Um, the first thing on the agenda is a call to order, which I just did. Sorry, I'm um I'm the substitute uh acting chair today. Um, next thing on the agenda is the roll call. >> Uh, Commissioner Ramali >> here. Uh, Commissioner Kermies is absent, Commissioner Fueling >> here. Uh, Commissioner Lighty is absent, and acting chair Bonia here. Um, next thing on the agenda is the meeting notes from March 10th. Um, commissioners, did you guys have a a chance to look at the notes? Uh, is there any edits you'd like to make? >> No, I looked at it. >> Okay. Um, will someone um motion to approve the minutes? A motion to approve. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Um, all in favor? >> I >> I. Um, next thing on the agenda is uh the 4412th Street appeal hearing. Um, Nathan or >> Joe. >> Joe, take it. >> Acting chair Bonia. Um, the city of Newport is uh just went out for bids for a reconstruction project on 12th Street here in the city of Newport. And um during the surveying that was done by our engineering firm um we did come across a property that has uh a number of violations of our zoning code um uh and some other issues and uh um some property offense and some other items that are in the rightway and in an easement. So, um, community development specialist Christina, uh, Adet did send a violation notice to the homeowner. Uh, the homeowner, uh, has appealed that violation notice and according to our ordinance, that does come to the board of appeals, also the planning commission. So, with that said, uh, we have comm uh, community development specialist Adet doing her first planning commission presentation ever. Um, and I'll hand it off to her. >> Hi, chair and commissioners. Um, >> oh, >> um, don't we usually review it then or no? >> I think if you want to just open Okay. >> All right. Um, it's 5:49 and um, we'll open the public hearing on this. Um, if someone wants to say something regarding this, uh, I >> we'll do the presentation first. >> You'll do the presentation. then take questions and they can respond. >> Sorry, like like I said, I'm uh I'm filling in today. Um so we'll take questions after the presentation. Um and so Christina, if you could uh give us an overview of this issue. >> Yeah. Um to provide background, um a part of the 12th Street area improvement projects, 4412th Street was identified to have numerous zoning code violations, um including accessory structures built within the public rightway and within a sewer and water easement. Um the sewer and water easement was recorded in the book of book 285 of deeds, pages 33 through 42. Um, the accessory structures in violation include a detached garage, a leanto garage, uh, driveway and parking surfaces, fencing, water oriented structures, including a wooden gazebo in blue shed. Um, please note that the blue shed is the current owner constructed without a zoning permit. Um, and he did identify that he constructed it. Um, and then also decking. And then in addition, um, a corrections notice was sent on April 2nd, 2026 pertaining to the violations at the property. Um, in addition to the violations at the residence, additional documents including non-compliance with the lean to parcel maps in certificates of survey were sent with the original violation letter. An extension request was received on April 16th, 2026 for the violations of excessive vehicles and also exterior storage. The city did grant on 416 the extension request of the two violations. However, it was noted that no future extension would be granted for the excessive vehicles as a violation letter was sent to the current owner in 2023 for the same violation. Um these were photos taken on uh February 24th, 2026 um a little after 8 a.m. Um the first photo on the left indicates some exterior storage. Uh the photo on the right uh demonstrates the fencing, some of the fencing and also the gazebo along with the blue shed. These are additional photos from February 24th um including a boat. Um part of the leanto can be seen in the back of that photo on the left. That is the structure that um is in concern. Um and then another photo of the gazebo and blue shed. And then the next photos were taken on March 31st, 2026, a little after 11:00 a.m. Um, it includes the boats and the vehicles in the driveway, a closer up photo of the blue shed and also fencing closer towards the river along with the decking. Um, it also indicates these photos show boats stored in the backyard. Um, and then the next photo does show a truck in the backyard as well. um along with other vehicles just parked in the driveway um that pertained to the excessive vehicle violation. And then that's the last photo is some exterior storage as well, also taken on March 31st. Um this picture here demonstrates the sewer and water easement. Um it runs through quite a few parcels um running down Second Avenue. Um the one indicated of 0031 is the property of 4412th Street. Um so a portion of the