Uh, welcome to the February 24th, 2026 City Council meeting. I hereby call the meeting to order. Uh, members of the public uh, may attend this meeting in person or may watch it or listen remotely by viewing the meeting on channel 8 WCTV and the city's website at weisetta.org. Public comment during the public forum and or public hearing portions of the meeting may be provided in person or at the meeting in advance or by logging into the team's call and raising your hand during the public hearing. When your name is called in the meeting, you will be seen and heard in our council chambers and the cable channel. You'll be asked to unmute. Make sure your camera is on and then you may begin your comments. All public comments should include your first name and the street or neighborhood or representing a group. Um, next is the pledge of allegiance. If I could ask everyone to stand if you are able and follow along. 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. >> Thank you. >> Next is uh our roll call. Um let the record reflect that all council members are present. And I will note that earlier uh this evening, we all participated in a workshop and discussed the following items. Discussion of Lake Street closures for special events. Uh an update on the park and trails master uh plan and uh CIP and then uh reviewed our future workshop discussion topics. Um next on our agenda is to approve the agenda. Uh, I need a motion to approve the agenda as is or would anyone like to make any changes? >> Would make that motion to approve as is, Mr. Mayor? >> Great. Can I have a second? >> Second. >> Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in those favor say I. >> Those opposed say nay. The motion passes 5 to zero. >> Next up is our public forum. Um, just a reminder for those here in the public attendance tonight and your interest in speaking, um, fill out a card, pass it to staff, and, you know, indicate your, uh, first name, the neighborhood that you're representing or group, limit your comments to 3 minutes. And if you want to speak that's something that's on the agenda, uh, you fill out a form, uh, also, but for a named agenda item. And so, um, first item on our public forum is a presentation of why the set a school district referendum by Superintendent Chase Anderson. Um, do we have anyone else that filled out a card for um, non-aggenda items? >> Um, Mr. Mayor, we >> Okay, great. So, we just have one presenter. Welcome, Mr. Anderson. >> Yeah, right here. >> You're on the home stretch of doing these, right? As you've as you've announced your your your retirement. So, >> yeah, it's a little surreal yet at this point after 18 years here in the school district and 43 years in my career. >> Um, it seemed like a an okay time for the district for the transition to occur and I have a lot of mixed feelings about it and have certainly loved my time here and serving the community. So, a lot of mixed feelings, but um >> I have uh two uh primary goals here in my remaining time. One I'm here to speak briefly with you about tonight is our upcoming facilities referendum. And then the second one is to help us nail the handoff to the new superintendent. So we're hoping by mid-March uh the school board will have that person selected and I'll have some nice time to to spend with them. So So I do really appreciate it. Uh Mr. Mayor and council members, thank you so much for creating a few moments for me. I'll try to be brief with my comments. I brought uh a few flyers here with me too that I'll leave behind and you can grab those on the the way out or following the meeting. Uh I think you also have been provided with a video that we're going to ceue up here uh in a moment, but I'm I'm maybe going to just uh hit a few quick highlights about um our proposal. I have a very thick PowerPoint presentation that you'll be glad to know I'm not going to go through tonight because uh I can spend up to 30 or 60 minutes depending on uh the number of questions etc with that. But I thought I would hit a few of the highlights and then they'll be reinforced with the video and then I'd be happy to take uh any questions that you may have for me. So uh April 14th is the date that uh is identified as our official election date. Early voting uh for our facilities referendum starts this Friday at our district service center. So there's a six week time period approximately prior to the uh concluding day for the election. And a few of the things that uh I wanted to share is we've been on an an enrollment growth journey the entire time I've been here. So I've been working with the school district for 18 years. When I started here in July of 2008, we had 9,700 K12 students, of which about uh 1,350, you can tell I've done this presentation a few times, were open enrollment students actually at the time. >> And uh today we have 13,000 K12 students and about 220 of those are open enrollment. So we've been growing and adding facilities to accommodate our resident students within uh the footprint of the school district. So, we've gone from about 17% open enrolled students to about 1 and a.5%. So, uh the facilities that we're proposing for the community are uh engineered and designed to accommodate what we're anticipating for uh a pretty good growth curve yet. We think that this is the final spurt uh for significant growth within the school district and these facilities would help accommodate that. I've been speaking at uh PTA meetings now for 18 years and I would say for 12 or 15 years of those I've been saying that I believe our community will probably cap out somewhere in that neighborhood of about 14,500 students K12 might go up a little bit or may stay a little bit below that. Um, our enrollment projections are suggesting that uh uh my approximations probably weren't too far off, but we are going to hit those outer limits of our school district. Currently, Madina is sort of the large open area yet that uh we're anticipating at least an additional 600 single family homes being built in Madina over a period of a number of years. Um whether or not there will be additional homes beyond that is yet to be determined, but we do anticipate pretty good amount of growth there. There's still quite a lot of space in Corkran as well that we anticipate that there will be a number of uh developments continuing there as well. Again, I'm just trying to hit the highlights. I did a little bit of a projection with um uh the whatifs. What if we grew at the same rate for the next 10 years that we've grown for the last 18? uh where would that put us out into the future? So, we've averaged about an increase of 185 to 200 new K12 students every year in the 18 years that I've been here. Uh the exception was the fall of 2020, which was the COVID year where some families made alternative choices for a year and then we kind of leveled off. So, we dropped actually 200 students, which was really an anomaly for us. Then we leveled off for a year and now we're back at that rate of about 180 to 200 students per year. So, in the event that we were to grow at the exact same rate annually uh for the next 10 years, we would be just under 15,000 students. If we grew at 75%, we'd be at about 14,500. 50% at about 14,000. And even with only 25% of that same growth rate, we'd still be at about 13,500 students. So, I don't think the 25% is realistic, and I also don't think the 100% is realistic, but I think we're going to approximate that uh about uh 75% of the growth rate for the next 10 years before our community is going to start hitting that equilibrium point and leveling off probably at about 14,500 to 14,600 K12 students. Um so, we've been real involved with facilities uh since the time that I've been here. uh almost every year we've been uh focusing on how to uh expand capacity within the existing buildings and or uh create new facilities by adding on classrooms or building new schools. We built two elementary schools in that time frame. And we uh Meet Ridge and Northwoods up in uh uh north part of Plymouth and we built a new early learning school uh which was an addition built onto Oakwood Elementary School to accommodate high demand within the uh community for early learning opportunities. And uh this proposal will add some additional classrooms on the second floor of that facility that we built. at the time we didn't have enough funds to finish off the upper level, but uh we've incorporated that into um our our plan that we're bringing to the community. So, there's three questions on the ballot. The first one is a straight renewal of one of our two technology levies. So, we bring in about 12 million per year uh through two voter approved tech levies and uh we're seeking renewal of one of those two for an additional 10 years. I think there's two or three years of capacity or um time frame left on the existing. So that would extend it out by 10 years. We utilize that for all the equipment for students, for our staff, uh for a number of staff members who keep our software and hardware systems up to date and uh also a number of safety and security things across the district as well. A second question will be what I'm calling our comprehensive facilities package. So, it's in the amount of $465 million and it includes a new elementary school, a new middle school uh on property that we own in Madina. We have about 85 acres of which 65 acres are buildable. And it's large enough for both an elementary school that would accommodate about 900 additional students and a middle school that would accommodate an additional 800 students. And again, I believe that uh that that increase or addition of those two buildings and an addition onto our high school would accommodate what we might anticipate for the great majority of the growth into the future. And then for the third question, um it's related to the construction of a new swimming pool at the high school and uh that would be in the amount of $31 million and that would be an eight lane swimming pool. It would be adjacent to our gymnasiums and our fed area. It would be the home of our uh approximately 200 boys and girls swimmers at the high school. And currently they use Lifetime Fitness in Plymouth. Uh we signed a 40-year agreement on that and uh of which we've used 30 years. So we're kind of on the clock with 10 years left of having access to a pool uh with no asurances beyond that. And uh in addition to the the convenience of the location and having uh opportunities to secure and and provide uh safe and uh maximum safety environment for our students uh to have it on our own campus adjacent to our locker rooms and other facilities is seen as a real big plus for us. So, um, the tax impact on the comprehensive package of the $465 million package for the elementary, the middle school, and the, uh, addition to the high school along with a number of other projects and all of our other buildings on a $650,000 house. And we had Allers and Associates determine what's the average priced home within the footprint of the school district. And it's currently about $650,000. So, for a home valued at $650,000, uh, the tax impact would be an additional $29 per month, and that's [snorts] on a 25-y year mortgage, so to speak. And then with the swimming pool, the $31 million uh package for the the swimming pool over a 25-year period on that same $650,000 home would be an additional $4 a month. So, it would be $33 per month on a home valued at $650,000. So, those are the three questions. Again, uh early voting begins on Friday of this week at our district service center. Um there are a number of other projects that are going to be done uh within our school district as well. Uh specifically of one of the changes that'll happen at West Middle School be which is here in the footprint of weisetta which I think most of you know will be the addition of a another gym. Uh we also just finished uh for those of you who may have attended uh West Middle School whether as a middle school or as a high school perhaps. We just uh remodeled about 13,000 square ft of former locker room space into uh three music rooms and some practice rooms and it was a great improvement for that building and a great utilization of what was underutilized uh space uh that we're able to to make better improvements with. We're going to do a little bit of uh site work around Plymouth Creek and improve uh traffic flow for buses and automobiles and trying to separate those two and and improving pedestrian uh walkways, etc. And yeah, that's kind of the that's the real quick flyover. I know you have a busy agenda and a a lot to get through tonight, but those are kind of the highlights. There's a lot of really great information on our website if you're interested in pulling that up and taking a look at uh all the things that we have in mind and if you're interested in uh getting a little bit more detail. Our website is really good. Just go to our homepage and then look for a button that says referendum. Click on that and you'll uh find a lot of documents on there that uh speak specifically to uh the improvements at the high school uh which would include a career tech uh education program where we would create many or several classrooms that would accommodate our uh career tech programming and move them out of current uh kind of standard classrooms that really aren't specifically designed for the construction and and uh the CNA or the certified nursing assistant program that we do. So, we're excited about the possibility of uh being able to more specifically design classrooms that uh in a better way can meet the needs of our students. So, uh we're excited about that and all the other things that are included. And with that, I might suggest we have Do you have time for the video yet? >> Yeah, time for the video and I think there might be a couple questions. >> Perfect. So, go ahead and cue that up. You'll hear hopefully a few things that you just heard me state as well. >> An amazing experience for our family and the best part is the staff. Everyone strives to make every day a day of opportunity for our kids. >> When you think of Weisetta Schools, the first thing that pops to my mind is this incredible reputation for being excellent, highquality staff in every role, buildings and resources and things that we're constantly investing in and growing. >> It's a healthy sign when a school district is growing. That means people are moving into the community. And with the anticipated [music] growth into the future, we know that we're going to need some more space because we just can't create that within the current footprints of the school buildings that we have. >> We are only a year and a half away from being over capacity [music] at all grade levels. That's concerning as a parent. >> To plan responsibly, Weisetta Public Schools closely monitors enrollment trends and long-term projections. By the 202728 school year, the district is projected to exceed available capacity at elementary, middle school, and high school levels. As enrollment increases, classrooms, hallways, cafeterias, and shared learning spaces become more crowded, many schools in the district are already at capacity, and many of the buildings need essential improvements. Planning now helps the district manage growth responsibly and maintain a positive student experience at all levels. On April 14th, residents of Weisetta public schools will be asked to vote on a school funding referendum. The referendum includes three funding requests designed to address continued resident student enrollment growth, space needs, and essential improvements across the district. These requests focus on maintaining technology safety and security by renewing our current technology levy, creating new and improved learning spaces to address capacity needs, and a [music] new eight-lane swimming pool at the high school. These requests were generated with the help from a community task force made up of parents, staff, and community members. Going into the task force process, the thing I was really focused on was going through enrollment projections and history, going through financial details, going through individual blueprints [music] of every single school and building in the district. The outcome of that was just getting to see on display the level of expertise [music] and depth of analysis and sort of datadriven decisions that shaped this plan. Results from our latest community survey continue to show high approval ratings for our district. We also maintain a AAA bond rating. This rating demonstrates strong financial stability and sound management while helping the district secure lower interest rates that save taxpayers money. >> Renewing the existing technology levy is at the top of the ballot in this referendum. The technology levy focuses on technology safety and security. Renewing the levy would result in no tax increase. >> The current technology levy is used primarily for teaching, learning, and the human [music] development mission here in Weisetta. And it also goes to operational excellence for safety, security, and technical support in our schools. >> Building new and expanded learning spaces to address capacity needs is a major component of this referendum. [music] As enrollment continues to grow, the plan includes building a new elementary school and a new middle school on district-owned land to create space for students across the district. When we're overcrowded in our schools, that becomes the focus. So, our teachers are constantly having to think about how to manipulate the space, how to move students around, and that creates a lot of stress both on our teachers and on our students. It also prevents us from having learning activities designed in a way that students should be learning today. So, we're not able to do all of our hands-on learning. We're not being able to be experiential. Adequate space [music] directly impacts the student experience. To address capacity and program needs, the plan also includes an addition at Weisetta High School designed to support up to 900 additional students and create a centralized space [music] for career and technical education programs. >> I think it's an opportunity to meet the evolving business world that our kids are going to be entering. It's an opportunity to create flexible spaces. It's [music] putting us and positioning us in a way where we can really help develop the skills that'll be transferable regardless of which pathway a graduate from Isetta High School takes. >> In addition to new construction, essential improvements to existing schools would be made as well. Kitchen and cafeteria remodels would be done at Birch View, Greenwood, and Sunset Hill elementary schools, as well as East Middle School. The plan would also include remodeling and expanding learning spaces across the district. The third request of this referendum is consideration of a new eight-lane swimming pool at the high school, allowing the district to plan ahead as its current swimming facility lease approaches expiration. The pool would offer the district and the broader community a yearround space. If request one passes, there would be no tax increase to homeowners in our district. If request two passes, the property tax impact on an average home in the district would be $29 a month. If request three passes, the impact on average home would be an additional $4 a month. This request is contingent on the approval of request two. >> Thank you for taking the time to learn more about how Weisetta Public Schools is planning for the future. We see growth in our district as a result of the quality of education here in Weisetta and we believe this plan will address the current and future space needs to continue providing each and every student with an excellent educational experience. We encourage residents to review the information, ask questions, and vote on or before April 14th. >> There you have it. >> Whoever invented this deserves a raise. I can't believe it's already 2025 and people are still using >> that's not a school project. >> I was looking around see who the question was. [laughter] Hey, they really liked our video. >> Yeah, no worries. No worries. >> Yeah, I'd be happy to take any questions if you have any. >> Yeah, questions of Superintendent Anderson. >> I've got a few actually. Um, you've mentioned the overall numbers for the entire district, but I'm curious what is the enrollment at the high school only right now? >> Uh, we have about 4,000 students at the high school. I think we crossed that threshold for the first time this year. >> Okay. >> And with an additional 8 or 900 students, uh we'd be probably maxing out at about 4,800. I think 1150 to,200 is going to be that upper limit which will generate that 14,500 or so students uh into the future. >> Okay. Uh one of the things you talked about is a technology levy. You said uh this would be an extension or a renewal. Do you know when that first came to a referendum if it was meant to be evergreen that it would continuously be renewed or is this a new idea? >> Um, we've had technology levies in place. I believe both of them for the entire time that I've been here. I think maybe a second one was added, but I think the first one may have been in place prior to that. I started here in 2008. I don't have the exact dates on that question, but uh we do bring that back to voters as required by uh the state law. uh to get seek renewal uh for an extended 10-year period. So that's the maximum that public school districts can seek a renewal uh on a levy of that nature is a 10-year time period. >> Okay. And do the families of the students uh are they asked to pay for anything for technology or is this all provided to every student? >> Uh it's pretty much provided. I can't think really of uh user fees for families for technology systems. So we're fortunate that our community has been very supportive for uh utilization of our technology system. So it does provide the iPads, the computers that we use in our computer labs and within a lot of our classrooms. It provides uh a lot of the uh equipment within classrooms, the smartboards and projection equipment. It does a lot with safety and security. Uh it also funds our cyber security programming to help ensure that we maintain our student and staff data in a safe way and work with a consultant on that. And then we have a number of staff that help with the installation of software and repair of hardware uh changing out and prepping new computers and iPads and uh providing professional development for the staff as well as support and assistance for the students. And have the parents or the families of the students ever been asked to fund some of this in the past? >> Uh yes, every 10 years approximately every five years because we renew these at kind of alternating times. So we bring one forward now. I think we renewed another one maybe three or four years ago. So since we have this uh uh election coming up in April, we decided that it would be a good time for us to come to extend that even though this has capacity until I think uh fiscal year 2029, but then that would extend it for a 10-year period. >> No, I guess I reframe the question >> because the money we're talking about here is coming out of taxpayers, all taxpayers. But I'm curious is do the families directly be get asked to fund some of this stuff or is it just provided to all students? It's provided through uh this tax levy and then it comes to the district, but it comes from the families, but because you know the homeowners and the uh >> many of the homeowners send their kids to private schools though, so they don't get the benefit of that. >> Uh that would be correct. >> Okay. Um and I would say you'd be hardressed to find an average home in Weisetta for 650,000. So I think the numbers are a little bit skewed there. I did the math and I know in my house uh that levy the all-in would be about a 25% increase in the city's portion of my tax bill. So it's pretty substantial. Okay. Yeah. I would say within the footprint of Weisetta I'm the the home average price would be higher. the footprint of the entire district that includes uh the parts of Plymouth and Maple Grove and Corkran and Madina um and um Medicine Lake. I don't know that I got all of them. I got most of them, I think. The average of all homes, >> little fractions. >> Yeah. Uh the average of all homes within the footprint of the district uh was determined by Ellers and Associates to be $650,000. >> So, it varies by community. You're right. Other questions? Um, I had a couple. Uh, just going to frame the question a little differently. And this is just a seek to understand question because these questions actually, as much as we try to refer them to the to the district, they they cross our desks, at least I've had several uh that have crossed my desk already this year. This tech levy, you said there's two, right? And so one is expiring and that's 6.5 million per year but extending it for another 10 years which is 65 million. >> Right? >> So it's factual to say there's no incremental hit to the taxpayer but if if it wasn't renewed that that would be taken off. So I just would encourage you to to be a little bit more transparent about the fact that there are two out there. You're extending one for another 65 million. I would be transparent about where we are in the cycle in the second one and how much that is annually. So my question is did I get that right? 