Good evening. Tonight is Monday, April 13th. This is a regular meeting of the Minnetonka City Council. I'm going to I'll call this meeting to order. Those of you who are able, please stand and join us for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance 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. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Faster Bolton. Here. Maxwell. Here. Wilbur. Here. Calvert. Here. Ramelli. Here. Coakley. Shack. Here. All right. Uh we have approval of the agenda item four. Mr. Funk. Uh thank you, Mayor. Good evening, council members. Two items for your consideration for the agenda this evening. The first one is related to item 11A, agreement with the Metropolitan Council for the Dominic Drive Freight Rail Crossing. There's an agreement that was inadvertently left out of the original distribution of the packet, so that agreement is there for your purview. Uh and then also there's some additional background information regarding this item also has been added. And then the second item for your consideration is related to item 14C, which is a conditional use permit for licensed retail care facilities at 2000 Hopkins Crossroads. Neighborhood feedback was received after publication of the report, and that feedback has been added for your consideration. With that, Mayor and Council, the recommended action is to motion to approve the agenda as amended. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Funk. Council? Uh Council member Faster Bolton. >> I'll make the motion to approve the agenda as amended. And Council member Calvert. I'll second. Thank you. I have a motion by Council member Faster Bolton, a second by Council member Calvert. Miss Larson, please call roll. Faster Bolton. Yes. Maxwell. Yes. Wilbern. Yes. Calvert. Yes. Ramaley. Yes. Shack. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. So, we've got a few special matters tonight, and before um we get on to those, I just want to remind folks Oh, excuse me. I'm I'm so excited for the special matters. I which I really am, sincerely. I jumped the gun a little bit. We have first, item five, which is approval of minutes. We have one set of minutes, uh 5A, the March 23rd, 2026 regular meeting minutes. Council? Council member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. I move approval of the March 23rd, 2026 regular meeting minutes. Thank you and a second. Council member Wilbern. >> Second. Thank you. I have a motion by Council member Calvert, a second by Council member Wilbern. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Faster Bolton. Yes. Maxwell. Yes. Wilbern. Yes. Calvert. Yes. Remaley. Yes. Shaq. Yes. Motion carries. All right. Um get now for special matters. And before we do that, just a reminder, if anybody's here on item seven or regarding anything in item 13, that they should which are which is our public hearings. Um we have cards out in the lobby for you to sign up to speak. And regarding item um eight, those items we limit this uh conversation to 3 minutes, not conversation, the the um comments to 3 minutes. So, go ahead and fill those out if you would like to speak at tonight's meeting on either of those items. All right, special matters. So, we're going to do a couple things first and then we'll get to the highlights. So, first up, we have uh 6A, which is the Arab American Heritage Month proclamation. And I believe I have asked Council member Remaley to read that one. Thank you, Mayor. Um whereas Arab Arab American Heritage Month was first recognized at the national level in April 2021, marking an historic acknowledgement of the contributions and presence of Arab Americans across the United States. And whereas Arab Americans have been an integral part of the American story, contributing richly to our nation's history, culture, economy, and public life through achievements in medicine, law, business, education, technology, government, the arts, and more. And whereas Arab Americans have often faced discrimination, bias, and stereotyping, yet they continue to build strong communities, engage in public service, and advocate for justice, equity, and inclusion. And whereas the American Arab American community is composed of a diverse group of individuals representing a variety of cultural traditions, religious beliefs, and national backgrounds. And whereas Arab American Heritage Month is an opportunity to celebrate the history, contributions, resilience, and rich cultural traditions of Arab Americans and to foster deeper understanding and unity among all residents of Minnetonka. And whereas recognizing Arab American Heritage Month reaffirms our shared commitment to diversity, equity, and the full inclusion of all communities in our civic life. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Minnetonka City Council does hereby declare the month of April as Arab American Heritage Month in the City of Minnetonka. Thank you, Council Member Haley. And uh our next item is 6B, which is the Earth Day proclamation. And I have asked Council Member Calvert to read that cuz Earth Day is a very special day for her. So, she gets first dibs on that one. It's my Earth Day is my uh wedding anniversary. So, um thank you for letting me read this one and I just want to say um in celebration of Earth Day, seeing the many people in the audience that are here for our sustainability awards, literally warms my heart. So, thank you for coming in for all you're doing in our community to make the world a better place. Whereas Earth Day, established in 1970, constitutes an opportunity for environmental stewardship commitments, sustainability efforts, and a commitment to an Earth Day proclamation. And whereas the official 2026 Earth Day theme is Our Power, our planet, which is a commitment to stewardship, resilience, and shared accountability. It invites every individual, community, and sector to exercise their power in service of the planet we all depend on. Whereas environmental progress is sustained by the daily decisions of communities, educators, workers, innovators, and families who understand that protecting the places they live and work is both a responsibility and a long-term investment. Whereas the global community faces extraordinary environmental challenges such as climate change, global health issues, food and water shortages, degradation of ecosystems, inequity, and poverty, and whereas all people regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, income, occupation, age, country of origin, or geography have a right to a safe, healthy, sustainable environment with economic opportunities, and whereas it is known that the citizens, businesses, and organizations of the global community continue implementing solutions that strengthen energy reliability, conserve resources, and improve climate resilience. And now, therefore, be it resolved the city The Minnetonka City Council hereby pledges this Earth Day, Tuesday, April 22nd, 2026 to continue prioritizing environmental stewardship through strategic initiatives in Minnetonka, Minnesota, and to empower all community members to individually participate. Thank you, Council Member Kever. And then finally, and and continuing in that spirit, we have the Arbor Day proclamation, which I've asked Council Member Maxwell to please read. Councilmember Maxwell. Thank you, Mayor. Whereas our trees and forests brighten Minnetonka's future by creating jobs, providing areas for quiet contemplation, increasing property values, and making our city more livable. And whereas our trees and forests enrich society by building strong community ties, reducing crime, providing common meeting spaces, and places to recreate. And whereas our trees and forests strengthen our lives by providing lumber for building homes, fiber for producing paper, foliage for decorating, and food for eating. And whereas our trees and forests enhance our environment by moderating climate, improving air and water quality, conserving water and energy, sheltering wildlife, and benefiting pollinators. And whereas each year on the last Friday in April, volunteers and city staff plant trees to invigorate our community and all the natural resources they represent, and dedicate themselves to the continued health of our city's urban and community forest. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Minnetonka City Council hereby proclaims Friday, April 24th, 2026 as Arbor Day, and the month of May as Arbor Month in the city of Minnetonka. Thank you, Councilmember Maxwell. All right, moving on to 6D, which is the reason so many of you are here and the reason we're just so proud. So, we are going to present plaques to the Sustainable Minnetonka Award winners, and I want to thank um the Sustainability Commission, and we've got our chair and our vice chair here, Brian and Ashley. So happy to have them. And we're going to talk about these um wonderful nominees and then ultimately the the the award winners um here and I think I have control of this PowerPoint so I'm going to try to juggle this year. So, first um we have so this program began in 2022 and with the idea with the help of our sustainability commission the awards that uh projects in the Minnetonka community that promote resilience by mitigating and adapting to Minnesota's changing climate, protect and enhance natural environment, and to promote adoption of sustainability and conservation best practices. So, we're taking time to um highlight some of the great large-scale projects and the smaller scale uh commitments that have been taken on in this community by volunteers and share the success stories. What I will say is since 2022 this is really uh blossomed this program. So, it's very cool to see so many people nominated and interested and I'm sure it's very heartening to the St. Sustainability Commission although probably harder to make uh decide on the winners but that's a good problem to have. So, in 2026 we had 17 applicants on in the following categories: energy, waste reduction, landscape, water, young adult 16 to 25, and then a new category youth under 16 years old. And so that was a fun thing to get some of these younger uh folks nominated. So, on March 17th the Sustainability Commission revealed the projects and voted for a uh nominee and special recognition recipients. Tonight we'll uh present the nominee and special recognition awards to the 2026 applicants. So, applicants will have you um walk up to collect your award after your project has been announced. And our sustainability commissioners here will help get those to you. And um then we'll because we have so many great projects, we're going to hold applause until the end. I know that might be hard, but we're going to try our best. All right. So, in the energy award category, our uh nominated award, congratulations to Vail Apartments, they installed 10 electric vehicle charging stations at their multi-family property. Uh congratulations to the Ridgedale Regional Center, Hennepin County. Uh they installed 309 kilowatts of solar. That's 562 solar panels at Ridgedale Regional Center. And congratulations to Peter Lund and Jean Samuelson, who installed solar panels and a dual-fuel air-source heat pump in their home. And they're not able to be here tonight. And congratulations to um Jim and Ann Koloidas, who installed a dual-fuel air-source heat pump and subscribed to community solar credits. And another one in the energy category, congratulations to Eric and Katie Winter, who installed dual thermal for heating and cooling and electric water heater. And the special recognition award goes to congratulations to Paul Stork and Sharon Papanik Stork who installed geothermal solar panels, solar tube lighting. They drive an electric vehicle and they winterize their home. I'm just going to highlight this bathroom photo here if you can see this. This is a solar light that they've I can't pretend to know how it works, but I thought it was a very cool to read about. So, congratulations to those folks. Here's what we're going to do. We'll take a pause on that court category. Well done. All right, moving on to the waste reduction awards category. And waste reduction okay, the special recognition award winner goes to Abbott Monadnock Campus increased waste diversion from landfill from 45% in 2018 to 89% in 2025 through recycling collection and education efforts. So, that makes a big difference and such an inspiration. So, well done. I That's the special RECOGNITION AWARD. YEAH. SO, I I REALLY LIKE THAT THAT UM this can really inspire other businesses in the community. So, hopefully All right. Uh-oh, we got a second special recognition award. Julie, you were right. Okay, um congratulations. This is also very very cool project. Residents of Ridgepoint, a group of Ridgepoint residents weave plastic bags into sleeping mats for people experiencing homelessness. Over 17,000 plastic bags have been repurposed and just hold that mad up there. So excellent in this group is yeah. This is a real team effort. So congratulations to the Ridge Point folks. Yes. Mayor All right. Mayor if I may if if the Ridge Point residents can just raise their hands of who's all here cuz it's quite a big group that represents Ridge Point. Very cool. Um the landscape awards category. These ones are the the visually really interesting ones. Okay. So nominee award, congratulations to um to Catherine Melchity and David Engelstead who improved landscaping and storm water capture by installing permeable pavement and storm water swale and native pollinator habitat with over 450 native species. They're unable to be here tonight. Uh the next landscaping category. This is the special recognition award goes to Peter and Melissa Gausman. And they converted all their turf grass into native landscaping since 2020. They planted over 120 native species and used locally made mulch from public works and I believe I had the pleasure of seeing this property in the fall and it is really inspiring. Very cool. So we'll give them a round of applause. If you have an opportunity to see this one, I highly recommend it. All right. Water Awards category. Op, I'm stuck. Oh, here we go. Okay. Um the first nominee award goes to Waters Edge Homeowners Association. They united the entire association to fully restore their shoreline by removing buckthorn, installing shoreline buffers, and plantings of over 3,000 native plants. So, take a look at that. Well done. Um If there's folks here come and and get your award. Our next uh water nominee award uh category award uh congratulations to Andrew Schneider and Lauren Debauch. They installed rain garden for stormwater infiltrating infiltration and planted over 85 native plants. And we have a uh nominee award in this category to Sandy and Mike Rosewald who installed a native shoreline buffer along their property to repair an eroding shoreline and planted over 900 native plants. Look at that. Another These ones are just beautiful all of you. Well done. All right. And the special recognition award goes to the Glenn Atrium Condominium Association. Association members repaired their pond's shoreline by removing buckthorn, installing a shoreline buffer, and restoring the area to mult multi-use park-like oasis for the association members and neighbors. They installed over 400 native plants and a project education plat plaque. Well done. Look at that. Wow. I know we have a big group here, so come on up and get your award or or if you prefer just raise your hand and show that you're part of that group. Well done, folks. And not to diminish the um the hard work of all these adults, but the really cool thing is to see the inspired young people as well. We'll let this them get this photo here. Thank you. Um so we have our first our young adult category. And the special recognition award goes to the Vantage program, the Dem-Con team. They collaborated with Dem-Con to complete a research project analyzing the feasibility of recycling polycoated fiber PCF packaging in the United States. So this is a very cool project. Well done. All right. And now to the youth awards category. So we've got a couple youth awards. We've got two We've got a special recognition award for Shu Peng. Shu is a third grader in Minnetonka, and he researched how ice rinks use energy and water and wrote a paper about that. He created a tri-board to teach students and families about hockey's environmental impact and ideas to make hockey more sustainable. So look at that cool thing. Well done, Shu. We're really proud to have you here and thanks for doing that project. And I bet you our our public works people might zoom in on your papers there. All right. And we have another very impressive special recognition award. This goes to Winston Hagg. Winston, a Minnetonka student, adopted eight local storm drains. He clears leaves, grass clippings, litter, and fine sediment from the drains. And he's been doing this since 2022. And he's completed uh his full cleanup route over 18 times. And he often, and look at his sib- siblings are here with him. They And his friends, he brings them along. Um and he also shares what he's doing with curious neighbors and classmates. So, hopefully inspiring other people to adopt the drain. So, well done, Winston. And And thanks to his siblings, too. But, you know, you can share all the glory tonight. So, again, you know, this is so it's so inspiring, really. I I think it's might sound trite cuz I've said it a lot, but