 4th edition of the Waconia Patriot. Wemailed out notices to affected property owners within 350 ft of the request. Itwas posted online and at City Hall, and at this time staff have not received anycomments on the request. So, with that, I have some suggestedconditions if the planning commission chooses to recommend approval of therequest. I've highlighted a few that are noteworthy for the planning commissionto consider. Uh number one being that the conditional use permit allows forthose five parking public spaces to be in a shared parking agreement. Uh that astaging plan must be reviewed and approved before the city would sign offon the mylars for the final plat. They would have to coordinate uh with 1600Arboretum Boulevard for the project staging and contractor parking that wasreviewed last time. They would also need to receive approval from Carver Countyfor those modifications to the north side of Steiger Lake Lane because it'swithin their property boundaries. The city actually doesn't own that area thatthey would be proposing to put those angled parking stalls in. And then theywould also have to provide a connection uh sidewalk connection from ArboretumBoulevard to uh Kwama Klip for that contractor and parkingum scenario. So, with that, I do have a sample motionfor you on the screen this evening. I can stand for any questions you have,and there are some representatives of the application in the audience as well.>> Thank you. Uh does the applicant wish to speak?>> Sure. I would love to. Thank you for the invite.>> Yeah. >> Uhthank you for having me. We're very excited to move forward with the hotel.I just want to give the planning commission just a brief uh overview ofthe schedule so that you're aware as, you know, residents inquire. Uh we have,once we get our final approval, which we're anticipating that on Monday at thecity council, we then have uh approximately 2 months of uhfinal engineering and structural drawings that will happen.And then there is a full bidding process that happens. It's a final biddingprocess. And that process takes 5 weeks.That brings us into August, um early September. Uh then umwe end up we believe that we'll be able to turn in for permit. The permittingprocess is an additional 5 weeks. And the time frame to get everythingdone would bring us to December. And so we are looking uh that it takesapproximately 5 to 6 weeks to uh deploy everything and have itstarted. So we're looking at a February 1st, 2027start dig. The road closure for the highway happensApril of 2027for highway 5. And that road closure goes all the waytill January of 2028. We anticipate being done very shortly within a monthof that road closure being done. So it aligns nicely to be able to getthe hotel open and running March of 2028.Your road closure will go till January of 2028, so that gives us um and then itgives us time for a soft opening March and April. And then you're really goingto go into your bookings May, June, July, August, September, October.So we're right at the tail end of being able to hit that season. And that uh ifeverything goes through, it will be a 2028 opening.Any questions? Thank you.>> Thank you. Did you have one? No.>> I have one for Brian. >> Okay.>> When it's appropriate. >> We'll just uh we'll do theum public hearing. We can now open a publichearing. If there's anybody in the chambers who wishes to comment on thisitem, I'll just remind you uh if you do wish to speak, you'll be given 3 minutesand then we'll kindly ask the next individual to have a chance untileverybody's had an opportunity. I will ask our planning commission formotion to close the public hearing and then just note that the planningcommission and city staff will will engage inback and forth just information gathering. So, umwith that, if there's anyone in the chambers who would like to speak thisevening. No brave souls, last call. Okay, I see no additional public input.So, commissioners, can I have a motion to close the public hearing?>> Motion to close the public hearing. >> I'll second.>> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All thosein favor? >> Aye.>> Any opposed? Thank you. So, we've closed the publichearing and now we can open the floor for the planning commission to discuss.Commissioners, have at it. >> Brian, I do have a question for youregarding the parking. So, um we're we're making up for adeficiency in the 46 spots through the five shared parking spots.Uh we all know that parking in Victoria isat a premium, uh especially in the summer months. My question is, what doesit mean to have a shared parking spot right in front of the hotel?Uh that's one question. Is it going to be signed as available for public use?>> Um chair and commissioners, that's my understanding is that umwe understand that those are prime spots for the hotel being placed right outfront for it. So, um it would be [clears throat] signedfor the hotel but open to public use if available.>> Okay, thank you. So, if the hotel is chargingoccupants for using the parking facility in the hotel,wouldn't that mean that naturally people are going to use the five shared parkingspots first? I I I just wonder if this is really a facade and and are theparking spots really available to the public?>> Chair and commissioners, that's a fair question.Um I guess we haven't got that far inevaluating if the valet parking would be a service for the hotel free tothe occupants or if that would be a charged service. I don't know if theapplicant is willing to speak to that. >> Hello commissioners. Um we have not madea decision. We have to wait and get all of our bidding, get everything thingdone. I think it's important to know that the shared parking is done exactlyhow the city has done all the shared parking. We are not an exception.Uh you approved Rich Gannon's project with shared parkingall along um the the street here. You've approved uhthe restaurant that's coming in with shared parkingand we are no different. Uh we actually created all of that parking that isaround the site. That would all belong to the Creameryand I put all of that parking to the city. Soum we're not we're following all the rules that you've applied to all of thewonderful gentlemen that have come before you. Thank you. >> Fair fair point. I'm just concerned thatparking is at a premium and um you know, people are naturally goingto take advantage of free parking if it's available.Go ahead. >> one more thing.I think if you take a look, there's another thing just to really weigh inhere as you're assessing this. Uh the parking that we provided is undergroundparking. It's millions of dollars for this hotel. You can drive from Victoriaall the way to the airport and I don't know if you're going to seea hotel that was able to financially put in an underground parking.And so for us at 41 spots, we have 46 rooms.The hotel is typically at 65% occupancy. So, um to for us to be able to provide41 spots of underground parking um is actually extraordinaryfor the city. And so, um again, that is how the sharedparking ordinance works. And we are no different. And I don'tknow if Rich Gannon is going to charge for his parking either.I don't know who charges. I do know that RollI think they taught they charge for their underground parking.They charge monthly. But yet you did shared parking for them,and I don't know if you had those same questions. Thank you. >> I mean, can I ask a couple clarifyingquestions just I mean Is there overnight parking?One question, just in general in town. >> downtown?