east side of the property does fall within the sewer and water easement. Um this is the existing utilities map um that was obtained by a city or obtained from a city engineer. Um it demonstrates the areas of concern including the portion that falls over the rightway of the leanto towards the um right hand side of the picture. The middle portion in red is the detached garage that falls within the public rightway. Um and then those red numberings indicate some of the fence and then also the accessory water structures that fall within the um rightway. Um this was also a survey from 2004 that was included in the letter um that indicates that the gazebo falls into the street. Um what's called a kennel encroaches which we uh mentioned as a detached garage um falling into the street along with the fence and how much it is over by. And then on April 17th 26 2026 um Mr. Mr. Huen submitted a notice of appeal to the city for the zoning and and nuisance violations at the property. Um the facts and basis for the appeal uh Mr. Huin stated that in December of 2021 he bought the house and at this time he was unaware about any of the zoning violations at the property. He discussed with the neighbors and found that structures in violations were built about 20 years ago. Mr. Hooen currently does not have a job and does not have the means to remove the structures. an in-person meeting with Mr. Huen on uh April 15th. He stated that he should not be responsible for the structures that are in violation minus the blue shed as he did not construct the structures and he bought the house this way. He believes the city should have went after the prior owner for the structures that were in violation and then Mr. Huin would like to find a reasonable solution to the current violations. Um these are a list of the zoning codes being appealed. Um on the left hand side you will see the zoning code um of 2026 that was updated um to reflect the current numbering and then on the right hand side you'll see the prior code of 2025 um in its numbering. The zoning codes pertain to setbacks and also lot coverage um building without permits encroachment of surfaces. non-operating vehicles um must be stored within like a building um or fully screened um front yard exterior storage, sideyard exterior storage, fence standards um and then also water oriented structures and structure setbacks. And then the intended options for the planning commission to consider um the city's immediate concerns are the lean to and the driveway as they do fall within the sewer and water easement. Our secondary concerns are the fencing, detached garage, water oriented structures um gazebo and blue shed um as the blue shed was constructed by current owner without permit. and then also the decking. And then the primary concerns, um, staff recommends that the lean to be removed and the driveway is brought into current standards within 30 days. Secondary concerns, staff recommends that the secondary concerns of the detached garage, fencing, water oriented structures be brought into conformance within 60 days. Um, city staff are willing to say that the gazebo and decking counts as one water oriented structure um rather than two. Okay. Um, we can ask questions for sure. Okay. Can you clarify what what what is meant by lean to? Does that mean that's falling down or or what does that mean? >> A lean to is an accessory structure. Um, if I go back, um, on the left photo, you'll see like this portion of the garage that you see, um, with two garage doors. >> Yes. >> Um, the portion that the lefthand garage door, um, is what we consider a lean to. It's essentially an addition built upon an already existing garage. >> Okay. Um, so you said the leanto and the driveway are in um are like they're in the way of of what was it like the the was it the public right away or >> uh the lead to and the driveway are located within the sewer and water easement. >> Okay. So that does that mean basically that we can't get to it because those two things are there like are in the way >> potentially if there was say a break um in any of like the sewer water lines um the city would have to remove those structures or destroy them to be able to access and properly do repairs. >> So it's it's kind of a well it is a safety concern. Okay. Yes. >> All right. I I just wanted to understand like the bigger implications of that. Um, ladies, do you do you have other questions? >> Nope, that was that was >> the one that I >> um Okay. Um, well, I have a secondary question. So, um, the public rightway um the the gazebo and the fence are there, right? >> And just to clarify because I saw some of the pictures um this is where that the overlook is, right? >> Correct. The 12th Street overlook. Can you go back to the pictures just real quick? >> Yes. Would you like me to just start from the beginning >> or stop on a certain one? >> Um, let's go to the one that shows the overlook