f all right I call to order the regular Mee city council for November 26 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 right any motion a second for the agenda I'll motion I'll second okay discussion we need to add an item right oh yes um we want that in consent or you want that as a separate item y May member of the council I have one resolution resolution 67 2024 that was sent out at about 3:30 today unfortunately sorry about the delay um it came up during the title search related to the property purchase on 17th Avenue that we have a trail easement it's about 20 ft wide I believe on the um property that we are looking to purchase or looking to close on so Council needs to approve basically vacating that easement because we own the whole property we no longer need a trail oh and it was never recorded so it never created recorded so i' like to add that to J1 it's J1 please um and I have a question about item C so are we kind of going on the fact that that your budget's going to be approved kind of kind of um keep ping on the door and that was yeah mayor yeah mayor and members of council the reason why that was on the agenda today is not to pay for it today but so we can get an invoice and the reason for that is then we bypass a 5% increase we see after January 1st by the purchase equipment of next year anyways yeah if we can get it 5% cheaper or at least not if wor about any price increases we'd like to do that again we're not looking to purchase it today just getting the invoice you will you will see a purchase for it in 2025 I think process wise item C and item J should both get moved to after item P sure okay you like REM okay all right um where do you want to move them to after after the budget discussion P1 P2 C and J pcj okay given those changes and the addition of J1 any more discussion I just had one question on on item H uh was a change order for wellhouse 2 Marty we have to add some ballards by a generator and I'm not questioning that I guess it it should have been on there but uh it it mentions that Conexus is is whose requiring this is that Conexus service area uh yes it is that area yeah but the well well four is not well four is Excel yeah just split right down the lines on my backyard if it makes you feel any better yeah literally it split it splits River Hills right down the middle pretty much okay that just was a just didn't seem right to me that was my question okay so we are voting on the overall agenda any more questions about the agenda all this in favor say I I all this oppos say no carries to zero and now we're on the consent I'm sorry I jumped that's okay all all motion that we approve a b d e f g h i and J1 I think I got the right on I'll second discussion anybody have in okay all in favor say I I oppos say no consent carries 5 to zero and we are on to open Forum open open Forum limited to 3 minutes for non agenda items state your name and address no conso action will be taken and items will be referred back to staff 1132 from I live over where by Dean's Country mana and I'm here again you know they say that people need to hear and see something can we have front of the mic remember it so here I am again I'm here to state that the south end of town does not need a six gas station SLC convenience store lest you forget there's already one by the elementary school one by the trailer park one on 113th one next to Target and one soon to be on Interstate 94 of course let's not forget targets right there too and all of these places are within 2 to 5 miles of Dean's Country Manor your car won't even warm up by the time you get to any one of those stations maybe you should do some planning for the north end of town where all they have is a bar and a liquor store or maybe those residents can give the Builders of these new houses a crash course on how to get along for one night without a loaf of bread because if you drive home from work passing gas stations and convenience stores and then complain about having to drive to a store two miles away you might need that crash course need I remind you that the plan for this gas station convenience store is right next to a big old holding Pond and every time it rains and every time it snows and all that garbage and pollution will run right into that holding Pond and then into the groundwater and then where does it go every single house existing right now in that area has a well we drink that water we cook with that water we clean our homes and ourselves with that water how can the city say that we will not be affected the existing holding ponds have already caused a watery mess in that neighborhood from new construction and what about all the lights and all the noise do we need to sacrifice everything for people don't even live there yet we have lived here 52 years doesn't that count for anything many others in this neighborhood have lived here a long long time too what about them what about us another point we have is that there are already so many empty buildings and warehouses do we really honestly need more the motto of this city is live the difference so what exactly is the difference we're cramming houses in worse than Maple Grove or Champlin or Rogers or any other City around here what is the difference what is the difference at the bottom of your own agenda it says the city of Dayton's mission is to promote a th thriving community and to provide residents with a safe and pleasant place to live while preserving our rural character what is the difference you're not preserving the rural character thank you thank you thank you anybody else is anybody online there's nobody online mayor cool all right let's move off to staff consultant Council updates Zack yes thank you mayor members of the council um One update that I have for you tonight is we have Holly Dayton which is our um parade event that we have and other Christmas Ty festivities uh in front of City Hall here that is next Thursday not this Thursday but next Thursday starting at I think it's 6 6 o' 6 o'cl um we would like City Hall to be able to be shut down at 2:00 to help with that um we have an all hands on deck staff basically that's able to try to get that thing ready to go for people and we want to make sure the residents get the best quality possible so we're I'm poly asking you if we going to close City Hall at 2:00 next Thursday the 5th all no problem that we're good yeah okay sounds good all I have you didn't even have to politely ask I know I politely apprciate you did Mar U mayor and councel a couple of things tonight uh the Hazardous Materials um at the old public Workshop have been lamp packed and are all safe now ready um we're waiting for shipping um that was going to be in the next week or so for those to come and be taken away the tanks uh the fuel tank and the waste oil tank um have been cleaned out um they are going to be picked up um I'm waiting for a date for the pick up on that we been negotiating on price for that for a little while um but that should be in the next week or so as well um so hopefully all that material will be out there within the next two weeks um wellhouse 4 I had an unfortunate update with that today no I knew that I agree with you may um so I met with trout today on site um there was some confusion at there and uh the tech that was looking at the project used goo Google Maps and was thinking it was well five um which is the submersible well and wasn't in a wellhouse so um that is a whole different procedure for going in through the roof um and that's a different piece of Machinery that is C currently out on another site so I'm working on them to expedite that to get it to us as quick as as we can um the good news is that they think from what they're they're looking at today and with this other piece of equipment they can get the uh material out there within a month so rather than the two-month period we're expecting it to be uh a shorter period of time but I don't know what the timeline is I'm getting there I stress that we need it as soon as possible given our history I was thinking there was worst bad news and how much is change how much is the change order that you'll surprise us with I don't know yet yeah so just I'm still unfortunate cuz it's you're still down right I mean we're down to one well still on that system that's that's the downside of it and I did stress to them that you know we've only got the one well that we're running off although the water usage is we're in the comfortable range of running on world 2 um it's still not comfortable yeah from a redundancy standpoint like it's literally the last when up you know yeah y exactly okay thank you good evening mayor members of council um I have one update I believe the fire truck that we have given to Ukraine um should be shipping out here shortly and so uh when it does arrive um or prior to departing upon arrival I'm hopeful to get some pictures of that so when arrives in the new station evening mayor members of the council um just to let you know officer Johnson is back in the United States um and back in Minnesota Oda um so he'll be ramping up to get going full-time come January 1st again um officer burn started a week ago um he is already on his own being shadowed um so we are currently going to be up to full staff um coming up so that's good news um we've had some traffic complaints in the area um one is with the new stop sign at Dayton River Road and North Lake Road um another one has been 117th um as you know I've restructured some of my organizations um we have a community Response Unit um that is both investigations um and doing traffic details so we have put them along with Patrol officers out on both areas so they've been doing extra traffic duties um in those two areas do you do you is has there been enough investigation done to find out what happened at with that fatality on timeing uh we're still waiting on the um accident Reconstruction from State Patrol okay was can you tell at this point whether it was related to the traffic change or no it was not it was not okay nothing John um the Eda is requesting that the city replace the eight Monument signs um so I know we just discussed cutting items from the budget and and I believe this was one of them as well no updates here no update from me Scot I got nothing nothing for me um where do we at with the uh has there been any changes with um the the D facility is that still the Federal grant we're talking the HUD stuff you're talking yes all that stff yeah yeah so the world treatment plant um Grant we are still working through the final stages um we had a final call with shipo yesterday um we had to get the final language related to that memorandum of understanding or agreement whichever one you want to use um which gives us they did extend it they didn't say you wanted it done in this year they said give yourselves more time which is three years so doesn't have to be done prior to us getting the funding it just has to make sure we understand that we need to get those things done again it's nothing that it's drastic to overall to the city of Dayton um but just to get a lot through what happens then is we get the information back we submit it then to the federal government and we're able to um um post for 15 days essentially waiting for comment um and that's I think I mentioned in the last weekly update is that we do have the ability to um let Magny know early if we'd like to do that and kind of run a little bit of risk of so Magny construction is the one who is doing the work they said that they need at least a 12we lead time in order to get back on site they have to order parts and pieces and get their subcontractors they have been great to work with so far and we appreciate their willingness to work with us with this so we're going to have to work with them with their little bit of delay um so it's up going to be up to the council as soon as I hear word that we're actually submitting and stuff I will most certainly reach out to the council I would anticipate it it'll be next week by the time we actually post so it'll be shortly after the council meeting of the next council meeting that I'd be able to give you guys an update of we're going to post this day so it takes about a week to get it in the paper uh if we submit it Thursday it goes the following or Friday then it goes the following Thursday so there's a little bit of delay there but um the council will be able to have a little bit of risk if they'd like to do something before the end of the publication period I don't anticipate any changes but I would just hate for it to fall back out and then we look like that kind of customer then yeah that's correct that's that's the Optics that's correct that's what scares me away from saying like yeah let let's do it early but I would agree yeah so like I said the early buys us yeah the early buys about buys is about four weeks it's about a month so it's a month savings I mean we're already shooting for the end of next summer right um we're shooting for the end of the year next year now based on the 3mon delay if there wasn't a 3mon delay we' be shooting at the end of that would be about September um now with a 3mon delay we're talking end of next year you know as unfortunate as it is we're going to do our best to keep moving forward as fast as possible but I'd rather just be done right and like I said I I will provide an update there's it'll there's no way it'll be done before the 10th between either um information given to the federal government or posting it so I will give an update the council at the 10th meeting if you guys would like to make a decision on letting Megan know early or just leaving it until essentially the end of the posting period okay all good just time is the only yeah that fall Dave um nothing really for me I am glad to hear that we are moving ahead with the cleanup at public works that's been something I've been a little bit concerned about for some time so I'm really happy to see it happen I was kind of disappointed to hear there was still fuel in that t um but uh I'm not hearing that that that it was leaking so we probably dodged a bullet there yeah I was surprised how much uh fuel there was in there wasn't there when they pumped it out but I I got a feeling there may be some water in some rain water got in there as well to to pump that up a bit yeah anyway I'm glad that it's happening it's overdue that's all I got on all right um let's go on to item k okay is the Planning and Zoning show tonight tonight so watch the thank you so this is uh the request to amend a interim use permit for an event center for Fisher Farms it's located 16900 north Diamond Lake Road uh this project had received an inter use permit for an event center in 2023 for tented events uh the intent at that time was once uh the owner wanted to build a permanent building that they would apply for an interim use permit for or to amend the interim use permit for a permanent facility uh so the owner is planning on building a permanent facility in 2025 which uh requires the interm use uh critical issues with this include there's a better picture uh completion of the storm water Pond uh that serves the parking lot so this is a requirement of the 2023 interim use permit uh and then as well as the uh access on North Diamond Lake Road so North Diamond Lake Road is a County Road um once that entrance uh ceases to be functional in the opinion of henan County the county has the ability of requiring it to be removed and then replaced or uh yeah I'll say replaced onto uh La there's no timetable with this it's just intended to be temporary put a Clarity on it uh with the Event Center uh the permanent refer to the map here the tented events are are intended to occur in this lo location this is the parking lot that is completed and then the new structure will be built uh Northwest of the parking lot so so this is kind of the high point of the property um yeah don't want that um right right around this area here so it over overlooks uh the larger property the building itself is around 9,000 sare ft um I'll note and lean on Gary a little bit that anything that requ that is uh over 5,000 or 5,000 square fet or larger or 100 uh persons does require a a fire sprinkler system and I will say the Planning Commission recommended approval for this questions I've got some but anybody else want to go first go Ahad all right um page 87 of the packet talks about um hold on here item five um City staff may require additional parking what what is I mean so the the uh owner has stated that at most um there could be up to 500 people on the property so whether it's both Event Center or inside or outside uh The Event Center ordinance requires uh one parking stall per two people so 500 uh guests would re would equal 250 parking uh the Park existing parking lot that's there is not big enough for that so the intent is and the way it's worded it's a little arbitrary but the short answer is if there's not enough parking it gives the staff the ability of saying you need more and I'm what was the discussion regarding uh grass for parking at the planing commission when the events oh well let me back up and tell Theory so in the Cod when we wrote the code in 2023 the the code requires that there be an improved surface for parking uh Fisher Farms was the first permit in and I guess my interpretation is we have a tendency to be a little a little strict on the first one in and then we kind of learn from that and and loosen up a little bit are we going to then correct the it's up to the council yeah I CU grass to me is fine so Fisher Farms was the first event center uh then came uh Dean pumpkin patch and then Magnus Center Deans and and Magnus both use grass okay and it's that's what I was looking at so we're looking at changing that ordinance then at some point I mean otherwise we have to variances right otherwise or we have a kind of a mess but corre so I I would look at there's a bigger question of is there anything else you'd like to change on the ORS too oh sure um number eight to the greatest extent possible well I mean I read that and I'm reading I don't know what that meant um it I would just I would think it would just be within to get it out of the red Redway in to try to put in the context when this went to the Planning Commission in 2023 the intent to I'm going off of memory at some point North Diamond Lake Road's going to be why you have no idea when or by how much so the intent is that for Fisher Farms to make whatever improvements as far away from the road as possible so that there's as Le least of an impact on North dond Lake Road right away okay um number 12 it says um wait a minute here this is going to 12 may I had a question about the sign ordinance and I referenced 12 except so have nothing to do signs this one yeah there's nothing about signs in there I guess the the question I had was well without seeing that I am I can't ask the question all right so let's move on um number 10 that had to do with um again I think there was discussion at the Planning Commission as to what to do with this this would put it that Amplified outdo music would be good to 10 p.m. um Friday and Saturday yes so and I know there was some discussion about when you have exceptions like this that that each event would be would would get a uh large assembly permit but I I think there was another mitigator there and I just don't remember what they put in what they talked about having them come back all the time with the form to have us approve seems kind of it that much so the intent of the Event Center ordinance was to avoid the the large what we call the large assembly right license so that here's one permit you have to figure out you know it more relies on the having an emergency management plan so that you know you think of anything that could go wrong you know here's my plan I'm doing this once I don't have to come back five times a year there was also discussion of some limit of maybe having it a couple times to to allow that them to um blow past the the ordinance but I don't know where that ended up either so this basically says that it's it would be an exception to the noise ordinance um I'm think the noise Ordnance is 7 is 7 to 7 10:00 is it 10 on weekends typical 9 to9 that was 9 to9 on weekends and 7 to seven week yeah I was thinking that too but I mean not too hung up on it but it'd be it seems like there's an inconsistency there that's all and maybe we have to we still have some tweaking to do with the activity this would be the time to do it the question I would have there with the 10:00 time frame there's other activities that go past 10 or there has been so are we talking of variance if there's a particular event that goes past 10 or are we shutting it down no I think what we've said in the past was they would fill out it would do would be notified a permit yeah and Mr Mayor members of the council in the past each organization that would come to council and request an extension of the noise Ur that's what I thought if they go past 10% right right yeah I think the okay so the says the noise ordance is 10 but it says that musical instruments phonographs stereo systems other such devices should not be heard past the property line so I mean kind of depends how you look at it I guess yeah a joke it's going to be pretty tough so what about a didy do big sound well okay so are we a here with the way that is I'm fine with the way through okay my concern is just having it late all the time I mean the neighbors that live around there I mean we've personally have dealt with neighbors that play loud music and want to play Loud Music until 10: p.m. and we've got a 5-year-old we're to put down at the time and couldn't cuz the music was was blaring so I think it there needs to be some system in there if it's a oneoff occasion I think that's fine but I think on the regular to have every single week there'd be music if I was a neighbor I'd be upset too and I know it's not proposed that it will happen every single week and I I understand that but it's there it could right so I don't know how I don't know the best way to do it but that's my opinion on the man around the if we're building a barn to have events in you can have music indoors pass in right but outdoor music is going to carry much further than indoor music is so that's my thought on the outter music piece is that I don't know if it regularly needs to be till 10 p.m. during the week right no I agree I think you have to have some time frame but if you have an event that's an exception I mean hopefully someday if we get an Amphitheater at Stevens uh we have to abide by we have toide you know we'll have we might have an 11:00 p.m. concert there we might and you might piss off a bunch of neighbors that live right over there too cuz