it really does um inspire me and I think all my colleagues and everybody here to do a little bit that they can. Um and as the awards just get bigger and bigger every year, I think it's having the impact that we intended. So, thank you all. All right. And you're you're free to stick around, but we also know that you probably aren't interested in doing that. So, we'll just take this a minute to let folks exit. >> want any pictures with the awards, Mayor, they can gather where they were in the back room. >> Yes, and you can go back to that back room if you want photos. Thank you. Okay, we will keep moving it once my Mr. Funk gets back to a seat cuz he's next up. All right, item seven is reports from city manager and council members, Mr. Funk. City of Minnetonka is a Tree City USA City for the 32nd year in a row. So, really good congratulations to the city and all of our efforts. And in that same vein, the city annual tree sale is occurring, and that will start on May 4th. And so, anyone that's interested in participating in our annual tree sale, that preview is live. So you can go to our website, see the variety of trees and get ready to to purchase those trees. This has been a long-standing practice and I think it goes to our city's natural resources. We've been talking about that tonight in our proclamations and just really us being a tree city and a tree canopy city. And it's always good to note that the city of Minnetonka, we plant more trees every year than that comes out in the city. And so we're always trying to grow our tree canopy. Um second then is uh spring's in the air and and maybe in the next half hour storms are going to be in the air, but certainly with spring in the air, uh our pickleball courts are opening up at Lone Lake Park. Our tennis nets are going up. Our ball fields are getting ready. So real shout out to our public works staff really getting all of our facilities ready for the spring activities and those summer activities. I'm going to switch gears then and recognize a couple of our uh staff members here at the city. Uh first our Minnetonka building official Dale Granberg. Uh council, I think you may be aware of this, but he was recently recognized by his appeers with an award for excellence by the state's association of building officials. Dale was recognized for his loyalty, dependability, and integrity. And quoted, according to the nomination, Dale's fierce loyalty shows in his positive relationships both internally and externally. Internally, his colleagues turn to him in difficult situations and ask for his advice in which he easily provides. He also is dedicated to being at work at all times, ready to answer anything that comes his way. Mr. Granberg also has helped oversee Minnetonka's largest construction period since the 1990s with thousands of new housing units, many office reuse facility projects, and extremely complex enforcement cases. This award also notes Dale's integrity, which he demonstrates every single day. His ability to get code compliance and not to alienate contractors is unmatched. Mr. Granberg wants and does his best to make sure those around him thrive. This is all done with his leadership. So, we congratulate Mr. Granberg for his award and it's well deserved. Next, I want to just recognize a couple of our staff members in natural resources who also recently completed their certifications. So, three of our natural resources staff research reached professional milestones. Ava Gorius and Tessa Lefley became certified arborists through the International Society of Arboriculture. And then our assistant city forester, Chloe Boneck, earned her certification urban forest professional credential, advancing toward board board certified master arborist. There's a lot of words in that. And then spring extravaganza, we haven't had a meeting for a couple weeks, but Easter was a couple weeks ago. Our park staff and rec staff hosted this event every year and this year we had more than 500 community members enjoy an egg scavenger hunt and all the festivities that goes along with that. So, we really appreciate our staff. One of our many fun outreach events that we've had and lots of great feedback on that as well. Uh second to last is then the Minnetonka Fire Department is hosting an event regarding sensory disorders with sense I'm sorry, with sensory disorders in mind. The fire station at that time will have no lights and no sirens and those that benefit from reduced noise, lower lighting and a calm environment are invited. We've been doing this now for a couple years and that event will be held on Saturday, April 18th from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at our central fire station right here in our city hall campus. A lot of fun things for young adults to enjoy such as our public safety vehicles, inflatable slides. Our firefighters, of course, will be around and lots of treats as well. And then last, I'm going to counselor, I'll turn your attention to our front row. We have some civil engineering students from the University of Minnesota here and I apologize I hopefully get your names correct. Riley Richland, Wesley Barnhart, Julia Peterson and Conrad Rodriguez are attending tonight. They're enrolled in a project management and engineering economics with their final project involving developing a report on a municipal project and they've chosen the city of Minnetonka. So they reached out working with Mr. Manchester and our staff and they're researching and evaluating our Minnetonka Boulevard trail. And so part of the research involves attending a council meeting and so they're here this night tonight to observe. So we welcome them and appreciate their attendance and working with our staff. So with that Mayor Council, I turn it back to you. Thank you, Mr. Funk. Council. All right. Well, it's been, you know, everybody it's been spring break and lots of meeting a little bit of a pause after a marathon first part of the year, that's for sure. So I think a welcome break for everybody. Um I just want to mention I just have one small thing I'd like to mention um and I it seems to just be more enhanced every day, but the work at Big Willow Park and um the Burwell House and the Gazebo area has been really remarkable. I think that is something that the community appreciates seeing some of the invasives removed and um making room for our our native trees that we're really trying to enhance and and keep healthy. So really impressed as we see that project come to fruition. So thank you, Mr. Manchester and your team. All right, without anything else we'll move on to item eight, which is citizens wishing to discuss matters not on the agenda and um I've got one card here. Miranda, there's no others is Oh. Uh couple here. I thought I saw some in your hand, so okay. Um so we will start with we're just going to go in order of I have them here, so we'll go first with Jonathan Kent, second with Nate Thornton, and third with Kevin Ringhofer. So Jonathan Kent, come on up and then I just a reminder you have 3 minutes. Hi, good evening mayor and uh council. Thanks for hearing me out. Um and my name is Jonathan. I live at 14513 Moonlight Hill Road. So I wanted to bring up um matter uh suggestion that I believe I made in a previous meeting and either way uh would like to uplift it and um for that matter have discussed it with other um fellow residents of the city who seem enthused by the idea, but basically um while uh city council meetings are great forum to learn about what's happening and there are resources online and we do have an avenue to have discussion. Um it's not really discussion, it's more of one-way communication and understand why uh that is in place. Um I'm calling on the council to host a town hall and to do so on um I'll say quarterly basis, at least yearly, maybe semi-annually. However you want to do it, having at least one and seeing how it goes might be a good place to start. And uh rational rationale for that being a case in point, if I ask you a question right here, you're not allowed to answer it. And if I say something you don't like, you can't respond to it or even if you like it, I have no idea of knowing that unless you follow up. And uh while there are telephones and email and ways of meeting up outside of this, I think in the spirit of building more community, especially in these times, having a town hall would be great. And I don't really see a reason why we shouldn't have one. So um I welcome hearing otherwise and this is not at all to um you know, tell the city how to manage its affairs, but more so to to expand upon and facilitate uh active dialogue. And then uh related to this point, as you've heard from uh several of us many times before, um with recent matters with Metro Surge, uh I think having a dedicated town hall or something similar that is almost solely devoted to that subject matter, I think would be very helpful. And uh in addition to sharing information, taking back uh directly feedback from others, and hopefully uh people beyond myself and others in the room who have spoken before. And with that, I'd like to add one suggestion of mine, um and I think there are others who uh might be interested in seeing this as well on the constituent side. Um with regard to Flock cameras in this city or the license uh plate readers, um I did a little bit of studying on the matter, and uh it's something that I um still need to learn a lot about. Uh and per public information, it looks like our city has about a dozen. And uh I am open to learning more as to their function. And then, as uh local news has reported in the Star Tribune, on Sailor and other places, many cities are discussing whether and how to use these cameras. Some are opting to rein in how they're used, uh es- especially given uh federal involvement and oversight. Um Flock claims that they're not uh working with ICE. And um I mean, I I think it's something that's worth looking into. And what I would quickly plug is I would love to hear from the police department uh how they're using the cameras, why, and what they're doing to assure that they're following and protecting following procedures and protecting our citizens. All right, thanks. Thank you, Mr. Kent. Nate Thornton. Hi, Nate Thornton. President Minnetonka, uh I'd like to second Jonathan's ask about the Flock cameras. Um I think that you've been made it very clear that ICE is here about the elections. Um our immigrant neighbors were just the start. And I know being bold is tough to do nowadays, but I think a small action, you know, disabling the cameras for 120 days uh the police chief has admitted that he doesn't know where the data goes. Uh these cameras are easily hackable. As a software engineer, I've looked into this and can confirm that basically anyone, even though the feds have $75 million, basically anyone can start profiling us. So, simple as um perhaps a recess session topic, have the police chief look at it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thornton. And uh Kevin Ringhofer. Somebody have their microphone on back there? Is that better? Oop. Okay. All right. If we need to walk them, all right. Thank you, Mayor and Council, for the opportunity to address you. Um I would like to talk a little bit more on a provide an update on uh extending the pre-eviction notice. Uh I've been kind of trying to gather more information about it. Um got another report that uh to get rental assistance took like 2 and 1/2 weeks, and that was a group that apparently was working directly with his house, and it still took 2 and 1/2 weeks for them to get their um their rental assistance. Uh learning some other nuances about um about eviction. Uh it seems like people have a connection with mutual aid groups, and they're kind of going to the mutual aid groups first in order to get um in order to get their assistance. But, a couple other things might be happening. Uh renters may be actually vacating their apartment and avoiding the eviction proceedings. Um and actually some organizations are even recommending that, that they leave versus going through the eviction proceedings. Not only because it's costly and complicated, but if evicted it may be very difficult to get another place. And so vacating seems to be the lesser of two evils. I extending the pre-eviction notice could help that allowing people more time to either gather their rent or get their assistance. And I'd be willing to talk with any of you further about the implications of I said I'm continuing to kind of gather information and and learn about this. But it seems evident that necessarily we don't want to wait for a for evictions to happen because that's already going to be something that's going to be difficult to overcome for the for the renters. And we may not see it if people are choosing to leave. I think one thing could be is improving the accessibility of rental assistance from the city could also help and it may give some relief to mutual aid groups that are trying to sustain the aid they have and that's needed. It's just going to be difficult to say for some of these mutual aid groups that have popped up in churches in different areas how long they're going to be able to continue to raise money. I want to thank you for making the immigration resources much more prominent on the the website. That's very helpful. I did notice one thing I did not see his house listed as a as a housing resource. So maybe listing them right there on the website maybe a way to kind of improve the accessibility. So thank you. Thank you Mr. Ringhofer. All right. So I forgot my to do my spiel. I'm all out of sorts. I've had so much talking to do today. But it's customary for us to receive the information, follow up with staff and follow up with any comments that were received to the extent that that's prudent. All All So moving on bids and purchases, we have none. Item 10, the consent agenda. Items requiring a majority of vote. Items are placed on the consent agenda that are considered routine in nature, and um we are able to approve those in one vote. If anybody would like to pull an item from the consent agenda for further questions or discussions, they may do that either from the council or from the audience. Consent We have two items tonight. Consent agenda item 10A, a 12-month extension of the approvals for Minnetonka Flats, a four-lot subdivision with flood plain alteration at 15917 Minnetonka Boulevard. And item 10B, items concerning the Minnetonka School District Independent School District 276 parking lot expansion at the Minnetonka High School campus located at 18407 Delton Avenue. Are there any items that need to be pulled? Otherwise, I would um take a motion to approve. Councilmember Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. I move approval of consent agenda items 10A and 10B. And a second? Councilmember Remely. I'll second. I have a motion by Councilmember Calvert, a second by Councilmember Remely. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Councilmember Bolton. Yes. Maxwell. Yes. Wilbern. Yes. Calvert. Yes. Remely. Yes. Schack. Yes. >> Motion carries. All right. Consent agenda item 11. These uh Likewise, these are also considered routine in nature, but they require five votes. Uh We have one item tonight. And again, anybody can pull this item if they would like. An agreement with the Metropolitan Council for the Dominic Drive freight rail crossing. Council member Foster Bolton >> I'd like to pull it. Okay. All right. Go ahead. Um so, I know that the addendum explained a lot in this, but um I had I just wanted to get some things clear about it. Um so, it was it was determined that these are these are quiet zones, right? And so, we have to upgrade the equipment to maintain it being quiet, and it became a quiet zone in 2006. Um do you know why? I mean, obviously, it's noisy. But I mean, were there complaints or Mr. Manchester >> Sure, Council member Foster Bolton and Mayor and Council. You know, at the time it was right before I was here. Um Yes, I mean, there's a number of residents that don't want to hear the train horn, so the quiet zone you know, a train horn can potentially be heard up to 2 miles. Um the radius in this area that would be about 1,800 residents. And so, this is just one of three. So, at the time in 2006, the city looked at all their crossings and kind of responded to some of the things they've been hearing over the years. So, yes, we had heard from residents at that time. Thanks. Um And And And it said that the there were trains crossing between two and four times a day, like all hours of the day, 24 hours. Mr. Manchester Sure, Mayor and Council member Foster Bolton and Council. I I didn't grab the times ahead of time, but they would be able to to run trains at any time throughout the day. The city doesn't regulate that. You know, as of currently, there's two to four trains, but in the future, if, you know, freight were to increase for any reason, you know, that number could certainly increase, but they would have the ability to run at all hours. Um I have a few more, sorry. So, $500,000 seems like a lot of money. Um can we get by cheaper? Mr. Winchester. Sure, that's a great question, Council member um Foster, Bolin, Mayor, and Council. We certainly looked at that. If we could, we would certainly propose that. So, when we looked at this project, um you know, this was previously owned by the Twin Cities Rail. Um it turned over to Met Council recently. Um they gave us a a number. Um they have a contractor, they do the work, and so we essentially pay them for the work. Uh we did have a consultant look at it on our on our end who does this a lot uh to make sure that the price was in line. You know, some of the work that's involved is they do need to build a small, you know, a little house to house servers and electrical equipment. Um what essentially is missing is the constant warning time. And so, the other two uh crossings, this one has never had the constant warning time, and they've never required it until recently, which uh we knew they would at some point in the future, but it wasn't necessary per the feds, and so they didn't require it, so we didn't add it, but um it it requires us running conduit quite a ways on the line as well. And so, essentially what the constant warning time does is it picks up the speed of a train um and the distance away, and so it regulates the crossing automatically. Um so, we can control the crossing on the street, so it's not too long, it's not too short, but it it does need to span quite a ways to make that work. Um there's concrete work required. It does replace all the crossings at it, so it's about half labor, um and it's about half materials. We did get a breakdown on the labor, too, just to make sure that that was in line, as well, but since there's such a extensive amount of work with the conduit, the other things, as well as the price of the equipment. That's why it gets to be so expensive. The contract is for 430. Um we did put a contingency in here, and then we put um some admin just in case we need to check something with our rail consultant just to make sure the city's comfortable with everything. Um they only bill us for what's actually done at that time, too. So, we don't If they don't spend the full amount, we don't pay that full amount. Anything else? Yeah. Just a quick question. Oh. Okay. I'm sorry. Why don't we You were still talking. You were still Um I I think I think that's it's in one it's not an option to say no. Unless unless we get rid of the quiet zone. Like, it's not an option to say we're not going to do this. Sure, Council member Foster Bolden. The only option would be to start blowing the horn again if we don't do it. Essentially, yes. Council member Remaley, just a quick question. How much have we had to expend in maintenance in this over the 20 years since we've had the quiet zone? Uh good question, Council member Remaley. Essentially, for this quiet zone, we haven't touched it since 2006. So, we at the time it was instated, we didn't have to spend anything at that time, either. We were in a position where we were approved, so we haven't spent money on this one. We have spent money on the others. Um even building this initially, it didn't cost the city anything at that time. We were already set up, so when we built the other two at Oakland and Crosby, we spent around 230,000 in 2006. And then we've done upgrades to the other two. With Crosby the Crosby Road project, we did an upgrade, and then Oakland we did last year, actually. Thank you. As somebody just a quick comment, as somebody who lives in proximity or good hearing distance from a train, it's really nice when they we instated those or Wayzata did for my case, and you no longer had to hear train at 2:00, and 4:00, and 6:00 in the morning. So, um so, I appreciate that. Thank you. Council, anything else? I'll reiterate what Council Member Remely said. I, you know, I grew up about a mile from two crossings, and we knew we were a mile from two crossings. I mean, you don't think about how loud that is um until the whistles are blowing. It's It's really significant, so I think it would be a big lifestyle change for our residents um to not have the quiet zones. Um that's my That's my two cents. It's probably It seems like a lot of money, but it's probably for the lifestyle impact that it creates. Money Money well spent. So, with that, I would um take a motion for consent agenda item 11A. Council Member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. And I'll just say I just rode uh on a train from St. Paul to Seattle and back, and I agree. If I lived in some of those communities where the whistles were blowing, it would be a a total bummer. So, uh I'd like to move uh uh let's see, make the motion to authorize the mayor and the city manager to execute an agreement with Met Council subject to non-material changes as approved by the city engineer and city attorney, amend the CIP, and authorize the city engineer to expend the allocated funds for project costs without further council approval, provided the total project costs do not exceed the project budget of $500,000. And the second? Council Member Remely. I'll second. I have a motion by Council Member Calvert, a second by Council Member Remely. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Foster Bolton? Yes. Maxwell? Yes. Wilburn? Yes. Calvert? Yes. Romilly? Yes. Schack? Yes. Motion carries. Um, thank you, Council Member Foster Bolton. I thought those were good questions and it does uh bear consideration. So, all right, moving on to introduction of ordinances 12, we have none. Item 13, which is public hearings and we have a few of those and we'll get started with 13A, which is a temporary on-sale liquor license for Boom Island Brewing Company LLC at 5959 Baker Road, Ms. Wishnak. Thank you, Mayor and Council members. This is uh a temporary license for what uh they're hosting on May 16th, which is a Saturday. Uh they're doing uh a free outdoor event. It does involve live music, some food trucks, as well as a market, a medieval-themed market. And then finally, uh what's called the fighting knights, which is a kind of a and I'm going to describe it more as a theater production, probably that's the best way I can describe it, where people are actually um involved in a fight of of swords and activities. I don't Some of the things I do in my job are so different um than other things that other people do. So, anyway, um the city code does have a prohibition of having alcohol and a sporting event together uh unless the council specifically relieves them from that um that provision. So, we are recommending approval. They did have the event last year. There were no issues. There were no uh uh situations that occurred. So, we're comfortable moving ahead with the recommendation of approval. With that, Mayor, I'll turn it back to you. Thank you, Ms. Wishnak. Council, any questions? Okay, well then, this is a public hearing, so I'll open the public hearing and I'll invite the applicant to come up if you want to tell us about your event. State your name and address, please. Thank you, everyone. Um Mayor, council members, I'm Laura McCauley um with Boom Island Brewing. Um I actually live in Shakopee. >> That's okay. We we've got your Okay. Business address, that's fine. >> Yes, we're on Baker Road, 5959. Um we are hosting our second annual Knights and Pints event. It is a medieval-style event, goes all day long, noon till we close at 11:00 that day. Um we will have a I think I've got seven um medieval-style vendors that'll be um participating in our ye old market. And then uh from 3:00 to 6:00 we will have our fighting knights. It is more of a production than a sports event, if I may. Um and they are fully armored, extremely um stringent on their safety protocols as well for the participants as well as um the uh guests that are viewing the experience. Um and then we'll have themed uh beverages and food trucks, of course. Um and then in the evening the always entertaining Gus the Bardic Troubadour will be playing in the taproom as well. So, lots of fun to be had. It is a free event to attend. Um and as always we will follow all of the necessary ordinances and safety procedures. Excellent. Well, thank you very much and we wish you a successful event. >> Thank you. Um all right. Is there anybody else who would like to speak on this item? One last call, anybody? No, I'll close the public hearing and council any comments or I would take a motion. Council member Calvert. Thank you. It's an awesome event. Everyone should go. It's a local business. I love supporting them, so um thanks for putting that fun event together. Um and I just wanted to also say that to our uh visitors for our civil engineer visitors, boy you picked a you picked a good meeting. This is not one that's going to go till midnight. So, I'd like to make the motion to grant the temporary liquor license to Boom Island Brewing with relief from section 600.071 and I hope that doesn't make the city attorney nervous. Councilmember Ramaley. I'll second. All right, I have a motion by Councilmember Calvert, second by Councilmember Ramaley. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Foster Bolton >> Yes. Maxwell Yes. Wilbern Yes. Calvert Yes. Ramaley Yes. >> Schack Yes. Motion carries. We'll have a blast. I would I'm going to be out of town, otherwise I would be there. It sounds like a lot of fun. All right. Next item is item 13B, an easement vacation for Carlson's Linner Road addition at 1923 and 1939 Linner Road. Ms. Thomas Mayor and Councilmembers, as you noted this is an easement vacation request. Staff is recommending that the Council approve this vacation. At your last meeting, the Council approved preliminary and final plats for what was essentially a lot line adjustment. I've tried to show the adjustment in that that dash line on the left. We moved from the solid line down to the dash line. That plat did establish new drainage and utility easements along the new lot line. This evening, the Council is requested to vacate the easements on that old and and now vanished Um, line. Staff does support the vacation again because the dedication of new easements occurred as part of the plat. And so with that, I would turn it back to the mayor. Thank you, Ms. Thomas. This seems pretty straightforward, but Council, any questions? Okay, we do have to open a public hearing on this. And I would ask, I know that we have the applicant on the line. I'm not sure, the notes say they're they're only here if there's questions, so we'll we'll take that at heed. Um, and anybody in the audience wish to speak on this item? Anybody? Okay, final call, closing the public hearing. And uh, Council, any comments? Otherwise, we would take a motion on this. Uh, Council Member Wilburn. I will move that we adopt the resolution approving an easement vacation of Carlson's Lindor Road Addition at 1923 and 1939 Lindor Road. Thank you. Council Member Maxwell. >> Second. I have a motion by Council Member Wilburn, a second by Council Member Maxwell. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Pastor Bolton. Yes. Maxwell. >> Yes. Wilburn. Yes. Calvert. >> Yes. Rameley. >> Yes. Schack. Yes, motion carries. All right, 13C. A preliminary and final plat of Oakland Estates second addition and an easement vacation for a two-lot subdivision at 1915 and 1929 Oakland Road. Ms. Thomas. Uh, thank you again, uh, Mayor and Council. As you noted, there's two actions uh, being requested this evening. First is approval of those plats, and then second, an easement vacation, and staff is recommending uh, the Council approve both of those requests. This site is comprised of two lots totaling roughly three and 1/2 acres. The south lot contains a single-family home while the northerly lot is currently vacant. And while development on both of those lots is is certainly constrained by the wetland area that you can see on the north, I would say 2/3 of the property, both of those lots are legally buildable lots of record in their current configuration. Lake West development has submitted an application again to essentially adjust the lot line between those two lots. The solid line common line is the proposed lot line. The dashed line is the existing lot line. By city code, city staff can actually administratively approve lot line adjustments between two lots when legal descriptions of the lot pre and post adjustment are short and simple. And we regularly review and approve those. The longer and more complicated legal the legal description is, the greater there is opportunity for error for both for a surveyor, for city staff reviewing that, for recording at the county, and that can certainly affect future property owners. So, in those cases, staff requires coming through the platting process to clean up and simplify those legal descriptions. So, that's what's happening here. The proposed plat again adjusts a common lot line. There are no new lots created. I would note and and we talked about at the planning commission that um because both of these lots in their existing and proposed configurations are over 1 acre in size, the tree removal thresholds of the tree protection ordinance don't apply in the existing condition or in the proposed condition. So, there's no change of in that restriction or or allowance, as the case may be. So, staff does recommend approval of the plats as the lots would meet all minimum standards, and we also recommend approval of the easement vacation along that pre-plat common lot line because the easements would be recreated along the post-plat common lot line. And I'll turn it back to Mayor Shack. Thank you, Ms. Thomas. Council, any questions? Council member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. Um I'm I've been trying to get my uh packet to load, and as usual, I'm having trouble with the um with my iPad, um which I've had all week. Um so, just thinking about um there was a a tree inventory. Um I talked to Mr. Funk about it. The general um explanation was that the number of trees in total for this iteration was it the same as would have been for previous. And if you could just explain that a little bit cuz I I I can't um I can't pull up my packet, and actually neither can Council member Ramelli. Um uh So, anyway, if you could just explain the um tree inventory situation, how it compares to the previous um proposal or iteration of the proposal. Ms. Thomas. Um Mayor and Council member Calvert, I'm bringing up um the I'm also attempting to bring up uh the packet uh right now. So, the city did uh receive two sets of plans on this. The first um set of plans, uh the lot lines were the the same. The shape and location of the proposed home was different and the original plan did not show a removal of some wooden retaining walls that are along the backside of um the trail that's on McGinty Road. And so staff requested that um if the applicant was proposing to remove that retaining wall, which is actually on on city property and and the city has to maintain, that they would reflect that in their plans. And then as part of that, the um size and configuration of the home changed also. So those two things um led to the change in the number of trees that would be removed. Um staff had a lot of conversation about those trees that are in the right-of-way, which is where um the retaining wall is. And um at some point that wall will need to be replaced. And at some point um those trees would would be removed, whether it's or impacted certainly significantly, whether it's the city that's doing the removal and replacement of that retaining wall or or the applicant. So we did also do a little bit of a breakdown in the report of how many trees are associated with the retaining wall and how many trees are associated with construction. I hope that answers the question. Thank you. Council, any other questions? Okay. Um this is a public hearing, so I'm going to open the public hearing. I will um invite the applicant to come forward if you'd like. Um you're not required to, but if you have something you'd like to say, just state your name and address for the record. Good evening. Kelsey Thompson, Lake West Development, 14525 Highway 7, Minnetonka. I'm just here to stand for some questions if you have any. Okay, thank you. Well, well, we may call you back up, but for I think we're good for right now. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this item? Anybody? Okay, not seeing anybody, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to council for any comments or further discussion. Council member Calvert. Thank you. We've been talking, this is not the first time we've talked about this property and everyone knows um how I feel about trees and their it's not so much just even the number of trees that are coming down but the but the type. So, a lot of mature oak trees it's not just things like box elders and and trees that people consider less desirable. um and I mentioned to Mr. Funk and he knows he's been listening to me say it for years now the one acre lot loophole on tree removal ordinances still in my opinion needs to be addressed and so I will be pushing for that for um till we have a good discussion on that. So, thank you. Council, anything else? Council member Remely. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to second those comments by Council member Calvert. I think it is a shame especially in this Arbor Day and Earth Month to to see those trees, so many trees go down. I understand the needs for, you know, kind of redeveloping and the issues with the retaining wall so and I'm not going to oppose it per se, but I I agree that the one acre um kind of requirement maybe needs to be revisited. So, thank you. Council, anything else? I will just make a brief comment. You know, I share some of the reservations anytime we see that there's going to be significant tree loss and you know, I I am concerned about that. I I have, you know, driven by this property quite a few times and stopped and taken a look at it. I also recognize to develop that second lot it with any kind of meaningful change and and putting housing on that lot would necessitate some significant tree removal. So, with that, you know, I while I have a little bit of heartburn, I don't feel quite as terribly about this one as I have at some of those in the past, but um with our with our zoning code rewrite moving right along and coming back to us, I think there is, you know, there is some opportunity to consider some of these things that have tripped us up. So, um but with that, it sounds like we're kind of all um apprehensively, but on the same page with this. So, I would um take a motion on this item. Council member Romilly. I'll make the motion to adopt the resolutions approving the preliminary and final plat of Oakland Estates second addition and an easement vacation for the properties at 1915 and 1929 Oakland Road. Thank you. And a second? Council member Maxwell, second. Thank you. I have a motion by Council member Romilly and a second by Council member Maxwell. Miss Larson, please call roll. Foster Bolton. Yes. Maxwell. Yes. Wilburn. Yes. Calvert. Reluctantly, yes. Romilly. Yes. Schack. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you and um you know, I'm just going to say I think we're all having problems with our iPads. So, I'm wondering if there's a a an internet maybe hosting issue. Granicus or Amazon Web Services. So, just FYI and we're going to all do the best we can based on what we have access to here. Which we're good at as long as we're not clicking into packet items. All right. Um moving on to item 14, other business, 14A, which is 16141 McGinty Road West. And this is a utility billing appeal. Mr. Funk, are you going to take this or Mr. Nelson? Oh, Mr. Nelson. Yes. Good evening. Uh okay. So, we got it up in the Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My pleasure to be with you tonight. Um yes, we have a utility bill appeal for 16141 McGinty Road West. Um and there is Where we at here on Okay. All right. And so, there is a staff recommendation with this appeal is a motion to deny the appeal and uphold the current billing statement including all past due amounts with no adjustments and we'll need we'll need four votes for that um for that motion. So, a little bit of background. Mr. Rivera, the property owner at 16141 McGinty Road West um is formally appealing his September-December utility bills uh due to a water leak at the property which resulted in in uh a couple high utility bills, to say the least. Um in the Minnetonka City Code um 1200.030 subsection 4 sub paragraph 4 allows for utility customers to appeal their utility bills first to the city manager and then to the city council if they so desired. Um this is the first city council has the final determination on any of those appeals. Um city council may not be aware of this process. We haven't had any of these for a number of years on um from what I've gathered on that end of it. Um and Mr. Rivera contacted Mr. or city manager Funk about um towards the end of last September about a formal appeal process and has wished to uh bring it forward to the city council at this point. So a little bit of background on how we got to here. Mr. Rivera purchased this property on or about May 1st of 2025. Um he did not occupy the residence uh for some time until um some time in the fall of of last year uh due to allowing the previous owner a month or so to stay in that property and then to accommodate some remodeling um activity that was taking place over the summer and through the early fall. City code section 1200.030 um sub paragraph two states the owner of a property is responsible for all bills accruing through the use of water and sewer facilities on that property whether the the property is being occupied by the owner or someone else. City records indicate a water leak started sometime in July and was not correct until about mid-September. So there was a couple utility bills received. The first one that was received um was in September and that was for a billing period of June 6th through September 2nd, 2025. Likely received the end of September, first part of October. Um that meter read 855,000 gallons of water and I have no you all know that's quite a bit of water on that end of it and it was a substantial bill. Uh the next billing period from September 3rd to December 3rd indicated another 267,000 gallons of water. Um majority of that was in the September um reading and so we assume that that's from that September 3rd time frame through to about the middle of September when the leak was caught. Um measured about that 228,000 gallons. And the remaining gallons of 39,000 were from October and November, which is still a good chunk of water for for that time of year. Um to kind of put this in leak into context, the average quarterly water usage is anywhere from 15 to 20,000 gallons per quarter. Um and this was, you know, a million 1.1 million gallons over two quarters. Um a substantial amount of water, obviously. This may be a little hard to read, but here are two snippets of On the left side is the September bill. Um kind of the bottom half, and it shows your usage of 855 units, which is 855,000 gallons of water. And then that is charged out um at a water rate based off the tier of all of those units of water. We had four tiers at that point in time. And so we had a little over $6,000 charge for just the water piece of that bill. Um amounting to $6,200 for that September quarter. Um the bill on the right is the December quarter. There you can see um there was 267 units, or 267,000 gallons of water used. And that amounted about to about $1,750 worth of water on that bill as well. And then you can see here is um the most recent bill. Um this was from March, and so you can see there that we the water leak has been corrected. It's been water winter usage, so there's been no irrigation, anything like that. Um the usage is back to a a nominal amount of 10,000 gallons of water per that were used. And I should note going back to these previous bills, you notice the water consumption is 855,000 gallons. We set the sewer consumption at a at a 15,000 gallon amount um each year on based off of prior history. There was no history here, so we just set that base at a 15,000 gallon amount moving forward. So we charged 15 units of sewer usage for both the September and December bills. You can see that 15,000 here and then here on the December bill. Then moving forward from March, there was 10,000 gallons used. Now we have a little bit of history, we will use that 10,000 as a base for sewer usage moving forward into the future. So as I indicated, um uh there was continuous water usage usage that started sometime in July and was not corrected until mid mid September time frame. The city does have a long-standing history of sending leak notices to residents when we um receive a report that there has been continuous usage over a 24-hour time frame, we'll send out monthly leak notices. Um this property did receive leak notices in both August and and then again in early September. Um and from the best of our knowledge, there was no um Mr. Rivera didn't contact public works or our utility billing department at that point in time. So those went on answered at that point. So Mr. Um Mr. Rivera's first contact with the city was on September 11th when uh my utility billing staff was going through their quarterly billing. Mr. Rivera was in that billing um and she was going through the exception report and noticed the high usage. Um so she called him directly. We had his number just since he had just moved in. Called him, left a voicemail, and um Mr. Rivera then contacted us shortly thereafter and um worked with both public works and a private plumbing contractor to get that water issue uh resolved shortly thereafter. And so you may be asking yourself, do we get these types of um requests often? Um Fortunately, we don't get them often, but we do get them. We probably get one to two of these types of scenarios a year with a substantial water usage like this. Um a lot of times we'll have somebody that buys a property. Um we've had pipes and then um is from a different state, shuts the heat and electricity off, and the freeze external water off, and the pipes burst, basement fills up with water. That type of thing or spickets go on that are broken and are running outside unbeknownst to the owner, those types of things. So, um what we do recommend is that the homeowners contact their insurance company to see what they have for um homeowners coverage as far as repairing the the fix and or paying for the the utility bill as well, too. And we did recommend that to Mr. Rivera um through various email communications as well. In all these other situations, we have not typically adjusted utility bills, either. Um obviously, homeowners are or property owners are looking to reduce that impact as best they can, but we try to we do stand firm on where we're at with utility bills and we do not make adjustments. We have 17,000 accounts, so we try to make it equitable across all accounts. And so, if um the city encouraging no cost to to pump that water, treat that water, deliver that water. And so, if we reduce the cost for somebody, we're basically pushing that burden off onto the rest of the utility users on that end of it. And then we have a lot of customers, too, that just pay the bill. I mean, they may have had a leak, didn't contact us, we may not know about it. And so, then by them not contacting us, you know, they're not necessarily getting that kind of equitable or fair same treatment if we reduce the a bill from somebody else on that end of it. Um and but we do allow customers so when there are big issues like this, we do allow customers some grace in paying that bill. You know, it's burdensome. And so, we try to do as best we can. We will eliminate any late fees with that. We'll allow them to kind of pay that off on through through the next assessment term. Um And so, what kind of what happens with that is so um in this instance, Mr. Rivera's leak happened in August, September time frame. That And what we do is we certify to the city council every year in November, you certify a list of delinquent utility bills. Well, those are delinquent utility bills that were from the August to August time frame. And so, this building come to us until September. And so, Mr. Rivera is going to have until this fall to really pay that bill without any additional fees, without any additional interest. And at that point in time, if he doesn't pay that, um we would certify it then to Hennepin County, and it would go on to his property taxes to be um paid through collections in 2027. Um and in this instance, we also forgave any late fees associated with his account. We will won't be charging any late fees for the remainder of this year until this issue is is cleared up on on that end of it. Oh, going the wrong direction. Um and so, Mr. Rivera is only being charged for the water leak. So, as we mentioned, when I looked at those utility bills, we showed the 15 units of wa- of sewer usage. Um we're assuming that that water, from what we gathered, the water went through a a backup sump pump, water-powered sump pump. So, hopefully, that water went outside, went to a storm water collection versus a sanitary sewer collection. But, if it did reach the sanitary sewer system, we don't know that. We can't prove that. We can't We don't know that. But, we will be billed um by Met Council next year if any of that water did reach the the sanitary sewer system. Um and then I should just lastly just um Mr. Rivera stated in um that some remodeling was being done at his home, but also that he was installing some landscaping as well, too. So, some a lot of this water was likely due to that leak with the the sump pump. But, um I think also some of this water might have been related to some landscaping that was put in place as well, too, to keep that water in of that new landscape in place and such like that, too. It's probably why there was some higher usage in that October-November time frame. Would be my guess. So, given the facts and circumstances of these two utility bills in the light of city code 1200.030, subparagraph two, the staff recommends to deny the appeal and to make no changes to the September and December utility bills. And again, the motion would be to deny the appeal and uphold the term billing statement including all past due amounts with no adjustment. So, and that would recall um again, need four votes. And I believe Mr. Rivera is here as tonight as well, too. So, um he may want to speak as well, too. So. All right. >> I'll be happy to answer any questions you have on with that. Thank you, Mr. Nelson. Council, any questions for Mr. Nelson? Uh Council member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. Um so, you were saying that Met Council, we won't know what we're going to get billed um for treatment um until the end of the year. Is there any way to get like a get an estimate from them? Is there any way for them to check or earlier so that we have sort of an idea? Mr. Nelson. >> Mayor Shack, Council member Calvert, um probably not. Met Council measures the sewage leaving the city at at certain They got flow meters at different points of the city and such like that. So, um even though this is a lot of gallons per an individual home, it's probably not um a big um fluctuation notice within um Met Council's flow numbers for the entire city at at that point in time. So, um it's going to be an you know, it's Met cost there if there was water there that went through the sanitary sewer system. But, if not, then there's a you know, there's no additional cost to the city at that point in time. So, and we have no way of proving yes or no on that. And um so, we're just kind of that's just our kind of sunk cost, I believe, to to move forward with this. So. Any other questions for Mr. Nelson? Uh Council member Maxwell. Yeah, I have a a question. If if the appeal was notif- Mr. Funk was notified of the appeal in September, why has it taken it this long to come before us? And the reason I'm asking is we're talking about a year to pay back this without penalty from the date that it happened, would it make sense to have it be a year from the date that a decision was made on whether that would need to be paid back? Um Mayor Shack, Council Member Maxwell. Um that's a good question. There was a little bit of timing issue. So, when um Mr. Rivera had contacted us, um he had he hadn't even received his September bill, so he was very proactive about, "Hey, um are you utility belt staff reached out to me? I have a big leak big water leak. I'm going to have a big bill coming out um shortly on that end of it. Um and then what we wanted to do is since there was a little bit of leak in that next quarterly billing as well, too, we wanted to kind of hold off and get the the whole picture of what the leak size of that leak was. And so, that's why we we waited a little bit and then um I believe Mr. Rivera had some um he was busy with calendar-wise and schedule-wise with with that the first part of the year. So, um as far as holding off from a decision at this point in time, um I I would be reluctant to do that. I would I would say you probably still have, you know, close to 6 months until that November time frame to pay that utility bill at this point in time or to, you know, figure out other um payment options at at that point outside of the city. So, Thank you. Anything else for Mr. Nelson? All right. We may have you come back up, but thanks, Mr. Nelson. Um Mr. Rivera, if you'd like to come up and um provide some comments, happy to hear you. Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm so so sorry that that happened. My intention is obviously not to waste water. I care deeply about the environment. I was actually happy to be at this meeting and see the words that people got for that. I really really do care about environment. I dili- diligently recycle at my office, recycle at my house. I really do care about the environment. And it's a shame that that happened. I wish I would have been notified earlier. Because I did not live at the house, I was living in downtown Minneapolis. I was not checking the mail. I didn't change the the my address to the the new address until then because and I didn't expect any mail, so that's why I was not checking. And only my general contractor and his team were there. And the first time I got the call was on September 11th. The same day I instructed my general contractor to call the city and then somebody from the city went there, inspected that, thought was the water softener and it was not and then we contacted a private uh plumber and they they fixed that on September uh 9th the 19th. So, from the day I knew this was September 11th by September 19th it was fully fixed, checked by the plumber, checked by my contractor and the issue was resolved. I wish I would have known in July when that happened and I you know, I was I didn't have a reason to check my mail. I don't even know if the notices were there or not. I I'm assuming they were. I'm not saying that they were not there but I didn't check my mail because I have a different address. So, obviously this causes a very very financial hardship to me and the reason why to answer your question I was busy because I'm an immigration attorney and I was working with you know, the issues of Metro search. I filed habeas corpuses. Uh tons of them. I work until 3:00 a.m. many many many days because if you didn't file it that day, the person was going to be shipped to Texas and then there was no way to bring them back in some cases. I still have cases that people are detained. So, it was very very busy and that's why we had to do it today and I really apologize. I wanted to get this resolved as soon as possible and I also wanted to see the clear picture of this. If you see that my actual billing is 10,000 gallons, not 855,000 gallons, obviously. And, you know, I just purchased this home. I made a big, big effort to be part of this community. I really enjoy to be in this area of town. I have good friends here. I want to make this my community and be as a positive member of community. And this will create a really financial hardship for me, you know, it's $8,200 that I will have to pay. Any Any reduction will be welcome. Um you know, I I In my In my packet, I you know, the If you go by historical usage, it will be around $400 for each period. So, it will be $800. So, it will be like, you know, 10% of what the bill is. I will welcome that. If you don't agree with that, at least I would like to be charged what the minimum rate is because the rate when you go from 1 to 18 is one rate. When you go from 18 to whatever is the different rate, and so on. And obviously, because it was so high, I'm being charged the highest rate. I, you know, I want to pay for the water that was wasted that unintentionally I that happened. But, you know, it's just I appeal to your, you know, to understand what happened. These are exceptional circumstances. I did not intend to waste water, and I will never do it again. I actually called my insurance, and my insurance has a $10,000 deductible, so it will be futile to file a claim. And also, I called In one of the emails that the city called sent me, and I wanted to thank uh everybody from the city. They were very attentive and very They worked with me, and I really appreciate that. It was very, very good uh the contact I have with the city. They also suggested to call a number to get uh the meter replaced. So, these meters have now an app that you can check in you know, actual use and current time like real time use. And I did that uh they said that they are not doing it now because of the water, but they're going to start doing actually middle of April, early May. So, I will call again and get on that. And you know, I just appeal to your your humanity and see that you know, it's a very hard you know, to pay for the taxes are I'm coming. I pay for the down payment. I pay a lot of things and the remodeling. So, you know, I it has it has been very hard. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. Okay, Council. Well, um any other questions for staff? Councilmember Wilborn. Um so, I know we don't have a history of of uh but words are escaping me. Of like forgiving these these uh charges that uh accrue whether the the the resident is is on on site or not. Um is it possible to look at the the the lower rate that was suggested? Mr. Nelson. Okay, thank you. Uh Uh Councilmember Wilborn. Um we can absolutely do that. Um I would caution a little bit is that we haven't done that before. We've had some leaks that have been similar circumstances, same gallons or more gallons on on that end of it. Um it's completely your call on that end of it. Um just note that this was in our kind of July through September time frame, which is the time frame that it is the greatest demand in our system as well, too. And so, we're having to pump a lot of water to keep up with the demand and this water would was obviously just um was through a leak that it it disappeared. And so, we didn't get its full benefit out of that water, but um it was during a high demand time so of the year. I have one more question. Go ahead. Councilwoman. Um So, my other question is um and sort of uh following up on what Councilwoman Vermillion Maxwell had mentioned, just the amount of time to pay this off. It would it be possible to extend beyond November um to to allow paying to allow the longer for them to pay it off. So, uh I'm sorry. Um Mr. Nelson, go ahead. Mayor Shack, um Councilwoman Wilburn, City Council. Um we can we can do that. Um it would just it would delay the certification then for another year. Um you know, or if it doesn't go to certification at all and it gets paid off. Otherwise, if it it is certified to the City Council in November, it would go on to the property tax statement and be paid over that additional year. There would be um interest on that charge. So, whatever balance that gets certified in November, um there would be typically we charge a 10% um fee for our um delinquent utility customers and then a $25 admin fee on there as well, too. But, then you would basically have a year an additional year to pay that through your taxes. Obviously, you're paying a a small percentage um interest rate on that, but uh or not a small, but 10% on on your remaining balance of whatever is there. So, um there are a couple options even if you didn't extend it for another um another year. So. Thank you. Uh Council, any other questions? All right. Well, we are in the position to make this decision, which I know isn't easy, but I'm I'm open to um hearing your thoughts. Anybody? Councilwoman Romilly. Thank you, Mayor. Um this resident lives in Ward 3 and I'm very familiar with the home. Um also, I've I've been in the position of of, you know, not living in my house uh before moving permanently to it. Um I did make sure my general contractor had a leak monitor on it. Um and, you know, it was his job to, you know, do that oversight. And then one other time I have had an exterior faucet that leaked and had to pay a pretty substantial uh leak fee um or water usage fee. So, you know, I know how painful that is. Um however, I'm I'm a little bit confused about the financial financial hardship because unless I'm really mistaken about the house, um maybe you maybe the applicant can correct me. Um and it's neither here nor there in my decision, but I believe that house sold for about $1.5 million uh last fall uh last fall or when it before it was sold this previous time. So, I guess it's neither here nor there, but it is a piece of information I think my uh fellow council members might want to know um about when considering this this case. So, um given those factors, you know, I'm really sorry for it, but I'm not prepared to put this on the backs of our other um you know, raising the fees or putting this on the backs of other users of this utility. Um I don't think that's fair. I think it sets a bad precedent. And I think we all have to take responsibilities for, you know, kind of our actions or inactions, including being a homeowner. So, um you know, at this point I'm inclined to uh deny the appeal. Councilmember Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. Well, I'm I'm very sympathetic. I mean, I appreciate Mr. Rivera's comments about um caring about the environment and I think he I think he's very sincere in his remorse and you know, it's a terrible feeling to to basically waste over a million gallons of water. So, um I I take that to heart, but also I'm also familiar with the house and um you know, it's one of those things things happen to many people. I have a friend that bought a new car and the day the first day she drove it, she got into a car wreck and her brand new driven once only car was totaled. I mean, things things happen and um I do I feel um a lot of sympathy, but I also feel sympathy for the other ratepayers and I just feel that this is a situation where um the utility payer is going to have to pay the bill. um I I would love to give them I mean, we have until I believe November to pay the bill. So, it can be paid in installments and um I'm I'm just not inclined to put it on the backs of other taxpayers and and ratepayers. Thank you, Councilmember Calvert. Anybody else have anything they want to contribute? Uh Councilmember Calvert. Um so, I also know the pain many years ago when my adult children were still children, Minnetonka staff came out to my house on a Friday, said there's a leak somewhere. We're going to come back on Monday to determine if it's on your part of the property or our part of the property and that Saturday morning there was water flowing through my finished basement. Um so, that and that was that was quite a mess um and very painful. So, I do understand the pain. Um, I also am not inclined to to as we say pass on those those costs to other people. I would be willing to consider like I said more time. Um, that might be something that like see what you can do, see if you can get it done by November and and maybe come back if that's not possible. Um, but yes, as of now I'm sort of with my fellow council members. Council member Fastrabol. Yeah, I'm I'm just going to as am I based on the fact that there the because I didn't know about the house prior to this. So, I appreciate you saying it and the other thing is is that when I read it I I had you know thought that this was the first time this has happened and clearly it isn't and it has it it does work out and it it's bigger bill. So, um I feel like this isn't a you know a um once you know the first time this has happened in the city and it's you know it's been dealt with before. So, um I agree with my colleagues. Did you Council member Maxwell? You don't have to say anything. >> Oh, sure. I'll just say I I'm sorry about this abysmal welcome to the city of Minnetonka to have this sort of thing happen in your home. Um, but I agree it's not something that I feel the rest of the taxpayers of the city should have to subsidize this type of a an incident. So, I am also in favor of denying the the appeal. I would be willing to give a bit more time to pay it back without going to collections. Um, but I would prefer to deny the appeal. All right, thank you. I mean I I mean these are the things that just are so hard for us because there's no good resolution. We could do something and make one person whole while kind of creating a whole cascading effect on the rest of the system and precedent and and I certainly don't relish making these decisions. The rest of the glamorous work we do is much but I certainly recognize that Mr. Rivera did not mean any malice by this. He's not you know, environmental um scofflaw like you know, I and so that's what makes this hard. It was an it was an accident. Unfortunately, you know, this is not a for you know, if we said, "Okay, we'll take our profit. We'll just charge you our costs." Well, that's already how the system's set up is to just charge you our cost. Um and so I I agree that this is just one of those things that we're going to have to um address and denying the appeal. I would be fine with holding off on certification of any remaining balance until November of 2027. If that's something I'm hearing some of my council member fellow council members say, so that would give an extended period of time to get that paid off. I know the feeling of saying, "Well, that's you know, still money I still have to come up with." But, that would give I think a lot of relief. So, if I'm seeing nods, so maybe we would take a motion to deny the appeal with the understanding that certification on any remaining balance would be um delayed until the November 2027 certification period. Is that an adequate summary, Mr. Nelson? Okay. So, if somebody wants to make that motion, Council member Remaley. Thank you. It gives me no pleasure, but I'll make the motion to deny the appeal and uphold the current billing statement including all past due amounts with no adjustment. But with the extended period of time time for repayment. Till November of 2026. 20 27. 27? 27. Okay. 27. And a second? Council member Welburn? I will second. Okay. I have a motion by Council member Remaley, a second by Council member Welburn. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Pastor Bolton? Yeah. Maxwell? Yes. Welburn? Yes. Calvert? Yes. Remaley? >> Yes. Schack? Yes, motion carries. Mr. Rivera, I apologize. We did not relish in making this decision. Thank you for coming. We hope that your experience in the community um is better going forward. And we're very glad to have you here and we're very I know to a person on the Council appreciative of the work that you're doing in your day job. So, thank you very much. All right, moving along. Um 14B, purchase agreement for the property at 16809 State Highway 7. I That is Ms. Wishnak. Thank you, Mayor and Council members. This is something that's being brought back to We had a closed session about 2 months ago to talk about purchase of this property. Now, all the information is public information about our purchase or a potential purchase, I should say. This is a property location. You can If you drive on Highway 7 a lot, you know the house that we're looking at here. This came to us as a situation where the current owner was in the process of selling to another owner in early '25 and while the new owner was conducting their due diligence on the sale, they were notified the septic system was failing. And so, uh the property is also on a private well and there are lots of different ordinances that um dictate how somebody gets connected and when they have to connect and then uh they're not very long time periods, but that is the situation this property based um when they were going through this transaction. So, what that took us to is an engagement with uh and Susan, if you can point out the property in question, is the 16809 and then we had to engage with the two properties to the west because the sewer line is all the way right there where the new nursing home building is. So, sewer and water accessibility is quite a distance away and so in talking through um what what have to be the extension in the backyards of these homes, it was determined that there was quite a cost. So, it was almost $500,000 to get water and sewer back to this property uh to get them to a working situation for utilities. And so, during that discussion, we uh found out that these two properties to the west did not have a need at the current moment for those utilities and obviously the price tag uh that was shared with them was quite extreme um and they were not in a position uh to support that extension. At that point, the city decided um perhaps we could talk to this owner about buying the property, uh moving the folks out that live there today and by the way, they have found new housing uh and so that is not a um a difficulty for the home renter at this point. Uh so, we're secured in that they have future housing. The city would buy the property from for about $285,000. That doesn't include closing costs, that sort of thing. So, there's additional fees that go along with that. And we would hold on to the property until such a time that the sewer extension and the water extension can be made in a more efficient and hopefully with the support of the other two properties to the west. And we would use the development fund to provide the financing for the 285 at a future point if we sell it for redevelopment, additional development on the site, what have you, then those funds would return back to the development fund and replace the money that were spent for this sale. It's not always that we do this type of purchase, but in speaking with public works and and our engineering folks, it just seemed to be the right answer for this very difficult situation that the city step in and purchase the property. If you want to know the details on the home, it is built in 1948. It's sitting on about a half an acre. It's two bedroom. It's a two bedroom home. It has a one stall garage off to the left side. And as we talked in the closed session, we could remodel it. It's actually in fairly good condition. We could do some remodeling in the future. Another option, you could demolish it at some point and then subdivide the property. And of course always in the mind of doing more affordable homes is the long-term goal. So, with that mayor, the actual action that you have to consider is a motion to adopt the resolution approving the purchase agreement for 16809 State Highway 7 and we're recommending approval. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Wishnak. Council, any questions? We did spend some time talking about this in the closed session. Council Member Wilbern. Um so the plan is then to wait for those two neighboring properties to either sell the property or uh come to a point where their systems are failing and and then do the do all three properties at the same time, get them onto the system? Let's switch >> that, if I may. Um Council Member Wilbern and Council Members, I think that there could be a differ a bunch of different ways this could come up in the future, so it could be that one or more of the properties to the west need services. Um now that we're if we're able to buy this property, we're in con- control of that third piece. Um let's say the property in between is going to sell, that might be a time um to um ask for utility extension. I think what's difficult is at this moment in time nobody needs it other than this property the furthest away. So, but that can arrive that decision could arrive in I think multiple ways. Which I have one more second. >> Go ahead, Council Member Wilbern. Kind of um feeds into my next question is so what is our um what's the procedure for if we're we're holding a property that's not occupied as far as maintenance, how you know, how often is someone going out and maintaining the property, mowing the lawn, um and and like and yeah, make sure no one's squatting. Um how much or how what's the procedure for that and and like where does the money for that come from? Yeah. Let's switch that. Yes. Uh Thank you, Mayor, and Council Member Wil- Wilbern. The uh city does a contract with a property manager, and we do track the property management costs over time. So, the development fund will pay for those costs. They get refunded at such a time that the sale, assuming there's more money that comes into the fund than expended. That's typically what's happened in the past when we've managed a property for a longer period of time. You think of the Rowland Road property. We managed that for years, but the rent kind of offset those costs. I think here the sale probably would offset those costs. Um so, they take care of the management of the property. They check on it. They make sure it's secure. Uh we have installed security in other situations, especially someplace where it's a little bit um maybe even though it's on the highway, it could have some people that you know, might want to visit. And so, we'll make sure uh we have security uh cameras. We have had to do that before on other properties we've owned. Anything else on this? Any comments? Otherwise, I think we've we did kind of talk about this. So, I will entertain a motion as well. Council member Foster Bolton. I'll make a motion to adopt the resolution approving the purchase agreement for a property at 16809 State Highway 7. And Council member Romilly. I'll second. I have a motion by Council member Foster Bolton, a second by Council member Romilly. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Foster Bolton. Yes. Maxwell. Yes. Wilbern. Yes. Calvert. Yes. Romilly. >> Yes. Shack. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Okay. We are cooking with fire here. All right. Um item 14C, which is an a conditional use permit for a licensed residential care facilities at 2000 Hopkins Crossroad. And Ms. Thomas, this is you. Uh thank you, Mayor Shack. Uh this evening staff is uh, recommending that the council adopt the resolution approving the conditional use permit uh, for this project. As you are aware, uh, this 2 and 1/2 acre property is situated southwest of the Hopkins Crossroads 394 interchange. It is zoned and guided for single-family or low-density residential use, but it's never been used uh, in that traditional residential setting. The building on the site, the original building, which is the northerly portion, was constructed in 1920 as a a school. And then in the 1950s, that southerly one-story addition uh, was made. 30 years after that addition, in the mid-1980s, the school itself was closed and the building in its entirety was repurposed as an adolescent residential drug treatment facility. And the use of that building uh, or that specific use ended a few years ago and the building is currently vacant. The building is generally centrally um, located on the site. It has existing parking lots to its east and uh, north. It's relatively flat, but if you walk the site, there is a an upward slope from behind the building uh, to that rear property line. And it's along that slope and and some along the north property line where most of the mature trees on the site are located. Hopefully you'll recall that in the fall of 2025, uh, the applicant this evening did present four uh, concept plans for redevelopment of the site. Two of those plans contemplated retaining uh, and renovating the oldest portion of the school building and then two other plans uh, contemplated its demolition. All of the plans showed construction of residential care facilities for people living with Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia. And during the concept plan review phase, members of both the planning commission and city council um noted that while they understood that it might not be economically feasible to reuse that building, um they certainly hoped the applicant would would take a look at that. I'd say that broadly um the planning commission and city council felt that this residential type of use of the property um was appropriate. The group then Excelsior Group consulted with a construction company and an affordable housing developer who specializes in historic reuse projects. And after speaking with them and going through their numbers, they found that the cost to refurbish the building, whether it be for office or commercial use, or the cost to convert that existing building into housing was simply too great. So, the Excelsior Group has now submitted on behalf of English Rose a formal application to redevelop the property. The plan does call for removing the existing school building in its entirety. And then constructing two 10-bedroom residential care homes. The homes themselves would be one story in size and about 8,000 square feet. I should say they're 8,000 square feet in size, one story in height. Um they would feature common spaces including the kitchen, living rooms, dining rooms, staff dedicated areas, and then again 10 bedrooms in each home. The homes themselves would be served by uh 20 parking stalls generally located in the same place as those existing parking lots to the east and to the north of the buildings. To accommodate uh the redevelopment, there would be um earthwork that would occur and tree removal associated with that. About 2 to 6 ft of excavation in the northerly and central area of the site. Um some of that occurring in that upward slope. Um also excavation certainly to provide for the three rain gardens that are located on the site to uh perform storm water management. The grading is likely to affect six high priority trees, four of which are on the rear slope, uh and then two on the north uh parking lot. Staff does support uh the proposed redevelopment for three reasons. First, uh and perhaps foremost, we find that the proposed use is reasonable and appropriate. Um though it's been used for other uses, it's always been residentially zoned and residentially guided. So, this type of use is um consistent with that. In our opinion, the site and the building have been thoughtfully designed. The buildings are centrally located, so they're positioned away from the county road. They're also positioned away from uh existing dwellings. The amount of parking that's proposed actually exceeds uh city code requirements. And the driveway access, as it's proposed, uh does offer the best sight lines along the county road. And then finally, uh this proposal does meet all of the conditional use permit standards uh that are outlined in code. Um so, that was a kind of a brief presentation, but just to conclude, we do recognize that removing that school building that has existed for over 100 years will certainly change the character of the property and the area. But in the opinion of staff, the Excelsior Group proposal has been well thought out. It's attractive. Again, it meets all city code requirements. The Planning Commission considered the project at its March 26th meeting and did concur with staff's recommendation, recommending that the City Council approve the proposal. Um before I turn it back to you, Mayor Schack, I would point out that the applicant has been very engaged with the neighborhood. We've received only two comments um from area residents. One was in your addendum tonight. Both of those are in favor of the project as presented. The applicant has also had really good conversation with the Minnetonka Historical Society and I think they'll talk about that this evening. And so with that, I would turn it back to the Mayor and Council for questions. Thank you, Ms. Thomas. Okay, Council, any questions for staff? Okay, I'm not seeing any. Um technically, the public hearing on this item happened at the Planning Commission, but I'm going to invite the applicant to come on up and tell us what you'd like us to know from your perspective. And please provide us with your name and address. Jill Kiner, 1660 Utica, St. Louis Park. Um I'm with Excelsior Group. Thank you for having us back to talk um some more about this project. Um since we met with the Council last fall, we've evolved the site plan. Um Ms. Thompson covered a number of the evolutions, but I'll just point out a couple of key features that I think might be interesting to the Council. As you can see, um rather than the more linear home structure that we started with, we opted to go with a home layout that we call kind of a cluster approach. Um the good thing about that is it meets the needs of the operator, English Rose, but it also really helps that larger building feel um, in scale with the residential area around that. And I hope some of the renderings help too, um, give that picture. Um, another thing that we have evolved is how we're addressing storm water. So, we originally thought we'd do one big storm pond, but as a municipality, great learning opportunity for the students. So, I'll try and bumble through the my civil engineering knowledge here. Um, but because of the slope on the site, it was really difficult to get all the water to drain down to one big storm water pond. So, instead we're addressing it through three rain gardens. Um, one as you're seeing there on the north of the on the site, second down on the south of the site, and then one in the middle that we've incorporated into an amenity area for the residents. So, they really become a beautiful landscaping feature. Um, that amenity area is fully fenced in, so it's secure. It's a space where residents can, um, go out through each of the homes. There's a deck There's a sunroom, a deck, and then there's a walking path that goes throughout that, um, amenity area. Um, we'll have benches, raised garden beds, um, and gathering spaces. So, family members can come and and spend time with their loved ones there. Um, another thing, um, we, you know, did our best, uh, to retain as many of the mature trees as we could. Um, but our tree replacement plan also includes replanting at or adding at least eight trees along the boulevard. That was something that we heard in our last, um, meeting with the council that we could reforest that Boulevard plantings that that would be a a value-add. Um, right now our plan has 3-in calipers, so diameter, but we are working with our landscaper right now to see if we can increase that maybe even as high as six, which would give us up to 30 ft of trees right at install. So really give that, um, uh, you know, replace more of the mature trees and we're looking at some really fast-growing species, oaks and maples, um, with the diversity of of tree type. Uh, a key item of discussion when we presented, uh, last time was around retention of the school building. Um, and as Ms. Thompson said, we did explore that in a number of different ways. Um, and ultimately are presenting a project that does remove it. However, um, through working with the Minnetonka Historical Society and the Sherwood Forest Association, um, we've agreed on a plan to memorialize the school building in the following ways. So one, um, the Historical Society will come in and and photograph and document the building. Uh, the Historical Society will then design a, uh, memorial plaque which we will, um, pay for and install in a public area on the site. We are also going to retain some of the red brick that's on the exterior of the building and use that to line the, um, sidewalks that go up to the front doors of the homes, as well as in some of the monument signage and other signage on the site. And then, um, retain the school Oak Knoll school building sign. And our goal now, um, we're working with the landscaper to make sure we can actually do this, but our goal is to reuse that sign in landscaping in a public area. So, the sign and the and the monument plaque would be in a space somewhere close to the parking lot where you know, people can come, see it, take a minute, read the plaque, and be by the school sign as well. So, those are some of the key features of the new part of the plan. And I'm just available for any questions that you may have. Council, any questions for the developer? Okay, Ms. Prior. Thank you. We may have you back up, but there's been a miraculously low number of comments about this. So, yeah, thank you. >> Um all right. So, council I was going to say we would be happy to take comment from but I don't see anybody here on this project. So, let's let's just have a conversation. Certainly, maybe shocking at least to me that we haven't heard more from the neighbors. Maybe that's a testament to the project. So, council, anything? Council member Calvert. Thank you, Mayor. I will just say that the mayors that have that the neighbors that have commented are positive and that speaks so well about English Rose and is in stark contrast to some of the other developers that we saw um uh in recent memory including tonight. Um so, I actually mentioned to Mr. Funk earlier today that um you know, I think I think this developer is um very sensitive um to the needs of the community um and their desires and um it's something that unfortunately is very needed um no matter how many of these facilities that we build, it won't be enough. Um, from what I can tell, it's very attractive. Um, I think it's a very appropriate use um for this property. I appreciate the comments about tree replacement. Um, I know that maples grow faster than oaks. I also know that there are some pretty wonderful um, slower growing trees that we might be losing on that property and um they're also valuable and uh more in their own way more durable. So, um putting in a plug for those and um I really like the um the design concept concepts in terms of honoring what has been there. Um, I think they're all really good ideas and uh I'm in favor. Um, I think it's well thought out and um going to be a good amenity for the city. Any other Council member Maxwell? I uh agree with Council member Calvert. I think this is a beautiful project. I'm excited to support it. Um, one thing I'll add just as a general comment is that generally I like to reduce the amount of impervious surface and so to see parking exceeding what is um required by the city. Usually I would be against that. In this case, for this particular use, it makes sense if you're going to have um that many bedrooms and the staff coming and going. In this case, I am supportive of that um more intensive use of the property. Anybody else have a perspective they want to share? Council member Rummel. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I agree it's this is a lovely design. It is a reasonable and even laudable use. I applaud all the work that has gone into that this and in thought that has gone into this design. And I also find it tragic um uh to lose the school. I was, you know, recently in Washington, D.C. in the old neighborhood that I lived in where there were many structures built at about the same time as this that have been um you know, preserved and retained. And even closer to home, we have Excelsior Elementary School, the Excelsior City Hall, other places that have been and saved and I, you know, I'm just sad, very sad as as somebody who has uh studied history and was trained as an historian to see this go. Um I wish we could somehow save it. I wish it could be sold for a dollar and moved. Um I would love to see that tried if it hasn't been already. Um but, you know, I I agree that this is, for all the reasons that have already been stated, um that I will be um sadly approving this this project. Anybody else? All right. Well, just I will just from a recent past historical context say that this property has not been without its neighborhood engagement. So, I have total faith that this is not neighbors not paying attention. It's neighbors who are probably relieved. You know, I I have mixed feelings about the building. I think it creates a pretty traumatic response for neighbors who were there. Just it was a difficult um they were difficult many years just at the nature of what type of care was being provided at the at that building in the past. And so, um I think that's why we haven't heard more and haven't heard more please to keep the building. You know, I did I was very torn about it and drove by with my husband. And my husband said, he's usually like, don't tear it down type of person. He really is uh to Council member Romilly's point. And he just his response was like, it's an old building, but it's not one that I would, you know, go to the map for. And I, you know, I I thought about it and and I can understand that some not all of these older buildings are created equal. To that point, I think that this is a very worthy project. I think we're always looking for these types of diversity of um living spaces, I'm going to call it, I mean, it's housing, but kind of a different use of housing. And so, um I'm appreciative also to the care that the developer has put into coming up with this proposal and thinking about options. So, with that, um I would take a motion. Council member Calvert. I think I can get it in here. We'll get it on the screen here. Okay. I'd like to make the motion to adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit for two licensed residential care facilities at 2000 Hopkins Crossroad. Council member Foster Bolton. I'll second. So, I have a motion from by Council member Calvert, a second by Council member Foster Bolton. Ms. Larson, please call roll. Foster Bolton. Yes. Maxwell. Yes. Wilburn. Yes. Calvert. Yes. Romilly. Yes. Schack. Yes. Motion carries. Good luck with the project and we'll we're excited to see it come to fruition. All right. 