>> Yeah, I believe no. >> Correct.>> So, in terms of like someone wanting to park it and just kind of walk away, youknow. >> I think that kind of caveats that. Isthere anything the city can do in terms ofhourly limitations as well as another thing to encouragekind of migration or mobility? >> Sure. Chairing Commissioners, this is aconditional use permit request, so you can require reasonable conditions suchas hourly restrictions if you'd like for consideration by the City Council.>> Isn't the Do any of the other shared parking spots have any restrictions?>> Not to my knowledge. >> And see, that's the thing. I wouldn't beproposing it if it wasn't. But just as one of those things, again, to kind ofget that you know, most people are parking for afew hours to go for dinner or for going to get ice cream or, you know,things. I think it's it's helping me withduration and overnight and trying to get out of a, you know, payingfor valet parking for a little bit. >> Mhm.>> It's probably a hard one to get around. >> See, the other thing, too, is that likewe know we're going to be in this time of frustration with everybody withparking, especially as like the road is closing on 5 for a while and we have allthis construction going on that like it's just going to be frustrating foreveryone, but as long as we can keep the goal, you know, hopefully by 2028 we'llhave quite a bit of parking up and going by that point. Um things should besmooth, so you know, I don't see a problem withwe've already approved other this kind of situation with other sites, so whyshould we treat this one any differently?>> I I don't think we should treat it differently. My point simply is thatparking is at a premium and I don't know of a long-term solution at this point.>> Mhm. >> And as we add more businesses and andthe hotel, uh parking is going to be even more at apremium. >> Mhm.>> I would say that the council, and Briany can comment, is looking at severaldifferent parking options to increase the availability of parking in downtownVictoria and to the west. >> Chair and commissioners, that's correct.If you haven't uh been part of the parking survey and the open house thatwas recently conducted a month or two ago, we are stillanalyzing all parking options, so stay engaged if you are interested indowntown parking and viable options for the city. >> I think one of the slides commented onsome updates or changes to the proposal.>> Go back to that. >> UmChair and Commissioner Graham, I'm not sure which slide >> Maybe I misread it.Never mind. Okay. >> Just a going tothe the list of criteria. Could you bringthat one up? Cuz I think, you know, I know I read three like some of theseCarver County was hadn't confirmed but they're amenable tothe idea of that land possible, you know, is being a point of discussion ifit moves forward. It was kind of a negotiation aboutkind of maintenance agreements for the portion on the north or the east side, Iguess. So, those are all part of this.>> Chair and Commissioners, yeah, we reached out to Carver County about thisuh ahead of time and they said they were absolutely open to discussing the idea.They generally know what the plan is entailing. We just haven't sat down withthem to finalize the details yet. That's why it's a condition of approvaltonight. We'll want written approval from the county.>> Mhm. >> Any other comments or questions? Okay, Commissioners, hearing no morediscussion, I'll ask for a motion. >> I'll make the motion to recommend theCity Council approve the request for Hotel Victoria.>> Thank you. Can I get a second? >> I'll second.>> All those in favor? >> I.>> Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank ThankOkay, on to item 4.3, the sketch plat for Astoria Lake Town,um just a reminder, the sketch plat reviewis the initial stage review for the Planning Commission.And uh there are no formal actions or recommendations taken by the Commissionat the time of the sketch plat review. The review process is intended for theapplicant to receive initial feedback from the Planning Commission and CityCouncil in advance of any necessary preliminary plat or rezoningapplications. So, back to City Planner Brian McCannfor a staff presentation. >> Thank you, Chair and Commissioners.Tonight, we will be reviewing a sketch plat proposal for a residentialdevelopment. Uh I'm not quite sure if any of you were I think maybe one of youwas on the Commission at the time that Amira was last reviewed. That was theformer project for this site. Uh so, I'll talk a little bit of the detailsabout that, but some of this information might look familiar to some of you whowere on at that time. So, tonight, we're reviewing a sketch platjust to get feedback back to the applicant. There aren't any approvals oractions taken tonight. We just want to provide them guidance as they startmoving forward with any other potential future submittals. So,the site in total at 2285 Arboretum Boulevard consists of four parcels, justover 56 acres in size. There are two existing single-family homes on thesite. There's one here just at the end of Sky Drive, and then there is anotherone tucked back here central to the site. Uh the southern two propertieshere, you see this long strip uh consisting of approximately 7 acres, isuh part of an easement that the city has for the future Lake Minnetonka RegionalTrail Corridor. There's also significant wetland coverage on the site with astream connecting Lake Auburn to the north and Carl Krey Lake down to thesouthwest off the screen here. Uh the former Amira site was here consisting ofa 147 unit uh senior age-restricted 55 years or older apartment building.Uh but that project was unfortunately not able to move forward afterpreliminary plat approval, so the property owner sought out a potentialnew developer for this site. So, that's why we have Ebenezers development infront of us this evening. They are proposing a 76-unit cooperative seniorhousing apartment building, as well as six senior housing uh townhomes orduplexes here. There's two units in each of these buildings shown, as well as twosingle-family homes, one of them being new and one of them being the existingstructure here. They are proposing 167 parking stallswith this project, 63 being in the surface-level parking lot, and 104 ofthose stalls are underneath the building.They are also proposing access from Sky Drive uh due to MnDOT restrictions toHighway 5 access there just isn't feasible for the project. Then for the zoning and comprehensiveplan, the site is currently zoned planned unit development with underlyingcentral business district. That was part of the Amira rezoning that happened uh afew years prior. So, uh the applicant is proposing to rezone that to PUD withunderlying R4 high-density residential district instead