their kids are trying to go to bed and you get before so I mean I I don't doubt that it'll happen again so this did come up at the planing commission I just don't remember what they said what their what their options were they wanted them to come back right without paying a fee to get the the the exception basically for large assembly permit yeah but the point came up is that I mean we're talking about every weekend for the summer would would they still come up every weekend and have us approve potentially but then if it's happening every weekend we can say listen it's a little bit much or if the neighbors aren't having any problems and no one's complaining about it then okay fine me I have no problem with the IND music till whenever that doesn't bother me at all a problem it's in the barn it's fine that's what the event Center's there for it'll be insulated it makes sense wasn't there a discussion around like an allowance at one point like giving them like three events where they get to do that but anything above that like they said they had to come in I remember maybe it's a completely different top I thought this part that's come up a couple times I just don't think anything's been drilled down yeah all right so well um it soundss like we still have some work to do on this but it sounds like what do you think D maybe you um you know I I think that I'm okay with the the noise thing it's it's fixing a problem we haven't had yet and so I'm not as concerned about it um there was another piece maybe I didn't wasn't clear to me what what it is and it's number three on page 90 it says is understood that site improvements related to this application are limited to the grading construction of a parking area along North Diamond Lake Road with building construction to take place at a later date presumably presumably as part of a separate application I thought this was primarily about adding a permanent building yes so the the memorandum that you're reading is from from 2023 that was the original oh that was the original Memo from our Stant group got it okay yeah it makes more sense I was reading say that going wait this is yeah okay that makes sense because well I thought we were talking about a building and we're not so okay thank you so are we are we saying that that item 10 is not an issue on page 88 or 87 or I mean I I you could you could ask the applicant to I know that they are here if they plan on having events every single weekend or not that way they C get a some sort of feel and you know I don't to say Comfort level with it um or if you want to limit a number of you know times that they can do it in a year um you party animal you E Today name and address and Amanda Fisher here with 16900 North Diamond Lake Road [Music] the likelihood anytime soon that there'll be events every single weekend very slim um I mean we we talk about summertime we talk about movie Nights Outdoors those can't even start until 9:00 when the Sun goes down down and I don't think there's a a film projector in existence that will powerful that will uh beat past the Sun so those start at n they don't end till 10:30 if it's a short movie So based off the Amplified outdoor music um when I was at your event M um would you consider the musicians that were there was that Amplified outdoor music at that point yeah okay cuz literally once you got on the back side of the bar and you didn't hear it I know anymore did my my construction did a pretty good job of keeping it going in the direction it needed to go I I look at that more as like well what is the scale of Amplified like stadiums are much louder than I mean their amplification was really nothing right and you had a good crowd in front of it so that's what kind of trips me up is like we say Amplified music but there's no scale against what Amplified means so I don't I don't know how we measure that and if you do that on a complaint base how do you it would be in Debs it's all you yeah you'd have to have a deer to be able do you have a decimeter here I don't think we have one here I think we have one in if if we left till at 10:00 my neighbors complained we could always red discuss it among C I say ultimately you guys can always have me back out here and and take this backwards a bit if it really becomes an issue I mean ultimately too is I my phone number is posted on the side of the road call me if there's an issue I can adjust as we go yeah yeah no I'm okay with it I'm okay with it I'm fine with it I just again if we're going to do Amplified I'd like to know what what are the terms what does that look like and I think it's probably a a term that a court wouldn't like I know like a DB Mr Mayor members of the council just let you know I think in the iup that we have the authority to shut it down at any time so if we do get a bunch of complaints we'd work with the owner to okay control it then that's that's that's good I think we ultimately we pre prefer air clapped and unpl Amplified version St way to heaven please I think we had that one at the festival last year towards the end of the night yeah um okay thought I had one more in here page 94 item one perits yeah was that just refer so that was under the general item one was that just referring to um before issuance of building permits are you talking about page 94 yep okay so this is the engineering memorandum yep um where exhib oh you see uh General so we recommend all work associated with the previous Improvement project be completed before issuance of a permit and other items required for the construction of the proposed building uh so my interpretation is complete the storm water Pond associated with the parking lot before issuing a building permit oh okay is that storm water Pond big enough for the parking lot and the barn or just the parking lot is she not need okay okay my question on the storm water Pond is Jason she can dig her own Pond okay I'm not digging my own Pond though well somebody's digging it but I mean yeah you're not you're not having Builder do it it was designed in regulations yeah the only reason I asked that is because the parking lot started before it was supposed to at I went a little backwards in the beginning right we all do mhm learning and improving is yep okay um anybody else have any questions asked my parents I ran before I walked at the the a thing talk about that or not um so you you're intending to to obtain a liquor license and I'm not too familiar with that that's a separate process that's not part of this okay I didn't see in here but I was mentioned at the slightly at the Planning Commission so I just want to make sure that I didn't they had I've been told you guys have to approve the change with the egg to be able to allow liquor licensing correct so I don't know if that is part of this specific spot or if it's a different night or different night different night we'll have to have it as a separate conversation yep Chop Chop Zach Chop Chop yep just sitting around doing nothing you know all right I need your motion a second I'll motion I'll second any more discussion I'm going to add one correction just so I don't forget so item uh condition number 14 refers to special event permit the correct language is a large assembly license oh sounds the same but it's yeah it's not okay that before so with that correction all right we got a motion second any more discussion all those in favor say I I I all those opposed say no motion carries 5 to zero thank you thank you item L master plan thank you Mr Mayor members of the council uh so tonight before you have the item for the acceptance of the mass plan for the extension of Dayton Parkway um applicant is this itself for this one um so this was a city initiated effort to create an area plan to guide the next comprehensive Plan update so this is just a guidance document that would then be utilized as part of the next comprehensive Plan update that would be due in 2028 um with no changes made to the comprehensive plan at this time uh this will provide direction for how we expect the future development to occur in this area um particularly informing the alignment of Dayton Parkway and future Street connections and Street design of Dayton Parkway and the associated roadways that are uh connecting into it uh reevaluates the land uses in the study area and recommends the modifications to better reflect the city's vision for that area and then providing guidelines for the type and style of development in the area meaning both um the site development and the Building Development within the area uh long history of where we started and where we are now um so this was was approved in June 27th 2023 and we started off with a Planning Commission work session in September of 2023 um starting at the end of October after we had that work session we posted a six week long online survey and the results for that survey were in the packet um November of last year we did the first landowner open house um which was well attended and had uh roughly 80 to 90 um residents attending uh then in March a draft M March of 2024 a draft master plan was presented the Planning Commission following that we received some feedback for further studying of the land uses within the area so we came back and did a joint work session between Planning Commission and City Council in May of this year um following that there was a presentation that was included in the packet as well um by Jason on the kind of the history of Dayton Parkway and the study and the analysis that's been done in the past um and that was presented to City Council in June of this year and then August of this year uh another joint work session was held between Planning Commission and City Council and that was the final work session um where you would have seen it the last time U following that we made changes to finalize the document and then it was brought to an open house to present that draft master plan um in October and then in November the Planning Commission held the public hearing on the master plan so that's kind of the timeline of how we started and where we are now um so the master plan area um there's a variety of land uses in there um you know ranging from the low density residential all the way up through high density residential and mixed use public and institutional and park um along with commercial and some business office um the GMU 2 is a zoning District that does exist for the Mixed use district and that's designated as that town center area which is the pink area in the center uh for Transportation uh it focuses on the expansion of the existing Network um specifically Dayton Parkway which is the major you know uh connection between the south end of the master plan boundary and the North End um where it currently aligns up with 117th and then where it connects in with Zanzibar those are essentially point a and point B that we had to connect between um and using that as the main Corridor between there there's a street hierarchy that establishes um what are these each of these roadways that Connect into Dayton Parkway are uh what access limitations they have what roadway design standards they will follow um and then generally what traffic we can expect on those roadways as well um to clarify two there is a green line shown through the town center area um that is a CU I know this can be confusing Dayton Parkway is actually designated as a connector Street the the street that runs through the town center is designated as a Parkway Street um so even though Dayton Parkway has the name Parkway after it it's not actually designed as a Parkway Street the parkway Street would be designed within the Town Center area and that distinction is important just because the parkway has more landscape buffers things like that and it's expected that there'd be uh pedestrian and bicycle traffic on a Parkway especially the Town Center where everything's built form is closer to that street uh to bring the building scale forward and I'll get into a little more of those design centers and how that'll happen as far as Street design um there's three major Street design components or breakdowns for the street design um focusing mostly on the safety of both vehicles and pedestrians for this um so as I mentioned the parkway Street which is the parkway that goes through the town center area is uh designed at 150 right away it has more breakups between um the trails and the sidewalks and the actual vehicle uh travel Lanes as well as having shoulders for parking and then a landscape meeting in the center of the roadway um all this is intended to provide opportunities to more green space break up the vehicle and the pedestrian traffic and provide environments for all three of you know bicyclist pedestrian and vehicles to travel safely uh the connector Street will be the next rank in it in the in terms of width of the RightWay that would have a 120t rway that prioritizes movement through the community um parking on both sides are on and portions we'll have on both sides along with still having the bicycle and The Pedestrian uh amenities provided uh this would be Dayton Parkway would be the connector Street um and then everything that moves off of that would be considered a local street so that's at the 60ft RightWay your typical design standards that would have um sidewalks on the side uh travel Lanes parking on the shoulders things like that um sight and structures so a new community park has been identified on the east side of French Lake um when you were looking at the land use map it was the green parcel right next to their existing DNR bolt landing area uh to give you a reference for what's there today um that's intended to be kind of the focal point that the Town Center leads towards um and in keeping with that keeping with the whole open space Green Space that was very very high ranking on the surveys we received and the comments we received was having lots of open space and green space so we have additional screening standards for overhead doors and loading areas are included in this that intent is then to screen those that don't have that natural character um parking standards have also been added to have additional landscape islands and features breaking up those areas um encouraging that storm water management um have a double use or two birds two birds one stone to have um designed to storm water management and as a landscape feature um and then also encouraging the use of native plantings and diverse plantings um and there is a requirement in the document that uh Landscaping has maintenance plans provided as part of it to ensure long-term survivability specifically for uh Native plantings as they tend to need um certain management of them to make sure they Thrive and uh grow um also as part of the uh master plan there's some resiliency options so there's a big also um response to having options for resiliency you know long-term sustainable development um so we came up with a list of seven options of which development gets to pick three that they would have to implement on a development proposal um to hopefully cater to what best fits their development not all of them are going to be the same um so those options are permeable pavers uh rain Gardens or bio retention systems native species Landscaping uh green rooftops aesthetic design chloride management plans and Alternative Energy um so they would just pick the three that benefit the project the most or which are most viable for the project um it also then encourages again storm water management to be designed as open space features which can be one of those resiliency options with the rain Gardens or bio retention systems as far as the Town Center uh the Town Center is intended to be an area within Dayton that will serve as the heart of the community um you know commercial retail offices entertainment venues high density residential development that uh brings people into the area um those are all things we want to have as part of that town center District um as part of that there was you know a lot of the survey questions that we sent out were catered towards like what would you like to see as part of the Town Center what styles of development um what types of open space things like that um so there's a strong support for Public Square town center and Boulevard Town Center um and what those basically mean you know the two images I have on the slides the top right is kind of your Public Square Town Center focal Green Space open area with surrounding development um and then the boulevard Town Center is kind of that um linear style along the roadway um kind of gives you a corridor feeling where you have the roadway in the center with Landscaping on either side and buildings are brought up close to The Pedestrian environment along the sidewalks um so we tried to blend those two options um so by having the focal Green Space area be the park at the end towards French Lake that can be your focal Landing Public Square town Center area with development surrounding that and then the parkway street that runs through the town center um land use would be the area where you'd have more of the boulevard Town Center where you'd have some of the buildings clustered closer to the street um pedestrian walkable environments things like that uh there was also a strong preference for commercial opportunities specifically cafes and restaurants were number one I think like 90% of people said they wanted cafes and restaurants so all of these will be options that could go within any of the mixed use area and any of the commercial area being retail entire uh entertainment venues would be probably a little more um having to find the right spot for that um but then also having farmers markets and groceries along with restaurants and cafes uh yeah so we were talking about the Pinker and the land use map um as I said the focal Green Space area is at the end there so uh that'd be the landing Point essentially of the parkway uh leading through all of the development that could occur in the Town Center area um the mixture of residential office commercial and Civic vies uses could all be Blended within there uh so there could be public spaces as well um and then having architecture standards included in the Town Center to focus on diverse styles with clear entrances so one of the uh different architecture standards that's in the Town Center is having ground floor Windows that's probably the most obvious change in the architecture standards and that's to encourage when you're walking on that you know first floor ground level that there's large Windows you know lots of natural light things like that that would go through those areas uh there's also additionally franchise architectures discouraged so when you think of any of your franchises McDonald's Burger King things like that if they were to locate in this area they would just have to blend their existing style of architecture that they use for their franchise with the character for the Town Center so they wouldn't stick out and be kind of a one-off within the area um and then the building facade standards are slightly higher for the Town Center so think percentage of materials things like that they're just slightly um ticked up for this to give it a a higher sense of design for that um So within the area two there was uh you know various architecture styles were desired um the survey was kind of all over the board in terms of a blend of having modern traditional you know lots of glass not a lot of glass clean architectural lines things like that so we kind of provided an option to do any of those and mix them together um so the building facade standards aren't specific to a single architecture style that way it'll kind of blend in terms of having natural tones having different stone brick things like that that could all be Blended in the area um so with that I kind of went over high level of the master plan and didn't Dig Two down into the details for each of the sections um but just wanted to provide an overview um looking for some feedback and then um as far as the Planning Commission recommendations so the Planning Commission did review this at their last meeting um they had some concerns with the plan as it was proposed um not citing specific changes just that they didn't feel that um was the area they wanted to study so a lot of the conversation ensued about7 um south of there um in the current Dayton Parkway alignment within there um so with that being the primary concern that was not their only concern I um in the staff packet I did try to summarize some of the questions that came up from them um but that with that concern they did uh recommend denial or not acceptance of the plan with a 40 vote um so that's how they the and the mayor will also at that meeting to hear the feedback um so if there is any questions for myself or John um please let us know and this is not a public hearing but you're certainly welcome to open it up for comment yeah any questions just to to reiterate the commission's concern really B is based on Transportation that that the plan planning area should have been larger and FOC more on uh the Transportation Route versus the land use land use that's per say you're saying they want to have like a definitive like this is where the road's going to go correct okay that line is on the map right now I mean it's pretty cut and dry I mean whether it moves 100 ft East or West it can be there for now think that personally I just think this is I agree that the south portion was much more important than this portion yeah and I think we're just kind of spinning our wheels on this deal cuz outside of about five people in this room none of us are ever going to see this thing that's just that's as sugar qued as I can make it so I guess what I'm wondering I think that you know I've heard listen to the Planning Commission meeting and and of course in the in the other public meetings that we've had you know ultimately do I think this is the plan for that area no I don't it uh I think it accomplishes some good things it kind of defines what flavor of development that we want in that area I I guess make and a lot of the other comments which are completely valid is you know we probably should have looked at the area south of this first and and uh figured out in more detail what we're doing with this road what's the final configuration going to look like and and the feasibility of that given um some of the challenges around acquiring property that are going to come in the future but that's not that's not this box and so I think that the you know the journey continues um what I what I don't know we're not changing the comp plan to add this to it that I understand it's a planning document to be used for the 2050 plan it's ultimately it's its use um if we