14D is a conditional use permit request for an accessory dwelling unit at 15815 Minnetonka Boulevard and Ms. Thomas. Uh thank you again. Um staff this evening is recommending that the council adopt the resolution denying this specific conditional use permit uh request. To give you some context, this property uh is quite large. It's uh located on the south side of Minnetonka Boulevard. If you drive down Minnetonka Boulevard, you've um likely seen it. The property is about 1.35 acres in size. It contains this existing single-family home uh constructed in 1941. It has a floor area of just over or 4,500 uh square feet. In the zoning ordinance in Minnetonka, perhaps unlike other communities, we define floor area as enclosed space that's above grade that does include uh garage space. And 1/2 of the space of a walkout or lookout level. We don't include full basements in our floor uh area. That's because Minnetonka has historically looked at mass in terms of building size rather than um what's below ground, essentially. This property um also includes an existing accessory dwelling unit that was built in the 1970s and that structure has a floor area of just over 900 square feet. Uh here is a picture of the south side of that structure as well as existing uh floor of both the main floor and second floor. The property owners are proposing to remove this existing ADU and construct a new ADU uh in generally the same location, but actually slightly closer to uh the home itself and away from that west property line. Like the existing ADU, the proposed ADU would be two stories in size. The first floor would include a two-stall garage, screen porch, and bathroom and wet bar area. And then the second story would contain living and kitchen areas, a bathroom, and two bedrooms. This ADU would have a floor area of 2,375 square feet and a total height of 30 feet, which would be 6 feet taller than that existing home. Uh this diagram, aside from the table showing you those um specific square footages and heights I've just noted, also shows the location of the existing home and ADU and then the proposed ADU um in red. As the council is aware, ADUs are conditionally permitted uses in our low-density residential district. And the zoning ordinance outlines two different groups of standards. The first are general standards that get to consistency with the intent of the ordinance and the impact that an ADU may have on public facilities, public infrastructure. And then the second group of standards, 20-plus standards, really relate to structural location and design. In general, reading through the planning commission report you noted, I hope that um this proposed ADU generally meets many of those standards. However, it doesn't meet two specific standards. Um those being the ordinance limits total size of an ADU to 1,000 square feet or 35% of the floor area of the principal home, whichever is less. And the ordinance also limits the height to the highest point of the principal dwelling. The ordinance does go on to say that the council may approve a larger building or a taller building um if the structure would not result in adverse impacts on neighboring properties. In the opinion of staff, that may is really important because if the council feels that the size and height of the proposed structure is reasonable and there's no adverse impacts, you could approve it. Alternatively, if the council feels the height and size are not reasonable, you do not have to approve those upper or go beyonds, as it were, regardless of whether there's site impacts. Really, there's there's no specific check boxes for the council in this area of approve or deny um these larger areas or larger heights. Some of you'll remember that when we looked at the ADU ordinance back in 2021, these specific standards were added and the intent was really to ensure that accessory dwelling units are just that, that they're accessory both visually and in terms of use to the principal structures. So, in the opinion of staff, uh this proposed ADU is quite attractive. It's been attractively designed. It's further from the property line. We understand the desires of the applicant to include those various components, the garage, uh the screen porch, the wet bar. They have a nice pool and lawn area. So, we do understand those desires. However, it's also our opinion that the ADU is not reasonable because it doesn't meet the intent of an accessory dwelling unit. It would be over half the size of the existing floor area of the existing home. Um and it would be taller than the existing home. And we do recognize that the 1941 home is modest in in height and size, but we don't find that to be a justification for a larger ADU. Rather, we find the opposite suggesting that this ADU is simply not in scale with that primary um structure. If approved, this ADU would be the largest new build in our community. Um I would note, and it was noted in your report, that we did approve the council did approve a larger percentage ADU. We approved a uh uh um almost a 70% uh ADU. Um that was for the conversion of an existing structure. So, an existing detached garage that was converted to an ADU. We have approved ADUs that are over 1,000 sq ft or over 35% of the primary structure, but we've never approved something that is both. Um when this application uh certainly would be. Applications get submitted or staff has conversations with applicants frequently um about ADUs that do exceed both of those. Those cases don't come before the council because we've been able to um work with the applicant to redesign so that um either they're under both or they're just exceeding either the square footage or the percentage. In summary then, staff finds that um this specific proposal does not meet the intent of the ordinance, and eliminating some of the components of this building would result in accessory dwelling unit that is better scaled to the principal structure. Uh the planning commission considered the proposal at its, oh, I think March 26th meeting and did concur with staff's recommendation recommending that uh, this body deny the project. And so, with that, I would turn it back to the council and Mayor Shack. Thank you, Ms. Thomas. Council, any questions for staff? Uh, Council Member Foster Bolton. Um, is this A R A D U's coming up at all in the zoning rewrite? Ms. Thomas. >> going to be any Uh, Mayor Shack and uh, Council Member Foster Bolton, yes. Um, one of the things that we are considering in um, the zoning ordinance rewrite is A D U's and looking at all of these standards, looking at um, whether uh, they may be primary and permitted uses, I shouldn't say primary, permitted uses or conditionally permitted uses. All of those things are are being discussed by our work groups at this time. And can I ask another one? And that includes the size. Is that correct? Like in the Uh, Mayor Shack and and Council Member Foster Bolton, I don't know about that specifically off the top of my head. Yeah, if I may, Mayor. Uh, go ahead. Uh, Council Member Foster Bolton, that is not something the council has provided clear direction on because you have just updated it uh, 5 years ago um, and you've had a long standing history of uh, the existing A D U's and existing housing. So, we you haven't kind of had a conversation like that. There has been administrative, like uh, Ms. Thomas has described to you, administratively uh, making these easier if you meet the ordinance, here we go, um, rather than going through a public hearing process, but nothing has um, delved into a size conversation cuz you did spend well, the council at the time spent a lot of time um deciding what those parameters should be. So. Council, other questions? Uh Councilmember Romaine-Alys. Thank you, Mayor. Um I just brought this up with uh City Manager Funk this morning and uh This may not be apropos for this one, but has there did Were there any discussions with applicant about possibly um rezoning to an R2? And would that make any difference here? Ms. Thomas. Um Mayor Shack and uh Councilmember Romaine-Alys, um I can answer that in two ways. First, I I don't believe uh that senior planner Jeri Engelson I apologize, Mr. Funk. Um and that he had uh uh conversations about rezoning. So, I think the answer is no. Uh I'm not sure that rezoning uh to R2 would work in this specific case. Um one it may be considered spot zoning um because it is a just a property in the middle of a a bunch of other R1 properties. I believe and I can take a look at the code. I also believe that R2 um is for attached product, and so you would have um two uh a twin home or a duplex. I'm not sure on that and I can I can take a look. Councilmember Calvert. Um Thank you, Mayor. There was some discussion this morning between me and the city manager, Mr. Funk, about um subdividing um and but there is I understand that there's a pool and the lot line would be in the middle of the pool making it not terribly practical. Am I understanding that correctly? Yes, Thomas. Uh Mayor and Council Member Calvert, um that is my understanding of where the pool is located. This site actually used to be two properties. It was combined at one time. So, yeah, we may have a a setback issue there. Thank you. Other questions? Otherwise, I'll invite the applicant to come up and share anything you'd like us to know. Um just state your name and address for the record, please. Great. Hey, thanks for pulling that up. Hi, it's Kevin Francis. I'm the resident and owner at 15815 Minnetonka Boulevard. Mayor, City Council, women, it's nice to see you all again. Um you've gotten the the detailed background. I appreciate Ms. Thomas taking you taking you all through it. I'll just give you a little bit of um our rationale for why we're approaching you today for the conditional use permit. We've lived in our house for 17 years. The existing ADU on the property predates us. Rather than invest in an aging structure, we believe it makes more sense to replace that structure while also addressing two additional needs on the property. The first need is additional garage space. And I appreciate the background on kind of the the math of this. What's ironic about the math of this is our garage is very small. That creates the math problem when you look at how much um forgetting the term now, but the the the the existing structure space. And what we're doing by adding the additional structure is adding the garage space that's needed for kind of the house of our size and the the family that we've got. And then just secondly, since adding a pool, uh an outdoor dining area, and and recombining the lots, we made use of that space and we we're like we'd like to have additional space in the the ADU for that purpose. Um because these functions are combined, the new ADU, a garage, and a screen porch, we're proposing to do that singularly rather than in three different proper three different buildings, which we believe suits the neighborhood better, but is creating kind of the the the problem that was delineated earlier. So, while the structure is larger than a conformance path, we believe the city code allows the council to approve this larger ADU when the additional size does not result result in undue adverse impacts to the neighboring properties. Um so, we've had three uh determinations um for considering that as the council. The lot size is first, the placement relative to neighboring homes and screening. Uh these are the benchmarks that are being called as paramount in making this determination, which we believe we we've uh met that bar. Uh the biggest thing that we've done together with our neighbors and friends is making sure that there isn't any problem with the neighbors um with regards to this ADU. So, we demonstrated that our project um meets and exceeds the criteria outlined in this consideration and additionally has has the support has the support of the neighbors. Um so, the three criteria I would look to you to evaluate tonight in making your decision is the lot size. First, our property is 1.35 acres. It's 2.5 times the minimum required for an R1 lot in Minnetonka and nearly twice the citywide average size lot size. It's also a double frontage lot as was uh mentioned earlier. This provides the substantial space to accommodate a larger structure. Second, in the placement and distance as you're looking at here on the map, the closest neighboring structure is 128 ft away. The next closest is 162 ft away to the west, which you just reviewed earlier, the planned Taco Flats development range from 237 to 300 ft away. These are significant separations. And third, on the screening front, 81% of our property perimeter is already screened by mature trees and vegetation, and we are proposing additional screening as part of this project. Uh this new structure will actually improve setback conditions to the west property line compared to the existing building and will be less visible overall um than the existing ADU. Uh and just to just to underline again, there have been no negative comments submitted to the city regarding this project. In contrast, there are four letters of support from our friends and neighbors, including from the property owner directly to our west, who's the neighbor most impacted, uh who also supports the project, reviews it as a positive for his development that you reviewed earlier tonight. So, we believe the criteria outlined in the code have been have been satisfied. Um you know, what I would say additionally is just to look at this from your side of the house, I understand there's some hesitation in going against the recommendations of the planning department and commission. However, it's important to recognize that the planning department does not have a mechanism within the code to weigh factors like lot size, distance, and screening when a project exceeds the conformance path. Their recommendation is therefore constrained. The council, however, is explicitly empowered by the code to consider these additional factors and determine whether a larger structure creates an adverse impact. Even with the planning commission discussion, several comments directly support the standard outlined in the ordinance. For example, Commissioner Waterman noted that this is a unique large property, and the proposal would not create undue impact with meaningful neighbor support. Commissioner Minion stated that the proposal would have no adverse impact on the neighborhood. These are the precisely the considerations the code directs you to evaluate and that only you as the council are empowered to consider. There was also concerned about precedent. In that regard, I would emphasize how unique this property is. It is again 2.7 times the minimum lot size for Minnetonka, has the double frontage, exceeds trunk road setbacks by three times and non-trunk road setbacks by five times the minimum and maintains unusually large distances from neighboring structures. Combined with existing screening and the absence of any neighborhood composition opposition, excuse me, this creates a very high bar that few, if any, future applicants would be able to meet. Approval of this project would not be based solely on achieving one of those conditions, but on the totality of conditions that make this property a candidate for a larger ADU and that any future project would need to be considered against. Uh and finally, it's worth noting that the standard conformance path accessible to the planning department does not evaluate adverse impact. A smaller code-compliant ADU could still negatively affect neighbors and be approved simply because it meets size limits. In contrast, our proposal exceeds side limits, size limits, excuse me, but has demonstrated through both objective data and the neighbor feedback that it creates no adverse impact, which is explicitly what the code requires the council to evaluate in making approval determination. When considering a larger ADU, I asked the code the code does not ask how much bigger than a conforming structure is it. It asked does this ADU negatively affect neighboring properties. And based on the factors I've delineated here, the lot size, distance, screening, and neighborhood feedback, the answer in this case is that it does not. For these reasons, we respectfully request your approval for this conditional use permit. Thank you. Thank you. Council, any questions for this applicant? Go ahead, Council member Foster. So, um the the staff was was talking about how they, you know, tried to work with you to to decrease the floor area ratio or whatever that's called. And is that because you needed the garage? Is that what you said? Yes, Councilwoman it is the garage that is causing the variance. And just to tell you about more of the the use of the ADU