with different PUDstandards. Is also currently guided in our 2040comprehensive plan as a mix of downtown mixed-use, open space, um and parks forthe section of the Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail.Uh they would likely need one change from that comprehensive plan amendmentthat was approved a few years ago changing that downtown mixed-usedesignation to high-density residential instead. Uh, the project is at about 17units per acre, so they're under the downtown mixed-use designation'srequirement of 24 minimum, but they fall within that range of high-densityresidential. Otherwise, the uses that they'reproposing comply with the R4 district and the uh, 2040 comprehensive plan. Then looking at the Shoreline OverlayDistrict, they are within 1,000 ft of Six Mile Creek and Auburn Lake. So, theyfall within the Shoreline requirements. We anticipate them requesting aresidential Shoreline Planned Unit Development as part of their PUDrequest. With that, they would need a 100-ft building setback from the stream,uh, which they are well beyond that. The You can see in the image on the lefthere, the center line is actually the stream location and all the other bluelines outside of that 300 ft, the building would be roughly around thisarea, so they should have no problem meeting that 100-ft setback.But, they also need to have 50% open space for the development and they willneed to conduct a analysis to verify that they aren't going over the maximumdensity allowed for the project per the DNR's requirements.And then with that, uh, the impervious maximum, anything outsideof the central business district is subject to a 25% maximum impervious. Weare anticipating that to be higher with their proposal. So, that will likely bea uh, another deviation anticipated withthe residential Shoreline Planned Unit Development. Then looking at building materiallightings and signage, it's too early for those submittals, so just note thatthose will be coming with any potential preliminary plat applications. We wouldlike to see street light and building light locations as well as any proposedwall signage or monument signage at this time.And then for landscaping and tree preservation, these are all the list ofrequirements that we anticipate uh seeing with any landscape plan thatis submitted in the future. They would need a mini- minimum 25% developmentopen space. That's likely very achievable based on the existing wetlandcoverage out there. They would also need one tree and oneshrub for every thousand square feet of that 25% required open space. They wouldneed foundation plantings around the duplexes or townhomes and the apartmentbuilding. They would also need a landscape bufferalong the north side of the site adjacent to Highway 5 that meets ourrequirements with a 3:1 slope. Um and then they would also need a 25-ft bufferadjacent to the single-family homes here on the west side of the site.We would also need boulevard trees every 45 ft along city streets.Um so if I actually back up a coupleslides, I should note that this here is anticipated to be a public cul-de-sacbulb. Everything outside of that is within their single property, so wewould require boulevard trees along this section of the cul-de-sac, but anythingafter that would be considered a site tree. And thenany off-street parking area, so that parking lot they had on the north sidewould need to be screened from Highway 5. That could likely be achieved withthe buffer, but if they want to include some 4-ft tall plantings there to deterany additional headlights that would be recommended as well.And then tree preservation requirements, as you're all aware, they can remove 20%without having to mitigate them. Anything over that 25 or 20%, they willneed to mitigate with additional tree plantings. Then regarding streets and parkings, asI mentioned just a moment ago, with the blue area here in the image on the leftis anticipated to be a public cul-de-sac, and then everything elsewould be a private street entrance. And then looking at ourparking requirements, senior housing requires one space per dwelling unit,plus one additional space for every five dwelling units, requiring 92 spaces forthe cooperative building. As I mentioned, they're proposing 167, sothey're well over that minimum requirement. And then the single-familyhomes and duplexes will have driveways, and we anticipate at a minimum thesingle-family homes will have garages. We'll need to evaluate the townhomesuh to verify that garages are part of that proposal as well to meet theirparking requirements. Overall parking looks good, too.And then regarding pedestrian connections, I put on the image on theleft here. This would be a public sidewalk meeting our 6-ft concretestandard. And then everything else internal to thesite is anticipated to be private um for their residents, or if they want to openit up to the public to walk through the site, especially as this trail has a orthis sidewalk has a future connection shown down to the Lake MinnetonkaRegional Trail Corridor. That would be up to the applicant.Um and then moving on to Parklanddedication, as I mentioned, there is an easement over these two properties forthe future extension of the Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail.We evaluated all the proposed residential uses with this project andcame out to just under an acre of required parkland dedication or $98,000.Uh the developer would be exceeding that requirement by dedicating 7 acres ofparkland to the city for this future trail corridor.Um and then just as a side note, we've been getting questions from the publicon this regarding if the developer is required to actuallydo the grading, clearing, uh and construction of the trail. Thatis not typical here. We only take the land in parkland dedication and thenit's up to city, county, um other partnerships to actually do thework out here to construct that trail. So, that's not something the city isanticipating asking the developer at this time. And then additionally, thereare a couple uh properties off screen here within the Lake Minnetonka RegionalTrail corridor that are under private property ownership.The city is not asking them to acquire those properties as part of this projecteither since it is not directly owned uh by the same group that is developing thesite. Then, looking at wetland storm watermanagement and site utilities, they're subject to the Minnehaha Creek WatershedDistrict's rules and regulations. So, they have to putuh wetland buffers within outlots that are deeded to the city. So, here you cansee uh one of their proposals include that wetland buffer within the actuallot lines of the single family homes. We've since asked them to change that,which they have. Um it's just not shown here. I just wantedto show you this example so that you understood they may be coming back withsome PUD requests for the single family homes. That's because they're requiredto put this area in an outlot to the city per our code.Otherwise, they are proposing a underground storm water system shown ingreen here and utility connections highlighted in yellow from Highway 5 andSky Drive. Last