accept this how obligated are we to just cut and pce this into the 2050 plan or is it just a starting point for that discussion it's a starting point for that discussion it's it can be used um if development comes in to have conversations with developers now um or if they're looking to pursue interest for their future to have conversations now this plan I mean things can change so I mean between now and 2028 that's four years from now uh this plan could change there could be uh different colors on here the the consistencies are certain requirements that have to be met as part of your comprehensive plan that will still be in this area this will still be a very dense area of Dayton in terms of development just because there's an expectation for units per acre Citywide and most of the high density stuff is within this boundary area so that will still remain but a lot of the other um components could shift so if um say a commercial opportunity comes in things could shift on where the commercial showing on here if so certain Parcels get bought and want to be developed a certain way so it you're not tied to this plan as part of the 2050 plan you could change it it does kind of become a guidance though yeah put a little bit more context when when we first started figuring out that we needed to to do a master plan we're growing by 400 houses a year MH and so the thought was if we continue at 400 houses a year we're going to run out of into the the next staging plan and we don't know where the road's going to go so that precipitated the discussion of the of the master plan area and brought us to where we're here now well I did I think that was a big part of their concern too was we still don't necessarily know that that's the road layout and I mean at least a few of them and I've said this over time too I don't how this lays out I I think doesn't make any sense and I know we've gone over this before but it's it's to the point where I look at this and just shake my head because we have houses there that are not going to be going anywhere anytime soon and the Maple Grove Parkway example that's all Eggland so yeah of course they were a to cut through there but here what we have are homes um I I just don't know how we get over that home and they're not trivial homes either so I I I think that was that was one of their bigger concerns it seemed to me was this layout the road layout and I you know I don't know what the answer is but uh I don't disagree and I think some of the feedback I heard from people so that that Line's going right through my entire property when I just shift it so it's on the property lines then it has to get developed it could developed South developed North depending on which one goes first so cuz you're right there's these are homes and these are not homes matter it's not egland some of this is egland but a lot of it's hes where the road is going through a good chunk of it is homes and I think part of it is cuz we're stuck with the current alignment of Dayton Parkway up to 117th and we got to Connected up we know where it's got to start where it's got to end and making that connection is a tough part and so I don't have a good answer answer I'm not I think that I like the the the zoning I think looks better than it did before for what it's worth but I don't I say it's perfect but I just I uh yeah I don't have any answers I just look at and I goe so to ask it differently what are what are the implications of us not accepting this plan we have what we have today which is the comp plan MH well I mean we can still keep this in our back pocket it's just so if if it's denied we cannot use this as a policy document um essentially so if a developer were to come in we wouldn't be able to give them this document say this this is more closely what the council would like to see versus what we see today in the 2040 compound because it's not essentially a policy document if it's not accepted I don't know that we could still use the information to provide on the 2050 comp plan but between now and the 2050 comp acceptance we could not we would not be able to use this as a policy document if it was not accepted by the council how do we use a a policy document that overrides the comp it does not override the comp plan so question other than the road layout is there any other are there any objections to the master plan besides the road layout well that's kind of the backbone of the it is but I me like as far as facades elements those are going to change in five going to change five times I'm not worried about that stuff that's immaterial but as far as like the use with the commercial with the residential like those element pieces there you're saying like are you asking if that's like the Envision this Council has to try not necessarily to that que speed up the conversation if if the major objections is the road layout do you want us to work on that more or do you want to just scrap the plan I would like to see more on the transportation side so I think that's kind of just where I feel like we all F feel it fall short I mean and and pl commission and by Transportation I think we'd like some guidance to staff because right do you want us to physically go out there and take soil borings and look for roadways do you want to just have us avoid every house out there that's kind of the questions we'd ask as staff is all our fine ansers is just we need to have more direction if that's the case I'd be very curious now if you were to move this road sh the angles of the curves whatever how many how few properties could you touch I mean we could touch less properties initially the direction was to use the alignment that made the most sense in terms of land uses and not it didn't there was no the preference was not to impact the least amount but show the best alignment we can certainly impact less I mean you can you can curve roadways to get around corners and things like that it just that when you're starting with a fresh slate and like this will not what's out there right now will not be there when all of this develops whether that takes 20 years or 50 years so we're looking at a plan that we're trying to plan for the future and not what's there today so homes that are there today may not be there in the future and so we're looking at that from that perspective if the object was to Preserve Homes we can obviously do things to mitigate and impact the least amount of properties to go through areas that are mostly open space I wouldn't say that we can avoid all of the homes in the area there's too many so no matter where we there's at least one you got to hit because it's at the end of the road so I understand you can't all of them no's disagreeing with that statement but I mean it would be I think I think you down maybe five or six okay total if you were to curve it around again I think I agree with um Kevin's point is that we're trying to do with a bank Blank Slate I know that it's difficult to Envision that because there are homes out there I think the next step is taking it Beyond a blank slate because it isn't a blank slate well the idea is that in 50 years from now if we curve the road away from somebody's property that's currently there and then they're no longer there cuz the roadway is next to their house cuz they don't want to be next to a roadway now we've curved the road around something that maybe we shouldn't have now we're having the so the best plan for 50 years is not to have those two end points sure I don't know where we would go with this cuz I I haven't liked it from the get-go but I and I've listed my reasons I I I don't I know where you guys let me ask this question if you if this alignment is the land usage is the way it is right there and the reason I asked this is because this happened is that how you're going to tax well assuming there's an assessment at some point no the city staff would not look to currently assess based on this okay I don't know that there' be any assessing going on at this point I would agree talking about two different things we're talking about past history recent past current staff would that assess assessment based on trip generation which was dependent on land use typically an assessment would be done not in that effect that was unique to The Interchange it's only been done twice were or were we the third you're the second okay yeah I don't maybe the question ask better or worse than what we had before feels kindan to me the only the only main thing that matters and it's going to change anyway is the road alignment that's all that matters took the x and we just went what really matters is the land uses honestly the road alignment doesn't much matter cuz as long if that's what the council wants to do is connect two end points it's going to be what does the developer really want to do to connect it from one of their property to the next they make it work right and and more or less what we're concerned about is the land use so you can do it one of two ways you can make the road and then put the land uses around it or you can make the land uses and then put the road around it but we're really more concerned about the land uses in general of what does the C want to see in this area not so much where the roadway cuz the roadway could adjust a quarter mile right either which way yeah I don't I mean the land use dictates where the roads are because I mean otherwise we wouldn't be caring about the commercial down below 117 that's what I'm saying so if you set the land uses first of what you like to see then you could adjust the adjust the roadway well I won't know what the land you should be and telling them where the road is sure like I said the argument could go either way that's why I'll say the one thing I do like and we heard this at a couple of the meetings is there is a um gradual shift from where BR bur Trails is now from light density to heavy density I'm trying to find a positive in this I would say that I do like a lot yeah to give credit for for the work that's been done and I heard that from all people I like that also I think the steeper those curves are the more many people slow down and the more people slow down in the city center the less of a fly through the city center it's going to be and the more people are going to utilize it it's going to drive business there so I think that's a benefit too so just to provide so when we when we started this project and we discussed the scope of the project and everything the focus at that time was discussing land uses that's you know the reason that drove this effort was to discuss the land uses within this area um I know there was discussion at that time of moving south of 117th we decided on this area north of 117th um is the area to study uh so working under the assumption that we kind of had two Landing points we had Zanzibar and we had where Dayton Parkway currently is and the Assumption the whole time was those were not going to shift those are constructed roadways uh we weren't going to make major changes to those Landing points so they the goal was to tie those two together with Dayton Parkway and then re-evaluate the land uses based on that knowing that if Dayton Parkway does end up shifting because when we actually get to constructing it um it shifts a couple hundred feet to the west or east on one of these Corners the land uses would then follow that so the you know to give the easiest example where it shows commercial on the south and east side of it and the mixed use on the west and north side of it if the road alignment shifts a little bit those land uses will follow so that the commercial stays on one side of the intersection and the mixed use stays on the other side um so that's where the land uses and the transportation are tied together and kind of play upon each other but they're not set in stone the terms of the if the alignment shifts a little bit the land uses will follow as well well feel like some people up com on up name an address yes Scott shy uh 11980 East French Lake Road um 32ye resident thank you Mr Mayor and members for letting me speak um I've lived out there 32 years um built the home myself uh have no intention of selling for a road I've made this very clear to everybody Kevin knows me uh been to the meetings been to the open houses um talk to the Planning Commission and now it's your turn uh there's just a lot of things wrong with this in my mind if you got to get from point A to point B it seems that there are routes that you could take that are more of a direct rout uh that you can miss a lot of residential homes for now I keep hearing that this is going to be 20 30 40 50 years I don't trust that um if if the right money comes in this could be in five years um there's um I this road has wandered around Dayton ever since I've been here it's at various times clipped the back of my property clipped the front of my property been just south of my property and now it goes through my dining room and it's the big S curve thinking that that's going to slow traffic or uh anything it's not it it seems that if you're going to do this just go from point A to point B try and miss all the residential you can for now so if the road comes in significantly ahead of the rest of the development the people that have invested Decades of their lives in their properties and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars have the opportunity to stay there a little bit longer even if there's road noise um also just in this presentation it it just something doesn't seem right about putting a town center up against the lake your developers that come in there and are going to spend hundreds of millions of dollar is developing This Town Center are going to want access to it from four directions you're already limiting it to three and it it makes it would make more sense it was further north where traffic from Rogers could get to it traffic from champing can get to it traffic from South day and the Maple Grove can get to it traffic from the top can get to it instead of being rammed up against a lake where you're already cutting off 25% of the access um so so the the Planning Commission rejected it 40 and I would just urge you to do that and maybe go back and just come up with a simpler more straightforward plan um it it seems like to me that ultimately developers are going to come and make proposals to you rather than the city and I know you want to you know guide this or or direct it but it seems like they're going to come and ask you for approval of their plan down the road so that's all I want to say thank you thank you thank he did he's anybody else all right um where we at any address after done thank you um April Johnson RoR 1 17100 117 a road is not going to be a little line that Road's going to be massive and though it doesn't go right through my my parents lot mine is the third one smack dab in the middle of that pink that's going to be commercial that's going to going to be what a a strip mall this is our family home we've been there for 40 some years and it just hurts my heart that we're going to change we're going to put a a huge Road through a family lot there's a lot of families that are out there too and I know I can I appreciate you guys saying this but there's got to be something different there's a ton of Farmland out there and I don't want anyone to lose their property but to say oh yeah we'll just give you we'll give you money for your house this is more than a house I grew up there I would hike down to French Lake we have a pond in our backyard I've got little kids that love going out there they love seeing the horses they love going to Dayton and to put this through this is taking away what Dayton is I think you guys are on the right track with it but we got to do something different cuz this is that's not Dayton by any means I don't know I can see your wheels turning but saying we're going to deal with it in 50 years or whatever well this is my family's Legacy this is my kids that are going to live there and you know I'm facing it now where my parents are getting older I want if I have to sell it what are we going to do are we even going to get what's worth out of it but I want to keep this I want to keep this in the family so by putting a a little line a Parkway is not a line it's going to be huge and it's even now with all of the development that's going in the traffic on that road is ridiculous I used to ride horses up and down that road I I'm scared to even walk down that road with an animal a dog because these people just zip through there the commercial traffic that's in there and we haven't even added in these streets yet so what more of a issue are we going to be creating so thank you for at least listening and I know your hearts are in the right place but let's keep dating we as much as we can thank you thank you for coming up is there any way that we could see like what keeping the existing Ro way alignments are with making small changes to kind of make this connection kind of just give us a visual to that like have you maybe we've done it in the past night neglect seeing it but like I've always been fixated on like this s Cur but is there something that we've done where we've tried to reutilize like the existing roadways and make the connection that way making slight adjustments off of like 113th and East French Lake and off of 117 some smaller yeah that that involves moving uh the parkway no remember how much that was remember how much that we talk about it yeah yeah we're unfortunately we're stuck with that kind of unless unless the development comes up with 349 bucks so I want I want to make sure this is clear with everybody is that the city isn't doing anything correct with this plan we aren't buying anybody's Properties or houses we have to plan for if a developer comes to them and buys the property now we have to know what to tell the developer what to put on there that that is all true except you could get a council come in here and condemn could yep could yeah yeah 100% well number one I mean I think we well at least I know I believe I believe someday that Road's going to happen it will it's something like it the state of Minnesota spent a lot of money putting that The Interchange there and their intention is to have a radway there yep 100% so someday it's going to happen it is and that's only going to be that's why the plan is in front of you today it's to plan for it not to do anything currently with that plan besides have a plan for that if it happens the packet does include the presentation that was provided back in June of different routes so we don't have that as slides in the PowerPoint but that that is included in the packet well so the request before the the council is is uh a request to approve the master plan guess the question that staff has is if you want to do you want to change anything in the plan or do you want to it sounds like there's concerns on the trans Transportation alignment is this something that you want us to look at or do you just want us to stop working on this I I think that if this doesn't get approved um I think we we would probably owe staff a direction as to what we're doing here I'm I um and and you know maybe I think we've had a work session on this in the past but to be honest I don't think there was a lot of um the acceptance of the fact that there were a number of Commissioners and um councilmen just had a major hangup with where that Road's at and you know maybe we are stuck with it but and it it wouldn't be cheap to move it but I think it's I personally think it's a bigger disaster to just say this is going to be our 50e thing so it seems to me like this is this has been the issue from the beginning is where does that road go and I think that a lot of the work around it makes makes sense if that's where the road goes but that's probably not where the road should go and so that ends up being my dilemma with it is I don't know do you know do we have to back up and and look at what is what is the best possible solution for this road and then move the the boxes around again or do we just call this call this done and talk about the road as a separate project I don't not sure I know what the right answer is and this this study has gone on for quite a long time already and it maybe has produced as much as it can but the road's got to get fixed I think there's probably a unanimous opinion that it that we need to do better with the road than what we've got today and are you talking about the road north of 117th well yes I I guess I'm trying to limit my comments to the study area I think we've got problems above and below it um but this you know this is this is part of it if the you know we because we had a starting point and an end point you know this is this is what you could draw inside that box um and I know that there's more thought gone into it than that but you had to get from here to there with it you know is that is that the the final answer is you know the the road work we've already done did we did we make a mistake there and we have to undo it before we multiply it or on the North side is it Zanzibar exists but does that mean we have to tie into it at the spot that it intersects today and there is more open land to the north you know the west of W yeah that you know so could the Dayton Parkway come through a different way and tie into Zanzibar in a different spot you know outside the scope of this study I get that but it just feels wrong to approve this with a road that nobody thinks is in the right place I have a question for the council what is the right place for the road then we don't know I think that's I think that's the bigest and I think that's the question the right place is just like this in my opinion to get it somewhere along that line I mean there is a house right there that you're going to take no matter what to me this is the problem right here this is this should have never happened originally it went this way and for some reason got Chang I know the council's stuck on shouldn't have gone the and I I get it I understand it staff but that's where it is today we can fix it it costs money to fix it that's fine um I just want to understand that I think every every one of the Cil members probably has different direction of where they think the road should go and likely every resident in that area probably has a different direction of which way the road was go and so that's what makes it difficult is we have to make some sort of decision of okay we going accept it and be okay with the land uses and then work on Transportation scrap the whole thing which has been roughly about a $30,000 expense so far that that's all well that's Sun thought it was closer to 70 uh no 30 huh that money is spent uh correct that's what I mean