All right, I will go ahead and call the meeting to order. We will get started uh with a roll call. McKe here. Lantern here. Friedrich present. Veronamp here. Nicholls here. Here. Something about those two chairs. Even when it wasn't you, that chair would always get a present. Let's see here. Pledge of Allegiance. If you'd like to stand and join me in the pledge. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All righty. On to agenda approval. Uh looks like we had one item 6M added uh to consent and then uh 7A and 7B were swapped from maybe not from a published version but from the version I saw. Uh yes, Mr. Mayor. And then uh item 6G was updated and item 12A was updated. Otherwise, no further changes from staff. Perfect. Any changes from council? No. Uh, can I get a motion to approve the agenda as amended? I so move. Second. Second from Maring Camp. All those in favor say I. I. I. Uh, we have a presentation from Colin Brown with the Northwest Trails Snowmobile Club. Yes, please. You could just uh state your name and address or take one and pass it down. Yeah. Thank you. This is the newest snowmobile outfit available. The newest snowmobile map available. No outfit. I'm talking. Yeah. Sorry. You're putting You're putting wheels on all the sleds and stuff. Appreciate you. Colin Brown, thank you for having me. I'm the trail administrator for Northwest uh Trail Association. We are the volunteer association nonprofit that um marks and maintains the mobile trails literally from Lake Matonka all the way up through Dayton on this side of the Crow River. Um we have just under 200 miles of trails and the city of Corpin has been uh our sponsor and Natalie was with me at our annual DNR meeting that we have and I'm required to do that as the the uh club's trail administrator. I handle all of our 45 captains that mark our trail sections and deal with our land owners. We have just under 200 land owners. A lot of them are corporate residents. Um some of them formal council former council members. Um and snowmoing is actually a pretty unique sport. Somebody doesn't know this uh just to kind of diverge a little bit, it's the only sport truly in the world that is organized and trails and the whole sport is maintained by volunteers 100%. Uh we're not paid to do our job. We're not paid to go talk to land owners. We're not paid to put a a sign in the ground and we're not paid to do any brushing or grooming or anything. Um, so the sport relies on a grant from the DNR and the state every year. It's called the grant in aid program. And if you go to the DNR website, it's uh laid out uh specifically on that. You can get any type of information you want on it. But the the grant and aid system is how we get our funding. And we get our funding two ways. One is gas tax and the other is snowmobile. rations. So, in order for the clubs in the state to receive these funds, they need a sponsor. We're nonprofit, and I don't know because I'm not an attorney. Um, but they're not allowed to give monies directly to the nonprofit. You have to have an intermediary sponsorship. And that sponsorship for our club has always been the city. So, thank you. By the way, um, we've had a wonderful relationship with and we hope to maintain that relationship for uh as long as we can maintain trails in the area. But our biggest problem unlike other clubs in other areas of the state is obviously development. So um I'm here for any questions that anybody has. Um I know a lot of the council members are newer and same with the uh people behind the scenes running everything. So, um, please fire away if you have any questions that I can answer. Any questions from council? I don't have questions, but I want to thank you for what you do for the city. It's a great amenity to offer to residents in the area. And I know it's a lot of work, just like a lot of the volunteer organizations that support the city are. So, thank you and thank you to the Northwest group. The hardest thing for us is the 10% in anything that ruins it for everybody else. Um, trespassing, not staying on trail. But we're a proactive group. A lot of uh our club members are not only former council members, but um local residents of your municipalities, your farmers, um your people. So, um we're always here to help. We're the peacemakers. We just want to make it a safer trail, more enjoyable trail for the land owners, the police, the riders, and everybody. So, um if there's ever an issue, that we can deal with it mid-season too. We can get stakes in the ground with drills and we do do that. Um so if we need to add ticker tape or a do not enter, no snowmmoiling or whatnot. Um that's kind of our job. We want to maintain the trails and the only way you can do that is if you react well and timely to a problem. So Mr. Come here. Yeah. Um, quick question and it's I read every one of our quarterly newsletters and stuff. Do we put anything in from these folks as far as trails are marked, stay on the trails, anything like that? Is that a request we can We love that. So, so I do believe that we've we've promoted it in the past. Uh we make the maps available uh at the desk uh to folks and we've also had links in the past on our website so that people can access it that way. Wouldn't it be nice to get on the city maps page where we have all the different kinds of maps if you have like a PDF version of that? Yeah, we have actually we're very fortunate because the employee at Polaris that handles their ride command app, if anybody's familiar with that, it's an app that shows the whole world every snowmobile trail. interactive and it's kind of a standard for snowmoers and he happens to be able to submit that within like a GI format to the BNR. So our trails are always quite honestly perfectly accurate on the app on the BNR website and we'd love to be able to overlay that with it and so yes is the answer. Great. Yeah, if you can give that to us. So where I was going I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Where I was going is I'd like to see that before the snowfall. also in the fall winter format as far as our newsletter and such. Um I know I get farmers asking me what can the city do to keep people on the trails and stuff. We've got like you you said 10% makes it miserable for the rest and stuff. And I I I fall back to I don't know how many years ago it was and Matt's not here but we used to have the snowmobiles for our police to be able to do that in stuff. We don't have that anymore and I don't think that's in anything. I don't know how it would work and stuff, but unless you can uh convince that Polaris contact to donate a couple Well, I know kidding. I know a couple of guys at Polaris, so there'll be I'll I'll make some contacts, too. But I'm sure you guys got uh got plenty of contacts there, too. Just what else can we do if everybody agrees up here to continue support and sponsor you guys? What else can us as city do for you? You know, there's really not much other than helping us communicate when there is a problem because we want to get on it right away. And I have a relationship with my Three Rivers Park District uh officer. Contact to donate. Well, I know kidding. I know a couple of guys that players, so there'll be I'll I'll make some contacts, too. I'm sure you guys got plenty of contacts there, too. I just What else can we do if everybody agrees up here to continue support and sponsor you guys? What else can they miss the city? They've got their sled that's your cover and I have a relationship with contact to donate. Couple kidding. I know a couple of guys that have players. So, there'll be I'll I'll make some contact, but I'm sure you guys got plenty of context there, too. I just What else can we do if everybody agrees up here to continue support and sponsor you guys? What else can they miss the city of snow? So that that's your I'm all for continuing support and such. It's an amenity that our city has that I think should stay as long as possible. Contact well. I know a couple of guys have players. So there'll be I'll make some contact. I'm sure you guys got plenty of contacts there, too. I just what else can we do if everybody agrees up here to continue support and sponsor you guys? What else can they say? They've got so that's your I'm all for continuing support. I'll follow up. Thanks so much for coming. I know this was exactly what I was a couple of guys to raise awareness special about corporate [Music] if you could follow up quality that our city has. I'll follow up. Thanks so much for coming. You know, this was exactly what I was to raise awareness about [Music] everybody about follow. I'll follow. Thanks so much for coming. You know, this is exactly what I was awareness special about corporate as we have changes. Well, the building starts right now about how uh and And then the we relate to east west trail that search corridor is just happening. staff and I were just at a university yesterday and we were describing home how people needs to have a regional park and I'll follow this exact special about corporate as we have changes well building starts right now in respect to how and and then the we relate to east west trail that's happening staff and I were just in yesterday and we were just driving homepecially about corporate building east. Jeremy Park building. We have required dedication. Greenway. We'll probably We'll definitely consider that. Uh as far as we're talking about environment, density and then through identify where those ironic [Music] trail. We'll definitely learn and then we'll be identif We'll definitely be identify where Yes. Also, as said, we're working with Kelly and her team that as things change, ensuring that we policy rather We'll check what the standard activities also as we're working with Kelly and her that insurance [Music] move on. Uh yes sir, we have two comment cards also and David again for anyone else that's in the audience. This is the time to talk about something that's not on the agenda for today. And so if there's still somebody else that would like to talk, the cards are by the door, fill out a card. An additional reminder, it's uh not really just discussion, but council certainly listening and staffing when needed. Yeah. Thank you. Hang on to Thank you. Did I hear you got married recently? Congratulations. I had a like an hourong conversation uh with Carl the other day. Yeah. Just small. Awesome. I'm happy for you. All righty. Go right ahead. If you could just give us your name and address for the record, too, Karen, that'd be great. I'm actually burn up. I want to be given David and I are the northern homeowners just north of Rush Creek Reserve back in 2014 when was originally planned in the mandate. The developers were instructed to work with the northern property owners. Basically, we've got 200 homes behind us with impervious surfaces into our into our property. If you came out to our property and you just took a walk down the gravel road and you looked at the ditch that and I put in, you would think it looks pretty nice if you set a little creek, you know, some farmland, some beautiful trees. And if you just looked around, it would look like everything's fine. But I'm here to tell you that it's not fine. And I have three issues present. I believe you need to know about the three issues are drainage and city council's intervention. I have the packet of photos. Number one is a picture of our which I put in or which I put in. You can imagine there's a gravel road down the middle and on either side they together some rock and brick and I have to tell you that it is actually um a disgrace for the it has no border. It is open to kids to vehicles falling in to erosion road. Why don't you follow our county follow the city of required that the homeowner would be covered and it's actually a huge So when you look at that comfort that was required 35 years ago and you look at this all I can say is it's a disgrace and the truth is it's a lawsuit waiting to happen for us homeowners and I won't be responsible city won't be responsible but Dave and I will get the post office falls into that And the important thing about this is that I know that needs to be fixed because we've been working with three years they said we're going to do it. We're going to do it and it never gets done. That's why I need your city council intervention. The second point is more controversial, but the second photo you'll see either side of the south side on the left of the page and the north side to the right. And you see the south side is clear and deep and wide. We got water in there. The north side is just filled with volunteer trees and leaves and and it's shallow and there's no no way to maintain it. The developer actually stopped. They cleared it out, but they stopped at this wershed line. I don't know where the water line starts or ends, but that was their excuse. I have to call it excuse for noting out the north side of the ditch. Karen, that was the five minutes. Can I get a motion from council to extend Karen's time? Yes. Second. Second. Uh, all those in favor say I. I. And just if you can be mindful of because we have a lot of a lot of people today. Appreciate that very much. And basically you can see the south side is fine, but the north side is not a closeup. trees that were not able to maintain. And the last picture is working. You can kind of see the curve of the buters fix the cover. We all agree on that. Even the developers did. I'm asking for your ing the drainage because you have reserve money. So if M doesn't do it, you have their money to do it for them. You have the engineering resources. You've got the political and connections and authority I would say to work for the district and just use old expression. I'm asking you just to get her done and thank you for the extension. David has some embishments for us. That's thank you K. I'm glad you said embellishments. David 8116. I just want to tell everybody just turn red now. Okay. So, I I really don't have a whole lot to add because Karen was very thorough. The bridge that was put in by Steve Leser demanded that bridge. Uh it's a cover bridge now instead of three covers like that are in my front yard and I put in through their contractor. It's got one gigantic and so that that was demanded by the city to have to be built like a bridge. Anybody's walk down look at it. It's got concrete side. It's safe. No one's gone off the bridge. No one's fallen over the bridge. I have grandchildren. Karen's got grandchildren. Um, we feel like we're a voice crying. This has been a subject not for a year or two, but for years, long before Emil, we had water issues coming from neighbor to the south because the water north. Um, the last time we met as a large group on our land, I met with some of you, but as a large group was with them and I was 2023. They actually promised looked up your records. It was in this room on my site. They promised to have it done in 2024, spring 24. They ran out of time in 2022, they said. So, because of health reasons, I wasn't on top of forcing them to do anything. After a while, you get tired of it. So, the last thing I'll say about the two things about that what we call the bridge is really just three culverts and there's erosion issues and have been from the day it was done. Even the guys that put it in admitted it won't hold up. And they're kind of laughing. They said, "Well, this is what we're getting. It's not going to hold up." Secondly, there's no guards, nothing to stop a vehicle or kids to go over the side. So, you may say, "Well, who cares? It's only know On it is only a couple feet deep. The other side it gets four to five deep. We have pictures more pictures you got in front of you. So that's not just dangerous. It's not holding up. It was promised a year and a half ago to do something. and I was in the hospital out of state uh during the during the February meeting where I understand it was voted to approve what unrelated to this was money set aside for something else and I'm glad they didn't get all the money back because something that's come up I don't mean a couple times probably eight or 10 times some of you on the council know about it staff knows about it and that is what Karen said from basically our common drive which I of us share that driveway. From that driveway that crosses the new channel that Em's channel, it's about 10 to 12 ft wide, four to 5t deep. Now, I'm not an engineer, but it's just common sense. You can't have two gigantic covers coming from M& facing us. A great big deep channel. It hits the road, a common driveway, and when it goes north, it squeezes down to three or four feet and it's full of weeds and brush and trees, volunteer trees. We couldn't get in and do anything about even if we wanted to because we've asked that it be shaped in such a way we can actually mow it and knock down and maintain it once it's done. So, it's time to have somebody dig deep and get that done. We were told flat out by a prior uh city manager, they're not going to do anything about it. It's not a city problem. It's not an M problem. My problem and I pointed out to them the last time I tried to do something with this, I got served with a cease and desist order from the DNR because I dug up organic material. It was 11 month. So clearly it needs to be done. It ought not be carried my neighbors that have health issues that couldn't be here. We shouldn't have paid for it. We didn't create the problem. Common sense says when you look at the channel coming at us, who would think that that huge channel would be neck down to 3 ft and weeds and it's about 2 ft deep. So, we're meeting next Friday. Jason, thank the heat needs to go on and I saying finish the job. deal with the wershed district. Even though nobody wants to talk to those people, deal with the wershed district, demand they finish the job and do north of the road what they pay for south of the road. Thank you. That was perfect. I was on five minutes on the on the nose. It's impressive. All righty. Um, anyone else for open forum? Uh, no other cards, no callers. Okay, then we will move on to item six, which is consent agenda. Um, does anyone want to pull anything? I do. Uh, B anything else, Mark? No. Okay. 6 6G for me. 6G. Anything else? Going once, going twice. Sold. Okay. I will entertain a motion to approve consent agenda items A, C through F, and H through M. So moved. Nicholas, you have a second. I will second it. But if we could just have a real quick discussion after that. Sure. Motion. Second. Discussion. No. Yeah. Is that okay? On on I mean you want it before the motion. After the before the vote, right? After the vote. Oh, okay. It'll be simple. Sure. Uh we'll call the vote then. All those in favor say I. I. Well, that passes. Dean. Mr. Mayor. We get a couple of special visitors again tonight. Marine, where'd you go? Um um that was a big deal. I'd like to introduce a couple of little guys laying around on the floor. They've been very very good and I I appreciate them very much and appreciate what Marine and her team does for us in Corkran taking care of uh our K9 and those kind of things. Can you bring them up? And they might not want to say hi, but I always like putting them under pressure. If I could, Council Member Baron Camp, as a retired military guy, I'm pretty proud of these two pups, uh, because these pups are in training, uh, in order to go serve veterans in need as service dogs. And so, uh, they are pursuing a noble calling facilitated, uh, by Moren and her team. And uh on behalf of uh so many veterans who benefit from these these types of supportive animals, I I just want to say thanks Marine for what you do for people like me and and so many others. So thanks. Seriously, it's it's amazing some of the stuff that um service animals in particular and dogs can medically do to help people that science doesn't fully understand how, but it definitely makes a difference in the outcome and it's astonishing. So, and if I could Mr. Mayor continue to speak. So, uh what was on consent for the audience for those who are watching at home was was an ordinance amendment that's going to allow the next step to go forward with a plan uh as Moren uh changes her site uh for what they already do at all seasons to also be able to train more. So, they don't train on that location right now. uh but but by the ordinance amendment uh then the the next step will be coming forward to talk about the planning in order to create more spaces for Marine to be able to train even more dogs to help even more people. So thank you I don't I don't know if you have anything prepared but you spoke very well at the planning commission. So if people don't know for the last my husband and I have lived in 21 years for the last 20 years we've operated a dog boarding um facility and quietly you know by probably even know that we're there and um 10 years ago we started breeding and raising and training and donating dogs to Minnesota veterans and we're 59. We've got um five that we've already done in the last couple months. We've got six in training right now, but our goal is to double or triple the amount of dogs. So, these dogs are all relatives of ours. I've got grandma, you know, so they all live in the house typically with us and then we've got um Jenna and Katie here. Katie resum multiple dogs. Katie and her husband have done multiple dogs with us and so we have been training out of another property that I have actually Rogers um that's a horse farm and so we're just trying to have a dedicated building to do the training at our um main property. So we do a lot for um veterans from anywhere from night care interruptions to um we train the can learn um their veterans response and head it off prior to an actual reaction. So they can um learn the smell when somebody is escalated into a situation and they can shut it down prior to that. So they go and they do what they call comfort or pressure to them. Sometimes it's you know starts out just like by the leg or the foot area and then it can get where they put extreme pressure on your thigh if you're sitting down. Um but they go everywhere. Um they go we certify them for flight training at the airport. Um so many of our dogs are at the airport on a regular basis flying throughout the country with the veterans that have received them. Um we service pretty much anybody. We do have Wisconsin veterans that have received their dogs. Um we donate them at no cost to the veterans. So there's zero cost to anybody um to receive the dogs. We work with a clical psychologist and the VA help the veteran able to receive it. We have a very simple process to apply to receive the dog and spend three to four months in actual training with the veteran to get them into certified handler of a service dog. So the dogs are mutually certified. The dog is certified handler certified that has their full service access right. Um these dogs are just six months old. So they're very really kind of a tough stage to be honest with you. They're doing great you know really challenged between listening and self assertion but they're doing really good. Um that one knows where the treats are. That's a good thing. Easy to train. Um quick question. Are you familiar with or have you worked with um Magnus Foundation in Dayton? We do partner with Awesome. I was going to suggest that in case you don't know what Magnus found the road in there and it serves everything from doctor care therapy therapy a lot of things that go on they serve 500 year free of cost if they don't want to go all the way to VA there's physicians and everything like that for them at partner referral. Glad to hear it. Yeah, they're great. Tuesday, Thursday, I think, and you can go up there. It was a beautiful old estate that was um actually given to a family member and that family member who is a physician and um a therapist, he has turned it into this wonderful facility for veterans. And so as I say, we're trying to strengthen the corridor of care for veterans here right at the northwest. So if they don't feel like going all the way to St. Paul, they can receive care right here. They have lab testing, Xray. So we do our And with that, Mr. Mayor, I I can say honestly I'm proud to have you as a small business in our community and everything you do. I know a lot of this is donated time and such, so it's huge. Appreciate it very much. And it's all volunteer. Yeah. And it's I'm I'm glad to see the facility changing. You're in a perfect area. Not a ton of neighbors or anything. And uh one more commercial all season is a dog motel, too. So, I know you guys are plenty busy and I never see advertised. So, it is probably just keep going. We do have a new one coming to town, a great big one on the corner of 101 in Ste Road, but that's that's a whole another conversation, but thank you guys very much. I've known Marine since my old neighborhood over in Maple Grove. And uh she's a great neighbor, great person, great business. [Applause] They're going, "What? What? What you do?" They get applause. But I love Thank you guys. And I got to remember names. This is Kelly. Jace. Jace. I remember. I don't remember. You brought Kelly last time. All right. Thanks for bringing them in. Yeah. Thank you. Good dog. Of course. Thank Thank you. All righty. We will move on to Let's see here. Mark, you had pulled item 6B. Yes. Go right ahead. Um if if you could just turn to uh page one of eight of the invoice general ledger. At the bottom or near the bottom of the page, there is a check of payment to our vendor computer integration tech. What page? What's that? What page? Uh page one of eight of the general ledger. So across the top it says invoice GL distribution yield report. You see that? And then it says to the right page one of eight. Yes. Yep. So uh toward the bottom of the page there is a check to a vendor. Our vendor's name is Computer Integration Tech. The memo says uh April 2025 retainer and it's a check in the amount of $2,600. With that payment in mind, could you please go to page six of eight? Toward the top of the page, there are two additional checks to the same vendor. One of which is for $4,185. And the memo states that it's monthly billable seer, I guess at service. And I guess my concern is because my understanding of the term retainer is the city is paying ahead of time for services rendered. And so we're paying for services ahead of time and then we're also paying for the services when they're being rendered. I believe that this is double billing and uh I would ask for uh an audit of these payments if I could Mr. Mayor. So uh we are have actually been conducting an audit and based on past requests that you had we can demonstrate by the invoice in which it demonstrates that the retainer is actually decreasing the amount of billable services. So what I would say is that that March billable services for 41.85 85 would have been another $2,500 more or $2,600 more expensive to services outside of the scope. No, no, there there are billable services and then there's so so um we we can share with you the invoices, but it demonstrates that the retainer is as you had asked in in past council meetings, uh the retainer is decreasing the billable service bill by the retainer amount uh as it should. Um uh and also to follow up on your request for an audit, uh since our IT manager, uh Dean joined us, Dean and Nicia have been in the process of conducting an audit and we're going to present to council here forthcoming uh the results of what they're discovering from that audit and then be able to explain one of the questions we owe you is what changes uh as we've added an IT manager full-time versus what our still our need is with CIT. So that that will be forthcoming. Awesome. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else on that? No. Okay. Uh I'll entertain a motion to approve consent agenda item 6B. So move Kim. You have a second. I will second. Nichols. All those in favor say I. I. I. Perfect. And then Dean G. Yeah. I I just with with the stuff that's going on and and I'm a neighbor to the all of this stuff. What is the status of this now? We we got the message from Steve Ling. Steve Ling this afternoon and such. Where are we at again? And I what I'm understanding is they want to build a home on the 40 acres and we need a lot more related to a split a north or uh how do I want to say? Yes, a northwest road identified for future growth, future plans, those kind of things. Is there stuff that can be shared with that up front here and and what can be done? And and the biggest thing that I'm concerned about is they've owned it a couple of years and they'd like to build a home. One home is what I understand. Can we get them to that point somehow some way anytime soon? Yeah. Uh Mr. Mayor. Yeah. So, um the application before you tonight is for a minor subdivision um and the final plat exhibit for the subdivision of the property. Uh the current legal description of the property in includes um the title outlot B of the mean woods edition and the way that our code is written is outlots have are subject to development prior or subject to platting prior to development. So uh before they're able to actually develop anything on the property whether that's the lot split or um or just building a house on it needs to be platted first. So that's why this um before you today. Um, one of the the concerns that staff has had with the application is the need for um, just planning for an internal road network off of County Road 30. Um, just as um, there's a lot of properties in the surrounding vicinity that have development rights remaining. Those are expected to subdivide um in the future and knowing that the county limits the number of direct access points onto the county road um planning for that internal road network to address those concerns in the future. And so with this application, we're requiring the dedication of a of a roadway easement. It's not we're not we're not requiring the construction of the road itself, just the dedication of the easement um that would run east west through the through the property. So, just to summarize it, they could put a driveway in and I think the driveway is already there, but we need we'd like to do something. I know the section or the the 40 acres to the west is now up for sale and such, but we are basically and only asking for an easement for future growth. And God, I hope there's no future growth out there for 40 years plus where it's clear on the other side of town and such. So, um, it is something that simple, but yet why are we getting so much conflict and such, or is it is it something that can be fixed? Is it something can be worked out so we could see a home there soon? or that's a lot of presumption on my part. If if the plat was approved tonight, um they could proceed with recording that plat at the at the county level and then go through the building permit process. Um but that flat tonight does include the dedication of the roadway easement um just for that future internal road network planning. So what you're asking for tonight will take it the next step. Correct. Yes. Okay. what would trigger that road to be built and who would pay for it? It's hard to know at this point. The specifics of that is is unclear, but as as the surrounding the neighboring property subdivide um right now, we've identified an access point that would connect up with Garden Lane um and would loop around loop north south there and then loop west uh through this property. But the exact moment in which the would be constructed is I think is unclear right now. It would entirely depend on the subdivision proposals in front of us. Yes, as councelor Baron Camp said, we are aware that the lot to the west is up for sale and that could potentially be subdivided into multiple lots and this lot could also be further subdivided. The lots to the east, I believe, are um are currently being farmed right now. All farmland. Yeah. Yeah. Um but they also have development rates as well. So, it's planning for the health of the future. And then again, I understand our planning department and stuff, we've got the six lots, five or the one's already built on the south side of 10, which is in this general vicinity. Um, Beck told Farms was done. That's complete and stuff. So, you're thinking and feeling that we're going to see a little bit more of this as things go on and stuff, but who knows when that easement would be needed. Yeah, we we did something similar for Beck told Farms where uh there's a house that kind of prevented garden lane from going all the way down. So they provided us with the easement to provide for that eventual connection should that house ever be redeveloped away so that we can provide that eventual network there. Um so that they didn't require them to build the road. So it's kind of assuming at that point it either be a developer driven project to bring the road all the way through or it be a city project. And again on this 40 acres 39 something if I remember right they have four development rights they want to use one to build the home that they're asking for and the other three are still hanging out. Well to be clear it's a two lot subdivision. Okay. So that there's um I don't remember how many. So yeah so and they would split off um I can't remember the exact acreage. I think it was maybe five acres off the top of my head uh on the norththeast corner of the the property and then the rest would remain as a 40 acre parcel and then would retain the other two unused development rights. So they would use one for their house and they give one to the new lot and then they would hold their 40 acre lot would hold the other two development rights. So, you're feeling that you can work with the the owners and the person representing this to get this going so they can build a house. Correct. Yeah. If if if it's approved tonight, then they're they're able to proceed with uh with the recording and and uh building permit process. Okay. Any other questions? With that, I'd make a motion for six to approve 6G to approve. Seconded by Friedri. Is there um not with consent? Um there is not unless council feels it differently. I don't believe so. There is I I wouldn't mind giving a couple of minutes. I don'tise I I censored issues. So discussion okay we can um make an exception here and if you'd like to come up and speak for a couple minutes we are the people who bought the land and want to live there. The concern about the bifurcate the property and completely diminish the value. We did not want to go through a subdivision process when we bought it. We thought we just come in for building permit. We met with city planning and we cannot build you have to go through. So we decided to do that. Now quick note, the cost of doing this so far is $23,0001 $23,1129 to get to where we are to get that remove that out. So then in June after we had applied after we had met with them twice with our engineer they said you're going to need a north south on the entire border and we objected and said that goes through the wetland that you just made us pay $5,000 to certify and it will go through house. We have a problem with that. So we finally were able to meet with them again in November I believe that's correct and at that time they said yeah right we don't need that now we can the other way so with all due respect process has been very painful and we this will bifrocate the property and also sever that is completely unusable where our driveway is right now and we tile inlets and wetland and the lot that we have proposed which we did a subdivision because we are encouraged we need to develop it completely and we said we don't want to and they said you better do it now because it cost a lot of money so okay let's divide it into two and then we have financial security if our kids ever want to go to Harvard you know or John's done farming um so we are trying to divide it But if this ement is approved where they want it to beong 30 there was a lot and then there would be five property I don't know who I could ever sell a lot to between two and then with the tile inlet drainage that goes into property the only place and the power line the only place to put this is literally the build site. And we are putting the house all the way back to the woods. So that John the family farmer his name is John Sherber family that's been there for 100 years they we bought it from them so they could continue to farm as much as possible. So there's been no understanding of what we can do with this season and it just dramatically decreases the value of our to live on a street. The only place to put it on that tree right the short of it is we didn't buy farmland at all. We bought it so that my uncle John financially in a position that end. We were looking for land to build that much. We wanted that land in the family so that our goal is just to keep it as viable as possible. 7 foot all the way across the property. That's just not a house. We're going to have to figure out a way to do it without my uncle's farming that land now. My cousin Quincy's going to be farming the next generation. the original. There's a picture of it right there. That's the transport. We did propose. Thank you. any I I want to help. How can we help or is this the only answer? I don't know how we can do it without I yeah I believe the staff report and the engineering memo of the I I I completely understand the frustration. Subdivision is not a cheap process. Um it was the city code is very clear that outlaws basically deferred future planning. Um and so That's why especially outlots with development rates. Other times outlots are what we put our storm water ponding or wetlands in. So there's no intention to ever develop develop upon those. But when we do kind of set aside outlots for future planning, um basically it's kind of saying we'll deal with that when we're ready to build on it. And so that's what's in front of us right now as we have to go through the planning process. And that's where part of the road network discussions coming with. Staff does respond to applications. Um So I believe after a real brief initial review uh when the application was still incomplete, the initial thought thinking was a north south roadway to align with the uh road across the street. Uh I don't believe we ever meant to convey that it have to go all the way down to the wetland. I think uh but regardless um after the we met with the applicants in November that certainly had a chance to reevaluate and engineering did take a look at the larger picture and believe that it made more sense for this to line up with Garden Lane for the west. That's why it's an east west location and that messaging has been consistent since November. um based on the building path that's in the preliminary plat. It does look like there's different options other than having that go through the um the building path. Um we definitely would want to make sure that we're not orphaning land. So that would be part of what gets evaluated. They do have some flexibility in the exact alignment of how that goes through. And certainly in the meantime and would that be determined between preliminary and final? That'd be part of what gets finalized before it goes to recording. Okay. Um and then um sorry, where was it going? um talking about alignment, the road, the north, you were talking about the north, the way the road was situated and you and you were discussing how it was switching or you said something about the direction of the road. So yeah, that's where they would have some flexibility is in exactly how that aligns. Um and that would be part of what gets evaluated here before it goes to recording. So that's part of something that we'd work with engineering on. Oh, and in the meantime, while we're not using definitely free to to farm it. That's we wouldn't prevent them from using it for farmland in the meantime. So, it's more just reserving that for future planning so that we have an internal network because this entire section between 30 and 10 there and this is right in smack dab in the middle of it um does not have an internal network at this point. Thank you, Natalie. I'm sorry. You're talking Garden Lane and that's well Oh, I'm sorry. For the east. Did I say west? Garden's to the east. Garden Lane's to the east. Sundance is the eastern border of this 40 acres. Yes. And that's originally why the north south alignment we thought would make sense, but we looked at it all of like less than an hour for reaching at that. It was that was just part of the completeness review that's completed. So that's um it was determined the application was incomplete. And so to try to not spend staff time on applications, we technic we don't continue review after it's determined incomplete and we have communicated with them unless they've reached out to us uh to have conversations and go over questions. We don't spend time reviewing while the application's incomplete unless directed to do so. So the initial discussion that staff had was north south um to have that future plan and then again as we reviewed the application as conversations continue. Uh that's when the east west determination was made. Kevin, did you have anything you wanted to add? No, I think that the early conversation was about, you know, one one lot or even two lots and whether a private drive would be allowed and that feedback came from me. uh and with the expectation that the county, you know, it was fully disclosed that the county, you know, provides access because it's county road 30 and it was anticipated they would want that to be matched up across from Sundance. Um the applicant went back to the county and actually got permission or permitted to have two single family driveway accesses which was quite surprising to us but out of our per jurisdiction. So that's kind of the pivot point there early on. And then when they formally came in, we always look at the larger transportation network to try to make sure we can provide those services long term. So that's a little bit of a there was a lot of conversation about different options of this property and it was really predicated on an assumption that the county would require one access and when they kind of opened up the options for the network there beyond Sundays if that makes sense. So, Mr. Mayor, my my question to staff is, do we spend more time with the applicant on this stuff or move forward and go? It It sounds like we still there's a conflict. Um, at this time, my understanding is they want a building permit and they want to move forward and this has been a very expensive process. The easiest way for them to move forward is to have a decision be made and so that they can move forward rather than having staff because the staff opinion isn't going to change at this point. Um so council can certainly make up the final call on this. Um what are you saying about a farm emanisting to what the applicant had stated as the intended use for the eastment area? Obviously staff is opined that the the road network it's necessary for the road network as a requirement as you would have required as a as dedicated rightway in this situation in utilization of the minor subdivision process the easements are typically dedicated as opposed to dedication of rightway which can't really be conditioned easements can you can you can draw different provisions within them now it has to match the rightway interest but I think you could put a provision into the easement that allowed performing of it until the road was So that might address. Okay. And I'm I'm asking what you want us to recommend. If you can I mean the deadline is I believe the I wrote it somewhere. Um Dwight, do you remember the deadline for this application? Yeah. The 60-day deadline to make a decision on this application is May 25th. So if you guys wanted to table it today and bring it back next month, we could certainly do that. your decision mayor if I if I may. Um just to address council member Camp's concern, if if the council is comfortable with just making that provision acceptable within the easements, I think the easements were to be drafted after this anyway. You can you can improve the subdivision as presented and just give staff direction to allow that farming use until road construction. I don't think you have to change anything yet. So, will Mr. Mayor, may I address the Sure. Is that sound like something you guys want to work with or you you you made the comment up here. It's just it devalues your property and all that stuff. I I I see it and our our planning staff can correct me if I'm wrong. I see it as you're going to be able to build your home. there's an easement at that some point at some point a long time down the road unless somebody comes and offers you more money than God has to buy your property and then you're going to move out and do something else. But again, that's long-term the way it's explained to me. I'm I'm understanding it that if if I were to have it, yeah, that's future planning, those kind of things. But the Century Farm that I'm so near and dear to and stuff and and love as a neighbor is still able to farm. You're able to put in a home and things can move forward. Your input, it doesn't sound like it's what you want to do. I don't want to delay this anymore. And then I still have the question about the your comment about $5,000 for the wetland deal. I' I'd love that to be resolved also as far as you paid an extra 5,000 for something and and that is actually okay staff is shaking their heads. So I think I don't I don't think we ever meant to convey that we meant for a road to go into the wetland. So I I do apologize for the miscommunication on that end, but uh the at this point that's not what we are recommending. So my question is again I started with a motion. We've got a second. We haven't said one way or another yet. Have we? Do we have We don't have a motion. We haven't had a motion. I was on the counter. I would like I'm asking, can we table it until the next meeting in May? That gives you a couple of weeks. I believe the deadline is May 11th. Or maybe said that the deadline is May 24th. So, and and we do have an extension if necessary. Believe it. Yeah, I believe we can extend it if need be. So that's something that you're more interested in than us just saying yes now. Correct. Okay. Make a move to table until the 8th of May. I would second that with the direction that there's open communication to come to an agreement. Please motion a second discussion. Um does that date work in terms of staffing and what's on the agenda? I don't well it works with what's on the agenda. I don't know if we'll be able to reach resolution by because we'd have to reach resolution by next Thursday and I don't know that that second May meeting. So second May meeting and the second main meeting is atrocious. Yeah. Absolutely atrocious. There's stuff on it that day doesn't even know about yet. Um so and he looks so enthused. I'm going to be in the Bahamas. I'm absolutely I might stay down there. I'll be swimming with the fishes. Um how about that first? So I yeah we present to do the first June the city would have to uh take advantage not take advantage the city would have to issue our extension our one time extension that we can do for an additional 60 days so we will issue that letter and then we could bring it back to the June meeting that'd be June 12th I'll withdraw and edit my motion to the first meeting in June I will second that okay any further discussion all those in favor Say hi. I thank you. Thank you staff. Thank you applicant. I hope it can come together soon. All righty. On to planning items. So um we will start with uh 7A which is the continental concept plan titled or called springs at Corkran. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Yes. Springs at Corkran. is a proposal by Continental and 928 Fund LLC. The applicant is here and does have a brief presentation after mine as well. Uh this is for a property located at 9330 County Road 30. Uh Mama G's owns the three properties that it wraps around off of County Road 101. Um and they are proposing a 280 unit market rate apartment complex on the west side of the property and then the remaining 34.5 acres on the east side would be reserved for future commercial development by others. The site is in total about 67 acres and is most of it is zoned for general mixed use here which is this pink color with uh the eastern tips C2 commercial which is our community commercial district but most of it is in mixed use. [Applause] So this is the concept plan. So again, it's uh in about 14 buildings that they're showing and they are low rise of buildings. There are two levels. Um and the building mixes range from studio to threebedroom units. The community would also include amenities such as a clubhouse, a resort style pool and deck. for parking. They have a mix of surface parking as well as attached and detached garages. And then um they again they potentially they provide a little bit of a ghost plat on here saying how the commercial uses to right could develop. They are not proposing being the developer of that. So with the mixeduse designation uh in our comprehensive plan, I do want to just point out that the language does say the intent of the mixeduse district is to allow for developments that combine residential and commercial uses into a coordinated plan development project. So that's one of the first discussion points that's listed for you in the summary section of the staff report is how the proposal satisfies the intent of the mixed use land use designation. is there something else that they could do uh to try to plan how this how this part of the site really speaks to the commercial part of the site in order to meet that intent. Um overall though the mixeduse area does expect approximately half of the areas to develop with residential uses. Um and they are attempting to do that with um by having about roughly half of the site be built for residential. It's a little tricky since not the ent the entire 67 acres isn't mixed use. Some of it was already earmarked for commercial. So by my best calculations, there's about 15 net acres that would be commercial that's in the mixed juice area. So it's not quite count. It's pretty close. So that definitely just a discussion point for you. Um this is again a zoom in of the what really they are proposing as far as the building product and then um the zoning district it's general mixed use and the general mixed use zoning district predates my time. It actually predates Kendra's time. Um, so that district really, um, does not really speak to our northeast district as much as I would like. Uh, and there's a lot of layers to it. Uh, so the site layout requirements and our general mixed use standards, they some of most of these they were able to hit. I would say a couple that I I wanted to get for discussion was the structures are supposed to be oriented and consolidated to complement existing adjacent developments to create a coordinated and visually attractive mixeduse setting throughout the district. And so again, how does this proposal really fit that standard? Are they meeting it? Is there something else that they could do? Um also site planning shall respect the relationship of the site to the existing and proposed buildings and streets and major roadways. I would say for especially the roadways they do a great they did a great job of hitting the roadways that we're requiring as part of our north northeast district. They will be extending 102nd from Bellweather and Elm with this proposal and they would have the connection all the way down to 30. I believe this still the exact location of the access to 30 still needs to be reviewed. Um and they're also providing the connection point to the business park parcel to west. So, they are doing um they're doing a fair job getting the road access requirements and then um they are meeting the step back requirements from the county road down here. So, um definitely have made a fair attempt at hitting all of these standards. And then for the building standards, this is where it really starts to get fun. Uh we have some requirements such as that the ground floor should be distinguished with the prop um and uh with either detailing such as cornice awning parapit columns. There are some awnings that are intermittent over the doorways. Um so does that really does that meet the standard? Do we need to do something more to hit that standard? Um is there also there potentially um permit requirement for the first floor elevation to for residential uses. We saw this with hope. Um, and we ended up doing as part of the PUD flexibility. We said we didn't have to do that. Um, so basically what I think this standard is trying to do is the like New York brownstones where you go up to get to your door to separate you from the the pedestrian corridor that we're trying to create with the mixeduse neighborhood. Um, is that necessary? So, One of the questions is it would be would you be open to a zoning ordinance amendment to potentially remove that requirement? Again, we decided that necessary for hope um if we decide it's not necessary for this project. That's how I would recommend handling that um as opposed to a PUD. We could also do potentially a PUD um because if we're doing the ordinance, we're just giving up on it entirely. Absolutely. So, we could also do a PUD. I don't know that the applicant wants to do a PED, but that can certainly be part of the direction from council tonight. I think at this point um the concept plan that was submitted was not for PE, so I did not review it under that assumption. That can certainly be the direction though. So, sorry to interrupt. No, no, you're totally fine. Um, and then we also have a requirement for each first floor unit to have a private courtyard enclosure. From what I could tell, it sounds like some of the units would have a private courtyard, but not necessarily all. I could have um misinterpreted that. So, feel free to speak to it. Um and then finally, oh, so another um question that came up with the uh buildings is for the we have in our code that accessory structures in urban residential districts are limited to a,000 square feet. This seems contradictory with our requirement in the general used to require 50% of the parking for resident residential to be housed in a parking structure. Um, additionally, it does not really allow for an accessory clubhouse or an accessory grounds building. Um, so I the urban residential districts does it mixed use isn't very clearly that's what we consider an urban residential district. That's how I would certainly interpret it right now, but I feel like that was more meant for the um single family twin home residential districts. Um so again, that could be a zoning ordinance amendment or a PUB flexibility to allow for uh these accessory uses that do complement the neighborhood and are very desirable for uh people that want to live in these types of neighborhoods. Uh but we would need to we'd have to address it somehow because right now I don't believe we would allow it. And then also they right now what's being proposed is uh two lots with several principal buildings within each lot. We do allow that through a cup. So that would be something that we want to discuss if that makes sense for these sites. Um the benefit of that being is the more lot lines you have the more setbacks that you have to it can be very difficult to work with that. Um especially if it's all a use that's within the same community, it may make sense to keep it on one or two lots. Uh parking is another question. I think it kind of goes back to that same question of are we opening to a variance for a zoning ordinance amendment to reduce uh the required structuring parking from a minimum of 50% to 30%. they are. So again, we still have that the structured parking um but they have experience with other communities particularly within the Twin Cities metro area that where they do have more than 30% structured parking, they aren't leasing out those parking spaces. They're just not seeing that demand. Um, so that was what they asked for a variance and I'm asking if we want to handle that as a variance zoning ordinance amendment to the mayor's point of the PD flexibility. Um, also they we do allow for driveways to count towards required parking uh, which they are showing, but their driveways serve onecar garages or at least some of them do. And our code specifically said we only do that for two car garages. So, another area that we'd have to address for screening. Um, so the they did not really provide a landscaping plan, but I was just going to but we have a couple of we have a couple items. We have the buffer yard requirement that they would have to do along the north from Bellweather. Um, one of the questions they do have a large u wetland that would also potentially provide a natural buffer for our code. So, of question for council tonight is if that's an acceptable buffer. Um, one more requirement that's uh in the general mixed use district specifically is screening. Again, we've uh the general mixed use and the northeast district both have slightly different screening requirements. And it's really not clear which one's stricter, which one's more difficult to achieve, which would be how we usually handle it. Whatever is the more difficult, more challenging standard to meet, that's what we're going to apply um the higher degree of standard. But this They're just slightly different. They're not really one or the other isn't easier or more difficult to achieve. So, but they would be difficult to achieve at the same time. So, again, hope we just let the Northeast District prevail uh because that was what had recently gone through the planning process as a community with a vision in mind. Um and so, how would we want to handle that for this project? Um parks and trails. There is um a on our comp plan there is a off-road trail that is shown. However, there um because of the north I'm sorry the three rivers trail planning uh there's also a off-road trail that potentially will be going through the Oswald piece. And so there is some discussion of whether or not this current alignment makes sense in addition to that if really it makes more sense for uh more efforts to be going through the um through the west parcel and up through blew weather. Um so just some initial feedback on for that we'd certainly go to parks and trails to have some discussion on that as well if this were to move forward. Uh finally for signage the um general mixed use does not allow for freestanding signs. We allow some for um allow some for hope. So would we want to handle that as an ordinance amendment or PD flexibility to allow them to have two freestanding sites? That's what they're showing at basically one on each lot. They're showing we allowed that for hope but that was for different like a commercial use. We allowed each residential portion to have a sign as well. We allowed we we allowed several signs for hope. So we had one monument for the commercial area and which also have the church sign eventually and then each residential component also will have a sign since they're each uh basically they're going to be have their own kind of community within the community. The town homes will have a sign, the villas will have a sign and each apartment. How many signs are being requested in this concept? Two freestanding signs, one at each entrance to the lot essentially. Okay. Finally, the environmental review component. This is a a question of both staff and the applicant. Um, basically they are right on the threshold. If we take if we really consider this as a separate project, just the 280 units, we don't need to do an environmental review. Um, however, if this the commercial portion of the site does come in over the next three years, uh, then the residential units will be counted into the calculation. And from what I can tell, my best guess is we would need an environmental review at that time. Um, it would be required and the city has some discretion on this. It is a large enough project that we can go through the process at this time if we would want to. So, looking for some direction from what would the downside of that fee? It's yeah, it's it's a cost the applicant would have to bear and it does add time to their approval process. the the upside being that we can kind of take a look at some assumptions with the commercial area and then whoever comes in next um we've already done that heavy lifting. The other upside is it does give us some mitigation strategies. So if there is some natural resources on the site if there are some um endangered species or anything like that. We do have a couple that pop up especially in this area. Um then we're all we're able to go through that process to find some mitigation strategies that we can then attach to the development requirements. Has there already been a study for the Oswald property to the west? I don't believe so because that project did not move forward. Thank you. We did do one for Hope. We have did do one for Bellader. So there are ones that have been done in the area. Um so we we certainly don't have to. I would say is that um if we want to kind of if we want to have all the information now rather than waiting for commercial development three years from now potentially um then it may be beneficial. Seems like it might disincentivize commercial development if they have to do the study for a smaller project. Well, on that note, maybe before we get into this fully, um what is council's opinion on whether or not this meets the intent of the gym you ordinance. I have some thoughts. Should we let Natalie finish first? Actually, that that's pretty much it. I appreciate you guys um listening to me and I have I can definitely pull up the summary list as well as the site plan images and then as I said, the applicant also has a brief presentation to go over the product a bit more. Sounds good. Do you want me to go? Yeah. Okay. Uh, I thought the design of the homes was appealing in terms of architecture and materials. Uh, I have concerns about the placement within the site and that if we're going to require roughly half commercial, half residential, can you zoom out a little bit? Yeah. And go up. So, if we put the residential on the west side, that means the commercial has to go on the east side and that puts it in conflict with the existing homes. And a lot of these parcels are relatively tight. I feel like it would be a more natural alignment to take this kind of a product and put it on the north half and have the commercial on the south half along. I had the same feedback actually. Sorry to interrupt. Yes, because It flows a it gives a buffer of more similar with the buffer of course in between bell weather and there but it's still a more similar use as opposed to commercial to bellweather it's bellweather another kind of residential commercial business park and I think with the business park to the west it might make some sense to think about utilizing the increased building height available for larger setbacks. So, when you're going to come up against a more intense use, you could put a taller structure, maybe have a little bit more density to enable us to have conservation residential in other places. Um, because there's not going to be existing homes that'll be as impacted in that area. Um, I did have a a question about if we do this as a cup, I think it's going to be hard for me to consider approval if there's no commercial given that the comp plan would require us to have commercial in the area. And basically, we'd be splitting it and saying, well, we're going to worry about commercial at some point in the future. I' I'd rather see it happening at least to some degree simultaneously. Maybe not every commercial, but I think some commercial should be part of the application. Um, I'm okay with parking that's based on historical norms rather than what code requires. If it's working in other places, I'm okay with a smaller number of parking spots. Um, is that in regard to all the parking um requests? I would I would say in general like with the structured parking specifically. Gotcha. Um, my last question. So, these are town home style homes. Um, what does this do with regards to the rental ordinance where we we allow rentals in multif family, but it's not clear to me how we define multif family versus something like this. Thank you. I um so the way that I defined it once we did that rental ordinance is these would be multifamily under our zoning and rental ordinance. They the intent I believe is to make them feel more like a town home by having a a semi-private or private entrance and semi private garage. But the reality is is we a town home would be floor to ceiling. There's no one above you that and for it to be a town home in our the way our code is this would be a multif family. So it would be something that would be able to get a rental license without running up to any issues with that. Okay. Um, and then real quick, just to clarify, I just want to um I I do think that the proposal of having it more on the north might allow for some more integration and we're speaking to with the with commercials to the south. Um, just the acknowledging that this area right here that kind of wraps around um obviously this is the wetland, but this area right here that wraps around Mama G's properties, that is commercial today. That If we were saying we want it the residential to go all the way across that would be reguiding and reszoning. No, I think Sorry. No, go ahead. I'll go after. What a PUD for the site allow you to deal with that complexity as well. I believe so. I think we were more strict with low density residential PUDs where we wouldn't consider difference uses, but I think we allowed it for I think it might have just been low densities. I could certainly take a look at it. We might be able to be more flexible with that. Either either that or potentially what I was thinking with Oh, you can't really see my red dot. Um, so if you go straight down from where it is on the ceiling there, that lot. Yeah, Jeremy. South of there, that lot obviously that is commercial now. um and west of of Mama G and and proposed Quick Trip um could be commercial, but that still gives you a pretty substantial residential buffer in addition to the buffer yard um from neighbors to the north. Um and then opens up here commercial from down there as well. Yep. And then I I just I I did say that he could give a brief presentation like the Oh, yeah. Go ahead. It'll turn blue. If I may, just real quick, folks, I'd really like you to pay attention. Okay? Talking amongst yourself while I understand. We'd really like you to give give the presenter your full attention so you can know and understand the same things we do. So, thank you. Thank you, Miss. Thank you. Uh again, my name is Rosetti. I am from Lake Area and I'm here on behalf of Properties Falls, Wisconsin. Um I'm here to present obviously our concept what we're calling which is a lowrise multif family residential community in the location has already outlined for us. Um just to give you a brief introduction into properties we might be familiar to some of you. We actually came um to council in late 2022 with a proposed multif family community on a different portion of this site. Um and so we're back here on the western side. Um just a bit about Continental. We are a privately owned um owner, developer, and operator of multif family communities. We have developed over 125 communities and around 45,000 units in 19 states. And um the thing that really sets us apart is we have a um vertically integrated team. So we've got all disciplines in house and we have a track record of um customer satisfaction and success of the communities that we do. Uh as Natalie noted, we are solely a multif family developer. We do not develop any sort of commercial or retail uses and so our application today was just for the multif family housing. Um just to briefly touch on our Minnesota or Twin Cities portfolio. Uh this we have nine existing operational communities today in the Twin Cities metro. This as proposed would be our 10th if it were to come to fruition. Um in the metro area we have our product which is what we're proposing here. So, you know, there's ever a desire to go on site and see what our communities look or act like, I can definitely arrange and bring you guys out on a tour just to get a feel for what our product looks and acts like. Um, but as you can see on the map, you know, we we really cover the metro area and um we're excited about this opportunity. in Minnesota specifically typically attract a lot of really high quality residents, white collar workers, people or users in excuse me, employees in tech or nursing um police officers, school teachers, and then also a big portion of our our residents are actually renters by choice or nesters. So, people who have chosen that they don't want to own the home but still want amenities and maint those those types of that we offer. Um to get into the the proposal, as Nat mentioned, we are just north of County Road 30 west of um Brockton Lane and um just west of M's. The site today is 67.13 acres I believe and it is currently zoned GMU general use. Um it's uh in full at 67 acres has that GMU zoning. However, just to be clear is only proposing to pursue that western half with the eastern half being retained by the current ownership. And just to step and this is just my and staff can correct me if it's incorrect or council feels differently. I think this this uh concept plan is fine to do and and we can give you feedback on that portion of it. I I personally don't think that it application would be complete without a commercial component integrated into it. whether or not whether I get that that's not what you do but when the if the property were to come in I think it would need to have also the commercial component figured out and this potentially could be if there's support for it be part of the residential component of that uh do you mean like a platted out for commercial or coinciding with a commercial developer to come in at the same time Mr. Mayor for hope uh the developer was not a true developer. So, uh he's definitely partnering up with as phases come in, but the preliminary plat does show the intention of the commercial area as platted. And so, the the first phase is in an outlaw. Um so, that the final plat might have it in an outlaw, but the preliminary plat having that fully thought through I think is what we're looking for because we want it to really speak to what it's going to actually operate as in the long term. So, just If I understand correctly, it would be some form of planned infrastructure. We would show parking, that type of information, but not tied to any sort of specific user or developer of it. It doesn't have to be, I suppose. Um, I think the closer it could get would be I I would certainly be more comfortable with it. Um, I have a lot of hesitancy of not of of this site developing with just a residential component and saying we'll do commercial at some future unknown date maybe over here. Um, for what it's worth, I know it is anecotal, but I think a lot of commercial developers seek established rooftops in order to also a good way to attract a high quality retailer or high quality user to the site knowing that there would be that that population that exists there. Okay, please. As far as the comp plan goes, I know Natalie covered this, so I'll be brief, but the future land use plan um shows mostly mixed use across the entire parcel with some of that additional commercial uh that that extends further west from. So, our proposed site today, it has that black outline. Um it is in the general misuse uh future land use designation and it does multiple public rights away future local roads that bite the site in various locations. Um the springs at Corkran uh would again fall on the west side of the site. There are a few things that make developing this site challenging. Um notably they are the existing weapons that encumber the site. In total there are six all shown in green here. Um and then the site just has some odd geometry with residential flag on the west side as well as our parcel hugging the existing commercial on the east side and that geometry is further um or made further challenging by by the requirements of the local roads. So when you add those additional local roads bisecting the site, you end up creating additional and less efficient lots that kind of limit some of the development potential. Um however with that said uh we did provide the concept plan that shows our proposed multif family use along with um the ghost plat which shows viable commercial lots. The east side shows potential public rights of way that are in alignment with the existing comp plan. Um, and those potential future rights of way would align with our proposed public infrastructure here. Um, on the topic of just the GMU district, you know, we we think we are hitting the goal of the GMU district because um, we're keeping the residential in a cohesive place. So, we're not creating any sort of um I guess disjointed or um oneoff commercial lots. This really keeps that residential use in one location that is cohesive for both the residents and for the community. Um it avoids those isolated development lots and then also that structure should be consolidated and oriented um existing, which I do think this accomplishes. It also gives the eastern side, the commercial side, more flexibility. Um, if we're creating oneoff commercial lots in various portions of the residential lot, you're really tied to a certain development type. This keeps a lot more flexibility to attract a different kind or a variety of retail or commercial developers. Um, also it it keeps the commercial, you know, very visible from the public roads, um, the county roads and closer to that intersection today. Uh, given that that wetland would not be impacted, you would have visibility into what would be a very cohesive commercial. not more visible than along Conor 30. There would be great visibility for parcels of commercial along 30. Um it just in in that scenario again creates oddshaped lots for the proposed multif family buildings that can really be planned in as efficient of a manner. Um part of the efficiency that we're able to achieve here even with the public infrastructure we would build um is that larger contiguous portion of multif family land that is um just west of the extension and if that gets broken up you end up with a very disjointed multif family just real I like what you've done from where it was before, a gated