night was a busy evening for thisproject. They had a neighborhood meeting and I presented this item to the Parksand Recreation Committee as well. Um Jen attended the neighborhood meetingand noted approximately 15 attendees at that meeting last night. Uh statingconcerns regarding the feasibility of the acquisition and construction of theLake Minnetonka Regional Trail Corridor. They also expressed concerns withincreased traffic on Sky Drive and Lakes Parkway since Lakes Parkway would be thedirect connection to Highway 5 for this project and the Lake Bridgeneighborhood. And there was also uhsome support noted for a lower density concept than what Amira proposed. We'regoing from 147 units to 82 total. So, it is a much less dense project than whatwas previously approved. But, uh people are also excited about the dedication ofthat trail corridor, which is a big step in getting that future of the LakeMinnetonka Regional Trail extended. Or in that, we did receive three uhactually four now public comments before the packet was post or after the packetwas posted. I did print copies of those and leave them all on the dais for youall this evening. So, hopefully you had a chance to review them. Uh we typicallydon't receive public comments at sketch plat, but I thought it was important foryou guys to have those and they will be included with the council packet as wellfor next week. Or and then the Parks and RecreationCommittee reviewed this last night and they recommend the City Council acceptthe trail corridor as the full dedication for the project.So, with that I have some general questions here to help guide thediscussion if needed. These were included in your packet. Otherwise, Ican stand for any questions you have, and there are representatives of theapplication in the audience tonight. >> Thank you. Would the applicant like tospeak? >> Absolutely. Thank you for uhwelcoming us here tonight. Um I'm representing Leap Development, mycompany, as well as Astoria Cooperatives, uh which is a product ofuh partnership of myself and Ebenezer Development um with this project. Andso, we're really excited. Um obviously, it's uh it's a beautiful property. Uhone we're pretty excited to be pursuing. It's not often uh that you get todevelop or look at a property like this one where you're as close to a downtownarea but sitting on 40-plus acres. Um and so, we're excited to be talkingabout that uh with you here tonight and learning as much as we can for our nextproposal or next submittals. Um the the neighborhood meeting was wasvery helpful for us last night as a team. We learned a lot. Our architectand civil engineer were there as well. Architect on the project is Kost Wilson.Uh and the civil engineer is Civil Site Group. Uh both great groups. Um andCivil Site Group in particular had a connection to the Amira project that wasproposed before us as well. So, there's a lot of learning that they had donethrough that process as well. So, um the trail connection is a big one. It it wasthe biggest topic last night at our neighborhood meeting. It's important forus, too, which is uh evidenced by the by the dedication that that the group ismaking. And so, um we're we're allies with the neighbors in terms of hopingthat the our project moving forward um would allow some more discussions withParks and Rec in the city about um finally getting that in so that allthose residents out there can can enjoy all the all the amenities of in downtownVictoria. So, umwith that, I think Bryant covered things pretty well, but I'd be happy to answerany questions that the commission would have. So, thank you.>> Thanks. Appreciate it.Commissioners? Discussion?>> Just a reminder of the context of having direct access of the property onHighway 5 was turned down by the DOT originally.>> That's correct. Yes. Um as part of the Amira project as well, I went back inthe project folder and looked at it tonight because we've been hearing a lotof questions about requiring um a traffic study as part of this. So, justsome additional context for the group, a traffic study was conducted for theAmira project. It noted that during the peak AM and PM hours, it would onlygenerate an additional 21 vehicle trips based on a senior use out in this area.So, we anticipate that number could potentially be even lower due to um thereduced unit count here. So, something to consider, Highway 5 access stillwon't be feasible, but we anticipate less traffic than what was actually donewith Amira. >> All right, help me understand, where isthe access point then to this new neighborhood?>> Yes, let me go to a better aerial. So, hereum Lakes Parkway here would be the mainaccess from Highway 5, and then you would turn onto Sky Drive to come intothe development sites. The cooperative building would be here, town homes here,single family here. >> So, you're not going through theneighborhood except for maybe what, 100 yards?>> Correct. >> And it's not by any other neighborhoodhouses, either. >> And that cul-de-sac you showed, doesthat become a drive-through? So, you drive through what was acul-de-sac, it looks like. >> Correct. Yeah, so um to get into thecooperative site, you would pull directly through that cul-de-sac.>> Okay, that's helpful. Thank you. >> And could you go back one slide just forcontext? Okay, so that that one there. So the easement for the trail of the 7acres goes all the way up to the right side and then there'stwo parcels that are still three of those three there that are still to benegotiated. >> Correct.>> would actually go through. So, a big gesture.>> Correct. >> one.>> Chair and Commissioners, just to give a little bit more context to the city hasapproached them in the past or has had discussions with them in the past aboutpossibly acquiring those properties to help facilitate that trail extension. Atthat time, I don't know the last time it happened. It was before my time, over 3years ago now, but none of the property owners were interested in selling to thecity for that extension. >> I know I read something about the heightof the um the apartment building, the tallerbuilding, would exceed the um the zoning code's maximum height.>> Uh Chair and Commissioners, so our R4 district is actually a little bitunique. Um our downtown height requirement, as you might know, is 50ft. >> Right.>> Our R4 standard in code right now is 55 ft.>> Okay. >> I understand that the applicant isproposing somewhere around 53 ft. So, they would be meeting the requirementsof the R4. They just don't meet the central business district heightrequirement as it stands today. >> Okay.>> Good. >> I have another question. Um in LakesParkway, is it proposed any modification to allow all theextra cars that are going to turn in to the left?