and why I believe it's would be incremental to the city stock. It's the living space above that creates kind of the alternate dwelling unit aspect of it where you can have multi-generational living, etc. But the two-car garage that we need underneath it, it's the additive of those two that's creating the the issue. All right, you can take a seat and we might have you back up if we have any more questions, but thank you very much. All right, Council. Um Any other questions for staff? Otherwise, we'll uh let's start discussing this. Council member Wilbern. I guess maybe I should have said it before you said um I'm just trying to figure out for the the screening issue. Like so from from the road, can you see the like the accessory dwelling unit next to the house and like a little bit see the size difference or I'm just I'm just wondering like how apparent it would be that it that it's a taller building that's supposed to be an accessory building. Ms. Thomas, do you have any insight on that? Uh Mayor and Council member Foster Bolton, we did have um some photos. Some planning >> Oh, Wilburn, I apologize. Okay. Oh goodness. Um we did have some photos in the uh in the planning commission um report. Let me find that. I think that the property is set back quite a bit um from Minnetonka Boulevard. I suppose each person has a different sense of um of distance uh that we can perceive. I I can't perceive, you know, a foot. I might be able I'm 5 ft. I always think is it one of me or two of me um as I measure um things. I think that the applicant has also suggested that they would be willing to do some plantings um in front of uh the building. So, between this property and um Minnetonka Boulevard. All right. Any other questions? Otherwise, it's down dust. Don't Don't everybody so excited to speak today. What happened our council over the break? All right. Councilmember Fasterbom, I guess I I I am inclined to um to approve this ADU because I guess I I and I I know that the the code was changed just in 2021, but I wasn't here um and so when we talk about the intent, and so the intent of an ADU is that it is an accessory, and um that that definition alone confuses me. Like a little bit. I know no no, it doesn't I I know what it means, but I want to know why is that important that it that it looks like an accessory. What? Staff, I guess for that. No. I mean Because it's it was us, right? That we that kind of decided that. And so I And that's that's that's what that's what I'm struggling with with right now because I don't see that as an issue. Um And and I and I and I don't think it's a I'm not convinced that it's a reasonable excuse to deny the permit. That alone. Because it looks like like I saw those pictures of the planning commission where I can't tell. It just looks taller. And to me And no neighbor is complaining. I and I and I know that that you guys that the staff is making the determination based on what the council has decided. I'm just saying that I I don't see I'm not convinced. Council member Calvert. Thank you. So, I have door knocked this lovely home. And it is a lovely property with lovely people that live in it. And um I fully understand what um they're trying to accomplish. I appreciate sort of the combining of the the many um needs into one structure and trying not to build many different structures. I will also say that the square footage of this ADU is twice that of my home. So, um it it I understand it and I'm reading it the supporting information here about the intended use. So, there's a full-time home office for someone who lives in a house that's four times the size of mine and that, you know, wants a separate office space, um poolside entertaining, a guest suite for their many friends. So, I want to come to some of your parties and be over your house because it sounds like a good time. Um and I mean, I think in some ways the most compelling sort of argument for was the the garage space. Um I I just feel like this is a this is is a total slippery slope because of the enormous size of this ADU and it does kind of um contravene the intent of an accessory dwelling unit because there's somewhere in a 4,500 square foot home, there should be plenty of space for an in-home office even with two kids in the house and um so, I just am not I personally am not convinced, um that it needs to be that big and it's not just the height, it's just the general size. The mitigating circumstance of sort of having a like a pool house / garage / guest home sort of makes sense to me, but I I'm just I'm just not personally, as much as it pains me, because I do understand what they're trying to do. I I do think it just kind of contradicts the whole intent of an ADU. I'll just briefly speak to the issue of kind of the accessory dwelling unit question. I mean, I I think it's important to remember that one of the things that we don't want accessory dwelling units to do is to act as a de facto kind of subdivision of a property, allowing residents to build a second home on a property that would create kind of a different zoning feel. Um so, I totally I mean, so that I think goes to the you know, to the question of Councilmember Foster Bolton. I'm challenged here because I'm looking at this lot. It's large. Um it could support two separate homes. Um it does make I mean, it makes sense. You see I I I will say that the applicant told a very compelling story. Um and so, that's you know, the challenge that I have. I wish there was something here. I wish it wasn't height and or it wasn't such an such a high um threshold above on the square footage or if there was something that we could kind of say, because I am challenged on the precedent piece of this, because we're building kind of a you know, a fully autonomous pro second home on the property, which is you know, whether I agree with that as a principle, I think is a zoning question versus a question about this application with the ordinance that we have. And so I'm very, very torn. And you know, I'd be interested to hear from my my colleagues on this because everything about this home everything about it, the people in it, the I mean, I want to go there. I was there this summer and I wanted to join the party. And so I, you know, I want to approve this, but the better part the rational part is saying we have to be careful. So I'm I'm willing to hear from my colleagues. Councilmember Remely. Thank you, Mayor. I'm kind of in the same position as both of you. I said I also raised two children in a 1,600 square foot cottage. But that's neither here nor there. Um but what I am more worried about besides the president because so many properties have unique attributes. We also have I'm worried about the fairness because I believe it was last year or the year before we denied somebody um a garage because he had like a vintage car collection that he had inherited from his father. And you know, we denied that even though it was fully screened from the neighbors, it wasn't visible from the road, all of these things and I just don't know what that says about this council if we've done that so recently and we're in the middle of a a zoning rewrite. I personally would say maybe it's worth and I brought this up with city manager Funk today that it may well be worth considering or relooking at our ADU standards in the zoning rewrite especially given our goals in terms of housing. So far, unfortunately, we haven't had a lot of ADUs being used as housing, which I think or as a rental housing or anything else as a way to kind of increase housing supply in our community and I would love to see that maybe change and maybe doing that can hear, but you know, if it wasn't both, that's you know, that's what's really hard. I could see, you know, either To me, there's kind of like three things you could do is you could, you know, go down from one two bedrooms to one bedroom and do a carport or you could, you know, do it on one level and have greater, you know, square footage or you can somehow dig into the hill so you're dropping. You know, there are other things that you can do and I realize for financial reasons I may not be as appealing. Um however, it's it's it's it this is a hard hard very hard and I I agree with Commissioner Minion who brought this up at the at the planning commission that this was just a an extremely difficult um Yeah, I've been wrestling with it all weekend. So, um I'm right now more inclined to say no, which really pains me. Um but, you know, I'm I'm willing to listen to my fellow council members and, you know, see what they have to say as well. Councilmember Maxwell. Yeah, I have also similar thoughts to the other council members who have already spoken. And I didn't ask this question. I've been frantically scrolling through my packet to find the floor plan for the existing primary home because I'm trying to think about that definition of what is an accessory dwelling. And we talk about it has to be subordinate to the primary structure. And I think that that can be independent of the size compared to other houses in Minnetonka. I think that's maybe irrelevant whether it's bigger than other houses, but is it subordinate to the main structure? And I think even if it's taller, it could be subordinate. Even if it's wider, you know, it could be subordinate. Um and so that's why I was looking through the floor plans and in this sub um accessory dwelling unit, it's two 11 by 11 bedrooms, which is a pretty modest size bedroom, whereas in the primary structure, they're 19 by 19 ft or larger bedrooms. Um quite a lot of huge spaces in that house. And so I think if I consider the just the size of the spaces in the house, the the ADU here is clearly accessory, I would say, to the primary um the primary structure. Um but I do hear the point that I think it was um you, Mayor, that said it feels like a fully autonomous home on the same site. And that maybe it does feel a little bit like a zoning issue almost. Um but given the size of the lot, the distance from other homes, um the screening with the trees, the setbacks, um even the support of the neighbors, I feel like it wouldn't really change the character of the neighborhood in this uh particular site to have just an extra four um foot I don't remember exactly how many feet taller it is than the existing um existing building. So those are um my thoughts. Councilmember Welborn. Um yeah, I don't know that I have that much more to add. Um I will say I don't know that like an ADU, in my mind anyway, can be autonomous. We've approved ADUs that are autonomous. They're just smaller than the than the um other structure. Um I'm I'm inclined to to lean towards accepting this proposal for the the reasons that uh Councilmember Maxwell has has shared. And and and I get it makes me a little uncomfortable. I know it's our job to determine if it's an accessory dwelling unit. Um, it makes me uncomfortable to get down into, well, you don't need that or you don't need this. Uh, that I don't think, you know, that's just I don't think that's part of my job. It's determine to determine if the if you need the things that you want to put in the unit as long as they're meet code and are, you know, aren't illegal. Um, so yeah, I I I guess that's kind of where I am. I think it's it's still an accessory even though I I certainly understand the the caution about setting precedent and going over both square footage and height. Um, that is a concern to me as well. That's the only reason why I'm like not 100% saying, yes, let's go ahead and approve this, but I am leaning that way. Question. Go ahead, Council member Fasterbaugh. Um, and the the the dwelling that were that was um, denied that Council member Romali spoke of, I wasn't on the council then. It was right before I I got on the council. >> were on here. No, we weren't. Yes, we were. He's my neighbor and I know we weren't on the council. No, because um, >> you're thinking of a different one. The we're I'm talking about the one on Yeah, no, with the with the on Orchard. Yeah, I'm I'd like to find out for sure because I was in the room. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Um, Okay. Council member Calvert. So, one of the things I I think about and I appreciate Council from Council bringing up that garage is I think about like things that were sort of pre zoning and um when we make exceptions and sort of the our reputation for being sort of a well-planned community and this suits the purpose for this family but to put a structure of that size next to that house where it's going I don't know if that's like well-planned. It suits the purpose for this one home. As much as I totally sympathize and understand what they're trying to do and it's very compelling. I but I do think about it's a 1.35 acre property and we're putting this sort of autonomous house right next like to me it's a zoning and planning conundrum that it's on some on on some levels it makes sense to approve and there is something that the the way the mayor phrased it to me there's something that does make me very uncomfortable. It's not just that it's sort of an autonomous home. It's it's having a fully autonomous home right next to a home without rezoning. So I mean just the fact that um Council member Wilbern brought I think it was Council member Wilbern asked question about rezoning and we can't do R2. It's not really R1A and it's in the middle of an R1 neighborhood. It There's something about that that just makes me uncomfortable. And when we were talking about the garage, it was the same thing. I love that neighbor. He keeps his home very well. I was very sympathetic about his intentions there, but it just felt like you know, when the next person buys it, what do they do with it? You know, what do you do with this giant garage in the back? And so, it's just these similar sort of planning and zoning like elements of consistency so that we do live in a well-planned community and that the intent of the ordinances followed so that it is orderly development. And this one feels a little a little bit disorderly. I but it is prob- it's one of the most problematic, I mean there are a lot of reasons to support it as well because he's right. You have a garage. You have um entertainment space and you have um the accessory dwelling all in one building instead of having a separate screened-in area and a separate garage and a separate ADU. I um I appreciate what they're trying to accomplish, but it does make me feel uncomfortable. All right. So, we I think people have said what they need to say. Um so, you know, we've got a recommendation from staff. And so one way or another um well, in order to we need four votes one way or another here. Um So, if somebody wants to make a motion we can make a motion to go Go ahead, Ms. Thomas. I'm Amir Shakur. I was simply going to note that if the council's inclined to approve this, um rather than make a specific motion to approve it, direct staff to um come back to you with a a resolution with your findings and conditions of approval as long as that's okay with the city attorney. So, I guess I would start maybe with a motion if if somebody wants to make a motion to adopt the resolution denying See where we land on that. I mean, is that where we want to go? And then Okay, Councilmember Calvert. And it pains me to do this because I'm very sympathetic, but I'm going to make the motion to deny to adopt the resolution denying the conditional use permit for an ADU at 15815 Minnetonka Boulevard. And do I have a second on that? It pains me as well because I like both the people who live there, but if I did that, then I mean, then I should have approved the garage. Um and I didn't do that. And I just feel for right now it's a it's it's an issue of fairness. And it's also something that we I hope, that the zoning rewrite will address for the reasons that I previously stated. Um I hope that this can be reworked, but anyway, I will second the motion. Okay. So, I have a motion by Councilmember Calvert and a second by Councilmember Romilly. Miss Larson, please call roll. Pastor Bolton? No. Maxwell? No. Wilburn? No. Calvert? Yes. Romilly? Yes. Schack? I knew that was going to happen. I did too. Um no. So, motion fails. So, we're going to direct staff to Well, we're we're going to make a motion to direct staff to prepare resolution to bring back to our next regular council meeting on April 27th um approving the conditional use permit for an ADU at 15815 Minnetonka Boulevard. So, I need somebody to make that motion. Councilmember Wilburn. So moved. Councilmember Maxwell. Second. Uh I have a motion by Councilmember Wilburn and a second by Councilmember Maxwell. Miss Larson, please call roll. Pastor Bolton? Yes. Maxwell? Yes. Wilburn? Yes. Calvert? Yes. Romilly? No. Schack? Yes. Motion carries. Okay. So, um we will bring this back I where there won't like we won't need to have a full presentation at that point. Um it's your choice, obviously, if you choose to come or not. Um, okay. So, council that, you know, boy, we're really earning our dinner tonight. Okay. Um, on to item 15, which is appointments and reappointments. We have none. Item 16, which is adjournment. And uh, take a motion to adjourn. Council member Wilbern. I move adjournment. And a second. Council member Calvert. Second. Have a motion by Council member Wilbern and a second by Council member Calvert. All in favor? Aye. Aye. We are adjourned. That's fine. And I I