community, all of those things and such. But the one thing that sticks out for me, Jeremy already has spoke, I'd really like more of a buffer to the single family homes to the north. And I think it would I think it would be better being residential across the top of this parcel with commercial along County Road 30. granite. This is an extremely challenging site with the wetlands that are on it and it it would be bifurcated by that large wetland on the north side if you were to do all of this residential to the south side of Bellweather. So, I understand both ways. I like what you've done with the previous concept plan and and did it over to here, but I I what kind of things could be done over there to I mean it'd be have to be a heck of a burum to to shield that neighborhood away from the commercial side of the business. It's um that's that's my input. This is a challenging deal. Um, I I like the fact that the mayor is talking about something more planned about commercial. I've always told people in Corkran, you want commercial close. You're three and a half, four miles away from a whole bunch of commercial in Maple Grove. I I just I don't know what kind of commercial is going to come out here. We're going to talk quick trip here in a little bit, which I am in support of on this, but it's going to take a lot to bring commercial in here. But again, I'm thinking of current property owners to the north. How can things be a little bit more of a wave from residential, higher density residential to commercial around the the 101 and County Road 30 side? That's just my thoughts. Okay. And then Natalie, just real quick, the three I see three roads that would be city responsibility or public works responsibility. The north south road, the east west road, and then that quick little road. It's not labeled up into the bellweather property. So those are the only three roads. Everything else would be private privately maintained and such. Yes. So I believe um yeah so the there's the north south road that would extend 102nd and the northwest elm lane north south road um and then it be the east west road to the business park and then the last question I had again this is concept folks so there's I don't think there's public comments that can be done on this it's our input but it just seems like an awful lot of parking all of these. It actually is. It's not more parking than what we're requiring. Okay. I'm I'm just asking. They all have they all have garages for each unit. No, they don't have garages for each unit. I'm sorry if that was conveyed correctly. They have But they have garages for some units and then they have some detached garages and then they also have surface parking. So, okay. Per our calculations, they're pretty spoton to what's required with each spot, especially or assuming we allow for uh driveway parking in front of a onecar garage. So that explains the other thing I had that 12 G's are detached parking buildings and such or detached. Yes, correct. Only hesitancy there is I wouldn't doing that in an ordinance change. Okay, that's the stuff that I'm openly talking about. I do have one question and I don't mean to keep interrupting you, but um I don't know how feasible it is, but potentially would there be support for if we the the residential area on the northeast, potentially a residential spot, maybe the g the clubhouse um just south of the new east west road, but then allowing for commercial on 30 and then the what's shown as the commercial skinny lot that bellweather in the east that res being commercial, would that be something that we could potentially support? Because we kind of have it a little more integrated. We're still having a couple options for the residential spaces. Can you say that again and use the pointer? Thank you. I was gonna I was going to ask her to say that all again. I think that's what I was here. One second. Trying to convey, but I'll take the wheel back. You got it. I got it. I think I got it. She's got a pointer. So, keep this um maybe kind of keep this area. Maybe move the clubhouse. central the pool clubhouse right about here that and then this southern part that turns into commercial maybe and then this commercial lot turns into residential up here so that that's buffered that's I think that would be good I had a question about this road here does that need to connect Yeah, that that is shown in our district. Yeah. And then we're there are the next conversation uh in the feasibility that study that was done with the quick trip application that internal network was reviewed and that's that the utilities are right there and that's what's being extended. So that that would need to get connected. Thank you. Another priority, excuse me, just there's going to be no more accesses on 101. So to be able to service those commercial properties, you'd have to local street access other than the one north of the possible quick trip if I said it right. There being an access to 101 there. The new well the one being proposed with the quick trip will be the only other access and then the bellweather main entrance. Yes, correct. So your access are limited which requires that local street. So then my my issue is somebody else squirreled. Has there ever been any inquiry as to the lot out in front of bellweather that's also commercial? I believe one by one. There's no there's nothing not at this. Okay. No, the the the and that one's for some reason not C2. That one's C1. I I I don't know. No, I the the other commercial lot that's a little bit north of here. T. Yeah, that one is still owned by the previous land owners, not FE. It was created with Bell Weather though, I believe. I remember incoring correctly. And um that would had interest on. Again, they also had an apartment that they wanted. I don't remember. Yeah, we said no. Kind of the same argument like we need the rooftop first to be able to attract the commercial user that I mean that is um I would say that is true. That's why we have the six showing that we need the rooftops to attract viable commercial users. And I one last question. I think I had one more that I forgot about. The percentage of commercial that needs to be on this 67 acres, if I'm remembering, what is what are our expectations of mixed use on this parcel? We anticipated in our comp plan that all the land guided for mixed use, half of it, roughly half of it, 5050, yeah, would be uh developed for residential. Um, so I would say with hope we were flexible on that, but as things develop, we're probably going to want to be a little less flexible. Ultimately, it depends on the density proposed, we want to make sure that we're um not having it too dense and not not enough dense. I would say that 50/50 is the target, but with the complexities of a site, if it's 48 52, I don't think just asking if we've got if we've got this, we've got other mixed use properties that are going to have to follow the same thing. We're we're going to be setting the precedent here with this. So Brent, if you want to hit the green button again, you can take control again. Thank you, sir, very much. Yeah. Um, I guess I would say one of Continental's concerns with a re orientation that kind of heads in the east west direction would be the extent of improvements. Um, this plan is pretty efficient, but still is has over 2,000 line of roadway and utility extensions for the city of our concern would be additional roadways and utilities that would have to be built in the east east west road from 101 over which would potentially become a burden that would make it finally. So I mean with this feedback of course we will absolutely study this but I don't know how or what the threshold would be for the developer responsibility for the roadway network. Um the comp plan clearly shows a very substantial roadway network through this 67 acres and so we would uh I guess be asking for a little bit of flexibility in the roads that we have to build. use dedicated for future use. I think it would depend on what that layout ends up being and and what another possibly good reason to bring in a commercial component with the southeast part was commercial or whatever. Some of that infrastructure would probably go to those that whoever's developing that aspect of the site. I think it' be something that we could definitely stud um we would have to part of the feasibility study is looking at what's being proposed and what's required and at what phases. So that would definitely be something that would be unpacked if Mr. Mayor just real quick. Hey folks, I see some folks leaving. Nobody has stay for the whole thing. Got two very good dogs there. If it's part of their training, keep them there. But anybody else if if you need to go ahead. We're not offended if you leave offended want to stay, we'd love having you. Not much. Feel free. Not much excitement here other than tail wag over here other than the dogs an hour ago. Please feel free. Thank you again you guys. Good dogs. Good girl. Finish this presentation. Yes. Okay. Keep on going. Okay. Sure. Um so maybe we can come back to some of the you know I guess just to go way back the main reason we are here is to determine what our path forward is. Um we we are entering into a purchase agreement that has contract timing and we need to understand exactly what processes we have to go through um to satisfy the needs um of the city but also uh to obtain the approvals for something like this. So maybe we can circle back process. I'll just really briefly go through the site plan just so everyone is clear. Natalie has explained these are 14 buildings here. All buildings have 20 residential units and eight attached garages. So, not every unit has an attached garage, but eight. Um, all first units have direct private access. So, that town and all second story units have direct private stairs. So, there's no sharing of corridors or corridors or anything that um we are exactly roughly the parking code here which would be 616 parking stalls for 280. So it's a 2.1 excuse me 2.2 ratio here and we are seeking a variance for parking based on some of our existing portfolio data. So we seek to to provide a 60% of our units with a covered parking spot in the 110% that is required. Um we've got the community clubhouse with pool and pool deck detached garages. There's a trash facility, a maintenance garage, pet playgrounds. There's buildings for you know pedestrian pathways recreation space clearly and of course the weapons that we are preserving. Uh just to quickly show some of the architecture. Um I'll just skip right over to some of our real photos from existing communities. So this is our class A house. This foursided design it's town home style. Um as goes or that first floor. We really do think we differentiate between the first floor and second floor just with material choices, color choices, um horizontal and vertical articulation and we are looking at the community specifically for selecting those materials to make sure we're going to be compatible with the existing. Um here would be another example. This is not refers or materials precisely, but again, it's just showing that kind of town feel. The interiors are open concept, granite countertops, stainless steel appliances. Um, really just the the highend amenities you would expect out of a class A housing, large bedrooms, walk-in closets. Um, and then the community clubhouse again has the large gathering area, cafe, um, the pool and pool There's grilling areas, a 247 fitness center. So again, all of the amenities will be offered to our residents um to use however and whenever they choose to. Um so then circling back to discussion components um again we're we're trying to understand our process here and we've met with staff on numerous occasions and so one of the first deciding factors um in terms of our entitlement process was whether or not we had to pursue the EA that's the environmental review that was suggested we are 28 minutes under the threshold for that requ If our multif family use is seen as a standalone project, I think the threshold is 375 units to acquire an EW, but there is discretion allowed by the city in that determination. I'm I'm trying to understand if we should proceed with that or not because my current understand that we can't make any other applications until that process. And so if there are any opinions on whether or not something Yeah. Could I ask a question? Um, with the EAW, is there a way because I don't think it's fair that the developer accepts the whole burden of the A since 50% of the land is going to be commercial. Excuse me. Is there a way that you could pay upfront but put half of it in escrow? So when the commercial part is developed, that section or that sector helps pay for the EAW. So the way that we track it at this So the developer would pay for the AW goes into an escro account and then the invoices that come in from you know staff time stand and um landform sometimes it's this I would probably do the AW in this instance so probably more city time but regardless that gets charged directly to the escro account I don't know I don't have a mechanism to reserve didn't we do something like with our infrastructure our roads I thought we did something with our roads on Hackmore with the developer where the infrastructure came in and a portion of it was we did a recapture agreement. Is that what you're talking about? That's what I'm talking about. Yeah. So the recapture agreement you can do with utilities. I don't believe we have a mechanism to do that with roads and then I don't know that we have a mechanism to apply that to the EA. I guess I've never heard of it in the EA context. road can't. I mean, I think the best way to answer that, correct me if I'm wrong, is if the council wants to see an EW done, I would say it's a developer to go back to a land owner and make that negotiation. Okay, thank you. We did not do a correct me if I'm wrong. we would do the feasibility study which has components of the EA to some extent. Yes. So we always do an infrastructure feasibility study for projects of this scale. Um so that would include evaluating road connections, traffic and utilities. The EAW is goes above and beyond that. So includes infrastructure feasibility. We're also looking at the natural resources, the impacts um on a different scale, more the environmental component. Yeah. Question. Just kind of throwing this out to council. I don't even know how I feel about it, but if the site were to be reworked to be more northern across the northern part of the property like we've kind of discussed earlier as a buff the transition buffer for bell weather, would we be l a little less concerned about the EAW upfront if it's closer to hugging bell weather because we have that data for bellweather itself and then we would require an EAW with again I still would like to see some of that commercial tied into an actual application but with uh additional commercial going in triggering EAW for the rest of the site that's farther away from where we have data. I think that's I think that's fair theoretically we could look at the bell weather study that was um look at the mitigation strategy and yeah I think that's probably not significantly different because we're talking about a residential use. Yeah. And then um but then just keep in mind that I think I think Nichols may have. So, um, what may happen is, uh, if a commercial user knows that they're going to trigger an EA, we're going to see this sit for three years before a commercial user wants to come in. That's why I'd like to see it come in with a commercial user. This might not be helpful, but it is something that we've been talking about. So, in our strategic plan, recognizing our ability in order to activate this corridor for commercial use, uh, in our In our strategic plan, we talked about the necessary infrastructure and we're going to study that here in the next 12 to 18 months. Is it feasible for us to consider including environmental impact in that so we get the necessary environmental impact, but it also doesn't burden or potentially hinder create a barrier for the potential of commercial development. So to that point, um the city did do an AU in the AUS do take longer. I don't know if that's necessarily helpful. The benefit of an AU a is you can look at a have wider cast. Uh you can look at basically any property in the northeast district that is developed and can look a couple different options as to how that could happen. And the benefit is then we're not doing not continuing to do these oneoffs which are very timesensitive or time consuming. And then in the southwest district, we did do that uh Pioneer Trail Industrial Park over a decade ago. They had originally came in with an AU and then the city was able to also um my understanding is there was the city assessed some of those property owners that benefited from it. So then that might be more of a mechanism to be able to so that it's not all falling on the developers. That would be a city-driven process. And again, But does it does it come with the same restrictions in terms of what they're able to do in the time being as an AW? I'm sorry, say that again. So like they wouldn't be able like you talking about adding to the AU they'd have to wait for us to finish that process. Yes. Well, I do have a question about that. Would would it necessarily have to tie this developer since an EAW is not required, but we could do a corridor study because we're already doing that for infrastructure. We could do the AU for the corridor and not into this particular development opportunity since an EAW is not triggered with 280 minutes but we include the commercial area is what we're saying but we include the commercial area so so we could get the benefit which would address the concern of the environmental impact would remove the barrier we're already planning on doing this for other infrastructure study and then that would also address some of the concerns we've had before about making it more attractive to some of the other potential developers because We we remove barriers because we we've done our homework. That might be the way to go, I think. Would that also be helpful for the 610 corridor planning or is that what you were doing it for? That's exactly how we were doing it. Okay. So So the Dayton interchange and the and the 610 impact, we've been looking at infrastructure in terms of roads uh and and our other infrastructure. But if we also add environmental with an AUR to that, that allows us to to strategically identify potential partners that want to come in here as opposed to right now like what we're suggesting. Uh it doesn't trigger an an EAW right now. EAW cumulatively is more expensive every time we do it with a development than than an AUR. So having each development do this, it's much more costly which becomes a barrier to entry. Uh and and then also it doesn't give us the total look. So to the point we might have something unique in this corridor that is of concern. Uh and and it would be good to know about that before we're moving ahead playing whack-a-ole. And you said there's a way to recoup some of that cost when things come in that would take advantage of the information. So I I I don't know exactly how the southwest area was handled, but my understanding is that basically we were the city was able to assess to the benefiting property owners. So we'd have to we'd have to look at exactly how I want to handle it. But yeah, I believe there's a way to recoup some of that cost and so that isn't falling on one property owner that's looking to develop. It probably break it out like it would be if they had done an EAW, but it sounds like actually maybe potentially a little bit cheaper each if you know the handful of properties that could develop when they develop. And could that be targeted at the developable properties and not Yes. say all the Bell Weather residents in the frame right now? That that would be my thought. Oh, yeah. It wouldn't work at Bell. No, it would it would be for the properties that have yet to develop. Okay. Good. Now, two Not to beat a dead horse or anything. We were shooting for 5050 residential and commercial on our mixed use and stuff. How much of this property would be continental right now? So, my best calculations, and these are rough because I don't I didn't have the um That's okay. Yeah. But I believe um grosswise it's fairly close to half and half. Okay. When you but when you take out the commercial the area that's already zoned for commercial and you're just looking at the area that's zoned for mixed use and then you take out the wetlands. Um we're left with about 15 net acres that are commercial within the mixed use area. Um and so it's not quite 50/50 once you break it up down to that level. So, what I'm the direction I was going was is there a possibility of a residential buffer on the north side aside from this type deal? Do you know what I'm trying to say? There's not enough acres. You mean like a different house? If there was an east west road, again, this is all dreams. An east west road. The north side of that road would be residential. The south would be commercial. Just a question. So all speculation. Yeah. I think I think theoretic Well, okay. If we allow this to develop on the west, I would say there would like staff would want to see a condition that everything else that comes in would be commercial on the east. Wow. Okay. Um because otherwise I Yeah, we're talking about significantly less than what we would we're planning for. And again, I'm I'm asking just for the concern of I I can't imagine what the backside of commercial properties would look like facing the folks in Bellweather, but that's that's a fair concern. I think the there is likely some verbiage in our northeast district that talks about properties that face residential. If not, we can fixing it. I remember all of that. I just I'm again concerned with uh long-term citizens here and and our folks in Bellweather, our short-term, but it's been it's been on the books to be mixed use for 30 to 40 plus years and stuff. And uh it's kind of like you live you build next to a golf course, golf balls are going to hit you. You build next to a commercial mixed juice, anything goes. So, just going down that side of things. Sorry. Can I add one more thing? I was just going to say I like Jeremy's idea of and the mayor's of going across the top of that property and having the commercial along 30. Um I don't know if there's anything with that top kind of skinny parcel. Um uh would that be just east of Bellweather? That little No. Go up now. Straight up right there. That's the That's PY's property. Would they be willing to sell? I have no idea. I mean, I don't know if there's something you could do to to pull that in that would give you some more land space and then but would that there's a different property owner which comple Yeah, that see because it makes sense that that should be residential because it's tucked into a residential area. That's just I mean I'm that's just me saying that it seems like that would make more sense to be residential there not commercial. So we kind of made this whole corner. So basically the the market study that the city did a while ago I think it was yeah basically said that where we can support commercial and industrial is going to be right here on 30 and 101. So that's why you see these the commercial kind of hugging 101 and going and then the mixed use going to 30. Yep. Okay. Thank you. But I think there there might be opportunity to increase value if these are the same zone agree and you do it as a PUD like part of that PUD. What it helps you resolve is those differing zoning expectations across the different parts of the site because you can balance it more evenly. And I don't know what PI is planning on doing with this. I doubt they're going to put in a grocery store. Um they'll probably want to get rid of it at some point. So it might be a consideration as you're working out the rest of the plan. The other thing too to to split I can see where to split all these properties into and divide it by that wetland and push everything in the north. It just does kind of take away from the environment you're looking for more of a Yeah, I won't say anything more. I I can see what you're doing. Would the council entertain identified roadways if we reorient our site to be more in that eastwest direction? Because if we do that right now, I'm seeing probably full extension and then we would probably have to build another 1200 ft east to get to lane to access all portions of multif family which would be extremely challenging for us. And so if we rework the plan to be to have that commercial on an additional commercial. Could we reook at the internal street network here as well? Maybe another way to ask it is does 102 up in the northwest have to be right and does have to be public as they are today. I