so I'd like to at least accept something for the 30 grand versus uh denying something we just spent 30 some thousand bucks on well except any more questions I'm going to make a motion to deny it I'm in a second it okay we have a motion to not accept um so is denial correct just around the same page yeah okay is not accepting it okay um okay any more discussion yeah say that again if you so it was motioned by salonic seconded by fashion to not accept the master plan as it sits today yes to not accept not so to not accept it we vote Yes Yes to not accept it you vote a if you do if you do not agree with that motion then you vote no rert would just say you don't accept it but we've had this come up a couple times yeah so any more discussion if if it's assuming it's not accepted we'll pick up the conversation again when we work on the 2050 comp plan good or yeah we my guess is we'll pick it up earlier than that because we're going to have to figure out something here at least with the with the connection points so I think there needs to be some direction there sooner than later yep okay all those in favor with the motion to deny say yes I um and uh oppose say no motion carries 5 to zero okay on item m I just pull up a couple things here all right to here all right evening Mr Mayor members of the Council of tonight you were being asked to uh consider a request for a variance uh to the Datt and sign ordinance um at 17950 Maple Court uh if you recall in uh earlier this year in May uh the city council approved a conditional use permit for a motor fuel station uh quick trip there there was a sign packet that was included in that development plan um and the guidance was to approve the overall development aside from the signage and any requests for signage that would be beyond what the code would allow would come back and um that's why we're here today uh so the applicant is Quick Trip uh the variance is uh related to an interstate oriented sign um is proposed to be 80 ft tall 225 square ft not located at a primary entrance of the site um and then as well as being located within a drainage and utility easement uh with the platting of the Quick Trip um plat it' be quick trip 11 87 uh that entire Southeast Corner that is shown here is uh located in a drain engine utility eement due to some storm water ponding directly north of that area just a brief overview about the sign or the variance requirements um it's a variance requests are to be considered by a three-part Test Meeting all parts of the test um variances may be granted when the applicant uh for the variance establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance um meaning the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance the plight of the landowner must be due to non-economic circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner and the variants if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality and just to note economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties for a variance uh Within applicants narrative uh there are U certain surrounding issues uh to the site that uh would hinder visibility to an interstate oriented sign that is code compliant at that 25 ft tall 64 squ ft sign area um and those include um significant grade changes from location of the sign surrounding mind. RightWay including the date and overpass uh for eastbound traffic uh there's a Grove of trees on City owned property directly northwest of the uh Dayton interchange that also hinders visibility and there's a billboard here uh that you can see on this bottom corner that uh on the RDO property that also makes it uh an issue for uh I94 traffic to be able to see the sign know that there's a Quick Drip there and safely make the Maneuvers to um safely exit the interstate and use the facility uh again just the applicants request uh they did a sign survey that was included in the packet and their narrative um that addressed what uh types what size sign what size sign area would be needed uh to meet the visibility standards for this area uh and that a CO compliance sign uh would not meet that uh based on their survey and I think that uh originally in may they had mentioned that they were looking at a 50 or 60ft tall sign through that survey that they conducted uh 50 to 60 foot tall sign would still not meet those visibility requirements that the applicants would be looking for for Interstate uh traffic um in staff's review of the request while the staff acknowledges this site and surrounding area opposed visibility issues for a C- compliance sign uh reviewing this rationale against the variance criteria did not necessarily warrant a variance um there does not appear to be a practical difficulty on the site that wouldn't otherwise allow a Cod compliance sign to be built um in this case it's more so of an issue of what type of visibility does a C- compliance sign get you in this area for Interstate traffic um another uh item that staff noted was altering the character of the locality uh sign like this in a mostly undeveloped Interstate Corridor could would likely set a precedence for future development expectations of signage in this area um as you'll see later tonight there is uh preliminary plat proposal for the South uh corner of the Dayton Parkway um that could uh would set this application would likely set a precedence for that uh future development um so a couple of considerations for the city council tonight is does the applicant's rationale for the request warrant of variance in this case uh based on the information provided and two does the city council feel that the character of this Corridor will be altered if the interstate oriented sign is approved setting a precedence for other developments in the future future um staff's initial recommendation was for denial the Planning Commission reviewed and considered this and held a public hearing at their last meeting uh in on November 7th I believe uh and the commission recommended approval finding that uh the applicant provided sufficient evidence for a variance uh to the sign ordinance um as such staff had prepared a resolution for each action uh for your consideration tonight uh one thing I'll just note as well is there was some additional con uh conversation at the Planning Commission level about the code compliant pylon sign previously proposed at uh the corner of Holly Lane North and Dayton Parkway and uh whether the applicants would be willing if this variance was granted uh to alter their codee compliance sign to the pylon at 25 ft tall at that corner uh to adjust it to be more of a monument style sign at either 12 or 16 ft and as you can see here the applicants have since provided that for um just additional context that stemmed from that conversation at the Planning Commission level um with that the applicant is here tonight I know that uh they had prepared an a presentation if the council would uh like to see that or certainly if you had just general questions uh staff is here as well as the applicant to assist with that just to be clear the monument sign is is requires us to approve the other side it was more yeah I would say that that was kind of the Planning Commission um thought was that if they if the the variance was granted for a pylon sign at 80 ft tall near I94 um would the applicant consider changing that to a monument I asked the Planning Commission at that night if they would want to add that as a condition of approval to the variants and they did not feel that that was necessary to do so so in short I would say know give us your name and address certainly Matthew lepy 1626 Oak Street Lacrosse Wisconsin at Quick Trip headquarters uh thank you to Hayden and John uh for their good advice and walking us through the process I was a city planner for over a decade so I have been in their shoes for a lot of these meetings uh do you have the uh PowerPoint is it the same deck you showed at the Planning Commission if I may yes did everyone see it already or no mhm okay all right yeah thanks for asking yeah so I will walk you through this quickly and then we'll look at a few of the photos as Hayden showed us uh from the sign survey so the sign survey company does these all over the country uh guy's actually based in South Dakota does a lot for loves and other companies so he does all shapes and sizes of these all over the country uh 80 ft was what we landed on for that particular spot where it's proposed uh due to the obstacles pton mentioned the trees to the north the billboard uh to the South there and then the height of the overpass actually uh one of the pictures we'll look at you'll see that 80 ft may sound like a lot but if you're coming eastbound it Peaks over the overpass uh and that's about it so we'll look at that in a moment uh the 50ft tall sign that he mentioned a moment ago uh for another spot on the site kind of the northwest corner uh when we did the sign survey unfortunately those trees you literally until the offramp was already going by you as you were headed eastbound that was when you finally saw that 50ft tall sign for the first time so that was why that really wasn't a safe option uh if half the traffic going by wasn't going to see at all until it was too late so again eastbound traffic we have multiple obstacles you've got the trees you've got the overpasses the one as you round the corner and then you head kind of Southeast there and then obviously day and Parkway itself just the height of that overpass westbound traffic aside from that billboard I think we'd be in a lot better shape uh the billboard is really the only thing once you make the curve uh and head Northwest there uh you should have a pretty clear view so I'm not as concerned about westbound as I am about eastbound is that billboard is that the property that we had an issue with during the acquiring of all the property different okay a different one yeah good question on there go ahead I the same thing so we'll look at the photos in a moment but um one of the things we weren't able to do was take the blimp uh one of the heights we actually looked like looked at originally was 125 ft which is once we put it up you could see it over the trees if you were headed eastbound well but that yeah but that's the problem is one of the criteria uh variance criteria not state but local is you're not going to change the essential character the locality we couldn't say at 125 ft that that wouldn't change things that was too tall so we didn't consider that but that's why we moved it to this other spot here for consideration and then 80 being lower so this was the last spot the surveyor did and unfortunately I didn't get to didn't get him to shoot video of it so otherwise I would show you video which I usually like to do uh in these sorts of presentations so local variance criteria here uh needs to be in harmony with the purpose of the code comp plan U also can only be when the applicant establishes you have practical difficulties so then it goes through those items uh again Planning Commission the use has already been approved it's only this interstate oriented sign uh at issue tonight uh you're dealing with B4 BP zoning so certainly this kind of use this is the right spot for it given you've got heavy equipment you've got ststone things like that nearby um the he mentioned non-economic circumstances uh surrounding this um again sight's in a bowl down you've got Dayton Parkway and then the site goes down and that's why the detention Pond is at the South Corner that kind of triangle area there uh by RDO because of the grade um again this is the kind of thing where you've got the Grove of trees you have the detention Pond you have those things around the site um that really are not anything that quick trip has created here so that's how quick trip believes it does satisfy that prong of the test again essential locality um character of the locality not being changed you've got heavy equipment you've got semstone you've got warehousing and distribution nearby this is about as good a place if you could find one for this kind of thing so you don't disrupt other things such as residential and then practical difficulties again every place defines these differently it's always interesting different places I go uh to see how they Define them a lot of times they're not defined at all it's sort of in the eye of the beholder so again this is a matter of the trees the billboard um the overpass that sort of thing and then also just giving people enough time to safely get off the interstate we've got four lanes going in each Direction so people are going to need a little extra time with that many lanes and the volume of traffic we often have out there um people need to see ahead of time to make a safe maneuver we don't want people making sudden Maneuvers I'm going to go up north in January to have a similar discussion and again I'm saying the same thing people are going 60 70 mil an hour and I hate to admit it but several people drive distracted anymore I don't want people to see the sign at the last second and not think about their surroundings and then try to change two lanes that's not that wouldn't be right on our part so we try to avoid that that that's why we again asked for 80 so it could be seen in both directions with enough time for people to make the right move and do it safely so very quickly and I'll show you some of the site survey photos here in a moment uh Quick Trip does believe this is appropriate for an interstate oriented use um and again the sign request does satisfy each of those variance findings I just went through from city code uh and I believe it satisfies state code as well for being granted a variance so we'll jump jump over we made to the survey photos and again thank you for running the show here okay so westbound coming toward the site uh once you round the corner you can see there kind of above there's that uh silver Dodge minivan there and the arrow means it's behind the sign on the interstate but if we go down to 6/10 of mile there you can see it in the background just peeking over everything between those two vehicles in front of us we keep going closer then uh you can see it there on the right hand side at this point the billboard is obscuring the bottom half of the sign and you have the same story there except for a tiny fraction of the sign you can't see it at 4/10 because of that billboard that's there 3/10 of a mile thankfully now we're clear although and again this is one of those interesting things just by Dent of where you are on the road and how things appear closer versus farther away sign doesn't look very big next to that billboard at this point but at least you can see the sign 2/10 comes into clear focus one10 and then at the exit you can see it clearly that's with the 80 foot sign yeah this is the 80 so yep so do you you go back to the half a mile one sure it's the half a mile one if you're going I'm going do quick math 60 M an hour that means you're going a mile minute so you've got 30 seconds at this point in time from seeing this to get over from the far right lane to over for the turn lane if you're driving a semi 30 seconds is going to be enough time I would argue my what I'm trying to is I don't think it's going to make a difference because I don't think that that that 30 seconds I've never driven a semi but I've driven a motor home before sure as have I and and um I don't think getting across four lanes on that road or three lanes on that road I don't think 30 seconds is going to be enough to do it really depends on the amount of traffic I think you're right driving that road on normal day I don't think 30 seconds is you're right middle of the night maybe but like on normal traffic I don't think 30 seconds is going to be enough to to for someone to see that and say I better get over and get over quick and I can do it safely sure and this is where the tension between code and what safe comes into play because yes if we built a 200 foot tall sign as we joke you can see it from Minneapolis you'd know with plenty of time but that's not appropriate here I I mean we have I'm not trying to say it should be taller either just so we're on the same page yeah no and I I agree with you um but basically what what quick Trip's trying to do here is thread the needle between what's appropriate along the interstate here not I mean we have much taller signs in other places oh I'm only worried about here but they aren't appropriate for here so that's why we went with 80 just enough and then if we go down to eastbound photos if I may thank you again um you'll see what I'm talking about for as we approach from this Direction so again yellow arrow you can't see it at all still can't see it at all now at 510 you might see a tiny sliver of it but that's why he put the arrow on there which is unless you're intently looking for it you're not going to see it so once you get underneath the overpass there still can't see it at this point so again we're not this is not a beacon for miles and miles away 3/10 of a mile you can see it clearly 210 to get a little closer now the other thing I want to point out with this one in the 1/10th photo uh would be you see where the traffic signals are so um again this is not looming over everything this is barely taller than the traffic signals as we get into the on10th of a mile photo here you can see the traffic lights are basically in line with the lower part of the sign so this is not something that's immensely tall um in fact if you parked a semi there and you've got your diverging diamond so you've got the lanes as they cross over there in the one side stopped I wish when we had the sence survey performed there had been a semi- park there just to give us a little more scale for uh I'm not saying semi would block it but just to see okay this is a 13 1/2t tall vehicle parked there and this is how much of it you'd see above it now obviously the traffic signals are taller than the semi but again it's really the bare minimum we could do and still have people see it we'll go down just to the last photo there at the exit um you can see the effect at the exit here of the fact that the signs down the slope uh because again now you see the tops of those traffic lights and the tops of the traffic lights in this picture are even with the top of the sign from that perspective so was there a problem putting the sign on the Southwest part of the property instead of the Southeast cuz that would help with this angle but I I don't know if there was um I can go back up I mean right now let's go cuz I think it is in the southwest Northwest I think well oh Northwest was the one where no it's you talking right here Southwest yeah right in this corner yeah okay sure um so that was the one where we did the 50 and everything the problem was then the trees um as you went farther out to the Northwest there the trees got in the way because that was the one where we measured it and the 125 was what you would have needed to get that's because it's it's more North and it's going to the trees are going to block that that was the problem yeah okay otherwise it would make more sense as you say to put it up on a little bit more elevation it would knock that Ang yeah exactly y but that was the issue was the trees so so I I get you know the need for this height for visibility from the roadway but when you mention that you know your neighbors are Ario and sstone that's only looking One Direction I Wish there had been and I did ask for this but I don't think it was done what does it look like from the West well this is all kind of sideways here so I'm going to say Dayton Parkway runs East and West just for my own purposes here and and so I'm talking about residents on the west is this how far west is that sign visible for them to that existing neighborhood Laurel Creek and also well I mean there's going to be more people there we're going to be talking soon here about a large apartment development more or less straight across the road from from where you're at so they're going to see the sign no matter what kind of sign you have I get that but how far does that light is that light traveling past the past that area if I may council member I did go out and uh after we had spoke at the Eda meeting um and went to territorial Trail territorial Grove and then the development in Rogers that is on the corner of Brockton and Dayton Parkway um and I used the semstone location as a reference uh that 77t tall building there um there was only one location that you could see it and it was from the closest point of territorial Commons excuse me I think I said Grove uh territorial Commons the town homes down there on uh Territorial Road and uh the only reason that you you could see the ststone uh building was because the uh leaves had fallen on the trees that would have otherwise been blocking that and just a just to add more context the grade or the elevation of that 77t tall stem ston building is 30 ft taller than where this is being proposed um so I did do a little bit of Recon it might not have been as much uh information as I could have um provided in that uh amount of time but uh at least there was a little bit of context in in terms of surrounding residential neighborhoods MH okay well that's that's better news cuz I'm a little bit sensitive to this um just because of my location then then it's not here I live along the river okay the other side of the river about a mile away is Highway 10 and towering above the trees all the signs year round is a pleasure Land RV Dynamic sign that uh well you know where to get you know you want to know what's on tonight I can tell you this is a mile away right and it's the only thing that sticks above there Ramsay's got ordinances similar to our so I'm sure that sign is is there because of a variance and how that ever got through I don't know but I might have been there long but it it it just looks ridiculous to me that you've got this huge thing towering over basically a tree line and I'm not buying an RV tomorrow so I don't need to know what's on sale um so you know this is the same kind of thing all the people that live in the area are going to know where your gas station is they don't need a they don't need a sign to find that it's the interstate traffic and so I understand what you're doing here I just am concerned about the the surrounding people that actually live there what are they what are they ultimately looking at well I think one thing that helps is this is the kind of sign where it's not going to be flashing it's constant the only time anything would change is gas price changes and that's going to be instantaneous doesn't flicker doesn't do anything like that um so there's not a message center on this call sign as you say to change and as you say sort of