there. Okay. Okay. So, I mean, basically because the fence and the gazebo are in the public right away, it impedes people from visiting >> kind of. I mean, it's a I mean, it is an obstacle cuz I've been there and I feel like I'm I'm impeding in people's private backyard. >> So, um Okay. I just wanted to clarify um those two points. Um All right. Um and you you all said you had no other questions. >> No, I'm just Oh, looking. >> Yeah. >> I I have one question. How many for the public rideway for the fence and gazebo? I couldn't quite tell how many feet over the line is that this picture is what was obtained from the city engineer. Um, starting on like the right side closer to the house, I believe it starts at about like 10 feet into the public rightway. Um, and as you move towards the river, um, I believe it goes down to either like 7 to 4 feet of into the public rightway. So the closer to the river it gets, the less severe into the public right away it is. Okay, got it. Are we ready? Open the public hearing. Um and just to um to clarify because this is kind of a this appeal hearing is different from a public hearing. I know with public hearings is not really the intent isn't to uh have a back and forth. It's more for um residents to to state their concerns. So is this let's do the same rules apply? >> No chair uh members of the commission we can absolutely have a conversation uh with the appealant uh you know my hope is uh and I think the city's hope is we can uh come to um a conclusion. Uh with that said, you know, um you know, happy it's it's absolutely the resident's right to appeal and happy to uh listen to any facts um or other information they may have. So, >> okay. Um and Christina, before we open the public hearing, could you put it back to um kind of like the list of priorities that you had um or immediate There we go. primary concerns. >> Great. >> Okay. All right. Um, so we'll go ahead and um open the the appeal hearing at 6:01. Um, if anyone would like to come up to the podium, please state your name and your address and um and we could have a conversation. Uh, the podium please. Yes. Yeah. >> Go ahead, St. So Steve is the broker. So he's present for me to talk to. >> Sure. Okay. Hello, good evening. My name is Steven Tao, real estate broker that uh um we assisted him on the purchase of this property back in 2021. Due to language barrier, I'm here to kind of support with that. >> Sure. Could you could you uh would you just state his name and his address? >> Oh, sure. >> Thank you. >> Go ahead. Say your name. >> So, my name is Tang. So, the 442 Street, Newport, Min. >> Thank you. Thank you. There there were some uh items that he uh stressed out and of course the biggest one is that uh when the property was purchased he wasn't aware of any of these at all. feels that it is unfair that it would be his responsibility to remove the items like the detached garage part things like that especially when he doesn't have any uh you know funds to do so as well too is willing to see if there's any possibilities any solutions to work around that um in the future if the city needs to access and he'll be able to provide accessibility to work with the sewer lines so that's one of the biggest thing there the second thing is um he mentioned about the the the setback of the structure is that it was only 5 ft and not 10 ft. Um I'm not exactly sure if that is uh clear on the on the survey that you guys have that but according to what Mr. Hun here has mentioned that is the cases he's uh he wanted to express out. >> Okay. Um I guess what do we do like if someone doesn't have any money to like these are big structures so you know like is there any precedents kind of like >> I mean in the city of Newport uh chair members of the commission um you know I'm not sure if there's precedent in the city of Newport but there are precedents in other cities. throughout the state. At the end of the day, um you know, it's very unfortunate that Mr. uh Newin uh purchased the property with these um structures and and other things that are technically on the public's rightway and in an easement. We have a water line that's underneath that leanto and underneath that driveway. If there's a break, we will tear that that down. We will remove the driveway and we will charge him for the costs. uh to restore it and for that cost. It will also delay water to other residents in the city. He needs to remove the leanto and he needs to remove that driveway. The other things we're more than willing to work with them on um you know 30 days is enough time. Um it's unfortunate. I'm happy to you know talk with them. Um but uh you know those are things we unfortunately as a city I don't think we can compromise on. >> Okay. Thank you for that. Um, it it just, you know, how how Joe was saying that it's unfortunate, but I think that like if if the city is forced to go in there and take it down, I imagine it's going to be a