believe that to be I think it would have to be evaluated and I think maybe the question is more of what is the extent that you're responsible for um first maybe that only I don't know I I don't want to speak to it without we don't have our engineering room we do have one of our engineers in the room but I don't know that he's ready to speak to it today um but I would say the road network is something we've been fighting for for a while. Um, and it was part very intentional with our northeast district to make sure that we're having connectivity to allow for a true mixed use neighborhood. That's part of you need it to be connected areas and so those support that. Um, it's also that we have limited access points that county that the Hen County traffic team will allow and this is one of them. So that especially the county road 30 and having that access for the business park I do think is significant. So I think it's more of a discussion of what is your responsibility. Yeah. And what would be the responsibility of the commercial use that comes in um and it might be that it's cladded but what it is that you would have to construct more so than forgoing it if that makes sense. Is this a fair question Natalie? So so we have some known points. We already have construction in Bellweather and we have some gnome points on 30 and 10 over. That's what you're saying. Do I hear you asking if there's flexibility in how you connect those known points? Yes. So, so what I hear you saying is we don't have flexibility where those known points are, but if they're they're responsible for everything in between those known points, can they be figuring out how they connect in order to maximize to create your community? Well, the reason they're kind of set because of the wetlands in terms of how they connect, right? But even how this draft from the comp plan is different than what was in the last draft for the ghost plat. And you can move a wetland if you put it somewhere else, right? It has to get approved. That's a big deal. But let's say could if they could work it out, you know, with the site constraints of I mean, I think we can be flexible on the alignment. I think right now what we're showing is an alignment that works without the wetland impacts because it's not just the city that makes that call. So, um, but if you could, let's say they could find one that worked better for them with tweaks that also didn't affect the wetlands. Would we be open to that if it still hit those points? I think so. So, so for example, right now in the north, one of the things that he's asking about is that bifurcates property in a way that might make it difficult to maximize the community feeling. Yes. But if you can still come in at the point that's known from the east, connect to the points that are known to the north, is there a way that that road maybe it goes round, goes, you know, instead of going straight across So yeah, they're fat line markers really. So yeah, the connections and the fluidity and the conduitness of the are open. Yeah. Go ahead. So we have known points, but how you get to those known points flexibility would be helpful is what I hear you asking. Yeah. So just so I'm the plan as shown today would or could not be supported and the path forward should be retaining commercial on county road as well as retaining this as commercial here and commercial back here generally I'd say yeah well it has to be 50/50 correct yeah 5050 so you necessarily have to keep those commercial spots there if they ended up if that whole development ended up shifting above if the 5050 is still below that. I'm not saying there's a line, but yeah, that's Yeah, I I think um I think we kind of talk trying to figure out ways to integrate it so it doesn't feel like it's a neighborhood an island by itself. So, I think that there's potentially just having some commercial here, some commercial here, but I think we could look at it. Um, there's a neighborhood in Maple Grove that has a really unique restaurant bar and it's in the middle of a neighbor, like right in the middle of a neighborhood and it's kind of cool because it has volleyball courts. People walk there to go to dinner. So, like I don't see it an issue having housing right next to Mama G's especially. No, I I that's what the commercial as long as Yeah, I think as long as we're close to 5050, I think that's fine. I I think what I'm concerned about is if we try to go back to where we're consolidating on just the east side, but maybe that allows for um yeah, maybe maybe that is better. I don't know. We have to take a look at it. Um but I think what I'm hearing is we want to see some attempt to try to integrate the commercial uses a bit more. Would that require a compment based on this piece being those? Yeah, those are commercial. I would say those are set as commercial unless we did a amendment and resoning. Um the other piece I um the part along Bellweather Well, why would that comp plan amendment? It's mixed use. It's mixed use in the comp plan. I'm sorry. It's commercial right now in the comp plan. And so in order for it to be residential, we'd have to change it. It is just those weird lats. And we might even have to do that for the little bit that um is directly adjacent to Bell. Um but I would I think that makes sense and then keeping the commercial area south of there. Yeah. Um and then um potentially again I think having some commercial frontage on 30 makes sense and then having the residential area kind of surrounded after that point. But we could certainly continue to work with the applicant on what makes sense. I'm hearing that we're really not wanting to look at zoning ordinance amendments to justice. We're would be more open to a So, I think it would probably make sense for us to come back at a concept level once we have kind of fine tune this a bit more as um doesn't necessarily need to be um yeah, I'm just a little hesitant on the broad ordinance amendments when we have a lot of that district in the area. No, I think that's fair. If we do want to amend it, we want to be intentional about it. Um, but maybe that's what I was trying to say is if we're not doing an EA, then we may not slow you down too much. We would come back with a concept that incorporates a bit more of the feedback. Um, so currently we were proposing site process zone. What is the difference process? Yeah, we'll talk this. There is a a different district essentially. There's some district standards. I'd have to send it to you. There's a lot of overright. Mr. Mayor, yes. Just real quick, just in the interest of time and such being a concept plan and stuff, I think we've given Yep. both staff and the applicant our thoughts and stuff and uh this makes sense to me. It just concept plan. Is there something better? Nobody knows. just something to chew on. But before you stick all the money up front, I think there's some options. I certainly would take you up on one of those uh tours, maybe some time to to look at the product. I would too. Yeah, if you could reach out to us, we I've driven through and I'd like a couple of them that I've drawn driven through. I've driven through two and uh it's neat. I think Natalie was saying something more about trying to centralize that community space, the the room in the pool and stuff to something more central might be the only thing if this were to come back to us this way instead of being out on the outer edge, but there's reasons you have things the way they are. So, and and seeing this come to fruition. So, I live in Chaza and there there is one in Chaska. gone on site and visited it because I was curious how this would impact Corkran and it's adjacent to a Costco. It flows the site flows really nice. Uh I had the opportunity to talk to some young professionals that live there. Uh and uh I think that this would be a really nice addition in terms of what we offer within the community. Uh just for people who are in transition, whether it's young people, young professionals, young families, or people who are moving out of their homes. We currently don't have any housing stock that offers this type of product. Uh and this would be a great location to do that. Thank you very much. And uh Michelle and I have cards. I'll we all have cards out front if you want to grab those and reach out. Like I said, we'd like to find a time to check one of those out. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Isaac. Uh, all right. Power through. Anyone need a break? Quick rest room if we could. Okay, we'll recess for be right back. Six minutes. And very true. Go ahead and call the meeting back to order. Thank you. And we will pick back up with 7B which is the quick trip. I lost the full title of it, but the preliminary plat C and variance requests. And we will start with a public comment opportunity if anyone would like to speak on this item. Um, we know that there was certainly plenty of comments emailed to us that we we read and at the planning commission, but you're free to uh come on up and and reiterate that. Um, out of the sake of time, if you have uh something that maybe a neighbor has said or something before you said that you'd like to just reiterate, if you could, you know, make it brief that you want to agree with that statement as opposed to going back over the point, that can be helpful when there's a lot of speakers. Um, but other than that, we can get started with who um, whoever would like to follow up. I have two cards, Mr. Mayor. Uh, the first one up would be Mr. Craig Matson. Kim first and then I'll follow him. Is that right? Which if that's be your preference. So, please state your name and your address for the record. Mr. Mayor, council members, pardon me. My name is Kim. I live at 101 82 Ironwood Court and that's a uh a place in Bell Weather. I want to thank you for the opportunity for me to state my opposition to the quick trip. I understand that the uh the council members have a criteria that they use to evaluate their proposals and plans and uh I've reviewed some of that criteria and I would like to discuss two of those. The first one is does the project enhance public welfare and will not be detrimental or endanger public health, safety, morals and comfort. So, let me read a couple of uh statistics from the April report using the US Bureau of Justice and the FBI statistics. 63,000 violent crimes occurred at gas stations and convenience stores each year. From this report, it also shows that many carjackings happen when women are buying gas. In a separate study from an article by Total Security Solutions, 5% of all violent crimes in the United States and 25% of all robberies occur at gas stations and convenience stores. Arizona state study titled private oriented policing, it stated that operating hours are by far the strongest factor contributing to gas stations robbery, particularly stations that are open 24 hours a day. The Minnesota statistics for crimes is very similar to the national average and this information can be can be found on Minnesota crime data explorer or the FBI data explorer. So would approving the quick trip promote safety in our community? No, it would not. Would the operation of this facility be detrimental to the community safety? Absolutely. The next criteria I'd like to talk about is are there adequate public facilities and services that are available can reasonably be provided to accommodate this proposed use. Now, even though the city planning has added in the proposal changes to County Road 101 and the removal of two access points for Mama G's, it's still a twolane road. Until the 610 effect is understood, I don't think we can say because we don't know. We don't know what the 610 effect is going to be like. So, can we say that a two-lane road is going to handle all the increased traffic from the quick trip? And I would say absolutely not until we know the effect of 610. So, how are we going to answer that question about that criteria? Until we know, we have to say no. We don't know if the services that we have will will provide everything that we need. So, I would ask the mayor and the council members to vote no with a quick trip proposal. And I ask and thank you for your time. Thank you, Kim. Next card is Mr. Craig Matson. I'm Craig Matson. I live at 10174 court in Bellweather and I too would like to put before the city council and the mayor uh the criteria which you're uh to judge development within the city of Cork and so you must consider all possible adverse effects of the proposed quick in particular I want to address the potential adverse effects on adjoining property In a 19 in a 20 22 article entitled Gas Station Effect, the author described a review of 430,000 property sales in the Dallas Fort Worth area. The author found that homes within 800 ft of a gas station appreciated only 11.9% during the two years of ownership compared to 22 to 20% for homes that were further away over the same 2year period. Similarly, Zillow has suggested that nearby gas stations and convenience stores do nothing to increase property values. Rather, they hurt them significantly. The community and environmental defense services have proposed the following recommendations to protect property values. is to maintain at least 500 ft to the nearest home or that it be buffered so that the store cannot be seen or heard by the nearest home and they recommend that it be located in downtown or commercial area and not in residential area. So in summary, I believe it is essential for the corporate city council to seriously consider these negative impacts on the pending quick trip on the adjoining bell weather and delane properties neighborhoods that are currently well established and have been here for at least three years for Bellweather and probably 15 years for Delaney. So I would look to the city council to protect our and vote no. Thank you. Correct. No other cards, Mr. Mayor. Would anyone else like to speak? Okay, then we will go ahead and close the uh public comment opportunity and go on to the presentation. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It is a 40page report, so and I know we've been here a while. Um most of what I presented at the planning commission meeting is still valid. I'm going to try to go over some real high points through this. Um, and then it does there is more detail provided in the staff report for anyone that's interested. Uh, so the application in front of us is by Quick Trip Incorporated and it involves currently three properties under the ownership of Mama G off of County Road 30 and County Road 101. The application has several components. A preliminary plat to consolidate a platted lot with an unplatted parcel and address an access change for Mama G's. A conditional use permit for a motor fuel station and a car wash site plan approval. And then three variance requests for mama g's a reduced building setback from county road 101 a reduced parking setback from county road 101 and a deferment for connecting to corker municipal sewer and water. So for the preliminary plat so a little bit more context as well the uh these properties are zoned commercial as we discussed previously and the immediately abudding properties surrounding it is also commercial. is our C2 district which is intended to provide for a variety of retail and service businesses which are oriented towards motorists and require high volumes of traffic and visibility for major roads. It's also within our northeast district area in addition to that C2 district. As far as the preliminary plat, we'll start with that uh preliminary plat. We if it meets the standards outlined, we must approve it as a city. Um for the most part, they do meet all the standards, they meet the minimum lot area, the minimum lot width and lot depth. Um the only area that we have an issue is the setback for mama G's is already not compliant with the setback requirement for the district and then with this additional right ofway will need to be provided. Um so that um they would need a variance to allow for a setback of 19.8 from the county road right away and that would be uh that variance we'll discuss in a little bit here. The as far as the access that the it is true that two of the accesses at Mama G's would need to be closed down. Uh, additionally, the infrastructure feasibility study identified that we would need to add um a northbound turn lane at the north access point on County Conor Road 101 or concrete median on County Road 101. And then that Henipin County continues to review the need for southbound turn lanes at potentially just one of the accesses, the new accesses that would be set up by QuickTrip, potentially both. Um, and then a new right of way. I'm just pl apologize. 47. So the plat shows the new access. They have Quick Trip and Mama G's have worked with Eerts with which is not a part of this plat but the property owner that will allow for a public street connection full right in right full access onto Henipin County um 101 which will wrap around the Quickrip site and then provide full access to Mama G's and that would be the first new access point and then Mama G's and Quick Trip will be proposing a shared access here about halfway site and that would be a right in write out only and so and then the two access points down here would be closed once the new accesses are established. Um so the just to keep in mind so a variance for the building setbacks would be required to approve the preliminary plot. Alternatively the building for mama G's would have to be relocated to meet the required setbacks. Um so technic so staff does recommend approval of the preliminary plan contingent on the other variance or moving the building further west. Next we have the conditional use permits. Oh actually I do want to touch on utilities real quick. Utilities um are a big discussion as you can see it's one of the variants that's been requested by Mama G's. Quick Trip is responsible for bringing utilities to the site as well as to the boundaries of the plat. U mama G's would be required as part of the plat to also connect per our chapter our public works chapter in city code and then they are mama g is requesting a variance be considered uh staff and the planning commission recommend a denial of that variance and we'll touch on that a bit more but if um the council were to decide to approve that we would want to make sure we add a condition that we're still bringing utilities to the boundaries to allow for uh connections in the future Um and so then as far as the conditional use permits, we have um several standards to go through. So the motor fuel station, there are six specific standards to that use. For the car wash, there's two specific use standards that the CUP would have to meet. And then we have the seven general CUP standards. I don't know if it'll be really helpful to ramble all those off. I'll just try to go through work would need to be done. Uh as far as the use standards for Quick Trip, um they do meet most of them. The one area that they will need to work on is the uh car wash queuing. uh does not have a um a bypass lane and it does conflict with the circulation plan that they provided showing how a semi would enter the site for fuel storage. There does appear to be enough room to pull that down south especially with uh in addition to pulling down the fuel storage tanks further south to reduce that conflict. So that is a condition of approval for the CU to meet that standard. Um the but they for the most part They have the motor fuel facilities that um have a reasonable distance between the width of the fuel pumps. Um and then the the lighting complies with the standards. All minimum step back requirements are met and um litter control was a conversation at the planning commission. Staff recommends we would need updated plans to begin with showing where the trap trash recepticles are located. Uh planning commission staff recommended that they be located at the entrance to each each building entrance as well as the entrance to the car wash and then a trash receptacle outdoor at the outdoor picnic tables that could certainly be beefed up a bit as far as the car wash. Again, this one just has two standards. Um the stacking is sufficient. They are showing space for about seven to 10 cars, but there uh again needs to bypass lane. There needs to be two-way traffic essentially on the south. So that's a condition of approval that they readjust their site plan to allow for that so there's not a conflict with incoming semi-trucks. Um and then the exit from the car wash is supposed to have a drainage system and uh with special consideration to the prevention of ice buildup during winter months. That information was not provided in the application. So that would be a condition of approval that they add that to to the site and floor plans and then provide additional details about how the ice buildup would be addressed in the winter months. Um so that is a condition of approval. As far as the seven general evaluation criteria, it's supposed to be compliant with our comprehensive plan. This is a use that is consistent with our C2 district and our land use plan. Um and it is consistent with goal three of our land use chapter to create new land use opportunities and expand and diversify the city's tax base by encouraging new commercial development. Uh as far as the establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use, promoting enhancing the general public welfare and not being detrimental to public health, safety, morals or comfort. Uh there are features of the proposal that will promote enhance the welfare of the general public. Uh the surrounding public will have convenient access to fuel, food, and other basic necessities. Uh even though it is a motorist focused use, there's also many people that would be able to walk or use their bicycle as well. We don't have a grocery store in the city. Um so this would be a potential market providing fresh food throughout the day uh with multiple or not multiple deliveries, but deliveries coming in daily as per their narrative. Um the nearest residential home from the proposed car wash is 400 to 500 feet away depending don't have a perfect way to measure it, but it's at least 400 ft away. The sound study completed by the applicant does provide data to support that the noise levels from the car wash will be within the allowable range. Um, and a condition of approval does ask for burning and or fence as well as limiting the time of day the car wash dryers can run to further bring down that noise that could uh impact surrounding uh surrounding residences. Quick question on that specific point, Natalie. What are the hour limitations proposed? Um I don't have anything specific in it. We can certainly talk with the Could we tie it to the construction hours just so that it's the same? Trying to think. So the construction hours I would say I guess I don't know if they have data to say when are people usually using it. I wouldn't want to make it impossible. So I would I I would want to talk with the applicant to see what they have done at other sites because that was one of their proposals for potentially addressing this. So, um, but I I think we could could look at limiting hours. What I've seen at other sites has been, uh, these several other states in Minnesota, 8 to 10 for a car wash operation. I I would love to see it to what is existing right now. If you go over to the H high that that is open till 8 at night. I wouldn't like anything going beyond 8, especially up in this neighborhood. Yes, I understand the four to 500 ft distance and stuff. I understand the decibel range and such. One of the questions that I was going to bring up is there a quieter drying system um instead of hearing a a plane take off every five and a half minutes to dry a car. Is there a different way to dry it quieter and stuff? That's just stuff I was going to ask. So, um I believe I saw here so he might be able to answer some of that. So, um I I I can't I don't know. Yeah, that's all right. Let's just keep it going, Natalie. And then we'll I'm giving him fluid so he can think about it. No, absolutely. Thank you. Um so, yeah, that that is one of the conditions of approval at this time is to uh mitigate the sound from the car wash. Um and we could certainly look at some standards there as well. Um, as far as the rest of the standards, um, the proposed light levels do meet all requirements, there is a note in the light plan that says the canopy lights would meet it with them being dimmed at 60%. Um, or dimmed 60, they would have to be dimmed, I think, 40% in order to be able to u meet the handle at the So that would be a condition of approval. There is a way for that to be measured. There's a a lumen. So that would be something that we could check on if that would be concerned later on and we can enforce that if that were to be um not being followed, but the proposed light levels