cause distraction if you will yeah so you're saying it particularly you get over toward where Dayton Parkway runs into Brockton that this is essentially not visible you're thinking at that height correct and that's just going out and kind of going to the corner and seeing what I can see and yeah um I think and I guess we didn't ask for it soon enough but it it seems to me like that's a normal part of a science study is I mean I understand you're doing it for a business purpose you know how are we going to get that traffic off the road and into the into the store but U you know what it looks like around you I think is important and I think should have been there should be pictures showing from at Brockton and Dayton Parkway what does that what does that look like um so I'm trusting you that this is not an issue at that height but I would have liked to have seen it sure understood I'm curious looking at your presentation and everything you brought forward sounds like you put a sign up that people might see and that's that's a huge might what about I've seen this before I've traveled a lot you've got a billboard a mile before Dayton Parkway West on 94 and then just before just coming like down 94 I guess on this side you got one a qu mile away permanent billboard T availability are they available this is well you do it today I guarantee that was spot now the the digital ones of course it's hard because the message changes pretty quickly so you're hoping the right person sees it in that right window I can't tell you how many times I yeah you look just about the time it switches and you're trying to figure out what it said and it's boom yeah and then of course you're not paying attention the whole time it's the whole other deal um yeah so our marketing department is the one that looks for Billboards uh sometimes depending on what town you're talking about uh sometimes they in long-term leases it's really frustrating because we would like that I mean you certainly see when you travel we will hey Travel Center exit such and such um but it all just depends on what's available and when and yeah it's hard because there's sort of separate things you're definitely not the first person to ask me these question oh I know I just I was like I'll solve all your problems right now yeah we both Drive places we both see Billboards for things right so uh yeah that's what's hard is it's hard to connect the two uh because if it's not available then holy cow uh the other question I get a lot is well what about the blue sign just before the exit the The Traveler information sign and again it assumes nobody's blocking your view it assumes you happen to be paying attention and looking at it all things that apply to your sign too so I mean yeah well say In fairness yeah how short time you have to react to this the same and that's up that's what's really hard here is what is the best sign that we think would work here because again you have Curves in both directions You' got an overpass going north there right or Northwest um you like I say you've got various obstacles but at the same time you're going to flat out deny me if I show up and say oh I need a 150 fot sign well could we build one yes we could actually afford it but I'll tell you those things are awfully expensive that's one of the questions that was brought up earlier one of the points that was brought up earlier was does this set a precedent yeah and I think part of the question is not every body could afford to sign this tall and I'm not saying that in a bragging way but we're probably talking depending on what one of these kinds of sites I'm looking at $200 to $400,000 sign here so the barrier to entry for one of those is kind of high so I don't know and they'd still need variance and they exactly and each variance gets considered on its own merits and all that so I think there are some obstacles to everybody jumping on board with that kind thing but it is a good question unfortunately I can't tell you okay at these three Billboards at whatever stretch of the interstate you know what's what's the leas status that kind of thing if I knew all that boy we' we'd be in good shape so I apologize I can't give you more about that I just know what it wasn't talked about so I got throw it in cuz it's there still it's already there absolutely all right any more questions I would need a motion in a second I'll make a motion to approve it are you going to put any dependency under their sign no the monument he wants an 80 foot sign that's what he wants no he's talking the monument sign the the sign up by the road comes the other put the py commission do you have that picture Stu I don't I definitely want the monument sign I think it definitely looks nicer I want I want it looks nice sure are you willing to put it up yes we are okay y I'll go for it I like it may we do the 16 I think that was to be your question wasn't it sorry 12 the maximum height allow is for a monument sign based on code regulation as of today is 8T tall so this would be 8T for mon even B how tall is our sign yeah we're mixed up so we the pylon we okay we WR the public hearing notice to be bag enough where it is just an overall uh amendment to a section of the zoning ordinance so if this was something that you would uh consider um we could include that into the resolution then if you would like to uh allow for a 12 or 16 foot tall Monument sign at the other location kind builds in a variance to that is that what you're saying essentially but the 25 foot sign's okay that 25t top I remember when we went through the sign ordinance he shaking is the monument still going to sit kind of down in a bowet as per se I'm just kind of looking at the corner where it might be look closer to level grade at that point from what I remember I just worry about it there's no sidewalk on that's down the center so but line of sight for car I think the monument looks better than I like the monument and I think the shorter one will be just fine on reality it's I think it's pretty close to even grade from the grading plan I'm looking at what do you have anything I could possibly block that that the pine wouldn't the 12th would would seems like 12 nearly as visible as the 12 I think if you'd Miss like other businesses across the street in D Parkway that would be currently on Territorial Road I'm thinking like Comfort matters Ziggler those are the couple I can think of that are behind those Grove of trees that may be blocked if it has a 16t sign I I don't know if you get blocked by a p sign either I'll be honest with you I don't know so let's go with the 16t sign Monument so just this is a complicated project so with each sign um there needs to be findings of fact that justify what the variance is so we we've talked a lot about the 80 foot sign not as much with the 16t foot sign and so the question is what is the Practical difficulty of why what justifies a 16t sign versus an 8ot sign can you go back to the what justifies a 16 yes what's easier to see well then the the problem amending the code it's going to look nicer too so that's what I was getting at it's it's it's now it's a our ordinance doesn't a lot and so we kind of have a mess what I'm hearing is this can this can act as a VAR ins for that or is that not what I'm hearing because we're really talking about two code boo boos and this was supposed to cover the 80 foot sign and now we're talking about tying in a 16 or a 12 whatever that's that's in violation of 8 foot correct so I understand that 16 is twice as easier to read than an 8 foot sign um you know but then why 16 why not 20 or or 10 what is the magic number so if the direction is that the code is a problem then we should be changing the code rather than granting a variance for this well because then we're going to be stuck with the pylon which I think there's pretty it sounds like if that is if that is the case where you'd like to see the monument signs be changed we can bring an ordinance Amendment for forward um within the time before they apply for aign permit application so then we would have that basis covered um it's just a matter of Direction matth when is this going to be constructed next summer sometime yes uh I don't have a full construction timeline yet so not before summer I so here might be a question for everyone particularly for the two of you uh is there a way wherein we we could construct the highway sign get get our sign permit in order for the signage for the building and the directional signs to get people circulated through and then apply for a second one for whatever we decide for whatever you folks decide for a monument can we do that later yep all right if we do that I think that I think that would work for us and that way it keeps the ball rolling but we don't get caught out with wait a minute PL commission didn't want this it wanted that that kind of thing we we so all right so we would not put any requirements on this today which means you could put up the pylon sign so let me ask you this theoretically but I think we're sort of you would rather have the mon an honest agreement here is what we're doing yeah so we're agreeing if you approve we'll build one of those mon signs that staff already has artwork for and that's part of the okay proceeding tonight so the or or the um motion will be that we approve the 80ft sign with the caveat that will come somewhere along what size Monument sign we're going to come up with okay but he is going to build it and part of the variance is to have a second sign yes okay so yeah kind lock in then did you get that got got that got that he's on it okay so you got a motion and did you get a second no Scott made the motion need a second I'll do the second any more discussion yeah I just want to say I I hope you go the monument sign I think it's a much better looking sign for the community um but I will be voting no against the the tall sign I think based upon the evidence you've shown I don't think the time limit given to get there is really going to make a difference at all um and so I don't think it's needed I also think it sets a bad precedent for the area um and I look at Maple Grove they've got gas stations all over the place and they've got sign allowances shorter than ours and theirs aren't falling down and crumbling and failing all the time so I don't think it's really going to make a difference in your business candidly just based upon what we see in the area and I don't like driving through Rogers where I see giant truck signs and when I drive across country hopefully you don't compare yourself to loves because you guys have a much better product than they do but uh I don't like their signs either so uh I just want to make make sure you know why I'm voting no but I don't think we should have the 80 foot sign any other discussion okay we got a motion in a second all those in favor say yes yes yes yes all those opposed say no no so that passes four to one thank you thank you thank you okay you taking a start no you know what it'll take I'm going to take a 15 minutes just to get started 5 minute recess here e e e e e e e e e all right we are back and we are to item n thank you Mr Mayor so item n is uh is mouthful so it's ordinance 202 24-15 approval of a comprehensive plan Amendment zoning map Amendment uh plan unit development preliminary plant I think that's it so it's an ordinance Amendment as well as a resolution so uh the project is this is the parkway neighborhood uh the project is located on the southwest corner of Interstate 94 and uh Dayton Parkways the previous project was on the opposite side of uh 94 um overall the plan is or the concept plan is for 650 apartment units uh what's shown on here is going to change over time uh with the preliminary plan the focuses on the road as well as I'm going to call it phase one which is 180 unit building and I'm going to go back and forth between and there's several applications here so what you're being asked to approve tonight is the comprehensive plan Amendment to change the sewer staging plan related to this property um as well as to reone the property from A1 agricultural to GMU 5 uh Southwest dayon I think I've got that number right um as well as the prelimary plant for see if I got a picture here oh I'm going to skip over a little bit um the prelimary plant for uh this project which is specific to the roadway in lot one everything else is going to be platted as an out lot which would have to be redeveloped or replanted later uh before it's being built on um we have a site plan review specific to the apartment building yes I believe that is it um again there this is being developed as a planning unit development so with the planning unit development it is necessary for the the Council to provide that there's a public benefit to this project that justifies deviations from the city code for certain items so that gets into the critical issues uh number one is white land impacts um and this has changed since uh the packet originally went out uh last week uh as part of the project or the original project last week there is a proposed Wetland fill in the north area for the road as well as a future development on Outlaw a that has since been changed to lessen the impact on Wetlands um that does affect the plan departments over on this side which will um then be shifted to the south portion um this really isn't part of the discussion tonight that's going to be part of the discussion when this outlaw is redeveloped at some point in the future I just want to make that as a point of when this comes back as a final plant it will be a little different than it is currently tonight uh critical issues with the billboard the city code uh allows Billboards as a principal use of a property the intent is that uh vacant land with a billboard cannot be developed unless the billboard is removed uh the Planning Commission was supportive of the billboard staying as it is so um I want to clarify with the council if you have any objections to the billboard uh staying as it is or if you'd like it to be removed you it's easier to just kind of go through these item by item yeah I'm fine was that a question like for right now yes oh that's fine say okay okay uh next critical issue is on tree preservation within a comprehensive plan um hold on a second John oh yep is there any disagreements with that if it wasn't already there I'd have a problem but it's already existing so we're just allowing to stay existing and I'm okay with that but if it wasn't there I would have a problem with it good okay great now you heard from at least three of us now you have a majority I heard more than oh yeah they're all F out I can say it again I'm okay uh next critical issue is on tree preservation So within the comprehensive plan uh Rush Creek goes through this uh property as as an agricultural ditch within the comprehensive plan it identifies this area as a Greenway Corridor uh which requires any development to be through a conservation planning of development or the conservation PUD the intent is you're you're conserving something something that has ecological value um the developer had conducted a tree preservation study those trees that are that are uh proposed to stay are outlined in green everything else would be removed there there are some Sprite trees that are going to be saved but for the most part the the majority vast majority of these trees would be removed and I'll say that when this project comes in in the future for redevelopment this green area will also change but the question for the council is should this green area be preserved as a conservation ement uh the Planning Commission was was opposed to this and wanted to allow the flexibility to remove trees as the project progresses you we we we kind of already have kind of a tree count thing going right so I I I guess I don't see that we need to make an easy can you this map is hard to see can you show better where this is or is this can you describe better where this this up against 94 there is that that dark line so this is 94 and that's the off ramp to the left uh yes on ramp on this is the onramp onto 94 uh the billboard is right about here that we looked at before so um essentially these trees on the corner here is what we're talking about and is the apartment building cut into those uh it will likely cut into those and I say likely because I I think the location of the next phase is going to change from where it is today can we choose to preserve a certain percentage of it or versus a yes or no is do anything want okay going to be planting other trees on the property yeah yes there's going to be over a thousand trees that will be planted yeah so fine you got to move the trees to put the building up then that's what you got to do yeah so no objection to I mean they're right next to the ramp I mean so kind of the directions do not include a conservation easement over these trees no no I don't feel that necessary I think that this project as it has gone through the stages of development they've demonstrated to me anyway that they are working very hard to preserve as much of the natural aspects of this property as they can and I I think that they've done a good job and I don't feel the need to put any boundaries around that piece okay means no perfect uh the next critical item is on parking so what is required for parking is one garage stall unit per uh apartment unit uh that is being complied with uh the surface parking is short so the code requires one surface stall uh per unit plus a half stall for every five units so this total is 198 what's being proposed is 165 uh when you add the garage and the surface stalls they're within 91% of what's required did we ever fix our code after we talked about this 1700 times no um no so here the reason why but I'm okay with this I'll just make this easy we can talk about it for today we should probably talk about it sometime the next you know council's you know time up here but I'm okay with this then that's fine I just want to make sure it wasn't below already lowered one that's why ask so for larger projects such as this it's more than likely that it'll be done as a plan unit development where there's flexibility with the code so I understand you know for every Apartment project that comes in they're short on parking um realistically if we you know unless we have a 10 unit apartment building or something comes in they're likely to come in as a PE in which there's flexibility I I just look at it from the standpoint of you know if they're short on parking it's going to impact their bottom line not ours um I I'm fine with the parking yes no I mean I could still see some risks if it's full and then you know there's emergencies there and then it get you know people are parking in different spots while plowing like but we don't allow overnight parking During certain times the right saying I see the risks I just don't know how if it'll get there but there was discussion uh more than once at the Planning Commission about some larger stalls and that the last Planning Commission meeting it sounded like they weren't on the plan but they're in the plan correct they're not shown on the plan but the developer agreed to include it so the discussion was and maybe the developer correct me or or the architect of having having the uh wider 10t um parking stalls that are in the back here for truck parking so our standard parking stall is uh 10x 20 and if if there's an allowance for an overhang then it's 10 x18 what's being proposed is 9 by8 9 by8 is the more common parking stall but it it's kind of a question for um what is the average size vehicle that Dayton residents have is a a truck versus is a compact car yes yes I'm with probably one of each yes yeah yeah uh hi everybody happy day um what name and address Michael Elon uh 10 17269 80 the place grow uh okay so the update on the parking everybody's good memory we made some changes that we all spoke about back in January which was some of the parking coming in and out of the project and then uh we intend to rent to market rate which means we're going to have some members with small cars and others with large full-size pickups so we've augmenting the plan that by the time we get to a building permit you should expect that more than 10% of the outdoor spaces are going to be the 10x 20 and we're going to Ben and I are going to work on not putting them all in the back some in the back some towards the front I mean you know uh so they're equally let's say spread throughout but at the end of the day I think you should expect 20 spaces at the 10 by2 um and then I think you've all addressed as Matt just said enough about you know uh the parking count we think that this number that we have is substantially adequate for a likey an in kind product that's available anywhere in the twin cities and we're working well within that uh context I have a parking question for you that's not related to either of those two topics and hate to delay the conversation but I'm just most more curiosity are you planning for any electric vehicle parking at all MH can you tell us more about that yeah um Ben can probably help with some of the specs but you know the bottom line is electric vehicles are a part of customers purchases today and those customers are renting apartments and so to some extent we're going to certainly have outdoor stalls I had a you know great conversation with the fire chief this morning and uh you know we're going to do everything we can to minimize any kind of adverse risk associated with indoor uh and that's where we're at at the moment that's where my question came thank you sir yeah no problem glad thank you okay uh critical issues on Landscaping so we we have a shortage of ornamental trees by two and and I guess my request for the developers just to to find a place to put those two um as well as a shortage on shrubs um the pl commission was fine with the shortage on shrubs so you I'm seeing a lot of head nods of you're okay with the shrubs i' rather have the over storage anyway so shrubs I would I would recommend as someone who lives in a new development maybe some more Evergreens and less shrubs even because the wind blows and then blows the snow thing and so you clear your driveway you clear the parking lot and then 10 minutes later it's covered in snow again so my one recommendation would be I'd be okay with less shrubs especially if you're going to put more Evergreens in there cuz in the winter I think the people that live there will really appreciate it right I concl and you will cuz you won't be upset people are plowing you someone plow it six times a day right for those of us plow basis y we appreciate that reduction that really it no way okay um so other items uh recommendations from staff I guess questions