lot more costly than if um if if um Mr. What I'm sorry, what was when Mr. Wen um was to like do it himself. Um, one possibility, chair, sorry. Yes, go ahead. >> Um, the city could, uh, you know, hypothetically, you could hire a contractor or we could and then you could sign an agreement where the cost would be assessed to your property and we could do that over 10 years. >> So, for those for that, that would at least make it, you know, where you don't have that uh that large financial burden up front. That is an option. Again, we would have to take that to to the city council for approval, but that could be an option um hypothetically, but we do need the primary concerns to be taken care of sooner than later. The rest of the things we can absolutely work if it's 60 or 90 days or maybe if there's we build some trust and something's done and then we continue to work for it. The end of the day, all the city wants is compliance. We're very concerned because we do have, you know, some critical services underneath that garage that that lean to. So that's um it's pretty serious >> with that option that you just mentioned about uh rolling the the costs into an assessment paying over 10 years. Is that with the requirement of removing those items or when the time comes if there was some issues? >> No, absolutely. We need those items removed th that property is on city property and that's unacceptable. So, if we worked out that deal, we could work on it. Um, uh, but, you know, we we'd want it to happen, you know, based on finding a contractor, based on things like that and coming to that agreement and getting it approved by council. So, it wouldn't be immediately, but it would have to happen as soon as possible. >> Got it. Okay. >> Did you get that? >> They don't Yeah. Uh I guess he just wants me to point out that you know back in February 23rd, 2012, this was already brought up to or similar was already brought up to that previous owner. How come it was never removed back then? It was never taken care of. >> Do we have that historical data? >> Um unfortunately I I can't speak for the decisions that were made um by the city in 2012 or or 2013. Um, but we became I became aware of this. Uh, you know, we were doing reconstruction on 12 Street. Um, the council will be approving those bids I think at the next meeting. And so there was a survey done of this entire area. And, um, you know, uh, we are going to do some improvements on that overlook, which is one of our, you know, something we really pride our community on is having overlooks into the river. Uh, it's public space. We're going to improve a trail there. We're going to help uh restore and kind of do something different with that historic wall. We're going to add curb and gutter. Um you can see what we did on Second Avenue. We're also doing a reconstruction on project on Third. The city's received about $8 million in grants and we've identified the um the highest priorities for the city and 12th Street is the highest priority, one of our highest priorities. We have significant storm water problems. we have significant inflow and infiltration problems and thankfully we've been able to go out and hustle up enough money um where we're going to do some great work for the city. That's how this came to our attention and um you know not not trying to make excuses for why it didn't get solved. It should have been solved in 2012. If I was the administrator it would have been. Um but you know we we have this information now. Unfortunately, I have a lot of compassion and empathy for the homeowner. I know this is a shock and and having to get a violation notice in in the mail. It's no fun. I've gotten them from the city before. And uh who wants to fight city hall? Not me. Um but at the end of the day, you know, we do have a primary concern here that that's pretty serious. Um we're willing to work with them. I understand the financial concerns. I think, you know, the city council may take that into consideration if that's something he was interested in. Uh but again I I can't make any promises. I think what what staff would be looking for is uh for you to sustain uh staff's uh recommendation uh that these you know timelines are reasonable. Um that's what we would recommend to the commission. Uh how with that said of course we take any feedback or any you know it's y'all's recommendation uh and decision. Um and staff's here to to help you as best we can. Okay. Well, Mr. W, um it is a safety concern. I mean, I understand that it's it's a huge burden. Um and you know, I personally apologize that this was overlooked in the past, but I mean, it is something that needs to be addressed. Um I think it's a good option to pursue if if uh if the city council will make that allowance like that. they'll uh hire someone and then uh kind of like bill you back over an extended period of time or you know if if you're able to to I mean at this point if I was