that they are presenting do meet all requirements. That would just real quick, Mr. Mayor, if I may. Yes. Just the lighting is on the front of the building and just very limited lighting on the car wash side than the north side facing bell weather. Correct. It's just illuminating more of the building down. Yeah. And the street lights and stuff. So, so all of our lighting standards require it to be shielded down. Um I would say the lighting that I'm talking about that would need to be dimmed uh specifically is on the canopy. Yeah. The there wasn't any concerns that I noted looking at the photoometrics plan with the building lighting. So that and then um as part of the planning commission discussion additional screening uh was added as a condition approval adding more trees and screening along the northeast as well as screening the I'm sorry northwest and the long 101 and also some screening I believe on the southwest as well too to uh screen the stacking area for the So that is a another condition of approval, another way to mitigate some of the impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. Um but other than that, the rest of the standards staff does feel they satisfied. Uh they are proposing something that will not impede the normal and orderly development of the commercial and mixeduse area surrounding it. Um and public facilities and services are available and several services will be or facilities will be required of the applicant to based on our usability study that was studied by um our engineering team. So, and then also they'll have to meet the final Henipin County determination regarding turn lanes to support the traffic for the area. Um and then the site plan really there are several areas where um they will need to do some corrections and those are outlined as conditions of approval. The areas that really the discussion that's left to discuss would be the proposed parking formula for Mama G's. Currently, they have about 236 parking stalls. They have about 236 parking stalls and those do get fully utilized when the volleyball courts are being used. So, what's difficult with our code is we didn't really call out what a volleyball court should be parked at. Um, so using the most similar use in our code that would assume about space for every 300 ft of volleyball court and that would be a parking count of about 227 with what they're currently showing. Um you I also have the ability when it's not called out into code to look at what u other standards there are for professional standards. So looking at the American Planning Association manual, there are a variety of formulas we could choose from. The most uh most flexible was one per every thousand square feet of court space which would allow for at 142 spaces. However, knowing that they fully utilize that, are we comfortable saying that they will be able to manage their site with that amount of parking? So, they would either need to um if we council wanted the formula that's most consistent with what we know today is needed for parking. um they would have to reduce their volleyball court space um and bring back a site plan that shows how they're reducing the volleyball volleyball court space and provided the necessary parking with what is remaining. So that would be one point of discussion to be clarified. Um and Mr. Mayor we need to talk about that parking and such with this because this is all owned by Mama G's. So yeah. So basically Mama G's parking lot is um over here partial of it is Quick Trip land. So yeah is yeah part of the land. So they're they'd be losing all this parking and some more because of the right of way. Um and again I think in the planning commission they could use some of that property to the west of your arrow there to add temporary parking and stuff or would it need to be permanent? temporary parking. Yeah, they would have to add they would have to add parking uh to in order to comply with our ordinance. Um is that wetland there too? No, actually that's not wetland. Um so the only little bit of wetlands right down here and it just barely crosses the property line. Um so yeah, it looks like they'd have space. What becomes tricky is we have an impervious surface limit and because this wasn't uh beded out at this point, it's possible they would need a variance. Um or they they might be able to be just a little bit more efficient with the parking space and show it restriped a bit differently to or parking lot and have it restricted a bit differently to be able to fit more spaces in. They have to go through the exercise of addressing it. Um and then I think the again if we're if we're saying one every 300 um it would be some combination of reducing the volleyball courts and maximizing their site um and adding parking potentially. So that would Oops, sorry to do that. So yeah, that that's the biggest concern with the site plan that would need to get dressed right today. Um and then we have the three variances. So we have a variance to allow the reduced building setback from the front property line adjacent to County Road 101. The staff in planning commission recommended approval of this. Um the proposed condition of approval was to return the space between the building and the uh new new right ofway to green space uh as well as add some landscaping to to be in line with our enhanced landscaping clause that allows for reduced setback. Uh the applicant did request that they not be required to restore the area between the front property line and the building to grass green space or plant enhanced landscaping. um staff took a second look at it and we believe that we could certain if the council agrees we could remove the requirement to not have additional landscaping but we would still need that to be a grass or green area or it's restored essentially otherwise it does get tried people try to use it for parking so um so I would say I think we could certainly look at forgoing trees and shrubbery in that area um but we would still want to see that turn into green space that is not the current resolution though we would need to adjust that. Right now you have the planning commission in front of you. So just calling that out. Also a variance to allow a reduced parking and drive aisle setback from um the front property line adjacent to a county road. So right now they have basically a zero foot setback. What I'm proposing uh is they would they're going to need to move this line for the right ofway um and then having a five foot separation from the trail easement that they will be providing. And so that would um still be a reduced setback from what we're seeing, but it would certainly be an improvement from the current uh the current setback on the site. So staff does recommend approval of that. and then staff and planning commission recommend uh we thought that landscaping that area might be difficult without knowing the exact location of the future trail um but that it did again make sense to restore the stepback area to a vegetated area. Finally, the variance from the requirement to connect to Corker Municipal Utilities Mama G's uh is a property that was granted utility access from Maple Grove in about 1998 through an agreement between both cities so that they could have utility So that's how they're currently served. But because of the plat and the overall development project, um to be consistent with how we treated other property owners that have been a part of a plat or development project, they are required to connect at this point for our chapter. Um so the the Mama G's Marian variance narrative does provide their argument and it is a fair argument. Um at the same time, chapter 51 is specifically meant to address the solvency and financial stability of our system. Uh and so far people that have requested a similar variance, we have denied. So staff in the planning commission to be consistent to make sure that we're having the long-term goals of our um utility fees um the way that they're set up and making sure that we're hitting those uh markers that we need. Uh we do recommend denial of that variance request if you were to recommend or if you were to approve it, um we would recommend that it be deferred to future development rather than having a specific year in mind just for the reality of staff capacity. That is something that we could easily overlook if there's turnover and might also be really difficult to actually enforce as was seen with the downtown project utilities. So that's what I have and I'll be happy to go over any other questions as well. Any questions for Natalie? And I'm sorry, Dean George is here with Quick Trip. We'll go to you in just Mr. Mayor. Yeah. And Natalie, thank you for that last thing, the deferring until development of the Mama Ge property. I would I would I would support just because we've kind of set a precedent with the sewer and water that was in our industrial park. We've had people that went a number of years beyond. So, They've already got sewer and water, correct, from Maple Grove. We have se water from Maple Grove at this point. So, I mean, that's that's one thing I would I'm willing to say um defer that until future development, but I'm I'm just one. So, thank you for for that commentary. Yeah, my only hesitation would be creating a precedent that ends up, like Natalie mentioned, hurting our ability to cash flow the the system. But are there really many similar scenarios to this that we can foresee where it's a one lot being split with an existing business being split? I I wouldn't want to pretend to be able to foresee it. I don't know. But we we do seem to get this request at least once a year at this point. Okay. It's never a good time to pay your sewer access charges. I just I don't think it's a matter of that. I think it's a matter of they wanted sewer and water back in the day and we had no way of delivering it and to to double dip and make them pay double. I think that's unfair. That's my opinion. One thing that I I would bring up and I didn't talk about this. Uh this is contingent on Maple Grove's willingness to continue to do this. And so that is we just need to acknowledge with an agreement that that's a risk y that that the property owner is taking because if at some point Maple Grove should say, "Yeah, we're not going to allow that anymore." Uh that's that's a different potential unpredictable problem. and probably should be called out in any agreement if that was don't we allow people to defer spread the payments of those fees or is that only for the downtown district or it wasn't part of the planning process red barn requested it that they have some kind of fiveyear payment plan and we said no at that time that certainly could be um if if that was a desire that could be We would want to still try to minimize how far we spread it out because again the staff turnover that can be difficult to I think that gets too much into us financing it as opposed to it just happening when development occurs on that site. Thank you. So general thoughts on that that part of the I don't think it would be smart thinking about the city as a municipal corporation looking out for the well-being of the overall residents base. It's always tempting to give people what they're asking for, especially when they have a good argument, but we don't really have the infrastructure or the systems to support ultimate collection of something like that or a mechanism to enforce. So, I I like to be the nice guy when there's a way to ensure that we're doing right by the taxpayers in general. I don't feel like we have that mechanism. So, I wouldn't support it in this case. Um, well, I just I'm thinking about the variance. Speak up, please. Sorry. I'm thinking about the variance that they're requesting. And I feel like with 610 coming in, allowing a closer variance to the road seems like not a good thing to do based on what's coming in in the future. Um, and isn't their sign almost right on the road? So, if if things get switched, like the the access points get switched, I'm assuming they'd have to move their sign, too, because that's almost right on the road as well. Yeah. Yeah. I would assume that they would have didn't um include the sign to change that, but their access would be changing. So, maybe we get them to put Corkin on their sign, too. Um, so I I would agree with Jeremy, too. I I with where we're at right now, I wouldn't support that either. I don't think right now. And just to be clear, part of the right of way um is um not necessarily roadway. So the rightway is the 55 foot ride ofway that staff is recommending they adjust it to to better account for some of the setbacks. Um would that doesn't mean the pavements going directly up to that. So there's would still be space in there. And then there's a trail easement as well that they would have to provide. So the the parking set back would be 5t from the trail. So that would be from the road that I think might be being visualized. Just I'm not just want to make sure that's clear. And the building set back would be about 20 ft from where the right of way line is. Yeah. Were you speaking on all three variances? Okay. Gotcha. Gotcha. I think I I personally land on Jeremy where you and Michelle were on on the third one. Um I guess we're planning commission and staff were on all three variances there for me. um regarding this the first two variants is the setback and the parking setback to this any opinions on those one besides Michelle I'm concerned about the parking in general I I can imagine it's pretty tough to give up the volleyball court area that would be needed to match the dem demand for parking with the actual parking and I think you're going to end up with people all over that area bellweather on the connecting roads in the quick trip parking lot and there's not really a mechanism for us to enforce containing the activity of the site to the mama's site. Um, so that's another struggle that I have and it kind of gets into some of the CUP criteria around impacts to surrounding properties because if you're consuming some of the parking that the existing business needs, that's going to force that onto some other person's property or onto city streets. So, I'd want to see some kind of condition around how the city could police the parking situation until and unless those courts are shrunk down to the point where it matches what they can actually accommodate. But I'm struggling with how to do that. Yeah. Yeah. Um, so the the street the new street would be signed for no parking. So there would be uh so if there were people parking in the streets, they could be ticketed. um we would have to work with public safety on that. But that would that's um some of where we struggle with ticketing where people are parking on the street right now is because we haven't signed the area for no parking. So, but this would be signed from day one. Um the cup wouldn't be the proper because the cup specific to the car wash and the motor fuel station. I do think that what we would have to do with the site plan is they would um and and I believe that the wording is already in there, but basically or yeah, basically they would have to provide a site plan that meets um that meets the parking formula. So, some combination of reducing those volleyball courts. I don't because it's a site plan, we have a limited ability to add a condition onto that. Um am I done. Okay, mayor council, I think what uh what you'd want to identify is what the appropriate standard you want to use is and how many spaces you're designating based on that standard and then that can be enforced. Mr. Mayor, can I can I offer an opinion? Um, so I'm familiar with the parking situation um at that location. It's a really popular place to play volleyball. Many people travel at least 45 minutes to get to that location because it's super competitive. There is never enough parking. So, I would say we would want to go with a more restrictive park or more parking spaces because what ends up happening is people end up parking on the grass behind other cars double stacked and you almost have to sometimes sort of figure out a way out of the parking lot. So, it's not the greatest. I mean, it's been there for so long. It's it's everybody knows where Mama G is in Corkran. Um and I can't imagine they'd want to decrease their volleyball courts. Um they at the planning commission they said that they were willing to look at that. So that would be I think that that would be the condition that we set and then that's the decision they make from there. to handle it. Do you have anything else? No, that was just my comments about the parking. I would say that we want to have a higher number of parking spaces if it stayed as it was. So, it' be like closer to that 300 formula than the Yeah, I agree. I think that's the best way to approach it. Make that the condition. I believe that was address. Okay. So, paragraph 18 uh would be changed to um parking for mama G's must utilize a formula of one for every 300 ft of volleyball court space and a site plan must be provided showing um a combination of more stalls and reduced volleyball courts to accommodate that. What counts as volleyball may spot for 300 300 doesn't seem like enough. So that so basically right now they're at about 236 and that came back that formula comes back at 227. So it's pretty close to the parking that they have today. But like 300 square feet, you know me, I'm not great with imagining how big that actually is. But it doesn't seem it seems like that is a really large space for just one parking space. So this is for the volleyball court. Yeah, it seems like it should be like 10 spots. Like there's six people playing on a volleyball court. So That should be at least six spots for one volleyball court plus all the other people that are coming. So I would say one in 300 was a fairly fairly yeah frequent formula that was available for sport courts and volleyball courts. So but um and that's the one that's most similar that's already called code as well. Okay. Um would it be the same resolution that we were discussing the maybe it's not actually the restoring of the green area planting you said we'd need to make an adjustment in the resolution we wanted to do that. Yeah. So that would be resolution uh 2025 26. So a different resolution. Yeah. the variances and that would be paragraph one F Roman numer numeral two paragraph two we would just strike that paragraph that's where it talks about requirements got required landscaping okay regarding the first yeah I I still I'm I'm kind of stuck on the the 300 square ft of volleyball court space per automobile. Just quick dimensions and stuff. A volleyball court that would end up being six parking spots per volleyball court at 300 square ft. A volleyball court is 1740 square ft. So, if we're going to go off of those numbers, they're only going to be able to have 36 parking spots. I have a question, too, about do you just include the court itself or also the area surrounding the court where people circulate? So, we have the is based off the numbers they gave me as to what they um we have the there's other parts to the formula. We have the restaurant space and that was calculated per our code. We have the outdoor dining space also calculated per code and then we have the area that is volleyball courts and so that that space is the one for 300 um oh okay I'm I'm understanding better restaurants outdoor dining and sitting and then the volleyball courts you were I understood it you were basing all of the parking off there's another consideration there though that you could compact the existing number of courts onto a smaller space by reducing the gaps between them and end up with fewer parking spaces for the same number of people. Does that make sense? If you go to the aerial view, it says they have to redo all the cords. I'm I'm guessing they're not too excited about relaying out everything. So, that's a lot of I wouldn't be I this Yeah. totaling 36,400 ft is what the volleyball courts are currently at. Um, so I think we do the one in 300 and as Natalie suggested is making a condition. I think the other ways too much. I agree with the ratio, but I'm concerned that there's ways to maneuver the calculation to keep the same amount of people on the site and end up with requiring fewer parking spaces. Would you want a minimum per volleyball court? Sometimes formulas do that as well as like we do one per 300 with a minimum of five per volleyball court or something. We do one per six for volleyball court. To your point, if there's six people going to each court, something like that. Maybe it's more like one per 10 because of the fact that there might spectators too. If I recall correctly, it's less than 10 per volleyball court. is additionally added as well. I threw the dimensions in just looking it up quick what a standard volleyball court is. It's 59 ft long, 29 feet wide, which is 1,743.5 square ft, which is six people per just for the court itself, right? That's not any spectators. And then you get staging for finished ball finished volleyball games, volleyball games coming up. They run a a pretty cool event when there's when they have their tournaments and stuff and then obviously the nights that they're there, they've got a tremendous amount. I just I guess I would ask for a little bit more a little bit more on them. They aren't going to want to have to run a business where they're going to have to police their own parking and such. And I I think it's something that I'd like to hear from them talk. I think they had some pretty good talking points at the planning commission meeting and such before we have them reinvent their wheel, so to speak. So, are you saying you you support it with like what we discussed and what's in here there? As they said in the planning in the planning meeting, they were going to try and figure out how to do more parking on that grassy area and do stuff. They they were willing to help with the same concerns from the planning commission that was that night. I'm saying I don't think we need to make it I don't want I don't want to tighten so many things up that we are impacting a current very good business in our community. I I just I agree. I I can't we can't do this especially if they're if they're looking at if things develop and change around them to put an initial investment in now to make everything conform and if things change around them over the next two or three years with everything that could possibly happen to that property that's surrounding them and quick trip to the north they could have another thought of I think they actually said in the planning commission They were looking at doing something different, but keeping the volleyball element to the tune of four courts instead of I think there's six there now. How am I doing? Did I remember everything pretty okay? Thank you. I'm sorry. So, I just I I I we are we are goodness gracious. We've been more lenient with a lot of our existing businesses down in the industrial park and we're we're tightening this up and I I We're spend an awful lot of time on Mama G's. It is an element of Quick Trip, but we we've focused on nothing but parking and such. And I think I think they had a lot of comments. I'm just a little confused as to what change or not change that to get what you were just saying to accomplish that needs to be done in the resolution. I'm lost. Yeah. Um, if the if the idea is that we'd want them to have a parking that supports the volleyball court space that they have, then I think we we set the standard one in 300. Um, you probably counselor Friedrich know more about how many spectators would be more on average. Um, but I think paragraph 18 in the resolution would need to get adjusted for one in 300 with a minimum of 10 parking spaces per um per volleyball court, something like that. So, I think we just want to set the standard and we'd be able to respond accordingly with what changes need to be made to the site. I'll make a motion to amend the resolution to that effect with uh paragraph 18 to the one and 300 with minimum 10. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I opposed. Nay. Three. We still are going to hear from the applicants and mama G. Correct. Okay. Yeah. And that wasn't approving any resolution. That was just changing. Okay. Um where were we now? Trying to get on to We're just talking about variances, right? Yeah. Did you have some? No, I'm I'm fine. Um, regarding the other one I I touched on, I don't think we I got this to council, the the green restoring the green space and forgoing plantings. Where's everyone on that? My personal thing is with the staff's recommendation of they should they should restore the green, not necessarily the plantings there. in my opinion and that's related to the quick trip element or what to the reconfigure of the parking. Yeah. So the variances are all on the mama G site. I'm trying to get knock those out to get to that. So we're talking about the two entrances going away and the new entrance from the north side northwest side and changing the parking that's between the building and 101. Correct. So essentially the Right now, I think we're focusing on the area between the building and the right of way. Y right now that's used for parking. That really there's not going to be enough room for parking. I think I think someone's going to think there's room for parking, but that's why but I I I think the applicant or or the Mama G's folks were in agreement with that. Yeah, I think they were okay with that. They asked that they not be required to convert it to green space or providing landscaping. So, Um staff proposes meeting halfway and not requiring additional plantings but do convert converting that to a vegetative space. Okay. And do we need to amend? Yes. So it would be 28 25 26 um paragraph 1 F 22. We're crossing out. I'll make that motion to do that. Do you have a second? Second. Motion to second. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Post. Okay. Making progress. Um, hold on one second. So, the draft that I have in front of me 2526 said F2 striking F2. F22. So, there's Roman numeral two and then the numbers are Sorry, my draft doesn't have number two like Arabic number two. So I must be out of date. I just have the plan must be updated to include this change to the site. Resolution for 2025 26. I think you're looking at the wrong resolution. Maybe no 202526. But this is one I downloaded on Friday of last week. So if it's changed since then. You know what? I think at one point the numbers might have been off early on. I had a similar packet, but I think we're on the same page. The actual resolution made that. Um, you said F2. There's not a two here. Oh, one then two. Now I see what you're talking about. Okay. On to let's see. Is there anything else with the variances that we did not cover to get those in a state that we would be supportive of? Yeah, page is Well, shoot. I'm using my packet. Um, page 60. Sorry, I just wanted to make sure we have the correct resolution for you. Um, the packet that I have dated 424 2025 does have that. So, councelor Nichols, I apologize. I don't know how that discrepancy happened. I blame Granicus. Okay. So, let's blame it on that. I don't have that one either, by the way. I only have one. Huh? I only have one. I don't see either. Okay. Well, what we crossed out for the record was providing landscaping per section 1060.070 subdivision 2K within the setback to the extent possible. That is the requirement that we hopefully that correct. Okay. Okay. So, we make the variances in an order that we generally support. So the one currently online does have F2. So one sub paragraph F Roman numeral 2 then the number two. Which page is that J? Uh so if you go to actually click on the quick trip packet, it's on page 60 of the quick trip packet. Staff report. It's page three of five of that resolution, right? Correct. No page two of five. How do I five? Oh, I see what happened. You guys are looking at subdivision. You're looking at paragraph two. Subdivision of Yeah. So, page three of five is the wrong page. If you go to page two of five, same thing. I have one F. So, there's two. Yes, there's two Fs, but they're both dealing with the SE being restored to gra, right? But one is under one and then the other one. Sorry. Page number two. how we cleared it up. I was really concerned. I do too. I'm sorry. So much connection and apology here. Reconciliation. We're all good with the change, right? Yes. Okay. Good deal. We figured it out in the end. Thank you. Okay. Um so that covers the variance items. Uh on to the site plan and cup. Uh, does anyone have any questions or anything they want to start with there? Want to hear from the applicant? I would. Yeah, love to hear from the Yeah, maybe I'm from Please come out to the microphone so they can capture it on the video. State your name and address, please. My name is Christie and I'm from Minnesota. currently a partner in Mama G. I talked to Natalie and staff and planning zoning commission a month or so ago that's I think one of the one of the things and the reason I asked to speak for the quick trip is because it's here and I appreciate the nice words from you guys business and what it brings to the city of And the minute you said that, why is it on? But um and I know we're here late and you guys have been at it for a long time. And just we're here to to either approve or disapprove a quick trip, but what we're we find ourselves doing is we're reinventing Mama G's business. In my opinion, in the way that partners and I feel it's kind of two separate things. Either the city endorses and welcomes a quick trip or the city doesn't. It shouldn't be contingent upon anything that happens at the green space on hook up to a sewer and water. Nobody wants to hook up to consuming water more than us. We want to cut our ties. It would just be a silly financial thing to do now until we have a clear development, a clear future of the existing center. What's going to happen back? We did talk to staff about lowering the amount of volleyball courts, but that wasn't that was when we take volleyball courts and we're kind of well known for the volleyball aspect of it. So we wanted to keep a smaller component of that let's say a new model when that happens I can't tell you if it happens in a year I can't tell you if it happens in two I listen to the conversation prior to this about the residential developments and commercial sites and I was listening and taking it all in and I was like well how do we how do we go to this particular site and in my opinion we need someone to stand up and say will be the first there and then we'll get some more retail and some more services for the community in the in the commercial spaces. But until we get some money quick willing to do that, they're willing to step up. They're willing to pay for the willing to pay for the rightways. We're willing to give away our two rightways from the county which we had that meeting. That's how long ago we had the need to give up our right away quick get the other right away. So I I feel like we're we're we're spending a lot of time talking about Mama G and I'm willing to do that with you guys and happy to do it with you and I appreciate the support and everything. I'm just wondering if we It's weird to me that we're tying the two together. If I was quick and you were saying, "Hey, we'll give you a permit to build a $2 million gas station. We'll give you that permit, but mom and cheese has to pay attention. I would be like, "What if they don't pay attention? What's going to happen quick?" So, I see all both sides of it, but I I would uh I just wanted to say that piece and I'll let him come up. Sounds good. Quick guy ask questions. And if there is any concerns about things down the line with whether there now or there in the future when we decide to redevelop that property. I'd be happy to address all the staff planning with you guys. It's just I think we're premature in that right now because Dean George 1626 Oak Street across Wisconsin, thank you for having us at this late hour. Um, I think the parking component is kind of the most important thing from my perspective, from perspective because I know Natalie probably say a couple of times I'll respond to the meeting after we are applying for a conditional use permit. Um, and within that conditional use permit, there are going to be some conditions placed on it that relate to a property and business that we have no control over. So we spend, you know, a lot of money out front putting in roads, dragging sewer, putting in turn lanes, kind of the whole thing. Um, we build a brand new beautiful convenience store and two years down the road there's a parking snap at Mama G. All of a sudden our permit is in question and that provides us a lot of anxiety at the office because it's something that we can't control a couple years ago. So that's why I think there's has been this ask from myself and from Mama G to maybe attempt to unangled the two and I've asked that before and kind of got an answer that because we are pulling out these access points and taking off some of that parking from the north side of that parking lot, they have to be coingled. Um, it provides us a lot of anxiety and that's that's kind of the long and short of the way the resolution is currently cracked. Um, so if there's anything we can do to maybe pull that out or come up with a resolution, we would love to explore it. Um, operationally, we're more than happy to be at this location. This is going to be a great location for us. There's plenty of growth in this area and we would love to service kind of the city of Corkin with kind of what Nine said, grocery hot food items, baked goods, kind of things that we're known for at the quality which we do them. Um, and it's been we said co county has been a four year process to get to this point. Um, it's been a lot of effort myself, a lot of Natalie so she putting down this dashboard together and happy to answer any questions you guys have for us about how we function operationally, what we are as a company, what we plan to do um in the future, and just how we are as a corporate. Got any questions? Yeah. Um neighborhood quick trip. Yeah. Not a truck stop. Not semi friendly at all. It's going to be correct. Initial iteration. SUVs, cars, stuff like that. Had a separate for diesel fuel. We pulled that off. So this is your local 10 pump display. It can accommodate 20 cars. You get one diesel pump on the outside for the guy who drives a diesel rig. Somewhat somewhat compatible to the one in Rockford, just not exactly like the one. So big correct as far as the semi traffic. It's just not going to be accessible to semis other than your vehicles delivering. Yeah. So the templates you guys saw um in the civil design probably to show you what our fuel does and what our fresh grocery delivery can get in and out of WB67. So that's why we're not intending to drag semis into the site. There's there's no room for that. There's no way in or out. And then the talk about the hours on the car wash and stuff. Is there a way to silence the turbo jets and stuff on the drying? Can you have somebody buy handing out towels and they can dry it themselves? When this comes up, I don't think that we have a way to I'm just brainstorming for you. When when this comes up, we volunteer and we're happy to limit the hours of the car wash during the kind of the evening hours and morning hours. I get I get calls from the folks that are next to Soda Shine by Hi Ve asking what is the city going to do about the dryers? And I'm like, I don't know. I don't live in Maple Grove. You got to call your city. And then that's where they finally realized they don't live in Corkran. So, I just I it's it's serious, guys. Some of the stuff we get is is crazy. But I'm the the the lighting I spent here the whole while for the quick trip that planning commission and such. And I think the planning commission did a great job. I think you did a great job encompassing a lot of people have the question, why a quick trip so close to the one that's up in Dayton? I'm going to ask that now. Why? Because there's there's convenience stores, not drive out of your way to get there. There distinct traffic patterns that utilize 81, that utilize 101, that utilize 30. Um, they're not all going to drive out of their way to to get a gas. You guys probably all do it. You drive down the road, address, there's a door right there. So, again, we are all extremely concerned with anybody that has not been here in the past and stuff. We are all extremely concerned about what's happening on the 610 dump, I'm going to call it, and all of the traffic they're going to give us and stuff. Henipin County is not engaging with us as to what their plans are. Well, the problem is it's not exclusive. It's it's Mindot and Mindot and County. So, FYI, there are people to contact, let us know, and we'll give you we'll give you that. But this has been a commercial part of the plan for a long time and one of the things one of the uses that can be done is convenience store gas station and such. So um I I'm going to ask the question because the neighbors 400 450 ft away the people across the street and Delgeni and stuff are all asking is it going to be busy 24 hours a day? Is it something that No. Is is there thoughts of of changing hours instead of a 24-hour operation to a a 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. at night? I'm asking the just a general question. So, the 24-hour operation becomes part of our brand. It's why we like to have them all open 24 hours, but you can you can drive by. I know Quick's open right now. Guess are we open? Are we not? No, we're not busy 24 hours. We're busy. We're busy PM. We probably don't make any money overnight. But we're there because it's it's people have this secret to kind of know that it's we do have some that close overnight. Um and that's usually mandated by city ordinance. Um we don't have control of it. If we have the opportunity to keep them open, we like to I just we've got we've got two gas stations in town and both of them are shutting down. I think the one shuts down at uh 7:00 on Sundays, 8:00 on Saturdays, and then the other one is down usually at 9:00 period. So, it's just two different areas. This is very close to neighborhoods and those kind of things. So, I can understand the 24-hour 24-hour option for you guys. Um you've already talked about adding the extra screening, everything else. Um it was it was a great presentation. to the planning commission and I think planning commission came up with some really good ideas and I think you uh you hit all of those. Again, I I hate to bring in the mama G side. I still think us as a city should should do something to work out with Mama G's as future development happens on that uh opportunity to connect to sewer and water down the road. But again, with the stipulation that we talked about, but that's just me saying that. But as far as this goes, I love Mama and G's a lot. I'm probably one of the few people that know it used to be a dinner supper club. Enjoy the I know, but uh we've we've beat up Mama G's even though we're we're I I'm not going to give up on the Maj deal. So, I'm sorry. But on the quick trip side, I think it's a great deal. I think it makes this road a lot safer than it would be if all the accesses were left alone and such. It turns into two and it's uh it's a lot of good stuff. So, thanks Michelle. Did you have something? Um I just wanted to ask a general question if if there's people still watching. Can you explain why there's the connection between mama's and quick trip? Sure. Um, so the issue is stemming from a couple different things. A lot of it is tied to the access points. The fact that we are talking about losing two access points means that they need to be a part of the plat. Uh, the fact that the new property line that will now be Quick Trip has a fair amount of parking on it and they're going to be losing that parking. That's why the site plan is tied to the site plan with Quick Trip. Um, and then we only have one applicant. And then the way that we handle development in the city is we have one applicant, one VA, one letter of credit. There's definitely room for there to be side agreements as far as performance goes. Uh, but we as a city, anytime we've tried to split it up into a dual model where this person's responsible for this, this person's responsible for this. It's been a mess. Uh, so we as a policy do not do that to keep everything clean. We have one applicant and that's who's responsible for the work. Now, having said that, Just giving a little bit of thought here. Um I I can understand while parking performance among G's having that tied to the cup could be a concern and is not fair because the C I would say the CU should be separate. So we could I could look at um splitting up the resolution right now to just so that the CU is by itself and so it's very clear what conditions that they are being held to for the CUP. Um and then we have one for the site plan for Quick Trip and Mama G. So, it's still doing the same thing, but there isn't confusion later as to what is a condition for the C that they must continue performing in perpetuity uh versus what needs to be done as part of this development before it gets closed out. Thank you. So, that would need to get brought back at the next meeting if that's what we want to do. But, I could certainly that would be potentially a way to fix some of that concern. You guys, I I think that would be a good idea. Um it seems more logical to have it separate to me. Usually it's together but I I yeah just trying to be creative here and I think that'd be the way to deal with it. Um best do you think that's also you can also capture it in the C itself um and allocate it that way as far as the the responsibility for certain provisions but there'll be overlap on it. Um if you're comfortable with setting the standings I think the way that Natalie is proposing it would be cleaner. Okay. And that would just delay that. Yeah, we could theoretically take care of the other two and then with direction to come back with this and put it on consent for the next meeting if we have everything else fixed. Do we really want it tonight? Sounds good. Um, did you have anything else you want to add? Um, yeah, maybe. I guess I I would say that, and I've said this before, I I feel like as our city grows, our zoning areas need to adjust to to what's popping up and growing development wise in our city. So, I don't necessarily think that this is the best location for a gas station because it is going to be by two residential areas. And with um a car wash and being open 247, I think that poses a problem for the neighborhoods around that area. I think they'd be more amicable to having a a convenience store there if it didn't have the large the loud blowers for the car wash. And so I have reservations about that. And I also have reservations about like long-term the upkeep of Quick Trips um what that's going to look like 10 years from now because it is again next to a residential area and I know we have buffering and things like that but and maybe that's not something we can even talk about right now but just the upkeep the painting that it looks nice that it's kept up being a good neighbor as D would say. I have a couple things that maybe can piggy back off and maybe um hopefully uh kind of take some of the concerns that you have and that a lot of people have uh and and mitigate them a bit. Um on the car wash dryer car wash operation front, you've mentioned it that you've uh limited hours on other locations. I I believe I was doing some research over the weekend. I believe um Baxter Minnesota you guys built one recently. Coming up. Okay. Limited hours in metro recently. Centerville is limited between 7 and 9. Empire Empire Township City of Empire is saying so I would I would propose that we add hours. I was thinking 8 to 9 or potentially 7 to 9 if that maybe isn't a busier time. I imagine for you guys that 78 or Okay. Um support that. Yeah. So that would be one um amendment I would like to make into the cup resolution. The other one would be regarding um a lot of the I think helpful stuff that planning commission came back with and the changes that were made post planning commission given all the feedback. But just to kind of amp that up a little bit and I wrote some proposed language to add and I got to find it here. Um basically Jeremy can you Oh yeah, sorry. And can someone pass that down? So for the enhanced screening that's been talked about, I would like to propose that let's see here and I'm open to you know the exact areas aren't uh what you guys are thinking but essentially from that point north the northern property line obviously except for where visibility and the roads are and the eastern to the southern part of the building. The landscaping there be enhanced such that um 50% of the the trees are installed at a mature height of 5 feet for coniferous and 2.5 caliper inches for deciduous trees. Um and that a final screening plan is subject to staff review and approval. So it essentially just adds some of the more mature uh additionally I guess there was um and this is already in our code but uh ensuring that it's th those tree those screening areas have a 80% opacity year round. Is that already covered? No, because that's typically for when we're like uh doing a screening for storage. So I don't think that's currently but we could we could add that in. Um I just for the point of discussion to of the west side is going to immediately but commercial. Um yeah and so so what I wasn't trying to necessarily do is screen it so much from what goes here that's commercial is trying to and maybe it's a smaller you know smaller distance we do here wanting to make sure that it's screened for the houses up here and the sound that just because you're not directly north of Quip Trip it you might be here northwest corner but not necessarily all the way down the building. Okay. Yeah, the dryer is going to come out. If you can put your green deal up there quick, is going to be just down a little bit now. Straight to the right. The dryers are going to be keep going to the building. Reverse dryers on the north side. Dryer is on the north. Stacking on the south. Could you reverse that? Yeah. Could you reverse that? No. No. Okay. Yeah. I So from the um last time I measured it, it was over 500 feet to the nearest house. Um the exit so and so the decibb are within the range that the Minnesota uh pollution control agency have set up. So with the addition of having a BM or fence and screening that would further reduce the sound and and then limiting the hours. So I think we're taking several measures to address that. Let me read this out to you Natalie and you can take what you think is is useful. Makes sense. Um applicant shall revise landscaping plan to include a combination of landscape BMS, fencing, and evergreen tree rows. So so that it provides 80% opacity year round. We need to define what that northwest corner is along the north. And so maybe uh 10 ft past the exit from the car wash or would that be about uh past the exit of the car? So go down on the building. So go down the building. Yeah. Right about there. And that would provide distance. Yeah. Yeah. Midline of that. I think that would work. What's the point of the midline of the building? Trying to get a sound wall without making it being the hole. Why would you start the building? If you want to certainly be more where the dryer starts. Right. So I think the idea they want to kind of wrap it around where the exit is. Okay. Um and then north obviously you know here not obviously the street right here. Same thing. Not here. And then that's east to and Mr. Mayor just out of this too I don't want to all of a sudden put trees up that need to be cut down later because they're growing into each other. If you do find trees that close to each other and as they grow Well, it doesn't necessarily define what they have to be. Yeah. The right trees got to be in. So, yeah. Yeah. I think as long as I don't think we particularly care as long as it meets that 80% opacity. Yeah. I think Yeah, I think um 80% opacity while allowing for growth and everything else that Yeah. And then with those minimums of for the 50% maturity. Yeah, I think I can um I'll probably have to come back to the table. Yeah, I think I can get something drafted that effect. Can Can I suggest to you that you include a restriction on car wash hours? Yes, actually I have that as well. 