uh staff had recommended uh including a sidewalk so there will be a Regional Trail that will go along the west side of the road and then a sidewalk on the east side now part of staff's recommendation is that each phase of the project be connected with a sidewalk on the interior of the project a Planning Commission recommended against this and said it's fine as the Developers propos um and then also staff had recommended not allowing EV charging stations within parking garage and Planning Commission was fine with them being in the parking garage so just to get clarity on that on those two items fine with so State Statute doesn't car mayor members of council the fire service is extremely behind with EV vehicles um obviously I'm not opposing vehicles I have one myself with a charger in my garage um we're just trying to prevent um and there hasn't there's been some documented cases of charging cars and whatnot if we can prevent that um I talked to Mike today and if there's a way to PR put those outside potentially like Target does or whatever it's just a a step in the direction of Trying to minimize um having a carfire such as that because they're so difficult to put out um inside of a parking garage I mean just a regular car fire in a parking garage is significant enough but when you have an EV that starts on fire it's very significant so you just let them burn right yeah more or less so is that a I guess my concern is is that we have them all over garages residences no you know one of the Beauties about the free market is you don't overr you allow supply and demand to help drive and you know scenario this is in Southern California I mean you know where there's substantially more EV um and you know I think Ben can speak to also well we can't change whether it's indoor out what we can tell you is that the way we build our buildings particularly the garages they have you know very thick concrete ceilings and so I don't know what the time you know penetration with fire but um let me just say in in short whatever we would be proposing on the inside would be a direct result of looking at the typical number of users that use those cars okay and I think the chief brought up we you know spoke and again I'm not the guy coming here saying I'm a pro at it um but Chief's saying that uh you know there's two issues with the electric cars there's the charging units right by themselves and then there's the cars by themselves right and so I don't know that always the charging mechanism is really the issue where these things are fire but the cars themselves and and so I think you know when we speak about what we do don't do with the charging I think we have to really look at them individually and what is the you know rate per I don't know what uh you know that these things are a hazard but I I I think that the cars are a bigger Hazard by themselves than necessarily the CH I don't expect that we're going to have a whole lot of them but you know you'd still like some in there just because your Market request you're incentivizing people with them to park outside then if the charges are on the outside incentivizing the park out there which then helps get in front of the problem in the first place so I can see totally and this is is someone who only drives electric vehicle so I'm not nothing against them right I think that they're great but I can see how putting them underground where everyone lives above it and not being able to necess put them out quickly could be a problem so if you're incentivizing them not that you'd stop them from parking on there you're incentivizing them right to park outside I think that makes a lot of sense right unless it's 20 below doesn't make a difference really you know the honest though the first time I ever seen when I moved here from New York when I was St Louis Park they had out Hest got out in the parking lots where you could plug the cars they used to heat up the uh engine cor you know wasn't electric but it was a yeah block yeah I one of those in my first try yeah exactly so I don't know but you mentioned that I think you mentioned at Planning Commission that that's a that's a three-hour lid on that parking garage I mean that's a substantial barrier it yes and the garage itself is also sprinkled which won't help I understand with a li battery fire but yeah it's a 3-hour uh construction and it's fully separated building below that garage its own technical building uh separated from the res so it kind of does ACT uh much more safely than a typical residential setup in that situation with a garage or you'd have a charger um and regarding safety I I I can't speak much to that but as far as where and how often and percentage of of projects we commonly see that Ben can you move the microphone closer um we commonly see the uh EV charging stations within garages usually cities actually require a certain percentage go into projects um we usually look around about 5% of the parking stalls have them um one solution could potentially be future EV charging stations that could potentially give a little time for I know fire um the way you fight fire in EV Vehicles is a lot more difficult than typical gas or other fire so I don't know if time and Technology catches up to that but we do see a lot of uh future EV ready uh garage situations but um i' would say typical number is about 5% mayor and member of council and like I said I'm not opposed to the Chargers or you know or electric cars we're just trying to the fire service trying to get ahead of being that this is a new addition to the community and trying to get ahead of it a little bit even with a three-hour separation um this car will burn for days so if it was a start on fire the 3 hours will help but it can be an excess of a million gallons of water to put one of these out so just putting it out there it's not to scare anyone and just trying to prep if you will I'm like I said I own one um we're just trying to help I guess if that makes sense try to mitigate um any situation in the future the risk is high I get cuz in your house probably only have yourself and your wife and your couple cars but somebody else's car and 200 other people potentially I mean that's just 200 units I could be 800 people in there for all I know but you know I can see where the risk get high but there again I don't want to deter because it's use um so is the council okay with the EV uh Chargers being in the apartment yeah okay I am yeah um two other items and this is more just for clarity so I don't forget uh as part of this project there's going to be a temporary emergency access that will be off the site on the adjacent Dayton Creek part no Dayton Creek addition which the council red in October I believe it was um the intention so the the temporary easement or temporary access will be built from this called to act to onto Brockton whoever builds first whether it's this project or Dayton Parkway will build this access the reason why this is necessary is that there is an alternative Farm access road is both it is below the 100 foot or the um 100-year flood elevation um so it's I'm going to say it's going to work 99 years but not event right um there's also the issue that there's a cver that we're we're not sure if it could withstand the weight of a fire engine uh the second item I I want to draw attention to you know so one of the conditions of approval whoever builds first has to build this emergency access road whether it's this project or the neighboring project in Dayton Creek they split it then afterwards or whoever builds first get stuck with the cost how does that work wherever this so I I want to emphasize this is a temporary ement because wherever it's built it's going to be in the wrong place okay um so when this lot gets developed um this access is going to move somewhere um to accommodate the project to the West do you have an estimate on what this temporary access is going to cost that's the some have to pay for I do not oh the reason I ask is and maybe this is moot but I mean it sounds like the reason that we're not considering that emergency access an emergency access is because an engine is going to sink in it I mean the bridge isn't rated for that um that's probably the main so other than the 2hour flood every 100 years why there actually not land rights either that's through private property oh and so there's not AAL eement agreement SE of that roadway we don't have access so we would need okay I'm just it just seems odd that we're going to build a temporary access and okay I agree on to the next Point um what are we going to do so the next point is is uh one of the conditions that it requires the developer to when this outlaw or outlaw a is developed it requires the that the developer included trail head um parking area to service the Regional Trail and when this went to the pl commission the Planning Commission what was against it and said you know there's other way Three Rivers can figure out how to solve their own problems um I believe that we do the city does have an agreement with three rivers to build the trail or find a location for the trail so if it's to find a location not to build it find a put a house set if they want to buy and they'll put it up right away yeah yeah so mayor members of council this has been um basically my job since taking over City administrator is fixing problems we've had in the past for um years yeah um this is yet another one that has come to light uh back in I believe it was 1998 2001 sometime in that time frame the city council basically said yeah we promise we'll do this with r Park District for an exchange of I think it was land rights or something at that time and Essen said yeah we'll build you a trail head later on down the road today is later on down the road in 1998 or terms or whatever so um three Park District has reached out as part of the beginning of the project and said let's figure out this one so we can write one more thing off the ship since I've been fixing nothing but problems since I got here closing commercial there though yes yes is there a different place you can put the the trail head somewhere in this area space we're running into Wetland and flood plane so Outlaw a is intended in the concept plan for a gas station so the thought is is that um you know with the trail head of of the idea of of 10 parking stalls that can be incorporated as part of the gas station trail head at a gas station it'll be able to get Refreshments as to say it's been done so we would like you said just to make sure the does it need to be a gas station and it can be anything not use gas station can we not use a gas station please call convenience store sure call it commercial site commercial just want to make sure that the council is aware that there is a trail head requirement and so something some part of this area doesn't have to be that at that location could be somewhere in this area doesn't matter has to be a trail head some sort of um fill so this agreement we but Three Rivers said you looked at it no Marty's got some wood chips we can throw in there sounds good yeah go ahead okay um so I think with regard to the Three Rivers um I'm not sure what Michael if you can move the microphone back towards you I got to tell you I'm standing up here like an idiot I talk with my hands all the time and it looks like I'm a little bit goofy so you guys have met I have two little nieces right so I'm just you can't believe then you can't make this stuff up but mhm that's okay it's a good no worri Sheed to while you were sleeping I was I took a KN I was mad I was wondering what he says 8:15 so I'm like okay a PA like this guy's got something no and then my wife's like we don't she's like we don't even have nail polish and I come straight up here I have no gas but I have a half electric car perfect you just come from but I talk with my hands and like you having a hard time now you own it now you're done of us have kids you're good don't worry about it so wait Mike where did you just come from home yes her name is Brinley and she's she's a sweetheart um she's spiking my milk with salt right now I promise it's just ridiculous but um okay so so Three Rivers I I'm not certain what you guys had let's say prior to coming online I call uh reached out to Three Rivers myself when I learned that they have this Regional Trail pre-approved from like 2007 and you know I telling you I you know kind of look at this from econom how do we really design this great project blah blah blah so I've had a lot of discussion with them as as early as last week just telling them that we're coming up here we didn't so me first start with what I understand out of the dialogue is they want to put in the trail they're going to write the check for for their improvements hard stop okay so our problem our our project is sort of to say how can we help thread that is it of benefit to the city and the Stu you know the the residents and I think all of that is a yes but it'll be on their dime and then in terms of this trail head and and you know parking this that and the other thing those are like on their wish list and what they want and we've made a great effort to try to incorporate at minimum uh creating a trail from the southern border to the uh to the north and we 've done that what we're going to do from there in terms of how big of a this and a what do you call that uh you know stay over this with bathrooms um there happens to actually be enough room up there to probably do it um but we none of that stuff is final what I've really told them is we've Incorporated a very nice roadway and the the trail will take us from you know the South to the north beyond that you know it's going to have to be justified and fit all of the type of criteria that you'd want to uh you know to make that kind of a commitment uh you know and where that would be but the most logical um and this trail head too guys can be as you come up to that land you know to the north let me start with you uh you the city of Dayton own that property we don't okay so the property that that we're referring to with a gas station a convenience whatever commercial that's owned right now by you and it's just to the the north of the road and what we found through some pretty extensive work with the Wetland plan and the mitigation um it's a very very tough site right to be able to even get to a point where you can build some vertical on it you know um but in so I think that there's a way that we can get something worked out uh with the county to to do something that I think is going to benefit you we the city of Dayton um and they've already made it clear as would I that uh you know they can come but it's a pay-to-play game if they want to put the trail in they have to cover those costs and she said that's fine they're already approved to do that and so I think we're okay they got nothing but money in Three Rivers so I'm not worried about that yeah they do our money our money they got nothing but our money right yeah well said so the the problem is is that we have to designate that now or that's for Three Rivers to figure out or could it be in a different property do it be on this one do be in this area like what do this action sry so this is the intersection of two Regional Trails okay and so it makes you know that's the reason why uh Through Rivers wants a trail head in in this area yeah um so we've had you know we had one project a month ago now we have the second project and this is an opportunity if the city council wants to require um a trail head it probably makes more sense on this project as opposed to Dayton Creek can they put it all the way down to the end of the excuse me called theck where there's nothing but field right now anyways yes it's harder to get to but and granted you know as this project matures like the plan is going to change okay um but the point I want to make is if uh if it if the developers not required to figure out how to fit it in this project then we have a responsibility of buying land somewhere else and building a trail so uh mayor and M C I was able to find the email that I got back from three Park District which was a year and a half ago um it said long story short the city assess three R Park District Road improvements which three R Park District is exempt from the two parties went to mitigation and three rers agreed to pay $110,000 to the city in exchange for securing a future Regional Trail Head land at the equal or greater value of $10,000 at a future date it doesn't buy much say $10,000 buys you like what yeah quarter of an acre if you're lucky but it probably did in six of an acre yeah said at a minimum 15 years ago maybe 15 years ago is what she what you said in the email so so we tried to assess them who thought that was a good idea the 15 a good idea 15 years ago Council so 20078 time frame okay so so must been Scott I mean um so we have to come up with some spot that's valued at 10,000 or less or more well it's like three parking spots yeah okay but we have to build it into the Pud is what you're telling us yes but we don't really care where it goes on the property as long as it's on the property choose wherever he wants to put it put it on that end of that service road yeah now to be clear you guys still own a parcel so for me to say it's going to go on parcel 2 what we call parcel 2 it's really you guys deciding that but um in an event but I don't disagree that down at the end of that cue act does you know that's where the trail heads South into me seems good um I mean and so we're working right now on that left par so anyway the point is yeah there's there's a couple different options that we can figure out to put that we appreciate you being a to work with us on that yeah yeah no yeah that so and I would say it doesn't this doesn't have to be resolved today we just need to get a certain direction so just an agreement that there's going to be a trail hit somewhere and it may be on our property but okay so lastly in I probably said this three times already um so one of the things that we've struggled with this project is what is approval through the Wetland Conservation act and we're I'm going to say mostly in agreement but it hasn't been approved yet so one of the conditions of the the preliminary plat is um that the project receive uh the approvals for the white line conservation easement prior to final plat approval I know the intent is that the final plat would come around in in uh December um couple weeks from now for the road in lot one I don't know if that's still the plan um so the question is if I don't know when this will get approval for Wetland Conservation I'm guessing not in December no we wait we talking about the for the the north section so the the T panel or technical evaluation panel is fine with Wetland mitigation for this roadway where there was an argument I should say an argu disagreement discussion is filling in the Wetland north of the road and so uh the project has been revised very recently um that pre preserves this wet land um which also affects the flood plane and then creates more build buildable land down here um this isn't going to get Wetland approval before December 10th no and the developers intent is to get final plat on December 10th for the roadway and for one can oh yeah yeah yeah okay so number one the final plat um is tied to a long string of things that on the development side we're trying to do particularly in the buy sell with the previous owner or current owner number one number two um in no way shape or form and I am I asking you for a final plat in two weeks unequivocally with no preconditions precedent I'm asking for a final plat 100% conditioned and contingent upon the tap and the Army Corps of Engineers which are which are the two groups that are uh doing yeah classy right I'm gonna Mesmerize the interesting part is everybody at home watching this yeah they might not be able to see it on the thing it'll be recorded Forever on YouTube oh good color at home if you add any right so okay so we don't so bottom line is we we did and John was on the call we've and and and and Jason and Ben and there's literally like 15 of us that have been working really diligently post eaw to move to this next what do we ought to do to make the site perfect and and that's this uh Army Corp in the Wetland so when I talk to Jason and the way we've kind of structured this is if we do the as you'll see the paperwork would be a final plat but it's already baked in there it's 100% conditioned on the approval from both the tap and the uh and the Army Corps so none of it's going to get built until we get that and I promise you we'll never close on a construction loan or any everybody's on the same page and we're all working towards the exact same thing so that they started their 120 day thing uh like you guys do with yours uh and it was uh was the 17th of October or something like that so point is this will be a spring approval from them and we we expect then to do the our vertical construction coming out sort of sometime after after that approval so everything kind of fits with a spring build um but we do we are going to come in on the 10th for for final plat um and the development agreement but we've already baked language in that says you you know we have to bring cash we got to do this and we have to get a personal approval and the last comment I would make John you know delightfully on a phone call all 15 of us and we were just getting ready to close and everybody's got the Happy Days and you know good stuff and he nailed it like 100 % nailed it and came right out to the state and the and the T and said I need to be clear do you have any problem at all with the roadway portion of the the Wetland that's being uh impacted and they clearly said no we have no problem with the road so I just want you to hear I was on that call he did a fabulous job closing it up and we got kind of a you know at least the positive answer and then what he's mentioning now subsequent is Ben and I in our original drawing we have some buildings and things up on the North End as well as quote this convenience store gig and it was stomping all over the wetlands like lot of it so they put a bunch of pressure they being the the guys on tap and the blah blah blah pushing on us uh to what's the right word uh something first what do you do uh mitigate or don't do yeah and so basically we were not touching any Wetlands other than the road now in this current plan and what it really resulted in is more Ben can you move the microphone thank you um we need two there so yeah we our current plan um that we've been working on this last week avoids any Wetland other than what it takes to get the road through the development um and that's resulted in a little bit more land you can