in that position I think I would get some family together and do the demolition and removal myself just cuz it would be less costly. Um, I mean, I I don't know what you think of that that first option that that uh Joe suggested that maybe the city council would be open to to doing the work and then billing you back. Um, do you have any thoughts around that? >> Yeah. So basically the option uh potential option is you know having a contractor make an agreement to remove it because of safety >> safety issues and then they could uh roll that into like you know property taxes and pay overtime that's 10 years if that's causes if cost is an issue but again that's still has to go through the city council owner Yeah, sure. >> I think we need to go back and see what they previous. >> So, at at this point, I guess um you know, he's gonna also have a conversation with the wife as well too. uh they wanted to know if there's any possibility to um for another hearing or >> to figure out what what decisions they were which route they would like to go. >> So yeah, after this hearing there is an opportunity to appeal to the city council >> um after the order is made by the uh board of appeals and adjustment. >> That's the date of the 21st I I believe. >> Okay. It'll just be on the >> Sorry. Is that the is that the nuisance hearing? >> It's a nuisance hearing. We could also do an appeal on the zoning stuff. >> Yeah. Okay. So, to clarify that the 21st there's an appeal on the nuisance conditions that was in the the notice as well. Um once you receive a copy of the order that's made tonight by the board of adjustments and appeals, then you can submit an appeal of that order to the city administrator, which will then be set for the city council. It could potentially be held that same night depending on sort of obviously the timing of submitting your appeal. >> Okay. Yeah. So, we'll wait for the results. >> Can I talk to them before? >> Oh, yes. Go ahead. Computer science. I would like to um talk a little bit about my circumstances before we purchase the house. My wife and I both have a job. My wife as a nurse and I as a computer scientist. And then um when we purchased the house, we have plenty of money and we even have some money in reserve. Uh but after I purchased the house about until three years ago, company was downsizing and I lost my job. uh our reserve money within two year were exhausted. My wife was a bread winner and uh to support the whole family including me and my two children. Okay. Inspection. Um, when I purchase the house, I even paid uh for an inspection. I even went to the city to see if there is any vi violation but found none. foreign. So someone sent us a letter saying that uh the letter uh the house has been uh in violation of city code since 2012. We purchased this in 2021. And why nobody within that 10 years uh ordered us um to take down the the thing that uh in violation. Um right now people talking about um um help for us. Um and then it will be roll over to our uh tax. Um but um my right now our property tax has exceeded $26,000 and my wife has to incur another debt. And if you are in my position, what would you think? For if city has done it job 15 years ago, we would have no issue today. The thing is people who've done wrong, why do other resident has to um obser uh absorb the cost? So to be fair, if the city has done its job 15 years ago, the previous owner has to be the one that absorb this cost. for today. If uh you um talking about giving me 30 days, 60 days uh to work it out, but where is the money to do that? I do not have any um um any uh plan or which way I should go, but I'm willing to sit down with you to find out what is best for for both of us. >> Um Mr. Win, it is a difficult situation. Like I I understand and it's it's not fair. It's not fair. But unfortunately, the property skated under the radar for very long because nobody was really doing any work there. And it is only because they started doing the work that they uncovered that oh, there's a problem here. And I as a resident and also a homeowner here in Newport, I I understand because there's codes now that when I bought the house, they they were not required. So, but now that I have to sell the house, I have to have like an inspection of the pipes and all kinds of things, things that didn't exist when I bought the house. And I'm I I ponder that same question. Why do I have to make this investment? And unfortunately, as the homeowner, like that responsibility now lies on you. And I know that it's unfair. This letter um says that the um violation has been um has has been found out 15 years ago. Yeah, I I and it uh the the previous owner was ordered um to um uh remove it 15 years ago. But I what I don't understand is that five years ago when I purchased the home, I did not see this letter. uh what I said what's done is done. I am willing to uh uh uh cooperate with the city, but I hope that