>> Chair and Commissioners, that's a good question. There aren't any proposedmodifications being applied to Lakes Parkway, which is that main entrancefrom Highway 5. Um as I was showing, they would finish out the cul-de-sachere on Sky Drive, but no changes to Lakes Parkway. >> Ryan,can you Is it possible to share the previousAmira MnDOT study and orI I'm interested if it contemplated emergency vehicle traffic and if whenthat study was conducted if the population and anticipated growth withall the new development that's happening materially changes any of the the entryand exit findings that they might have. >> Sure. Chair and Commissioners, so wehaven't engaged MnDOT yet on this. They typically don't review sketch plats.It's something we can certainly send them now since it's been 3 years sincethe Amira project. Maybe sentiments or parts of their evaluations have changed.So we'll definitely be sending it to them as part of the preliminary platsubmittal. We can engage them sooner if the Planning Commission thinks it wouldbe beneficial for them to look into that before the applicant starts preparingpreliminary plat plans. >> Ryan, you mentionedthat the impervious maximum is going to be a challenge. Dowe know the percentage of of impervious coverage that will likely have?>> Development wide, I don't anticipate more than 50% based on what they'reshowing in the current site characteristics.So it won't be an extreme number, especiallywhen we're talking about the site itself or the development itself.But if we're talking about a site-specific analysis, if we're talkingabout just their site boundaries, which doesn't include this hatched area downhere, that percentage could be inflatedup to potentially 80%, which would be like our central business districtrequirement. Umso it's what it's guided for today, butthey would have to change the designation to high-density residential.But um the impervious would likely still match something of a central businessdistrict nature. >> How does that compare to the Amiraproject? Is it more or less? >> It would be similar. Um as the applicantstated, they have the same architect working on or the same engineer workingon the project. So, I would guess that the engineer likely tried to keep thesame figure. >> If I could speak to that too, we we feelfor our program we're we're over parked and so that has been a discussion. Iwould assume that when we come with our next submittal, some of the surfaceparking is going to be removed just for more green space for our future members.>> That makes sense. >> Um just because we are over parked forwhat we typically shoot for and and we are above and beyond the one-to-oneunderneath. Um every every share, every co-op membergets a parking space with theirs uh with their share and then additionally thefirst there's a first-come, first-serve basis and we have I think it was 100 andfour underneath or 106 underneath? >> 104>> Uh with 76 units in the building. So, we have an abundance of underground parkingand so it'd be my hope to be able to minimize some of that surface parking aswell to help with some of that. Thank you.>> Very good. >> In this image on the northeastern side,it looks like the part of the driveway kind of just ends. Is there anticipationfor continual of that or is it just like that's it?>> Chair and commissioners, that's a good question. I should have pointed that outin our staff report, but that is actually necessary for uh fire truckturnaround. >> Okay. >> BrianWhat? >> I was just going to say there aren'tthere aren't additional buildable acres on the site. The rest of it is inwetlands, so there's no future proposal for additional >> Brian given umthe the um Met Council's density requirements,where are we at given just overall density um requirements to kind ofadhere to their guidelines, especially given the withdrawal of other projectsaround Victoria and this one coming in a little bitunder proposed density.>> Chair and commissioners, that's a good question. Um overall, we're still rightaround that three and a half, which will be our 2050 comp plan requirement. Uhthis proposal, putting it in a district that is slightly less dense, would bringdown our overall density a little bit. Um I don't know how drastically itcould, but it's something I could discuss with our sector representativeto see if it's going to be a drastic change for our future projections.>> Something that we need to Council needs to keep in mind overall for for allprojects moving forward. >> The other thought I had is looking atthis, and I'm pretty sure the new roundabout 45 and Steiger Lake, that'sthat uh top right corner, right? The north>> Correct. Victoria Drive and Highway 5 roundabout is under construction here atthe moment. >> I would love to see uh part of the trailsystem from all of this or a sidewalk connecting to that so that residentshere could easily walk and have a easier way of crossing the roadthere. >> I will when I reach out to MnDOT aboutthat, I will ask him as well about that possibility. I've under If I'munderstanding correctly what I've heard from past staff members is that MNDOTwasn't interested in a trail in that section, but I can certainly ask thequestion again to see if sentiments have changed.>> It actually would facilitate connection to downtown West as well.For all of the neighborhood areas. >> Mhm. >> I just feel like right there wouldprobably be best anyways cuz that's traffic's already slowing down with theroundabout, so a little bit easier for pedestrian crossing.>> Mhm. Brian, is there any contemplation or tothe developer on the entry the current proposed entry and exit on Lake Bridgefor either um traffic controlsigns, stoplights and if there's going to be any requirements around umyou know, resurfacing, reconstructing that given that there's a big uh youknow, center troll planting in that middle and that you know, right at thatentry exit there which I don't know how that would impact either emergencyvehicles or heightened traffic. Has that been contemplated or is that present inany of the packets either for this or Amira?>> It was present in the packet for Amira. As I said, there was a traffic studythat was conducted for that project. Um they determined that the I looking at itagain earlier today, the worst level of service meaning um A is the best, F isthe worst. The worst was a left turn out of Lakes Parkway onto Highway 5 umat the peak PM hour when everyone's commuting home from work, but that wasstill only a level service C after uh construction, which is a fairly averageuh traffic designation, so that doesn't warrant any additional improvedintersections. >> When that project or study was done, wasthis neighborhood already built out fully or>> Correct. That's my understanding. The Lake Ridge neighborhood just to the westhere started construction, I believe, 16 years ago. So, they've been built outfor a bit of time. So, that study considereduh all of this neighborhood as well as the Amira project with impacts to theHighway 5 and Lakes Parkway intersections.>> So, to that point, just for cuz I I don't remember, butdid it quantify how many vehicles were movingthrough that intersectionin the early period? So, of 21 additional,you know, what percentage? Cuz that's kind of the counter balance. It's likehow big is the community that it's serving relative to thisnew additional, you know, impact?Um is it proportional? You know, is it>> That's a good question. I did not get that far. So, I will look into that andhave a better answer for you next time. >> wondering is like, yeah, how big is thatneighborhood? I can't you know, I don't know what everyone that flows that way.We all know what it's like on some mornings.