10 years at six and a half that's being extended and then the second one for how much and how many years are remaining. >> Um well we renewed one three year three years ago I think at the time of a school board election that was extended for 10 years. I can't tell you for sure how many years were left on that one. I'll homework on that so I have the right answers for that in the future. Yeah. >> Uh but that one was extended for an additional 10 years and that's what is being asked uh for this one as well. >> Okay. So you're right over a 10-year period that 6 and a half million per year would be the 65. >> Okay. Just want to make sure I had that correct. >> And when we say that there's no increase, I have and I don't think I mentioned it here because I sort of accelerated my presentation, but I have indicated doesn't mean it's free. So in no way was I trying to intend that it was free, nor is the video, but there's no increase because it's renewed at the same level >> for sure. >> So it's a it's a no change. Yeah. Yeah. No, I I I guess my comment was more about the transparency that it's another $65 million investment. That's all. Um just being yes, that there is another $65 million spend and here's what it's going to. >> Um the second question that I have is related to um the decision to have an offcycle um special uh you know decision for this referendum. So I'm sure you had a choice. Do you do you put it on the regular election cycle at the the fall? Why did you choose to put it off cycle? What was the reasoning behind that? Because I had that question asked multiple times. >> It's a good question. Um, last November when we had an election, we wouldn't have been in a position to be ready to bring it to the voters at that time. And if we were to wait until this upcoming November, I've been told by our construction managers that it would probably increase the uh through inflationary uh increases by maybe up to $8 million. So there's a a financial concern to wait for it as well. Um, and if uh they were here to respond to that question, they could probably give you a more satisfactory answer, but there are some benefits and a focus on timing for when school districts uh go to the voters uh primarily due to bidding timelines. Everybody in the school business wants to do all their construction between uh June and the end of August. and that's when it's easiest when we have the most access. Uh with big projects like this, uh our construction managers and architects and engineers believe there's some uh value in uh the spring elections for bidding timelines and to ensure that we meet that timeline of the fall of 2029 to be able to open our elementary and middle school and hopefully at least part of the high school edition as well. >> Okay. Um let's see if I had any other ones. Oh, the last one was just and I think you already covered this, but I just want to make sure I got it right. I mean, you're you've got open enrollment, which is a much smaller percentage of your your overall population, but the eight cities are Corkran, Maple Grove, Medicine Lake, Madina, Minnetonka, Orno, Plymouth, and Weisetta. Many of those cities are just tiny fractional slices, but the primary cities are Plymouth, uh, Corkran. Is that right? >> Yes. Maple Grove, and Madina has grown a lot. >> Yeah. In the last several years, it used to be, well, I think when I came, there were a lot of uh 5 to 10 acre acreages with one home on them, but now a lot of the property has been sold. A lot of the farm land is adjacent to our anticipated site and location for these schools. So, we would anticipate that there would be an acceleration of uh home building in Madina uh in the event that we're able to move forward with those schools. And I guess the last question um then I'll turn it over to anyone else that wants to ask a question. The part three of the three-part question would not even if it was approved, it it requires that big facilities marker at 465 to hit. So like if if you get a a a no on question two but a yes on question three, it does not pass. >> That's correct. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Other questions of Superintendent Anderson? I've got some follow on. Yes, sir. >> What would happen if this referendum failed? >> Uh, we'd have to do our best to determine why and learn from that and then we would have to start thinking in terms of what might we do uh to accommodate the anticipated growth in the future. Um, some of the alternatives that districts sometimes have looked into is to lease space. Uh I and we have never felt like that's a really uh great option because uh it's not free to lease space. You oftentimes have to do quite a lot of construction and remodeling work with it in order to make it suitable to be a a classroom space. And we would uh have to learn from the feedback in the community uh what was it that wasn't u uh you know that caused it to not be able to be supported and then make a new plan from there. >> Okay. the u you know we are in on the Weisetta city council work exceedingly hard every year exceedingly hard to keep the tax levy to a minimum and you know we've uh worked very hard to get it down under 8% for this year but again doing the math just this levy alone would have increased our city taxes that proportion of the property tax bill by an incredible 25% said. So, I think the the people that are out there listening ought to take a very very careful look at this before they vote in favor of it. >> Okay. And I can't respond specifically to the math on that, but I'll seek to learn more and work with our finance director to try to learn more about u uh those numbers that you've cited. prorata distribution based on on the tax capacity is always hard for a lot of people to understand because it's not it's not as simple and straightforward for any of the tax of the taxing authority. So, >> right. Yeah. The larger net tax capacity within the large footprint of the school district does have a a moderating effect for individual homeowners which which helps for us >> for sure. Other questions of Superintendent Anderson? Um, thank you for the information. I think it's really important to to uh educate at least our constituent base on on this and I think you've done a good job of explaining it. >> Um the second thing is just thank you for your service. I mean you've been a long tenur leader here in our community. Um you've been a great partner to the city of Weisetta. I've had numerous personal positive experiences an elected official with you Mr. Anderson over the years. um you've always been a champion of our little town and our you know moderate contributions to the overall ecosystem of lucky that we are the namesake of the district. We're proud of that as well and um certainly uh high functioning and high impact public schools are part of what make communities great for sure. Um but I know that you've put your heart and soul into this job over the last few years. I I wish you well in in retirement. Um sad to see you go. you know, big shoes to fill, but um you've been an excellent partner to us, whether it be community education, you know, our Panaway project, just about any asset we've ever made of the district, you've you've been the first to raise your hand to help. So, I just want to recognize that and I can speak from firsthand experience over my 17 years, you know, numerous times that call uh has come out to you and and you're you're there and always supportive and I I just want to recognize you for that. >> Well, it's very kind. Thank you for that. It's been my great pleasure to serve this community and uh all the wonderful students that we have here. Our own two kids graduated from here, one in 2013 and one in 2017. So, they both moved on to be responsible taxpaying citizens and well in the world. So, we're happy about that. But, >> well, we appreciate what you're doing. This is this is a heavy lift um anytime you're asking the taxpayer to pull the lever on a significant investment like this. So, um, I appreciate your your willingness to help communicate and help us direct questions and communicate on your behalf. So, >> you're welcome. Thanks again for the >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, do we have anyone else in the public forum that creeped in here online? >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, we do not. >> Okay. Next is new agenda items. Um, to council, does anyone have new agenda items that we'd like to discuss or bring up here in the future? Hearing none. Um, next we'll review the consent agenda. I will read uh the items on the consent agenda this evening. Uh, approval of the city workshop and regular meeting minutes of February 5th and February 10th, 2026. Approval of the check register. Approval of municipal licenses. Receipt of the police activity report. Receipt of the building activity report. Authorization of mayor and city manager to educate to execute engagement letter with LB Carlson uh for fiscal year 2020 audit services 2025 audit services. Adoption of resolution 1026 appointing a housing and redevelopment commissioner. Um approval of the second reading and adopting ordinance 865 amending city code chapters 501 general licensing provisions 502 intoxicating liquor 503 wine 504 3.2 2 uh percent malt liquor and 505 private club liquor. That's basically just a change in the timing of when and how we receive payments to help our uh restaurant community and those who sell liquor to have a a spread out way to pay pay their fees um rather than paying it in the actual downturn of their their season. And then adoption of resolution 132026 accepting the donation from the Wise American Legion. And lastly, approval of a contract renewal with Rainbow Tree Company. So, I'll ask, is there a a motion to approve the agenda as presented or do we have any items that need to be pulled or amended for further discussion? >> Okay, hearing. >> Move to approve the consent agenda as outlined, Mr. Mayor. >> Great. Uh, do we have a second? >> Second that. >> Are there any further discussion on this one? All in favor say I. I. >> Those opposed say nay. That motion passes 5 to zero. Um, next is our public hearing. Uh, we don't have any items on our public hearing this evening, so we'll move on to new business. Uh, first up on our agenda is consider adoption of resolution 11,2026, approving an extension of zoning approvals at 1405 Holdridge Terrace and 15419 and 15429 Weisetta Boulevard East. This project is known as Harbors of Weisetta. Um, and so we'll go through a brief presentation, I believe, uh, from staff on this. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mayor and Council. I'm going to turn it over to Community Development Director Alex Sharp to give an overview of this item. >> Great. >> Thank you, uh, city manager Joerger. Uh, as stated, this is a extension request from Harbors of Weisetta, formerly known as Kantisimo, when it came through original approvals. Uh, it is actually been under four different addresses at one time. The three active addresses are 15419 and 15429 Boulevard in 1405 Holdridge Terrace. The applicant is Care Cliff LLC. For location, uh I chose to zoom out a little bit further and uh highlight the site as it was a former residential property. So it is in the northeast uh portion of our community right along the border of Weisetta and Minnitankka with Weisetta Boulevard to the north and then Holdridge Terrace uh that road name is actually shared for that section and then Holdridge Ter Terrace to the west for reference. The Ensley is a project in Minnitonka that we have received significant questions about. We even have some posting on our website that is actually just across the border into Minnetonka u behind the residential homes on Holdridge terrace >> which is not this project >> not this project just to be very clear which is why I'm wanting to identify the difference this project is in the red box uh shown on the site uh canisimo or harbors >> because it has been a a period of time I wanted to go back through all of the approvals and the order in which they have occurred as I think it demonstrates uh where the project sits today in the best way. So originally a PUD concept plan was brought forward to the city. This was approved in February of 2022. As with other projects, PUD concept plans then turn into PUD general plans if they are approved. A PUD general plan variance and resoning of the site as well as a regiding was approved in March of 2023. Their first extension was in February of 2024, and that was a one-year extension to March 7th of 2025. Shortly thereafter, the actual development agreement and final PUD plan were approved in April of 2024. Another one-year extension was granted in March of 2025, and that is just for the PUD and the variance extension as the resoning and the reguiding have taken place. They've also filed the final plan at this point. So the original three properties have been combined into a single parcel. So the parcel has been regued into being a institutional and the resoning has occurred into an institutional use at this point. Those actions hold regardless of whether this action uh were to be renewed or not. So it only applies to the PUD and the variance items moving forward and specifically the PUD agreement. in March. Uh the request right now for March of 2026 is another one-year extension to March of 2020 March 7th of 2027. The applicant has cited financial financing and bringing together partners on the project. Their letter is attached to the council packet and they have been invited this evening, but they have had some health issues in the past. I uh do not believe that they have been able to attend this evening. to remind the comm the council of what the site plan looked like. This was a combination of a 2.49 acre acres of three different parcels regided and reszoned from single family residential and what was approved as a 40 unit senior living facil facility and specifically high level of care or memory care. So low driving low impact to the neighborhood. The building itself is a two-story 18,000 foot building. For renderings, I've got uh renderings largely from Weisetta Boulevard on the left hand side and then from the rear as you would see towards the marshland area and the homes to the south and I could bring those up if uh council needs for any further discussion. The action before the council this evening would be to adopt uh resolution 112026 approving the extension of the PUD and variance for 1405 Holdridge Terrace and for 15419 uh and 15429 Weisetta Boulevard East. With that I stand for questions. >> Questions of staff. >> Go ahead Mr. Pish. >> Yeah. In the nine years or so that I've been on council, I've never heard of anybody requesting a third extension. Um, are you aware that we've done this in the past, gone to three extensions? Mayor, uh, council member, I'm aware of two, uh, extensions that have occurred. Um, were this one, the answer is no. I've not heard of the third. there was an incremental action after the first extension with the uh PUD agreement being approved or the development agreement being approved. Um so I've characterized it as three extensions as well, but there has been an action between that first extension and a approval granted by council or action taken by the developer to submit for the BUD agreement. But there does seem to be some bit of a precedent being set here by extending for a third extension. Am I right? Correct. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Other questions, Mr. >> Sorry, Mr. Mayor. Are we going to hear from the applicant or is this >> Well, I guess he's not here. Um issues. >> Okay. So, um the questions would be to staff then. >> Yeah. >> Um I mean, it'd be great to see this project move ahead. Um and there's a quick note about the rationale of uncertainty in financial markets. Is there any more to that conversation? I mean, is there a I had >> the same question. Is there just a letter statement of confidence? Are they trying to convince us this thing's going to happen? Is it just, "Oh, hey, by the way, we need a another one year." >> I've had conversations uh mayor, council member, I've had conversations with the developer uh as recently as about a month ago before their health issues have come up. Um they've proposed potential changes that they would want to bring uh back forward, potentially requiring new public hearings um and potentially needing to come back before city council for whole new approval packages. I haven't seen submissions of those items, so it's difficult for me to answer without with the limited information that I have available. Um it I've attempted to uh invite the applicant here to try to explain that for on for their case uh so that I'm not trying to mischaracterize anything that they've represented. But I have very limited information to be able to share other than what has been presented to me via the letter. >> Does the applicant actually own this property? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Can you go back a couple slides? I just want to make sure that I have the sequence of events in my head here about uh Yes. So you said that there was a change. Is it just a change of of named entity or was there actual an ownership transfer or a different partner brought in during this timeline from February 22 to March 26? >> So when I was reviewing the development agree uh thank you mayor for that question. When I was reviewing the development agreement uh canisimo was the original name that everything was applied for under. uh by the time they were creating LLC's for ownership of the property and marketing harbors became the official name that they were going forward with as they were marketing the property. >> So it was more just associated with how they're framing the project as as is very customary in in development. It's not a an ownership change or a different partner or whatever. >> At the time of that name change, all of the same names were still associated during the development agreement as with the original application. >> Other questions of staff? A quick one. We reviewed a similar extension not that long ago and the applicant was delinquent on some of the payments that were owed to the city. Is is this applicant in good standing with us? >> Uh thank you, mayor, council member. Yes, this applicant is. In fact, we have received park dedication funds as you noted in the memo. Um so we would need to determine where that would be at if this project were not to move forward. Okay. Thanks. >> Any other questions of staff? So, maybe bring it back to the council for for discussion on on how folks are feeling about this. Um, I'm I'm just going to start off with just a general comment not specific to this project. Unfortunately, this is more common than I would hope in our environment right now. They're they're not the only applicant that has stated financing as a difficulty in in moving forward. Obviously, another senior living facility had that as an issue, but then ultimately defaulted on on the property itself, right? And now it's changed hands and there'll be a restart. But there's a couple other projects that that have we've granted extensions based on the assumption that financing is the issue. Um, you know, I don't know if that's why is that a specific or or a more macro level environment. My guess is it's more macro because you see it in other communities as well. Um, I would provide greater comfort if we could get more details. I mean, we don't have to act on this tonight. Um, we have to act on it quickly and reasonably. Um, uh, you know, but but could we ask for more information as a condition of giving us more comfort? >> Um, Mr. Mayor, I would chime in and just add that their approvals lapse, I believe, March 6th >> and our next council meeting March 7th and our next council meeting isn't until March 10th. So that they did put us at the very end of the timeline. Okay. >> Thank you for that clarification. >> I also just as a other point of clarification, um staff had to reach out to notify them in order to be able to apply. So we've been trying to make sure that the approvals have not lapsed proactively. >> Do you know what time we or when we notified them of that? I noted 60 days out and 30 days out from March 7th. >> Okay. >> All right. So, bringing it back for to council for discussion. How are folks feeling about this? Who would like to weigh in first? >> My questions were intended to be directed at the developer. Um, you know, I I would love to understand what hurdles they're facing. Um, specifically if I look at like the the interest rates over the past like I like just looking at the treasury rates from 2023 till now it's gone it's changed like 40 basis points. I guess the high water mark was about a year ago and it's come down 60 basis points. It I don't know that that should make a project economically infeasible. So if there's other hurdles in there I' I'd love to know. Um, from a financing standpoint, certainly seeing projects around town being done over the past three years. It's granted it's been slower. Um, I don't know if it's specific to this product type or or if it So, I would I would feel more comfortable acting with more information. Unfortunately, that's not what we have here unless we decide that we'll let it lapse. >> Well, is one year the only option? Can we prov provide a a bridge period and say, "Hey, we gave you the benefit of the doubt, but we we need more information for us to extend it or I mean, what's driving is that just our customary practice or could we could we say, "Hey, we're going to take this off the table for the next 90 days, but we expect you to be here to provide us more information to give us comfort." I don't know if that's possible. >> Yeah. Or maybe um we could approve something for 90 days. >> Yeah, that's where I was going. and then and then force them into revisiting it. Yeah. >> So, I don't know, Mr. City attorney, if that's possible or I don't know of any code or policy things that would say that we can't do that. >> U Mr. Mayor, yeah, that and that's what I'm looking at the city code. Um the provision that's relevant to the request is it says that the application which is the application for an extension that's been submitted shall state the facts of the request um show a good faith attempt to utilize the permit and shall state the additional time being requested. So we have a request I believe for one year. I don't know that the code would preclude you from granting less than a year if a year is requested. So I don't think we've ever done that before, but I think you have the authority to do that. >> Yeah. And again, I don't think it's a preferred method, but if if I heard one person, two person, three people say like to hear from the applicant at least giving them a path without a wholesale, you know, rejection. I think I have some empathy also for the the statement of of health issues, right? I mean, that that that's a real issue for a lot of people that gets in the way. and want to give them benefit of the doubt versus assuming something different. Right. And >> yes, and Mr. Mayor, just to give you the full outline of what the code would require, um, if you if you said went with 90 days, they would have to submit a new application within 30 days of that deadline. So, they still have to meet that under the code. >> But I think yes, true. But I think if we're really clear and our direction is >> we want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but we need to hear from you beyond the letter that you've given. I think if we're really clear, they're going to understand that we need more information to get comfortable about this. Um it's certainly not any way to try to trigger uh anything other than more information. And I think if we're really clear about that um that to me feels reasonable, but it's not my decision. It's our decision collectively. Uh could I ask maybe an obvious question which is uh what what is our fear or what information are we looking for that we would find acceptable to grant this and what information would we not see that would we would not think this extension is acceptable. So, as I as I think of it, this is um a valuable service to our community. And I'm just I'm just curious what you all see as the downfalls of giving this applicant another year to secure their financing and get their shovels in the ground. >> Not to sound condescending, that's a genuine question. I was just looking for a path to make sure that we had options. It was that was the only reason why I suggested it just to make sure that if we knew all our options available to us. To answer your question specifically, um I think u the vagueness of a letter and a refusal to appear just causes me to question the viability of the project. >> It's just as simple as that. >> Okay. um even when we've had other applicants, we had at minimum one of their representatives here, right? And so it just gives me a little bit of pause that you know, hey, simple appear or designate someone to appear, amplify your your reasons, and then that would give me comfort. >> Okay, understood. Just um that was helpful. I appreciate it. >> Yeah, I I'll just add that a little bit. I think I think um kind of their laxidasical approach to uh how they've approached this and the fact that we had to let them know that they they need to file um raises some concerns and they really haven't made a compelling reason other than maybe one one simple statement. Oh, I think I think um Council McDown that's that kind of I think it's raising all our eyebrows a bit. If there's a way to I mean this isn't a hot site. So, you know, you look at what the the alternatives are. I mean, if it were, you know, a prime site downtown, you may look at it a little different. So, you'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt. Um, but it would be it would be nice for him to um it would be nice to hear from them and kind of understand better why they're asking for the extension because it's quite vague. [clears throat] >> Yeah. And I Yeah, I I would agree with that. And I also am cautious about creating precedent of well we'll just continue like if projects you know you can bring a project in and develop it whenever you want and just keep kicking the can down the road without very like more specific information about why it's been difficult to get this project going in the past three years. >> Fair. >> Yeah. And with that said, I mean I think I'm stating the obvious. We're giving this applicant the benefit of the doubt. wouldn't even be talking about an option to get more information. So, it's not like we're >> we're being obtuse about this and saying, "Hey, arbitrarily we're just not going to allow this. We're exploring options to give them a path, right?" >> Yeah. Well, in that in that spirit, I think 90 days doesn't feel like enough time. Um, I I look at this site and this use different thanly than if it were a a real prominent um site that would be a little more noticeable or a little had some adverse effects to the the community. So, at at first blush, I didn't I didn't think granting this um extension was that that controversial. I you guys are making some really good points. But at the same time, I think if from what I understood, I think from the city attorney at 90 days, it feels like maybe then that only actually gives them 30 to get them stuff figured out. Do I understand that? >> Uh, mayor and council member, I I don't think that's a um quite the way I'd put it. I I think they would just have to get together within 30 days before the expiration of the 90 days. So, within 60 days, they would have to file for another extension. So, that's really what they'd have to do. when I think it's gathering the information that council members have expressed they'd like to see and hear from the applicant in person. Uh more information about how they've made a good faith attempt to utilize the approval but haven't been able to. More details on the financing. I I think it'd be pretty straightforward. It's not like they have to prepare a big presentation or anything. >> No for this either. Frankly, just being here to answer questions would probably go probably be all they need to do with, you know, be armed with the information that'll be responsive to the the statements that council has has made. So, that that's all I meant. Uh, council member, >> that clarification is helpful. >> So, that brings out another question for me is if we were to deny this tonight, what is the next step for this applicant? >> U, mayor, council member, I can't answer that. Uh it would be a start over with all approvals. Uh for the PUD variance, they would need to come back. Uh the only approval that would for sure stand is a reguiding of the property that has already occurred. The PUD and institutional side of things that has occurred in the past with that um would likely then lap or would lapse with this project. So they would need to go back before planning commission for public hearing two act or two meetings with that uh and bring all their dev design deviations and variances back before for re-review. >> Um >> I I would be okay with shortening the the extension, but I'd want it to be longer than the 90 days because, you know, if there's a a health crisis, >> I have to feel a bit more compassion to that. If if the health crisis is serious, I can see why just being reminded by city staff and just writing off a quick email, hey, what can I do? Can I get 12 months? I have XYZ going on. So, I I feel they um were maybe not expecting that this would set a precedent or be a real uh tough hurdle for for them to get over. So, for what it's worth, like a longer extension is better. >> Yeah. U M Mr. Mayor, I um I think we're just asking them to come back and talk to us and explain kind of why why they're asking for is really all we're asking for. I don't have a real issue with what the time frame is. My sense though is the shorter the better. I mean, maybe the health issue is a reason to make it a little bit longer, but um I don't I don't think we need to drag it out. So, I would interject again. If we were to table this today and had it come back in two weeks or whatever our next meeting is, I guess a week away, but um is that enough time still for us to uh vote in a year extension or it's or it's not? It's tonight or not? Nothing is, >> mayor. Unfortunately, no. The approval lapses on March 7th. So, >> but when's our next city council meeting? >> March. >> March 10th. >> 10th. Okay. >> Well, for what it's worth, I'm not inclined to approve this. I mean, it at the least they could have had somebody here. I mean, I'm not trying to be insensitive, but you know, we reached out to them to remind them, and it doesn't sound like they've been very communicative to us over the past few years, and you know, they should have had somebody here to answer the questions. So, I'm not inclined to vote for this tonight. Okay. Anyone else like to weigh in so we can kind of move this along in one way or the other? >> I do have a one more question. Are the the rights under the approval, are those transferable to a different developer? >> Mayor, council member, yes, the rights run with the land, not with the property owner. >> Got it. Okay. >> Yeah. I I'm inclined to give a short-term extension. I'm not opposed to the project and I'd love to see it move forward, but I'm I have hesitations about um not showing up and not not answering questions that and and it doesn't have to be a long like these are all questions. My questions are they could walk into the room right now without preparing anything and their historical knowledge of the project, they'd be able to answer all all the questions that I would have. I would hope. If not, then I'd have greater concerns. But I'm in favor of a shorter term extension of some sort, whether that's 90 days or 120 days. But I would like to keep that shorter in nature. >> You weighed in a little bit or would you like to amplify what? >> Um, yeah. I just I I did weigh in a bit and you know, 120 sounds better than 90 to me. So I feel that gives them a bit more time and to you know find a a spokesperson if someone is unable to be here due to health issues. >> Okay. >> Mr. Swornson. >> Yeah. I I'd be fine with 120. >> Okay. I would too. I mean I I only suggest that it's an option just to not give a hard no that then you know uh potentially has some of the implications that you talked about. So, I mean, my hope is if they watch the record of this that our intent is to give them the benefit of the doubt, just ask for some more simple information, grant them a extension for a reasonable period of time, answer the questions. If we're okay with those answers, I'm I'm assuming that we would we would grant them the longer extension. So, I'd be supportive 128 days. So, just moving it along. Um, I've got one nay potentially and then or but seem open to it. So, Mr. City attorney. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. So, if you do go uh if you do entertain or ask for a motion um that would uh modify the one on in the packet, uh I would just recommend that it be read as follows on your screen. Um and then append at the end with the modification that the um uh the approval run until June >> uh July 5th, [snorts] 2026. >> July 5th. Yeah, that's >> 120 days from March 7th, 2026. >> Okay. So I would accept a motion to adopt resolution 112026 and approving extension of zoning approvals at 1405 Holdridge Terrace and 1514 15419 and 15429 Wetta Boulevard East modified that that would expire on July 5th 2026. Um I think with that I just want to then say it's just all about how you communicate it to the applicant. I I mean I would want you to represent that there's support for this just need more information which is why we took this path so that it doesn't become you know adversarial in any way. Um it's just a request for more information and since we didn't have good options we came up with a way to be more flexible to keep it moving along. Um so I'll go back to the resolution that I read with city attorney's guidance. Could I get that motion? >> I'll make that motion. Motion, Mr. Mayor. >> Okay, great. Could I get a second? >> Second. >> Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say I. I. Those opposed. >> No. >> Okay. So, that passes 4 to one. Um, thank you for that and thanks thanks for, you know, spitballing some some ways to keep it moving along without a hard null. Um, so next on our agenda is consider adoption of resolution 12,2026 approving a PUD plan unit development, general plan and other related requests at 1022 and 1042 Wetta Boulevard East, which is the Waler project. Um, so I'll turn it over to staff, I believe. >> Yep. Um, I'll turn it over to community development director Sharp for the presentation. >> Thank you, mayor. Thank you, interimm city manager Joerger. As stated, this is for 1022 1042 Weisetta Boulevard East. It is for planned development, general plan, preliminary plat, final plat, five variances, and two design deviations. Sometimes I want to add partridge, but you know, uh this is from owner and applicant walls of real estate LLC. So for th this evening's actions, I do want to break this apart uh as there will be some future actions required by the city council. So the current actions under review are the PUD general plan, the preliminary plat, five variances which include required parking stall variance, parking setback variance, fence height variance, and then fence height and opacity within the front yard variance, and an access separation variance. I will go through each of those individually. Uh I've got specific slides for them. If you do have questions, feel free to interject as we go through as it may help with the discussion. There are also two design deviations also slides on that. These include a 6' wide planting strip between a private sidewalk in the building and uh street trees not being provided uh in a separation of 26 ft and again I will highlight that and where that is on the site. There are future actions as I noted required that will be the final plat that again only comes before city council vacation of a drainage and utility easement. I will go through that as well to preliminarily introduce preliminarily introduce that and then the final development agreement and PUD agreement. For those not not as familiar with the site, uh this is the current site of Malber's former site of a gas station on the western parcel. It's actually two separate parcels. Uh bordering it to the east is Central Boulevard or I'm sorry, Central Avenue South. To the north is Weisetta Boulevard East. To the west is Superior Boulevard and Huntington Avenue, which is a deadend street uh with a turnaround and is a essentially a parking area or public parking area to the west. The site is guided for mixeduse commercial and residential and it is zoned C3 service district which is our primary commercial district along Waysetta Boulevard. As I stated, this is uh two separate parcels totaling 088 acres in total uh with uh number of different types of uses surrounding it. So we've got Colonial SC square to the northeast. Uh we've got single family homes to the south, uh reality building to the west, um and housing throughout the entire neighborhood. There's also significant grade change particularly as you go east west and north south on this site. for existing conditions. On the uh eastern parcel or left side of the screen currently is Malber's current use uh unplatted parcel currently uh with Malber's uh currently in operation. On the western parcel or right side of the screen is a vacant parcel, former uh gas station. All tanks have been removed. Uh so there right now it sits vacant as a gravel pad. The demo plan uh is to demolish both buildings on site uh or I'm sorry, the single building on site and the exist uh the former building at the gas station has already been demolished as you saw in the photo before. The preliminary plat is for both parcels. The reason why I've highlighted the parcel to the western side of the screen is that parcel has already been platted and when it was platted in 2023, there was a dedication of drainage utility easements, which is a standard condition around the perimeter of the parcel. These are the easements that are being proposed to be vacated at this time uh and then rededicated when a new final plat would be brought forward. Again, council's not taking action on the vacation this evening, and so the vacation wouldn't actually occur now, but I'm wanting to set up that future discussion so that you're familiar with it. This is the actual vacation exhibit for ease of being able to describe the legal description of these easements. They are proposing to vacate all of the drainage utility easements in association with that western parcel. They would then uh dedicate new e perimeter easements around the combined parcel if the final plat were brought forward. It's staff's goal to bring all of those actions together as one item before city council. Uh to do so, one of the things that council should be aware of is that I will need to schedule a public hearing on an agenda that will go on consent where the public hearing for the vacation will be held at a council meeting. And at that time, we'd hope to bring back the final plat, the vacation, and the PUD and development agreement as one single item so that you can comprehensively review that. That is contingent upon this PUD general plan being approved and moved forward this evening. However, the this is the proposed final plat. Again, sharing more for context for this evening. The main piece that I wanted to highlight here is to show you where the vacation and why it would need to occur. and that is in the green circled area. Uh they would be then rededicating the easements around the perimeter of that new parcel, but that uh center portion would go right through the proposed building. For this plan, uh one of the first steps, as I noted, was a PUD concept plan, which is a standard practice for many developers. This PUD concept plan was brought forward with a 7,845 square foot uh new dealership on primarily the western parcel and the Malber's existing dry cleaner uh would be significantly reduced in size but remain in place and remain in use. This came through planning commission in 2025 uh with the unanimous recommendation of approval and then through city council with a uh split vote but ultimately a approval of the concept plan. Hearing the comments from that concept plan, Walzer has resubmitted a new site plan which is before you now that is actually increasing the dealership size by about 1,000 square feet, removing malberries as a use entirely on the site, reducing the overall uh building footprints on the site and reducing the overall impervious surface on the site from the concept plan. uh the service bays and um amount of activity proposed largely stays the same. However, it expands over both parcels. Now, when reviewing the project, uh staff generally compiles this table in part to demonstrate what the requirements for the district are, but also for our review. Uh the item that I would like to significantly note on this is uh where they are seeking the variance is in the parking setbacks. Uh that is where 10 feet are required and uh southside around four to five feet are what are being provided. So the variance is for that parking setback but I will go through that uh in future slides. The first variant uh as you're going through and counting is for a parking stall variance. They have uh the site plan proposes 29 service parking stalls and 20 garage parking stalls. Uh so a total of 49 stalls. However, in order to meet the parking requirement, traditionally the city has required that all parking stalls be publicly available. Because 20 of those parking stalls are contained underground, a variance in the total number of parking stalls is required. However, they are on site. So the applicant has applied for the variance at staff's uh recommendation as it uh while code isn't necessarily explicit, it has been consistent practice that we have had that parking to be publicly available. Slightly getting off of my numbering here. So we're actually at variances 2, three, and four or one, two, three on this slide. The first is the uh six-foot parking stall setback variance. the app. This is on the southern side of the property. And for those that are trying to keep an eye out, this is southeast corner up against the apartments and central avenue. So, Central Avenue is the driveway offer off the east side that it's gaining access from. They are looking to ex uh expand the parking lot closer to the southern property line. 10-footer are required. They're providing uh around uh 4.28 ft. So, they need a 6ft variance to round things up. uh for ease that's where staff obtain that six foot versus the five foot. Additionally, two additional variances are being required. An 8 foot tall screening fence where six foot tall is required or a two-ft variance. And then because this is actually considered the front of the building, Central Avenue is as it's the narrowest road frontage. Uh that's how code defines front versus side. They need a variance to extend that fence into what is considered the front yard. Within front yards, code requires that you have opacity of fences uh to only be 50% and you're only allowed a 6ft tall fence. I'm sorry, um a 4ft tall fence. And so they're needing variance for the height and for the opacity essentially to provide screening. Waler chose to keep these items in their application at the request of neighbors. uh they could potentially these are the two variances that if council did not support could be dropped from the application without substantially changing the site plan. >> Director Sharp, yes, I'm just a little bit confused with this yellow circle. Is that the only place where the parking back variance is? >> I was highlighting the distance there with the yellow circle. It would be for the entire stretch of this parking piece. I'm just highlighting that 4.28 distance foot. >> Appreciate that. >> Yep. >> Sorry to interrupt. >> It didn't want too many overlapping circles and trying to highlight specific items. >> And this is for the green. >> The green is for the front uh just for the front yard portion though. So that is just for the area that is in front of the building. Okay. The blue applies for the height of the fence for the entire distance. Now, where a piece does change from that, I'm just going to touch into it now, is they've actually at the request of planning commission uh or a a condition of the planning commission extended that fence through the entire rear property line. That would actually extend as their site plan changes. So, there are areas that it will not be required, but it would be anywhere that it would be less than that. uh over eight foot for that entire section. >> So, are we asking questions as we go along here, >> please? >> So, go back a slide. Couple of things. I assume I'm assuming that the 8ft tall variance is for the benefit of the neighbors. Is that correct, >> mayor, council member? Largely, yes. That was at request of the neighbors for the benefit of the neighbors. >> And the building it says here is existing building. I thought that was an empty lot that had a big drop down. What is that building? >> Oh, I'm sorry. That's the apartment complex to the south. >> They were that close. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thanks. >> I don't have their distance to the property line. That part wasn't surveyed, but they are quite close. >> That that's an existing I believe from the public hearing the property owner had stated that it may have existed in the early 1900s. So it from what I call recall from the planning commission the opacity was agreed that it was going to go the whole way for the neighbors. Is that not how this application reads? >> Yes. So the opacity at 100% opaque would apply for the whole n for the entire fence. However, the variance is only required in the front yard. Yes, it's there is a complexity there. Apologies. In a rear yard or sideyard, you're allowed to have 100% opaque fence. In a front yard, we have requirements about total opacity not being allowed to exceed 50%. >> Okay. Appreciate it. Sorry. Again, >> this is why I wanted the questions to come up during the presentation is there are complexities to the review. >> Alex, just one more there. You may have covered this. I missed it though. Um the curb cut that exists to service the dry cleaner after central is kind of I mean it's like immediately uh as you pass through the intersection on central where does that fall out in in in the context of this? Um >> let's go to this slide mayor. >> Okay, perfect. >> So this is the access and loading and the final variance. Uh so existing SPA uh access points that are being removed are shown in the purple X's. >> Uh so there is an existing access point very very close as you noted >> to Central and Weisetta Boulevard East >> that is now being proposed to be removed and the concept plan it was going to remain because the dry cleaner was going to exist. >> Correct. >> Y >> now there are only two access points being proposed. I would note that you cannot uh traverse from this access point to this access point due to significant grade changes between. You will be able to see that in some of the renderings coming up. So this access point remains. It meets the 40ft spacing required by code. No variance required. This is the access point off of Huntington. This is your fifth and final variance being requested and it is remaining in the same space and largely the same configuration. However, it is being completely removed down to complete base. When you completely remove, it is best to apply for the variance and make sure that you uh rather than rely on a legal non-conforming status. So, it is going in the same place, same configuration, not any closer, likely some grade change uh to affect how the site is entered, but not significantly altered from existing conditions. >> But that that access point is not for cars though. I mean, that's a that's a walkway that goes to Huntington. >> I'm going to go back to >> So, right here is an access point for cars onto Huntington from this site that is existing. >> See if we can see it here. Yeah, you can kind of see this entrance. >> So, you're you're talking about at the at the north side of the property, >> correct? >> Got it. That's that's got it. >> There are actually two access points on the site from Huntington currently. One is proposed to be closed and one is remaining. >> Yeah. It's just confusing because I mean that's not signed as Huntington when you're going down west on a boulevard. >> No, it is not. It's used as parking which is why I was trying to >> It was It was left there when that building which is now known as a diner reality was built and that that was vacated. So that makes more sense. I just was missing that context. >> It's still tech Huntington is still technically >> if you look at the plat it's still there. Um, you've actually reminded me of a point that I did want to make with the parking variance. Uh, the stalls on Huntington are not permitted to be used as required parking for this site, but they would remain in use, uh, and technically are public parking, but largely used by the Adina Reality building, as you noted. That was an item that came up in discussion with planning commission. >> Does the Adina reality building have adequate parking per code? Uh, mayor, council member, I'm I have not done a completed a full review of that site. It's an existing condition that it's got some long-standing odd agreements with use of that right away. They actually maintained it for a period of time and may still. Um, so there are some complexities there. If you're interested, I could certainly look it up in the future. >> Okay. Thanks. One of the larger concerns on the site uh during the concept plan was how deliveries would function on site. So I wanted to make sure to put this in the uh presentation. There are no variances required. Uh they meet code provisions for a turnaround uh for a firetruck vehicle or a delivery vehicle. The applicant has additionally stated that the size of vehicle required by code is actually larger than what they would utilize uh for their deliveries of vehicles. Interior plans are largely uh to determine parking requirements and for illustrative purposes to identify how the space is going to be used for council. Uh as you can see they have uh six stalls and um four showroom spaces and then the lower portion of the building is either storage or parking. The facade uh meets all of our design requirements. uh there it is largely brick in nature and white brick in nature is being proposed. It does have the ways coating on the uh bottom of the building and then a aluminum composite panel above entryways uh as an accent material. Code also requires or the design standards also require that at least uh that all sides of the building have at least 25% glass. All exceed 25% glass. I'll go through just for illustrative purposes. This is a west elevation or what would face Huntington. This is east or what would face central. The south elevation is what would face the residential neighbor to the south and somewhat of the rear yard of the single family dwellings. And then the north elevation is what would face Weisetta Boulevard. Uh one item of note is that the the northern face actually hits 45% glass. uh so exceeding that 25 by a fair amount along a prominent uh roadway face. These are building perspectives and renderings uh from different angles to allow you to conceptually view the plans. Additional renderings renderings in color were provided and presenting to the presented to the planning commission. I actually have some additional renderings that were not presented to the planning commission as well that we want to uh provide to the uh city council. Our common practice has been to not share new materials with city council that the planning commission didn't have the ability to review. However, some of these relate directly to planning commission requ uh recommendations or uh requirements or conditions of their finding and recommendation. So these were the original renderings and we'll go through these briefly. Um principally this would be from uh the left hand screen would be from Weisetta Boulevard. Right hand screen would be from central looking in uh with that apartment building that I noted on the left hand side and then their lower level. And this is where you can see that significant grade change between the two different lots. This would be from the culdesac on Huntington and showing that it is closed with the pedestrian stairway. Uh they have updated this because this was the rendering that they had shown but their site plan did not originally share this fencing. They have since updated their site plan added that fencing throughout the rear side. Um and we have those additional renderings that I was going to note. Before getting into that um wanted to go through some of the design deviations. So there are two design deviations being required and I understand that the uh that these can be confusing. So again, feel free to ask questions as I go throughout code or the design requirements require that between a private sidewalk or public sidewalk that in front of the building you have a 6-ft buffer between the building itself and the sidewalk. That is largely for seating areas or landscaping is what the design requirements specifically site would go in that area. When interpreting that section of code, you can see that there's a bump out for the front entrance of the building here and here. I determined that this section did not require that design deviation. However, the section from here to here around a 25 to 30 foot section does require the design deviation. And then for this section here, they have greater than 6 ft. So the design deviation for that separation between sidewalk and building only applies to this location here, not to the public sidewalk, which is up on Weisetta Boulevard. The configuration of the sidewalk is largely being dictated due to grades and ADA compliance. Uh the ability to go directly from their front door out to Weisetta Boulevard due to grades would not be ADA compliant, would require stairs. Additionally, this was the most efficient for impervious surface coverage to actually gain access to their primary door from their parking lot and their front door out to Weisetta Boulevard. The second design deviation is created by similar constraints in this very tight section of the site plan. Our design requirements requires uh streets along requires trees along public frontages with spacing no greater than 26 ft between them. The section uh from approximately this tree here to this tree here exceeds the 26 ft. That section in total is around 80 to 90 ft. It's somewhere in that range. Um so it is significantly more. However, this section is where some of the most significant grades drop off between one site and the other. Uh, additionally, it is getting constrained by multiple different forces of the public sidewalk, the private sidewalk, their private building. So, there are pieces that are mitigating factors to that. There are potential solutions that they could have come up with. Uh, those would have included largely though shrinking the building footprint. >> So, um, okay, if we ask a question here. Yeah, absolutely. >> Um, on the six-foot buffer issue, isn't there some requirement that this building be so many feet from property line or curb line? So, design our design handbook and our design requirements uh emphasize placing buildings as close to their setback line as possible. The design handbook actually specifically recommends when adjacent to public frontages that you place the building within the first 10 to 15 feet of the property line. In this case, they are right at their 10-ft setback. So, they're within that 10 to 15 ft. Design requirements then that part is a uh recommendation. The requirement is that all parking and all uh trash and refuge areas are behind the building. So anywhere behind this frontage uh from this front area is where all parking must be. So in our design requirements it is not listed as a code section but is within the handbook for that 10 to 15 foot uh placement of the building when adjacent to public frontages. >> Does that answer the question? >> Sort of. Um so what's that mean? I mean are we does that mean we are encouraging them to push the building closer to the street? >> Correct. And that why >> therefore we have this variance issue. >> The design requirements encourage buildings to be pushed to the street. Yes. >> Right. >> That is why we have a design deviation issue. It's not technically a variance. These are a different set of criteria. I have all those criteria for you later that we'll go through. And is there a is there a solution to the tree issue or is it just a matter of it'd be expensive to deal with somehow by build building tree wells and grates and that type thing. >> So speaking with the city forester tree wells wouldn't function well in this area. However, if you did shrink the building's footprint, you may be able to uh fit additional items, including the 6 foot uh buffer between the private sidewalk and the building. The reason why tree wells wouldn't potentially work well in this area is the grade changes would be relatively significant and you'd end up with some very odd planting styles through this section because there is there's a lot of competing forces going on within this limited section of the site >> of which there's no trees there today and never have have [clears throat] been. >> Yeah, I I don't know that there have been that section. Yeah, there there may have been prior to when I'm available to >> not when the gas station was operational. >> Can I ask a question about that? Because I I don't totally understand. Will there would be significant grading changes done because as I look at like where these trees it's flat along that whole >> along a boulevard. >> There won't be significant grading changes done but the grade actually down into the site is more significant than the eye appears when you're using uh when you're viewing the site. And the further west you get, the easier it it becomes. As you traverse east on this site, the grade does start to taper off down towards central. And [clears throat] to get a steady building pad within that, they're leveling pieces out from east to west. So, and north to south. So, you end up with a a kind of a three-way grading where on the western side it of the circle on this screen, significantly easier than as you move east. Okay. So, a question on this, too. If it weren't for the private sidewalk being inserted here, would there need to be a design deviation? >> No, there would not need to be the design deviation. Uh we we do require that the front yard or that the front entrance front on Weisetta Boulevard though and that there be sidewalk to connect to Weisetta Boulevard. >> Okay. So, it's a necessary feature. >> Correct. Yeah, I would also think that maybe a dealership like a Lamborghini wouldn't want a regular public street to go right into their front door. >> That's I would leave that answer that. Yeah. Okay. >> Uh >> and uh and also on that same slide, >> uh you show the red, you know, ellipse there that says that's where the design deviation is required, but not that little blue or black or whatever it is stretched there. Why is that? Why is there bifurcation there? This was an interpretation by myself as staff that once you hit a front entrance, you have to have a sidewalk go to a front door at some point. >> Otherwise, it's not meeting its intent. >> Okay. I could have made the interpretation that the section from here to around here where the front door starts required a deviation as well, but yeah, >> we're talking around 3 to 4 feet a single square of concrete that maybe for planter, bench, bike, rack, etc. that we also require. >> Okay, thanks. >> And Director Sharp, one one more piggyback question to Council Member Pleish. Um, I can't help but noticing there is no buffer between the public sidewalk and Weisetta Boulevard. And I think that's a that's a really big miss for the community. Is there a an option for them to combine the public private sidewalk, add that buffer, plant the mandatory trees, and still have access between to the front door that that way. Also, I I can't imagine this is really the front door that anyone would use. I assume their clients will drive. They claim they're flying in from out of town to shop here. So, wouldn't they park and walk to this entrance on the west side? So, I guess that's a two-part question. Um, if you could >> Thank you, mayor, council member. And I may and unfortunately make it a bit of a three-part question. >> Okay. >> Um, so to answer your question, yes, there could be a way of doing that. This is a preliminary plat. And during a preliminary plat, as long as there a ne is a nexus between the combination of property and the condition being presented, the council could add additional conditions to the resolution uh for combination or right away. To answer the original question on the buffer, that is actually outside of the site and within the Weisetta Boulevard corridor. And the city has completed a Weisetta uh Boulevard corridor study that has encouraged some of those buffers to occur as you're referring to. There is not currently design. The county is looking to solicit bids for that design right now and it's projected out to potentially as far as 2030. Without the design of that corridor, this uh actual design could be in significant flux of what the council sees. But it is outside of the purview of this specific application. But if the applicant was so inclined to, I would argue, be good community members for one of the most um valued asset to the community, which is walkability. If they were so inclined to make that initiate that that decision on their own and add that buffer between the road on the public sidewalk and then somehow combine the public sidewalk with the private sidewalk and then have the appropriate plantings. Would that be >> that? Yes, that uh council member, mayor, council member, that could be possible. That could also be um we could list it as a condition this evening. I can bring up that section uh within the resolution. I've got that available um for your review. We would likely want to see where that uh easement would need to be negotiated as part of the development agreement and PUD agreement at that later date, but we could add it as the condition for the resolution of the preliminary plat this evening. >> Yeah. And we'll give the applicant a chance to to talk about what their design considerations were um so that we have a a balance of you know an option and we should hear why they designed it. >> Completely appropriate. But this is still this part of Weisetta Boulevard is owned by the city, right? or is this still county? Where does that >> this this section is largely within county uh over to the the full eastern side is county. >> So recall that there are two separate parcels. >> Yeah, >> the eastern side actually is within county jurisdiction. The western side I do not believe is and this is going to be right on that line [laughter] >> of where that jurisdiction lies. as it's not part of this application. I don't have that marked. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> Before moving on, were there any other questions? I don't want to skip past. I'll just weigh in that I think that's a great idea. Well, I think it's a great idea to combine the public sidewalk with a private sidewalk if that's something that we can do and then move that sidewalk further away from the street which improves aesthetics and safety. So, I don't know what's involved in that. Sounds a little complicated maybe, but if that can be done, I think everybody would win. So, great idea. >> Thank you. >> I'm a walker. >> So, I'm gonna Your packet includes more uh robust comments from the city engineer and city forester. For ease of presentation, I've tried to uh break them down to basically a bulletoint list of uh highle items. Uh this is the first comment was about truncated domes. These are the uh ADA compliant domes along Weisetta Boulevard. This has actually been corrected within the plans. This was instead of having two individual squares, they must make the circular fashions so that somebody couldn't accidentally walk into uh the intersection of Central and Weisetta Boulevard. Uh our design requirements require 7 foot sidewalks, not five. Originally, uh the applicant had heard from Henipin County to put in a five-ft sidewalk along Weisetta Boulevard. Again, our requirements require seven. Uh, storm water management report uh for the eastern half of the site was not originally completed during the concept plan. So, that needed to be expanded and is under review currently. Um, additional storm water review for roof drains was sought. It actually has been provided and uh the city engineer has no further comment on that. Uh, removal of existing water service um and removal of existing sewer service. Apologies. Use the same word twice. Uh that has been acknowledged by the applicant as items that will need to happen during the building permit process. Um and then full san and actually I didn't do it twice. We have two separate water services to the two separate sites. Um and only one sanitary because that was actually removed as part of the gas station. Um so all of those will need to be removed as during the and complete re uh installation of a larger size will need to be done during the building permit process if the project were to be approved. For item two, we require five and you're saying it's >> sorry, Henipin County required five. >> Got it. >> The city design standards require seven. Got it. >> If I misspoke, apologies. >> No, no, I just want to clarify. >> City forester comments. Uh, the trees shown on the plans need to be updated. Uh, specifically the species diversity mix. My next slide actually goes uh prevent or presents the new updated diversity mix. They are now meeting that. It has switched requirements from actual fee required to more escrow. Uh as you become more compliant, your escrow always goes up and your fee goes down. Uh 7 foot sidewalk seems to be mentioned again and unfortunately uh there are other comments that repeated itself. My apologies for the technical difficulty on that. The other items from the city forester report have been now met through the revised uh landscape plan that was submitted on 224. It does not correct the design deviation of that 26ft spacing that I had mentioned previously. However, uh species mixer over on the right hand side if that's what you're looking at. >> And then the current site has a limited number of trees on it now. Correct. >> Very few and most were uh elm trees >> and needing to be removed. So there's the site is largely vacant or trees are in extremely poor condition. They've got a couple trees that are looking to be retained in the landscape islands over here that may or may not survive. >> It's a it's a significant net pickup. >> Uh as required by the uh city's notification policy, a neighborhood meeting was uh held for this project. It was held on July 22, 20 and that was meant to be uh 2025. Five residents attended. Uh issues discussed included noise concerns and fencing and screening public comments. Uh no, we actually noticed out further than we do for standard properties for this one. So normally we do 500 ft. In this instance, we did 750 ft. Uh there are now five public comments that have been received. Three were contained within your uh packet. two were received within since the packet has been published. Public hearing was held uh by the planning commission on January 26, 2026. Uh four residents spoke largely uh responding to the fence request which I'll uh present the additional renderings shortly. Uh storm water improvements were requested. Uh questions on impacts to Huntington, specifically parking and how they would be utilized. Uh the traffic uh report was made available uh and would continue to be made available for the uh owners of the property to the west. Uh and then noise, traffic and safety uh were significant concerns. And then there was a general support at the public hearing from a uh from the public. However, there are public comments in opposition contained within your packet. Again, as I kind of highlighted, we don't traditionally uh present new renderings because we want to make sure that the council sees the same materials as the planning commission. However, is this was a required condition from the planning commission, we are presenting these updated items. Uh, as you can see, they've uh shared these renderings with I'm sorry, you can't see this, but they've shared these renderings with the neighbors already um in an effort to continue their outreach. They've extended the fence along the southern property line. Um, and you can see where it's at that 100% opacity. >> Additionally, they've extended it. >> That big white building on the left, that's >> that's the apartment. >> That's the apartment building just right there at the at the fence line. >> Yes. And there's a retaining wall between the fence and that building as well. >> There's significant amount of activity within that area as well. This is a a this is a redevelopment site. >> So there's a there's going to be a retaining wall that's not pictured. >> It's it's already present and either staying in place or being repaired. So you can see the uh edges of it here and then the wall the fence in itself is actually on top of or uh blocking the view of in this rendering. >> So the rendering is not all that accurate. uh >> kind of >> I I would want the applicant to speak to how their rendering is playing with that wall. There's a wall right there that varies which property line it is actually on. So for portions of it looking because I've spoken with the nearby resident for portions of of that retaining wall it is on the apartment property and for portions of that retaining wall it is on the subject property. Uh sometimes split evenly. So it it's right on the line. um unable to determine full ownership. Walzer has agreed to repair as needed and improve the drainage of that retaining wall as there is significant storm water damage to it. >> Do you know if that apartment building has windows on the north side? >> I believe that it does. >> Oh, whoa. Okay. >> I have a Google Street View here. >> Yep. That's There are times I wish I could bring that up for you. Uh other items that uh the planning commission had required was the extension of that fence all the way over to Huntington. This is what that rendering was attempting to convey. Uh that was largely to help prevent uh any additional light and noise from Weisetta Boulevard. Uh going into the Huntington neighborhood to the south. the PL uh for planning commission recommendation um at the public hearing on January 2026 uh they unanimously directed staff to prepare a report and recommendation of approval. We then brought that back on February 9th uh where they uh affirmed that decision uh but members of the planning commission did provide some additional comments and recommendations that were not necessarily voted on uh by the commission that the city council consider potential additional requirements or conditions being added onto the resolution specifically in regards to the use of the property uh for noise impacts to neighborhoods I don't know about >> use of the uh vehicles for tours. Um the use of uh used car sales within the site to specifically try to limit this to that boutique dealership that is identified within the application. So, uh, commissioners individually specifically recommended that council consider those and consider any additional conditions they may may want to include or considerations as the development agreement uh, proceeds through the process for your next step, which would be reviewing that development agreement uh, in a draft format. The next several slides are all of the criteria. I'm going to be reading just the top portion. I for your deliberations, I wanted to leave these items in. They are also contained within your packet. There will likely be a source of uh for the city council during your discussion, but I don't want to go through any individual or every individual point unless sought by the city council. So when reviewing PUDs in general, what planning commission and city council are charged to do are to evaluate the effects of the proposed PUD on the health, safety, and welfare of residents in the surrounding area. When reviewing preliminary plat, the city council should cons shall consider the possible adverse effects of the preliminary plat based on its judgment uh with the following factors. This will actually be two slides, but please note this is not actually limited to just these factors. When reviewing variances, these meet the these must meet the practical difficulty standards. So, not only must they be in harmony with with the zoning and consistent with the comp plan, they must meet the four provisions all of the four provisions below. Where this differs from the preliminary plat and the PUD is that all four of these conditions must be met in uh opposite with those others. Any single uh piece of those they may not meet but it may meet the overall intent of those two items. And we're reviewing design deviations. This is city of Weisetta specific criteria. So these are not set by state statute. These are uh contained with an Rcode and it is essentially does the deviation uh is the negative impact created by that deviation outweighed by one or more of the following positive factors. So when reviewing whether the deviation for separation between trees or that 6 foot between sidewalk are there other factors that you gain additional positivity for? And with that, the action before the commission or before the council this evening would be to adopt resolution 12-2026. The applicant is present and is prepared to make a presentation as well. And I am available for any other questions you may have. >> Yeah. Let's see if we have any other questions of staff at this time and then we'll turn it over to the applicant and then bring it allow questions there and then bring it back for discussion. Are there any other questions of staff at this particular time? Okay, hearing none, I just wanted to note that um the the two individuals um that were supplemental to our packet was an additional comment from Mr. Shaw and then a net new content comment from Mr. Johnson [clears throat] who lives on central directly adjacent to the apartment building or one one door down on Central. So, just wanted that noted for the record. Sometimes I hear from folks that say, "Did you ever read my my additional information?" So, I wanted to call it out by name to know that we uh acknowledging their additional uh information in the packet. So, >> mayor, could I ask one more question of staff? Um >> the access spacing variance. That's the one that they're just redoing, but it's legal nonconforming. So, they'll Yes, that one. Now we require 40 ft and this is a is a pretty significant difference um with such a busy road kind of a confusing um intersection. Could you explain to me, give me a try to give me a brief explanation of why we require 40 ft and and the purpose of that requirement so that we I can evaluate better if >> um not having the 40 ft seems like it would impact a busy thorough affair. Certainly, mayor, council member, I'm going to do this with my very best ability not to present any form of bias, but the when I'm evaluating this as a planner, this access spacing existing offers great concern uh on the eastern side, the existing one. When you have a spacing that close to an intersection, the propensity for accidents, particularly sideswipes and even driver sideswipes, which are the highest uh mortality rate accident, um are increased by a significant margin. Where that is largely determined is just the amount of time individuals have to react as someone else makes an action. These are why we have the 40 foot spacing and actually that is fairly short still for lower traffic roadways there's less impact to that. In the instance of Huntington uh specifically I've spoken with the city engineer uh and the assistant city engineer on this access point. It doesn't present significant concern as long as Huntington remains closed. If it were to be reopened or reconnected, >> then it would present some level of concern. There is at no time that we are anticipating it reopen opening due to significant grades. >> That that access point is that left turn that's sort of guided on um >> wish I had a better photo >> boulevard. I mean like that got redesigned at the intersection change at superior and a boulevard you know all that turn. So, I mean, my point is it's a >> it's a guided left turn that's already in a, you know, kind of a >> So, there's the left turn >> signal way to get in >> as we're evaluating or as I'm evaluating. I don't want to speak for the city engineer and on this subject. >> You can see it right there, but here's the left turn >> corral there. >> Here would be if you were taking a right turn of the site. Where my concern is reduced is at this point you've gone to a slowed condition. You're now entering what feels like a parking lot, >> right, >> before you are then making the entrance into this site. >> That left turn is 60. >> So, you've already reached a shielded location in some ways uh by removing that vehicle off of the traffic of Weisetta Boulevard. >> But the 40 ft is from Weisetta Boulevard, not Okay. So, you're saying >> well it's from the intersection of those two. >> Got it. So, >> so where those two meet is that's the 40 foot. When you look at their site plan, it doesn't I don't really understand why they wouldn't have gone with the compliant entrance because it leads right into parking. >> So, I'm going to let the applicant elaborate on that. They have answered that question previously, so I know that they will be able to explain that in greater detail. >> Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Um um anticipating we're going to we have a ways to go on this when you might deem it appropriate. I'd suggest maybe a little 5 to 8 minute break. >> Sure. Yeah. We just for you guys context, we've been here since um 9:30 this morning. Um so it's been somewhat of a longer meeting. So, that's I think a very appropriate request given uh we've been here since 9:30 a.m. So, um would you'd be open to the applicant making a presentation? Um or whenever you prefer now. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Maybe let's just because the the the questions are so like right there. I think let's give the applicant a chance to to make their presentation, answer questions, and then we'll have a short recess and then come back for a deliberation. Hopefully, you guys understand that. Um, so [clears throat] who who will be presenting on behalf of the applicant? >> Welcome and just state your name and the group you're representing. >> Good evening. I am Dan Bham, one of the architects on the project. >> Yes, thank you. And John Brennan, senior vice president, general counsel for Wallser Automotive. >> Thank you. Um, so I guess if we want to start since the slides up with that entrance and is an existing entrance and Huntington significantly slopes slopes as you go to the south and we wouldn't be able to achieve proper grading to get into the site if we were to relocate it especially I mean with the fact that these cars are very low profile and they need flatter grades in order to get in and out of the site. If we were to move that to the south, we would not be able to achieve that with where it sits with how that existing grade on Huntington works. >> You're referring to the question I just asked the >> 40 foot setback and that's why we couldn't push it any further south is just the way Hunting without rebuilding Huntington, which you know, we don't own any of that. We couldn't get get it to get access into the site for to hit that 40 foot. >> Okay. >> So that's why we chose to keep it where it is. >> Understood. And then as far as the sidewalk right now in front of Edina along Weisetta Boulevard, that sidewalk is right up on Weisetta Boulevard. And so we're just there's a chunk of a sidewalk in the western existing western lot right now that is only 5 foot and then it stops and does not continue to the corner. Right. And so we're going to widen that existing sidewalk and make it 7 feet and continue it all the way to the intersection where there is a curb cut and it continues across. But all the sidewalks throughout this stretch are right on Weisetta Boulevard. There's no grass between the road or and the sidewalk. >> You're talking about existing conditions, >> correct? Yeah. >> And so we're just continuing that for our site with what's on the east side and west side of what we currently have. Do you want to address the suggestion of, you know, factual statement? Those are existing conditions, but why did you choose this design versus you could potentially maybe uh provide a a green buffer from the street to the sidewalk? So, just talk about the design consideration as you thought that through. Um we well in order to meet the city code we had the 7- foot sidewalk and we so we could meet that requirement and then we have an internal sidewalk for when people come in they come directly into our building without having to go to the city sidewalk and come back in. And there was a comment I believe in planning or something to physically connect those two sidewalks. So if you were to be walking down, you could walk into the site. And so we did on the west side there. Originally, we didn't have that connection, but we had to we put that in on that where he's circling. We added that since the original concept plan in order to connect the city sidewalk with our internal sidewalk. >> Would you be opening to combining those two sidewalks and putting a green buffer in between the road and the sidewalk as as someone who does look at it. >> As someone who does walk Yep. >> a lot, it doesn't feel safe when you walk next brightly on the street. So, what I would do is I would walk on your private sidewalk until I couldn't and then scoot right back up. And I think a lot of the public would do that, too, just for >> I agree. But it it's no different than the site to the west as it sits today. So you >> understood I understand that it's no different but right now it's not >> it's not safe and so >> we could look into it. Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And we we've faced this on numerous properties on Wis Boulevard and we've tried to balance each time trying to provide that buffer and then that they have the same situation. Their existing condition is either no sidewalk or a sidewalk that's right to the curb. >> So it's it's not unique to this property. It's it's a goal that we have as a city along this corridor. So, you're just it's it's not unique to this property. It's just a consideration that we're trying to advance along the entire corridor. >> Yeah. We just reviewed uh another property on Weisettto Boulevard and they said the same thing. One side didn't have a buffer, one side did. So, we just went with the one that didn't. And then they heard from us and said, "Okay, no problem." >> Absolutely. >> Just want to give you the context. >> Okay. No, I did. I wasn't aware. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> That helps. >> Okay. Um, do you want to keep going with answering questions or did you want to give your own sort of >> um Well, I think we kind of reviewed everything. Do you want to nickel tour the building, the site layout, or do you want to just open >> Yeah. I mean, why don't you just give us I mean, it's one thing to have a staff narrative, but just give us your own narrative of of of the project. >> Right. So you know why um Lamborghini drove around and chose Weisetta as the city that they wanted to be in. And so Walzers had the site and originally we were going to keep the Malber's building in place and over time it turned out where this is how we continued on with conversations with Malberries and it worked out to where we were able to acquire that and take over both parcels, combine them into one for one building that faces Weisetta up to the setback line as it sits today with the showroom that sits along there. So, as you're driving down Weisetta Boulevard, there is significant amount of glass where you can see into that showroom and the cars will be visible with all the finishes in that showroom that Lamborghini requires. And so, we do have a significant amount of mason all masonry except for the black piece that will be ACM. We me or exceed the glass requirements on all sides. Um, >> so it's masonry at the at the ground level and then at at that one story that's just a different substrate, masonry substrate. >> Yes, we have a burnish block like Wayne's coat up two and a half ft and then I have a pre-cast architectural band and then brick all the way up to the top of the parapit. >> Okay. >> And on the service side of things, we'll have the six service bays and they do have heating and air conditioning in the service bay. So those doors will be closed a majority of the time, not like un air conditioned service bays where they'd be open in the summer ventilating air. So the noise will be significantly reduced to the south as well. And then with continuing that fence, basically the entire property line east to west will help with that as well. >> So they can run cars in the repair bays with the door down. >> Yes. >> Yep. There's exhaust systems that they would put in place that would suck the exhaust out, not in the room. Correct. >> You just mentioned the fence. Would that be would would there be an 8ft fence between uh on the east side of the property kind of that runs along that retaining wall between like right up against that apartment building? >> Yes. >> Yep. and talking with the neighbors. That's how we got to the 8ft fence is we said we'd like to have the nine stalls right there. And in order to block headlights, noise, street lights, etc., we would put a solid fence going east to west right up against their apartment. And then when we were here for planning commission, it was talked about that as the hill jumps up on top of that retaining wall, we would continue that fence all the way to the west. Did the owner of the the apartment building agree with that while being there? Okay. >> Anything else that you'd like to to offer? >> Um, no. That's kind of it. [laughter] I heard everything else. >> Okay. >> I have a couple more questions for the applicant if I may. Absolutely. >> Um, >> how many boutique Lamborghini dealerships are operating right now? in the US. >> Yeah, in the US >> 30. >> 30. >> Speak to that better than I can. I don't know. >> It would be right around 30 for this one. >> And they're all about 9,000 square feet or under. >> I am not familiar with the exact square footages, but this has to be within the realm of what they expect. This is a boutique exotic brand. Yes. >> 30. Could you give me a couple examples? I I looked and I found one. >> Oh, well, yes. Uh Chicago, I