see on the west side of that main road where we're going to have some Town Homes similar to what you guys saw actually in the earliest i' say yeah the very early concept plan with like uh 350 units or something like that so um yeah 374 thank you great great memory uh one less than eaw would require as I recall um so yeah we're we're looking at that so from a housing standpoint we we it's kind of a favorable um but right now it it leaves us with less of a plan on that uh future retail site we just sell Through Rivers the entire Dayton trunk that since we can't build so here you go it's all you have it for a buck build your trail head good luck with the Wetland yeah the area is just for it is in 100-year flood plane and I you might have um some lock building uh Park pavilion there since it's non-habitable um so it might actually be a good use for that area now that's true I think at the end of the day the benefit of it is we end up with a you know frankly I think a stronger overall neighborhood um without with the trade-off right we're not we're losing all this Wetland you know and the drama that goes along with that um and it gives us more buildable land in the core of our neighborhood and it and so I think it's uh that's helpful and the truth is as you look at the plans and and the how would you say just the overall condition of that lot that you guys own to the north it's it's not just you know pour a foundation and go you got 100,000 plus cubic yard I mean it's it's a very very difficult site so I think we look at you know you also have to look at kind of present day value and now and you know that that land that we now freed up to the left of the of the road up until you can kind of see that blue gives us about 170 ft to the west of the road and that's all you know high value right now it's not guessing it's not competing with the guy that that just left at quick trip and trying to create you know it's uh we've got plenty of demand for the product and uh and I think it makes everybody from the FED to the state very happy that we've um you know not gone in and in inadvertently just wiped out Wetland for the sake of building they said you know adversion is the first step or whatever they say and so we really pushed oursel a bit and uh and we came out with something that we think is uh is viable so that's what we're how our current plans will look avoidance avoidance there it was yeah right so just to summarize this real quick so one of the conditions of approval is that final plant be not not be approved until the Whitland conservation act approval is what the developers requesting is that uh approvals be final PL would be approved um with a condition of I'm call The Wack of uh approval so as staff our our responsibility is to have a minimal level of risk for the city when the council approves the project um that's always a careful balance and kind of in internal discussions I guess our intent is to have a larger discussion with the council at a separate time so not related to this project but um internally we we have a struggle of how quickly do we push projects through and how much risk are we taking um by approving projects before I'll say all the the eyes are dotted and all the tees are crossed if they were to start early we'd see it right I mean from the interstate someone would see something going on down there it wouldn't be known to us if they were to start yeah the first thing that would happen is the trees would be clean yeah we we'd know real quick if they were doing something they had clean everything up yeah don't what are you concerned about um well let me save that for a different conversation CU it's a long explanation well okay so again what what's being asked tonight so we have an ordinance Amendment to reone the property there's a preliminary plant a plane unit development and site plan approval specific to the appearance of the apartment building as well as the landscaping and so on that's it now I'm done okay we answered all your questions you need a motion for all or you need more no I'm I'm good okay then we can move on okay okay I'll make a motion to approve preliminary plat and else did we have here zoning plan amendments uh zoning Amendment comp plan Amendment zoning and preliminary plat second I understand the the um explanation around the final plat but we're not dealing with that tonight so um I think what you're talking about will work for me but um we're just talking about this one right now and so here we are okay we got a motion a second any more discussion all those in favor say I I all those oppos say no motion carries five to zero all right thank you next time come with GRE very much want to see a different color next time right yes I'll show you all my secret thank you gentlemen thank it'll be spring then see item o okay so this is a ordinance for to men the zoning map as well as a prelimary plant for plant for territorial Grove uh so territorial Grove is located on the northwest corner of a Territorial Road in East French Lake Road that is consisting of 42 single family lots uh the concept plan was reviewed say some point this summer I don't remember what maybe it was spring um uh py was also the developer of the adjacent project or territorial trails and so I think the housing type is somewhat similar to what's at on adjacent property so again uh two requests one is to amend the zoning map from agricultural or A1 zoning to R3 residential as well as the preliminary plant approval um you got a great presentation by hty um I oh I even have the same misspelling I did last time so um yeah so de if you can come up here this is not K compies yeah it's okay is this the same presentation as that one it is yeah WEA pretty quick then Mr Mayor members of the council I'm Dean Lauder uh I'm with py homes we're located at 1650 West 82nd Street Bloomington Minnesota did you come with painted fingernails too mine's all natural I noticed that as he was waving his hands I didn't know what to think I was like that's interesting um thank you for allowing me to be here tonight and speak uh to this presentation as John mentioned we had previously gone through the concept plan review process and what we try to do by going through that was make note of all the things we heard and then respond to them and and try to change our plan accordingly and we we did several things uh we created a a more wide ranged appropriate amenity in the form of pickle ball um and got rid of the Tot Lot um we have homes that will complement the existing neighborhood as John mentioned uh we provide Trail connectivity throughout the site and we uh intend to pay Park dedication fees as well uh we'll provide a lit Monument uh we'll have enhanced perimeter landscaping and I understand maybe in the report it says we need to do a little more on the Territorial Road side as much as practical uh so we'll we'll certainly um do whatever we can do to enhance that um homes will comply with your architectural standards and then one other thing that was brought up at the public previous public hearing is if we were willing to have the HOA for this neighborhood uh enjoying the territorial Trail and uh we're certainly open to that we advance to the next so one of the things uh that I've requested is um this is a difficult site the gas Bain the roads um kind of uh leaving behind an exception parcel the Olen parcel we're just taking a little bit of land from him uh in a purchase agreement all of those constraints make this a really challenging site it's small it's difficult to to navigate with our homes and comply with the code but we're doing just that so what we're asking for um I think there are conditions two and four uh in your preliminary plat resolution one condition would be to get rid of the East French Lake Road connection uh we're asking that that stays uh we will lose a a lot if that connection goes away um and if there's a connection made just south of the gas main eement we would then also lose that lot as well um and the the this project is um challenged uh financially already so um I would ask that um the council consider the recommendation the Planning Commission made with regards to the plat and and if I could just clarify so staff's recommendation was not to have um this access and to have kind of an eyebrow culd act which you know as Dean pointed out would be a loss of a lot so but again the Planning Commission recommended to keep it as it is and just briefly Mr Mayor um not to sound like a broken record because it is similar to what I said at the Planning Commission but uh East French Lake Road's a local Road territorial roads a a minor collector it's not uncommon to have access points that you know are are in the proximity that the existing territorial trail to the North and the proposed one in our neighborhood would be uh situated uh the traffic flow uh in out of the neighborhood would be relatively light and then one other thing that I just want to speak to and then I'll stand for questions um because I know it's been a long night for you already um when we presented the concept plan and we had that storm water pond that's just in the South uh kind of middle South part of the site and just immediately west of the culdesac actually further south there you go that one uh that one was configured a little differently it was a little more oblong and it was smaller uh as we made it through concept plan we then had our Engineers do the storm water calculations to make sure that we're sizing our storm water correctly to take all the water from the site and be able to to to maintain the rate the quality and the volume just like we're required to by the rules so what you now see there is a pond that's actually been engineered and is correct in its configuration the reason why I bring that up is it makes it difficult to address one of the other uh staff recommendations which is to uh connect uh the Olsen property that's existing to uh an internal connection on that kisac it makes it impossible um the other thing that's complicated I heard the previous applicant talk about their engagement with the core of engineers um there is a ditch uh that runs kind of uh through that pond right in that general area that's being highlighted and that pond right now um does touch that ditch and so we're still negotiating the with the core to figure out what we can do there um but as it's designed it that General design isn't really going to change it might move a little bit to the East and in any case there's that ditch there that is most likely coregulated which is going to make it difficult for that driveway to come across anyways and and so we're asking that and Mr Olsen uh I just visited with him last week uh he he wants to maintain his access um and so we ask that that uh request also be honored to see get that I if we don't do anything different that property is probably never would be going to change and it's always going to be that way and he won't be able to a chance be able to sell that and put seven homes on or something like that or two homes on there it's going to be pretty low I think it's going to be low because uh there is a portion of the ditch that is actually not on our site or in the storm water Pond and that's going to affect the buildability in that northeast corner of the Olsen property anyways um to say that it it would be implausible I I couldn't tell you that I he need to share a driveway and yeah I don't see that be very tough I just want to make sure he understands that if there's no other access to that property he's them limited to right okay yeah um you okay for questions though yeah um the access to um uh East French leag is that are you planning on having that a divided uh what kind of access is div he doesn't want one at all um doesn't it's it's a it's proposed to be a full access it it could conceivably be perhaps a right in right out yeah and that's not what I was getting at the staff was proposing that it get a um Center Island a center Island yeah oh I'm sorry you're talking about the cuac nope oh right there yeah the so in sta median so staff recommendation is to have a center Island similar to the the next Street North here I misunderstood that oh I thought perhaps you were talking about putting a something decorative in the the middle also in there yeah okay um what do you have for you have enough RightWay to do that I'm I don't know for certain I'm inclined to say no I thought when we originally looked at this we were going to have access onto uh FR East French from uh in the uh gas line area that we talked about that south of the gas line we talked about that was part of I know that was part of the recommendation from the Planning Commission the issue is there's not a lot of depth for the gas line to accommodate a change in grade but as far as far as an emergency vehicle coming into that development if so we prefer one not if in your opinion Gary yeah mayor members of council I I have no issue the more access for me the better honestly um one other thing too briefly on the center Island uh Chief Anga and I would prefer not to have that Center Island on that just from accessibility for us or parking you talking about in the uh the in the entrance the entrance oh I'm guessing the CU act too cuz if it's anything like the other cues act just to the west of the head you can barely get around there with one vehicle with the I could have a I bet you have a heck of a time getting a fire trucker around that called theck cuz they feel you guys fill it in and it's so that road is so skinny right there that I think you'd really struggle I don't know I'd rather not have anything in the cuac it's going to be as tight as the one is to the west of it that one's really tight y so so Gary are you referring to the median on the north entrance there yeah yeah we would prefer yeah not to have uh Center Island if you will because a chiefing go would end up with a parking complaints trying to get in and out we do this with a lot of our developments are you saying we we shouldn't be doing that the one that was installed um going into the other neighborhood we have had issues with homeowners parking alongside of it which obstructs traffic right in there um that's the only one that we've ever had issues with so that's the one north of this yep Lally okay mayor's members of C the reason why that has issues because the house is right on the center Island in other devel we squeezed in a med correct which is what we be doing here with that one yeah that's how much Frontage they have so I get it so people are yeah all right so next that one mhm um I would Nick the one in the C side again it doesn't look like it's much bigger than the other one and that other one is very hard to maneuver and a car without any there's no room to park on the street and get someone past it so you're saying the decorative Island within the clde yes okay all right cuz the one you're speaking of as on problem is they look nice but can I the other C SE we're talking about was undersized it's not to our normal City standard for some reason it got put in that way and it wasn't Court um the normal size ones are enough for those guys to get around but it also provides a lot of snow storage for public works so is this one undersized or normal sized this should be this should be normal sized we have a standard detail for these so okay my concern was just having been the other one and see how bad back in like 2020 we made that adjustment with the old Chief and uh Greg Cruz I believe brought that forward this undiz the C to sex that the dead ends should be called to sex for turn around for apparatuses oh me just yeah and then we ended up with yeah some houses where they got a C in they're Fring um okay so so we're okay with the well it's a question for the council I I think they look much better with the median with the center Island and if this is big enough to handle it I don't see any reason why not to then I'm okay with it but on this map it looks almost smaller than the other one so if it's drawn to a scale then that made me a little worried that it wasn't going to fit so goad so I'm trying to track because I think the cue sack one is not a concern for us to accommodate if that is pleasing to the council uh I do have concerns about the entrance because we didn't that's that's a new thing for us and we didn't evaluate that I think that would I'm guess squeeze us there not doing that I would I would forgo it think you're good there thank you the sorry Mr may go ahead but you're still okay with doing that entrance up there I would I would like that entrance to East French Lake Road I prefer the entrance be South and just make a fourway right there personally I think that makes way more sense the development when you say South are you referring to South of the pipeline to make that threeway into a four-way yep right there basically so that would lose he's going to lose he mhm he's probably losing two houses I think you l two two houses cuz with the r whatever you want to call it the r cut on the top if you made that into a bump B called the sack or whatever you want to call it you lose one lot you also lose one lot right there where your the cursor's at that would be a straight across you lose two lots two lots he's going to lose mhm which we originally talked about having it right in the pipeline ement now we're saying that doesn't work we cannot we did we did contact the pipeline and we aren't able to put it there based on the depth of the pipeline at that spot we did conure them and they the answer was we would be able to do it there right there was also a concern if you if you made it of of an intersection there that cars had just shoot through to get to the to the old I existing I guess I'm I'm fine with where it is I'm okay with where it is I think we should have one there though on that on that road someplace I agree with that 100% so what from the council's perspective because I may or may not agree with that I want to know why we think that and I'm more on the engineering side of things because um why do we think it's needed on this if this came in as a third addition to the previous development you wouldn't have had an access so that's why I'm asking the question wow because an emergency vehicle coming all the way around there it's going to take another what 3 four minutes to get there and we're talking about 3 4 minutes is a uh the difference between life and death okay my reason I don't disagree with that either but the reason I I would add to that is because if this was being built all in one phase how long has this been since we finished the last Phase 5 21 22 yeah so what's going to happen is going be bajillion construction vehicles coming through there and so this allows them as they've got one in and one out the construction vehicles have no reason in my mind to go through the existing neighborhood at all and they can build it without that and knowing that as we learned a semi- trck full of lumber is equivalent of 177,000 Vehicles driving down that road that's a lot of we and tear on existing roads and so I'd rather they use the roads that are not completely finished to do that sure so if it's a if you'd rather have a temporary access that goes away and Chief's fine with it sure but I I think it makes sense and the expectation from my side so that the Builder is aware as that the construction vehicles will not be using the current entrances to go in or out of the the development as it exists today yeah may I speak to that real briefly Mr Mayor um it's common for us what because it's obviously causes us heartburn too when that happens because we get the complaints and we want to make sure that we're we're keeping as many people happy as possible so what we'll what we would do is create a a map that would that we would share with all of our vendors and it would you know we would say this is your construction run yeah and and in a preon meeting make that very clear we try to do that on all of our projects because the the concern is universal good perfect and I hope that when if it doesn't get followed and someone decides not to follow the plan that they reach out to the cities the city can take the steps needed to reach out to you in that you absolutely the other period of time do you anticipate that this neighborhood takes to build out um you know it's it would develop uh we'd close on it this first quarter most likely first or second quarter of this year do the roads and utilities the remainder of the Year build the model homes for sale in 26 and I I'm guessing 18 months 20 months L than year have it all built y bought out I should say at that point yep the other question we got a lot from the residents is what steps you going to take to keep the existing trees kind of on the border of the current proper the current development and the new develop um you know one of the exercises we're going through is uh in order to comply with the code we're trying to keep as many Lots as possible right at that 62 cuz feet wide that gets us the 7 and 1 half side yard setbacks if we have any that are 62.5 or 63 or 64 we then have to go to a larger side yard setback that doesn't work for us so what I told my engineer we're going to do is we're going to make those adjustments I think what that will do uh is slide we'll be able to slide some of those lots and create a little extra space there between the existing and and our proposed and we we can we should be able to vegetate that or landscape that if there's a desired buffer there okay and then is there enough space up I so you get the Tot Lot which is good cuz there's one a block away from there but um you're think a pickleball court I right props you put in there are you able to fit like a pickle ball court court and a half basketball court in there I think a pickleball court hits a a unique A specific group of people you need a specific group of people I think a basketball court hits a specific group of people I see a lot more kids on basketball courts and I see a lot more adults on pickle ball courts and not that there's anything wrong with that but you've got a Tot Lot which is you know young and then you've got a pickle ball court appearing you're missing that core middle years I think a basketball court would help hit that and I think based upon everything a scale there's room in there to also get a basket half not a half basketball court up there for some kids to play sport court um I Mr Mayor uh to the question I I think what I would say is yeah we could we could look at doing that if I could also get a a credit for that additional cost against the park dedication fees that we're paying is that going to be a city park or is that going to be a it would be an HOA maintained Park that would be I mean