>> And that traffic study is part of the Amiraum development. I can tell you that wasreviewed in July of 2023. If you want to go back and look at that package, thatuh traffic report is part of that. >> I got a question for you. Is thatThere's a pond there, and then how close is this getting to Sixmile Creek?>> Uh Sixmile Creek is the stream that actually runs through the site here. Uhthis is a 300-ft distance. So, the building itself is probably 400500 ft away from the stream. >> The footprint of the building on thiswould be inside the light not touching any of the dotted blue.>> Correct. >> By another100 ft? >> Potentially, yeah.>> And what about the pond there? Is that considered aNo, no, up. It's next to the house. >> Oh, this one? That is not on the DNR'slist of registered waterways. So, umthat could just be wetland and not stream. There is a difference betweenthe two. DNR doesn't care as much about wetlands as they do streams.Um but there are wetland buffer setbacksthat the applicant would have to comply withum district's requirements. So, MinnehahaCreek will look at this section, but DNR will look at the rest of it, if thatmakes sense. >> So, is that a potential issue if theyHave they come on site and looked at thiscall it pond? >> Yeah, they did with the Amira proposal.I don't know if the applicant has engaged Minnehaha Creek WatershedDistrict yet, but they will be required to as part of their preliminary plat. >> Kind of remember something about that,but not the details. I know it was looked at, though. So, good for context.>> Um what were the umWhat were the trail concerns at the at the meeting last night? What WhatWhat more could you do? >> Um I So, I think it was the trailconcerns were probably less about our proposed property and more about thefact that when that development went in many years ago, I think the developerhad shared, "Won't this trail be great to access downtown Victoria?"16 some years later, still not complete. Uh a number of factors leading to that,I think. Um but certainlythis property now being up for sale and us proposing this project, it feels likea good opportunity, I think, to share those frustrations and concerns to say,"Hey, can we fix this now?" Um and certainly we we would supportthat with with the dedication and and he mentioned umMinnehaha Creek uh Watershed District, that'sum some discussions we've had. While we haven't We haven't talked to them yetabout that pond structure, Civil Site Group was on that project as well, sothey were likely involved with that. And so those are some of those learnings.But additionally, we understand that um we would like to reach out to them totalk about a potential funding source, too. So that in August when when thecity um Parks and Rec meetings start, we hope to have a seat at the table. I'msure the neighbors will also have a seat at the table along with the city and andhopefully be bringing up those ideas of, "Hey, how do we How do we finally solvethis um for everybody?" So um >> Thank you. Can I ask another question?Brian, can you get a little bit bigger viewof this image on the left? >> The whole of the whole of the basicallythe top side of the trail. I'm sorry. Is there another slide thatyou have that shows a more zoomed out view?>> Yeah. Uh yeah, that might do it.Uh is there the potential to run the trail to the north of these not tied uplots and make the curve a little bit different?>> I mean, in this >> Uh-huh. Right. So the curve would go>> So the curve would go a little bit higher, kind of parallel five.>> There's potential with that. Um I think the city owns this lot. I could bewrong. Um we own one of these four and we own this one.Um but if it did have to go from here all all way up uh and connect back downhere or something. That could potentially be achieved with aboardwalk. It would be a pretty expensive boardwalk. Um>> Why boardwalk? Cuz it's wet cuz it's >> Correct. Yeah. Everything back here iswet. And then we would still be working with two different property owners herebecause these are um industrial properties that own all the way backthrough these wetlands. >> I guess the only point would be on thedeveloper of this if we'd be able to contemplate that budge of that land ifwe needed it because if we run into afull stop on one of those and we find someum you know, some property owners that areinterested in working with the the county to move the trail around thatcorner. The solution to connect it, which is thegoal. >> Yeah. Um chair and commissioners, I'llnote that will likely be a city responsibility. That area is outside thescope of the applicant's project. So if there's interest in that, I cancertainly bring that up to uh senior staff here at the city.>> talked to these other property owners on the on the north side about>> Not to my knowledge. >> Hm.Okay. >> I could be wrong.>> When was the last time we talked to the uh the four property owners with thelittle boxes? >> It was at least 3 years ago.>> Okay. >> Well, there's new momentum though. Ithink that's >> There's what?>> There's new momentum for a conversation. >> Get the propertygiven the circumstances. >> It looks like there's actually a roomthere to make a little bit bigger turn if it's if it were possible because>> Yeah. >> We we wouldn't I mean I it's it's trickybecause I'm speaking on behalf of the county. >> It's tricky because we're speaking[clears throat] on >> behalf of future shareholders and ownersof the cooperative, and so that's always a tricky spot that we're in right now,but I would say umuh in general, we would support uh any sortof potential for additional easementdiscussion if that's what it required to get a safe trail connection to todowntown. That's going to benefit those members in the future, and so if that'ssomething that that comes onto the table, we would be absolutely open todiscussing a number of different scenarios, I think. So, but to Brian'spoint, it is an expensive uh way to construct the trail, butcertainly if it gets the access done. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Anything else, commissioners?>> Uh if we got a connection to this property, uh would the owners be willingto make it a through connection for the other residents on the uh western side? >> Yep, really good question, and and sortof similar answer. It's it's tricky cuz we're speaking on behalf of a future umorganization that operates like an HOA, and so obviously security and safety aregoing to be priority number one, but if uh uhagain, I would say that yes, we'd be open to discussing that access comingthrough ours uh through the cooperative's property,um especially if the idea of the the sidewalk and Mendota is open to it upfront, that could be a potential solution as well. >> [sighs] >> Brian, one more question. Uh correct meif I'm wrong, but there is currently a trail from that neighborhood through theother neighborhood. It does it go through this property?>> Um >> I don't know.