He's on there. >> No. Please rise as you're able for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible and justice for all. Welcome everybody to our uh August 17th uh regular city council meeting. We have a quite packed agenda and we have uh opportunities for many members of the public to speak. So we are going to start our meeting as we always do with our open comment period. And this is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on items that we will not be taking a public uh testimony during a public hearing later on in the agenda. During open comment, uh members of the public have up to two minutes to speak for a total of 20 minutes. However, the council is able to suspend our rules and open that up if we need to. I will be keeping track through two methods. one the stoplight here in front of me and uh you the speaker and the uh and the digital clock on uh the wall that will be to your right. Um and I request that each PE speaker be concise to allow as many people to speak during the designated time as possible. Participants are also encouraged to limit comments generally to topics that are within the scope and jurisdiction of the council's ability to affect policy. Council members and staff do not respond directly to your comments during public comment, but will instead follow up on any specific requests separately. If you have any materials to share with the council, you may give them to the city clerk who is to my right there, Anne Queso, to distribute. and you will be invited up to speak in the order in which you signed up. And we will start with Mr. Jared Luck Lucker. [snorts] And uh Gerald, you may have to push that till it turns green. There you go. >> Jared Lucker, resident of Rochester. Uh good evening, Mayor Norton, council members, fellow citizens, and distinguished guests. I want to speak with you tonight about the proposal for additions of student housing to the historic Broadway district which [snorts] would affect Tree Dome, Arttheads Emporium, Steam Cafe, and many other retail businesses located on Broadway. When I take into account the recommendations of the Heritage Preservation Commission, the existing businesses, the planned development, the incredible amount of road construction currently, the voices of the business owners in the area, and the nature of the project, I ask that you respectfully decline the request. When it comes to preserving Rochester's history, it is important that we not only consider the economic implications of such preservations, but the character of the city and the meaning it has not only to everyday citizens, but those who currently occupy the buildings. While I agree there is a need for student housing, when I consider all the factors, I do not believe this is the appropriate project and there are other viable alternatives that must be considered, analyzed, and discussed with the larger public. We must preserve not only our historic district, but the arts and the character of our city, as well as consider the dilitterious effects more construction may have on existing businesses and the pressure they are already under, not to mention disruptions to already limited parking. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Mr. Lucker. And I just want to be clear to folks uh that uh Mr. Lucker spoke to item G1. There will be a separate hearing under G1. So, if you signed up on the blue sheet and you want to speak to item G1, which is the appeal to the Historic Preservation Committee's denial of certificate of appropriateness, you may want to be on this sheet. And when we do get to public hearings, not that I'm encouraging you to do it, you will have five minutes at a public hearing. I'm not encouraging people to take five minutes, but you will have more time during that. So uh so just to be clear and I didn't want to interrupt Mr. Mr. Lucker. So we will continue with open comment uh period with uh Jess Garcia. >> I will put you on that sheet. Thank you. Next we have Carol and Lumis. Hi, I'm Caroline Lumis. I would like to thank the mayor for giving us this opportunity to look at this again. I am talking about the H.2 Willow Creek phasibility study. Um both the reports narratives from September 25th and this one focus on connecting people to the jobs, food sources and school which sounds lovely but this but truly this feasibility reports sole focus and onetrack plan is the connection to the sports complex not connecting the people to these important community needs since those plans are unfunded at this time. So I please ask the council to vote nay on accepting the report and nay on the segment 1 C alternative A which divides my family's property and look at how and look at how we can connect the people's needs first then add the sports complex after which again can be done without segment 1 C alternative A. >> Thank you. Uh next we have Jesse Lumis. Hi, I'm Jesse Lewis talking about the Willow Creek bike project as well. I believe Pat, you guys all got a copy of this. Um, [sighs and gasps] why are we trying to cut through the middle of our property when we have all these other alternatives? And according to Dylan over here, who at the beginning of us when we talked, he was going to do the feasibility studies on all these routes we discussed, which none of them were done except for one. We don't understand why now you guys on the other side of the highway buying license. You have the dyke that goes around the whistle binkies pond. You have the ability to go on all the properties you easements and everything you already own following 52 down and going on the west side of the bridge coming under going around the pond. And in your last little branch you had coming off that would connect you down to Whistle Binkies, you could bring all that in, cut out all this bike path on the east side of that creek, which you're worried about the bridge. You don't have to make a bridge. You can come under here and your little branch that would come back to the sports complex can all be done in one shot. You don't have to build this whole bike path here which will bring you to all the communities down here. school whistleblinkies channel one. It'll bring you I mean if you can see it as a red line on your on your map here but there's no reason to come through the middle of our property for this bike path when there's any other alternative. I mean at the end of the day it comes down to there's no reason to take something from somebody that does not want to give it if there's any other alternative. At the end of the day it's not voting for a bike path. It's voting to steal from people that aren't willing to sell something. So, that's the most I can say about it. But there is ungodly opportunities with all the current bike pass you got. This is the quickest route to get you to the ones you already have established. >> Thank you, Mr. Lumis. >> Next, we have Michelle Gberger. I thought it >> G1. I'll put you down for G1. >> Uh, Jacqueline Johnson. >> Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Jacqueline Johnson. I'm the managing director of Rochester Civic Theater and a board member of Minnesota Citizens for the Arts and a member of the Rochester Arts and Culture Strategic Plan Steering Committee. I'm here in support of the proposed council action to fund an arts and culture arts and culture uh economic impact study for Rochester across Minnesota. Arts and culture represents a 13.8 billion industry. In 2024, the nonprofit arts and culture sector in region 10, which includes Rochester, generated more than 86.8 million in economic impact. And across the state, the average arts attendees spend more than $33 beyond the price of admission to on restaurants, hotels, gas, shopping, and other local businesses. But statewide and region 10 data only tells us part of the story. We need a clear Rochester specific picture of this sector's economic impact. That's what this study will provide. The findings will be a community resource for strategic planning and future advocacy. This study can identify opportunities for growth and investment, inform decisions by arts organizations, by businesses, tourism partners, funders, and the city. An arts and culture economic impact study also perfectly complements the experience Rochester study through the Minnesota Tourism Center, giving our community a more p a more complete picture of how arts, culture, entertainment, and attractions contribute to Rochester's economy. This investment is one piece of a much larger effort from the arts for the Rochester Arts and Culture Strategic Plan Steering Committee supported by active research data and countless volunteer hours. Thank you for your consideration. >> Thank you. Next, we have Ryland Wolf. Good afternoon. I would like to voice my support for Miss Jacqueline's uh wish for the uh advancement of Rochester's art culture. Otherwise, I feel like my points have been spoken for already eloquently enough and I would like to give up my time. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Wolf. Next, we have Stephanie Kylin. [clears throat] Good evening. My name is Stephanie Kylin and I am here representing the arts and cultural strategic plan steering committee and speaking in support of tonight's council initiated action item to fund an economic impact study for this sector. The Arts and Cultural Strategic Planning Steering Committee was created to formally identify the needs and challenges within Rochester's arts and cultural landscape through a community research process with broad representation from across the sector. Our goal is to find solutions and create a long range strategic plan for a thriving arts and cultural landscape. Over the last year, 80 arts and cultural or arts and cultural organizations have participated in our process and our steering committee represents 12 organizations from both nonprofit and for-profit arts and cultural sectors. We are structured to include participation from new groups at any point within our process. I became a member of the steering committee through my work at Rochester Symphony. Last spring, this project was accepted into the Chris Nelson community-based research program at the University of Minnesota, also known as CURA. The program supports community-based initiatives like ours at no cost. Along with methods such as stakeholder mapping and focus groups, an important next step is to conduct an economic impact study. While all the work so far has been conducted through volunteer hours and through CURA resources, the economic impact study is one piece of the research that we cannot conduct ourselves. And the unique nature of our group and our strategic planning focus make us ineligible for many grants and other funding opportunities that we've explored. Funding this study through council initiated action will allow us to continue moving forward at a critical point in our process. The current conversations and questions about what we are doing in Rochester that impacts our arts and cultural landscape make this work especially timely. The next step in our process could not be more beneficial than it is right now. Thank you for your consideration. >> Thank you, Miss Garvin. Next, we have Terry Kinsey. Members of the Rochester City Council, Mayor Norton, and members of the Rochester community, I'm Terry Gosskinsey, W five resident and chair of the Rochester Sustainability and Resiliency Commission. On behalf of the commission, I am here to express our support in [clears throat] advancing the community focused sustainability pilot programs that will be discussed at this meeting. The commission recognizes the extensive community engagement effort completed by city staff during the natural gas franchise fee discussion. Commissioners were also highly engaged in that process and appreciated the emphasis on transparency, afford affordability, and visible community benefit. Community feedback reflected strong interest in local investment that reduce household energy costs, support renters and lower income households, and contribute to Rochester's broader sustainability and greenhouse gas reduction goals goals through practical community centered action. The programs that you will discuss will do just that. Our commission discussions emphasize the importance of developing visible community centered pilot programs that residents can directly experience and have clear and measurable outcomes. These programs need to be accessible to renters and households that may not traditionally benefit from existing rebate or incentive programs. In conclusion, the commission believes these pilot programs provide an opportunity to demonstrate measurable community benefit such as reduce cost, strengthen public understanding and trust, expand community participation in local climate actions, and inform future sustainability and resiliency investments within the city of Rochester. The Sustainability and Resiliency Commission appreciates council's continued leadership in exploring sustainability funding and community investment strategies. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Amy Cockett. >> Good evening. I'm Amy Cockett. I live at 71628th Street in Rochester Northwest. I am also a member of the League of Men Voters. The League of Women Voters is a national, state, and local organization. always nonpartisan. We defend democracy, empower voters, but we also study issues and then take stands. One of the issues that we've studied thoroughly is the environment. Our position on that is the League of Men Voters supports action by appropriate levels of government to encourage the use of renewable resources in energy conservation through funding for research and development, financial incentives, rate setting policies, and mandatory standards. The league urges you to fund the Sustainability Commission's pilot program request tonight found in number H3. We also remind you of one of your adopted 2627 uh recommended budget strategic priorities, which is responsible environmental stewardship. And your budget program says of these strategic priorities, we will focus our resources and initiatives to drive progress in this area. And here is your chance. H3, please vote yes tonight. and I will free up my seat and go home and watch you online. >> Thank you, Miss Cocket. Next up, we have Nells Pearson. >> Hey, good evening, city council. Um, and Mayor Norton. Uh, I'm Nel Pearson. I am a candidate running for Minnesota Senate District 24. just here tonight uh by way of introduction and uh as always appreciate the hard work that you all do for the city of Rochester. Um I have been up and running as a candidate since May and in that time we've attended city council and uh township meetings in 24 jurisdictions. Uh we'll be wrapping that up this this week and and completing our final township meeting to have attended a township meeting in each of the townships that I hope to represent uh moving forward. So, I always just want to thank every everything that you do, I always tell a story about our farming, our neighbors in Farmington Township and how when one superintendent's giving the roads report, another superintendent says, "Well, how are the Johnson's doing with the repaving of the roads?" And they reply, "Well, they're waving at me again." And so, you as city council people, you get to deal with that every day. You see it more personally in the grocery stores and you you you live with us. You you are amongst us. And uh it it's certainly something that I don't take lightly and appreciate the service that you provide. Uh I just always ask that should I be so fortunate to be elected that you would be my eyes on those township roads and in the city of Rochester and the grocery stores letting me know if there's any issues or uh problems that the state is causing that would prevent anyone from waving at us again. So thank you for so much for the time and have a great evening. >> Thank you, Mr. Pearson. Next we have Kyle Pike. Good evening, Madame Mayor, esteemed members of the Rochester City Council. I come to you tonight on less grave circumstances than January, so I'll be a little walked back from that. But I come here to speak on behalf of my friends and neighbors to advocate for local businesses. And you'll have to forgive me. I'm not as prepared as I was in January, but for generations, the city of Rochester has relied heavily on small businesses, which are and will continue to serve as the lifeblood of this city. As you are well aware, many thousands of Rochester area residents work or operate small businesses in various parts of Homestead County, and we all rely on one another to help keep our local businesses thriving and successful. Although the overprivileged and lordly members of its board of directors are today scarcely likely to admit it, even the illustrious Mayo Clinic and St. Mary's Hospital were once a small business practice operating right on what was then Zumbro Street and what is today Second Street. These corporate overlords could forsake the entirety of my hometown for greed and profit and sleep soundly for their evil. Many thousands of their staffers, doctors, nurses, and employees trample upon the backs of hometown kids like me without even thinking twice of the pillaging they do to the businesses, neighborhoods, and former heritable architectural spaces they demolish and level in the name of corporate profitable greed. Each one of you need to wake up to the reality of obnoxious construction noise and cluttered city streets that bury the rotting bones of what was once my hometown. You have all had a helping hand in corrupting Rochester into a corporate money funnel for the only and biggest game in a town built now around an allegedly not forprofit medical industry that mutated out of what was begun as an altruistic investment in the millers, farmers, and laborers who built this city. >> Thank you, Mr. Pike. Uh, next up, that will that concludes our open comment period. And I am going to I I'm going to say this again when we do have our public hearings. And I didn't say anything during open comment, but uh we have 40 people that are signed up for G1 and applause will just take away time from uh people's presentation. So please uh just be respectful to all speakers and uh remain silent uh in between the speakers. Thank you. With that, I will call on Clerk Case to call the role. >> Good evening. Council member Keane >> here. >> Council member Miller >> here. >> Council member Wall >> here. >> Council member Frederick's >> here. >> Council member Palmer >> here. >> Council member Doring >> here. >> Council President Schub >> here. >> Mayor Norton >> present. >> Thank you. Uh, next up we have our city administrators report. Administrator Zelms, please take it away. >> Thank you, [clears throat] Council President, Mayor, members of the council, lots of members of the community that are here today, I just wanted to start off as I always do with thanking all of our teammates for acting with respect, integrity, safety, and excellence in mind in everything that they do. Out of respect for the many speakers that are forthcoming, I will zip through this. Um we do have our final two forward concerts coming up um this Wednesday the 19th at White Oaks Park Rains with Jojo Green and uh next Wednesday, August 26th, Me Like Bees with Scorched Waves will be at Cook Park. They'll start at 5:30 and go until about 7:45 p.m. So um be happy to join everyone there. Also, we are looking for feedback about the Silver Lake skate park expansion. So, if that's something that you're interested in, there will be um opportunity for feedback that started last week. Um there's a brief online survey and that is running through Friday, August 28th. Um you can find it on rochesterm.gov to take the survey. Um there's a press release there. It's also on our social media. Um we are nearing the end of summer, so I'm sorry to say. Um the closing dates for pools and beaches as well as splash pads. Uh Silver Lake pool closed yesterday. Uh, Soldiers Field Aquatic Center will close on Sunday, August 23rd, and beaches, splash pads will be open through Monday, September 7th, which is Labor Day. Uh, so enjoy that while it lasts. Our last item on this agenda is about alternate side parking and snow, so it's coming quickly. Uh, story time at White Oaks Park. White Oaks Park will be getting a lot of action this week. Uh, so August 21st on Friday, 9:30 a.m. to 10, uh, the Rochester Public Library is hosting a story time. Bring your blanket. um and whenever else you need. Uh story time is going to be cancelled if there is bad weather. Um but again, that will be at White Oaks Park on August 21st. I will turn it over to the mayor. >> Thank you, Administrator Selms. Mayor Norton, take it away. >> Great. I have a couple announcements as well. Uh first, uh the on Friday, so it's passed. I wanted to note that it was n national emergency management awareness month. Um, so we had the city hall lights done green for them and um was a nice followup to the uh practice run we did, the emergency management uh run that we did uh over at Century High School a week ago. So that was good timing for that. We want to recognize them for all they do. Um we have uh the town hall that um we're hosting called Getting Around Town. It's about all modes of transportation in Rochester. It will be Thursday, August 20th, this week from 6:00 to 7:30. And we moved the location at we've been holding them um at RCTC, but with the start of um the school year, we're going to move it over to John Marshall's cafeteria. So, um please feel free to pop up there. Um and I'm, you know, requesting the council if they're if you're available, some of you are, some of you aren't, to pop up. It's really nice to have you at the tables when folks have uh their discussions. It's really helpful. So, looking forward to that. Um, we're looking at showing on September 10th. We don't have the location identified. Uh, we're confirming uh the one that we thought we had. Um, we've moved this event called 911 reclaiming ground zero. This will be the 20th anniversary of 911 and some folks have done a documentary about it. But it's not just about 911 and what happened. that is covered in it, but it really is about how New York City responded using community engagement. And so, um, we would encourage you to come. Uh, we'll have more information as we have a location and we'll do some publicity about it. So, um, we'd love to have you at that. Um, we are I will be doing we the parks department and I will be doing my last uh tree planting. And for those of you that don't know, um, Ardell started this when he was mayor where he did tree plantings regularly. Um, and I don't know how long he did it during his tenure, but he did it a number of times. And I thought it was a great idea, so I took it up. And so for the last eight years, um, I have been purchasing and working with the park parks department to put in 10 trees a year. We'll we'll be doing a few extra this year. Um, so we will be putting in our 70th to 80th trees out at Cascade Lake. We've I just selected Cascade Lake. It was a new city park. It needed some tree cover. So, that's where they've all gone. Uh it's been a joy to do. And if you'd like to come help us plant trees on September 17th at 9:00 a.m. If you're available, we'll be at Cascade Lake Park to put in our last seven. And there will be three special trees that have been purchased to honor uh my friend Melissa Hortman and her husband that died this year. So, they will be putting in three crab apple trees in honor of them. Um, also on Wednesday, September 23rd, we will be hosting the Youth Leadership and Success Summit. It's for high school students. We will be having people in a variety of uh businesses come talk about their careers, but it is also about leadership and wellness. The students have helped plan this. We will have um if all goes well, the governor and some other folks from up in the Twin Cities as well as some really wonderful speakers locally um and then folks that will be sharing about their own career choices and how they got there. So that will be a day that students have off school September 23rd um and it will start around noonish and go until 7 or 8 in the evening and we'll be at Civic Center and Chateau Theater. Should be fun. Uh last or one of the last things I have to share I guess is that um I want to thank Anna, Eric, Devon, Elizabeth, and Khloe listed here. These are local artists who stepped up and um you see I took one day because we had a a sick day with one of the artists and we provided an art project for all of the summer school kids in the Rochester public schools who um for whatever reason um needed that extra help this summer. So we supported the artists um by having them come and the day I was there was a little simpler. We painted birdhouses because I am not an artist um though I love the arts. So it was uh it was wonderful and those five artists gave their their time and talent to our students and it was fabulous. Uh and lastly, the sustainability and resiliency commission um takes uh part of our chart or part of our uh policies or our procedures for the city, I guess it's an ordinance, says that we will have a youth member and typically the youth tend to be juniors or seniors and so they go away to college and so we're often having every year a new youth opening. So if you know of any youth who are really interested in sustainability and resiliency um they could go online and apply for that u that youth position and we say 16 to 21 I think um for for any interested youth. So if you're interested please go online and apply. That's all I've got. >> Thank you mayor. >> Next up we have the order of the agenda. Are there any changes to the order of the agenda? I don't see any. I would um uh recommend a motion to approve the agenda. >> So move >> moved by com uh council member Frederickson's and seconded by council member Wall. All in favor say I. I. >> Both say nay. Motion passes. Uh moving on to our consent agenda. I have not received any notice of items to be pulled. Is that correct? >> If not, I'd invite a motion to approve uh the consent agenda. >> So moved. >> Second. Moved by uh council member Frederick's and seconded by council member Doring. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Post say nay. Motion passes. Moving on to our public hearings. We have four public hearings on our agenda this evening. And before we start, as I mentioned, uh we do have uh over 40 people signed up for the first public hearing. And so we do have uh some uh guidelines for that. First uh staff will make a presentation or introduction of uh the item that uh that we are uh dealing with and then if there is an applicant or applicant representative present they will have up to 10 minutes to discuss the item. After that I will open the public hearing and uh members of the public will have up to five minutes each. uh strongly encouraged to keep com comments brief, concise, and building on but not repeating previous uh comments. Public uh can be uh joining us in person only as far as uh public testimony. After all of the uh people that want to speak during the public hearing have been heard, uh we will invite the applicant back up for a rebuttal to answer any questions that came up during the public hearing or to uh make any closing comments about the item. After that, I will invite um my colleagues and the mayor to uh to ask any clarifying questions of staff and or the applicant. So, with that, we will move to item G1, which is an appeal of the historic preservation committee's denial of certificate of appropriateness for 311 Broadway edition renovation. And we have uh Irene Woodward to make this presentation. Good evening, Council President, mayor, members of council. I'm going to do the introduction for the public hearing. Um, I just wanted to kind of This is an appeal of a certificate of appropriateness that was heard by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Um, I will kind of go through the different criteria. These are all listed in the uh packet under the RCA. So, I'm just going to highlight a few of those. Um, this is a quasi judicial. Um, it kind of mirrors a zoning appeal. So all of those different items that we identified in the packet are kind of make up our findings of fact for this particular application. Um just to note um this was denied by the Heritage Preservation Commission and they noted that the rehabilitation standards of 1 2 5 6 9 and 10 were not being met. Um I can repeat those at the end but just wanted to note them up front as we go through these. And I'm just going to kind of highlight some of these. I know there's a lot of uh public that wants to also provide comment. So um just to note the applications when we review for anything that's a certificate of appropriateness we review it against the rehabilitation standards but also the city adopted design guidelines that take into account city priorities that were done by council. So it is the combination of those two documents is how we review each of these different criteria. Uh so to start um really what I wanted to highlight on this is that as we continue to look at this application it will continue as a mixeduse uh majority of commercial space will remain which really indicates and continues that this is referencing a commercial historic district um as it was identified and designated um and the distinctive materials especially those along Broadway will remain um and that's a key factor within this. Moving on to the next one. Um the historic features of the facades are going to continue to be preserved. Um in addition, the storefront at 309 will be rehabilitated. It had um undergone several different iterations over the years um and kind of closed in. And as part of this, it will be opened back up um and taken into account to look more like a storefront, which was at one time that way, which isn't appropriate as part of the rehabilitation standards. um the changes that have occurred um within the district within the period of ma uh period of significance will be maintained um along with also noting that the rehabilitation and the facade of 309 um and to the alley side of the buildings will utilize more contemporary design um which is consistent. None of the materials um being removed qualifi qualifies as distinctive materials, features or finishes. predominately that is behind those front facades which are facing Broadway will remain intact um and be preserved within this um and that there the changes having occurred to already at 311 to 317 within the period of significance will be preserved. So those will be maintained as they are. Um, the other thing to note is that no character-defining features are being removed or replaced in this project. Within the the character defining features within the historic study that was completed to designate this were all generally along the facades facing Broadway were those character defining features that were identified during that and were adopted as part of that historic district study. And um wanted to note on this one of the main things that I think there's been some comments and feedback also from HPC was about the overall massing of the structure. When we look at it, we look at the presence of 318 Commons building mitigates the additional building mass. Noting that within the historic district, it's the collective of all of the buildings that were established and designated. So it's not one particular building, it's the overall district that was established. So, as we're looking at the overall district, we're looking at the impact of that massing within that district and with um the location of 318. It looks like it kind of aligns with that and so it will not have an impact on the other buildings. Um, in addition, it has been designed to both compatible and differentiated from the property's historic element, which is a recommendation when we're looking at additions or rehabilitations, especially when we're looking at additions, is that it has a differentiated so that you're not mimicking what is on those front-facing facades that are part of those um contributing buildings. And then the last item I just want to quickly noted are properties are being pursu once again I've kind of noted a couple times that it's really looking at those properties being preserved along Broadway as being a key feature of this. And so with that um I will note and I'll just provide the recommendation. This was a staff recommendation that was submitted to HPC. Um once again the HPC voted 62 to deny the certificate of appropriateness. Um and most of their comments and I'm just summarizing them. I'm not speaking verbatim for each one of them was really concerns about um the addition would it detract from the district. The concerns about setting precedents and the massing design are not compatible with these buildings or the district and just wanted to note those and um that is the end of the brief presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions at the completion of the public hearing. >> Thank you Mrs. Miss Woodward. Uh next up uh if uh the applicant uh is here if they can uh step forward and uh introduce yourself and uh uh and you have up to 10 minutes. >> Just uh how do I advance the slide? Just the green button. >> Okay, thank you. >> Good, good evening, mayor, council president, council members. My name is Bob Heis. I'm working with Howal Henderson, Grant Mikolitz, and the GH Investment Group regarding this uh 311 Broadway development. What this appeal is about is that HPC denied the request for appropriateness and did so without any factual support, any substantive factual findings. And GH2 did not walk away. They met with the city. the city invited them to continue in this uh down this road to find a project that would be compatible with what the city was trying to do in terms of develop the downtown district. And so after months and multiple meetings and many many communications, a substantially modified proposal was developed. And that proposal earned the support of the experts, the city development team. The properties, we all know what the properties are, so I'm not going to go into any detail on that. The city's done a good job of outlining that quick history. All I would point out is that again, GH2 did not walk away. They were invited by the city to continue this progress uh this project and find a way that they could collaborate together with the development team and come up with solutions to some of the concerns that the initial project raised. And they and they did that through months and months and hours of communication and collaboration. This is a snapshot of what the differences are. You can see the 309 Broadway. The facade is now being preserved as opposed to full demolition. The storefronts are returned to historic opening. It preserved whole portions of the buildings to be used as apartments. It went from 11 stories to seven stories which satisfies the massing considerations. There are now setbacks that didn't exist before that satisfy the city development team and this and the standards and the guidelines and no change in the designation of the buildings as contributing buildings uh was required. This is just to give you the visual. The city has it in theirs, but you can see the the substantial difference in the massing that resulted in the uh significant changes to the proposal and to the project, which clearly as the city has determined uh falls within the lines of the standards and the expectations. The I think it's important. I'm not an expert in historical preservation. I'm not an engineer. I'm not an expert in downtown uh district renovation, remodeling, and expansion. I rely on experts. I I suspect that nobody here uh in your I don't mean this in any disrespectful way, but are not experts in historical preservation or downtown development. I don't envy the position that you're in. Okay? This is outside a lot of people's expertise, and it's a hard position to be in to to have to make a decision like this. So, what do we do? We rely on experts. The city has a team of experts that are devoted and committed to understanding the secretary of interior standards in the context of a project like this. They're committed to understanding the UDC in the context of a proposal and a project like this. So what do we do? We rely on what the experts say. And the experts have indicated that this project, this new proposal substantially modified, comports with, complies with and adheres to the Secretary of Interior standards, and it adheres to the UDC, the regulations and the codes that apply to a project like this. Just in brief, the uh HPC's decision was a one-page letter that that denied on 12569 and 10 the Secretary of Interior standards and the conclusion was simply not met. No factual support, no factual justification, no basis whatsoever other than not met. to the extent that uh somebody from the HPC may have submitted some documents to the city council afterwards that weren't provided to us that were not part of the HPC proceeding. It's outside the scope of the HPC proceeding. It's it it's inappropriate to rely on anything that was provided to the council after that. And certainly if something was provided, we would have liked to have seen it so that we could address it. not a single factual finding in a quasi judicial proceeding. Procedurally, we think that's inappropriate and and we would ask that the city council take that into consideration. We look at what's the investment case for this. The the this isn't theoretical. It's not hypothetical. It's real. The second floor of 311 Broadway hasn't been rented in five years. This is despite over $900,000 being invested in the pain building. The second floor remains vacant. Right now, ownership is subsidizing tenants. They may not know it. They may not appreciate it, but at $15 a square foot as opposed to what the market is for that area for between$25 and $35, it's not sustainable. It's not theoretical. It's reality. The math simply doesn't work without this project. There's no realistic path to recouping the investment in these build buildings as they sit today. And that's what makes really an opportunity for the city council to allow for real investment in these buildings to be possible. What's the practical alternatives? Sell the buildings. Who's going to buy these buildings after what they've been through for the past three years in the current condition that they're in? Maintain at a minimum. It's not sustainable. You can keep putting money in to maintain the building, but the rents that that are getting uh uh paid aren't sufficient to maintain that. So, downtown business, property owners support this and you know, we should not have to choose between allowing a property owner to reinvest in historic building and supporting the small businesses that have make downtown possible. Why this matters? whether the commission's decision was supported by the findings in the HPC, which it clearly was not because there were no factual findings, and what's at stake in the outcome. This is a $23 million investment that's being brought to downtown Rochester. The city development team itself recognizes what brings more business, more residents, more revenue, more vitality for the whole downtown community, not just this block. There's a message beyond this one project. If a developer does everything that they're asked in working with the city, goes to meetings, makes changes, makes revisions, complies with everything that the city wants, and then is told by the HPC, we reject your project because it affects old buildings, it sends a message to development that development in downtown Rochester is not wanted. We would we would think that this council has the opportunity to send an opposing message today and that message is that if you work with the city, if you combine and collaborate with the city and you provide what the city is looking for in compliance with the standards and the regulations, your project should be approved. And for that reason, we're asking that the city council accept the recommendation, the second recommendation now by the experts, the development team to overturn the HPC's denial to award the certificate of appropriateness and to allow this project to go forward. I want to say thank you on behalf of GH2 investments, Mr. Henderson and Mr. Miklettes. And we have uh anticipated some questions. So in the slide deck there are questions and answers. I don't know how much time do I have left. A minute. >> You have a minute and 54 seconds left. But you also will have five minutes after the public hearing to answer questions. >> All right. So let me just take what time I have left. Uh there are no conditions that this approval and this recommendation for approval are subject to. The standards al all all that are identified are not supported by any factual findings or any factual support. When you talk about the alley, we're very conscientious of the alley. Uh how and Grant have already done things to enhance that alley by consolidating garbage collection for all the business owners in that area by installing new lights, by installing benches, by installing planters, some of which have been vandalized already with plants being stolen and and rocks being pulled out of the planters. But it shows that they're willing to work and do more. And this project, if they're given the opportunity to move it forward, can do so much more to preserve the culture uh of that alley, actually enhance uh the culture of that alley by doing some things like this. This just demonstrates the massing. This has been done in other cities throughout the United States. You can see a lot of historic buildings have accepted the idea of regenerating with modernization that bring revitalization to a downtown community and a downtown district. So, we're not asking the city of Rochester do something novel or something that hasn't been done. Again, this shows the massing this tower subordinate to the historic buildings. Professional support. We relied on the former commissioner of the Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission who supports our project. consistent with all the secretary of interior standards as the city team and the experts have identified and if for some reason it needed to be removed the historic buildings would be preserved in their original state and this just identifies over uh five meetings in 2024, six meetings in 2025 and two meetings in 2026 and multiple conversations. Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. We will invite you back up after the public hearing. At this time I will open the public hearing and I will go through the list of uh speakers and a reminder please remain quiet during the speakers and after the speaker is done and we will start with uh Sean Kettlecamp. >> Hi there. I'm Sean Kettle Camp. um the researcher at the history, >> if you could pull the microphone just a little closer. There we go. >> History center of Mstead and the researcher at the history center of Mstead County. Um you know, I just want to say that you all created the historic district and uh it can't be something that's a hop on, hop off. We changed our mind later. We want to do something different. Um [clears throat] it's all um it's all been set. we the the historic district is in place and you know when he says that he can't uh find anybody to buy those buildings I think really what it comes down to is what are you going to rent it out for. you know, if you're doing everything specifically for the University of Minnesota Rochester, um that's um I don't know, that's that's not going to work. And it's the you know, and I've said it before, the University of Minnesota Rochester should really be the University of Minnesota Mayo because you can't take an get an English degree or a history degree there. It's only teaching they're only teaching classes for what they uh what they want uh to make workers for for them. Anyhow, um my aunt and uncle Jerry and Mary Ellen Kettle Camp um lived here for years. They moved to Denver in the 19 late 1960s. And my aunt Mary Ellen's father was the uh district attorney and mayor of Southbend, Indiana, attorney for the Studebaker uh family. And uh it was my aunt Mary Ellen who when she moved to Denver um ran and was on the city council there who counseledled me on going to the city council. If you had something to uh say, you should go. and don't be afraid. And so, uh, I've tried to keep that in mind. But, you know, she was on the city council there, but she would come back. They would, my aunt and uncle Jerry and Mary Ellen would come back every year. And, uh, I always remember in the late 1970s, my mother was talking to her about some issue here in town. And uh um and my my mother told her that this was this and that thing was happening. And uh my aunt said to her things happen in Rochester, Minnesota that don't happen anywhere else. And I've always remembered that because it just kind of speaks to um you know kind of unacceptable behavior. I mean, going to the um for staff recommendations and going to city developers and and everything. If they're trying to get you all to vote a certain way, that's unacceptable. And um uh telling the city council how to vote is something that uh I don't believe should happen. But, you know, corruption is chic these days. And um I just don't want you all to be pushovers for changing your historic district by a building that's so towering that when you're driving down Broadway, you're not going to be able to see the Kaylor Hotel or anything else beyond that. Um it's not so much really what's happening right there on Broadway in front of that building. It's like coming up there on a car. You're not going to be able to see beyond that. Um, you know, it's just towering over uh an historic building that uh and a historic district that uh we all care very much about. Um, and I remember being out at the history center how to give tours at Maywood and have uh people come up and want to know where where was the downtown Rochester and you try to explain it to them and it's it's it's very difficult because um they all want to rent out to like I said the University of Minnesota Rochester. It's, you know, it could be hard to sell that building, but depending upon what who wants to buy it and what they want to use it for, if they're not going to use it for the uh the university, they have all kinds of of great possibilities. So, um I encourage you please to vote no. We don't want any building on top of our historic buildings and we don't want anything done to our historic district. as little as it is. We're only asking for a millionth the building space in all of Rochester. And that apartment thing that they want to build could be built anywhere else. So, thank you so much. >> Thank you. Next, we have Chris Allen. >> Good evening. Thank you for having us here. My name is Chris Allen. I'm a 50-year resident of Rochester. I'm the daughter of Marge Allen who founded Channel One and I am a professional artist. Grassroots. It's what started Channel One. It's only bigger. It continues to grow. Look at your audience here in attendance tonight. It is the people. It is a grassroots effort to say, "No, we want our history. We the people are here to protect and preserve our own history as permanent re residents of Rochester, Minnesota. It's a progressive state as a direct result of grassroots efforts. Minnesota is ranked fourth in the country to support and promote the arts. Yet Rochester Rochester artists rank less than 1% in our state. 1%. Think of the growth. Our small art businesses are being threatened by creating an unnecessary change today, proposing to add five floors of student housing onto our haven of historic buildings that have remained throughout the hardworking historians of our downtown neighborhood. Two stories says charm. Seven stories says corporate greed. Honestly, changing our historic neighborhoods downtown would displace and once again would hide the creative, hardworking artist, artists, musician, performers, writers, and grant writers of the most expensive place to live in Rochester in Minnesota right now. The vibe is similar to the ripple effect build the building of the civic center had on the Rochester Art Center. Have you been there? Do you know where it is? Do our visitors know where it is? How much more could it grow? So, please have the decency to support alternative businesses that are arts focused and settled in a wellestablished downtown location for all of us. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Richard Gil. Please, everyone was so good that after the first speaker, and if you do want to applaud, go out to the the lobby. Uh Mr. Gil. Go ahead. >> Hello. My name is Richard Gil and I'm here to speak specifically about the import the importance of treat records and the need for it to remain open uninterrupted which be imposs which would be impossible if this passes. I'm 46 years old. I grew up in Rochester and graduated high school in 1998. So I was around during the money magazine best city in America days. And as an artistic teenager during that time, I can say that it was anything but that for us. We would hang out in public spaces like the Galleria or the Peace Plaza and get harassed or ticketed by security guards and police officers just for existing in those spots. The same thing happened during the live music shows at the Playmore Ballroom. Harassed by the owners even though we went to spend money there. It was not an ideal situation and it made us all extremely bitter and untrusting of the people in positions of power in the city. In 2003, I left Rochester. And when I moved back a few years ago, I saw a much different city. There were multiple venues that hosted original live music, and there was a vibrant arts and music community. On this particular stretch of Broadway that we're talking about, there's a coffee shop, an art store, and a record store. And all these places welcome the youth with open arms. The point I'm trying to make is that the impact Treeome has on the community goes beyond dollars and cents. In a place like Rochester that when you're young seems to only care about the male clinic and catering to the over 60 population, Treeome is a place for the youth to go for live music and community events. Kids have taken prom and senior pictures at Triome. Bands have formed in that store. Friendships and relationships have started there. I met one of the very most important people in my life because of that storefront. It's important to this community. It's more than just four walls and some crates of records. It's a cultural and community hub for this city. I would hate for the next generation of young people to miss out on that at the expense of more apartments. For the next generation to grow up the way my friends and I did, bitter and untrusting of the people in positions of power in the city, feeling like their best interests are not being considered. They've already lost one place with the closing of Thesis. Don't let them lose this place, too, even for the amount of time it takes to renovate a building. >> Thank you, Mr. Gil. Next up, we have Charlie Miller. >> Good evening, Council President Schub, Mayor Norton, and members of the council. My name is Charlie. I'm here tonight to ask you to deny the appeal for item G1 and uphold the Historic Preservation Commission's decision. I'd like to speak from a slightly different perspective than others here tonight. I'm relatively new to Rochester. I moved here with my two teenager sons um to receive ongoing medical care from the Mayo Clinic last summer. When I arrived here, we didn't know anyone or have any community. I didn't have a network of people or a sense of where I belonged yet. The businesses in these historic buildings changed that for me. Through these businesses, from attending Zen Scene and open mic nights at Cafe Steam and painting classes at Art Heads to attending concerts at Triome, I found my people. I found employment. I found music, art, friendship, and a sense of belonging. The community that I built here over the past year is directly connected to these spaces. And I think that's something that can be easy to overlook when we talk about historic preservation. We aren't just preserving old buildings. We're preserving the places where people build lives. These spaces give us small businesses, artists, musicians, and community members somewhere to gather and create something together. They contribute to the character of Rochester in a way that a new development simply can't replicate overnight. I'd also like to note that a huge part of the community spaces these businesses provide is the safe, welcoming environment they create for my teenagers and for Rochester's youth as a whole. Almost weekly, I have the privilege of witnessing close to a hundred of our youth and young people gather at Triome to enjoy live music together. As a parent, I can't name nor imagine another space that feels as wholesome, inclusive, and safe for our youth on a Friday night. These spaces give young people a place to belong, connect with one another, and experience their communities in a way that's incredibly meaningful. I moved here only a year ago, and these businesses help me make Rochester feel like a home. I hope we'll make decisions that allow future residents to have that same opportunity to arrive here not knowing anyone and find a community waiting for them. Please deny the appeal for items G1 and uphold the Historical Preservation Commission's decision. Thank you for your attendance. >> Thanks, Miss Miller. Next up, we have Rigs uh Rep. >> Good evening, mayor and uh council members. My name is Rigs Rep. I am a Rochester small business owner, resident, and homeowner. And I'd like you to I'd like to ask you guys to reject this proposal. I want to be very clear. I am not opposed to housing, especially for students, and I am not opposed to development. I'm oppos I'm opposed to destroying Rochester's history when there are other places to build. These South Broadway buildings date back to the late 19th century. They are a part of Rochester's architectural and commercial history, and once they are gone, they are gone forever. But they are also more than just old buildings. These spaces have become important parts of Rochester's art and creative community. They provide places for artists and creative businesses to work, gather, and contribute to the character of downtown. That community is part of what makes these buildings valuable today, not just what happened in them 100 years ago. The federal secretary of interior standard for historic properties found in 36 CFR part 68 emphasizes preserving historic materials and features, minimizing changes to historic buildings, and avoiding alterations that destroy the character and make history property significant. These pro these principles are consistent with Rochester's own heritage preservation policies which recognize the preservation of historically significant properties as being in the public interest. I understand that facades may say may stay similar, but these buildings are more than just that. So, I have to ask, why are we willing to make an exception here? This is not the first time we've had this conversation. This is, by my understanding, the fourth time a proposal has come before the council about these changes. At what point do we stop changing small pieces of the proposal and recognize that the fundamental problems remain the same? Changing the number of units, changing the design, and making other small adjustments doesn't change what is being asked of you tonight to to approve a development that comes at the expense of historic buildings. I don't need believe we need to make that trade. Look around downtown Rochester. There's construction happening everywhere. New apartment buildings continue to go up and there are vacant underly utilized lots throughout and around downtown where new housing can be built without destroying 19th century buildings. We can have both. We can build housing for these students and we can preserve history. What we cannot do is demolish or fundamentally alter historical buildings and then then decide years later that we wish we had protected them. If this council approves this proposal after four separate hearings and repeated revisions, what precedent does that establish for the next historical property? What does historic historic prevention actually mean? If a developer can simply keep modifying a proposal until the preservation concerns are worn down, these buildings have survived well over a century. I am asking you not to be the C council that decides they won't make it another century. Please reject this proposal and require development to happen in a way that allows Rochester to grow without erasing history, art, and character that makes our downtown unique. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Rep. Next, we have Kevin Ewig. >> Good evening, council members. Thank you for your service. And Mayor Norton, I first knew you as PTA president. Thank you for serving children, for serving this community, for representing our state and at a national level and international level. Your service has been phenomenal. I came to Rochester in 1989 to teach at Gage. I was a brand new teacher. My first grade that I taught was sixth grade, which was kind of a nightmare for me, [laughter] but we managed. And um one of the sections that I taught was Minnesota and Rochester history. and we went to the history center to learn about the tornado that wiped out most of Rochester. August 1st, 21st, about this time of year, 1883, most of this town was wiped out. The historical buildings are gone. There's photographs and drawings of it, but what remains in downtown Rochester are a few historical buildings. For the sake of our children and their understanding of the history of this town and this community, I urge you to veto or to deny this permit and keep those buildings in place as they are for the sake of the children, for their sense of history, for the sense of the artist community that is there. I in my retirement have become an artist, a woodworker, a cabinet maker, and a carver. I appreciate Arttheads and all the buildings in that block, but I also appreciate the historical nature of those buildings. As a carpenter, woodworker, I appreciate the stone, red brick, not steel and glass, but the brick and the stained glass on those storefronts adds so much to what this town has already lost. So, please don't let a second tornado wipe out the few buildings we have left. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Igu. Next we have Santiago Canu Canu. >> That was correct. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon, the mayor and the council, the city council. Quick apologies. My throat is not exactly where I would like it to be, but this was an issue that was important to me and so here I am. Anyhow, so my name is Santiago. I moved here to Rochester about a year ago or so with my wonderful partner, Phoenix. We came here looking for new work. We came here looking for a new culture and a new life. And so far, we have very happily found it. And a big part of that was because of the institutions that we have in our historic district, the arts and the life and the youth and just every part of the energy that really fills us up and allows us to live and allows us to feel like we have a home. I because I don't have as much of an experience living here and because I'm a relatively recent resident, I want to save some of the more technical aspects of this kind of conversation to more experienced residents to the small business owners who are impacted. What I really want to speak to is my role as a resident and your role as you are deciding on this. First, I want to speak to your role specifically um particularly in the kind of decision that I think you should be making and that really you are entrusted to be making. I think that there are three big principles that really underpinned this type of discussion. I think the first is a recognition that this is not a decision on the actual certificate of appropriateness itself that has already been delegated that has already been decided by the previous historic preservation committee. This is about an appeal to that. And so I would ask you first and foremost to go towards the past president. There are going to be lots of arguments that are made about why it still does not satisfy the historical guidelines for the heritage and for the heritage preservation. But even if you don't necessarily buy all of them and think, well, maybe there's an argument to be made there. If there is any amount of doubt, I implore you to go back to the president that has already been established by the initial committee when they said no, this does not go by our guidelines. We will not allow this to stand. As someone before me had already said, this has been delegated multiple times. Multiple times the same decision has been reached. I would implore you to reach the same. But second is I think it's important to recognize that in terms of a lot of the economic developments that could be brought by this by a lot of the money and investments that the applicant have been speaking to. This is not a unique issue to just this district. There are many opportunities to be building new housing to be getting new investments. This is not about whether we want our city to grow, whether we want more money into it. It's whether we want these specific apartments and these specific developments in this specific area. And so I would ask you to look first and foremost to the impact it will have on this area specifically to the impact it will have on the small businesses that will be impacted by its construction that will lose a lot of the valuable people that are going towards it that are giving them this money that are relying on it for community [clears throat] and for gathering and for the enrichment that these historical places bring them. I would implore you to look to that first and foremost. And finally, I would like you to look to your commitment and the commitment that you have, not just to the people in this room, but to the 120,000 people that stand outside of it. the people who directly rely on the type of culture that these types of areas bring. Who are finding themselves just like me, somebody who was able to find a new life, who's able to find a sense of community, who's able to find a place where they wanted to be, where they wanted to grow, where they wanted to stay, where they wanted to give back into the community and to give more personal investment to the into these places. This doesn't come just because I so happened to live in this area. It's because when I first moved to Rochester, Our Heads was one of the first places that I went to and made a couple of friends and thought, "Wow, maybe I can find people like me." It's because as a music lover, I was able to go and frequent to the vinyls in Tome and attend their live concerts and see just how much vitality there was and see how much love other people had for the city and for the spaces that are found in this city. And I was able to think, man, this could actually be just a wonderful place to live. But you don't get that with simple housing developments. You don't get that with just looking at financial amounts and looking at muddy amounts that are going in and out of people's pockets. You look at that by hearing your constituents, by listening to the voices that have already spoken here now and that will continue to speak well after I'm done, who are imploring you the same thing. Don't give up on this city. Don't give up on the things that give it life, that make it a place that's worth living in. And please because of that I implore you uphold the precedent uphold the denial for the certificate of appropriateness. Thank you very much. >> Thank you Mr. Kanto. Next we have uh Gabriel Mesparen. Good evening council. My name is Gabriel Mcparen. I am 23 years old and approximately 1 year and two months ago I moved from Sous City, Iowa to Rochester after graduating with honors and an associates of applied sciences degree in engineering. Currently I work in broadcast engineering but over the past year I have cultivated a range of experiences in fields related to mechanical engineering, IT administration and construction. I'm all by all means what is now considered a high-skll worker if there is such a thing. I bring all of this up to illustrate one of the biggest problems that Iowa is currently facing economically at the moment, and that is the continued phenomenon of young skilled workers moving elsewhere after graduating, not only for better career opportunities, but also in search of more vibrant culture and a stronger sense of community within the cities that they live in. Iowa is currently being bled dry by private contracting and luxury housing firms who decimate small businesses in order to build luxury apartments and student housing that no one in the state can even afford. And personally, I see what's happening between Iowa and Minnesota mirrored on a smaller scale between Rochester and the Twin Cities. I myself and and I know I'm not alone in this have already started to consider moving due to what I to perceive to be this city's hostility and carelessness towards the vibrant culture oriented small businesses that serve this community. The most recent example of this hostility and carelessness being the completely unnecessarily unnecessary and utterly avoidable closure of thesis beer project on second street southwest. The continued reconstruction and renovation of every single small business and building space in town in order to create student housing and luxury apartments is not only economically shortsighted, it continues to solidify Rochester as a simple tourist destination for those from out of state who only wish to visit the city to seek medical care at the Mayo Clinic. While this practice may be may bring negligible profits for the companies leasing these properties in the short term, in the long term it will only cause younger skilled workers such as myself to want to look elsewhere for community oriented culture and work opportunities. If this renovation is approved, it not only sets a dangerous precedent for the disregard of small businesses in Rochester and the communities that they build, but it also sends a message to younger educated people that the communities and cultures that are important to them are not important and do not matter to this council. I'm just one example of someone who will look elsewhere for community and work opportunities if this practice of kicking out vibrant small businesses continues. Now, taking all of that into consideration, I humbly ask that this council deny the appeal for item G.1 and uphold the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to deny the certificate of appropriates of appropriateness for an addition to the project at 309-317 Broadway Avenue. Please allow these businesses to keep their respective building spaces so that they can continue to maintain, grow, and nurture the communities and cultures that contribute to the economic growth that this city needs to maintain in order to keep the people who want to live here living here. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Tyler Og. >> Hey, everyone. Uh, this is a pleasure having the chance to be in front of you all. I'm usually stuck in the back recording this, so I appreciate your time tonight. Um, I'm here as a stakeholder in a downtown business and I've spent the last what, three years now dragging my family from Ohio to Tucson, all over the country, everywhere across the Midwest, uh, looking for unique businesses, shops, art supply stores, and curating ideas that we could bring back to Rochester, something that we maybe didn't have here. And along the way, without even trying, we always ended up in these small towns, historic districts time and time again. And that color and vibrancy was always so important. And any time a day that we might have gotten there, there was always something going on. Uh people walking around, shops bustling, etc., etc. And we definitely wanted to bring that back in in some way here. And we saw that it worked everywhere else. If you've ever had a chance to be in downtown Hastings near the bridge or in Park Rapids, um it's always an epicenter. It's a diamond. It's a gem. It's a magnet. It attracts people who are either passing through town or on their way elsewhere. Um, I brought this book with me cuz my small sliver part of our business uh downtown was to curate a gift shop, something that was reminiscent of some of the old vintage junk you might find as a tourist in an old gift shop. And I had put together a museum of Minnesota history, Rochester histories on one shelf. We got a huge case of Red Al stuff to celebrate entrepreneurship on Broadway. And we've had nearly a thousand people sign in from Paris, Florida, New York, California, Texas, everywhere. And what's amazing about this is that it's always a conversation starter. And we get people towards the end of the line in the block, late evening on a Saturday, a lot of things are closed, they've had their meal, and they're having the worst time of their life visiting Mayo and going through that experience. and we're kind of the end of the block for retail and they always stop in and we always say we use the word linger because they they linger because they want a conversation that doesn't remind them of anything else going on in their lives at the moment. And there's nothing else that can really replace that experience. And I know that businesses come and businesses go. And I don't understand why we aren't using this moment in time to save this little gem that we have downtown, this magnet that does attract people when they leave Mayo's ecosystem. They always end up down there just wandering around even without a mission. Um, and I hope we can use this moment here uh to really continue a conversation about why subsidizing a perfect little section of what's left, why subsidizing something like that would be bad to keep it affordable for small businesses. Um, this new building is grays and glass and whites. It's it's dead color and people don't notice it. they don't see it in the same way. And I just hope that you'll vote in favor of this appeal tonight, not based on maybe your friendships or any personal texts you might have received or the idea that we this can't be supported and maintained and sustained in in any which way. So I appreciate your time tonight and thank you. sign on the next. >> Next we have Leah B. >> Hi, I'm Leah B. That was my husband, Tyler. Um, we actually met at 317 South Broadway and our first kiss was in the cove um where these buildings might be built. Well, I hope you all are well. Good to see your faces again. Um, I feel fortunate to be a steward of a property on this block. Um, my mom and I, she's here, too. Uh my mom and I were just talking about the golden hour downtown. And if you haven't experienced it, I highly recommend. Um an hour or so before the sun begins to set, it cuts through the top of our buildings. It bounces off the street across the street and then that sunshine um comes right into our windows in the west and for like 15 to 20 minutes, the whole room is golden. Um, and it feels like magic and it's a good reminder of one of the many reasons that we're in that exact location. My understanding is that this proposal violates multiple preservation guidelines and I trust that you've all read over these standards as we all have. Um, I trust the judgment of the HPC members, the experts. Um, and I sincerely hope you do as well. They are an unbiased organization appointed by the mayor and this council. Uh the guidelines presented are not just downtown specific as you know. Um these guidelines are set for all across our country. Um the decision that you make tonight can set a precedent for what rules will be broken all across our city. And as the third largest city in Minnesota, um it can really set a precedent for our state. Um, tonight you're hearing other voices, perspectives, and my request is that you all listen and decide with a sound mind. My ask is that you deny this appeal for a modern tower. And the financial status is not what you're voting on this evening. And landlords set the rent cost for their tenants. Um, I like to think that the people who inhabited these buildings 100 years ago also experienced that golden sunshine and I hope that uh future generations after I'm gone will as well. Thank you for listening to your communities. Appreciate all of you. >> Thank you. Next we have Barry Skolnick. >> Hi. Um, my name is Barry Skolnick. Uh, I know you all know me and this is probably one of the most difficult. >> Mr. Skolnick, if you can get closer to the microphone there, just there. That works. My name is And we can bring it down if you want. There we go. >> Okay. Y >> My name is Barry Skolnick. You all know me. I >> This is one of the most difficult speeches I've had because I care so much about it. And uh I was with the original group with Mark Bilderback that helped design the uh the HPC. and uh and and the the whole district and uh I really don't want to see it ruined. I was so concerned about it and what the what the staff the city staff was proposing that I called uh Shipo and spoke to um Michael Coupe who is probably recognized as one of the most outstanding authorities for preservation and for the standards and he looked at it and he said this can't be this no way does this qualify as uh as meeting the standards. It doesn't. and he said I and I can quote him on it and I've asked other people to call and Ben Zastro also spoke to him and uh I think Ben already sent you some kind of a an email about it and he and it's very clear that that the HPC is not violating the standards but Coupe is one of the national experts in it and he believe and he said that HPC was right on the money and believes in it totally. So, it's not like all the experts are against HPC and HPC are your legal experts in a sense. They're the ones who the mayor and the other person pointed out um the mayor and the city council approved as their legal representatives and the criteria the interior stand interior standards criteria are the most important things. And by the way, one of the prior speakers made a mistake. Um is not behind house proposal. I checked with the chancellor's office there and they specifically said they have nothing to do with house proposal whatsoever. They didn't ask for it and they're not working with him on it. So they have nothing to do with it. There are other students who could be involved with but it's not students at least not anywhere now. Maybe someday but not now. So he anyone who thinks that is wrong. So they shouldn't be criticized for it but they also were not behind it whatsoever. Um the other thing that you should know is that there are in within the districts there are things called non-contributing buildings and contributing buildings. The contributing buildings are the ones that are worthy of landmarking and that and the buildings on the block are all contributing buildings. The building that HAL owns on the or was involved with on the next block that's non-contributing. So, yes, it looks like that building, but as Shipo will tell you, when you put a non-contributing addition on top of a of a contributing building, you ruin the district because you don't want to include the include nonparticipating non-contributing um objects and large things on top of your landmarks. That's suicide in terms of keeping a landmark district. If there's issu if there's issues about how much money yes the there we need to have some look at the economics of the district and there should be a study session on that and we should talk about that and I fully agree with that but as far as saying that these don't meet the standards I mean the HPC felt that it met the standards and again Shipo feels it meets the standards and they're the state historical preservation office so they don't agree with Molly and uh you know and and Irene So there are differences of opinion there but but it's very clear that you only have to miss one standard. You don't have to have a majority even one standard and standard nine is very clear that this is a bulky object much bigger and out of sync with w with the rest of the objects and it's not and it wouldn't be a contributing part of the district. So it's it's non-contributing. You don't want to increase non-participating bulk. And how said he wants this to set a a precedent for the rest of of Rochester. Yeah, he's right. The president will be you destroy the district by You don't think that uh other other developers are going to come along and try to build more on top of of the district? Yeah, they'll destroy it. Is that what you want? Then go right ahead. I suggest what you do is have a meeting uh approve the the uh the HPC thing and uh don't don't change don't approve house proposal but what you should do is try to sort of meet amongst each other to try to come up with ways of economically improving the buildings downtown and and and how to get incentives tax abatements and stuff like that. That's what you should be doing. And in my opinion, please please don't uh don't deny the HPC a decision and stick with that. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Skolnick. Uh next we have Vanna Paci. >> Hi everyone. My name is Vanna. I've been here >> the mic please. >> Okay, thank you. I was here the last >> You can move it down a little bit. There we go. Just like that. >> Oh my gosh. Okay, >> there we go. Perfect. >> All right. Okay. My name is Vanna. I've been here I think the last two meetings that we've talked about this. Um I spoke to you in May of 2025 and so did my children. Um I work at Arttheads Emporium which currently occupies 319 and 321 and previously we were in 317. I have a lot of love for 317. I raised my children there. Um, my frontal lobe finished developing there, I think, and I met a lot of people in our community in there. It's apparent I have emotional ties to this space, the block. My latest experience, I think it was Friday night, August 7th, I pulled up into the front of all these buildings. I think it was about 10 p.m. I went to visit Leah and Tyler after their shift. Um, to my surprise, the curb was littered with what looked like teenagers or young adults. I can't say for sure. Um, I was confused. I found out it was because of Tree Dome and their events. Um, as a mother of two, basically they're teenagers. It's comforting to see a space that is not alcohol- centered for these young people. They're off their phones sitting on the curb having real life relationships and experiences. Please don't threaten to take moments like this away from all of our kids. The modern world seems to view new as better, old as weak. I know that to be untrue. New is empty and old is full of stories. Perspective is important when we talk about these historic buildings. I'm trying to see the perspective from seven stories high. Who does that serve? Students and only the students? What about my community that is already here? the people that have spoke to you, uh, that have called you, that have emailed you. It doesn't serve the community that already exists. We are the people who spend our time and money in these places. We are the people who work there. We are the people who interact with the locals and the non-locals and the existing students. We know the bizarre quirks on that block. We understand the value and the impact on the community and those that are visiting. We understand it all, more than you could possibly know. It's very intimate. To insist on not protecting and preserving the historic district is so out of touch. A seven-story building on downtown Broadway is so out of touch. I heard the term outofouch wealth just recently and it hasn't left my mind. I ask you to trust in this community and the HPC. No means no. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Luna Snater. Good evening. My name is Luna. I'm 14 years old and I've spoken about this not once, not twice, but three times now. And I'm here tonight with my family and friends. And I've grown up with the historic district. People have spoken about the community that's been built, the his story behind these buildings, and the charm these spaces bring to Rochester. But nothing seems to stick. I know it's not easy for you to decide what's next for these spaces. But please listen to your community. If we continue to gut Rochester of these meaningful places, Rochester will become bland and lifeless. And I truly believe no one here tonight wants that for our city. It is worth taking care of what we already have rather than having to modernize and strip a joy from Rochester. Just imagine yourself traveling to an entirely new city. Ask yourself, is it the dull apartments that make you feel connected or is it the small businesses that make you feel a part of something bigger than yourself? I guess it depends on what you value in life. Thank you for listening. I hope to never have to talk you to you about this again. >> Thank you, Miss Nater. Next we have Phoenix Snater. Hello again. I'm Phoenix. I'm 12 years old. I'm here to preserve the historic district. You probably remember me from the other two times I did this. I don't really know what to say. Building 317 isn't just a structure of bricks. This is more than half my childhood. I watched them open the building 317. I watched them close it, but I'm not going to see it tear down, especially not for overpriced apartments that are mod modernizing historic buildings. Thank you for listening. >> Thank you. Next, we have Alita uh Alida uh Kustler. >> Hello, council. My name is Elida Kesler and I'm here to share my thoughts as a private citizen, not on behalf of any of the boards, commissions, or organizations that I am in association with. That said, I am involved in our LGBTQIA S2 plus community, the art community, and I have a deep interest in historical preservation. I hope all of you have had an opportunity to watch the HPC meeting from June where this proposal was denied because it did not meet six of the 10 criteria laid out of the secretary inter of interior standards. If the de if the developers had actually listened to the discussion that was had, they would have had a clear understanding of why the commission cited these six criteria. Here's a summary of the HPC's findings. The removal of one-third of the space from the back of several buildings and the modernization of the alleyway val violates standards 1 2 5 6 and 10 and the fact that it significantly alters the spaces of these buildings and the spatial relationships of these buildings with the rest of the district and city. This includes but is not limited to the view shed of the Kaylor and plumber building from the corner of Broadway and 4th Avenue. Standard 10 specifies that if the new addition were to be removed, the historic building would be returned to its original state. The removal of one-third of the back of several buildings makes that impossible. [snorts] The number of floors being added to this proposal violates standard six as it adds five additional levels when the standard limit for a historical building this size is two. The proposed materials, height, and size violate standard 9 as it makes no effort to be compatible with the historical buildings. The standards across the country say that it may not duplicate the original style, but must be compatible in style, materials, colors, and must not overshadow the original building. These are national standards that we should abide by. These are standards that are applied to the historic district and when applied encompasses more than just the face of these buildings. The HPC weighed every part of this proposal heavily. For the developers to state that they were denied without factual reasoning is plainly incorrect. It's staff that failed to give reasoning for the HPC discussion. And that's a staff issue, not an HPC issue. to overturn the HPC's expertise is a clear disservice to every citizen in our city and a blatant disregard for the importance of historical preservation. Additionally, in reviewing the DEI impact of this, the city failed to account specifically for the LGBTQ community who would be hit hard by this proposal. Triome would have to move because their space would be turned into a lobby. There are they are the only midsized stage for musicians in town. The back side of Threshold Arts would be demolished, eliminating their gallery space. Both of these businesses frequently highlight women and queer individuals. These businesses and Cafe Steam are also all places where queer events and had and display queer art. I am disappointed that this perspective was excluded from the evaluation. I appreciate your time and your consideration and I hope you uphold the HBC's decision to deny this proposal. >> Thank you. Next we have Sarah Hutchinson. Hutchinson. Hey guys. Oh gosh. Hey guys. Okay. Um I'm Sarah Hutcherson. I lived here for 18 years. I moved I live in the cities now, but I'm here because this kind of sucks. Um, I want you guys to think about a time where you felt like you didn't really fit in to the world. Maybe you had a hobby or an interest that just wasn't something you felt like you could pursue or you felt like you couldn't express yourself in the exact way that you wanted to. I hope that if you've ever felt this way, you were at some point provided with or you eventually found a place or a person or a thing that allowed you to express that feeling. And I hope that the experience of expressing your true self allowed you to feel more confident in the person that you are. As a teenager, I was lucky enough to be supported in this exact way by people who run and occupy the very businesses that this appeal threatens. These places, Treeome, Cafe Steam, Art Heads Emporium, are run by passionate, creative people who have been providing spaces for people like me to explore um my passions and my creativity and express the thing that makes me different. When I was 14, right Luna's age, I was given the opportunity to perform at the inaugural Rockchester Music Festival, an event aimed at providing a stage for young musicians and artists. I was eager and absolutely horrified, getting on a stage that felt way too big for me. But that day, fear and all, truly changed my life, and it opened a door to a version of myself that was itching to get out. This opportunity to share my passion with people who cared about me was invaluable. And the community members who supported that festival are the same people that are so deeply invested in the artistic heart of Rochester. That first festival took place at the Wicked Moose, like on the south side of town. In 2018, that building was demolished and they put an apartment building there. On the corner of First Avenue and Fourth Street, just down the road from here, there used to be an art gallery. When I was a teenager, I played my first show with a real band in the back of that building. It was New Year's Eve. All of my friends were there. We laughed and we danced and we listened to real music performed by real people who cared so deeply about the community that was being created. I think of that night fondly and without it, I wouldn't be the person that I am today. This gallery closed and the building that C4 occupied was eventually torn down to create, you guessed it, an apartment building. You must understand that creative and cultural institutions are what make Rochester special, interesting, and a meaningful place for all of us. I've only been around for 26 years, but I've seen so many music venues and community gathering spaces disappear from Rochester. Uh because so many of you only care about making Rochester big and shiny to people who don't live here, but like maybe one day might live here. You must understand that this is much bigger than any opportunity for profit. Your actions, your choice to put small business owners and their vibrant, interesting neighbors needs second and apartment buildings, road construction, and corporate entities need first needs first has made you all look really bad. On the destination medical cent's website, there's an introductory video that provides insight to the DMC's vision for Rochester. This is a quote from that video. Destination Medical Center and Ro and the Mayo Clinic are working together to transform Rochester into a city that offers hope, health, and healing to everybody who comes in. This hope and health and hearing that you healing that you are all aspiring to must not only come in the form of a new hospital building. Hope comes from acknowledging and and affirming that the work of existing communities is important and a vital part of this town's future. Healing comes from giving people a place to gather. Newcomers and young people in Rochester need a place to meet, a place to get to know one another. They need creative outlets, and they need a place where they can feel a sense of community. We all know that no matter what direction you go, your choice will have a real lasting impact on the way that Rochester will look and feel in the future. If you want that impact to be that you approved the construction of a bunch of apartment buildings and parking lots and parking garages, then sure, so be it. And if this is the case, I hope that when you sit and reflect on your actions many years into the future, when there are no cultural, creative, or or artistic institutions left because you literally tore them all down, you'll have fun in your house all by yourself, no community to engage with. And I hope that you'll be willing to take responsibility for it. But I know that at your core, you were all good and caring people. I know that you want the best for Rochester, just like all of us. And I have the potent and you have the potential to maintain and support the places that people meet where people laugh and cry and smile and share stories and become closer to one another. I hope that you see that the people of Rochester and specifically young people are worthy [snorts] of places where they can share their passions and their interests. And I hope that you see that they are deserving of a place where they can be themselves. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have Joel Campos. Mayor Norton, Kent City Council. [clears throat] Hi. As a nine-year resident of Rochester, I found myself to love the community and pacing it offers. Whether it be getting groceries, a drive to meet friends, maybe at a local music show like Tree Dome, Thesis Beer Project, or even get coffee at Steam Cafe. I mentioned these because they hold a place in my heart due to my old hometown not upholding upholding to these standards. I believe other community members I've come to know or just seen around are urging that you do not take away this place we call home. After many years, many of us finally found that home inside a record store that is ran by amazing people. As a musician, it's difficult to find places that will accept not just one, but many genres and forms of life to perform for others life. Triome has been that place for many musicians, and they are greeted with love and cheers every time they showcase their talents. It saddens me and many others that this is being considered to be taken away. For many, this is all we have since not everyone gets the privilege to be a part of the Mayo Clinic staff or government members within the state of Minnesota. As an educator as well, please think of the youth that would be affected by your decisions. Not many places here in Rochester are accessible to many of the youth who want the chance to finally be a part of community. Triome offers that more compar that more compared to any other pro program by the city of Rochester. Please consider pres preserving the arts and music life here in Rochester to give myself and other community members the feeling of grabbing that vinyl record like it was the 60s. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Next we have Zo doin Dubin. >> Hello. Hi. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> So, good evening uh Mayor Norton and members of the council. I am Zoe Duben, uh a researcher and a recent resident of Rochester. Uh when I moved here two years ago, the first thing I heard about Rochester was that I will leave. I will work here two to three years and then I will realize that I want arts and culture and a space for dancing and music and I will leave. Uh I asked my father who grew up here and spent his youth here and then moved out as soon as he possibly could what he used to do as a child and a teenager in Rochester. and his answer was a drive to the cities. Since moving here though, I don't agree. I've actually found an amazing art community at Arttheads. I founded the monthly Zen scene, an art club at Cafe Steam downtown. And I've been recently able to throw Rochester's first Zen Festival, which was spread across historic downtown, including Tree Dome, which really lovely opened their doors for us to have this beautiful event that brought together local artists. Um, with the extensive construction that's been closing down all of these local businesses and all of these art spaces, I respectfully ask that the council follow the advice of the HPC and preserve historic downtown. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Eric Strangeand. >> Well, thank you for having here. And uh don't worry, everybody adds an R to my last name. [laughter] But yeah, um you know, I only learned about this uh >> I had an R. Oh, I did. Yes, >> you did. It's okay. >> Stain land. [laughter] Sorry. >> Yeah, it's okay. It was a professional conference where my name tag had the R on [laughter] it. The person was like, I'm so sorry. But anyway, but yeah, I learned about this what, two days ago. Um I've been a resident here for seven years. And in that time, I keep on thinking to myself, I should go to a city council meeting. But yeah, I guess uh finally learned about something was like, "Yeah, I need to go." Um, but yeah, I started during the beginning of the presentation uh the meeting here, you were showing, oh, all the kids like in summer school doing all that art stuff. And you know, you said you appreciate the arts. And I mean, I believe most people here like know the importance of it. And it's like one of those things where you know every weekend um actually the previous person speaking was talking about like oh you know told going up the city stuff like that and you know when I first moved here I thought like oh you know Twin Cities are only an hour hour half drive away and I thought I was going to be driving up there all the time but because of the downtown here I it's like well why would I do that? You know there's plenty of stuff to do here but you know I go downtown a bunch. I'm I go to Treeome. I see a bunch of shows there. And the thing is like I feel like I'm the old guy in there [laughter] because there's like so many kids. There's a bunch of kids. That's where the kids go when they wait to hear music, right? Um I go there. I do a bunch of painting. Um paint a lot of people. There's a bunch. If you ever go to Cathy's, I have a bunch of little paintings above the beer cooler. But you know, it's like that area. You know, there were people too speaking to wanting to do some initiative about um you know, looking into the c culture and the art. Well, it's like that block, that section of buildings, that is where the culture is. That's where the art is. And um and I know that and again, I don't know who the people are who was who were presenting for uh this appeal. Um you know, I I'm sure they're very fine people. They live productive life. But you know when they come here and they talk about like wanting to um you know what is it rescue or reinvigorate or whatever the word rehabilitate. That's right. They want to rehabilitate 309. And they call keep on calling it 309. Well 309 has business that has a name in it. It's uh tree which I mean they showed the presentation the the slide where it was showing like oh you know the people have covered this right. It's almost like a wave of the hand. Um, and you know, I know in their presentation too, they were talking about like, oh, this construction is going to be done in a manner that's not going to be disruptive. It's like, well, just take my word for it. I And as many people have said before that this is kind of in the wake of um, Thesis, which is another kind of smaller music venue shutting down. I really don't think it would be good to um to be uh overturning the denial to uh be letting the appeal go through. Um and I believe in my heart of hearts I think all of you value the arts and culture and I'm just again coming here short notice. This is supposed to be the first day of my vacation and I just came here because I really believe that all of you all of you have the best intentions in your heart and I want to speak to that and thank you for having having us here. And again, one other thing they said is all the small business owners support this. Well, where are all the small business owners that are supporting this today? I I mean I've heard multiple small business owners, but none of them are in favor of this. Anyway, thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Stangland. Next, we have Nick Duncin. Hello. Um, plenty of people before me and I'm sure after me are going to speak on this better than I am, but uh I'm here because I thought this was very important. And this is my first city council meeting I've ever been to. Um I was I found it very funny that uh there were some concert announcements included in the PowerPoint before this uh this meeting. So I can see that everyone here knows how how important local music and culture is. Um and I I think that denying this this appeal is is the way to hold on to that music and that culture. I understand the need for housing uh but this is not the way to go about it. building apartments uh that are for students isn't a good idea if those students will have absolutely nothing to do when the culture of Broadway dies. Uh they'll go downstairs and there'll be nothing there for them to do. I'm sure uh you know the people who are who are for this are going to say that these businesses are going to survive through this and be fine. But but I I I don't think that's going to be the case. We've seen that with thesis closing. Rochester is not a city in the rust belt that needs uh revitalizing. its vitality is already here. Uh we don't need to add on to these historic buildings if if the lifeblood of this city is already in them. I'm from St. Cloud. I've only lived here a year. Uh every time I tell someone I'm from St. Cloud, they kind of go, "Sorry." St. Cloud wishes they had our scene. Uh and I want to keep ours. They had to build a millions of dollars amphitheater to build up a scene of music and culture. We don't need to spend millions to build that. We already have a scene that we should be fostering, not suffocating. Watching thesis go has been disheartening and I don't want that to keep happening to these great places. If these businesses are forced to shut down, which we have seen happen, then I fear the culture I fear for the culture and identity of Rochester. If Steam Cafe becomes Starbucks, Taiop becomes an Applebee's and Treeome becomes an insurance office. How excited will those living here be to go to Broadway? The facades are not what is important. I don't want to I don't want to live in a town that looks like it has culture. I want to live in a town that actually has the culture. I met all of my new friends here since moving here last year in this block essentially. And I hope that many more friendships can be made here as well. Please deny this appeal. >> Thank you. Next. Next we have Ethan Slos. Sh. I'm sorry. >> Sh. >> Sorry for that. >> No worries. >> Go ahead. >> So, over a year ago, I and many others came to speak at city council as Hal Henderson tried for the third time to convert historical buildings into student housing. Tens of Rochester residents came and spoke long into the evening about how important it is for Rochester to preserve these historical buildings and how destroying them not only deals major blows to the art and music community here in Rochester by kicking their current tenants out, but also destroys parts of Rochester's history. And over a year later, we are back again as Hal Henderson tries to appeal the decision made by the city council. It concerns me that the Department of Community Development is recommending that city council reverse the appeal. There are direct violations of the standards of rehabilitation it says this project isn't adhering to. Relevant sections such as section one. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, etc. Section nine, new additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. And section 10, new additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. This project requests that one building is completely destroyed in order to complete a lobby area for the student housing, leaving nothing but its facade. Furthermore, it builds up against the rooftops of Cathy's and Tap House and destroys multiple historic buildings, all for the sake of 35 apartments. Not only are these drastic changes, but they are not changes that would be easily reversed. Kevin Lund pointed out in 2023 during the second hearing about this that two of the buildings affected in this project were used as a community space following a tornado in 1883 with Dr. WW Mayo and Sister Mary Alfred present meaning there are direct ties to Mayo's history. We need to keep these buildings. The current residents of the buildings affected by this project are thriving businesses that serve the younger members of this community. With the recent announcement of thesis beer project closing, Triome is one of the only places for Maiden and Rochester that does live music regularly and has hosted local artists, musicians from out of state, and even some musicians from overseas. Threshold Arts has allowed many motan artists the opportunity for more people to see and purchase their art than they normally would by themselves. Cafe Steam has become a major place for many people to hang out with friends and relax and study in a time where third spaces are being attacked more and more nationwide as shown here in this very meeting. This building project greatly impacts the music in our communities who will ironically probably be living in some of these proposed apartments. It also sets dangerous precedent where any historic building can be altered or destroyed for future projects. This only benefits Hal Henderson, who allegedly resorted to practices such as predatory rent increases when some of these business owners spoke out last year, raising rent by up to $1,000 and resulting in some of them not wanting to come here tonight out of fear of further retaliation. And while we're at it, how will this construction affect the 317, a building currently housed by Solaflow, a soon to open wellness spa that according to its blog on its website is housed by by Hal Henderson's son, Ryan Henderson. Will that be altered at all or will they have be conveniently untouched? In 2023, during his second attempt at demolishing these buildings, he cited difficulties in the upkeep. If it costs so much to do so, why did he spend money doing the upkeep on Solaflow? Clearly, there's plenty of money for upkeep. If he's putting in the updates needed to accommodate saunas, cryotherapy, light therapy, etc. for his son's business. Why not spread the wealth instead of intentionally letting these buildings rot? City council, you have denied this three times, and it's time to do it a fourth. What message will you send to your citizens tonight? that you care about the arts and the history of Rochester, or that you care about the arts and history of Rochester only until something more commercially and economically valuable becomes available to replace it. Whatever message you send, I ask that everybody here remember it in the future. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Eli French. Hi, my name is Eli French. Um, I've lived in Rochester my whole life. Um, I actually grew up down the road from the Dorothy Day house. Um, I watched downtown grow. Um, but beforehand there wasn't much to do here. Um, I remember the most fun I had was going to the Apache Mall and um trying to bug the security officers, see how quickly we could get kicked out. Um, after we would just walk around downtown and kind of snake through the alleyways and try to avoid anyone that we didn't want seeing us. It's not like that anymore. I get to go down there and I get to hold my head high. I get to hold my chest out and I get to walk wherever I feel like I need to to feel loved and supported. Being a part of the career community here is I feel like my silence says enough on that. Um it's gotten better significantly, but it still it still tears us apart regularly. Um, I also currently live down the road from Thesis. I see it every day. I drive past it every single day. I am trapped in my neighborhood. I have one way out. Um, I can take a right and go the completely opposite direction towards Byron or I can take a left and maybe maybe make it downtown or to my job on time. Watching it suffocate has been disheartening, heartbreaking, and it scares me because for the first time I want to stay in Rochester. For the first time, I don't want to run away. And for the first time, I want to fight for this place. I want to fight for the community that I've been that I've seen built. And I hope I hope that you guys will make the right decision to deny this and to protect the community that we have built and that we have fought for because we do deserve it as well. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have Veronica Starfall. Hello again. We met I think it was like what six months ago. Same thing over again. Why are we here again? Honestly. Anyways, my question for them, do they know how many vacancies we currently have? What the rent prices are like for these vacant buildings? There is a lot literally right beside where they want to build that they could build on instead. Why are we trying to currently destroy perfectly good businesses that bring in culture, tourism, everything like that? Why are we currently trying to destroy that rather than build up on it? Bring if we I'm very energetic right now. [laughter] The whole reason I decided to stay in Rochester is because of the historical district. I found a place I could be myself, to enjoy the tea that I get there, the music, the venues I've been to, the art that I see, and it has given me a place to stay. And if we continue to destroy our local businesses for the sake of the students or even the doctors, are they going to want to stay because they won't have anything to do because I'm thinking about leaving myself because there's nothing to do here because it's being choked over and over again. And it saddens me because I love this city. I have been here three year three years and I want to stay. But if there is nothing to do here, why would I? We have I have met some people I would consider my best friends at thesis, but I can no longer go there because it's been choked. I can't go enjoy the music that I really enjoyed there. the last Punktoberfest which is a yearly thing thesis held it would have hours of music and I have only gotten to go to one but now I won't I won't get to go to anymore after that another question is where would the businesses go do we just abandon the local businesses for student housing Do we not help them, subsidize them to go somewhere else if we're going to kick them out of their basically rightful place to be? [sighs] I [snorts] do have a main question. Why are we here again? This is the fourth time. Why are we even considering listening to a person who does not know how to take no for an answer over and over again the fourth time at this point? Why can we why can he just not accept no? And I feel it's prime real estate. He can make lots of money there. Other than that, I do hope you stick to the decision that has been made by the HPC and I hope y'all enjoy your local businesses more. >> Thank you. Next, we have BJ uh Gangstead Burks. Hi folks. Thank you for holding this today and for listening to your constituents and to our emotions. And I hope you felt them as I've felt them. [snorts] Sitting in the back row listening to my friends and friends of my friends who I've never seen but [snorts] can tell that I've met them one time at a show at thesis or at Tree Dome or maybe one of them taught me how to sew at Arttheads. and hearing the emotion in our voices as we stand here and shake and plead for our businesses to stay alive. I heard about the closing of thesis uh two weeks ago and my coworker told me that and I had to take a 30-minut break from work to mourn which might sound very dramatic but I can't imagine what it would do to all of our youth today to lose multiple of these businesses at once. these places where we get to go to enjoy art and culture and get to know more people and love more people and find new friendships. It's been a truly wonderful place to be. I feel that we have two emotions in this room. And one of them is love for this city, for Rochester. For wanting to make it a better place, for wanting to keep the things that make it unique and special and make it reminiscent of the city that parents grew up in, grandparents grew up in, your children will grow up in. And then I feel there is one of contempt from those people in the back over there who could not bother to be here for the pledge of allegiance, who could not bother to be here for the entirety of our speeches, who cannot bother to even listen to us with a shred of emotion or kindness. Who will smile in contempt at you as you turn to look at them whenever something damning is said. They do not care for us. They do not care for you. They do not care for your decisions. They do not care for the people you appointed causing calling them quasy governmental. They are real people that you appointed. They made a decision. These people cannot accept no for an answer. And I feel it is because they've had too much money to have had no for an answer too many times in their lives. We all know what it's like to have no for an answer. And that's why we're here today because we care about this. And we really, really want you to make the decision that prioritizes the children, the teenagers that will bump up into you as they're enjoying the music completely alcohol-free just living lives. when your seniors will come and teach new people how to mend their clothing in art heads. When you get to have a nice coffee and meet new people from out of state who are visiting the Mayo Clinic who just want to have a conversation with a real person. People who are studying students in the cafe, they'll certainly be there. I met some of them today. It's so important to have these businesses. It's so important to have local businesses and places where fathers can take their daughters to listen to music together and places where people can make these memories. These are all real things that I've experienced. I've only lived here for a year and I care so much about it. I really beg you to uphold the decision that the historical preservation committee has made and to please listen to those experts that everyone around me, everyone who has spoken here today has brought up. They know what they're talking about. They care like you care. That's why you work here. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Connor Johnson. Hello, Mayor Norton and members of the city council. I'm here to speak with you on a personal level asking you to reject the G1.1 appeal and project the small downtown businesses. I am a student at Gustavis Adulus College. I am a chemistry major and I wish uh I live in Manville which is a great um historical town and with an amazing community and that community is highlighted by the new um Tuesdays in the park the music concert series which I just want to highlight. I would like to someday move into Rochester and work at Mayo, but I'm not feeling very inclined to because I am seeing how these small businesses are being treated. Um, I started going to Tree Dome a couple years ago and I met some of my closest friends there. I go there with my closest friends. I've met so many amazing people there and it's gonna sound crazy to say I've heard people that I know even say that some of the best nights of their lives have been at a tree dome show. Uh I see students over at Cafe Steam from UMR. And I just think I believe that the soul of a city is in its small businesses and in its arts. And I'm also a musician. So it hits hard when I see the music scene and the art scene being hit by in by profits basically. Um I love Mayo. I think it is a great hospital obviously, but the heart of the city, the heart of any city is in its arts. It's small businesses. When I go to college and I tell people that I'm from around Rochester, they say, "Oh, yeah, that's the that's the place with mayo in it." And that's great that we're known for such a great thing. However, I always tell them about Tedome. And I tell them about Cafe Steam. [snorts] And I talk about my experiences there. And I tell them, "Hey, you should come around and come to a show sometime. That'd be awesome." Because I just I love it so much. And I love Rochester as a city. I want it to be when I go and tell people about Rochester at my college, I want to be able to be proud of Rochester and I want to be able to tell them that I don't want Rochester to be known as just the Mayo city. I want it to be known as a place that supports small businesses, supports the arts, and I don't want us to be known for a place that is aggressive towards the arts and pushes it out for money. Uh, one final thing I want to add is that I do have friends at UMR and UMR is a great school. They talk about how great the school is, but I've also heard complaints that there's not much to do. And we have to realize that UMR students are also part of our community and community members deserve to have places where they can gather, they can make connections. Um, Teddome is also a great place for people who are under 21. And I think that we just deserve as a community to have these small town businesses. And I think that these apartment developments could be we could find an alternative solution because housing is important, but I think community is much more important for a city. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Gage Sanden. Sanden. Hello, I am Gage Sanden. I uh am asking you please to not go through with this appeal. I uh have attended Treeome for many years just like uh Connor has and many other people have here too and I have seen amazing things uh some of the best conversations. It's a cultural center. It's a place where art is freely shared and expressed. And I can't imagine Rochester without it because uh for many years growing up around here, I didn't even know what to do in Rochester. There was I don't know, go to Walmart and walk around, not buy anything, leave. That that was one thing. And then I found Tree Dome and I found a place where I felt important. I felt the importance of this city more than just Mayo and the money. I uh I've seen many bands form. I my sister is in a band who formed through Teddome and gained a platform because of it. And I can't imagine what she'd be doing with without Treeome. I I have been to many other places also with the music scene. I I go up to Minneapolis all the time to experience it, but it is nowhere near as special as what we have in Rochester. I can go to Trio and I can recognize everyone there. I can talk to them about anything where other places that's not quite the same. And I feel like we need to protect this. We need to protect the people who have found a community and safety within Treeome and Arttheads Emporium and Cafe Steam. I really implore you, please do not go through with this appeal. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have Brian Dean. >> Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. I'm Brian. I live in W 6. Um, it's great that Rochester is a growing city and improving infrastructure and building new housing is doubtless a necessary part of that growth, but every time a new crane goes up in the city, it should not leave wake of destruction. Thesis beer plans on closing its doors by the end of the year, citing a 50% drop in business since the Second Street construction began. Uh, Red Cow and other Second Street businesses have also reported significant losses and shop owners along the corridor point to uh lost parking and blocked sidewalks as customers simply can't visit the area. Um, we're watching that same story play out twice. Construction has already cost us thesis. Now, a re redevelopment decision could cost us the 300 block of Broadway as well. These are businesses that actually make downtown worth visiting. When I go downtown, it's to buy a record at Triome, grab coffee at Cafe Steam, find a book at Datom, uh purchase or view some art at Threshold, or make some art at Art Heads. Downtown Rochester is already starting to feel like a ghost town, and this vote decides whether we lose one more block of it. I'm asking the city council to deny the appeal and uphold the Heritage Preservation Commission's decision. Rochester doesn't have to choose between growth of downtown of a downtown worth visiting, but tonight's vote is exactly that kind of choice, and I'd urge you to choose the latter. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next, we have uh Jean Proott. >> Good evening. Thank you for listening to all of us. It's it's really important and I'm grateful. Um I'm Gene Proott. I am Rochester's poet laurate. I was appointed by the city in 2024 by many of you on this panel. Uh as a representative of our arts community, I find it vital that I offer my insight to um the appeal. As um let's see, so I'm here talking as the poet laurate, but also as a public school teacher. The argument um that the facades will be preserved and that most street level businesses will remain after construction is in bad faith. The word preserved means many things. Here preserved means buildings and social architecture. The word investment also works twofold and I encourage investment in people over profit. In August 2024, I was in Washington DC representing Rochester among 20 poets laurate from the United States. Introducing Rochester was an interesting task to those poets laurate who only know us as home of Mayo Clinic. When I spoke about our arts scene, I was discussing the exact businesses on Broadway that would be impacted if not closed because of this um appeal to the decision. These businesses keep people in our city, as you've heard tonight. They are where we gather to feel safe. They were are where we can express individuality. They are open to our minority populations when they otherwise have experienced oppression directly in Rochester. They served our immigrant community during Operation Metro Surge. Um, and they have literally literally saved lives. Sacrificing these businesses would be losing what myself and our poets and musicians and artists and many of my students fight to prove arts are what pull people together in times of celebration and vulnerability. Even temporarily losing this camaraderie does not make our city does not only make our city less interesting, it makes us less safe. It makes us lonely. It says stay home. It tells us that we don't matter. This appeal operates under the guise that upward development will make Rochester's downtown more robust. I reject this premise, especially from a developer who knows that business proximity and shared patrons are necessary for success. I never visit Steam without walking through DATM, Artad's Threshold, and Tree Dome. Even a temporary closure of Broadway will suck the breath from them. already downtown's orange signs, cranes, and broken concrete are preventing any activity other than business in that space. As a poet, I will not point out that well, I'll point out the obvious that that's working metaphorically, too. Um, stepping into my other role, I would like to speak to you as a teacher. In my 10th grade class, I teach the play A Raisin in the Sun, written by Lorraine Lorraine Hanssbury, and it is about uh red lining in 1960s Chicago. To set that play up, I often talk about what Rochester means to them and the value of living in a neighborhood that uh makes you feel welcome. I've taught this unit for 10 years and every time um when I ask the students to use adjectives that define Rochester, they come up with boring. I've had to ban that word. They're teenagers. Um so it's not unexpected, but I really have had to prevent them from saying boring in class. I always push back on that observation by describing the opportunities that the Broadway businesses offer. I tell students that Cafe Steam offers an open mic where they get to have a voice beyond centuries walls. When ArtDad holds a Zen event, I begin class with an announcement to go if they can. I tell them about our poetry readings at the Chateau and Grio. I hang art from local artists that I purchase at Threshold. I talk about my record collection and Tree Dome. I shared about four times when uh Daton Books opened the most adorable little closet of a bookstore. And last time I was there, Lucy, the owner, told me that she had seen a freshman from Century multiple times who was always walking out with a stack of new old books. It was an English teacher's dream. It is hard to believe that I need to argue for the preservation of the city and the culture of my city and that the third largest city um in a state that is the most artsfunded state in the union would consider disrupting our most unique spaces for seven floors of a towering milktoast skyline. I'm proud to see that many Rochesterians are here to stand up for our small businesses. I'm asking, as I'm guessing you figured out, for a vote to deny the appeal. It does not hold up the interior standards. It doesn't fit into the historic vision plan. And it sets a dangerous precedent that would discourage any new independent businesses to take shape in our landscape. I'm here as a teacher for my students. And I'm running out of time, so it's just like a lecture in class. Um, and I'm sorry I didn't read a poem, but thank you for listening to all of us. >> Thank you. Next, we have Connor Cortun. Well, my name is Connor Quattran. I am now 22. And to give you some backstory on myself, um I was born and raised here. And um I went to school in Kassen. And I had a teacher who had a class called genius hour where you were to come up with a Shark Tank product and you did basically the whole class making the project. And my project was this brand called Seamless. And the vision at its time was just for clothing, but then it turned into skateboarding. And as you can tell with the community how important skateboarding is, especially with the expansion of the skate park, there is going to be more people coming into this town for the skate park just in itself. And Triome isn't just a music record store. It's now a skate shop. And it's the only one really that sells used skate goods. Um because there's Zooies and there's the Garden and none of those places will sell my product. Um, the garden is a professionally only um, you know, supporting of local brands. Um, you have to be a professional skateboarder to actually have your things in there. And thank you, Rich and Charlie, for taking me in and supporting my vision and my dream because no one else would. And they are the only people that will. And if you approve this, they will be gone. And I have nothing. I have nothing. And it's not just that. It's that this will help the community in the sense of that I use my brand to build events and to support the local scene as much as I possibly can. I put out videos to try to en encourage people to just keep skateboarding. Skateboarding is a very important thing. It helps people not just connect with the community, but also with sobriety and challenging and athleticism, exercise. I don't have to get into it. You already know. But it's not just skateboarding that's important here. It's also the scene of people that come together that make Rochester Rochester. And it's not just the people who are already here. It's the people that are coming in like, you know, even celebrities. Just yesterday, David Arquette from the Scream series was directing inside of Cathy's bar. This scene, if you change the look, no one will care. I mean this will be influenced onto people generations to come. This isn't just the now. This is you know for the future generation of our [snorts] community and I understand that I don't know specifics on the building and everything like that. So the choice is yours here and you know the importance of the community but just know that this country is built on dreams and this place is the biggest supporter of dreams that I have ever seen in my entire life and these people make this town. So thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Next we have Amy Garrettson. Hello. Uh, in 2025, I spoke on this, uh, topic on behalf of, uh, Miss Maggie Panetta and Mr. Nate Nelson, owners of Tedom Records and Creative Studio and a wonderful skateboard shop. Um and tonight I have come with a statement from Miss Nelson or from um Mr. Nelson and Miss Panetta again that I would like to share with you. They write, "Dear City Council, we are writing as the owners of TROM, the vinyl record store and all ages music venue at 309 South Broadway to uphold the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission and deny the appeal for the proposed development on South Broadway. There should be no comparison to previous proposals for development on this block because each proposal has had the same outcome. Disruptions and displacement that cannot be undone. Historic properties forever changed and construction. Our location at 309 is set for nearly full demolition in this proposal when no other efforts have been made to renovate the property. I will move down to share a few more excerpts from this letter. They want to take a moment to share how TROM brings attention to this district at a larger scale. Earlier this year, we received a backing small businesses grant from Main Street America and American Express, a growth and innovation grant specifically for businesses in historic districts with strong community impact. Treatum was one of only 400 recipients nationwide and only eight in Minnesota. Mr. Nelson and Miss Petta include this fact because affecting the historic property status would affect small businesses like theirs the ability to apply for these grants to pay their fair market rate to building owners such as house. So you see how these things they are tied together. Last year, when the council was last approached about this project, much time was given to the idea that businesses on our block were only there for sweetheart rent deals and that without rent increases, the buildings would become economically inviable. Shortly after last city council meeting regarding this property, we entered into a new three-year rental agreement for the space, but with a rent increase of nearly 100% over those 3 years and a 60% increase already instated. We felt that the new rate and term was a fair adjustment to support the building, but at a pace we were only able to manage by making significant changes. The important thing to us was remaining in that space. Not just for location, but because of the history of these community spaces. Our music scene is about to undergo significant changes without Thesis Beer Project, Rochester Thaw, changes to the Chateau, making it critical for us to maintain our space and keep Rochester's musical legacy alive. The full version of this letter, I believe, was emailed to council members. Um, I do have a full version of the letter. Um, including different historical photographs of the property and photo um, taken at TROM events. Um, and so that is my conclusion of representing the owners of Treatum. as myself, Amy. I just want to say I am so proud of all of these young people who got up here tonight to speak. Uh it's certainly not easy to approach the council and talk about um these very large and meaningful adult issues that um can be hard to navigate and hard to understand. Um, I I know um it's hard to be a property owner. I don't think that Mr. Henderson is, you know, this this evil person. It's It's not about that. Simply just simply this um appeal really should be denied. it was already denied by the HPC and I just have not seen evidence um within that um that large multi-page proposal. Gosh, I can't remember how many pages it was. I did read the whole thing. [clears throat] >> Thank you, Miss Garinson. >> Yes. So, thank you very much and thank you council. And may I present the letter? >> And if if you give that to the the city clerk? >> I certainly I certainly will. Thank you so much for your time. So uh we are on our final page. I have seven more uh folks that have signed up. Uh after uh the seven people speak, I will ask if there is anyone else who wishes to speak. So, if you're thinking about wanting to speak, I think if you can let our city someone from our city clerk staff know that so that we uh we are uh very efficient in uh getting those folks on uh the list. After the last person speaks, I will close the public hearing and we will take a 10-minut break. So, with that, I'm on the last page. I have seven signed up. And the next person is Andrew Kaf. >> All right. Good evening, Mayor Norton, City Council, uh, Council President Schub. Um, I have essentially six takeaways that I kind of want to talk about here relative to agenda item G1. Um, I agree with the HBC's majority viewpoint that the pro uh proposed addition re and rehabilitation violates several standards and the secretary of the interior's guidelines for treatment of historic buildings and support the denial of the COA. Uh, key takeaway number two. Um while the city and the applicant did their due diligence and provided significant information relative to the project, uh I believe that city staffers at the community development committee got their decision wrong in initially recommending a COA. Uh in three reasons for that. Um the interpret uh the interpretation of the standards referenced was very uh narrow and highlighted certain aspects of the proposal that supported a narrative while disregarded or minimized others. Uh the community de development committee did not consider the full scope of the project especially relative to other cultural and historical landmarks in the city and their views of said landmarks. Um we've heard a little bit about this namely the the viewshed and spatial relationships of the plumber building and the Kaylor sign. Um the community development committee consistently used conjecture and opinion to reach its decision to recommend a COA approval which is in direct contradiction to the modus operande of this process. Um the third takeaway I have here is in my professional capacity as a small business owner I do a significant amount of computer AED design. That would be CAD work. That's drafting of ground plans, sections, elevations, perspectives. Basically what you saw in the submitt um when I reviewed all the documents that were in the submitt there were several things that were missing from these drawings. Um there were key annotations that were missing. There were dimensions that were missing. Um there was uh sorry uh there was not north stamps to orient somebody looking at the drawings. Uh the drawings omit built architecture such as sidewalks, roads, trees, and alleyways. Uh the drawings lack proper use of line weights which are different thicknesses of lines to make drawings easier to understand and they do not include any use of color to graphically explain architectural elements. Um additionally beyond the drawings the renderings are also inefficient. Um the renderings do not show in any any existing detail of the architectural components in the area that would ideally be included to adjudicate the project in totality including architecture of the Cathy's rooftop and views of both the plumber building and the Kaylor sign. Um, lastly, in this regard, the use of white model boxes to show other existing architectural components minimizes the viewer's ability to see how the proposed addition specifically violates the spatial relationships uh found spatial relationship language, excuse me, found in standards 2 and nine. So, from a professional perspective and a drafting perspective, I just think we have a lot of issues with what was submitted here. Um, key finding number four, nowhere in the administrative record, which is referenced by the applicant in the appeal multiple times, nowhere in that record did I see any indication that the applicant engaged the business owning tenants about this proposal or engaged the public, which I do not think shows a good faith effort. Um, and just a couple more for you here in my minute and a half remaining. Um, I was very surprised, I would say maybe even shocked that a private developer, um, or property owner can go directly to a small city department and if things go their way could potentially have a massive landscaping, altering, construction project approved with virtually no tenant, community, or public input. Um, that seems undemocratic and that seems deceptive. And finally, I also think it's very surprising. um and shocking that uh the community development department process does not include any public hearings for community to offer input. Um that seems disingenuous and egregious and I hope in the future uh the council can address specifically items five and six. Thanks for your time. Have a great night. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. Next we have Dillith Albertson. Dillith, I probably messed up your name >> a little bit. Yeah, >> it's it's Danielson for the record, but >> Dan, where's the D in there? Okay, go ahead. [laughter] >> My name is Dylan. I'm 27 years old. Most of my life has been spent in and around here. I spent a lot of days at the Mayo RNR as a kid, graduated from RCTC. I worked two jobs here and have to commute about 40 minutes to do anything. Uh, so Roster is effectively my home. Uh, this city has one of the greatest music and arts community that I've ever seen easily in Minnesota or anywhere else for that matter. Um, so we want to preserve what little joy we still have left. And I'm going to point a little thread here, so bear with me. Uh, but the average person is struggling to get by. A conservative estimate tells us about 25% of American families live paycheck to paycheck. Productivity increases. Wage wages remain mostly stagnant. We have an affordability crisis and economic inequality and mobility is now worse than it was in the guilded age. All that to say, in a deeply inequitable society, one where face-to-face human interaction is less common than in generations past, where we live more alienated and isolated lives, people need to feel like they're a part of something that matters, something beyond ourselves at the bare minimum. Uh, local businesses in general and our arts community in particular give so many of us our belonging. It's a huge part of our identity. Um, unfortunately, not only the average person's wallet being plundered, but our cultural institutions and third spaces have been under attack by corporate interests for decades. It's nothing new, and we need the wholly rejected at every turn or risk seating even more ground to people who don't have any of our interests at heart. What good is more apartments if the average person will struggle to afford it? And what good is a city if there are no spaces for us to belong? What's the point of working if we can't immerse ourselves in the world around us when we're off the clock? Our local businesses matter. Without them, we're a monotonous corporate slopcape. We become just another soulless copypaste city where you can get the same Chipotle bowl you get in Florida, the same Walmart you can get in Washington State, and drive the same god-awful stro you would in Terote, Indiana. We're losing thesis beer project, and that's already too steep of a price for me to pay. We're Rochester, and that means something to me. The arts are not just commercial, they're essential. These aren't just businesses, they're cultural pillars to us. Triome, Cafe, Steam, Threshold, they're essential. Treeome is a wonderful place. me and so many others go to for concerts. I performed at Cafe Steam in 2024 for Thawfest and it's our closest thing to a third place that I can think of. Threshold and arts, they welcome me without judgment. We can't afford the cost of losing functional and mind you commercially viable businesses and let them be eaten alive by disinterested capital. Artistic fulfillment and collective purpose supersedes private interests now and forever. We work to live, not live to work. And we require communal spaces. To put it plainly, me and many others don't believe that this is a community development. All we see is the acceleration of community collapse. Given that these businesses are not shutting down naturally, I think there's no other way to phrase it. Someone earlier called it suicide. I would beg to differ. It's not minced words. I think it's a form of cultural homicide. These places are all we have. We have all these nice sayings like people over profit and all that abstract idealist language isn't for nothing. But these people are in front of you. They're real. They're here. [snorts] Um people watching outside, people in their homes. So, uh, self-s serving short-term gain for one man is never ever worth the human cost that's right in front of you. Three failures should be enough to strike out. But let's make something clear. We're all here today again to reject every attempt to destroy our irreplaceable arts community. We will again if and when we need to. Hope you make the right choice. >> Thank you. Next, we have John Creel. Goodness. Madame Mayor, Mr. President, members of the council, I've been going to city council meetings since approximately 1964 when the city of Rochester rejected given the uh piece of property that now uh is a parking lot where Kmart is, the Graina. Been going there since here again since ' 64. This is uh this is epic for me tonight. I'm exuberant. I'm more exuberant than I've ever been in my life because of the people that have spoken here tonight. This gives me hope. So much hope. Because attending all these city council meetings has been a drag. It's been an embarrassment because our city has freely given away its soul. It's even doing it more so now with the help of tiff money, with the help of outside landlords that could care less about the fabric of this particular community. It's being discovered by outside money so that it can turn into something that in the future the youth will leave this community because there's nothing here. There's nothing here of uniqueness. [snorts] So here again, I'm given hope for the first time since about 1964. I thank everybody that came here before me because maybe some of you will stay here in the future. My family has been here for six generations. I don't know what that means. I guess it means that there was hope someplace along the way so they would stay here again for a few more generations. But the vision is in your hands. If you lack the vision and do not understand the fabric of a community and what a community is, the youth will come here for some training and then they will leave because this is a bland, sterile community. Let us not be that way in the future. I ask you to deny the project as put forth again for the what is it the fourth time by Hal and his team the commission HPC who are the experts not city staff have given you their findings. Now I will ask you this. Do experts contact other experts? As I understand it, the experts here within the city council did not contact Mr. Coupe. So why would they not seek another expert in the state of Minnesota? It's a phone call away. That negates their ability to even be called experts. The experts are HPC. They are a commission. They're advisory to you. You take their word over city staff. They are not the experts. Now, I want to touch on a few points that uh Bob Heis, I believe, said. If I'm not mistaken, I think there were some incorrect details there. He said downtown business owners support this. He asked for data and facts. Where are those data and facts? He said development is not wanted. Really? Where's that? Where's that data and where are those facts? Maybe we got too many cranes around here. I don't know. There are, if I'm not mistaken, the mail clinic has 31 surface parking lots that are yet to be developed. We have other land available to be developed. It's development ready. Collect some tax base from that. Uh and I believe uh Bob mentioned that the alley has been enhanced. Really? I've been to many studies over the years where we talked about enhancing alleys. He also said that they they um uh enhanced the alley by I guess 318 comments dealing with a waist stream. If this project takes place, people are not going to walk through that alley. It's not going to be an inviting space. Put yourself in a car coming from the south driving north. What are you going to see? Are you going to be invited into a community that welcomes you? that that is. Thank you very much for your time and the vision is yours. >> Thank you, Mr. Croisso. >> Thank you very much. >> Uh Lucy Cisso, >> you said my name, right? >> Yes, I did. Lucy Creel, >> number 34. I've been counting. Um good evening. Um, good evening. Thank you for your time. Good to see all of your faces. My name is Lucy. I'm the owner of Daton Books located 319 321, which shares a brick wall with the adjacent buildings in question. Its only entrance is via the alleyway, which is very unique between third and fourth. Um, I'm a second generation business owner in the historic district with the familiar family antiques business being an anchor and steward of the district for 50ish years on historic third. So, um, my business, John's business, as well as many small, unique, quirky enterprises that are located in contributing buildings would be directly affected by this proposal in a multitude of ways. some who haven't been mentioned tonight. Cathy's, um, Tap House, Threshold Arts, um, Solflow, Rach, Ly's, Bitter and Poor, The Garren, Smoke Shop, Historic Francis Apartments, Taipop, those are also all businesses which are loved and coveted in this corridor. Keep in mind that the alleyway is the lifeblood of all of these businesses, um, even to include the non-contributing complex of 318 Common. So, I know waste isn't pretty, but it it definitely is part of this ecosystem, and I see it all the time. I don't feel as though the um the west side of these buildings has been discussed enough as being um appropriate and essential for these businesses to function. Um so, why do people stay in Rochester? I can't even turn around because I'll I'll Yeah. Because um you know, everybody said it in this room, right? Like the wind is in our sales. We we've already won because we have this community here. But I just wanted to share um some of the things people have said to me, just testimonies over just being open 9 months. Our senses are overwhelmed. This is a place of solace in between our appointments. This is where I take my family when I when they visit. I made my first true friend here. How you experience this part of town makes you want to stay, right? We know this is true. Um, you already know this. You've heard all the testimonies tonight from all of these incredible, articulate neighbors. This district and this neighborhood is vibrant and animated. And the historic district soul is our ballast. So when you hear on repeat tonight, I love X, I love Y, I love going to this music thing, it's not even just affection. It's this um need for safe inspiring third places that are human scale in size and in soul. Okay? And there's a lot of names for it. It can be your tribe, your respit, the spirit, softness, culture, connection, but it's all the same thing. We've heard it tonight. Pride for this downtown neighborhood. Um I just want to briefly touch on um how this is an unnecessary um development and just touch on state historic preservation office should have been consulted still needs to be considered. Um, these have always been commercial buildings, standard one. The viewshed to include adjacent contributing buildings, standard two. Um, you've heard these all before, okay? And and just to the applicant, regardless of the amount of hours and accommodations and discussions and effort, um, that does not equal that um, a home run has been hit here. Third time isn't the charm. It's not right. It's not right for this place. Um, so when I'm thinking about, you know, are are we going to see are we going to get what we see here? I'm not sure. Um, I I loved one of the last speakers talking about I feel like the insufficient um responses to the standards to the violated standards, not just one, okay, but six, and that there is a sense of um not good faith by not directly addressing these concerns from community members. Um, so when we're um, especially when we're engaging community history, right, there there's a level of responsibility to the stewardship of um, history that is not just our own. It's it's other people who have been in the room tonight and who aren't in the room tonight who share stories about this block that is so essential and there's a responsibility there. Um, both staff and the applicant have acted out of step with the UDC preservation standards in addition to undermining the expertise of the commissioners who serve on our HPC. Um, please do not deny these findings. Please uphold the denial. Um, you know, in with the old. Let us not lose our imaginations of what we can create here. Um, I was a Main Street Grant recipient, so were many others, and a lot of money has been invested into this community already. um also into the downtown commercial historic district which is our future history. So I just ask you um this is really hard work. We would all agree and at the end of the day it's always worth it. Thank you for your time. >> Thanks Miss Creel. Next we have Emily Brit Juan. >> Good evening madame mayor and members of the council. My name is Emily Britesman and I am the mother of three teenage boys. My kids don't play sports. They don't yet have jobs to go to. And but you know, they they are readers. They're artists and they're mu musicians. And they are also chronically at a loss for things to do in Rochester that are age appropriate and safe. Treatum is the only business in town that they are actually excited to go to with me and spend time together as a family digging through bins looking for albums. The records we buy there together give us something to talk about and connect on long after we leave the shop. I can honestly say this business has helped my family stay bonded through the teenage years. And that's a challenge, right? I've also found Treum to be a safe space for my kids to hang out at. Something that, by the way, we did not have when I was a teenager here. It is the only venue in town where they can spend an evening with their friends listening to live music and not be around people drinking and all that comes with that. Hundreds of kids attend shows at Treatum on a regular basis. When they are there, they actually put away their phones and engage with music and the atmosphere while enjoying each other's company. And if you have teenagers, you know that this is an increasingly rare phenomenon. If this is replaced with apartments, there's literally nowhere else in town that these kids can go that will fill the same need that they have. Um, I've also attended multiple community events at these businesses. They actively support local artists like my husband who and it gives them a space to to share themselves of their work. Developers care about getting a return for their investors, but the city residents will be the ones that pay the cost if we lose this space to development. The construction of the apartments alone would do these businesses in. Losing these spaces would mean more than losing a coffee shop or an art shop and a record store. They are c cultural cornerstones in a company town where most downtown public spaces are not actually for the residents of Rochester. Rochester cannot survive on Mayo alone. And people may move here to work at the hospital, but it's places like Triom, Arttheads, and Cafe Steam that get them to stay. Please vote to deny the appeal and protect these important spaces for our community and for our kids. >> Thank you. Next, we have Jess Garcia. >> Good evening, Council President Schub, members of the city council, Mayor Norton. My name is Jess Garcia. I am a W4 resident and mayoral candidate who cares for and frequents these historic businesses we're all trying to protect tonight. We have all been watching in horror as businesses in our city have been struggling and or closing down for the last few months, seeking clear and direct help from city hall. Do not let these businesses be the next casualties. You have the opportunity to show up for them for all of us by denying this appeal. Upholding the denial of the certificate of appropriateness as determined by our local heritage preservation commission will signal to the community that you care about what is important to us. It will signal to small business owners that you value them. It will signal to building owners that they cannot treat their tenants the way they reportedly do and expect to be rewarded for it by us offering them more business. When the requesttor of this appeal is some someone I'm told accepts rent payments from tenants while allowing buildings to fall in disrepair after it's repeatedly brought to his attention and some other issues you heard from other speakers before me. That is very concerning when the outlined standards by the Secretary of the Interior are not followed as the HPC outlined which they're now trying to discredit. That's also concerning. It does not seem this project has the best interests of Rochester residents or small business tenants in mind. That is made particularly apparent when the apartments they hope to build would be housing students that would want to be able to access the businesses targeted and made vulnerable by this project. And these young people who spoke before me are all confirming these businesses are what will attract and keep them here. So, city leaders, I believe that if you have the courage today to preserve the historic district you helped create, you will help to maintain the vibrancy of downtown. You will ensure the culture and community created on that block can flourish and expand outward. You will be helping to maintain a city culture that preserves our heritage and uplifts the everyday resident and small business owner over corporate interests. So, I urge you, deny this appeal. It is not good for our historic downtown. It is not good for our small business community. It is not good for the people of our city. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Next, we have Michelle Gberger. >> Is she still here? >> Oh, you're okay. >> Okay. Next we have uh uh Kristen Meyer. >> Hello. Um thank you all for listening to me. This is my first city hall meeting, so a little nervous. Um um first of all, I'd like to say that um I it's just amazing um all of the the businesses in this block that are available to young people. Um, where I grew up, we had a TCBY and a Perkins. Um, and um, so it's it's wonderful. They know obviously what they have, and it needs to stay where it is. Um, seven years ago, um, I brought my bought my dream home in Rochester, a 97y old home that, um, all the people who lived in it before me took excellent care of. Um, and I intend to do the same. Um, I don't consider myself an owner of this home. I consider myself a caretaker. And that's what all of us are of Rochester and the buildings and businesses in history we have here. And um I would just like everyone to consider that for the future. Would you like a future with, you know, these giant [sighs] Oh, good lord. Um, sorry. [laughter] Um, unfeilling, you know, um, I don't I don't even know the words. It's just it's not what's fair to Rochester and our history and the people who live here. So, um, thank you for listening to me. >> Thank you. Next, we have Nick Noatne. All right, thanks for uh listening to everybody today. Uh I am a small business owner. I'm a co-owner of My Town, My Music and the festival director of the Rochester Thought Music Festival that ran from 2019 to 2026. Um and the heart of our festival was in this historic district. um the incredible businesses that open their doors to us as a company to bring thousands of musicians over the years of the event. Um it just speaks to the character of people that run these businesses and operate and hold these buildings. Um and I think it's so crucial uh to having this vibrant arts and music scene. Um, we've worked with thousands of musicians that we've brought to Rochester for the first time and the first thing they tell us about is how special this district truly is in the shape that it's in right now. Um, we hear from folks all over the country when they come here of, "Oh, I went to Cafe Steam. I had the best latte of my life. I went and saw some crazy record I haven't seen in 20 years at Tree Dome." It's all of these little things that add to these very crucial third spaces that make our city very unique and it gives people a reason to come back. That's I think the biggest thing. Um, anytime we worked with anybody that came through the festival and spent time in this district, the next question I got was, "How do I get back? How do I come back?" I think if we were to impact this area, you would be having less people asking that question. And I think that's a very dangerous situation that could happen if this building goes through. Um, another note that I just cannot not touch on, there is, and it was mentioned before, there's so much pride with the folks that have come up and spoke, especially the young folks in our community that are standing up for their music, their arts, their creative spaces, their spaces where they feel safe um, in a world that seemingly tries to make it harder and harder to feel safe every single day. Um, so I think the big point to take is please do stand up to what the historic preservation said and keep these buildings intact. Um, it is the heartbeat of our arts community. It's the heartbeat of our creative economy here. Um, and that ripples all the way throughout to the edges of the city. Um, so yeah, thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. Noatne. Next up, we have Andy Smith. Mayor Norton, [sighs] city council members, and very hardworking uh city staff that sits here as well. Uh you guys know me. I I've talked to all of you many times. My name is Andy Smith. I am the state representative for this district in the uh Minnesota House. And I'm here on many different uh wearing many different hats. The one is of course small business owner. Uh I want to come and defend my fellow small business owners. Uh two, as someone who loves the arts and who has tried to add to the arts in uh this city and has been so grateful for those who have added to that arts community, but I do feel that I also am here a bit in my official capacity as the representative of this district and this people because I have heard about this particular issue and this vote a lot. Um and uh I'm happy to be here to tell you this. The Rochester people are optimistic. They're wonderful people. We all love Rochester. We're excited about the future of our city. But I do think that there is a growing suspicion with the people of Rochester that that future is going to be guided not by what is best for the vast majority of people of Rochester, what will make their lives better, more enjoyable, more fulfilled, but rather by landlords, executives, and corporations. And I can't honestly think of a better example of why people have that fear than the idea that to revitalize downtown, we would have to mortally injure the part of our downtown that is most alive. And we know it's the most alive because of what we heard tonight. You heard from kids. You heard from the parents of those kids. You heard from people who have been here. their family has been here for 50-ish years to people who have moved here this year. To a couple people who haven't even moved here yet, but are excited to move to Rochester eventually because of places like this downtown. Thank you for listening to these voices. I'm happy to add mine to the loud chorus that asks you please deny this appeal. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um that uh concludes all the people that have signed up. I will ask is there anyone else wishing to be heard on this item before the uh public hearing? >> Anyone else wishing to be heard on this uh item, please come forward, state your name, and you have up to five minutes, but you don't have to use it. >> No worries. I'll try. >> Did you already speak on this? >> No, I was here earlier. Uh, I was for the public's uh the open speech session. >> Okay, very good. >> Well, I'm Ryland Wolf. I am the affforementioned UMR student of this area. I want to say that my time is at UMR as a student has been very fun and enriching. However, the greatest sentiment that I have heard amongst my fellow UMR students has been there is nothing to do here. I have had many UMR friends who have transferred to other schools because they have found no fulfillment. I watched just down the street as a building was turned to rubble and it became the laughingtock of the school because it was charmingly hid behind a chicken wire fence with fake vines. Uh I would also like to mention that the establishments at this sector being mainly Triome and Cafe Steam are places where my classmates work at and where we have a lot of fun. Many days we go to Cafe Steam to study. And I remember the many frustrating nights of my classmates as they tried to hammer in the concept of bone layers. Uh and then after we had our time at Cafe Steam, where my friends shook and threatened to throw coffee in my face as they could not get the point across, we went to Tree Dome to go have a night where we sung and laughed and worked off the previous stress. I'm in my third year of nursing school and I'm also currently a healthcare provider. When I think about Rochester and I think about the greatness that our healthc care industry is here, I also think about how I want our patients to not only remember the walls of their hospital room, but also the culture of this city and the art that is a part of it. And as everybody knows, there's already way too much construction in Rochester. And I would like to ask why add more now. Thank you for your time and I hope you will make the right choice again as you have three times before. >> Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. This is a public hearing. Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item, please uh identify yourself and uh and you have five up to five minutes. You don't have to use them. >> Yeah. Well, okay. Uh, I'm Emily Felos. I am a community member. I work in many places around town in the community. And all I have to say is echoing everybody else's statements. Obviously, um, that block is very important. Um, I've seen firsthand what another person was describing, just dozens of teens out on the sidewalk during breaks between uh, music enjoying the one place that's not like age restricted. There's no alcohol, that sort of thing. And personally, sometimes like if I'm having a if I'm having a rough day, it's middle of winter, which you know how winters are here. Uh sometimes knowing that there's like something happening at Tree Dome is what gets me up and moving and going out when normally I wouldn't be doing anything downtown. I always go to the business businesses next door, buy something there. It's uh it's a great little block and it's one of the highlights of this city. So, >> thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone else wishing to be heard, step forward, please identify yourself. You have up to five minutes. >> Hi, I'm Liam McCarron. Uh, I'm a newish resident here. I moved here about two years ago from Queens, New York. A lot busier than here. Huge, vibrant art scene. I've worked in the scene over in New York for many years. I worked for both acts big and small. And I saw how important it was for those communities to come together. And I sadly was forced to move out of this city that I called home my entire life because it was just getting too expensive and just unlivable due to all these developments of, you know, rent going up and just hard for me to live in that place. So I moved to Rochester and as soon as I came here, whenever I tell someone where I'm from, they always have the same answer whenever I tell them I'm from New York. They say, "Why? Why are you here? It's boring. There's nothing to do. There's so many other places you could be. Why did you choose here?" And you know, I always, you know, do the joke, oh, it's cheaper, etc. But I really found in the short time here, I found a really close community. And I really, I guess I've discovered the whole thing of Midwest kindness in Minnesota nice firsthand. And I've seen that these communities, especially in places like Steam and places like Triome, they're kind of the only place I really have a whole lot of fun here. You know, [laughter] I find myself with my friends uh that I met here and I asked them, "Hey, is there anything you want to do?" And most of the time we're always sending each other on Instagram posts of concerts they're doing at Triome. We're always talking to each other about, you know, let's just go to Steam, you know, read a book and have a good time there. We don't even have to talk to each other. And to see that these communities are getting crushed by these developers that force me not only out of my home in New York, but forced me out of my apartment here in downtown myself because they're turning down to make more luxury apartments and these fancy apartments for their downtown. It's just heartbreaking to see a city that when I moved here, I saw had so much opportunity and could have just I it felt like a city that was just rising rising and now I'm like it's crumbling just so quick. I thought it was, you know, going to get so big. So, I I I just really want to see this place succeed because it is my home and these are the places that as everyone seems to agree or make you want to stay and if they're gone, I I don't know. I don't I don't know if there's going to be a whole lot of reasons for me to stay around here. >> Thank you for your time. >> Thank you for stepping up. Uh this is a public hearing and anyone else wishing to be heard, please step forward. Uh state your name and you have up to five minutes. >> Uh good evening. Um my name is Chris Kepki. I I'm just just a guy. I'm just a person who lives in Ward One. Um and I just I felt compelled to come to this meeting and I've sat out in the lobby for the last three hours. Uh for me, a perfect weekend day. I have two young daughters. I have an 11 and an 8-year-old. We would go to the library. Then we'd go to Cafe Steam and I get a night howler to wake up and um we would go to the different districts um the different buildings that are being impacted by tonight's hearing. And um for me that's a a perfect Saturday. Uh and I'm really going to miss that if that goes away. Um but what I have to comment on as a lifelong Rochester resident and sitting out there during these last three hours is this community has given me so much pride and I can't quite um overstate watching the the youth just the people with passion come up and talk about this and it gives me so much pride in the things that they're doing here. Um, and for me, it would be bad to lose that perfect Saturday, but for them, um, quite the community. Um, and I I am so grateful, and I don't know if you were aware of this community that was here, but I am so glad to, uh, hear them speak their support and their passion, and I really appreciate that, and I don't want to take any of your time. Thank you. >> Thank you. This is a public hearing. If you, uh, wish to be heard on this item, please step forward, state your name, and you have up to five minutes. >> Hi, I'm Lucy Rasmmanson. Um, I have been a very thorough member of this community that these businesses has have provided for me. I have learned so much about music. I've discovered so much so many new people in this community. I have discovered myself really as who I am as a person. And to think that this would all be destroyed for some bland buildings that have no meaning, no community, nothing that provides anything for this community would kill me inside to see something like this be destroyed for unaffordable housing for these students. I mean, I'm barely holding on as it is. And to see that it would all be destroyed by, you know, these these kids, they come here to learn and at the end of the day, you they come here to pay for school. You think they have the money to pay for expensive housing that's going to destroy something that they can do in their spare time where something else can be built elsewhere. I have found such a great community through these buildings. I have grabbed so many refreshing drinks from Steam. I have found so many amazing records from Treeome and they have opened up so many opportunities for you know possibilities for people who want to be in bands and form these different kinds of communities and seeing this it really hurts me and I really I deny this. I do not want this to happen. That is all I have to say. >> Thank you. Uh this is a public hearing. Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward one final time. Anyone else wishing to be heard on this item? Uh, I will close the public hearing. At this point, what we are going to do, and you are all welcome to stay, and I hope you all do. Uh, we are going to take a 10-minute break. When we get back, the applicant will have 5 minutes to respond to uh the public hearing and any closing comments. And then after that, myself, my colleagues, the mayor will have an opportunity to uh pose questions to staff and the applicant and after that we will uh deliberate on a decision. So with that, we are on a 10m minute break. Uh before we continue on uh item G1, I just want to let the council know that uh under our rules, uh we are not to begin a public hearing after 10:15 this evening. After G1 we have G2, G3 and G4 which are public hearings. So uh depending on the length of the discussion on G1, we may bump ourselves up to that 10 15 times. So, I am uh wondering if council members have any interest in suspending the rules, which I think G2, three, and four may be able to be dispensed with more rapidly. if there is a um a desire to suspend the rules and I don't know if uh according to our rules we can postpone discussion of G1 and and then come back to it after uh dispensing with 2, three and four. Mr. Spindler Greg, >> yes, Mr. President, with a supermajority vote, you could. >> Okay. So, is there interest in suspending the rules and pausing the progress that we have made on G1, which is all the way through 3 hours of public testimony, we will go to G2, G3, and G4 so that we are able to hold those public hearings before our time certain of 10:15 and then we will come back to G1. Is there a motion? >> Make a motion. Uh, council member Keane, ju >> just before a motion, can is is there a possibility of suspending the rules and starting the public hearings after 10:15 or is that not an option for us? >> That is an option as well. >> Okay. Council President, that would be my preference that we continue on with our G1 work and suspend vote now to suspend our rules to start our other public hearings later and see if we can get a supermajority there. Yeah. Okay. Is that sound is that? >> So that would be my motion. >> Is that second? >> Okay. There is a motion on the table to uh to suspend the rule that uh we actually can have public hearings after 10:15. Made by council member Keane and seconded by council member Doring. Any further discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any oppose say nay. we are able to hold public hearings after 10:15. Thank you very much. Uh we will move back to G1 and at this point we will hear from our applicants and uh the applicant you have five minutes to respond to any questions, things you heard during the public hearing and any other information that you would like to share with the council. >> Appreciate that. Council President, council members and mayor, one thing I know for sure after tonight is the arts and the music and the culture, they're not leaving Rochester. The passion that filled this room with the arts and the love for music and love for the downtown convinced me they're not leaving. The great thing about this proposed project, we're not asking them to leave. We're not destroying any buildings in the down downtown downtown [snorts] district. We're not proposing to destroy the downtown district. What the passion shows me is we all love that place of our first kiss with our wife or our spouse or a partner. We all love those special places where we celebrate things. We want to keep them to ourselves. We don't want others to share in that >> and that's what's happening. Uh, excuse me. >> Please, no response from the audience or we will have to have you removed from the audience. Consider continue. Mr. Hass, >> we're proposing to bring more people into the downtown community to provide a place homes for others to come into the downtown community. And that passion is so deep that they don't want that. This proposal is about inclusivity and broadening the rich history of Rochester in a way that preserves the historic integrity of the downtown district as confirmed by the experts, the city, city development team who live with the UDC, who live with the secretary of interior standards on a daily basis. You've heard people come up here and say that the standards aren't met. The HPC concluded only that they're not being met with the proposed project. They provided no factual support. I know the city, somebody said it was a staffing issue. It's not. The city requested the HPC to provide findings of fact. verbally requested that and they didn't do it. The only information in the record that that is of any substance factual findings comes from the city, your experts, your development team that found that this new revised proposed project satisfies all 10 standards. It complies with what the city asked the in HGT team to do and they did that over months of meetings, over months of communications to level set. This is an appeal from the HPC's denial based on standards. This is a standardsbased analysis. I can stand up here and be emotional and compassionate about the community that I have found in Rochester, but that's what I have to say. What I feel is not part of a standardsbased analysis that you have to consider. Your experts, the city did that analysis through all 10 of them. We addressed it in our comprehensive appellet brief and appeal documents. The record from the HPC provides no factual support for denying the request for a certificate of appropriateness. It actually contravenes the recommendation of the experts in the room. Those experts have now come to you and said, "We request for action that you overturn the HPC's denial." And they provided reasons under all 10 of those standards that show that this new proposed project complies with every one of those standards. Old buildings bring challenges. The rents that people pay are below market. They don't even cover the property taxes for the buildings. >> Who cares? >> Uh please be please keep your thoughts to yourself. Continue. Mr. Hash has >> old buildings bring challenges. Different types of shops come in. We're already seeing it on Broadway. THC being sold in shops, adult only stores on Broadway. They bring an element that does not bring character to a historical district. What we're offering is an opportunity to continue the historic nature of downtown Rochester while also growing downtown Rochester, making it more inclusive to more people that can take advantage of the rich history and culture, the arts and the music and the shops downtown. And we ask you to overturn the HPC's denial. >> Thank you, Mr. Hash. Uh at this time uh I will invite my colleagues to ask questions of uh staff and or the applicant. Council member Keane. Yeah, I I had a question for staff uh just going through this. Much of the public input are items about impact to local small businesses uh and the space that has become the anchor for these local arts communities. Um, what are the decision criteria that one through 10 that have anything to do with the businesses that currently operate within in the space the the historic building that's being under question for the certificate? >> Who's taking this one? M. Woodward. Go ahead. >> Uh, thank you, Council Member Keane. Um, the certificate of appropriateness deals with the alteration that's being proposed in to the building. It doesn't have anything to do with the existing businesses within the building. So, it's evaluating how the alterations to the exterior or the additions, how that has an impact on the overall structures and the buildings, not necessarily on what the existing businesses are. >> Okay. Do you consider that to be like a rigorous sort of thing or is it a flaw in the criteria we're using that we don't consider what's happening in the building right now? um the rehabilitation standards don't really consider that and that along with the design guidelines are really focused on what is the design of that building and what are those elements that need to be considered in terms of the overall um additions alterations and things that are happening with those buildings and those are the primary of what we're evaluating as part of the certificate of appropriateness. >> Okay. Thank you. And then I also had a question for the for the owner owner representation just comparing this project to projects we've seen before and turned down. Um it appears to me that this new product is better protects the historic streetscape. Um but I also want to confirm is it and it does these stepbacks but I also am trying to understand can I assume that this project is economically viable and then this is a way now that the building is maintains historic preservation but is also maintained. Yes. >> Just Okay. All right. So, good. Good. I'm glad to hear that because I I will be surprised then if this group comes back in the next year or two saying we need public support for something because if it's economically viable, you should be able to handle it yourself and not depend on public uh support for that. >> Yeah. I mean, certainly as we go forward, certainly if there's public funds that are available to anybody else that would also be available to us, we should consider it. But it doesn't mean that we have to pursue it. But I wouldn't want to be locked in right now to say that we're not allowed to apply for public funds that are available to any other developer. >> No, good point. But I but but I'm trying to establish that this is an economically viable project. You wouldn't come in here with a test that said but for some support that the city or DMC would give you, we can't do this because you're coming in with an economically viable project. Well, we'd like to think so, but part of the economics is sort of tiff funding or other public funding that may be available. I'm not saying we're asking for that right now. I I know you're not, sir, but I'm just trying to get it on there that that when I when we when we deal with this and try to say you need to come back with something that both preserves the history of the building, but is also economically viable. I I think that says that we're not coming back for other. Now, when you talk about DMC's got these grants and stuff, that's fine. >> I got you. Okay. Okay. So it's like there's a facade grant and we're working on the facades. We're not saying no, we shouldn't be able to apply for that. >> No, no, but I but but this idea of going through and coming back with the butt for test going, we want to do this, but you guys have to come to the table. I that that's not what I'm seeing what you're coming back with at this point. >> I understand. Thank you. And you're you're correct. >> Okay. >> Questions from council members? I have a question uh to uh well, first to the owner group and um Mr. Henderson, you may want to answer this as well. So, um, and this has to do with, so you're the owners of 309 to 317 Broadway, which are contributing properties to the downtown commercial historic district. So, can you talk to us about how your proposed alterations contribute to the historic district that the building is in? And when I say how it contributes to the the the historic district, looking at the objectives of uh the uh the historic district and its activation of storefronts, p public realm character, all of those pieces of uh what it means to be in a historic district. >> Yeah. Um well, honorable President Schubing and members of the council and honorable mayor Norton, uh thanks for the opportunity tonight and appreciating you listening to us as a revital period. Um there's a lot of information offered tonight that is not true. I won't go into that, but uh I wish I could if we had time. Um so to answer your question, I I think if you look at the image on the screen, essentially it's it's exactly what's there now. And uh by a development that allows us some economic vitality to work with. Um, it allows us to bring those buildings back to their original grandeur and character. Without it, they're not going to get what the HPC was hoping to get in terms of character, quality, all the things that they they're hoping to accomplish with the HPC um mantra. So um yeah, without giving us some financial viable ways of generating their level of income needed to maintain these properties, the property taxes, the insurance, the maintenance is just not a viable long-term reality. And it becomes a point we have to face that reality. We've heard a lot of passionate conversation tonight. I get it. I appreciate it. I understand it. But I've not heard a word about the five years that we've subsidized the rent at a $5 a square foot rent, almost free, and then we doubled it 100%. We did to 10. But I don't think there's anybody in this room that owns property that would say that $10 a square foot is sustainable to operate a building and maintain a quality building. >> Go ahead, Mr. Anderson. >> Sorry. Um, it's just not possible. I think you you talk to anybody that's a landlord, talk to any real estate agent that has commercial property, they will tell you the market rate is at least $25 a square foot or greater. >> Please, you are not a member of the city council or the mayor and so you do not have the right to speak right now. So please, if you would keep your thoughts to yourself, Mr. Henderson, continue. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. Um, that's all I have to say. I'm not a politician, so I have no more to say. >> Thanks for the opportunity. Appreciate it. And thanks again. >> I have a question for staff. So, and I want to talk about the um and I think it's um measure nine and it's the the whole idea of uh uh new alterations being subordinate in size, scale, material masking to the historic building and to the historic district itself, I believe. So, I'm just trying to get my head around how a sevenstory building, which is I think four or five stories higher than any of the contributing buildings with among the 31 buildings that are contributing buildings in the historic district. how that building is subordinate to the historic district or the historically the historic um contributing building. >> Thank you for the question. I will start um and provide a little bit of context. As we establish the commercial historic district, it is the collection of all of the buildings together is how it's evaluated. It's not one individual building. So as we started to evaluate the addition being put, we are evaluating how that contributes or how it aligns with the massing of the overall district and evaluating it. So it wasn't just looking at the existing properties but the overall district. And so we were looking at as we mentioned some other buildings within the district and how would it have an impact overall, not just on one specific but on the entire historic district. My understanding is though that the building you're using as the to say that it this proposal is subordinate to is a non-contributing building and it is the tallest building in the district and it is non-contributing. Why isn't it uh it uh used in relation to the building that it is becoming an alteration to? >> As we started to evaluate and then I'll let Miss Patterson Lungren jump in if she um needs to to add additional context. We're looking at how ultimately as we're looking at this addition to the building, it it really starts to mimic 318 Commons and it starts to look like an addition to that building within the historic district and that it is set back from the facades of the buildings that are facing Broadway. And so that you're still maintaining that perspective when you're on Broadway and maintaining it within the historic district, but then able to have the addition in the rear um and be able to kind of tie those together. And I'll let uh Miss Patterson Lungren also add to it. >> Uh Chair Schubing, I think your question, if I'm understanding correctly, relates, you indicated it relates to standard number nine. Um and that the size scale I'm I'm pulling just the last part of that standard um and proportion and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. So the way I read that is the property is the landmark property which is the historic district. The landmark property are not the individual buildings. They're contributing to the district. But when we're talking about protecting the integrity of the property, I read that as the property that is landmarked, which is the district in its entirety. So, we're looking at how the features, the materials, features, scale, and proportion and massing um impact the property, which is the district as a whole, which we've landmarked. >> Does that answer? >> Well, let me let me pose a hypothetical and can you go to slide 31 in the deck here? So, I have a hypothetical. if we are to uh to uh approve this appeal and I'm looking at the integrity of the historic district itself and one of the pieces that I'm really concerned with is precedent and how we are setting a precedent. So on on slide 20 31 we have a view of the non-contributing parking lot that is on the corner of Broadway and Fourth Street. Correct. That is part of the historic district. It is a parking lot right now. It's not contributing. It is adjacent to the 3 uh 18 building which is across the alley. So if we are to then uh have a sevenstory building that we say is uh is uh not it it is subordinate to other buildings uh a and I don't even know who owns that property but let's say a developer owner comes in and says I want to build a sevenstory building there on that corner which is the first block of the uh historic district going north. Will we will we have set a precedent to allow other blocks non-contributing or contributing to then scale up to seven stories, eight stories or whatever we consider whatever is considered uh subordinate to another building. >> Sure. I think we would have set the precedent to um to review the project within the context of what's what's adjacent to it. What's adjacent to that empty lot is a two-story building on Broadway and I think a three or fourtory building which is the Francis apartment to um to the west. Um and then the Hue is right there and that also is taller. So, we would be looking at how a new building in that site would relate to um to its environment um within the historic district. So, not necessarily a sevenstory building because there isn't a what 8 to 10 story building right next to it. >> I mean, and please bear with me my colleagues. I'm going to ask a maybe even more immediate one. So, if we were to um continue with this and approve this appeal and a sevenstory building goes up on the on the rear of 309 37 through 317, what prevents that sevenstory building from being uh the sub uh then uh the owner of the building to say, "Well, I want to go further uh uh forward and the sevenstory building is uh is what I'm using as a guide. I I would just note that any new if there was a new project coming in for that corner lot, that would also require a certificate of appropriateness and would have to go through and we would evaluate what that proposal is against those um design standards that have been council adopted as well as um the secretary of interior standards and evaluate those things to determine as to what Molly is saying, what is that um general look of what's happening around there. So it's we're not it doesn't necessarily mean the next one would need to be that. So the certificate of appropriateness would need to be reviewed by city teammates at that time and then it would go to the heritage preservation commission as well. >> Council members other questions I can keep going. Can I ask a question on there has been talk among the uh applicant that the HPC did not address findings. Can you clarify that? the H I think what um the clarification and I would just note is the motion that was made by the HPC um was was specific in in identifying that the building and the project didn't meet 1 2 5 6 9 and 10 um there was additional discussion at the HPC the heritage preservation commission but in terms of the motion that was taken those were the specific ones that were identified during that but there was discussion about um generally about the historic character of the property will be reta will be um would won't be retained. The project would detract and doesn't preserve the sense of history. Um these are homes to marginalized businesses. Loss of sight of Kaylor sign and plumber building. Seven stories is too big. Um and there were several other but that was summary of discussion that was had at the heritage preservation commission. The actual motion that was taken only referenced those numbers. >> Okay. Council member Palmer. >> So, how long has the staff been working on this proposal with the um applicant? >> Um I after the last request which was to remove the pro the properties from the historic district. There's been on andoff conversations I would say dur since that time period. There haven't necessarily been consistent. There's been questions asked of us um review and we've met with them on occasion. I can't say to how many, but it's probably been going on um since after that last time where there was a request to remove him from the historic district. >> And in the recommendation from the staff is that we we approve their or overturn the HBC's um recommendation. Is that correct? The recommendation that staff made to the Heritage Preservation Commission was to approve the certificate of appropriateness and the motion and our recommendation would to be overturn the Heritage Preservation Commission. >> So if I go to the next block over and we've got the Bio Business Center, I think that's nine stories. How does that fit into the historic district? >> So the bio business center is not within the historic district. >> Okay. Is the parking ramp? >> It is not. >> Okay. Is the hotel that's just to the north of this part of the district? >> No. >> So, the district kind of moves around a little bit. It doesn't like a solid block. >> It it it does move. There's a um I think we've shown that kind of district a number of times. So, it it it kind of goes along there and it shifts in terms of what is contributing and non-contributing properties within the historic district. >> Okay. Can I ask a question on the developer? >> Uh go ahead. >> Um >> forward Mr. The question is is last time if you wanted to take the whole building down, you didn't want to do that and it was about a million dollars just to keep the facade. I'm assuming there's an added cost to to just working it in the back of this building in the alley. Is is is there added cost to that or would it be just cheaper to tear the whole building down and just start from scratch? >> Well, it certainly be less expensive to >> Can you get closer to the microphone, Mr. >> Council President? Yes, it would be less expensive to tear the building down, but uh there are and there are added costs related to the project in uh keeping the culture of the alley and trying to enhance the alley and and do the things that Hal and Grant have already started in the alley. >> And you're adding 35 apartments >> roughly 37 I think. >> Density to downtown. >> Yes. >> Okay, >> Mayor Norton. Yeah, this this has been an interesting uh process and I guess um in talking to some former city council members, I would say throughout this process, Mr. Henderson has been asked to keep coming back with something else that preserves the historic integrity and this is closer to what the council had been asking for. So I want to acknowledge that you have heard what they have said over time and have made changes every time and you are bringing something different forward this time. So I want to acknowledge that. I do I think the question um probably ties a little bit um on to I think what uh council member Palmer was getting at but but I want to ask it very specifically. A person buys a building or a set of buildings and they own them. It's their property. They can rent. They can leave them empty. They can do whatever they want. And we have some wonderful businesses that have been allowed to be there. does, and I don't know if this is for probably for staff, but does a building owner that happens to have that bu the the building or buildings that are then designated as his as historic, do they have the right to remove those buildings completely from a block? Um, we do have a process in place. If you are trying to um submit for a demolition permit, then you would be required to to remove the property from the historic district and show that it is no longer contributing to the historic district. That's not >> exactly getting to the to the answer. If someone owns property and they don't want it anymore and they own it and it's theirs, does our designation as a historic district mean they no longer have control over what they do with their buildings and their property? >> No, within the historic district there are ways that you we go about this process of making changes to it. So they still have the ability to make changes es interior changes aren't reviewed by the heritage preservation commission. It's only exterior in terms of additions or things that are happening. So there is a process >> and does that process include removal of buildings. >> The process to to remove a building would be that someone was submitting for a demolition and they would need to remove it from request removal from the historic district. >> And does the do do does this city or the HPC have the right to tell someone who owns property that they cannot get rid of that property? that property could be sold. So, it doesn't mean that that property owner has to maintain that. They could sell the property. It would still be within the historic district because the historic district is an overlay zone within our UDC. So, the what I'm trying to get at is that if a person owns property and they decide they don't want that property, they want something else, we have a process to go through to modify that property to make it appropriate for the historic district we've designated. >> That is correct. I guess I'm I'm trying to get at do they have the right to just get rid of the building, demolish it because they're not So, so my council member is saying a a business owner really doesn't own that building and have the right to decide what to do with it because the HPC won't let them. I mean, I'm trying to really understand that because I don't want to put us in a position where buildings will be demolished because we're not allowing them to be modified. So, I'm trying to get at do they have the right to remove their buildings because they don't want them they want them to be something else or have we disallowed an owner from a building to to control his building. So I I I think I understand what you're trying to get at and I think that's where within the unified development code within the heritage preservation overlay there is identified in terms of if you wanted to be removed from historic district you wanted to demolish it there's a process to identify that there's a process if you want to make an alteration to your building um and that doesn't prevent anyone from selling their building to somebody else or utilizing it in within the interior in a different way but in terms of removing it are demolishing the entire structure that is a contributing building and identified within the historic district. Um that is a process that you'd have to go to to remove it from and that comes before the city council to remove it from the historic district um and have that approval. >> Yeah. Just to clarify, so we know that this council in January of 24 designated a historic district that includes 31 buildings. >> And in that that ordinance, the council said with these 31 buildings, if you want to alter that building or you want to de demolish it, there is a process. It starts at HPC. it comes here to this city council and that's what we're doing this evening. So, anytime any one of those 31 buildings uh want to make an alteration or they want to put something else there, it has to come to our council. >> Yes. And that's what I was trying to clarify that there is a process for removal as well, but that ultimately these people own that pro that that property. The city does not own the property. They do. And so ultimately they have some choices to make. So I just wanted to make that point. And I I guess Mr. Henderson or or has anyone ever made an offer to purchase your property? >> Please come to the microphone, Mr. Henderson, >> if you're going to answer. >> Mayor, um the answer to that is no. I have not. Um, and no one in the room that spoke tonight has approached us. If somebody were to buy it, they would obviously have more control over the future. As a as a tenant, they don't have that level of control. And therefore, we have to generate enough income to make these properties viable, maintain them, pay the taxes, pay the insurance, pay the maintenance, list goes on. So, yeah, I mean, if they want to buy them, they should approach us. Um, we're more than happy to do that. City wants to buy them, you should approach us. >> Okay. Thank you. I just wanted that on the record. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. And our just to clarify, our first proposal was to remove the buildings to demolish them and that was denied. So that I think answers your question. It's been tested before. >> Okay. >> And that was one of our requests early on. Thanks. >> Thank you, >> Council Member Wall. >> Mr. Henderson, I hate to have you come back up again, but please >> uh I really appreciate the passion of so many of the speakers here tonight. Uh and I think there's an assumption on the part of many of those speakers that the current businesses will simply be displaced permanently. Is that part of the proposal? >> That was one thing I was referring to. That's not true. That was said. >> So they certainly would be displaced during a time of construction. >> Our goal is to not do that. Steam coffee would stay. Uh the businesses other than the tree dome would have to be replaced somewhere and possibly come back. But again, they'd have to be will have be able to pay the rent and willing to pay the rent. Um that's be the question. Um can their business tolerate that? Do they generate enough of their business to tolerate a rent to that level? And that's what I mentioned is a reality check. I mean your business has to be able to produce enough income to rent a space that you want to be in. >> It's kind of simple as that. >> Uh that that is uh probably where some of my next questions were going to go. However, I thought that maybe uh when when uh you talked about an economically viable project, uh you could use uh the towers to help subsidize uh some of the costs of the street level. Uh not really. >> Well, I mean, yeah, to a point, yes, we can't continue to maintain those buildings long term without something that allows us enough economic generation to do that. they'll just maintain at a certain level that the income that we generate could support which currently it doesn't. So >> yeah, so you would see the rent going from 5 to 10 to 25 >> would have to. Yes, I I'm just telling you the truth and you ask anybody that's renting space downtown, you look at what the what the Discovery One and two buildings are renting for. >> Um you know, they're they're a lot more than that. Mhm. >> Um, and I could give you a list. The brand new or the the the vacant space that's on the Merchant Exchange building that the MEZA building property was in, uh, their business was in, it is now being listed at $32 a square foot, >> just a half a block away. >> So, that gives you a sense of what the difference is and what we're getting and what the real market is. So, >> I mean, even if we were to get $25 a square foot, I'm not convinced that it even covers the expenses and and all the cost of real estate taxes and everything. Yeah, >> with the buildings as they currently are. >> Well, they're not right now as they currently are [laughter] by far. And that's actually a lot of the motivation for doing this. And it's not just us. It's going to be other people are going to have the same issues we're having. Yeah. >> Um, you got to either unless there's a major decision to support these businesses for the purposes these people passionately want, which I can totally understand and appreciate that. In fact, we've helped them for the last 10 years, but I haven't heard a word about that. Nobody said that they appreciate that. Um, so I that part is the reality is the economics are coming to bear. It's it's just the way things are. Right. >> And and property taxes, insurance, everything else is not allowing us to continue on this path. >> Yeah. >> It's just that simple. >> You know, I imagine if I were you, I'd be uh very discouraged at this point with the time and money that you put into that. Uh uh I think maybe I'm along the same route as the mayor and and uh you know if you could sell the building to someone who'd be willing to take on those uh just in the paper tonight on North Broadway uh a woman who bought her building uh an arts building uh if someone wanted to take that on. I this is uh this is very thorny um you know I appreciate what you've done. I appreciate the passion of the community. It's hard to have a business that supports these rents. I agree. Sure. >> I don't disagree with that. >> Yeah. >> But it's hard to have a business these days that can do that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Council Member Miller. >> Yeah. I have a question for staff and I'm first going to read a section from the Secretary of the Interior Standards and then a section from the landmark designation study and then I have a question. So standard number one says a property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. And then the the quote I'm pulling from the landmark designation study which stated 2019 but with 2024 updates says of this block of the early commercial development along Broadway and its cross streets. The highest concentration of extent buildings is located on the 300 block of Broadway Avenue South and on third a third street southwest between Broadway and 1st Avenue South. Architecturally, this area is characterized by contiguous development along the blocks, one and twotory masonry buildings with first level storefronts, flat roofs, punched openings at upper levels, and revival style details. So, is that block scale building form and the continuous low-rise street wall character defining under the 2022 guidelines or only on the the facades? Like thinking about flat roofs, I mean, obviously that's considering a characteristic beyond just the facade. So, how would you interpret standard one with that quote from the um designation study? Yeah. Are um Councilman Miller, are you asking if um the addition if the addition would um alter that characteristic? >> Correct. Right. So, looking at minimal change. >> Sure. >> How how do you interpret that or or help us understand that standard right within this project? >> Yep. So um the the minimal change to the distinctive to the distinctive it's distinctive materials features spaces and spatial relationships. So what are the distinctive materials features spaces and spatial relationships? I interpret that based on the eligibility study to be the facades of these buildings. Those are that's where the distinctive um I'll read it again. the distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships exist. And it's and that's why um the last goround I recommended denial because the addition was infringing on that in terms of its proximity to those facades. By pushing them back further, you are allowed to still as a as a viewer, as somebody who's experiencing that space, you're still experiencing them at that second at that two-story level when you're in the district. >> Okay. So then I I appreciate you bringing up the the viewshed. So how did the analysis your analysis as staff >> contemplate the viewshed? What points is it the entirety of the district? Where where are you kind of looking at that from and saying minimal change? Sure. Yeah. So, um and and then you've got an illustration on the screen right now that shows that you do see the tip of the plumber building um from some vantage points. Um how important is that to understand the history of the district. I think that's where my interpretation is that um being able to see that does not directly relate to um to the historic um significance at least not not to the weight of prohibiting this. >> Okay. And then also looking back to the guidelines, I was looking through the document. It says the guidelines state character defining features must not be radically changed, obscured, damaged, or destroyed. And so I'm curious about the word obscured too because I mean it does feel like depending on your vantage point, there is some obscuring of the spatial relation of the district >> of the character defining features, >> but also it defines the environment as well. And so I'm which I would assume goes to the spatial relationships between the buildings. >> Sure. Yeah. I I mean I don't think that it's obscuring um and I used the example at the HPC meeting. You have some historic districts where um the significance of the viewshed is directly related to the significance of that historic site. um take a battlefield where you see something in the distance where maybe some action was coming from that direction and it has a direct relationship to the historic significance of that property. I don't see this as being that case. I just don't >> that's my opinion. >> So then some questions for the uh applicant. So if the standard 10 which the HBC also found for denial says that if the addition were removed that the character defining features would be intact. So if for some reason this project this addition were approved and then removed what would remain >> of these buildings? >> I think that ex why all the emphasis was on the facades and the preservation and the setbacks. So all of that would be preserved. The uh what's behind that would come down but then it would be back in its original condition based on the historically significant facades as as was always articulated to us. >> Okay. Uh so on standard one which again talks about minimal change did you consider alternate um addition heights between zero and seven stories of addition and where what were some of the alternatives? We're at 14 uh >> but lower between like a two-story edition and a seventory edition. Were there? >> Yes, we did consider a lot of variations, but to make the project economically viable, you have to have a certain amount of space that's rentable to generate revenue and income to support the cost of and then the ongoing maintenance. So, we leveled out at at seven with that number of units. >> And so, seven is the minimal change that when your analysis makes the building economically viable, >> correct? program. >> Thank you, >> Council Member Doring. >> I'm ready to make a motion. >> Go ahead, Council Member. >> I move to deny the requested appeal and not overturn the denial of the certificate of appropriateness for an addition to the project at 309 through 317 Broadway Avenue. >> Motion has been made by Council Member Doring. Is there a second? >> I'll second that motion. >> Go ahead, council. First, I want to thank the members of the public who came and spoke during uh public comment. Um I am also a fan of the businesses in uh in these buildings. I just read a great book about national parks that I purchased from Dietm. Uh am looking forward to reading a history of Mayo Clinic that my wife is reading was also purchased at Biote uh Dietm. Uh Threshold Hearts is where I go to buy my Christmas gifts because I believe in supporting local artists. art heads. I wish I was good at visual arts. I'm a musician, so love going in that space, but it's really not for me. Uh, cafe a steam as a um as a pastor of a open and affirming church and a fierce advocate and ally for the LGBTQIA plus community here in Rochester. When members of my congregation were looking for a safe place to hold a Bible study for teen youth in that population, Cafe Steam was my first recommendation. Tree Dome is a beloved business from my family. My son is a sneaker head and likes thrift uh thrift store shopping. Doesn't really work for me, but I like going into I loved going into Tree Dome with him as he was growing up so I could pat Phoebe on the head. love the businesses. That being said, our task is to not make this decision based on the current business use. Therefore, I have been doing a lot of research and came across the document this the secretary of the interior standards for the treatment of historic properties with guidelines for preserving rehabilitation, res uh restoring and reconstructing historic buildings. Um this document is very lengthy. Offers recommendations on page 26. New exterior additions and related new construction. There must be a balance between differentiation and compatibility to maintain the historic character and the identity of the building being enlarged. I don't believe that our current proposal does that. Page 146. Recommended designing new exterior additions to historic buildings or adjacent new construction that are compatible with the historic character of the setting that preserves the historic relationship between buildings and the landscape. Because I believe an essential character of uh this historic district district is the view of the plumber building and the Kaylor sign. I believe that our current proposal does not meet that recommendation. Page 156, recommendation ensuring that the addition is subordinate and secondary to the historic building and is compatible in massing scale materials relationship of solids to uh solids to voids and color. What's not rocket recommended in this document? constructing a new addition that is as large or or larger than the historic building which visually overwhelms it to results in the demunation or loss of its historic character. I believe this proposal takes the nonrecommended route. for recommendation page 156 using the same um forms, materials and color range of the historic building in a manner that does not duplicate it but distinguishes the addition from the original building. Um looking at the renderings provided in uh by the applicant in the packet uh it does not appear from the renderings provided that the same materials and at least colors aren't being used in the complete construction of this new uh addition. Recommendation page 156 ensuring that the addition is stylistically appropriate for the the historic building type. Um, if I look at the 309 building that has a big glass tower sticking out of the top it top of it, I believe that uh this proposal does not abide by that recommendation. Recommended considering the design for a new addition in terms of its relationship to the historic building as well as the historic district, neighborhood, and setting. I believe contributing properties uh in the in the district itself will be uh diminished by the size and scope of this addition. Uh therefore, it doesn't abide by that recommendation. Recommendation designing an addition to a historic building in a densely built location such as a downtown commercial district to appear as a separate building or infill rather than as an addition. In such a setting, the addition structure must be compatible with the size and the scale of the historic building and surrounding buildings. Usually, the front elevation of the new building should be in the same plane, not set back from the historic building. This approach may also provide the opportunity for a larger addition or infill when the facade can be broken up into smaller elements that are consistent with the scale of the historic building and surrounding buildings. I do not believe that the project in front of us uh follows that recommendation. My main standard for uh voting to uphold the HPC's decision is standard 10, make it reversible. New additions, new construction should be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be uh unimpaired. If you remove the back from a building, you are changing the structural integrity of the building. Therefore, I feel like this project does not live up to that standard. I really appreciate the work that our community development department has done. Mr. Henderson, I appreciate your continued uh passion uh to to to do work here. I just don't think we are here yet to to make me feel comfortable moving forward. Thank you, council member. Uh, as the seconder, I I will u speak next and I will support um the findings of the HPC. And again, I also uh uh uh will echo what my colleague said is uh I appreciate Mr. Henderson, you coming back here with an a uh altered version, but I really it's hard to see when you look at the building and it's the uh the alteration is supposed to be subordinate to either the historic building or uh subordinate in the historic district. and uh and it's clearly a building we can see it is not subordinate to the district and uh I have some concern with uh uh staff using a non-contributing building as the model to then say this building is subordinate to uh that building. We are in a place uh colleagues where we have a historic district that was designated less than two and a half years ago and it's been tested um by developers and it's also uh has uh some integrity to it and we are also creating this his uh certificate of appropriateness. I have some concern with staff not reaching out to the state historic preservation office for their input on whether or not this was appropriate. This is appropriate. We are very nient in the work of protecting 31 buildings in a very small part of our city. And we made that decision that we wanted to protect these buildings. And with that protection comes standards and and uh the need for business owners who were uh who were consulted as we went through this process on what those uh standards mean. a as far as whether something is is appropriate. I really am most concerned with us opening the door to allowing what, as I said, this council created to be to to be uh diminished and wounded by the first of a thousand cuts here. Uh and uh we also have as a council and as a DMC put financial commitments into building up this historic district with no interest loans, grants, and others to help really build the the vitality that we all want to see in the district. And I just have to also say I am just overwhelmed by the over 40 uh uh patrons and Rochester residents who are creating vitality there and they are creating that and we need to be looking at preserving that and I encourage you Mr. Henderson to encourage that vitality where it's at and look at those uh no interest loans and and look at your historic properties as historic properties. I look at this and I say this is a backo way or maybe even a back alley way of getting around the objectives of our historic district. And what you need to do is work with the communities there and see see what you can do with the buildings you have or sell them because they are in uh our historic district. Council member Wall, >> last night uh my wife and I decided that uh we would eat downtown and then uh walk uh through the downtown so that we could uh really study the fronts of the buildings, look in the alleys. Uh it's something that we think is valuable and we would like to preserve. I I I would like the best of both worlds. I would like a viable project that would protect and save uh those buildings. Um I worry that this might be the last best effort to actually save the facades and twothirds of uh the buildings that if Mr. Henderson uh needs to divest himself of those buildings. Uh who will take that on and is willing to invest the amount of money that would uh actually bring the buildings to a continued safe uh safe uh operation uh with businesses that can afford the rent. Ah, it's so thorny. I I it's you know, you want to have it all. Um, I appreciate the work that Mr. Hender has Henderson has done. Uh, the community lack of support has been overwhelming. >> Mr. President, >> uh, over here. >> Uh, Mr. [clears throat] Spindler Craig. >> Thank you. If I could interject, I was just trying to figure out the right time to um push the issue a bit on the question of findings. Um, there's more discussion to come, I think. Um, but we really do need clarification perhaps from community development whether they have heard enough from the motioners in this case to have clarity on what findings would support this particular motion. We really do need some amount of clarity in order for the body to uh deliberate on those specific proposed findings. Um, so I would defer to community development to weigh in. Miss Woodward. >> Thank you. I just wanted to clarify. I know that Council Member Doring listed and kind of went through the guidelines that were identified in the Secretary of Interior standards. Um the actual standards that we reviewed that were part of Heritage Preservation Commission are in the packet of those 10 numbers. So I just and then I heard Council President Schub mention being consistent with the Heritage Preservation Commission. So I wanted to make sure that we were clear on what those findings were. >> Uh Council Member Doring. Uh so I I feel like my motion stands because I feel like standard 10 is not being met. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Can I add uh and clarify Miss Patterson London? Uh I spoke to the scale and size of the alteration. Is that standard nine or is that 10? >> Nine. >> Pardon me while I look. Yep. That is number nine. >> So, council member Doring, are you okay with adding also it's not in keeping with standard nine? >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Uh, Council Member Miller. >> Yeah, I would agree with that. I I I think standard 10 for me is just the crux of this. If the permanent demolition of part of the buildings and 309 largely in its entirety but for the facade is removed, its essential form is changed. And like those aren't reversible steps for the buildings and I and I think that that's the clearest place where I just can't understand how to apply standard 10 in a different way. I think similarly standard one and nine that talk about minimal change and the spatial relationships also I I cannot get my head around how a sevenstory edition is compatible in scale with a twostory building. So those are my read of the HPC. I I I find it more difficult to apply to five and six but I think one nine and 10 I just it seems quite clear to me that those findings do not fit the Secretary of the Interior standards. >> Council member Palmer. >> So staff is recommending um nine and 10. How did you justify nine and 10? >> Yep. So, um, with number nine, um, I'm indicating that the proposed project will not destroy the historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that provide the historic character to these properties along Broadway. That takes us back to what the eligibility study indicates and it's referring to um the facades of the buildings and it's referring to them being directly adjacent to Broadway and it's referring to them as being um direct entry from Broadway um mixed uses. It doesn't um uh the project has very little impact on four of those storefronts on two of the buildings. Um the project has a little more impact on 309 um but uh but it maintains that facade. So you're still experiencing those the the character defining feature features of the historic district. >> How about number 10? Number 10, let me just look at my notes here. Um, again, I think that it's the essential form and integrity of experiencing it within the historic district. One of the things that our certificate of appropriateness considers is the exterior, right? We don't review and we don't require certificate of appropriateness for alterations on the interior. So, I think you start to um have to define where does that, you know, where does that happen? Um you're still maintaining the exterior facade and that that's why that's why I made that recommendation >> and you're comfortable making that recommendation. >> I stand by what? Yeah. By what I said. >> And you're our historic preservation person on staff. >> Yes. >> Correct. >> Yep. Correct. Can I follow up on council member Palmer's questioning, Miss Patterson Longrenid? Yes, you are our historic preservation uh specialist on staff. Can you talk to us about why uh the state historic preservation office was not contacted and asked to weigh in on this alteration? >> Absolutely. Yeah, that is not part of our process. It's not part of our adopted process. There's no requirements for it and it's not something that we typically do for a certificate of appropriateness. So, it's not typical and it's not required. So, there >> you do it for other historic preservation projects, don't you? >> No, not for certificates of appropriateness. When we are looking at designation, then we are required to reach out to them and get their opinion. That's by state statute and by our UDC. We're not required and we don't typically follow that as a procedure for a certificate of appropriateness. >> When a building owner wants to demolish a building, is Shipo contacted? >> So when a building owner wants to demolish a building, they have to come before the city council and ask for the designation to be removed. Community Development will not issue a building demolition permit unless you remove the the designation from it. Um we are not required by statute to approach the state preservation office for removal of properties from for removal of the designation. But you have in the past, correct? >> I don't believe we have. >> You uh the demolition of the Lord's high school. I do know that uh Shipo was there was a letter from Shipo uh speaking against that. >> I we specifically didn't reach out to them. It could have also been the applicant at the time that requested that from Shipo. Uh, is are there any other council members wishing to be heard on this item? >> Council, uh, >> can I follow up my question? >> Yeah, absolutely. Go ahead, council member. >> Are the buildings landmarked or is it the district that's landmarked? >> The district is landmarked. We landmark the historic district. That is the property that is landmarked. The buildings, these three buildings contribute to the historic district and to the landmark. But it is the district that is landmarked. >> I'll call the question. >> Uh can you hold on calling the question? It looks like >> you can call the question. It'll just be I hadn't spoke yet. >> Okay. >> Go ahead, Council Member Keane. >> I mean, in this discussion I'm following it. There there is this we're in quasi judicial and we have these criteria we have to use. It seems reasonable that differing people cannot take the criteria and say it it's met or not met. think that's can happen with these things. Um I I I am still trying to like take this whole thing in with the public hearing as far as more the you know the the powerful part of the public hearing and the emotion but also the idea of like the the the support for these avanguard communities and what they need and what what they're owed from us. But I can't find any of that in the criteria that I'm dealing with. Um, and I I'm worried that we're working to get there and I and I'm I'm fighting that that uh that impulse. Um, Council Member Wall talks about the naughty issues with historic preservation. We as an owner of the chateau are fighting with the same thing. um how do we uh maintain that building viably and have it just be used as a you know community place and it for whatever reason it's not working out. Um I I'm sitting here right now knowing that I you know we we went through one of these reviews for demolition and another review for another building type that I we could not accept because we were like the experts were looking at going like it does not support the the integrity of it. Um, I actually do have much more of a facade view of what the historic district is that you experience it as you're walking around. I I'm kind of thrown off that someone says, "No, when I go over to the corner of Fourth Avenue and this, I can't see something." I had no concept that that was part of the historic district that you can't block anything or that you could put a drone up and say, "Oh, you're changing the roofs." I I just didn't think that was part of what we were protecting. I thought I really did think it was the streetscape and what our staff talks about of these setbacks from there. So, as the as the motion is made here now, I I don't think I I'm not going to support it. Um, I think we have a uh we have this back and forth going on with um we did a historic preservation uh policy which you know I don't need to say this but I will that I didn't support at the time but it is the law of the land and I'm going to enforce it for for where for how we're going to use it in this historic district. Um but we have gone back and forth with this problem of how do you make these buildings viable uh versus how do you keep them historic? Uh and it is a struggle. Um I I struggle with the idea of what does it mean to be economically viable. I don't want to say well you could have made 10 more dollars a foot if you'd have done this. Does that something we have to do now? And I don't think that's upon us. But I think it is a worry that and and we've struggled with this through DMC and through other areas to say how do we help make these better? And this is a case where the building owners are coming and saying we can protect the fronts of this. We can do the setbacks that you talked about. We can do this height because it's really not noticeable from this. So based on those things and what I thought a historic district was for both contributing and non-contributing, it makes it difficult for me to support this motion. >> Thank you, council member. Uh uh so we are voting on the motion to uh to support the findings of the HPC. Uh and uh Clerk Queso, please call the role. >> Council member Keane. >> Nay. >> Council member Miller. >> Hi. >> Council member Wall. >> Nay. Council member Frederick's >> nay. >> Council member Palmer. >> Nay. >> Council member Doring. >> I. >> Council President Schubang. >> I. >> Motion fails. >> May I make a motion? >> Uh, go ahead, council member. >> I'll make a motion approving the requested appeal and overturning the denial of the certificate of appropriateness for an addition to the project at 309 to 317 Broadway Avenue. >> Is there a second to that motion? >> Second. Motion made by council member Palmer and seconded by council member uh Frederick's. Uh any more to add, council member? Any uh further discussion? Council >> president. >> Uh >> again, >> I'll jump in earlier. Go ahead. This time, >> are there findings? >> Want to clarify with the movements what with the movements what uh findings are being referenced? >> Are there findings that you >> the ones provided by the staff >> in the staff report in the packet? >> That is correct. Any additional clarification needed by community development? >> No, we don't need anything additional. Thank you, >> Council Member Wall. >> H [sighs] very just so hard. Uh if we were to move ahead, it would be with my certain uh hope that we would be working with the businesses. That that really was the crux of uh what so much of the testimony was about tonight. and the community that is so important uh to Rochester. So that would be a provisal for me. >> Council member Frederick's and Molly, thank you for helping us navigate some really difficult waters and helping us see this for what it is and what you're telling us it is. I appreciate it. These are not easy decisions. >> Clerk Queso, please call the role. >> Council member Keane. I >> council member Miller. >> Nay. >> Council member Wall. >> I. >> Council member Frederick's >> I. >> Council member Palmer. >> I. >> Council member Doring. >> Nay. >> Council President Schub. >> Nay. >> Motion passes 4 to3. >> Thank you everyone for uh being here and for your testimony. We all appreciated it and uh we hope to see you again. We are going to move on now to item G2 which is the 2026 transit program of projects federal transit administration. Uh Miss uh Rachel F and you can hold for a minute if you like as people leave. I hope you all feel shame. >> Please exit if you're not staying for the meeting. What? >> There's no presentation. [laughter] >> Um, >> go ahead, Miss Welch. >> Good evening, mayor, council members. Um, this is the 2026 annual program of projects or sometimes affectionately called the POP uh to receive our federal funds which include operation and capital uh project dollars. This year it's just operations and I'll be getting to that in a second. So these funds are uh federal aortments that are uh distributed based on an equation and that equation includes population and population density and so those are often referred to as formula funds. So if you hear us discussing formula funds or 5307 funds, these are the same uh they have many names but uh the same dollar amount because it's an equation. Uh the POP is a compliance checkpoint for FTA. It's an opportunity for FTA to verify that the formula funds are being used for eligible and appropriately scoped projects. It's also an opportunity for public engagement in terms of our federal funding opportunities. The projects listed are found in the state transportation improvement plan or the STIP and they are uh funneled through ROCOG. Uh and I can throw in a bunch more acronyms as we go. So they're in the the STIP and the TIP uh federally and statewide. So you'll note that in the the public notice the transit development plan was listed as one of the funding projects. However, that is included under VIA's uh contract. So that is a value ad and that is being uh services being [clears throat] provided to the city at no cost um to our our contract. So that those funds have been rolled back into the operational dollars for that grant. Um, I wanted to point out that in there very loud it says local match and that local match includes our our local dollars from Rochester from our revenue and our advertising dollars, but additionally it includes our state funding dollars as well. So, when it says local, that includes both of those because this is a federal um federal grant. So, we're still on the hook for 15% total um of that if we were to spend all of those dollars. And I think that's a really important uh designation there. We don't have to spend all of the dollars. we can roll those over. You saw those kind of listed out within the public notice as well. Um and so the project program of projects um includes current pro current known projects and again that's just operations for this year. Um it doesn't include competitive grant opportunities. So things like um the link BRT grants that we received or even the North Broadway grant are not um they wouldn't be listed within here because these are just our federal funding dollars. So, we're requesting approval of our annual program of projects. >> Thank you, Miss Fouch. And, uh, this is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. Anybody wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. Anybody Anybody wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. Invite you back up. Uh are there questions from uh council member Keen? >> Yeah, just just on that um this is the thing that had the federal in local state is ripped looked in there. Is the state funding a percentage? Is it the same like um formula for federal is is like 70% and state is 10 or is it very different? >> It it can vary. Um and so a few council meetings ago we approved the state uh funding. Uh and so that is more of a a state driven um dollar amount. So it's not a >> so they're not coordinated together. They're >> they're they're neighbors but they're not uh they're not the they're not util utilizing the same formula. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Any further discussion? Is there a motion on this item? >> Sure. make a motion adopting a resolution authorizing the filing of the 2026 transit programs [snorts] and subsequent submission of grant applications and execution of grants. >> Second motion made by council member uh Fredericks and seconded by council member Keen. Any further discussion? Council member Frederick's. >> Thank you. >> Uh all in favor say I. >> I. >> Post say nay. Motion passes. Thanks Rachel. Next up, we have uh item G3, which is a conditional use permit uh by UCI Tower. Uh Mr. Desmond McIll. >> Yes. Uh thank you, President Schub. Uh >> thank you, Mr. Mc McIll, for staying later than you usually have to. >> You're you're welcome. Um and uh good evening, Mayor, members of the council. I'll be bringing you this introduction. Uh this is a conditional use permit for a freestanding commercial wireless telecommunications facility. It consists of 125- ft monipole tower and ancillary equipment and located in a light industrial district at 1811 7th Street Northwest. Uh the subject site is at the John Hardy's restaurant location situated north and west of the interchange of Highway 14 and Highway 52. The applicant UCI is looking to construct this monopole uh for a service provider with the uh colllocation space for two additional providers uh for companies wishing to serve this area. Uh the applicant uh looks to establish a 25 by35 lease area site on the south side of the restaurant. Uh the leasing site is generally concealed by large structures located to the north, west, south, and southeast. Um to approve this facility, UDC requires that no existing viable monopole structure or other structure be uh available to colllocate on within a half mile. Uh this proposed facility meets that criteria. A freestanding uh monopole up to uh 75 ft is permitted is a permitted use in the light industrial zoning district. Uh however uh through a council approved CUP uh a up to 50 additional feet of height may be requested and approved. Um the 125 ft height for this structure is requested to maintain adequate service and reception in the central portion of the city. Um, this structure will serve as a replacement facility for an existing 180 foot high uh tall tower uh located 100 feet east of this site uh at the John Marshall High School. Uh this facility will likely uh eliminate future need for other monopoles in this uh immediate vicinity. subject approval of this request. Uh any future mon pole uh within a half mile of this site would need to demonstrate why this particular site would not meet their needs. Uh should all three of this uh colllocating uh areas on this pole be used. Um the UDC does also uh require that any other monopole that could be located uh in this general area be no closer than 100 1,000 ft away at their July 22 meeting. Uh the planning commission did recommend approval of this uh by unanimous 70 vote and uh that's my u presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Mr. McIll, is there an applicant for this item? Please step forward, state your name, and you have up to 10 minutes, but you don't have to use them all. >> My name is Matt Coonard. I represent UCI. Um I I would say the same thing that I said at the planning commission is the staff report is very complete. If I'm happy to reiterate anything or if you have any specific questions, I'd be happy to to answer those as well. >> We will invite you back after the public hearing if uh and uh see if my colleagues have any questions for you. You can sit down now. >> Okay. Thank you. >> This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to be heard on this item, please step forward forward. Seeing no one, uh, I will close the public hearing and invite the applicant back up for any closing comments. >> Um, does anybody have any questions for >> Does anybody have any questions? >> Council member Palmer, >> is the one at dry marshall then getting torn down? >> It's the lease has been terminated. It it it will be coming down at some point is is what we've been told. >> Soon. >> It's This is a pretty complicated uh project that that's going on right now. There's a lot of things that are going on that are just sort of gray areas and everybody's a little bit in the weeds right now. There is no viable alternate solution. That's what this is. So >> So once this tower is done and completed, is the other tower coming down? >> That's my understanding. Yes. >> It's it's not ours to to take down. We just know we just know the circumstances of it. Any further questions on this? Uh, is there a motion on this item? >> I'll move to adopt a resolution approving a conditional use permit CD 2026-011 CUP by UCI tower for the construction of a wireless communications facility consisting of 125 ft monopole tower and ancillary equipment in a L1 zoning district. Second >> motion made by uh council member Keen and seconded by council member Fredericks. You can sit down, sir. >> Uh any further information to share? >> No. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppos say nay. Motion motion passes >> six to one with council member Palmer voting nay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh we will now move on to uh G4 which is our 2027 master fee schedule. Mr. Aaron Parish. >> Actually I can take that one Mr. President if that's all right. >> Go ahead. Mr. >> Council President, council members, Mayor Norton, administrators elms. Uh as part of the budget process uh before you tonight is a 2027 master fees schedule. Some of the salient components of this year's schedule uh 32 fees have been removed, seven fees have been added. the community development building division. Uh some of which were transferred from their housing code update. And then there were some uh fire related uh fees implemented for non- non-emergency non-m missionritical services based on the most recent current FEMA equipment rates which is a sim uh similar methodology that we use for the public works that's currently within the fee schedule as well. Um, so with that, you see a clean version, you have a redline version that show the changes. And with that, me and my colleagues can stand for any questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Anderson. Uh, we may have questions after the public hearing. Uh, uh, I will now open the public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to be heard on this item? Is there anyone wishing to be heard on this item? Anyone wishing to be heard on this item? Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. Are there questions from council members to staff? Seeing no questions, is there a motion on this item? >> Yes. I'll make a motion approving an ordinance establishing the 2027 master schedule, directing the city attorney office to prepare an ordinance for the first reading on September 21, 2026. >> Motion made by council member Frederick's. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by council member uh Wall. Any further to add? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Post say nay. Motion passes. Moving on to our reports and recommendations. H1 is wood debris management operations update. This is an item that was vetoed by Mayor Norton. The veto automatically places the item back on the next agenda for consideration. To override a veto, the item must pass with a supermajority of the body voting a I five reg uh regardless of a quorum. The item may only be considered as it was passed. No amendments may be made. Uh Mayor Norton. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so, as I mentioned in my veto note, I support this project. Um, I think it belongs in the 2027 budget. Um, one of my hesitations with this and and one of the things I shared at the last meeting, um, and maybe not as well as I should have, I I view contingencies as for unexpected items that come at the end of the year. We are very close to the end of that year. Um, we in fact are in the next month going to be discussing the next budget and it seems to me this would be an appropriate discussion for that. in the first place. Um, secondly, I think when when an item comes forward like this, and it's happened several other times since I've been mayor, it disallows a council to be able to think about its priorities and the things it may want to spend that contingency on as opposed to a single item that is brought forward kind of out of the blue. Um, and so for me, we have had at least two items in the last month that I would have loved a discussion about should the contingency be spent on this. Um, I hate to get into the controversy of Elton Hills Drive, but one of the questions was asked, could we put in protected bike lanes? And we were told, well, that'll cost $150,000 and that's not part of our budget or whatever whatever amounts. Um the uh item that's going to come up later this well actually the next item is another item where um with extra funding we could have considered alternative routes for um a bike path. There are multiple things that this board cares about. And when we have an item like this, it gets approved. If you determine that a contingency shouldn't just be held for emergency, it should be the items that you select should be part of a larger picture and not just a single item brought forward. That is my belief. So, I was very uncomfortable to have an item brought forward that wasn't an emergency that in my going over and talking to all the neighbors that have moved into the home said, "We don't hear any noise from Hathway. It's not an issue." And I I had been led to believe or at least that was what I heard is that it was loud and we would have to, you know, this one of the reasons we want to do this is to tamp down noise. The neighbors said that the construction noise of the homes being built around them was a far bigger issue than anything that they had heard. and these are literally the next there's a trees and the next thing beyond those trees is halfway and they said they don't hear anything from there. So as I um as I went home after the last meeting with two items only two items on the agenda and two items that had a lot of controversy and a council member missing. Um it was my determination that um we bring this back and uh and have the full board vote. Um again for the reasons that I listed. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh I can I I'll speak to it. Um I agree with you, mayor. Uh when it comes to the contingency fund that best practices are to have both staff and council members uh to uh feel uh they can come forward with projects uh to use the contingency funds. I do however look at the contingency fund as something that gives our staff the flexibility to use not just in an emergency but when situations change when there is a uh a new direction that a project may come in uh come before us and I think uh I definitely support this project. I think I heard you say you also to support uh the the goals of this project. So I agree that best practices are not to use the contingency fund, but we do have a contingency fund and it is tied to uh to the uh to the >> It's late, you know, Yeah. >> Do you want me to clarify how the contingency is >> Yes. built into the budget. So annually, your existing levy carries a million dollars each year and multiple times throughout the year. Sometimes staff will come forward with something based on things they've heard from council. We've been working on this halfway site for at least three years, perhaps longer. Um and so as that the dynamics have changed throughout the how we've been looking at where the project might go, um where we might be able to move the commercial site further away from development. that is actively happening there. This is how it has developed over time. There's been emerging changes in where and how that could go. The alternative would be that you would either need to add $350,000, maybe more depending on the timing of this project. oftentimes the cost of them go up um to your 2027 levy or find a pathway to agreement of four or five of you to reduce $350,000 worth of the budget if you wanted to stay at the current proposed levy that is at 5.59% increase year-over-year not the rate. So the contingency serves as an as a as you have stated an opportunity to bring items forward to the council that we have typically don't bring those forward without having been working on them. And you still at the end of the year if the contingency isn't utilized whatever is remaining goes towards the 42% reserve. And that 42% reserve from a governmental finance officer's accounting standard and from a state standard is where it still provides you that buffer for any type of emer like very emergent issue coming forward a pandemic a financial recession things of that nature. So the actual emergency reserve is your is your general fund reserve. Thank you, Administrator Zelms, for clarifying what I was trying to say, Council Member Wall. >> And I might say it just in a little bit different way. Uh although I think Mr. Schubbring was uh going down that road. Uh my understanding of a contingency is not always emergency. I uh would more call it a change order. And I think this is a change order. when we use contingencies in in uh construction projects, it's to cover change orders or things that are uh different than what we had planned. So, I'm not unhappy using that 350 rather than adding 350. The only additional thing I would say is uh we as a city have invested money in that particular housing uh development uh through our sales tax money and uh I think it would be good to support that. Anyone else wanting to be heard? Uh, council member uh Keane, >> I was just going to put it mo I think we have to I mean our only action is to put the exact same motion. >> Exactly. >> Okay. So, adopting a two-part resolution uh authorizing preliminary approval of relocation of commercial operations um and authorizing preliminary preliminary support to the funding request of $350,000 in contingency funds for the costs associated. Motion has been made by council member Keen and seconded by council member Fredericks. Any more to add? Uh, council member Miller want to be heard. >> I'll just say for the record. I mean, my position hasn't changed since the last time this came up. I I my my gripe with the way this has come is that it was a council update with no uh identified funding source or cost. And then the first time it comes to the open meeting to our our discussion is a recommendation of a funding source, not a a a consideration of possible funding sources with a recommendation to use contingency. And then this doesn't allow us to compare alternative projects in the 2027 budget. So, I don't plan to support this as I didn't in the first time, but I understand. Welcome to our last meeting, Council Member Wall. Get to reitigate both items. >> Right. Uh, Council Member Frederick's, you know, did you have a >> Oh, I'm good. >> Oh, you you were moving your pen. It looked like you wanted to be recognized. >> If I were an auctioneer, you would have bought everything. >> I do. >> Uh, Council Member Dorian, go ahead. I'm also going to remain consistent and and not um support uh the motion. Uh Mr. Council Member Miller very well expressed uh both last time and this time uh his rationale and I agree with his rationale. So I will not be supporting the motion. Council member Palmer, >> I haven't decided how I'm going to vote because I I I it's an it's not an unexpected um expense and um this is something we can budget for next year. I really have a problem with us not not waiting till emergencies or something that's unexpected. Um one of my examples would be Cook Park um pickle ball. That was something that came up last year. We used um contingency funds for that. Um that came up unexpectedly and hopefully this next week is going to be open. It would not have happened um if we didn't use contingency funds. This would probably happen next January um in our budget and so um we'll wait to roll call. I guess >> it [laughter] sounds like Mr. Yeter may be able to clarify how this became an emergent issue. >> Yeah, thanks Council President Schub. Uh members of the council, mayor, that I do want to clarify that. Appreciate the opportunity. U the reason why we're saying it's unexpected certainly the project as administrator Zelms pointed out has been uh in conversation for some time. The change that was unexpected outside of the budget process is previously we had been working towards a partnership with the county utilizing their site where we did not think that we would be bearing this much cost. And so that's what has changed about the project since we had been talking about it over the years. So that's the the reason for the ask. >> Clerk Queso, please call the role. >> Council member Keane. >> I. >> Council member Miller. >> Name. >> Council member Wall. >> I. >> Council member Frederick's >> I. >> Council member Palmer. >> I. >> Council member Doring. >> Nay. >> Council President Schubank. >> I. >> Motion passes 5 to2. Our next item is H2, which is the Willow Creek Regional Trail Feasibility Study and Professional Services Agreement for Final Design. This item also was uh vetoed by uh Mayor Norton from our last meeting. As she mentioned, it was our only two items. And as I said before, it automatically places it on our agenda. And to override, we must pass with five. And uh the item may only be considered as it was passed. No amendments may be made. Mayor Norton, >> thank you. Uh this was the second of a very difficult discussion that we had at the last meeting and um this is one I had been involved with prior and I shared some of this at the last meeting as well. Um, I had the family had been here before when this item was brought forward. Um, we moved ahead and did some testing on their property um that they did not want to have, but we did it anyway. I worked with Dylan in particular, met with the family and they shared their concern about not wanting their property bifurcated with a trail and could we please find alternatives. And again, this is where we have to make choices as a council about how we decide to spend our money. Um, I do support and have supported putting a trail out to connect Well Creek and out further in the past. This has been talked about for as long as I can remember. Um, and I do support that concept, but I do not support a condemnation process and moving a trail, putting a recreational trail on someone's personal property. They live out in the country for a reason. They purchased a homestead out there. They have a pond and land and they love their life and they don't want a trail through the center of it. And so I was frustrated in that we did have an alternative brought forward that was not seriously considered um at least it wasn't it didn't appear to be seriously considered as an alternative because of the cost. And again, we have contingency funding for unexpected delays. And we had a discussion at the time about going out for um potential grants or finding other funding or approaching the county or township or whatever. There were other discussions that came up at the meeting. I have since talked to um our some of our legislators who are would be interested in helping us if we need a deferral on a timeline. they would be interested in going back and asking for an increased amount based on what we have found which is it will cost another million plus4 I think 1.4 four 1.3 um that they would entertain the idea of talking about bringing forward and asking for additional funds at the state level. Um and in fact, one of them said that's not become all that unusual because the costs have gone up so much on so many projects that um that that would be a reasonable request. So, I am not interested in personally um I have I cannot sleep over the idea that we would be taking u doing something to property owners that that truly don't want it and have asked us not to do it. And if there were no other alternatives or if it was along the border of a property, it would be one thing, but neither of those are true. We have other alternatives and perhaps there are even more we haven't thought of. It would be my preference and the reason I vetoed it is because I want us to find those um and not do a go through condemnation and put a trail through someone's personal property. >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh Council Member Miller. >> Yes, I emailed staff some questions in advance of this and just want to get those on the record. Um, so just if the veto were overturned, what council approvals would remain before the city acquired any property interest and is eminent domain action proposed or authorized by this vote? >> Uh, Mr. Dumbrossski. >> Good evening, Mayor, President, members of the council. Uh this vote would just identify the trail alignment that future action would need to occur with the council to initiate property acquisition. At that point, you do identify the you the potential for the use of a 90-day quick take. If it got to the point where we couldn't agree with different property owners and needed to go to court, there would be an additional action the council would need to take to file in the district court for a condemnation proceeding. >> So my second question is how common is this process? What was passed at our last meeting in trail efforts um in for example the Chester Woods trail extension? How common is this process on our trail network as a as a whole or has it been historically? >> The most recent project we completed would have been the Chester Woods extension from Eastwood Golf Course out to 50th Avenue Southeast. That is a similar path overland goes through different properties. We worked with the the property owners along that project. part of the when we when we get to acquisition process if we have an alignment part of that process in in acquiring land what easements in this case is there's a negotiation it you know it could be you're taking two of my trees I want two more trees planted as part of the project just it everything's up for negotiation at that point as we move into that process >> so related to um Mayor Norton's statement about where where this partial located. Could you talk about the um bonding dollars that were authorized with the state legisure legislature for sewer expansion in southeast Rochester and how that impacts city growth and development in the broader southeast region of town? >> Well, generally speaking, you have this area, the shops on main area and the subdivisions that are south of Highway 52. The highway acts as a barrier to people who cannot drive, choose not to drive, cannot afford to drive. This path, the goal is obviously to provide access both people there getting say into downtown and vice versa um to access whether it's recreating getting to the future sports complex. Game Haven Park is what the bonding money was approved for. There's a very clearly identified corridor that we're working within. And there's only one place to cross the highway that's safe. And as the city engineer, I know these aren't always easy decisions, but we need to bring back the most feasible option. We looked at county one. We would have to reconstruct the entire county. The ditches provide an urban section. The length of that corridor going all the way out traveling up the hill through the roundabout and then back over on another county road. It just is priced us out of that as an alternative. You can't go down Broadway. It's 65 miles per hour as you pass Highway 52 and having to try to navigate a maze of signals and uh the the exit ramps on ramps with the the two highways at that interchange. So really it's looking at two two ways to go along the creek that we presented in the feasibility study. Um we did also during early stage of the the study look at going east of the Lumis property. There's about 90 feet of elevation difference. So created challenges in being able to even make the ADA grades work where we were having to carve out these 25 foot cuts and sort of this cavern you'd be walking and biking through just to make the grades work and tremendous amount of earth work and cost. So ruled that out and we're left with these two that were presented in the feasibility report. We're going to present to you the most feasible option which with the funding we have was the one we recommended. >> And in addition to the difference in construction costs of the two alternatives, what would other cost differences be in design work and ongoing maintenance work of the two alternatives? >> So the current design proposal was for the recommended alternative. If if the council chooses to go a different direction, we will need to get an updated proposal from uh our consultant, Alliant Engineering. Um then there's the ongoing maintenance costs. Um talking with our parks teammates and thinking about winter maintenance and and just replacement of a boardwalk. Um those numbers, we're looking at 10 to 15,000 annually. Let's say we need to replace the boardwalk 30 to 40 years from now. Um just using inflation, we're looking at couple million dollars in the future. Um as compared to just a paved batuminous path, ongoing crack sealing and um just different preservation plus the plowing in the wintertime. That's more in the thousand annually. Um, >> you said >> comparison >> the the elevated section would have a 30 to 40 year useful life. What what is the useful life of a paved section? >> I mean, we would try similar to our roadways to get 50 years out of that um with the ongoing preservation work uh like we do with our roadways. >> And what would the replacement cost of that be 50 to 60 years from now? Uh I I don't have that number right in front of me, but it's not going to be $2 million. >> Okay. >> Uh I've got a question on kind of the the So you you uh and your team did due diligence to look at several options, numerous options. Is that correct? >> Correct. And so you came up with the two here. And can you talk about from a kind of viewshed or screening uh the the differences between the two with there? There is the one that goes through the property owner's property and then there's the one that's on the edge of the property. as far as the ability to screen that to for the neighboring properties owners. >> Well, I mean, like I said, when we're going through acquisition and negotiating what what the project looks like, like on the Chester Woods