cuz that pickle ball court that area would be HOA maintained and you're looking for a credit for the additional cost past the pickle ball court uh the pickle ball court is is our expense uh if we're going to add another amenity that we weren't expecting I guess I would just ask for that consideration I think we're right now we're budgeted at paying another $188,000 in park fees among past the trails we're putting in and the pickle ball court um so I would just ask for that consideration if we were going to add an amenity do you remember the price approximately when we priced out with a half I don't have my notes at home there I have written on a piece of paper I don't have it with me when we looked at it recently was it like 60 Grand I think half basketball court it wasn't over the top I think it came in around 58,000 thank you yeah 50 is what we see I'd be preferential to that then you get a full wide of range of outdoor amenities for people it makes sense yeah we done that in the past given credit for an ho Park as opposed to a public park it's weird not normally yeah we can't but we hav't we hav't in the past the other option is pick one or the other I'll say the other option is you place it in such a way you can get both on there and then if the HOA wants to add it later they could come and add it later correct they could use HOA and pay for it themselves if they decid they wanted to have basketball court there for 50 Grand they could do it as long I would just say at least leave the space if nothing else so that both can fit there okay and yeah map it out and show that they'll both fit there and then that works if they want it they can easily add it that works or you put a hoop next to the pickle ball court that's if that's what they what they to do then they can do that too Google search brings up quite a bit of I'm okay with that too if the wants that's a better idea if the wants to manage it then let them manage it okay thank you for that I have a question just for the council is there a trail proposal on the south side of that development being constructed or just easement there's or neither so on the pl I think on the planet it's neither um this is intended to be a a Three Rivers Park District Regional Trail um so I think we need to have more discussion of how that fits within the grading uh there's a condition of of approval of connecting this I can't remember if this is a sidewalker trail that goes north south to the entrance on off the map here on a territorial Trail so that goes beyond the project but does connect one sidewalk to another corre and so I was just going to ask about that one of the staff recommendations number two is a 35 ft landscape offer along there yes so um in the comprehensive plan this is guided or identified as a I think I wrote it as a collector it is not today but it's guided to be a collector uh the attent is to have a landscape buffer along collector roads okay but what does that do with uh well it's challenging is we have a wetland that's in there so I guess the thought is as to have that storm upon as much as practical of having that 35 ft uh buffer area so as you see a lot of developments and I use Sund as an example you're going to have a a landscape buffer along ma roadway so that you're not seeing the development so much that was part of the conversation when we had workshops of what M State and Rural it's hiding the development so you want to put a bunch of trees and stuff in that 35 ft there's not allow within the 35 ft or within the 35 ft so so that's a bad intersection to begin with do we want to cram a bunch of trees in there I don't think so um I don't think so either I'd rather have I I don't know maybe it's just me but i' rather have the wide open the line of sight to that intersection than have a bunch of trees crammed in there so you can't see what's coming sure and that's the whole corri I agree with well yeah um what's the 35 foot do to the the pond as it sits I think the pond would be within that 35 foot EAS so you're just going to have a whole hold to look through there's only so many places to put the pot yep no I get that but there's going to be a whole wow how does that easement impact the existing homeowner um I couldn't tell you from the scale of where 35 ft is w uh I mean there is some area you know along here I I couldn't tell you if this is 35 ft or not I think we can just put an easement on his property so I mean we should so when we talk about his property he is part of the development not this this piece is this is yeah um how's that work well lot it's got a lot and block number oh I I Mr Mayor I I think what I would suggest is Mr Olson's retaining ownership of just a smaller portion of the land that he owns um so so trying trying to add in a um a buffer and a trail that would also go across his property is not something I have control over as the developer um I believe we did leave space though for the Three Rivers Trail future Trail um we we I would struggle to see how we make that connection across Mr Olsen's property which we don't control and then across um south of territorial Trail our original conversations about that trail always um were from the perspective of providing space for it but that Three Rivers would build it at some point when they they determined to do that so it wouldn't be a city expense but it wasn't ant anticipated as as a development expense so in and the intent if the developer builds it the intent would be that they would Pro be provided credit towards Trail fees I don't know for for me I would leave it as the you know allowing access for the trail and not deal no no buffer they don't know that it accomplishes very much right yeah mayor I think we should at least get the easement from the property so we have that in the future well for the trail for the trail the property he controls corre Mr not so this is still part of the development how can it be it's it's not beert there's three lots that are part of this development so this this is Mr Olsen's property is part of the development it'll be a platted lot within it we've had s um final name was what Edgewater I own Gardens had the same or some of them became this actually the the py development immediately West uh territorial Trail had the same situation on one of the stub roads so it's a larger lot that will just be whittel down if you will and and become a smaller pled lot um I was just going to make mention that there is additional RightWay being dedicated along both roadways that do accommodate Trail within the RightWay the the extent of both both legs that's on Mr Olson's property as well right so it' be across his as well so there's an additional we would need additional eement there should not be an additional eement there should be enough room in the RightWay oh similar to the trail that was my concern they yeah I just don't I mean if we go to him and say by the way we're taking an Ebro you I appre sure'd say I don't think so okay but we're coming with with the right away um so for for my clarity if I can just summarize things the council is supportive of the street as it is shown so with this full access and no Island no correct within this um what else the council is supportive of not requiring a landscape buffer along East territorial correct correct um the trail I guess the question of do you do you want the developer to build this connection now or wait till Three Rivers connect wait till Three Rivers I only have one question on that so there's going to just so I understand there's going to be a path that goes down French Lake Road East yep it's just going to go nowhere correct where if we have them completed over then it connects to this then it connects to the other Trails cuz we try to avoid dead end Trails just like we you know that's a in our trail system we try to avoid dead end trails and so we'll be intentionally creating a dead end Trail then where if we haveen him put the trail in he gets the the credits back for the yeah Trail the credit makes sense but east of yeah that where you uh go west from there on to the the territorial Trail yeah is there's not a trail well who's going to build that trail who's going to build that uh so the developer would it's an offsite Improvement but again the intent would be to to provide credit towards the trail dation okay so okay it doesn't really cost him any extra money because it's going to all be covered by TR it's not Financial impact the Builder but then we don't have a dead end trail that ends on territorial which would be a bad place for dead end trail with it now yeah no I understand um so there's a trail already on the west Edge there's a trail on the right there there's an easan here this is where they're talking about right here Scott yeah there there a sidewalk that runs currently territorial Trail complete this Loop and go to there yeah mayor M there is a trail that currently exists on territorial Trail on the the east side of the road that is currently just dead ended right into territorial Ro no I think it it makes sense I would agree with that but there's nothing on the east side of East French Lake Road there will be there will be on the west side of East French Lake Side yes there will be as part of this development yes there will be a trail done all the way down to the edge or to the intersection of East French Lake Road and Territorial Road that is correct okay is the council supportive of that if we yeah he just get credits to The and there's enough credits there right and giving credit for completing the trail saying yeah I think so okay yeah and then last question I have is on uh the should there be an island within the Colac so this is I'm going to call it a standard culdesac bulb versus what we have in territorial Trails is more of an eye drop it's probably kind is prer tear teop an island tear drop ey drop I just want to make sure there's enough room for a vehicle to park there and people to get around cuz the other one does not have it the one on the north side of the project does it does okay there was two two there was two called The Sex builds in that development one was to spec one was not quite to spec can we go back one item real quick so the the trail that'll be built to three rers Park standard so that way we can go back to them and get refunded because they'll take it over like always I'm guessing yep okay perfect thank you so it won't cost us anything either true yep John I did have a few more questions about this about these recommendations I don't know if you were going to um so four we were already chocked right four was splitting that into three lots yes yep and then I was confused about uh five that lot um it looks like I it looks is it just drawn in correctly the setback or what um yeah so in the R3 district for lots that are greater than 65 ft wide there's a 10t sidey yard setback if it's less than 65 then it's 7 1/2 ft so the plat is drawn um showing all 7 and 1/2 foot okay I think the developer has looked at it and can accommodate it um one more question I add in this was getting back to one of the letters that the resident sent in um and this isn't just limited to this one but we we do occasionally get these outlots and they become weed patches um how do we and I know a few of these Outlets we've sold to Neighbors which works out well because now they can deal with it um do we have a lot of it's particularly over the pipeline in this case correct m a lot of it is yeah and so do they become weeds SL wildf flowers or what what well it I'm going to say different people are going to have different opinions do you want a pristine Golf Course lawn or do you want uh everything to be left down wild well yeah my concern is it becomes really neither it becomes this this end up overing The Path garbage yeah mayor m c the uh the territorial Trail development has it maintained by the HOA mhm okay the HOA maintain so then up to the residence it's up to the residents to maintain that area so we would just that my assumption would be the same thing on this development would be the HOA would then maintain those areas that are over the gas l no different than um in the territorial but wasn't the letter basically saying that the quality that they received it in was never to a quality that the uation was used to in the first place and so they've been stuck paying a lot of money fixing something that was never taken care of in the first place I did not receive the letter I think that's what I got from the letter was like we spent tens of thousand trying to fix what py left us and it was not good so please don't let it happen again can I speak to that yes um so I if our vpa development was here he'd speak to this a little more eloquently but I had uh followed up with him on that and I think to John's point there are are kind of differing views on what is uh left in appropriate condition uh one of the things we talked about you know the gas main easement is something that we have some challenges there we can't do plantings we have to minimize how many utilities are are on there and what kind of intrusions we would we would probably though uh seek to get the gas Meine companies permission to do like a native plant seaing for that so at least it would be native plants that would grow which is my understanding is what was done with the easement in territorial Trail some people see that is visually pleasing some people don't and so there I think were some differences of opinions but there were many attempts made to try to um appease concerns and I know some of those folks never felt satisfied well I I we can tell you from experience because the city's been trying to convert a park over to Native planting and it has not gone well for us and we are constantly maintaining it so my question is is is that the right fit knowing the pains that go along with that um and I wish someone from the neighborhood was here to it but I think before the final we should get some hopefully some input for them if we can cuz if we can if they'd rather see it SED and they're going to maintain it and water it then maybe that's the correct route I don't know what the correct route is but we've tried Marty for how long to get Le's Park to look nice and every time I drive by there it just looks like no offense dirt yeah I me leather's park has been a 2-year thing it's going to get receded next year so the the thing with a lot of these out Lots is I'll just say from my experience is they get they get um seeded um for vegetation but they're not seeded with a seed mix they just got Ry grass in them and so a lot of that time that doesn't happen and it doesn't grow in and so that's where I I personally see it on a lot of different things that's where the issue is um okay and it could come down to the city being more stringent with landscape inspections which we haven't been able to do before um until this last year cuz we haven't had anybody to do those properly sure okay well I'm out of questions I don't have anymore anybody else have anything okay I need a motion in a second so uh you've already got the exceptions to yes we're we're removing on the prelimary plat resolution we're removing items 2 47 No 2 four and 7 uh um I'm looking at that so I'm looking at the staff recommendation page 256 okay I I'm looking at the resolution of 2 268 269 oh so I think we would remove one remove two from your staff recommendations keep three remove four keep five and keep six so that's at the culdesac islands yeah I think that's right revised lot four block five and 3 Park District Regional Trail along the south side of the development we would remove the ghost plaing the 35t land landscape buffer and remove we would remove removing 111 avue yes along with the a median part of it yeah okay okay I'll make a motion to approve based on the condition based on all them condition all that stuff I'll second any more discussion all those in favor say I I I all those oppos say no mo carries 5 to zero thank you Mr Mayor thank you Council thank you appreciate you all right all right let's beat this next one for a half hour um which one so we're skipping over P yeah whatever You' like to do Council by P is essentially just the continuation of the work discuss if you guys need more time to discuss that's why I put it on the agenda if you don't need any more and you're good to go and you're okay with the 425 with the cuts we're moving forward well I think the majority of I think so we're good okay yeah I I just don't want to get to December 10th provide this giant presentation and then you're like I don't like any of this stuff and now we're back at SCB so well I'll just let you know now I don't think the 425 is I think the the the so again are we going to open this up I go ahead all we're approving is cim the 425 right when we're in Green Space when the conversation had to cut the 425 and based on the cuts that we talked about today I'm okay with that us as it stands today but we haven't hashed us how we're going to spend the 425 or the the remaining money which I think probably is going to be a discussion unto itself but the question is what do we want to achieve tonight cuz if it's just to approve what to cut then I think we're there mayor and members of council I need to have clear direction for what you need in December 10th so I need everything that you need yep and so a portion of it is what we expected what we needed to cut to get to the tax rate that was you know desired by the council other part is are you okay with everything that's currently in the budget if not let's please have a discussion on it so we have clear Direction so that when I provide a TNT presentation on December 10th in two weeks it gets approved it's approved and not just voted on or yeah at least voted on otherwise we are going to be meeting on Christmas Eve or some other date after that so with what we just discussed at the orc session are you you good with it I'm kind with it you I don't have any we don't have any choice really I mean do have Choice well yeah kind of I mean I think that 425 works okay um that's what all I can say about it okay I just I've had a problem with the the Capital Equipment number the equipment is the issue that's the main issue I mean but I think that's another conversation I mean do you I don't have any problem with his mower he's got to have a mower the the backod deal I don't like it I mean cuz we're not trying anything different it's always this is what I want I mean and I'm not I would argue on that one Scott cuz we wanted to some larger piece of equipment that had a lot more snowblower and whatever else and we said okay I think we can live I think we can live with something smaller we figured if we could trade something in can we did it so it's not just staff saying No this what we're getting that's it but um we are trying to work with console and understand that dollars are you know they're all around us just trying to figure out what works and I'm just trying to see if we got three here oh there's three okay I'm sure three I don't know I got one I got one I got two and then where where you at where am I at well with the 425 and with the arrangements that were I yeah you know I have said enough times I have reservations around adding firefighters this next year I think that I'm you know talking to the wall on that one so I'm going to move past it um and and the the 425 I guess we still are you know it gets us a gets us 50 um and we are still putting something forward toward the lad truck which was kind of my mental condition around going from the 14 to the 16% when we originally talked about it um I don't you know we're not going quite 2% that would have to be what 150 8,000 to get that but um so I think in the in terms of compromising I've gone pretty far and I I will live with this can I ask what's included what's left after we've cut the 425 mean what's so someone's going to motion something right that we cut the things we talked about but as far as I see it I just want to show on the same page that includes the two full-timers and the $3 an hour does not I okay I'm okay with that don't budge off of that so I don't I just think it's has changed since April then I'll motion that we approve with the cuts that we we need a motion we need no I I don't need a motion I just need to make Direction I just want good so that I'm good with we where we left it you got at least three votes okay wonderful sounds great anything else you knew that before the meeting even started but I did not I'll I'll be honest with you I came into the meeting and I had um probably two votes for one two votes for other two votes for one something else two votes for this and I did not have a majority vote CU so right now we're at 11.24% correct that is correct yep with the $425,000 wor the cuts that we discussed tonight that's correct that's certainly than 16 so we have to go back to the two items removed right yes we have item C and item J can we do we do them together or separate I don't know Jay came out of here I don't remember I would I would recommend passing them um individual individually okay so item C uh approval purchase loader and Tor grounds Master equipment and that's in the budget that we just talked about corre longterm plan that is correct so we can either talk about it or get a motion and uh all motion I'll second approve okay Matt second is okay discussion all right all those in favor say I I say I just to get it over with all those opposed say no noted for the rec that's 5 Z and item J need a motion a second on that one go ahead you same to do it I'll motion you're going to do it anyway approve okay I need a second a second all right discussion this is with the uh safety dollars right this deal may members of council this is not this is um a reduction on the $450,000 rescue that should have been purchased so I took the $450,000 and reduced it to 200,000 ,000 for a rescue that is being taken out of the public safety dollars and this 100,000 um which is a grass truck is been budgeted from the capital Improvement the the vehicle that this goes on is already ordered is that correct we have that vehicle here currently uh Council M Shan we have that vehicle here already Yes you approved that uh couple cons two F350s trucks get order so if it's already here why is it on here the vehicle here the vehicle's here the skids this is the order the basically to put the piece of Machinery in it into the pump guesss and service once you started you got to finish it I guess so yeah pretty much okay we knew that to be from the day one all right no more discussion all those in favor say I I all those opposed say no carries 5 to zero okay with that if there are no objections we will be adjourned I'm ready for bed I am ready for we are adjourned hot e e