>> Chair and Commissioner Shower, yes, that's a good question. Um I canhighlight here generally on the screen for you. Uh this is a trail that comesfrom the Lake Ridge neighborhood. It comes down and connects to a dirt orgravel path here. Um but this is these two properties are still under privateownership. So, there's a trail there. Maybe it shouldn't be there, but that ishow people have been connecting up to the Kelzer Pond neighborhood to getthrough and into downtown. >> Got you. Okay. We're good for now?Okay, we don't have a formal motion, so we can move on.Thank you. Yep, thanks for the presentation.Um so, now on to item 4.4 with some development updates and a map.Final discussion is to review the development updates, and I'll turn itover to our planner Brian McCann for the staff presentation. Thank you, Brian.>> Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. Last discussion item tonight, this should bea quick one. Um every quarter, I just like to bringforward development updates for the commission. Uh and then also have thatpublicly available as a resource for anyone interested on just onecomprehensive what's happening in Victoria document. Uh so, I've brokenthis up into five sections uh just for ease of reading. We're going to focus onthe central business district area. I say that as area because not everythingon the screen here is part of the central business district, but it'severything in close proximity to our downtown. So, tonight you reviewed thesketch plat for Astoria Lake Town, that 76-unit cooperative with an additionalsix uh duplexes and the two single-familyhomes. That will be going to council for consideration of the sketch plat onMonday evening, June 22nd. Downtown West, uh they got their third additionplat approved for those four retail buildings. We're working with them andconstruction should be getting be beginning shortly on those fourretail buildings. Downtown West first edition is the Olivine apartmentsconsisting of I believe 145 units. They are actually having um aopening ceremony later this week, I believe. But they are taking residentsin at the moment and it sounds like they're doing well.The Victoria Condos project that was the Gannon building located within downtownfor the 10 condo units. They've received final plat approval. They're stillworking on their pre-sales for those condos before they actually plan onbeginning construction. Then for Hotel Victoria that wasreviewed tonight and recommended for approval for the final plat that will begoing to council on Monday evening as well for their 46 unit boutique hotel.Then Row Apartments is nearing final construction completion especially forthose retail units. I've heard that potential userswill be opening at the end of July for that building.And then Victoria Gateway East, that's the Hometown Bank Mocha Monkey project.They also have final plat approval. They are planning to stage theirconstruction around the same time that this section of Highway 5 reconstructionbegins so that will be anticipated to begin later this year.And then for the Church Lake Boulevard proposal, you may recall the PlanningCommission was going to review a sketch plat for I believe 92 or 96 townhomesout in that area. David from David Weekley Homes. They've rescinded theirapplication and so we're getting lots of calls about these properties but noofficial sketch plat submittal for those.Any questions on the Central Business District area? Okay.Moving on to the General Marsh Lake Road area, Shores of Marsh Lake First Editionis still under construction. They're finishing the last of the homes outthere. Shores of Marsh Lake Second Edition with an additional sixsingle-family homes received final plat approval and development agreementapproval. So, that should be coming in, um, as soon as they get theircomprehensive plan amendment approval from the Met Council, they'll startconstruction of those six homes as well. Hunter's Glen, all the homes out thereare complete and staff are working with the developer on public improvements andlandscaping inspections. So, that one's almost complete.And then 8675 County Road 43, you might recall that was a minor subdivision.They're putting in, uh, two new single-family homes here at the end ofthis street. And then a new, uh, larger parcel here which would be on septic andwell. We're still in discussion with this property owner about how they areplanning to move forward. They don't have all their final approvals yet, butthey did receive approval from the Met Council on their comp plan amendment forthat project. Any questions there? Okay. Then, moving on to the East area,Brookmore is nearing final completion as well. I think they have a couple homesstill under construction out in this area. Staff are doing public improvementand, uh, landscaping inspections out there. And then, if you haven't drivenalong County Road 18 recently for the new fire station, it looks great so far.I believe they are planning an open house for September this year, but itwill be officially complete, uh, I believe in July. So, that will beexciting as well. Any questions there? Great.Then Victoria North, only the one project here, which is Belle Maple Farm.Uh this one was originally tabled by the City Council for some officialevaluation on their utility corridor because this is a particularlychallenging development. Uh they came back and were going for City Councilconsideration, but they the City Council received a petition that was sent to theState Environmental Quality Board, so they had to delay again until anenvironmental analysis was done on this project. Uh the petition analysis cameback stating that a mandatory non-discretionaryEAW was required for this project, so the City Council approved thepreliminary plat. The applicant is still working in the background and planningto submit for final plat for that project soon.>> Will we see that again, Brian, or is that just go to council?>> That one will just go to council. Um >> Okay.>> The comprehensive plan amendment was only other section that requiredPlanning Commission review along with the comprehensive plan amendment forthis one. Um so, as soon as those are approved, itwould just go straight to council. >> Very good. Thanks.>> Just quick question on that one. So, that's the one that would all of theexcess would be coming from that current Mill Creek area,right? It's that. >> Chair and Commissioners, that's correct.>> Yeah. That's what I remember. >> Any other questions on this one? Okay. Um that was for15 single-family homes, if I recall correctly.