extension, all of the properties we were bicting along that corridor, they we added a fence along each side of the path. We worked with those that need to get farm equipment in and out to um increase the pavement depth in certain locations. We put we provided gates in certain areas. Worked with the property owners. So, you know, with this project, for example, we could talk about a potentially a fence that that provides a more of a screening benefit than just a barrier. Um uh but between the two, I mean, you have the wood, you're in the woods, um council president. Um, so you're there's going to be trees that provide some of that screening just with the natural corridor that we're we're looking at with either of these two alternatives. >> Thank you. Uh, council member Doring. >> No, he >> I just have a point of inquiry for our uh, council uh, chair. I know a member of the public wanted to speak about this bike path during public comment. I think there was some miscommunication where that person was invited to have a seat because there was an assumption they were going to talk about G1. I'm wondering if it's appropriate to invite that particular member of the public who has sat here now for 4 and a half hours or three and a half hours. Council member, are you proposing that we suspend the rules and allow one member of the public who uh wanted to speak on this item during uh open comment period and somehow got steered probably by me to the G1. So uh >> that's what I'm proposing. >> So council uh so we have a motion to suspend the rules for one member of the public to speak. Uh the motion has been made by council member Doring and seconded by council member Palmer. We do need five to do this or five to do this. Uh anyone need to speak to it? All in favor say I. >> I post say nay. It passes unanimously. Um so with that uh we can invite um yes I remember your name Gberger come up and you have two minutes to speak. >> You can have someone come up and help you. my first council meeting. So I thought when I was signing up that I was assigning >> Yes. And uh we discussed that and I really appreciate my colleague uh bringing that up. So go ahead. >> And did this get provided to you? >> We have seen that. Yes. >> You seen the alternative routes? >> Absolutely. >> Code that is already placed in public domain already to get you over to whistleblankies the school. I I drew this out. Michelle doesn't know what I drew. She just kind of So, I'm I'm here for more. >> We showed alternative routes that were never ever looked at. Due diligence was not done by the city engineer to make sure he was spending our money, my money too, the appropriate way. He just wants to get as fast as he can to this new complex. They're bypassing the school. everything that they say that they're they want to do with this project so that the people can use this path to get to the other side of 52. I'm all I understand it to be honest, but they do not need to come across my property in that pond. They've got so many alternatives. >> Thank you, Mr. Lumis. I because >> Yep. >> Miss Goulberger has that. This is her time. Um, we just wanted to know, um, >> Jesse wanted to know why they didn't, uh, uh, go for the west side. >> That is the west side. >> That is the west side. Okay. And then plus, when you're talking about somebody's land, if you want to get it, how come no one's ever said how much money that they could receive for the land? Like, are we talking, you know, because some of the parts of the city and they're out in the country, they go by the feet. And so, you know, maybe you want to give Pat $2 million. I mean, what I don't know what's in your budget. Maybe that's a a big number, but I know the town is changing all the time and they're selling the land by the foot. So, maybe if you because how come no number has been set? >> We'll address that after you're done speaking. We'll ask our staff that. And I know this the Lumises have been there for over 50 years. So it's generational. And they've built up things for their grandkids to be out there in the pond and all those things. And I was just here to support because I know if you guys all had land out there, you'd want to keep it to yourself, too. >> Thank you. We appreciate it. We appreciate you staying. >> Thank you. Thank you. Uh Mr. Dumbrosski, can you speak to um compensation to uh where that fits into the process? >> Sure. So, the the council hasn't authorized us to proceed with any sort of land acquisition. Once that would happen, if it happened, that is when we need to hire an appraiser, establish a valuation. There's a process on when we make an offer, then the property owners can do their own independent appraisal, get reimbursed up to a certain amount for those for that appraisal. It's all part of the negotiation process that that we need to follow during um acquisition procedures. >> Council member Frederick's, >> Mr. Dumbrossski. This is a fun one, but I've had about a week to think about this after you brought up the fence through the one that you're using to connect to Chester Woods. The construction easement to go through there. Yeah, we put up a fence and that sounds good, but there's trees laying on about every other section of that fence currently. It's solid parsnip, it's solid buckthorn, and it's solid box elders. All three non-desirabs. It's almost impossible to mitigate that issue now that that fence is there. You know, you go spraying, you're hitting everything. And now we just It's just a mess. I I I I use that trail weekly, multiple times. It's a great trail, but don't go off the trail. You're going to itch or break out and boils. It's nuts. So, it sounds good to put up a fence, but then how you going to maintain that after it when there's nothing there? You can actually maintain the side and that construction easement and take care of it. I don't know that that fence keeps anybody out or in anyway, but that's my opinion, but I witness it and it's just it's just another thing for any further discussion on this item. Uh, Council Member Palmer. >> Yeah, I I voted um against doing this and and I will um um not support overriding the veto on this. I think um condemning the land um is wrong. there is an alternative to it and um we need to do that. I'm all in favor of the trail. I think the trail is fantastic. Go out to Game Haven Park. We've planned for it for a long period of time. Um but I think the segment 1C alternate 2. Um is doable and I think that's what we need to be doing and and focus on that. I think going to court um sounds great. It's going to cost a lot of money, takes some more time than we really want to take. So, >> Council Member Frederick's >> I believe the taking of land by government entities is for basically safety or emergency purposes only. And I don't see this as either. I don't see this as either. And I think we should reserve that right just for must situations. This isn't a must. So, I'll stand by my vote as same as last week as well. >> Council member Wall, >> uh, Mr. Doug Browski, is there a much farther west uh uh route that's been suggested here tonight? I don't have that in front of me, but I'm guessing it might be what was shared after the la the first open house and trying to get to the whistleblies Wood Lake Business Park area and work your way along the public streets. >> Which is challenging with the floodway that we still need to navigate and have to construct boardwalks. And then I'm not certain where we're going to acquire the space to get through that industrial area. Um those are all platted lots. Uh so we're going through the same conversation and impacting a business potentially. Um we're going to have similar conversations if that's the direction the council wants us to go and we can if that's the case. >> Um Mayor Norton Thank you. Having trouble with my microphone. Um I did just want to say I'm I'm I struggle a little bit with the conversation about um the extra upkeep on the the wood options because it is actually the option that we chose to do out at Game Haven. So it is we do have a history of choosing that option. So, um, so I'll just say I I don't I don't think that holds water, um, with what we're doing. But, um, I am asking for you to uphold the veto. I am asking that we find an alternative route, whether that's the one we were just talking about, um, or another way. I I do not think it is fair to to take someone's uh, property against their will when there are other options. And there are other options. Uh I I saw you move your microphone so I didn't know if you would speak. >> Yeah, Council Member uh Keane, go ahead. >> Yeah, I and I again I I just feel like we should just be dealing with the veto here instead of just relitigating the same thing. We we're all just just restating whether we why we supported or why we didn't. Uh [clears throat] the fact is I think we're really here to see where if if it's a if if we can override veto or override the veto or not. Um, I I did support the staff recommendation on this because of the and I do trust the re the assessment that it was a $ 1.3 million hit to move to a segment 2A and then and then that would block the money that we had hoped to use as an overpass that so I was thinking it was the the public safety trade-offs here and this the viability of this route. We've been talking about doing this since 2021 and we're on a a little bit of a clock right now with bonding from 2023. So this idea of sending the staff back to look at other options to me is just folly. Um if if we if we're you know I we have used this idea of there's very set methods of going through um and getting easements. It's not like taking over people's property. you get easements to do this and and if and and they are contentious and I think that's what our staff have said we need to give them the ability to get that started and see where it goes. Uh just to back off on it, you know, I'm not there at this point. I I think this is a valid public interest in getting this trail to work and that's why I think why I'm trying to move this move this work forward and public works has a comment. >> Uh go ahead, Mr. Neeemire. >> Yeah, thank you council president. We just wanted to reiterate what council member Keane had to say there that, you know, if we have to go back and drill alternative routes, there could be schedule implications to this. It's not a forever clock on the uh grant. We have till mid 2028 to get the project done. So, just as the council makes a decision. Um, keep that in mind. And so with that, I'll make a motion just to the two-part motion again, accepting the feasibility study uh and recommendation of the preferred route to advance the final design and authorizing supplemental agreement in the amount of $418,70 with Alliant Engineering for a final design for the proposed trail. >> Second. >> A motion made by Council Member Keen and seconded by Council Member uh Miller. Uh any more to add? >> No. >> Council member Miller. >> Sure. I'll I'll just add I I also accepted an opportunity to go out and see the trail and I appreciated the the hospitality that I received. I think where I'm coming to on this is really the upfront and long-term maintenance cost and differences and the ongoing commitment of public funds that we do not have a budget for. And so that's why I will be supporting this motion tonight because I think that with the growth in southeast Rochester, additional population that will be cut off or provided access um by this trail connection. I think there's a public safety I think there's a transportation access and I think there's an economic access point to be made there and and that's why I'm planning to support this as I did two weeks ago. Uh I also will support it again as I did two weeks ago and I really look at it as and I think uh Miss uh Gsberger mentioned it. There is urban growth here and we are seeing it all over and I we have an urban urban growth plan and that includes uh trail systems and others and uh we do have a process and I do believe staff has done due diligence to find the best alternatives, the most workable alternatives. That said, there is a process that starts after this, which is that mediation process where the uh the issues of compensation and uh and uh mitigation uh screening and and in that process, the property owner has an arbiter that is a part of that process. I do believe this has to do with being good neighbors and I do believe that we as a city have been a good neighbor and trying to be a good neighbor and uh there are projects that we do that change environments. It happens. It's what we do. They're difficult decisions. Uh we try to work with the neighbors. We work as well as we can with the the neighbors and we want to work well with the neighbors going forward. Uh Council Member Doring. >> Um I plan to not support the motion tonight which would be a change in position for me uh from our last meeting. Um I have not had very many decisions from the dis that I have regretted. This was one uh my vote. So I appreciate the mayor's opportunity to uh to bring it back before this body. Um I uh along with some of my colleagues on the dis this evening have a problem um with intersecting the Lumis property down the middle when there is a viable option uh to go towards the edge of their property. I know that that is a more difficult um route to navigate. It will take some additional costs. Um it might delay um some future infrastructure projects. I just think it's the right thing to do. So, I will not be supporting this motion tonight. >> Thank you. Uh, Council Member, uh, Clerk Queso, please call the role. >> Council member Keane, >> I. >> Council member Miller, >> I. >> Council member Wall, >> nay. >> Council member Frederick's, >> nay. >> Council member Palmer, >> nay. >> Council member Dorne, >> nay. >> Council President Schubang, >> I. Uh the motion fails to get five votes and does not override the veto. >> Thank you. Uh moving on to H3 which is sustainability pilot programs funding request. Who is the lead on this one? Mr. >> Council President, Council President, Mayor Norton, council members. Uh thank you for having us here tonight. I'll have my colleagues come and sit behind me here. Um so good evening. Aaron Luxe with public works department. Also with me is Caleb Bets, our sustainability coordinator, Josh Mason, and Lorie Cook with Rochester Public Utilities. Um tonight we are here to talk about the proposed um sustainability pilot program funding request. Um this is a followup from the study session that we had in April. Um, so just really quick, uh, what we're going to cover briefly for you tonight is we'll do a recap of that April study session, what we had heard from at least the majority of the council members, um, to continue to work on this project. Uh, the proposed sustainability pilot programs and you'll see we kind of have a suite. So when we say programs, there's two main buckets and then within that there are some sweet suite of options. um the implementation and the evaluation um plan at this time and then we'll close out with what is the ask before council tonight. Um and Kayla will be assisting me with the presentation and then uh Josh and Lori are here to be able to help with any questions uh specifically as it relates to RPU and and their assistance with this with the proposal. So um again at the April study session what we had heard from the majority of the council members was um if you remember that that was tied into the engagement that we had done on the natural gas franchise fee and the direction was don't move forward with the natural gas franchise fee based on that public engagement and instead develop specific testable and measurable pilot programs based on that community feedback that could be considered. Um, it was also to specifically work with Rochester Public Utilities on developing those programs to make sure they worked in concert with um, uh, the the RPU programs and leaning on their expertise and implementing rebate programs and then to return u to council um, with approximately $100,000 in um, uh, 2026 council to contingency funding for consideration. Um, so since that time, that's what we've done. We've we've worked with RP. We've also worked with other city departments um as we evaluated program implementation, program expertise um in an effort to create efficiencies and and streamlining. Um we also through that we're able to identify administrative responsibilities how to be able to implement this within a regional um financial ask review some of the technical components and and regulatory components related to it and then ultimately put together um the proposed pilot programs um that you'll see before you tonight. And so with that, before I get into the high level of of the proposed programs, we just wanted to step back based on the community feedback because this is what we used as we work through that process um to kind of keep fine-tuning and and narrow down the list of of the programs that you'll see tonight. Um the public engagement that that we uh we had received the feedback one is what people wanted to see was support for home improvements that reduced energy use and household costs. So ways to reduce those costs direct visual investment back into the community. So getting the the funds back into the hands of of residents for those projects that it would be resident community-led projects. Um that the programs are accessible to a wide range of applicants. So, not just single family residents, but also multifamily renters, things things of that nature, that there are clear eligibility requirements um associated with those program details and then that we're able to have measurable outcomes and funding transparency. So, where the funds are being used and what are we accomplishing with that? And so, that's what we used on the basis of um bringing forth the programs that um you'll see tonight. And so from a high level standpoint, again, there's there's two primary buckets or we say funding areas that we're looking at. The proposal is $75,000 in the first bucket, which is for residential rebate pilot programs. Um these are targeted incentives that are specific for residential energy efficiency. And then you'll also hear some emerging um technologies. So allows us to beta test um those technologies and and and start to roll those out. The second piece and Kayla's going to go into great great detail on that. So I'm not going to on this slide. You have a few more slides coming up where she'll talk about that in more detail. The second one is partnering with the the building community grant program and actually enhancing that by 25,000. Um Chow was just uh in meeting with the council last week talking about um that program and so the recommendation is to increase that by $25,000. Um and it would have specific support for environmental stewardship focused projects that are led by residents and and those um community organizations. Um, with this approach, it allows us to utilize existing RPU programs, um, tying into the expertise they already have with implementing rebate programs, um, and through their their billing system. Um we can um also implement on a small scale that allows us to uh measure that and be able to to track that um so that there's hard data that we can bring back to council and and be able to do a full evaluation um when we come back for recommendation for 28 and and potentially beyond. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Kayla. >> Thank you, Erin. Uh good late evening council members, council president, mayor. Um [clears throat] I'm going to talk just a little bit more specifically about the pro uh the programs that we are recommending. So this slide kind of shows the breakdown of the 75,000 that we're recommending in the residential pilot program budget. And so really the goal of this is to mix energy efficiency, uh electrification, resilience, and renewable energy strategies. So we feel that each of these rebates kind of serves a different purpose in that regard. Uh so first the uh 22,500 for the plug-in or also known as balcony solar. Um the purpose here is to explore a smaller and potentially more accessible version of renewable energy. Um for those folks that you know maybe um you know are renters or multif family or residents who can't install rooftop solar for whatever reason. Um, and so with this one, we are going to be working with RPU and community development on some equipment certification and code related uh, conversations. Um, and hoping to launch that program in 2027. Um, next 20,000 for the battery storage rebates, which um, could be partnered with new or existing rooftop solar or standalone batteries. Um, there is also a state of Minnesota battery incentive and so this rebate could partner with the state of Minnesota rebate to kind of further reduce those upfront costs. >> Um, this one, >> can you hold for a minute? Council member Wall, >> one of the questions I had uh in looking at this chart is do you have any idea how many households represent the 225 and then the 20 and then the 20? How how many households are we going to touch? >> We do on the next slide. >> Oh. That was my question, too. So, >> Oh, okay. Thank you. >> Can I get to the next slide? Because we have it in each on each row. >> Council [snorts] member Palmer also has a question. >> So, on your first plugin here, um you you say pending code and safety approval. What What are you talking about? >> Yes. And I might invite RPU up to kind of assist with this, but we are talking with community development and RPU about just some aspects of the program that we still need to kind of figure out details on and hoping to launch in 2027. >> Okay. But but you're asking for contingency funds. You're hoping to do something and you have you you don't have the the code and and what I'm I'm concerned about is that you're going to say plug-in balcony solar. Is this for rentals? Is this for for homeowners? There's a lot of questions here that that doesn't make any sense. >> Yep, I can field that question. Uh great questions, Council Member Palmer. Um so the idea behind this one is we want to be ready. So there's a lot of um interest in balcony solar, but there is right now there's um questions in regard to on the code side. um our our building officials as well as state building officials have been in correspondence on the national energy code side of it to put language into that code. It just isn't going to be ready until they're anticipating mid 2027. Um and the in order for us to move quickly, uh we want this in the hopper to then be able to to implement the program um if that is successful. Now people are purchasing these. there are items um available and so they are being used already. We just would not want to be able to have a rebate program incentivizing something until that has been fully flushed out. So, um, in the event that that does not fall into place and we're not able to implement, part of the ask would be to allow us to shift that funding into the one of the other pots where we are seeing high demand and perhaps have already exhausted um all the funding um in within that area. So, I don't know. >> Jump in quick on that. >> Um, there is a certification right now UL 3700 listed products um with a plug-in solar. We're likely looking at some of the smaller systems. You hear like 1.2KW, a number that other states have used. We're looking at something probably around like 420 watts or smaller. And it is essentially you plug it into an outlet and it delivers power into the home that essentially powers like a refrigerator, some light bulbs, that sort of thing. It does not export power out to the grid. So, so, so from a code perspective, is it is it an electrical code from from you as a distributor or is it from the building code as being proposed and you think it's going to pass next July? Is that where which is it? >> Uh, there's a couple things going on. There's state legislation right now um that was introduced earlier this year that did not pass that will likely come back in the 2027 session. Um, but the safety standard is that UL 3700. So essentially once products are certified under UL3700, customers can buy them. They've been deemed safe and tested um and able to be used. >> So the only UL listed product >> UL Yep. UL3700 >> and RPU is cool with that. >> Yep. And I know Lori, do you want to jump in? You had a conversation with our state electoral inspector and this is the very reason why it didn't pass at the state earlier this year is because some of these concerns about >> Well, the state doesn't pass anything till the end of May. So, >> right. >> And then they don't do June 1st. So, >> no. Exactly. >> Yep. >> Yeah. So, in each of the states that have passed uh balcony solar product or balcony solar laws, um the laws are essentially to prohibit utilities and other entities from disallowing it to be used. Um and again virtually all of the states have allowed up to 1,200 watts which um you know without any UL um support or anything like that. Uh what we're proposing is only UL 3700 products which so far are all in the you know 420 watt range. uh some of that are going up to about 550 and incentivizing good behavior if you will. Um you know these products are already shipping any any of us could buy one right now and plug it into our wall. Um what we want to incentivize is you know the smaller safe units that are ullisted. >> My last question what's it cost? What's a UL listed product cost that you're going to save? >> How much? >> Um, that's actually on um an upcoming slide. >> Okay. >> Y So, thank you. >> And and one other um thing to follow up, I'm not electrical code expert and so that's where we've been talking with community development on this. So, um regards to the comment that I made. So, what we're understanding is there is some code changes that are being proposed and they'll come out in draft for the 2029 update. But if it's in draft and our the state of Minnesota and our our team has been involved with drafting that language, they will reference that um and allow that to be rolled out early. So um if it goes beyond the products that that Josh and Lori had just mentioned, those are what we would also be able to then implement. Um but it would come down to the approval from our community development part department to start implementing that. >> Thank you. continue to jump to the next slide. >> Yeah, let's all see how much this stuff's going to cost. >> Okay, you can see kind of the rationale for the rest of them. Electric panels, remove the barriers to these larger electrification projects, air sealing and insulation, kind of the first step, energy efficiency, um and then uh some funding reserved for program administration. So, getting into the the question that was just raised um on the proposed incentive amounts. And so this is where we're looking at incentives um from $1 to $300 for the balcony solar depending on kind of some of these conversations that we're still having, sizes of systems, eligibility, um the safety, the UL certified um equipment types, things like that. So we're looking at a reach of uh 75 to 220 households with that one. Battery storage, we're looking at 2,000 per project. Again, >> can I ask a clarifying question? So, how much of the cost of whether it's the plug-in solar um unit or the battery storage rebate, how much of that cost does the incentive cover? Is it the whole thing or is it a portion of what the consumer pays? >> Uh the plug-in solar would be around like 10 to 15%. Um battery storage probably somewhere in that range too. 10% 10 to 15% of the incentive is 10 to 15% of the total cost. Got it. >> And then we did try with these as well to find other programs that we could support. So for instance, battery storage, the state of Minnesota incentive um may also apply for that one. Um same with electric panel. Um there uh and then on the air seal and insulation that one uh partners with the Minnesota energy resources rebate which is the natural gas company. So looking to you know leverage other funding sources to continue to bring down those upfront costs. Um we're looking at 2,000 again for the electric panel upgrade add-on and that would be partnering with um an an RPU incentive for air heat pumps. So supporting barriers to electrification, not just someone who would like to increase their electric panel. Um and then the air sealing and insulation again supporting the the Minnesota Energy Resources rebate. Um and we're looking at about 100 projects for that. Um this uh table kind of or this uh chart kind of shows the program cost effectiveness of the RPU program. So what we did was look at um you know how these programs not only um match up with other RPU programs on a cost effectiveness scale but also how do they fill gaps in existing programs. So you know we don't want to duplicate existing programs. We want to fill gaps and we want to support RPU in that sense. And so we do feel that the programs that we have recommended fall within you know a reasonable cost effectiveness range. And then the electric panel is not shown on this one because it doesn't directly save energy, but it does reduce those barriers for those larger projects. And then the second um piece or the second pilot program um bucket is the enhancement of the building community grant program. And so this would be an additional $25,000 um that would be directed towards environmental sustainability related projects um within this larger grant program. So, I know Chiao was here recently and she shared a little bit about this program, but it is a very popular program. There's currently $100,000 allocated annually to this grant and funds are utilized within they have been utilized within the first six months of 2024, 2025, and 2026. And so, we we also know that some environmentally focused projects are not receiving full funding. And so this would really be in an effort to um support and enhance the program to support environmental projects and to again leverage the existing you know application um structure, the outreach process, the staff review structure essentially tweaking the program, making small changes, bringing the sustainability team into the review um but leaning on the program that already exists. And then I listed some uh potential projects on here. Um but again, these are grassroots efforts and so it really is up to the community on this one. A little bit about implementation and evaluation. So this um timeline here shows a little bit about um what the what the future timeline would look like. So, if uh funding were to be approved tonight for the rest of the year, we would kind of be working with RPU and city departments to finalize all of the components of these programs. So, um you know, eligible equipment, program materials, putting together the applications, the rebate processing, um uh order of operations, things like that. And then in 2027, launching the ready program. So conducting outreach um through existing channels um in collaboration with RPU with um the healthy home program that we've created through um you know community groups things like that um and then um tracking kind of metrics costs outcomes of all these programs both quantitative and qu and qual qualitative so on the quantitative side we'll be looking at participation number of projects dollar per kW reduced dollar per greenhouse gas emission reduced or saved. And then on um the more qualitative side of things um we would be looking at you know participant experience certainly you know similar to the community grant the photos the stories the um the community impact of of that grant um enhancement. So, as we go through these programs, we would be collecting that data, analyzing that data, and then coming back to you in 2027 to kind of report on the outcomes of these pilot programs with recommendations um for how we'd like to either continue, modify, or discontinue each of these um pilot programs moving forward into 2028 and beyond. And with that, I will turn it back to to Aaron. >> Yep. So, then just the the last is we wanted to follow up. Um, just a reminder, the the ask before council tonight is to authorize the use of $100,000 from the 2026 contingency funding um with $75,000 for the residential rebate pilot programs, $25,000 to expand the building community grant program with that sustainability focused um funding. And then the second component of that is authorizing staff to finalize and implement those programs, evaluate uh the 2027 pilot year, and then um return to council with the final results and recommendations for next steps. So with that, if there's any additional questions, >> Council Member Keane. >> Yeah. Again, just want to I know you tie this together, but you were with us, I think, in the maybe in the winter when you talked about like, hey, we done this outreach and I think it was a council recommendation to try to do a pilot and do and do it this way. So, just to tie that together and I and I am supportive of that. Uh the couple things I'm surprised at though, I'm really glad to see RPU here with you because I know there was some early on like how does this work and how does this work in conflict or in together. So, it's good to see that. Um, one thing with the the I'm glad to see the balcony stuff on here because it's happening whether like you say whether we support it or not. Um, but I imagine it's all behind the meter and there's no way of tracking whatever that ends up doing. And I I see RPU kind of saying you can you can help get them out there, but there's no way to know that they reduce, you know, per because it's all behind the meter. Is that do I think I have that right? Are you answering you? You'll need to verbally answer for our >> Yes. We think of it more like energy conservation. It's behind the meter. It's reducing that energy usage >> and reducing demand. Yeah. >> Which allows it to be part of your demand management. >> Exactly. >> Where some of these other things that we were talking about when you talk about converting things to electric, I don't think the RPU dollars can participate in that right now. >> If customers are on a time of use rate, then they can. >> Okay. >> Yes. because we don't want to build load that contributes to our peak, >> you know. So that's why we have a time of like electric vehicles for example is a good one too. Yeah, >> we can provide incentives for electric vehicles assuming that they are going to be charging at night if they're on time of use rate. >> Okay. My my other kind of observation for this was I was surprised by the level of detail on what the spending is and the breakdown to that. I probably good, but you're also do you feel you're painting yourself into a corner a little bit? >> Yeah, thank you for that question, council member. um a little bit, but there was a lot of thought that went into this. So again, we did research the number of projects that we felt we could fund. Being able to talk with the applicants, get their experience, be able to track it was important so that we had that measurable information. And so that also played into, you know, that uh the factors there. And then the last thing, as I noted in Council Member Palmer's previous questions, not knowing fully what would happen with the balcony solar, Yeah. that $22,500. Part of that ask would be if there's a program that that um all the funds are being expended much faster than we thought. There's a lot of interest in it. Good. The requested have the flexibility to be able to shift those funds. >> And that's the specific one because when I look at the timeline, like if you're going to get approvals in mid year and then you're going to be back to us in, you know, report back in October, it's just there's just no time. >> It it's going to be very very fast. And but we do think in the >> when you look at the amount of investment that could be made in this space 100 I I know $100,000 is a big ask. It also is a small amount in in comparison to many of the rebate programs that you see the investments happening in these residential properties. So um we do think that we would be able to implement it and get those funds out to the community with with the the short amount of time that we have. >> Very good. And and again, the way we're the way the uh motions are put in front of us, you do have the flexibility in next May to switch funds around. You don't need to be back to us. >> Uh correct. That that's our that's our >> that's that's I'm going to state it is my understanding too, but just going to get it out there. Thank you, >> Council Member Palmer. >> Well, I asked the building code question. I've been in the building code for 40 years and and nothing happens fast there. So, I I I I'm Godspeed, I guess. Um I looked up on Amazon what it costs for a plug-in um um system. It's $1395 and $150 to have it delivered. So, I'm not particularly sure that people are going to be spending money to save a little bit of money. I'm I'm I'm I'm missing this whole entire concept. Um the other one is this isn't an emergency. Um using our our our dollars for for something like this. Um, if you want to plan it, you could plan it. I I think RPU does a really really good job on sustainability. They do a really good job on rebates. Um, I would rather just give them money and just say, "Hey, here's 50 grand. Um, this is kind of what we like to do and we not have to to reinvent the wheel here." And, um, they're already they already are the experts in this. So, I won't be supporting this um motion. I think somebody's going to make um for those couple reasons. Council member Miller, >> could you clarify the other savings that would come from having a solar panel behind besides the initial cost and rebate? >> I'm going to defer to >> help my colleague understand the cost proposition. >> Yeah, I can answer that question. So, for a smaller system about 420 watts, you would save about $70 annually. >> Okay. So, what is the payback period of that compared with a rooftop solar? >> Very similar. >> Very similar. Yeah, probably that 8 to 12 years, you know, depending on cost, but somewhere in that range. >> And compared with the rooftop solar program, the advantage of this for renters who we heard not represented, they're able to take that with them should they move. It's not fixed to the building. >> Yep. They can move it. There's no interconnection process that they need to go to. There's no extra meters or extra wiring or anything required. >> Thanks. >> Y >> I've got a question on So, you mentioned Yes. $100,000 is a lot of money, but it's also when it comes to really implementing and evaluating it may not be that much. And so what I'm struggling with is the evaluation of the pilot project and how how how you're going to get data that will then support the expansion of the program. And so can you talk I know you covered it but can you talk through that again in a little more depth? >> Actually Kayla since you covered this in more detail I'll have you cover that question. Is that okay? >> Yep. And I did flip back kind of to the valuation pieces that we'd be looking at. >> Yeah. I think that's part of why you know we kind of have these two programs that are pretty different. I think on the residential energy rebate side it really is more that quantitative side of it. Um and we, you know, started with a larger list of what the rebates could be and we kind of trimmed it down to these four options. We do recognize that some of them have kind of um a smaller number of projects, but you know, we will be working closely with RPU on you know, the data collection um with those um you know and and you know, we'd like to also you know, do surveys and understand um kind of did this move the needle? did this make an impact on if you could complete the project or not. And then we also have um RPU, you know, has the the um um you have your different formulas that you use to calculate all of the energy and greenhouse gas emission reduction savings from all of these. And so we'll have kind of that hard data. And then on the community grant side of things, you know, they have um the criteria already that they use to evaluate the effectiveness of that program. And so I think we do understand that it is a limited amount of funding. We're also taking that funding and kind of breaking it down into um several different options as well. And that is why we tried to use existing program structures where we could and really align with processes and try our best to not recreate the wheel. So, so just just to to clarify, so so a lot of the data you're going to get is the experience that the homeowners or the participants in the in the project give you. We uh council member Keane talked about behind the meter so that it we're you're going to be relying on the the participants and their assessment of how much they're saving. Is that correct on the plug-in balcony? Is that a good way to am I hearing that properly? >> How are we going to determine success? >> Council member Keane says no, I'm not. Okay, go ahead. We can quantify the energy savings. Yes. And then >> you can for the participants. >> Uh, yep. And so like for example, for each solar panel that's installed, we can claim energy savings that contribute to our state energy savings goal of 1.5%. >> So it helps us in that way as well. >> Yeah. But the point with behind the meter in front it just was with the rooftop things we're they're connected into the RPU system and and when this anything that's behind the meter I think what we'll do for these is estimate how much impact they have like on average and I think that's a fine way to do these kinds of things. >> Exactly. Yep. Yeah. Because we'll have information on the systems. We'll know likely which way which direction panels are facing so we can do some pretty good estimates on it. >> Good. That helps. Thanks. Thanks for that clarification. Uh, Council Member Frederick's. >> Thank you. I hate shooting holes and things, but I got to a little bit here. >> Bring your mic on. >> I look at it this way. I see I see the amount of the incentive to do it. And somebody that's struggling to make ends meet isn't going to buy a $1,400 piece of equipment to save a hundred bucks. I mean, or 50 bucks or 70 bucks. Um, I see it as giving people a little bit of money that were going to purchase this stuff anyway. They're going to buy this stuff anyway and it gives them a little bit off of what they're buying. Um, to for somebody in my mind to make a decision like I'm going to step outside of my norm and I'm going to try something new. I'm going to have to get a substantial savings and and and to get payback. I heard you say seven years, but my math said 20 years. If it's 70 bucks and the thing's 1,400 bucks, it's 20 years. I don't know. That's my math. But I'm just