believe it's called Gold Coast is the brand. That's that's the nearest two in Chicago. >> In Chicago, one in Denver. Those are the closest ones to the Twin Cities. >> And I I looked at the one in Greenwich. There were two that were in interior malls. They didn't feel too comparable to me. Um how many Okay, let's just go with one of them maybe. Like how many sales do they have a year? >> Minimal to to say the least. And so, you know, Waler operates nearly 30 independent franchise dealerships across the country, but primarily here in the Twin Cities, nearly 20 or so locations. >> Oh, I apologize. I meant Lamborghini, the boutique Lamborghinis, not >> their unit count. I I apologize. I can't I can't speak to that. But this would be a lower volume um Lamborghini dealership even compared to certainly the Chicago examples or Greenwich I mean other higher larger metro metropolitan areas you're speaking of. >> How many test drives do they offer you know monthly or yearly at these boutique dealerships? >> Yes. Uh thank you for the question. I apologize I can't speak to specific numbers on this but in terms of test drives you know everything is appointment only. So, this is completely different than any other, you know, dealership that that I or any of us are probably used to frequenting. You cannot just show up and test drive a $300,000 vehicle. Uh, so it is it is scheduled. Um, they are very sporadic in terms of trying to vet those customers to make sure it's not somebody out for a joy ride. Uh, that's not what the OEM expects of us. That's not what we want to spend our time on in terms of generating actual sales. And so I would venture we're talking single digits per per week. >> Okay. Um on on your on your original meeting at the planning commission you were you told the commission that these were appointment only but then at the most recent planning commission I mean it was you you guys stated that you did allow walk-ins and now today you said that it's appointment only. So I'm can you clarify on >> certainly certainly apologize for any confusion. So in terms of a walk-in, there is there's not a scenario where somebody can walk off the street without any other kinds of credentials or showing their uh you know running credit or being identified as a re a true prospective buyer um that would be able to get in a vehicle. I don't as an employee of the company expect to be behind the wheel of any of these vehicles ever. Um, so it is I would say 99% of the time appointment only. If not to play the hometown card, Anthony Edwards walks in off the street, um, you know, Minnesota Timberwolf, uh, we will probably put him behind the wheel to say, "Yes, this is a true prospective buyer that might actually be interested." So, it is it is a rare exception. I would say almost in every case, it's going to be appointment only because we can't vet anyone else without having done some pre-work. H >> you think that a person couldn't walk in and and prove their wealth to you that day? Um how many of those other Lamborghini dealerships, boutique style Lamborghini dealerships have active repair shops? >> I believe the majority. And then and how many uh service tickets or repairs do they do monthly >> or yearly? >> In terms of the number of tickets, that's that's hard to say. Just by the number of bays that we have scoped out, this is very limited. I mean, by comparison, our Toyota dealership in Bloomington, >> again, I just want Lamborghini uh comparisons. Other boutique Lamborghinis, not Walter Repairs. >> Yeah, that's apologize. What I'm trying to say is there there are such a limited number of bays that the repair tickets are extremely limited in this type of market. >> And and so you don't you can't tell me how many sales there are. You can't tell me how many repairs there are. And you can't tell me how many test drives at any of these other locations. >> Those would I apologize. Those would all be estimates. Uh it in terms of other Lamborghini dealerships, this is our first in that obviously it's a boutique market with a very limited retail presence compared to anything else on the street. Maybe maybe uh one of the other uh business people would know this. I think if you were going into an agreement with uh in sort of a franchise situation, you would have those numbers. >> Yeah, I I can tell you that. U council member. So the the planning volume which is assigned by the OEM and we have third generation uh Walzer here to represent, we're looking at three-ish new vehicles per month. That is what the OEM looks at in terms of planning volumes. So that that's the sales volume. They don't look at number of ROROs or service tickets. >> Okay. Well, I would love information on how much how many service um tickets, appointments, and then how many test drives you all do. And and and I'd like real solid confirmation about this appointment only situation because it's flip-flopped now back and forth twice twice. So that feels like it's inconsistent. >> Hi. Um, Sawyer Walls, uh, one of the directors at Walzer and in charge of part of this project. >> Um, there's a boutique style dealership down in Chicago, no, in Illinois. It's called Downer's Grove Lamborghini. And in speaking with them, their size probably isn't exactly, but it's pretty close to what we're talking about here. They're looking at around 5 to 10 RORO's a month. So >> RORO, >> sorry, repair orders on uh customer paid vehicles, not internal work, but just people coming in with appointments to get their vehicle serviced. >> What I can tell you is is that this dealership operates in such a different way from a traditional dealership in every metric. Um, for the most part, as far as the new side goes, Lamborghini offers three vehicles and two of which are generally north of a half a million dollars. These are not vehicles we will be test driving >> almost ever. Uh, >> your narrative says five models. >> True. There's different classes, but I would tell you that the Huracan is being phased out. And there's another version of the Urus, which is the SUV that's also being phased out. So, we're kind of in a weird limbo period with those. Right now, it's the Urus, which is an SUV, a Tamario, which is a sport car, and the Revoltto, which is a hyper car. The Tamario and the Revoltto will not really ever be test drivedrived just because the customers don't want to buy a car that, you know, 10 plus people have been in and driving around. the Urus will be the one that would probably be test drived although very rarely. Uh these customers generally know what they're buying and they know what they're getting into if they're spending that kind of coin. >> So where do they go and drive the car before they decide they are going to purchase it? >> Generally this class a customer has a an experience with this type of car. Not necessarily the specific one they're buying, but they know what they're getting into. And this are more often than not vehicles that they just come in, they've already got their heart set on something. They know what it drives like and they're coming in to buy it. >> Okay. So, they spend half a million dollars on a car they've never and they've never >> believe me. It sounds crazy. >> Well, I mean, I know, but it sounds [laughter] it doesn't sound very >> It's not the way that I would buy a car, for sure. Um but um in in often cases we're not actually dealing with the customers themselves but a representative of the customer that's coming in to facilitate the transaction. And uh this is just kind of the nuance of this hypercar world. >> So your your counterpart in the greater Chicago land area. >> Yes. Downers Grove. >> They can't tell you um how many test drives they've done. Um, there was either this dealership or the one I in Denver, forgive me, I'm pretty confident it was Downer's Grove. They don't offer test drives at all. >> But, okay. And all 30, they just don't do any test drives of >> No. >> Seems okay. >> A lot of these are custom orders, right? I mean, so when when you're when you're ordering a a luxury item like this, >> you're going through a discernment process to to really pick out almost every detail to leather and to you know, so it's not it's not the stitch, >> not the model. I just just want to clarify also um clarify, are you trying to ascertain like a comparable dealership or try to compare and contrast >> to to a more traditional dealership because I understand the line of questioning. if my questions have been not clear. Um, >> no, the questions are clear. I just want to understand what you what you're trying to learn maybe more helpful in answering them. >> Um, I'm very concerned about the use in this location and I I I hear that this isn't your typical car dealership, and as I can see, it isn't. However, car dealerships are where you sell cars, test drive cars, offer repairs, and maybe even sell used cars. And now, they may be a different price point and a much different caliber automobile, but those four things is what makes a caller dealership a car dealership. So, I'm trying to gauge how active this is because I don't feel that it's going to be as quiet as you think. And um I mean quiet in multiple ways, but we'll get to that. Um and you know, yes, you're you're very expensive luxury cars, but you're not the only luxury car out there. So wildly, you kind of have a pick of a litter if you want to spend half a million dollars on a car. And I would imagine if that was the kind of money you're going to spend on a car, you would want to drive that andor the Ferrari up the street or the 911 or the McLaren. You know, there's just a lot of really luxury cars. So anyways, I'll I'll move on. I just think the lack of information you're providing from existing boutiques I'm finding a little bit alarming. And I do also note that your um I don't know if it was the CEO but made a a pretty public shift in your in the Lamborghini retail model pretty recently where they have abandoned their whole EV um program and was actually quoted as saying in the in the news um Excuse me. >> I know Ferrari just did made these claims of eliminating their EV branch. >> We don't have any uh EVO only vehicles. These are all hybrids. >> Understood. But they were working on one that was going to come out in like 28. And it said uh Lamborghini would continue to build internal combustion engines for as long as possible. >> Yes. Um, now the three vehicles that we, again, I understand it's five, but the three vehicles that we're going to be selling new are all hybrid vehicles. Um, I'd be happy to touch on any of the points that you've brought up. Um, as I, you know, I'm kind of new to the podium here. Um there has been a question that was brought up in the last meeting or the two meetings ago, which is we'd be happy to put up signs, things of this nature, uh to kind of reduce the noise level. When you start these vehicles, the new vehicles, uh they start in an EV mode, and they don't actually shift into the crazy V12s and all that stuff until you put it in sport or Corsa, those modes that Lamborghini has. It would be an expectation we hold of our customers that they're not revving the engines and they're not peeling out of the parking lot. That would be a bad look on us. And honestly, it's not the uh the way that we do business, >> right? >> Yeah. >> People who buy half a million dollar cars though are probably >> for sure. We just don't want them doing it around us. Uh we've genered a great relationship with the neighbors behind this building. We want to keep that. >> Yeah, I bring it up with that focus on internal combustion engines simply because if you draw if you do spend time on Lake Street and Weisetta, um you will know that it's a big nuisance down there. >> I am on Grove Lane East. >> Great. >> I know. >> So >> it's brutal. >> It it it is. And more attracts more. And someone who buys a half a million dollar car may want to be seen in it. >> They definitely want to be seen. >> I would say so, too. So, I can't imagine a cruise down Lake Street won't be part of what you want to experience when you're test driving the car. >> Now, we'd be happy to generate a route for our test drives or we can have that discussion later on. Um I don't believe that that's going to be an intentional route at this point just because there's six stop signs. Um you know these are routes that we'd be you know the customers can take on once they own the vehicle. But that's not again of the few test drives we do that's not going to be a part of our route. I mean, I get what you're saying and I can't I can't fathom why anyone with a high performance vehicle wants to stop at six stop signs and deal with pedestrians and make a bunch of noise and a bunch of in front of a bunch of people trying to enjoy a park. >> Yes. >> But they really like it. >> They do. >> They do. So, generally my experience with the Lake Street stuff, and again I'm kind of speculating here, so apologize, but generally the Lake Street and the revving and the cars that I've seen is of the younger crowd, kind of my age demographic. Um, and uh would very well wouldn't be the normal customer we have. My anecdotal research is that your Lamborghinis are also um really attractive to a younger >> for sure. For sure. >> So yeah, >> kind of prove my point there. Okay. I would love to give my colleagues a moment and I appreciate very much clarifying just trying to understand it's all about intensity of use, >> right? So that's really the line of questioning. So, I was just trying to draw that out and just maybe after the break you guys can huddle and be maybe a little bit more specific on yes, we understand it's not uh comparable to a Toyota dealership, but within the luxury class trying to understand intensity of use. That's that's the question behind the question. >> Yeah. And maybe you could gather some of that pertinent information from these other dealerships if that if that if that's at your fingertips. I would love to have qu those questions answered specifically rather than just kind of best guesses. >> Absolutely. >> About the sales, the repairs, the test drives >> and then how many used cars they sell. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> I can try to get that. >> Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Just had a second request for a break. So, let's just We're not I don't think done with the questions or presentations. We take a break now and come back. >> We'll come back and have more questions. >> Yeah. If if they have more Yeah. So, let's take a fivem minute break. >> Yeah. I did nothing. That's good. Are you comfortable? [clears throat] [snorts] Yeah. >> Okay. I'm going to call the meeting back to order after this brief recess. So, we will pick up where we left off, which was we had a brief presentation, a series of questions. Uh, we didn't have a chance for all council members to ask questions. So, now I would turn it over to other council members to ask questions of the applicant. So, who would like to go? >> You're okay, Mr. Mayor. I'll make a few comments, please, sir. A question. Um, well, I very much appreciate the nature of the questions that Council McDonald asked because I think I think that's kind of we're getting to the heart of the issue that we'll probably have more conversation about. So, just one other question that maybe didn't get asked that specifically, but what what's your how do you deal with used cars? Like if Chuck wants to trade in his Chevy Malibu for a Lamborghini, like how do you do do you deal with used cars? You so just do you sell them to individuals or just other dealerships or franchises or you know kind of getting back to the volume issue of like how much traffic we have and >> um you could help us with that it'd be great. >> Yeah, love the example by the way. Um, but based on the nature of the the vehicles that we're selling, it's going to be very rare. Um, I'm talking less than 1% that we take in on trade on a new vehicle. Um the the way that we formulate the used car inventory isn't necessarily based on any volume strategies or um things that we're taking in on trade. It's a specialty class of vehicle just as the same as our new cars. We we could see 2012 McLarens just as well as we might see a 1980 Toyota High. If it's a specialty car, it's something we're interested in selling. Because of that, we're not going to be seeing, you know, six test drives on a Honda Civic or something else that we bought at auction or wholesale or whatever else. If we do see vehicles like the Tahoe that you mentioned or things that are kind of more of an A or B car, these are vehicles that we'd most likely distribute to one of our other locations as the goal here is to sell specialty class vehicles that is not necessarily a high volume sale but just um exotic. So, not necessarily a volume pusher, but just rather uh we have 20 20 bays underneath in the the lower garage. We intend to use those for uh for used cars for the most part. Um but again, the style of vehicle is going to be very specialty class, not offering a lot of test drives unless it's something that's align with the vehicle itself. Um but, uh definitely more low volume. You don't plan on having used inventory on the lot. You may you may be transactional with it and repurpose it somewhere else, but you're not you're not lining up used cars in in >> not on the not on No, that's not our intention. We have that underground bay to hold some of that specialty class of vehicle that isn't a new Lamborghini. Uh but we aren't going to uh you're not going to see the row of used cars with inflatable tubemen and the balloons alike. This is not that style. But you'll have used car inventory at this location. >> That is our intention. Yes. >> Up to 20. >> It's hard to put a number on it at this point. That's I'm just brought up that number because that's what the underground parking garage will hold. It's not our intention to hold used vehicles on the outside uh lot as that's mostly going to be customer parking and service and and the like. But um I just bring up the number 20 because that's what the underground parking garage will allow. >> I think Mr. S had some follow-up. So hold on. Mr. or wasn't question. >> Oh, my apologies. >> If only 1% of your people deal with used cars, how do you get even half a 20? How do you get a bunch of cars downstairs? >> Great question. So, um, these are vehicles that we were going to be acquiring across the country or vehicles that are a specialty car or class that's taking in on trade uh at one of our other locations as well. >> Oh, so you are in the used car business in this location? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay, another question you just thought of. Um, how many typical team members will be on site every day and where and where are they going to park? >> Great question. Um, as of right now, the team looks to be around eight or less. Yes. Um, general manager, a few service technicians and a couple of salespeople. Um, and a branding manager. Uh, so, uh, around eight. As far as the specifics of the parking, five underneath is what she just gestured to me. And that's where they're going to be in the underground parking garage. >> Five spots for eight people. >> Five spots in the lower level. And then yeah, Katie is going to be better at answering this question. >> Hi, I'm Katie Cohen, director of facilities and construction for Walzer. Um, yes, eight is what we're currently planning. We have five stalls dedicated underneath in the lower level garage. And then we do have the surface parking to the rear also on the lower level. That would be the additional three for the other staff members to park there. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Other questions? Mr. Sornson, M. McDonald, I think you had a follow-up. I just wanted to give you that chance. >> Well, out of those that used car um inventory, those can be test driven, right? Um, it again it just depends on the car itself. And I'm going to just bring up a wild example here, but if we had a Ferrari F-14 worth $5 million, that's not a car we're test driving. But if I had the same 1980 Toyota Hias with the van and the curtains and the windows, we'd probably allow that to be test- driven. Um, fairly wild examples just because I don't have specifics for you on the rules that we have in place. Um, it's just more discretion uh of the general manager and the vehicle itself. >> Okay. I would imagine that used car inventory would fall somewhere in between those two examples you gave. >> Yes. Specialty class for sure. That's a great question. Yes. >> Okay. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Vehicles to be admired. >> Other questions of the applicant from other council members? Um I just had one like I just want to drill into you know what Miss McDonald was asking. I think the context is can you just make an overall statement about use right the so in the luxury class best of your ability you know service sales intensity of use right give us comfort that the intensity of use is lower as I think you know or or consistent with previous uh presentations >> um what I would tell you is that as far as we've seen with the malberries that's there. Our traffic is probably going to be lower than that. >> Um there is a decent chance. Now I'm just now remembering a concern that you had brought up um that uh we had appointment only but also we are opening the doors to the public. This kind of aligns with that which is that this is a cool product. We're excited to have it. We're excited to show it. So that was more of a concern on test drive specifically for appointments and customers and actually spending the time with a person to show off a vehicle. Generally speaking, it's our intention at least in the opening months to have the doors open to show these vehicles off to the people that just want to come in and see. If that gets to be too crazy, we are toning it back and making it completely appointmentbased only. But that was just appointments only for the test drives. Um, but we are still planning at this point to have our doors open to the public as this is stuff that we want to show off. Um, again, the volume and the traffic is, forgive us for continuing to bring up examples from our other dealerships. That's just what we're like, that's just what we know. That's what our experience has been. Um, in every metric, this dealership will be smaller, lower traffic, completely different from any other or uh franchise dealership we have. I would be shocked if the traffic again exceeds that of Milbury's right now. >> Yeah. I I just want to express that I'm disappointed you don't have some data from like boutique Lamborghini dealerships especially. >> So we we reach >> you told me there were at least 30 of them and you can only even think of two. >> Well, so these are private businesses and more often than not these are not businesses that are willing to share the data that of of the experience of their locations. We have a relationship with one or two of these and the ones that we speak with don't even have the metrics on how many test drives they do in a month because that's just not a a number that they track. But again, it's so low to where when we bring up the question, it's something they kind of chuckle at, which is like, oh, I mean, that's not even a concern. That's the reason I don't have a specific number for you. If I could get one, I would be. That's where I wanted to spend that time. But this is not not something that we normally track because it's so low. >> This feels like you would want that information before you open the business. >> For sure. And I want it to the the information that's important to us is what Lamborghini predicts that we'll be selling. Uh that's as far as a business, that's what we're the most concerned with because that's where we make the money. We sell the cars. Um we don't make the money on test drives. don't make the money on a a you know a a bad example but a timer that or a bell that counts how many people that walk in the door. We make the money on selling the car and that's the most important thing to track. And again, all these other Lamborghini dealerships, they're private businesses. These are not people or staff that want to share the information of the specific metrics because it relates to the closing of that dealership and these are not things they're interested in sharing. Okay. >> Thanks. >> Yeah. Any other questions of the applicant from anyone at council? Okay. Hearing none, bring it back to the council for deliberation. So, uh, thank you for Oh, did you have another >> Yeah, the public speak. >> Yeah, we we'll get there. So, so, >> um, two cards. I just wanted to get transition here >> if I may. Um, in the, uh, >> recess, >> the recess, the break. Thank you. Um, we did discuss the the sidewalk as you had mentioned and assuming that it would pass code and all the like. Excuse me, I'm a little fresh to all this. It would be something that we'd be very happy to do um to to continue that on for the public. Yes. >> Just wanted to bring that in uh to the discussion as well. >> Great. Appreciate it. >> Perfect. So, you feel like you've given all the information you you want? >> Yes. Okay. Great. Um, we're going to bring it back to council. We did receive two cards um at the break. So we will give you a chance to give that feedback now and then we'll begin our deliberations. So I'd first uh invite to the uh podium Mr. Gordy Straa please. >> Yeah. Gordy Straa 130 Huntington. Um I want to bring up a few things. First of all, I'm the first house right behind it. And that's was the concern with the with the 8-foot fence, not only for me, but the whole neighborhood beyond me because I sit down in the hole, but it does help for the traffic on Wisetta Boulevard and what have you. And uh the one of the other things this this set this green lawn a little bit what 7 ft of it that was didn't meet code where the green space you got to remember that Edina it isn't Edina building but they ran it >> primary tenant. when they built that that's at zero setback that's right up to the to the Huntington line and in the back and um this little 5-ft section I don't think is anything that needs to be of any concern but uh also [clears throat] we've had water problems me part of it but coming from the cleaner lot over the backhill of the apartments washing it out across their driveway then it goes against Marty Johnson's fence around the fence down my backyard to the pickup station down in Fischer's backyard. It never used to be there. And this will be a great improvement for that with them grading it. And they also had talked earlier about they're where that driveway is going to come in off central. They're going to have a curb and gutter there. So any water that does get there will go out. It won't be able to get over the curb. it'll go out to central. Um, [clears throat] they've been really good to deal with and this this noise thing. Everybody concerned about it. That's ridiculous. If you come to my house now, you put a noise ordinance in here I think last summer. You need somebody out there to enforce it because all I hear is Main Street noise. Main Street noise. Fooy about Main Street. I don't even go down there anymore. It's dangerous. But come on up on Weisetta Boulevard in 101. You want to hear noise, but we need some enforcement. If you got a a new law, let's enforce it. There's never seen a squad up there working on it, but the noise is tremendous up there. And u we're all in favor of this because it's it should be low volume than what the last thing you proposed with a drive-thru coffee. And uh even the station of course over the years the station increased. I worked there when I was in high school. They didn't wasn't too much traffic then. But um yeah I the test drives and all of that stuff and them saying bringing the cars out the noise they make fooy. That's nothing compared to what goes on in the highway. And they aren't Lamborghinis doing it. It's many of the cars, even late model, I've seen late model Ford Mustangs, just factory stuff that they get after and it makes tremendous noise. And uh so I think that's a big concern that you're putting wasting a lot of time on, but um I may have more to say later, but right now that's all I can think of. >> Thank you, Mr. Straka, for your input. Um, next uh card I have is from Mr. Greg Hogland. Welcome, >> mayor and council. My name is Greg Hogan. I live at 120 Chevy Chase Drive in Wisetta, Minnesota. Could you do me a favor and put the new renderings up? Yeah. Couple things. Uh my wife and I own the apartment building. It's not a vacant lot. It's an apartment building that's probably been there I've I've been told over 150 years. Okay. So, um it predates me um if you know what I mean. Um what's interesting here is we have five residents. Some of them have lived there for over 20 years. They're Wisetta residents. Um, and they're they're great great people and uh my wife and I bought it maybe a couple years ago and our intention is to fix it up and provide uh they're like little boutique units there and they're great people. So, um I've also had a lot of experience with city council meetings and developers. Okay. and I've lived side by side to some of the biggest developers in this state and normally the person next to the development is opposed to it. I and my wife are in favor of it. Okay? Now, you got to understand that apartment building does have windows. Uh there's people living there and they probably are five feet from where this development is going. Okay. So why are we in favor of it? Number one, if we brought you over there, you could not believe they push all the snow and you push all the water. the there is probably 50 years of water damage running through the bot the back of our property and it flows like Gordy says all the way down the street. So number one, you're going to fix your water problem for a lot of residents. That that that is a big thing. Number two, I sit there and this is this is I I I wonder if you were not going to approve this tonight, what are you waiting for? Uh we've had a coffee concept and I guess you'd be waiting for another medical building or um I I can't even imagine, but I bet you you will be waiting for 5 to 10 years for something to come here. Okay. So, we have been working with the Walzer group. Um, there is an existing retaining wall from our property. Some of it is on, some of it is not on not on. And they have been extremely collaborative and open-minded and willing to work with us. Okay. Which is the opposite of any developer I've ever dealt with living next to it. Okay. Um to another point there is the fencing is will be great. Um the back of our property here is where it gets really interesting and we've got to work together uh with a retaining wall to improve the back of that property. And all we ask for in the development process is is one um that if there is any rain or I've had 10-in rains in the middle of construction and this stuff flows into our property that they will cooperate with us promptly um and and help repair it. two, if there's any foundational damage, we're talking really close to a 150y year building or something hits my unit or what have you, they will cooperate with me, right? And um the last one is um I'm forgetting one um that the tenants, okay, we just need to abide by the hours of construction. Okay, we've got people living there and um I've had some challenges in the past there. As long as they abide by the the posted hours, we will notify our tenants and we will be cooperative there as well. So, I think from a strategic standpoint here tonight, you're looking at one a reputable car dealership um in the community who also has another dealership in Weisetta. They're wellunded. They're going to put uh additional taxes into the city and I think it's going to be a boutique exotic uh car location and I can't think of what else would be preferenceable to go in there versus another medical building or a dentist office. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Hogan. Okay, so uh bring it back to council for discussion now. Um, so who would like to begin to weigh in on on the pros and cons or more information they'd like to see? Um, who would like to start? >> I have a question. Um, >> and maybe this is for uh >> city attorney Shelzel or um or staff. One of the concerns is that that I've heard in watching the planning commission meetings and uh other feedback from community members is about preserving. So, if we if this gets approved, we're approving it as a boutique high-end luxury car dealership. How do we incorporate into our approval that it maintains that character in some form or fashion? um mayor and council member. So um that is a you're right that was a that was a point that we discussed uh to a great extent at the planning commission level. And because this is a PUD, the city does have flexibility to incorporate into the final PUD plan and the PUD development agreement operational standards and use standards. So we can be very specific that the permitted use within this PUD is limited to a boutique automobile automobile dealership and we uh some of the resolution condition number four has has some parameters that go to go to that. So we have a lot of discretion. I don't think we can be unreasonable or or ask for something that's not tied to a genuine health, safety, welfare concern. But yeah, on your screen there, condition number four was uh what was recommended by the planning commission um that the final PUB plan and development agreement must incorporate a general description and specifications of the permitted use for the PUB including hours of operation of the high-end automobile dealership, volume of cars shown, sold, and serviced, policies and procedures to be followed that minimize noise and uh that could impact adjacent areas. And I won't read them all, but that so I think you should review that and if you feel like there are other things you might want to see in the development agreement uh either that the applicant has mentioned or that has coming out of your discussion as long as it's reasonable goes to health, safety, welfare kinds of things, genuine concerns, I think we can we can put that in those uh final uh plan and PUD development agreement. >> Okay. And then that way if they were to someday sell the property, the new owner would have to abide by whatever was approved at the PUD or have to come back for city approval for any different use. >> Uh mayor and commissioner exa or council member. Exactly. I think that's you know I think it would be it's hard to imagine a change of ownership and like in in not having to get a PUD amendment but perhaps a Ferrari dealership that was a competitor wanted to buy it and operate it in exactly the same way. Maybe maybe we would analyze that and say, "Oh, yeah, they meet all the that's a permitted use here." We >> we're doing almost everything except tying it to the brand and the and the particular maker. Um, but everything else is basically what what the applicant has told us that they want to do with the property. >> Thank you. You know that's was also another reason for my uh line of questioning was about these conditions in the development agreement is you know I wanted the conditions to be reasonable and if we had an idea of how many sales, how much repair work, how many test drives, how many used cars we could put in appropriate conditions. And so I hope that this information can be found by the next round if there is a next round so that we don't we're not in the car business. So we don't know what's reasonable and what isn't. So I would really encourage um the applicant to do a little bit of homework if this passes through to the next phase. >> Mayor and commissioner, if I if I may respond to that. I keep saying commissioner. I apologize. We had a planning commission meeting last night and I keep thinking that way. So, Council Member McDonald, I apologize. Um, uh, Director Sharp has already had conversations with the applicant about some of those parameters, and you know, the development agreement will come back to you for review and approval. And although that often goes on our consent, I think in this case, it would be one we'd want to take up on new business. And so, you could specifically review and look at those things. Um, and I could see uh putting parameters in that agreement that were, you know, ranges or not to exceed volumes that the applicant might feel very comfortable with. I mean, I've written down numbers that they've said at different times, you know, single digits over certain periods or no more than, you know, four, five models of cars or those sorts of things. I think we can put in that wouldn't unduly restrict them, but also clearly pin them down on the boutique model. So, we will we'll work on that um and incorporate those things into the development agreement. >> I appreciate it. >> Any other questions at this time or did you have a question or do you want to start to weigh in? >> I don't have a question. Okay. >> Would you like to start to weigh in then? >> So, try to keep these comments brief, but um number one, I think our our planning commission uh did the heavy lifting on this thing and Joe, you and your team did I think a really nice job uh kind of got to the heart of the issue. Um, so that's very much appreciated. H how long has this site been um how long has it not been occupied by a a commercial business? I mean an operating business. >> Gosh, I don't know. I mean >> more than five years for sure. I'm very confident. I'm thinking more like 10. >> So I'd done some preliminary trying to go back. I could identify when the tanks were removed. I could identify when the building was demolished based upon permit records, but I couldn't identify the exact date that the gas station had closed down. I know that it was greater than a decade ago based upon the fact that the demolition permit was pulled approximately eight years ago. >> Yeah. So, I just point that out because I think it um it just kind of um uh is an indication of how difficult this site is. Um, you know, there's been a few things that have been suggested in the past that um, we didn't >> I can give you a point of reference. I mean, the gas station closed >> in 2010 um, or 2009 because I moved from Huntington, lived there 11 years and then moved right around that time and the gas station had closed before I made that move. So, yeah. Um, and a a point was made um, which I think is a good one. If not this, what >> I mean, I think the the real critical issue on the site is access and it begs for a low amount of traffic, even though we all wish it was more of a retaily. You know, we want the quarter to be a very engaging uh place to people come and retail and walk, etc. But this site doesn't lend itself to really that, I don't think. I mean, we it needs to be something low volume to work. you come from the east side I was at a bow authority you have a little turn lane you know don't take many many cars to back that up so um so so in that respect I think this usage especially if we can restrict it to what we're saying uh is a pretty good you use use of the site in terms of the four or five variances and the design deviations I think they really are a result of the p practical difficulties of the site I think we should include the suggestion of modifying the front walk in our development agreement or make sure that gets incorporated some somehow. Uh and then the real key issue is what we're talking about is um making sure development agreement as specific as possible on the operation of the facility because my my sense is if it really does operate like it's being presented, it's it's a good use of the site. But the concern is it kind of over time evolved into something a little bit different. And I think that's what we're all concerned about. So I would give a lot of credit to uh the applicant and working with the neighbors. I mean you got you had a kind of a tough bunch to work over. I think you did a really nice job there. Um my final comment was that um you know any anything with burnish block on ways boulevard I don't think is a good idea. It's just we need something of higher quality. Maybe it's a different size brick or color brick below the the back and even the back of it as you come on central. I mean burnish block I mean can you get much cheaper than burnish painted burnish block? Um, so anyway, I'd say throw that out there. Try to make it look a little better for that so important corner of our community. So those are my comments. >> Thank you, Mr. Senson. Who would like to go next? >> I'll just go ahead go down the line here. Um, I was one of the uh two people I think that voted against us in the first round. And the the main issue I had is one that you all resolved, which was to try to wrap a Lamborghini dealership around a dry cleaner, and it just didn't make sense to me. Uh, so I'm really happy that that got resolved. Um, going through all I don't want to go through each of the variances and design standards because every one of them to me made a lot of sense for good reason. Uh the only tiny heartburn I had was the design deviation which I had the last time and I I do now a little bit. And the reason for that was that you know I was part of the war the design standards committee and the Weisetta Boulevard corridor and we had this vision of what Weisetta was going to look like 10 20 30 years from now. And one feature of that was walkability and a setback from the road which uh was a safety and an aesthetic and it so that was a little bit of a heartburn for me going into this meeting tonight but it seems like we had a good idea to resolve that issue. So even that has gone away. So all in all I think this is going to be a real good addition to the community and um it's not a car I would drive exactly but uh but I I can certainly appreciate them. And with regard to um some of the comments made or concerns about test drives, I don't really think that's an issue. I mean, I think there'd be more noise complaints and issues from people just normally driving on the roads if they have that kind of car. They might want to do exhibition driving wherever they might be. I don't think that the dealership is going to allow exhibition driving on a test drive. In fact, if I were to guess if they do any test drives, they pro they're probably pre-sold and they don't need this. Uh they'll probably start them in electronic mode just to get them away from everything before they kick it into into high gear. Uh I drive an expensive, you know, fast car myself and I don't do exhibition driving where people are actually I don't do it anywhere, but I don't >> Jamie, that's for you. The [laughter] >> right to the speed limit. >> Good catch. >> Yeah. So, uh, anyway, all in, I think this is a good design. I think all the all the problems that that the design had, all the little ins and outs have been resolved, uh, for good reason. So, I have no reason not to approve this tonight. >> Thank you, Mr. Pesh. >> Uh, would you like to go next? >> Um, I'll go next. >> Sure. >> Um, >> thank you, Miss McDonald. >> Yeah, thank you. And and thanks for all the the good comments and good work from commission staff, colleagues, um, and of course the applicant. I do appreciate you and the neighbors. Um, lots of community at work here. Um, the neighborhood support really weighed heavily on me. um even with my own um uh resistance to this idea that that is um the neighbors supporting it is more important than than my personal opinion. So I I can acknowledge that and and glad I have the opportunity to do that. Um, I I agree with uh Council Member Pleish. Removing the the dry cleaner was just such a great choice and and glad that got resolved before this next round because it did create a lot of issues. Um, the one thing I I do still have a couple of things I still have kind of an issue with is um is really the setback to the actual neighborhoods. I our neighborhoods are I I really think what makes Wisetta so special and having a commercial business so close to a residential neighborhood it seems um I I don't love that idea. I I think the the fence and the opacity of the s the fence is um a really nice thing to do and I and I I support that. But I think it would have been an a a wonderful addition to abiding by the setbacks for the residents and of course uh and the drainage problem. Those those feel like those should have been the musthaves, the setback to um people's residences. Um maybe the neighbor or the tenants now won't mind looking at a fence that's just 5 feet from their window, but a future tenant or um it just doesn't feel a neighbor and residential to me. So I I really am having a hard time with that setback. Um the the building grew a thousand square feet. So perhaps it could go back to its original size and then we would still be protecting the residential neighborhood in addition to fixing this nightmare of a drainage problem and also uh the generosity of adding that a nicel looking fence too. So, um, and then of course the design deviations. I think we found a good solution of combining the private walk with the