>> Mhm. >> And then the last larger section of townhere, this is for um what we're just generally calling Victoria South. So, uhstarting at the north side here, Hunters Brook and Hunters Brook Creek Side,they're still busy building homes out there.Um the Creekside area are the executivelots, which I believe they have two houses up down here. I'm not sure ifthey have any constructed yet out of these three down here.Um but they're getting close to completion in the Huntersbrook area, butthe Huntersbrook Creekside area is still under development. And then MarshHollow, they have completed all the single-family home rentals for a while.They're still constructing the last few townhomes out in this area.Then Victoria Ridge will be starting construction of their first 70 townhomesthat were approved last year out here. Um the apartment building just to thesouth here in this section uh was approved. They have not come in toactually record the plat yet, so we don't anticipate construction on thatone starting soon, but that was for 163 or 167units, I believe, for an apartment building there.QuickTrip is also working through their building permit plans. Uh should bebeginning construction soon. No other updates on the Victoria commercial area.We did meet with the real estate uh the commercial real estate agent out on thissite to discuss possible uses that the city would like to see out here, so theywill be doing some additional engagement, and you guys would reviewany new commercial projects that come out in that area.Then West Creek Village is the Lennar development. They got their firstedition approved for 56 townhomes and 13 single-family homes, so they've beendoing mass grading out there and should be constructing soon.Then Enclave at Huntersbrook, uh you guys I don't believe reviewed this one.This is actually a section of West Creek Village that Tradition Developmentbought from Lennar. So, they'll be constructing the 13 single-family homeson the north side of Creekside Lane within that larger Lennar project.And then, Kookenmeister is still being evaluated by Pulte. Um a year or twoago, the Planning Commission City Council reviewed a sketch plat there fora mix of single-family homes and townhomes. They've been working with thecity on modifying their sketch plat. They should be coming back with arevised plan soon for your consideration.And then, lastly is the Athletes Village project further down on County Road 10Angler Boulevard. We do not have any movement on that project. So, we knowthat they're still engaged and planning on doing some sort of uh sports facilityout there with a future commercial component, but we don't have any recentupdates for the Planning Commission. >> Is it going to be affected by the 43road if it changes?>> Correct. Uh chair and commissioners, they've been engaged with Carver Countywho owns County Roads 10 and 43. So, the county is working with them on whattheir access looks like for that site uh because it likely will be a largecommercial user which would generate enough traffic to require someintersection improvements with the project.>> What was the last you heard on that project? How long ago?>> 3 months, maybe. >> Okay.>> Yeah. >> Frank, can you remind us where the cityproper boundaries go on the south side there?>> Yes. Um so, all these uh black lines that you're seeing are propertyboundaries. It's really convenient in this image on the left because this isthe future line for the city. Everything south of this line that you don't seeproperty lines for is future area for Carver. So, everything that you see tothe left or west of County Road 11 going north-south here, and everything northof this east-west black line is either current or future Victoria area.>> Was there any further updates from the county on Engler Boulevard and whenthat's going to be worked on? >> Yes. Uh so, I that segues if we're donewith this, I've got a transportation project slide as well. Does anyone haveany other questions on this? No? Great. Perfect. So, starting at the south end,the county is evaluating the remaining section of Victoria Drive, County Road11, as well as County Road 10, Engler Boulevard.Um I'm part of a team with the city engineer, Carrie Garen. We meet monthlywith the county and their uh selected consultant to do these projects. So,they're anticipating improvements to Victoria Drive being done in 2028, andimprovements to County Road 10 being done in 2029. We're still workingthrough the designs and alternatives of what those access uh and intersectionslook like. So, nothing's been finally determined yet. I will note they areplanning another open house in July. If you're able to attend that and areinterested, it will be held at the Westbrook Community Church.Uh if I back up a slide, which is right on the southwest corner here of CountyRoad 10 and 11. So, if you're interested in that, I highly recommend you attendthat and listen to what they have to say. And then, uh other transportationprojects, Highway 5 uh and County Road 11 north is stillunder construction. From what I've heard, they're still on target forum July 4th opening. So, that could potentially change weather pending.We've been getting some rain recently, but from what I've heard, this shouldstill be opening July 4th weekend. And then later this year, they will startworking on the remainder of the large Highway 5 project. And then the state isstill looking at improvements to Highway 7 on the north side of town withanticipated reconstruction of that happening in 2029. Any questions?>> No, that's helpful. >> Great. Well, that's all I had for youthis evening. Thank you.>> Good information. Um so, if there's no more discussionthere, that concludes our items this evening. So, we'll move to themiscellaneous section of the agenda. Any staff reports?>> Yeah, just a couple minor updates for you. Uh the July 7th meeting, I willlikely not be attending that meeting, but we do have two items on that agenda.Um we potentially have a zoning text amendment request coming forwardregarding fences that Travis will be presenting to you. And then uh outdoordining interim use permit, which I believe Jen and Travis will be jointlyuh presenting for that. Otherwise, those are only two items asof right now for the Tuesday, July 7th meeting. I know that's a Tuesday after aholiday, so please let me know as soon as possible if you're not able to attendthat evening. We want to make sure we have a quorum because those two itemswill involve public hearings. >> Brian, is the fences topic related tothe June 2 topic that we addressed on fences?>> I believe so. >> Okay. Let's make sure that we've get thenotes out or the minutes rather for everybody to I know it was a shortmeeting, but if we're following up on it.>> Yes. >> [clears throat]>> It's great idea.>> Uh other than that, there is new art in the room today as well. So, I left thoselittle slips of paper for you if you wouldn't mind taking a look and uhwriting down which one is your favorite. Our city clerk for the new commissionerslikes to collect these and uh send out a note to everyone on what the favoritepiece of art was. >> Thank you, looks good. Any reports fromthe commissioners? >> No, has there been any communitydialogue with the city about data centers? I know that's a hot topic rightnow, but has that come up with our city at all?>> Chair and commissioners, it has not come up with our city and I can tell you inour conversations with potential developers, none of them have approachedus. >> Okay. Just wanted to double-check.>> [laughter] >> Any other items? And then I'll ask for a motion toadjourn. >> I'll make a motion.>> And a second? >> Second.>> That works. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed?Thank you. Meeting adjourned. >> Mhm.