saying. And then what's the reliability of this stuff? Is it tried and true? I know a lot of solar panels in the past. Friends of mine have tried them. They failed before they even got close to a payback. Things like that. There's there is there is a lot more to somebody taking this leap than just uh honestly a very small percentage of their money upfront to uh to do it. So, >> Council Member Miller. >> Yeah, I I feel like we're kind of relitigating past discussions and I know it's a somewhat narrow uh direction, but I think you've provided that. So, with that said, I'd like to make a motion adopting a resolution authorizing $100,000 from 2026 council contingency funding for sustainability pilot programs, including $75,000 for residential rebates and $25,000 for a sustainability focused expansion of the building community grant program and authorizing staff to finalize and implement the programs, evaluate the 2027 pilot year, and return to council with results and recommendations. >> I'll second council. Uh motion made by council member Miller and seconded by council member Keen. Any more to add? Council member Miller. >> No, again I think you've uh done what we asked you to do. What what direction came from the last time we engaged this? I appreciate the uh innovation and thinking about projects that are emerging. Balcony solar being one battery projects that aren't immediately paying back their full potential but are flexible or applicable to a different um subset of residents and maybe apply for other incentives particularly renters. And so I I feel like you've heard our feedback. You brought us a program that meets those conditions. And so I glad to support this. >> Council member uh Frederick's. >> Thanks. I have a feeling this is going to pass tonight and that's fine. I'm on board with that. But I don't want to come back in a year or two and say, "Hey, we're going to do a franchise fee on gas to sustain this program." I'm I'm not on board with that because that hits everybody that isn't getting an incentive from it. and it and it hits our lowest people, our lowest paid people in this community, our least affluent the hardest. >> I will also be supporting the the measure and because of the data and the information that we will be gathering. So I will be very interested in the evaluation piece of this to really give us a clue as to what direction we should be going in. I do uh I I uh I understand Council Member Frederick's point. Uh but there are people out there that purchase these products and they see some kind of benefit. They see some kind of savings. Uh I have a solar panel system on my roof and it's very successful. [laughter] >> So uh so it's the evaluation that uh that I'm really going to be looking at. So with council member Palmer, go ahead. >> Well, I'm a little uncomfortable tonight with with contingency contingency contingencies being spent. Um it's it's not free money and uh we need to be very careful what we're using it for. This is not an emergency. This is not unplanned. We can budget for it next year. Um we have RPU who was there. Um and I Mr. Frederick's math, I think it's 22 years to pay back for the plugin in and that equipment, I would say, would not last 22 years. That just be my guess. Um there's a lot of unknowns in this project and and I I don't like unknowns and I also would not be in favor of a gas franchise fee um sneaking in um the back door. >> Clerk Case, please call the role. >> Council member Keane, >> I. Council member Miller. >> Hi. >> Council member Wall. >> I. >> Council member Frederick's >> nay. >> Council member Palmer. >> Nay. >> Council member Doring. >> I. >> Council President Schubin. >> I. >> Motion passes 5 to2. >> Thank you. Okay. So, at this point it is 5 minutes to uh midnight. We do have uh two more items on the agenda. I'm going to just kind of check with my colleagues. Do we want to power through or do we want a five minute break? >> Power through. >> Power through. Okay, we are >> we are at seasonal parking restriction update, Mr. Tyler Neee. >> Although I did want to welcome you good morning instead of >> it's not quite [laughter] there yet. >> Not quite. The break would have helped. >> So I do have to say good evening. You're right. Uh thanks for having us here for an update on seasonal parking restrictions. Uh we're calling this attempt number two after study session last week. I'm Tyler Nemire, public works director. Uh Dan Flesga, our street maintenance manager, is also here to help with the presentation. Uh we'll start with a little Oh yeah, I got to advance the slide. Start with a little background on the ordinance. Uh as a reminder, alternate side parking, the way it works is you park on the even odd sides of the street based on the calendar date when we are under the parking restrictions. Compliance is handled through enforcement. Um and that is ticketing. Um but we do uh implement a warning period each season season where information is uh supplied to people that are in violation violation of the ordinance. Um and this is how we started to kind of onboard the community uh to the seasonal parking restrictions and then later ticketing begins. Um these details evolved over time. We started with a pilot in the east side Pioneers neighborhood in 2019. we did a citywide adoption of that ordinance and then in 2021 the season was shortened to November 1st or from November 1st to April 1st and that is the date that we are currently under. So at that point Dan's going to share some operational observations with us. >> Yeah, thank you Tyler. So you know the background goals of the advance here background goals of the program are we really want to provide predictable routine thorough fast and equitable snow removal across the city. And what that means is congested streets typically you know on towards the inner part of the city would receive the same level of service as those uh neighborhoods where there's for example more off- streetet parking. And it also provides routine um expectations for residents and a proactive approach to our snow removal challenges. And a couple other benefits the ordinance has. Um one of those is like law enforcement efficiency. And second is street sweeping for those uh winter days we might not have snow on the ground. So what do we see from an operations perspective? Well, from the snowplow driver's seat, we've seen a lot of success. Uh, streets are definitely cleaner. Uh, we're able to clean them better with cars parking on just one side. Um, plows are able to also move more quickly through the routes more efficiently and with less followup kind of day in and day out. Uh we also seen fewer plow versus parked vehicle damage claims which uh can be difficult when you're trying to squeeze a large plow through streets with cars parked on both sides. Uh less buried cars because people are moving their cars every day versus uh them sitting on the street for weeks and then we get called to deal with those icy speed bumps that are pretty difficult to remove come January. And actually it's less towing for residents versus how we used to do in the past where we'd come in and you know post a street and clear it. Um we'd have to tow a lot of cars in that situation. So looking at uh ticketing data uh this was the winter of 2425. Um so if you look at that you can see the first part of November was the warning period. So no tickets were issued during that period. And then as you might expect uh the first um kind of start of towing there were obviously a lot of tickets as people were getting used to the ordinance and then after that uh ticketing kind of coincided with a snowfall events where we get snow enforcement would ramp up to so that we could plow the streets and then that would subside. And as far as analyzing ticketing by vehicle, so number of tickets per vehicle, you can see by far the majority of tickets were just one uh per vehicle, you know, and then it trailed off very quickly after that. So what that shows us is, you know, people likely got a ticket and we're like, oh, this is this is what the ordinance is or maybe they're a visitor to Rochester and then uh we're aware of the program at that point. And so what do we hear feedback uh from residents and uh people calling in and stuff? You know, it's definitely increased over time. Now it's again, it's a routine um occurrence every winter. People understand how it works and why it works. The majority of the negative inquiries that we received are, you know, it's February, there's no snow and I got a ticket. So, a lot of dissatisfaction around that ticketing and not being any snow on the ground. And in the spring, we were able to address that working with the police department by saying, "Okay, there's no snow in the forecast. Let's let's suspend the the enforcement." In the fall, that's a little more difficult to do because um you know, we have a stated start date and then if you're to delay that, how do you communicate that? Obviously, there's all these street signs saying November one is when it starts. So, um you know, one thought we had was we could possibly um extend that warning period farther until we get that first snowfall. >> Thanks, D. So, public works has also been working with um DI director Matella to take a justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion audit look at the alternate side parking uh ordinance. Uh the purpose of this audit is to clarify and understand if disproportionate impacts um exist within the ordinance. Um there was some suspicion some years ago that that might be the case. So to start, we map ticketing locations and our justice tracks. Those justice tracks are established based on specific levels of people of color, lower incomes, and limited English proficiency. Uh when we lay layer those on top of each other, we actually do see a disproportionate impact. As you can see on your slide, 41% of the tickets in the city came in 11% of the city area and 15% of the population. Um, you can see those areas indicated there in that kind of olive color. So, we started asking, okay, so what's causing this? This looks disproportionate. And note as we move through here, um, the bold outlined areas highlight the justice tracks. That's meant to guide our visual. Again, those are the areas that have had 41% of the tickets over this uh duration of ticketing. So, when we look at building age by track, we do see a correlation with older parts of the community. This is likely due to the characteristics of those communities. They tend to have smaller lots, smaller garages and driveways, and that leads to more on street parking, thereby probably more ticketing. When we overlay owner occupancy um on the ticket areas again we generally see lower or low excuse me lower owner occupancy rates in these areas of denser ticketing. That's likely the higher degree excuse me uh lower rates lower owner occupancy rates in the areas of density ticketing. That's likely means that we've got more turnover in occupancy and potentially less ordinance awareness in those areas. Um, also interesting to note that when we first went through this, uh, we tried to use the registration data that was associated with the license plates of the tickets and most of those were actually outside of city limits. So to do a GIS exercise, we had to pivot back to um, uh, the ticket location as it was issued, the physical location of the ticket. And lastly, looking at percent single family units, we're generally seeing lower owner occupancy, meaning higher occurrences of rentals and apartments. That results in probably more vehicles per address. Also, with a half parking spot per unit, that likely means that on street parking is utilized by visitors going to those residences. So, a few other things to keep in mind related to this audit. Our practices do include more frequent enforcement near downtown, but that is deemed as appropriate as poorly plowed streets near downtown will impact the most people and the most traffic. It's also a fact that we need to plow streets in Minnesota and Rochester and different areas of the city interact differently with those operations regardless of what our ordinances say. uh the steam team still finds that seasonal parking is accomplishing its goals and there's nothing inherent in the ordinance as it stands today that is disproportionate. It has more to do with the characteristics of the communities than it does with the ordinance itself. So tonight we're looking for council input on a couple items. First, if you have >> Can you hold a minute, Mr. Ne? >> Oh, you're jumping the gun. Okay, go ahead. >> [laughter] >> So, if you have any perspectives on the Jedi audit and also returning to the challenge uh that Dan brought up earlier about ticketing before snowfalls, other cities have implemented a sliding start date for seasonal parking restrictions. This would be a potential tool for us to implement in the fall for these people that are getting tickets when snow hasn't fallen for the season yet. One significant consideration with that is how to keep a warning period. We've talked to parking enforcement in our uh police department and they really don't want the warning period to go away. They see that as an important part of onboarding the community, these restrictions each season each season. If we were to start restrictions with an announcement, say within 48 hours of a forecasted snowfall, they fear that we would generate a lot of confusion in the community without some sort of onboarding period. Alternatively, it does seem feasible to us that we could implement a warning period from November 1st, where the ordinance sits today, up until 48 hours before the first forecasted plowable snow. And that actually wouldn't take an ordinance revision at all. That would just be direction from you all to have us implement the ordinance that way. So, with that, welcome your feedback. Council Member Palmer, >> I'm not a fan of the program that we have and a couple reasons. In your data that you had, um, in 2024, we had nine events that you plowed. Of those, three of them were 2 in or more. So, to me, I'm moving my car left and right all the time for three events that are more than two inches. And so, um, that doesn't make much sense. and and you just got done saying that we could have a sliding start, but the problem with that is that we always tell everybody we're sweeping the street. That's why we have the the the early um early start on the on this removal. So, I I don't know where you're coming from on that, but for me, I understood that we were going to plow one side of the road and come back the next day and plow the other side of the road. But what I see is that we plow both sides of the road. We we we we pile the snow on the car that's on the other side. I don't see the savings there for us. >> And you want to take the second part? I was going to respond to some of the first stuff. So, not every winter is created equal, right? And the last few that we've had are fairly mild, right? The ordinances are designed to cover an average winter and a couple of our last ones haven't been that. So, yes, the community does struggle with having to move their vehicles in a lower than average snowfall winter. That's a fact, right? But we need to put something in place that protects us in the event that we have an above average winter. So that's why we've advocated for >> when we did the ordinance, it was after or during an a big snow winter. And so we decided to do that, which we we've goofed around with it. But to me, if we only have three in three events of two inches or or less, and if we can make an announcement to say, hey, a snow emergency, you need to now park on the even side or now park on the odd side. To me, that just makes more sense and is easier for people. I've lived in in in northeast Rochester where I had a single car drive and all my neighbors, it's a headache to move your car back and forth and left and right and and do that. So, to me, it just makes more sense for us to make this announcement that, hey, it's a snow emergency, more than two inches. Let's move your car. >> Do you want to speak to that because you were part of the early Yeah. research on this? Okay. >> Yeah. I mean, we did a lot of research when we brought the ordinance forward to start and I, you know, a couple things thoughts I have, you know, with this with these trending warmer winters, we see more ice. You know, we've had a couple bad ice events and that those are almost, you know, more difficult to plow and sometimes less forecasted. And I mean, there's streets where if if that ordinance wasn't in fact in effect and let's say we, you know, call, let's say, starting tomorrow at midnight, park on the odd side, well, if people don't comply, you know, there's streets we're not going to be able to get down if cars are in the way. So then that brings up the, you know, towing component. Um, so that would be one, I guess, specific comment on that. >> And and I'm curious, you brought up towing. Um, outside the downtown area, how many cars have we towed last year? >> Not very many. And that's part Well, that's by design, actually. So, the alternate side parking allows us to get away with way less towing because in general, we're able to plow the streets more effectively. What we dealt with before was not being able to get down streets. People were getting delays in service to get their streets plowed because we couldn't physically get to plow through. We had to wait for the tow truck to show up. And on top of that, we're talking about disproportionate impacts. I have a hard time accepting that a ticket is a worse situation for somebody in these disadvantaged communities than their car getting towed and not being able to get to work in the morning. >> So that's >> that's some of the trade-offs that we've talked about as we continue to contemplate the best way to implement snow plowing. >> So I I am in favor of snow emergency, but I I'll end with the last thing is you see snowbound cars around town and they sit there for a week and nobody no one teets them. no one towes them. And you get people who are rule followers and and they they call me and say, "Why isn't this car being moved?" And and it's really frustrating for people again who are actually following the rules. And there's cars that's lasted 10 days that I've seen um that that no one cares. >> Yeah. And I I mean obviously the plow drivers deal with that frustration too. And I think a lot of times there is stuff going on in the background. You know, I think it's kind of the last resort for towing those cars um because we're trying to people the benefit of the of the doubt. You know, they are typically getting tickets, maybe multiple tickets. Uh PD is trying to get in contact with them. The towing and impounding is kind of a last resort. So, but I'd like to respond to your other question on the plowing the other side. I mean, if we were to literally, and that is some confusion, if we were to literally plow only half of the street, that other side we didn't touch would be so compacted that, you know, it wouldn't be able to be plowed. So, we're still going to plow as much of the street. You know, we always remind the plow drivers, don't plow it tight to the cars. Give people room, you know, as much as possible room to get out. But obviously, we're going to clean up as much of the street as we can with, you know, what we can get to. >> Council member Frederick's, >> thank you. I I'm going to enjoy arguing with Sean a little bit here with my back to him. So, efficiency is utmost important when it comes to snow removal. I mean, you can't have drivers out there hitting things, scratching their head, wondering how they're going to get things done. It's just it's just not efficient. Having a definite start date is important. A parking enforcement officer can forget to give them a ticket. I mean, they can tell when it's a problem. They can tell when it's not a problem. They have jurisdiction to make decisions, so we can trust their judgment, I would guess. I don't think they're just writing around giving everybody running around giving everybody tickets for the heck of it. Um, consistency is super important. People do not do a good job of keeping themselves informed. That's just a recipe for failure to say we're going to put it out there when the time comes. About 10% of the people will be tuning into said station or website or what have you. That's probably an exaggeration, but I bet you it's less than 50. So now you got major problems with vehicles on both sides. You're hitting stuff. I mean, we don't need those problems. Um, people are going to complain. It's inevitable. No matter what, people are going to complain. And I agree with you. A $20. What's a parking ticket? 20 bucks. >> I've got a few. >> How much? >> 35 for this. >> Okay. 35. I'm going to remember going forward to go back and forth. That's going to I'm like, that's on me. I didn't read the sign that's on I feel like every block when you're in these residential parts of town. Um, be informed. And I've got the tickets. I've paid the tickets. So, >> and like Dan said, the the data shows that is the case, right? Most people after they get their first ticket, they comply the rest of the season. We're not >> And now I'm used to it next year. And when you're changing it the next year, you got to stay consistent. In five years, everybody just be used to it. They'll complain a little less hopefully except for Sean. And way we go. >> That's my take. >> Mayor Norton completely lost my train of thought after [laughter] that one. Um >> it's tomorrow. It's a fresh day. We got a live [laughter] >> Good morning everyone. Um two things really quick. Did you do any data collection before to know about the difference between what we were doing before and now? Is this as far as and I was thinking even with the diversity, equity, and inclusion the Jedi >> ordinance you're saying like pre209? >> Yeah. >> Um we didn't put any of those. We didn't track and map all those addresses. >> Okay. So >> certainly not from a diversity, equity, inclusion standpoint. Yeah. >> But you did have the information that you were towing much more frequently. >> Yes, that's true. >> Okay. So that that's what I was trying to get at. You were towing more. You don't know about the number of tickets >> before and after or compliance before and after because you just weren't tracking it. >> I mean, we would call in cars. Same thing. Cars that would sit, you know, for weeks without being moved, right? >> I mean, I'm certain there were less tickets, you know, before the ordinance. >> Okay. But but you were having a more difficult time plowing. And I I will just say you guys do a great job plowing and keeping the streets clean. You know, it's rare that somebody complains that you haven't gotten to their street and usually it's a culde-sac when I hear from someone, but so I think you do a really good job. I did wonder, have you noticed and and maybe you don't maybe you don't check this, but I often wonder if and it ties a little bit to equity if some of the people that are maybe getting ticketed in the streets and the ones that are more than once because they didn't learn. I don't know that it was they didn't learn or they may not have a driveway or garage. And I'm wondering if you've seen any correlation between areas that don't have driveways and garages where street parking is their only option and then we're kind of punishing them for something we don't have a lot of control over. But >> yeah, I think the answer is potentially right. It was a little bit of an overgeneralization to say they have smaller driveways and smaller garages. They may not have either. Yeah, you're right. Right. In some of those areas. So what we've talked about with cow is okay if there's nothing inherently disproportionate about the ordinance what what could we do and what we've started to talk about is there a different way to engage or a different way to educate y >> on the ordinances you know like what would the next steps be there uh to be able to successfully implement it in those >> yeah and I appreciate that that was going to be my suggestion is if there are some areas areas that don't have driveways don't have garages you know is there a way we can get to them earlier with some education to try to prevent. Yeah. Thanks, >> Council Member Miller. >> Sure. Uh, I'll stick to the feedback slide. Uh, perspectives on the Jedi audit. I It seems like there's maybe not enough data to really draw the the lesson when you're looking at location of ticket versus where the registration falls. So, I suspect it's likely also building style, design of the roadways, availability of off- streetet parking. So, with that said, I think in some of these areas where there's higher demand for on street parking, I think a a a rolling enforcement start date, but with a continued warning period starting into November 1st, could really feel like giving people a break, particularly in the downtown where parking is already at a challenged capacity level, particularly for on street parking. I think the warning period allows the police to have jurisdiction flexibility, but by not having to enforce writing tickets when there's no snow on the ground, no snow in the 7-day forecast, but it's after November 1st, especially with our trending climate. It seems like the winters have been quite mild, and I think it it would reflect an evolution of the spring practices that we've already implemented, ending the season early. It feels consistent with that policy and I would support uh piloting that. It also feels like we're all acknowledging that we have communications challenges as a city and so evolving our tools, making sure that we're able to work with partners, employers, businesses, neighborhood associations to expand the capabilities of reaching people at the right time. But with that said, when there's snow in the forecast, people pay a lot more attention to the forecast than they do to city communication. So, I think tying those things together with the warning system could be a really common sense evolution of the program and I I could absolutely find myself supporting this. >> Council member Keane. >> Uh, yeah. Again, I'll stick to the feedback, but first just thanks for like kind of doing this sort of like review of these sort of programs instead of just waiting until complaint driven. This is this is good to see. As far as the Jedi stuff, again, it's good to see that going on. And I would agree that they're probably more neighborhood or kind of oriented than they are really like equity equity issues. Um and and I I want to go back to the start of this. I mean I think you underell the value of when we went to seasonal parking and it's not just cleaner streets, it's less dings on cars, uh faster routes where there's a there's it is working better. I and I don't I don't think it's all based on the fact that we really have had lighter winters that that input about like plowing things, but this these ice events really have been and when they get down once they get down it's really hard to those better to pre-treat before that happens than than treating them. Um I also find that seasonal is and and we've got like six years of it now. this idea of changing it to like an emergency and telling them there's a snow emergency. I I just think I haven't the the bad the two examples I have of that work so dramatically worse than Rochester that they just you just can't get the word out. So I think we have done a better job of training people over time. So I'd stick with the seasonal. I I like the idea you're talking about, you know, we do we have a better way to end the system now. As far as starting up, I still would suggest November 1 and you know whether we have these sort of like two months or two two weeks and maybe it's four weeks of just letting people know that hey, you you got to start following these rules. Um but I would like you guys to keep track. I mean, is it really faster or is that just it is every once in a while? Is it really less dinged cars and we're our emergency stuff? Is it better use of our equipment? because I I really do think the roads are better, but that could be back to this other thing of lighter winters. Um I don't think back in 2019 when we had the polar vortex, I don't think that's why we did this. We I think you guys were working up to this for many years coming up to it. But those are the years you do this stuff for and and you better have it in place when you do get that next bad year. So I'm more thankful for the program we have than leaning into let's start experimenting with it. I'd rather not do that. Thank you, council member. Any other uh feedback? I just want to thank you as well for the program and uh I don't get to say this very often. I agree with council member Frederick's on his approach to this. So um that's my feedback. >> He looks excited about that. >> Thanks gentlemen. >> Thank you. >> We are going to move to council initiated actions. Uh I one we have one council initiated action and that is arts economic impact analysis. Council member Miller, go ahead. >> Thank you and I will try to keep this as brief as I can. Uh realizing that we're already well into Tuesday. Uh thank you for our speakers who came to the open comment period to share feedback and uh perspective on the work that they've been doing. I've been thinking [clears throat] about arts and culture for a little while. I know this comes to us for discussion was part of our how does the city support arts and cultural efforts is the um indoor recreation presentation a few weeks ago. Um and I've been able to really wonder about kind of the underlying foundational organizations of different groups, different sectors of our community. Uh the Greater Rochester Arts and Cultural Trust has been active for many years. It's my understanding that they are wrapping up this operations this year, having done the statues for equality project with the mayor. And so I've been wondering about what's next and how might we engage the arts and cultural organizations who are already doing great work in our community. And so I was able to engage with them several points in this year. They've been diligently working to bring everyone together, do stakeholder mapping, seek funding, be denied funding, go to the University of Minnesota's Chris Nelson um research center, find an alternative approach to do this strategic analysis to be able to report and understand this impact in our community. And it's my understanding that one of their um um sort of uh stop points has been the ability to fund an economic impact study. They have a proposal. It's included in this attachment in this packet and it seems like a quite reasonable amount of contingency. They would not qualify until the next community building fund cycle which does not open until January 2027. So in order to advance the work of our many partners who we heard from the impact of arts and culture tonight um in an earlier hearing, I think this is a a common sense way that we can advance this. tie it into the work that Experience Rochester has done with the tourism master plan work with a study through the University of Minnesota and expand that look beyond just tourism impacts and entertainment but also into the arts and cultural impact and economic impact for our community of these 82 organizations that they've identified. So, I appreciate Council Member Keane um reviewing this with me, supporting it, and so we're bringing this forward with the proposal that we would fund this economic impact study as proposed by the University of Minnesota Extension Office at a cost of $7,000 using 2026 contingency. >> Council member Keane. >> Yeah, I'll I'll just add that again. Um, when discussing this with council member Miller, I did have memories of other things that the council had sort of gotten involved at that didn't end up well. And I think this one we structured such that it is the city contracting with someone as opposed to giving money to somebody else to do something. Um, I think that this is a little bit modeled if you look at the sports foundations and how they try to look at how they approach the city for support. They have the foundation. They have this advisory board. The arts are much more all independent players and not really having any sort of like structural way of dealing with the city. Um, this doesn't solve that problem, but I think it gets you in those discussions towards how you could do this better. >> Thank you, Council Member Frederick's. >> The arts scene adds a lot of character to community and I I enjoy it. I I'm obviously very not artistic, but I very much enjoy it. I like the culture it brings to a city. I always find myself going to parts of every city I visit that is very culturally artfacing, so on and so forth. So, um I I plan on supporting it. What do we do with the information when we're done? >> Yeah. So, great question. >> Council member Miller, >> thank you. Um so, as part of the proposal, there is a presentation that would be included of the results. So, similar to the way that the researchers worked with Experience Rochester to provide a a presentation in that case in a video format and an executive summary, we could receive that presentation ourselves as a study session in coordination with the arts and culture steering committee. So, that would be my recommendation is that we hear a a live presentation which would be already scoped into that study and I believe that they would target early next year to complete that work. Council member Ke and I'll just add I'll just add to this that I I think the softer >> value of this work is how will it help the arts groups >> organize better and that's the softer side that's not it's not like an a planned outcome but if they'd see a way of saying we shouldn't be all these separate organizations all competing with each other what's the way we can run together and I think that's what I'm looking for out of this a better way that the city interacts with what We like a lot generally referred to as the arts, but there isn't a place you do that. >> Council member, >> looks to me like they organize better than any group in this community after this evening. [laughter] So, uh, I think they have the ability to come together well and with that kind of power, they should be able to come up with some great things for this community. Council member Wall, >> two of the people in open comment uh identified themselves as part of the Rochester Arts and Cultural Strategic Plan Steering Committee. Uh how how did the 12 become a part of this uh self-organized? >> So, Council Member Miller, >> thank you. It's been a process of invitation and stakeholder mapping and then an invitation to further participation. So for those groups, those 12 organizations that opted into more work, more meetings, and the others, it's my understanding, have um opted into being engaged but not having the capacity to participate in the steering committee's work. >> Thank you. Second question, how were the 82 arts organizations identified? So my understanding is that there was a broad survey um an invitation sent out. Obviously while there's not an arts and culture steering committee trust arts council formally organized there is broad um cooperation and knowledge across that space. I'd also point to the work that GRA has done to identify stakeholders. So it's an evolution of that work. Uh many organizations are nonprofits. So there's public filings and it's been a an iterative process to map out all of the relevant stakeholders across performing arts, visual arts, um businesses that have an arts component, educational programs and working together across this network mapping. And so much of that work and I participated in a meeting where it was literally are we missing anyone? What of these 12 organizations who do you know who is not represented here? and building that out in collaboration with the researchers from the Chris Nelson Center at Cura. >> So the survey will go to uh just these 82 organizations. >> They would be the target of that economic study. >> So for the economic uh impact, I was wondering uh what will actually be measured in Rochester from something so massive as just for kicks when they bring in 3,000 families? uh doesn't include uh the wonderful Latino Fest uh and what that brings uh over a long weekend. Doesn't include uh independent music studios of uh eight uh piano uh teachers. Uh it's just really it's wide. I >> I think it's a great question. I appreciate you raising it. I I think that there is a question of who's not here and that can be added but at least from the project approach as presented in in this proposal. It is really trying to clarify what's being surveyed. So what is the art? What type of art is that organization representing? Visual art, performing art, physical art, uh cultural event, what kinds of services and activities and that will be subjective. um how many employees does that organization um employ full-time, part-time? What is the total organizational spending annually? How many artists have been supported, helped, involved? And so for an organization that is doing performance, I mean, I would suspect that that includes the number of participants for those events. And then it allows the flexibility of additional survey questions um that get to that. what is the what is the size scope impact ticket sales perhaps right other other features that are not universal to the organizations but are attempting to get at that impact >> and any any study I mean I'm sure we could never define a perfect study that we would forever be refining it to figure out whether the individual piano teacher who teaches two afternoons a week out of their home fits within that impact I mean we we do have to draw a line somewhere or we'll never get started. This felt well um anchored into a scientific method with a research organization that is well known and gave a a defined project scope that is fundable at a reasonable amount. So that's why I felt comfortable bringing this forward. It felt like the organizations that are active in the space had done quite a bit of due diligence. Mayor Norton. >> Yeah, I I'm not opposed at all to this and I um but I I just want to be clear. We have had for the last 20 or 30 years, 20 years, the Greater Rochester Arts and Cultural Trust, which was exactly what you've just defined, which was a group of organizations, and at one point the list was very long, of people from all the different arcs or art organizations, including members of the city. Ardell Brady sat on that committee forever. It had legislators as well. And so as we move forward, I I think it might behoove the group to interview who's left of Gral. There are four people. I think we just said goodbye to one who left town. Um about what worked and what didn't work so we don't make the same mistake. Um and also recognize that while this organization has been um slowly disappearing over time and we are selfd disappearing as of uh when there's a there's a talking trails thing that's getting done and when that's done the organization intends to close down. Um they do and have a long history of getting grants in this area. So, I just I just really hope that whomever does this research will get a hold of and I've got the names of who's left um on that that small committee that remains um so that we don't end up because the group, you know, I don't want to say fought within itself, but a little bit um didn't feel like it was doing for their group or was doing too much for another group. And you know what I saw tonight with an arts organization that was all here excited, wanting to work together is what we need more of and and not what happened um with with the other organization. So um I would encourage them to reach out and get that information and include it. >> Council member Dory, >> I I plan to support this the CIA as well. I would I would ask uh for an additional question uh to be included in the project approach and that would be the number of volunteers that the uh organization engages. That is not a uh that also shows economic impact. Right. So um I I would invite that as as another uh tool and another metric to be explored. Uh to that point, uh Council Member Miller, so we are we're uh proposing uh funding this at $7,000 and um uh is it CURA that's um doing the project >> doing an extension? >> Do we uh is there ability to have input to the mayor's point and to council member Doring's point? I mean, it looks like we would be the sole funer of this. Correct. >> Correct. And I I think what we would do is direct staff to um take that proposed expansion of of volunteer number of volunteers and or volunteer hours to the proposal to make sure that that's feasible within the funding amount and then to enter into an agreement with them to proceed with the study. and the mayor's point to uh to get some of the history of previous groups as well. >> So, I would think that that's probably outside of the scope of the proposal directly, but would be feedback and direction to the steering committee members to um pursue those connections. And I'm hearing that the mayor would like to be a resource to create those connections should they not have them. >> Sounds good. All right. Is there a motion on this? >> Uh, sure. I'll I'll make a motion. uh to direct uh staff to enter into an agreement with the University of Minnesota Extension to advance the economic impact study the University of Minnesota Extension and allocate $7,000 from 2026 contingency funds uh to fund that work. >> Second. >> Motion made by Council Member Miller, seconded by Council Member Frederick's. Any further discussion? All in favor say I. I. >> Oppose say nay. Motion passes. >> Thank you. >> Uh moving on to our uh ordinance second readings. Uh go ahead, Mr. Spindler. Craig. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Item K1, an ordinance amending subsection 1 and subsection two of subp paragraph A of paragraph 10 of clause E of section 6.2000. 040 relating to flood plane overlay and various definitions of the unified development code. >> Move to approve. Second. >> Motion made by council member uh Keen and seconded by council member wall. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Post say nay. Motion passes. Uh council member Palmer. >> Grateful to. His colleagues are very grateful that he had two items under other business and he is relieving us of that. So >> my questions have been answered. >> Great. So is there a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> Okay. I didn't hear the who who made that motion. Miller. >> Motion made by council member Palmer and seconded by council member Miller. All in favor say I. >> Oppose say nay. We are adjourned.