public sidewalk. And I and I do want to see the trees in that area as well. So, all in all, I there's a lot to support in this, but there's a few things with such a big empty lot um that I don't think we need to make um concessions on on protecting residential neighborhoods and walkability for our community. >> Thank you, Miss McDonald. Mr. Cook. Okay. Um I actually so yeah I I agree with a lot of the comments that have been said here by my colleagues um with the in regards to the variances. Um the neighbors input uh has weighs a lot on me and I I I put a lot of value in that. One of the one of my bigger concerns was the uh the 8ft fence along Mr. Hogland's um uh apartment building and concerning that that was going to block at least the first floor windows along there and the fact that you support that and uh support this that that is significant for me. Um I was around when the on the council when the first Chase Bank uh proposal came along and I think this is a much better much better use. Um, I think it will be quieter. I think it's um, as council member Sorenson said, this is probably about as good as a of a use for this property with traffic and noise um, as as we could get. Um, it's a small site. It's um, even with kind of combining the two parcels. And so I think that it is there are some practical difficulties with that. night. So, um so with all that, uh I would support um support this with the with the conditions that are in there and that that we'll work out with the development agreement and um appreciate the applicants uh working with the neighbors and the neighbors working with the applicant and and again like it's been said, but I think it's also important the planning commission's work on this was super helpful uh in doing research for me. um in um getting me up to speed on the project. So, appreciate everybody's efforts there. >> Thank you. Um try to be not duplicative, but the pros that I see are, you know, improved landscaping to current conditions. I mean, lot net new trees, um the willingness to partner with us on a change uh in how the sidewalk is configured for that buffer. now that you understand the context of kind of the the the migration that we're trying to make over time all along the corridor. So appreciate you guys uh meeting us there in in that way. Um I think the um variance on the fence for example I mean to to screen the neighbors that's that's a very strong justification. Um that fence is I mean I lived on Huntington for 11 years and that fence has had struggles Mr. track over the years of who maintained it and unfortunately a lot of a lot of folks had to complain over time to get it maintained and the fact that you're going to put something subsidive there of a higher level you know I think is great same thing with the drainage I mean certainly the lift station or that in back of Fischer's yard remedies the problem once it occurred but it does nothing to to to to snip the the root cause and the root cause is that that high retaining long cliff and the grading of the site and it at its worst I mean I I videos on my phone. You would not believe. We're talking like a cascading waterfall that you'd see on the Northshore um along that edge there that goes right down to Mr. Straa's backyard and flows around the corner and all the way down to the lowest point in all of Wisetta, which is Bob Fischer's backyard. So, I think it mitigates that. Um you the one concern that I think was brought up is valid, which is unintended consequences for a future use. If for some reason Waler decides to get out of this class of car, we wouldn't want unintended consequences of somebody picking up this for a car use that is different than what we intended in terms of boutique sales. So I would look for language and the planning commission called it out about I think this is what they're referencing is [clears throat] related to a stronger business description, right? you know that they talked about in their unanimous approval and that weighs on me too when you see unanimous approval uh and and in this process that's another thing to the positive. Um, I do think we can get there though based on the feedback that we gave you tonight. Uh, working with our staff and the development agreement to put some parameters in there that mitigate our real concern, which is, okay, what gave me some comfort is if the use is lower than than the existing dry cleaner, [laughter] dry cleaner's gone, you you've got a net gain just on that alone. Um but but putting some parameters on on in that development agreement that prevent future change that unintended consequence because it runs with the land and we don't want okay well it turns into I don't know a a yeah Bob's repair shop or or or a uh you know used car lot of classic cars and they're all on the street whatever it is right we don't want that as an undequ consequence so I I do favor this and the last comment I would make is if you look at it in the context of what has been proposed and the unique parameters of an already site that didn't work, right? I mean, you had a gas station and a dry cleaner. You had a dry cleaner with a curb cut that is probably I mean, no city planner or or engineer would allow a curb cut to be right after a red light on a county road, right? So, we're mitigating that as well. So, you're you're getting a lot of net positive to this use, right? Um, and I think the the the I think Mr. Plucker stated it very well. I mean the the the tipping point is getting rid of that use to to make this more workable. So for all those reasons I would be in support. Um so with that I heard some consensus moving towards a majority position for some sort of approval. Um I think we I guess I would look for Mr. Schelzel's guidance because there are variances involved. We do have a findings of fact within the planning commission report, but we're also adding some additional conditions or I mean I guess not specifically but there I heard consensus for a condition in the development agreement that prevents unintended consequences in the future. So can you kind of guide us through sequentially what the resolution needs to look like to address variances and to address um uh the additional condition that I heard consensus evolving for. And if I might add as well, City Attorney Schelzel, could you talk about where if it's at this stage or in a future stage, the concept of the um public sidewalk would fit into this as well? >> Yes. Um, so, uh, mayor, I guess, why don't we put up on the screen the actual resolution because I think the resolution as drafted supports almost everything that's been discussed and and what's left to be worked out will be coming back to you in that PUB development agreement and the final PUD plan that staff will review. So, it has all the findings that support all of the requests uh in the PC report that's referenced in this resolution. And maybe I'll just spin real quickly through the conditions of approval there on if we go back one page. Yes. So, the first thing covers they've got to get all their building permits. They've got to follow follow rules of construction including days and times of work. I know there was some public comment about making sure they're neighborly during construction. Um storm water facilities, grading and drainage. That's all has to be reviewed by the city engineer. Um and then number three starts to get into what we've been talking about. They've got to enter into a PU development agreement that meets with city attorney's approval, incorporates all the approvals and conditions of this resolution and the final plans requirements of the zoning ordinance. And then number four, we've got to have a PUD uh development agreement that has a general description and specifications of the permitted use for the PUD, which would be, you know, boutique, high-end, automobile dealership, limited volume, all these things we've heard from the applicant and that are in the public record, but specifically addressing hours of operation for the dealership, volume of cars sold and services, the policies and procedures they'll have in place to kind of uh you know regulate the use to to address noise and other things. Um the final plans I actually think the general plans probably have the expanded fence design to run the entire length of the south end. Um uh and then a construction management plan for the project that's acceptable to staff. The one condition that I've heard tonight that I would recommend adding to all that um would be that the applicant modify the sidewalk sidewalk design in the final plan that runs along Weisetta Boulevard to incorporate a buffer between the sidewalk and Weisetta Boulevard. Uh that also incorporates standard tree plantings and that combines any of the public and private part of the walkway. Okay. >> So, to restate that, mayor, I think you could ask for a motion to approve. Well, I think if if council doesn't want to break any of the requests apart, like, oh, I'm all for this except for that one design deviation. If council, you could entertain a motion to approve everything, which is what the planning commission report and recommendation was. It just be adopt resolution 1226 as presented with that additional condition. I read about modifying the sidewalk. >> Could I ask a quick question, mayor and city attorney? Um, so then with those modifications, the design deviations aren't really necessary because the land but we but the street trees deviation that's scrapped though. So they wouldn't get that deviation for the street trees. >> That that that's a great question. Council member, I uh Director Sharp, if the plans were modified for that buffer, would the would the deviations that are needed change? Either they wouldn't need those anymore or would they need another one? >> Uh, mayor, council member, city attorney, I think that would depend upon final design and pending being able to see where things fit, grades, and ADA compliance. I wouldn't be I would be unable to say whether a deviation at this time would be required. I suspect they may still struggle with the 26 foot spacing on trees, specifically if you're combining sidewalks. So, I would recommend that they remain in place at the moment if until a a final design were be able to be brought forward because it may reduce the total amount of deviation required, but there may still be so let's say it's at 30 foot right now for the separation between 6T and I think this one potentially could go away and it reduces to 15 foot of that needs a deviation. we would still need that action to occur this evening. >> So essentially, we could vote no on the deviations and then deal with them. >> I'm sorry, let let me rephrase. I think the deviations may still be required until we see a plan that they would not. >> But if we were approved them, what would make them motivated to create a plan where they wouldn't be needed? >> The additional condition added would then be addressing the future design. I what did we do on the Minnotonka Avenue project that where where we did a change, right? We we said, "Hey, your proposed design, we'd pre prefer the buffer." How did we handle it in that situation? That was very recently. >> I don't They were asking for a deviation. >> They weren't asking for a deviation, but they their original plan didn't have the buffer. That's my only point. >> I'm I'm unfamiliar with that how we process that one. >> Okay. All right. That's fine. I in to to amplify or build on what director Sharp said, uh, council member, I I think my my feeling would be to leave those deviations in the application and prove them. They may not be necessary and then in the end, hopefully they won't be with the redesign, but if they still can't quite fit those trees in that they need to for some reason, they wouldn't have to go back and get another deviation. My only concern would so with that approach would be if the design creates the need for a new deviation that they haven't asked for then they would have to go back to the planning commission for that that approval. Um and then that would eventually come back to you too. >> Sure. I >> I think it's a little bit difficult to design from the dis and know exact without seeing a design whether a deviation would be needed and what it might be. But the best way to set this up, I think most efficiently if this is the way council would want to go, would be to approve the application as presented, but make a condition that they present that or they incorporate that modified design to the sidewalk and that may eliminate the need for one of those or both of those deviations. >> Okay. include the modification for the sidewalk and also include that street trees be there if there can be >> if there can. >> Yeah. Now, the way I had articulated it a moment ago, and check me on this, is that the condition that would be added would be that the applicant modify the sidewalk design in the final plan along Weisetta Boulevard to incorporate a buffer between the sidewalk and Weisetta Boulevard with standard tree plannings and to combine any public private aspects of the walkway. >> I can I can live with that. Okay. Um, if I wanted to vote no on the sideyard setback, could we pull that out separately? >> Um, mayor and council mayor, that it'll be a little tricky to do that procedurally. Um, I think you could take two approaches. You could vote no on the motion and just say for the record that I'm voting no because uh I I can't get behind that piece. Or you could vote yes and say, "Well, I'm only I still don't support that, but I'm for this modified design." So, it's kind of up to you, council member. I think uh how you would want to express that and mayor, you could take a separate vote on each piece of the application. It would be because there's so many of them be tricky. Or you could pull that too. >> I guess my preference wouldn't be to to pull it out just because I I heard consensus for approval. Um, but I think you would have great purview to um define your up or down vote based on what criteria you know um was giving you pause, right? So that your record be very clear that you support everything except for and because of that I'm supporting a no or I'm I'm there but I have to state for the record that this setback gives me you know you know pause >> because otherwise I think >> there's so many different variables and if there was a split if there was a split counsel or if I heard you know then I would be more open to trying to take it down that way but I think it it might provide unnecessary complications to to move along. Well, then if I could just real quickly, I know I've taken up a lot of time tonight and I apologize for being so um >> wordy, but um I do support the majority of this application, but I feel very strongly about setbacks abuing residential neighborhoods. And for me, it's just six feet, so why can't you guys just make six feet work? So, um with all that said, I am going to vote no tonight. I know it will be passed because I've heard that it's supported here. Um so please take that with a grain of salt and just know that um it's really about neighborhoods abuing commercial properties and I just don't see that variance request um as being reasonable. >> I can just say I hear that you're going to vote no. That's fine. Uh but I would think there would be some level of comfort in knowing this that the setbacks like that are designed for the purposes of helping the next door neighbor in these things and the two neighbors closest to that property that are the ones affected are both here tonight and both spoke in favor of it. >> So I know there's a philosophical general thing, but in this case the people that are most affected by it both support this. So take some comfort in that. >> I do take comfort in that. I just am thinking further ahead with a 100 and plus year old building that sounds like it has significant damage. So it might be a diff. Anyways, I do take comfort in it, but it's still um setback variances are um just I just don't think it's necessary. I think this project could have gone forward without it. >> Fair fair point. noted for sure. Um I guess one final question for Mr. Schelzel. I mean we do have one more bite of the apple in terms of reviewing the final PUD and the final development agreement, you know, and typically that would come on consent, but it certainly if if someone's uncomfortable with the conclusion that you reach working with the applicant, it certainly could be pulled and tweaked at that time if necessary. Um if necessary. >> Uh yes, Mr. Ray, that's corre correct. But we'll come back to you as council will be the relevant thing will be that final uh PUD development agreement. It'll have the rules. I think those staff the you >> council approval isn't technically needed for the final PUD plan. It's usually reviewed by staff because this condition has been attached to ask for a change. I think it makes sense for it to come back because staff will want to make sure that the modified sidewalk plan >> captures its intent of what >> and if and you would still have the prerogative to to say no because you don't think the development agreement captures that condition too. So yes, the short answer is you will have another uh chance to review and approve >> if something we just felt didn't get the spirit of of what we communicated tonight. That's and not not saying that >> yeah it just just make sure that we have another chance to >> I think the other area Mr. Mayor that'll be really important to look at are all the parameters that we'll work out with the applicant about operation and permitted use too which are kind of alluded to in condition 4. We'll want to make sure that council looks at that closely and feels comfortable with those. Just last question to make sure I get this right to tee up a motion. The buffer sidewalk um and trees um in a public private sidewalk scenario and the to generalize business description that reflects you know intent of if it moves on to another owner all would be wrapped up in part four of the existing resolution. >> Yeah, condition four would require that. Yeah, I think >> both of those issues can be framed in item four. >> I think they are. Yes. >> Okay. Just want [snorts] to make sure so that we can be really precise. And >> city attorney Shelley, you think the sidewalk component is wrapped up in item four? >> No. I I guess I re I understood the mayor to say that the use and operational things are there and that there's a requirement that they're incorporated into the PUD and that new condition would be two. Mhm. So >> there would be an additional condition about the >> sidewalk. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So I I guess [laughter] to further clarify it's the last condition and so just making sure that it's you know we're addressing everything that we >> Yeah. Mr. I think to be really precise about this when you when you sign this resolution and we work on the final language with the clerk. It will look exactly like what you see here and I will add what I read to you right at the end of four >> or it might be we might end up making it the new five. >> Um I don't you know substantively it'll be the same result. So, uh, I would accept a motion to approve resolution 1226, um, for the the final PUDA plan and Pew development agreement that needs to come back to us subject to the revisions to uh, condition 4 that Mr. Schelzer just stated and acknowledging the additional condition of the buffer sidewalk um, with standard trees in a public private partnership manner. Did I get that right or? >> Um, >> yes, Mr. Mayor. I think if if if I can use the exact language I read earlier as part of your motion and and the uh, you know, the amendment to existing 1226, I think then that's that motion stands. >> Okay. So, reflective of the precise language that Mr. City attorney uh, guided us on that adjustment to uh, item four. And so, I would accept that motion. Mr. Mayor, I'll make that motion. >> Thank you. Can I have a second? I'll second that. >> Great. Any further discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor? I >> I. >> Those opposed? >> Nay. >> Nay. That passes 4 to one. And thank you for your patience tonight. And it's been a long day for us at least on this side of the DAS. So >> Mr. Yeah, Mr. com count if that's okay. >> Of course. Um, so this is primarily for the applicant, a little bit for staff, but um, I mean, I think there's pretty good conceptual alignment on where we are, but we're not done. Uh, I think there's going to be a lot of scrutiny given to this development agreement and final PUD. As you can tell, we're um very keen on on what that's going to say. So, I would encourage everyone to be as specific as possible and work hard to really make sure that's something that uh you think is going to meet the intent of what what we we all have in mind. So, I just want to everyone will leave with the with the idea that we're not done yet. It Thank you for that clarification. I'm sure it's noted by the applicant and uh appreciate that. Um, any other comments before we move on to the next agenda item? So, the next item is pretty easy, which is the interim city manager report. >> Um, I'll be brief as my voice is barely going to hold out for the rest of this evening. Um, I just want to issue a reminder to folks that um, this Thursday night, all are invited to attend the state of the city address this Thursday night in this room at 6:30. We'll kick it off with a reception, cookies and coffee um and conversation and then transition into the formal program which the mayor will lead starting at 7. So again, that's this Thursday at 6:30 in the council chambers. Um please don't miss it. I'll be brief and leave it at that. >> Yeah. Well, it's not it's not going to be a long address, so we'll be brief and be gone, as they say. So, um well, thank you for that. Um the only other comment that I have is just to note for the record that we we did meet earlier today to uh go through our discernment process on our final candidates for city manager and we um intend to make an announcement very shortly about you know those results um as as as we communicate with all of our final finalists and then we'll we'll make that more formal in the coming days. So just wanted to acknowledge that. So with that I would any other comments from council um that you'd like to make this evening? Okay. Hearing none, I would accept a motion to adjurnn this evening. >> So moved. >> Thank you. And a second. >> Second. >> Further discussion >> hearing none. All in favor say I. Okay, that passes. Thank you.