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. I have that. I I would mirror construction hours because I think it's a similar kind of noise and if we wouldn't tolerate somebody using an air nailer at 8:00 p.m. I don't think a car wash dryer is that much better. So the they're different per day though. Yeah, I would Well, I would also say to keep in mind that was because the construction is happening in the middle of residential and this is a commercial district. Um I'd also say as someone who doesn't home until 6 o'clock. If you I don't I think 7 a.m. might be cutting it a little short for what their peak hours are for car wash. Um and the decibels I I didn't mean to scare anyone by pointing out the decibb or anything, but the decibb are uh within range and the nearest home's about 500 feet away. So I I say it's a little different than your next door neighbor having a construction crew with a nail kneeling gun at that point. But Dean's getting calls from people in Nic. It's it's significantly different though as a comparison. I believe the exit of the Soda Shine over to those apartments is around there's no there's no BM or anything is around. I'm aware of that. I'm saying we're talking about a fence of BM and landscaping. There's nothing from that exit and that dryer to those apartments. Yeah. Okay. And I'm guessing it's 300 ft from that. So, but again it's it's to to define the gap of what we're talking about. Can you pull up the construction hour? So, it's 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 8 to four weekends and holidays. Yeah, I don't think the 8 to 4 would be fair weekend. I'm okay with the 7 to 9 with everything that's going to happen. And then if commercial gets put in, it opens up a whole another can of worms. So, I would Jeremy, are you okay with the 7 to9? I think it should be earlier than 9. Okay. Well, I'm going to make a motion to um amend the let's see a resolution it 25 with the cup. Yeah, I would just say uh at this point since we're going to split them out into two resolutions, I believe um uh make a motion for the cup to have these two standard. Yeah, I'll make a motion to direct staff to add the standard of the screen the 80% pass 50% mature planting both those sizes. I can hand you this for help with the wording. Um, and the limiting the blower or the the wash. Is it actually limiting the the just the dryer portion of it or the car wash? The car. Okay. Uh, the car wash from um having hours of operation from 7 to 9. Now, you bring up something else to think about and I'm sorry I rattle. Is there a way to turn the dryers off at 9:00 and still keep washing till 10:00 or turn the dryers off at whatever? And there probably is a way. I don't know that we were doing just asking. I'm guessing you can do that, but I don't think again I'm I'm thinking a lot about the neighbors folks. So if you don't want me to, I can stop. Um All right. So perfect. Um, do you have a motion just Yes. So, motion to direct staff to do that as they're doing the second. Uh, any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Okay. Then is there any remaining items? Um, councelor Frederick, uh, I didn't know if you wanted to speak on the building materials at all. I believe like the roofing is metals, but to help with degraation. Yeah. We do have four sided architecture and the building materials are high quality materials brick, stuckle, glass, fancy ro. So the upkeep there we don't qualify each building as lead certified but we have done that in the past on a couple of our buildings. So they are built to lead standards. Um so it's our intent to make sure that they are maintained as well as they can for as long as they can be. Thank you. Thanks. Any other concerns? So the one is being brought back. That's 25. Yeah. Yeah. 2025 will be brought back into two resolutions. Um so then if there's no other changes, I didn't know if there was any discussion on resiliency strategies or anything since they hadn't chosen any quite yet. Um but other requirement as is is still that they have to meet they have to come back. Yep. Um we they have a final flat so they're kind of next to I don't particularly have a stance once they have to and then so then we could theoretically approve the other two tonight 24 and 26 um and then this would be brought back with the changes tonight on consent for the cops and site plan. I'll make that motion. Have a second. Second. Second. Any further discussion? What is the to approve the 20 uh 2025 24 and 202526 and bring back the split updated cup resolution for the next meeting which is part of that split is the the uh split of sewer water. Yep. that Michelle brought up and then um we'll come back the updates. So the sewer and water is in the variance resolution just to be clear. So if uh so basically no it was it was about in the entangling of the Yes. Yes. So the okay sorry just to make sure we're all have it correct. So 202524 is the preliminary plat 202525 right now is a cup and site plan. So I will bring back a resolution that's just the CP for quick trip and then a separate resolution that's the site plan for Quick Trip and Mama G's and then the resolution 202526 currently approves two variances and denies the deferment for city utilities. Okay. So we'd have two but we'd still have two right now to act on. Yeah, we could act on the preliminary one that's becoming too. Okay. So, we have a motion in a second. Does that everyone understand it? I'll I'll air my opinion before I go. I appreciate all the creativity that's gone into trying to make this as good as it can be for the neighbors. I still feel like with the north facing car wash, it has too big of a negative impact for me to feel good about from the cup criteria. And I struggle with what is the long-term future of the gas stations we have as gas volumes decline. And this is a really popular hightra corner. So this one might be okay, but it also may not. And so I struggle with dedicating scarce commercial property to a use that might not have the market at its tail. Um, so I think a combination of those two factors, it's not strong enough for me to say that we clearly meet the intent of the comp plan for commercial. And I think the impact on neighboring properties is still higher than I would want to see. So I'll plan to vote no, but I other counselors can certainly feel differently as they make that decision. Okay. Any other discussion? Then I will call uh the vote. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed? Thank does not pass. Okay. Someone want to make another motion. Someone who I think technically I mean who who voted in against that motion? I can't think of another condition. I I think where I struggle is just the orientation is pointed right at the residential. Um I think maybe if it didn't have a car wash, but I don't know if they want to do that. That's a big ask at this stage, but that would probably be enough to get me on board by mitigating that impact neighboring property. That's why I asked if there was a different way to shift your the car wash along a different side of of the quick trip. Would we get a different vote if we change a resolution to include everything we've talked about with the exception of out a way to turn the car wash around, but as you guys already said, that's so you can stack seven to 10 vehicles without impeding the two entrances to the north if I remember right. Yeah, I don't know that you'd be able to meet the stacking requirements with it having the stack because now you have the stacking facing the res. Well, we haven't voted it down. It just that propos that motion to approve did not pass. So, we're trying to see. Well, until something either passes or or is till something passes to deny or passes to approve. Is there anything that can be done, Natalie, that's not as dramatic of a change to and Jeremy, if this meets your uh helps alleviate your concerns. See the um the little bit of curb and and potential landscaping that comes out there that was able to be extended a little further and kind of divert traffic to head back into that. So, it kind of gives you another buffer of some material, whether it's a landscape or something, a fence, something there to um you know, shield right right where right outside of the blowers. You might be able to uh So, you want a dry at least 26 feet. So, you might be able to extend it a little bit um to try to encourage people to take a right out from the car wash. Does that Yeah, because then you're even getting the lights even with the buffering. I know that. And buffering takes a while to mature. Um, but again, that's what I'm thinking too is headlights at night in the winter homes immediat and it's going to be shut up. Yeah, it's gonna be shut down at nine o'clock. Right. But I'm thinking in the winter when you probably use more car washes and you're getting the dark at 4:00. Yeah. So the um but yes, we we could extend that island a bit further. Uh there's going to be planting to meet the planning commission requirements along here and here and you'd have to do that for the screening the headlights of these cars anyways. So that would be done. And then just for the reference the there's this commercial piece and this commercial piece. Um these are both commercial areas. Um and potentially some residential to the west there. Yep. Potentially some residential over here and multif family. But yes, we could um that if folks really would like us to have the conversation if at all possible, please. Theoretically, you could put like a BM or I don't know exactly how how logistical that would be to put a BM there, but maybe some way of keeping. I'm just trying to think of something that's not astronomically difficult to do or expensive to do that might help. Yeah, concerns. I would say there really isn't another way to orient the car wash. Yeah. Um because then you would have stacking over here in the parking the the whole the whole engineering changes if you flip the car wash dryers and washers and I'm not going to agree to redesign on the fly. Yeah. No, with you guys. I um I I I do recognize that the bell weather is near um that there is quite a bit of land that is going to be commercial. Whoops. Cron City Park. Uh that there's going to be land that's commercial that theoretically there could be um commercial buildings in between this potentially three other commercial buildings in this Before we even get to weather, just out of curiosity, what was the point approving we get the sound ordinance standards in the city? What what was the point of approving the sound ordinance with the noise? I uh because you did that, right? Yeah. And that's and I included that as part of the findings and and you do meet those standards and we've added mitigating strategies as well. So yeah, I that is true. If there's not a another way of tweaking something that is agreeable, um, someone's got to come up with a resolution with reasons to deny it. But I think it's I think that the additional screening and the the mature plantings and the things that we've added on and that limited hours mitigate that car wash quite a bit. I agree with that as per what our previous vocals. So if you extend that island, can you zoom in a bit? Yes. How wide is that right now? This between the two or the island the the width of the island itself like what is the room to do there? about so 12 feet or so it looks like right now. Um this area here is about uh 25 a little over 25 ft and then there's some green space right here too. So potentially some some give. And does that island protruding by the car wash have to be clear of obstructions or could you have plantings there? I think there you could do some sort of sound panel fence or something. I got a I got a quick question for the applicant. Mr. Mayor, go for it. Comparing to the Rockford Quick Trip and such, the exit of that dryer and car wash is how far away from the houses across the street? Um, it's probably a comparable business, but that's shielded by the building. Across the street is not residential, where it was when we went in there. I'm I'm talking straight east is there's a home right at the facing the exit of the car wash and then there's the one right next to it property line probably only some of the house yeah that's not far away I did stop and talk to those folks and they said they don't even know it but again I'm I'm going off of 400 450 50 feet distance from here over to Bellweather. It's it's a considerable distance more, but again, we're talking one one property over to the rock compared to the Rockford ones. So, I'm just thinking, could you put like arbor vides or junipers or something in that 12oot island and further obstruct the entrance from the homes? I I think so, but I I think so, but I don't know. was actually that island because that would tend to obstruct that entry point through the north sorry the west entrance that provides the direct visibility. Is there a way to condition it to that's the the goal if feasible if not whatever uh you know similar so I think we could also so if it's not feasible there then potentially looking at um what options are on this island to try to mitigate it further with the planting choices and potentially a fence up here. Um something like that we could I think so look at options at either at ideally extending this island if that is not feasible then looking at the island landscaping island directly north car wash. How tall is the burm? The the b is at point up to them that was a strategy that they said they've used with uh quick trips that are near residential areas in the past. So it was combination of BM fencing and landscaping to reduce sound and then the hours as well. What's what's been an average BM height for you? So six foot BM with overhead trees on top of that at at 500 500 feet away from that. That's Yeah, that's pretty. Could Could we get What I would propose is we table it till next time to give you a chance to put together what that would look like. I'd like to see a view like a cross-section from the residential area when you have your burm and you have your trees. What is that going to look like to those people? That would help me make my decision. So, here we're at. Are you going to be able to turn that around by next Thursday? Okay. Um the we would need unless um in order for it to not have to go to May 8th, we would need an extension. So, we would need you to submit a writing and extension. Um and you're not able to provide plans by next Thursday that address that. Okay. That's what we want to do. Would we also know what the parking is going to be like by that time, do you think? Or have we already decided we're not going to worry about parking? I feel like that's not what the resolution says right now. I I think um before we ask them to mama G's to significantly spend more money on a site plan, it should be for a project that's going to move forward. Yep. Mhm. So, I'm a little lost as to what the motion here would be to um bring this back table, I guess, to the 8th. To May 8th, unless an extension is received by the applicant. Oh god. For May 22nd. You guys have no idea what's going to happen on May 22nd. We're going to be here all night. Um I'll be gone on May 22nd. Um, 11:06. Yes. Jeremy, how about the the option we were talking about before of trying to extend extending and planting that landscape island immediately off of the building if possible and if not the other one. Would that as a condition be sufficient for you? Can I see? Can you zoom out again to see where the houses are? Zoom in out. This this view doesn't show. Do you have a view that shows the neighborhood in relation to that? The park keeps coming up. Yeah. Well, because that's my staff report. I still have to write tonight. I just Oh, anyways. Um, so right here, um, and then the way that I have measured it is that little thing. What? Oh, the measuring. Thank you. Roughly this house is about 500 feet away right about here I believe. Like I said it's not an exact measurement because I don't have the but about 400 feet away. I think once you once you actually like measure it straight to the side, it's closer to about 500 ft. But that's really right in. So I think what we have so far, it's also something we could potentially work to improve as something comes in on that intermediate site to make sure that we're covering screening while there, which I think is something that we definitely will be doing in general. Yeah. Oh yeah, because yeah the if if this site if the continental comes in there would be a buffer yard added between mixed use and commercial. So that that that is not a permanent there will be that buffer yard and that's fairly significant buffer yard requirement between mixed use and RSF3 if they come in well comes in would have there would have to be a significant buffer yard. So that's where that protection would have to come from then. Well, we can we can add we we have talked about adding a burm six foot burm plus landscaping combination of fencing along that northwest corner of the quick trip site. So, we are talking about having screening available with the site. But yes, there would be potentially an improvement coming whenever the site further develops as well. What do you think, Michelle? It' be immediately 12 feet and then as those trees grow larger depending on how large those over story trees get and how much they I mean my first thought is that this is going to be here for another 20 years. So to me it's worth it to at least take a look at what that might look like what you suggested and come back and I know that's going to be a long meeting but I I feel like that's doing due diligence to make sure that we're making a good decision. At least me personally, I feel better about that. The other person you could try to convince is contrament. Do you have thoughts? Nope. Keep them to myself. Yeah. Does someone want to make a motion to that effect? Then I will move to table to May 7th unless an extension is made. Sorry. provided and then if so to the 20 second or the next feasible opportunity. Yeah, I would second that. Okay, motion to second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Thank you. Thank you. Um, thank you. Get that remaining worked out. Thank you. Okay. Um, with that we will go on to new business. Um, we have a planning commission vacancy that we are filling. Mark and I were the nominating committee this time and uh I will say for the record that it was we talked about this a bunch. It was maybe the deepest um and kind of most diverse applicant pool in terms of background and and what they bring to the table. There was four really good applicants. Um and I think uh after some back and forth discussion, Mark and I landed on uh nominating Jay Zachman to the planning commission. Um I I think he brings a new perspective and and uh he's a younger guy. Uh lives off of Shuddy, I believe. Um and he just really impressed us on on his interview. Um but we also have a few other people that are indicating that they want to be involved in maybe other capacities or for future vacancies. And so I think it's good that we're building a good bench as well. So I think it was a good choice. I think they're all four of them were good, but just that element of where that person lives, it keeps the distribution like we've done in the past. So, I would agree with what you guys recommend. Then I will make a motion to appoint Jay Zachman to the planning commission uh for a term ending. Hey folks, folks, we're still meeting February 28th, 2028. I'll second. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. And with that, any staff reports? I believe uh Mr. Mayor, the only two things that I'd like to point out is, uh, uh, the director of public safety sent out the fire services packet, second edition, to all of you. Just want to encourage you. It's a lot of information. And so, uh, as as we don't have a council meeting next week, now is a great time to start getting into that. Uh, so that, um, Matt's preparing for that May 8th, just a reminder that we have a work session to discuss that those materials, uh, prior to the May 8th meeting. Uh, and then the next one I I wanted to highlight, uh, we've talked about it before, but our quarterly newsletter, corporate news, it's out, information's out there, but I I just wanted to to give a shout out to staff. There's I I've worked in a couple different communities that have different ways of trying to communicate. And, uh, I think that this is a really cost-effective way with a lot of information. So with with the amount of information that's in here, uh I I think this is a a really great way. So wanted to say thank you for supporting this. Uh and then also there the flexibility as staff has continued to to try different ways to to continue to make it more accessible with as much information as possible. So I wanted to give a shout out particularly to Erin. He puts a lot of energy into this and he does a great job. The other one item I wanted to clarify on, I I plan to bring the commercial industrial update a draft ordinance back at um on the May 8th meeting. Is there a desire to potentially pause out of it to do there email I sent out last week talking about potentially re-evaluating auto oriented uses the districts potentially at trying to collect some data from local businesses to understand how many we already have and what kind of jobs offer jobs and wages that they offer. Is that a desire from the council to proceed before I bring a draft? My initial thought would be to push that out given what seems to be a big workload for the next month and to resume all of that the update and every and the study after the 22nd or whatever that meeting is. So there there's a desire to do a study then on the autoorient I'll leave that. What I heard you say Mr. there was hit pause on the industrial commercial update with the workload we've got right now and we'll revisit it with this item having to potentially be on a short table and a short time table and and that big meeting on the 22nd I date we paused till after that so we can bring that back in July uh or June June June 23rd yeah that's what I would say that's Monday night oh that's right that's or it's a blank slate. That's part of the reason why I suggested I would say July if it if it's something that we can wait until July just because there's a pretty big chunk of things happening through the first meeting in June. There's always a big chunk of things happening. Well, Jay, you were saying there's a Yeah. So, so right now the 23rd is an open slate, the June 23rd meeting except for our ribbon cutting uh at the water treatment plant. June 23rd. Is that the It's a Monday. Okay. I was like, that's of the before the Yeah. Okay. Perfect. Okay. Okay. So, does that work, Natalie, to hopefully give you a little bit of breathing space. Appreciate all your hard work. We don't want to drive you crazy. Too crazy. Have to deal with this. So, um All right. And with that, any council reports? If I could just put one thing on the on the book, sorry to extend this a little bit longer. It would really be nice if we could see a cleanup of our corner across from the Lions Park next to New Horizons and such. The the sail fences are there. The construction is done. I've asked um the original person um to get that cleaned up. They tell me that's in the rightway. That's not theirs to do. But the county, the city did not put in those sil fences and all that stuff. It'd be nice to get one of our entrances or that entrance cleaned up in our city. Right now it looks awful with the piles of sil fences rolled up the to sticking out. It's not very uh you're talking Hackamore. No no parkour park by the road project is also still full of silt fence and blown in insulation but it's on the Madina side. So Kevin, I know that project's close to getting cleaned up. So I think this we're still kind of in the window of final seating. So I would anticipate as we get through this rain the vegetation gets established. I' I've asked Beth Houston said three times to do this and oh it's up there. I was speaking to the hack more on that just I'm speaking to the one that we started talking about. I'd like that cleaned up that those developers need to do something there all of a sudden we're going to get another responsibility that is and try to get us some patents on that. So that has been a pinch point uh because it is in the rightway. Uh but to your point, Council Member Gramp, uh that stuff was placed there by the developer. Yeah. Uh and so we'll continue to if Yeah. Maybe if staff and and uh attorneys can come up with some ideas of how we could tackle that, that would be great. Um my report, I'm gone for I go to the airport in five hours. So, uh, he won't see me for the next week. I'll be back for cleanup day probably. So, see you then. Uh, if you need anything in the time being, email Jay cuz I don't think I'll have cell phone or Wi-Fi the whole time. So, hopefully we don't need a mayor while you're gone. You if we do, what have I gotten myself into? I move to adjourn. We have a second. Wait, before we get that, I did want to get a head count because we do have to do public notice. Uh, Saturday is firearm safety field day in a words and so just want to know how many people are planning on being there because if we end up with a quorum, we end up with a problem and so I just want to know because we have it on the calendar. Is anyone planning on attending? Okay, I will be I'd love to be there but uh I will be there. Thank Thank you for clarifying. Would that apply to cleanup day just in Yeah, I would apply to cleanup day as well. So, clean up day. I will be there. I'll be there. So, so we'll do a public notice for for uh clean up day because we will have enough people. Don't know that I'll be there at 8 a.m. But I will be there. I get back on the second. So, we'll see how tired I am. I will be there at some point. Perfect. Thank you very much. And with that, we had Let's go back to that motion. Whoever made it, I move to adjourn. And I did a second. All those in favor say I. I. We'rejourned.