this um the the city commission uh um would um understand my situation and give me um a way out. >> I mean, I think we do understand, especially as homeowners, and and the what Joe had said. Um, I didn't even know that possibility existed that maybe the council is willing to like hire the contractor and then bill you back. I didn't even know that was a an option. In my eyes, that seems like the city wants to help. Um because if I was in the position like I said earlier, I think I would just get a bunch of my friends together and start the demolition cuz there this really especially the the um the lean-to garage and the driveway, those are really a safety hazard. Those need to be addressed and it's going to be a lot more costly if a water uh line does break and then the city has to go in there and force their way in there. I understand that, but currently I do not have the funds to um get that done. Foreign speech. Foreign speech. Foreign speech. Um um um to have as you have known two months ago um gas price is almost $3. Now it's almost double. Um and so is the living cost and I don't know if uh with my wife salary it's going to be enough to cover our living costs even. I mean, those are all real concerns. I think we're all feeling them as residents and just living in this country. Um, as I stated, the the city has proposed a potential solution. I mean, that's something that you could pursue. Um, again, you know, I don't want to like keep saying the same thing, but it is a safety concern and and it it has that's something that needs to be addressed. >> Um, um, chair, members of the commission, staff does recommend um that you have a findings of fact based on our uh recommendation of the primary concerns and the secondary concerns. Um, the resident still has the option to appeal any decision that the planning commission makes to the city council. And additionally, uh, I'm here every day. My telephone number's here. Uh, my doors open unless it's closed. Um, so, you know, I I think that's the option. I do know my staff has been working with the resident and um, you know, it is what it is. Certainly, we wanted to work it out. Um and and we're still willing to try to work it out uh with understanding his concerns. Uh and you know, it's it's unfortunate that this wasn't solved many many years ago. It wasn't. Um and uh no excuses for that, but we're going to solve it now. >> And none of us were here for that. >> Tire and commissioner, if I might add to that a bit. So I mean the question before the commission tonight is you know whether the his designation of this as a violation of the zoning code uh should be upheld. So that's sort of the number one question just to add to some of the discussion I want to do with things that are already there. you know, if the city were to have entered into, say, an encroachment agreement for some of these structures on whether it's the easement or in the right of way, uh, any agreement like that would allow the city to require those be removed at some point at that property owner's expense. So, even if it's something that wasn't an issue 10 years back, if it becomes an issue under some sort of agreement at that point, the city could have ordered it removed. So that's that's often how these things end up working out basically. You come to an agreement like that and then uh it is done at the property owner's cost whether they they pay it or or ultimately it's assessed or something along those lines. >> Thank you for that. >> Okay. Well, I mean I think we've we've heard your concerns, Mr. Wyn. Um the commission has to make a recommendation given what you've presented and what the city's presented. >> Thank you for your time. >> Chair and commission members. I'll just say because this is still a public hearing there could be an opportunity now for members of the public if um if the appellant is finished presenting to speak as well. >> Okay. Um Mr. Mr. Win, if if you are done talking, um we'd like to open it up in case anybody else has something to add to the appeal. >> Is there anybody You're welcome. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to say something on the appeal? >> Okay. So, um we're closing the um the appeal hearing at 6:26. Um, commissioners, you've had an opportunity to kind of hear um the staff recommendation and als I'm I'm willing to to um basically uh approve it as it reads. um the way that staff recommended it sounds reasonable to me. Um I don't know what you all are thinking. >> I agree. It's unfortunate, but it's still something that has to be taken care of. So, >> and to clarify, even if uh we support the the language as it stands, he still can go and appeal to the >> city council. Uh >> oh, sorry. >> Chair commissioners. Yes. Correct. >> Okay. >> And also during that time um we're more than willing to meet with you sir uh you know during this process. Absolutely. >> Okay. >> All right. Um well um can I get uh >> sorry chair and commissioner I have prepared a resolution of findings based on uh the staff recommendation for your consideration. If uh so I pass this down. Is this resolution 001? >> No. >> Chairing commission. I don't think the planning commission has passed any planning commission recommendations yet this year. So my understanding is this would be the first one. So it' be 01. So you could um make a first and then state that it's that resolution with that finding based on the um based on the staff recommendation. >> Correct. Make a motion in a second to approve resolution 2026-01. Uh and then you can read the rest. >> The whole thing or just >> Yep. The whole thing above. >> None of the whereas >> Okay. None of the >> Wait a minute. No, none of the where's just the just the top part. >> Just the top part. Yep. >> Okay. Is there a motion um to approve this from anyone? >> I move to approve uh PC resolution number 202601, a resolution of findings, conclusions, and order of Newport Board of Appeals, and adjustments regarding alleged zoning code violations at 4412th Street in the city of Newport. >> Do we have a second? >> A second. All in favor? >> I Okay. Um, the next thing on the agenda is uh Bailey Nurseries Development request for public hearing. >> Chair and Commissioner, you'll have to give me a moment. I'm going to move uh up to the dis and uh begin sharing a presentation. So, you might consider taking a a very short recess. >> Okay. How long? Well, we're going to recess for like five minutes. >> Two minutes. >> Two minutes. >> Three minutes. I don't know. >> Um six uh we'll be back in session at 6:32. Gosh, I feel the commission's back in session. Nathan, go ahead. >> All right. Uh, thank you, chair, and members of the commission. So, um, we've got a kind of a two for one here on on this item. So, um, we're going to talk about Bailey Nurseries developments. There's uh two separate development requests that I'm going to talk about. The first one we've called Bailey Nurseries Business Park. The second one is called Bailey Nurseries Multif Family and Gas Station. So, uh both of these items are on the agenda this evening. There are two separate public hearings, but they're very related and you'll you'll see why. So, um I just wanted to start with identifying what is the overall Bailey's ner Bailey Nursery site. What what does that include? Uh you can see the the aerial on the screen here. Um what you're seeing uh on the sort of the bottom of the the screen here, this is Bailey Road, just to orient uh everyone. And so Newport's share of the Bailey Nursery site is what you can see uh in that yellow outline. And so I know the planning commission has um seen various iterations of concepts for development in this area before, but uh just as a refresher, that's the Newport share of this site. the majority of the land in in this uh site, there's over 200 uh plus acres of of Bailey Nurseries property here that's being considered for future development. Um a majority of that uh area is in the city of Woodbury and another uh portion of the site is also located in the city of Maplewood. So we have three different communities that have been coordinating over the last several years on uh what we're you know what's sort of a larger area for a development. So, uh, what we're looking at this evening are preliminary plat requests for the site that's located within the city of Newport. And so, uh, this is a a figure that was in the recently reviewed, uh, Bailey Nurseries Business Park AW. Uh, this just gives you an idea of the mix of different land uses that are generally envisioned across the entire site. So just narrating kind of broadly if you look at the city of Newport we we'll look at the development uh that's being proposed in in in this community in the city of Woodbury you have a mix of business park multifamily and what effectively is highway commercial and then in Maplewood you have uh very likely a future business park. Um that part of the development is a little bit um it's it's a little bit further off in terms of the phasing is as our current understanding. So, and here again, this is um uh this is part of the submitt package that was just provided to provide some context for some of that development that's happening in the neighboring communities in addition to what you'll be reviewing this evening. So, um not all of this development is likely to occur all at one time. Uh it will be phased likely in in both communities over several years. Not sure what the phasing looks like in our in our peer communities. So, uh, this is generally speaking, uh, on the screen here. This is the roughly, uh, just under 40 acre site that, uh, is currently proposed for development in the city of Newport. Uh, we'll walk through a lot of different elements of what you're seeing on the screen here. So, I won't jump too deeply into this, uh, site plan. Uh, I do want to talk about though, uh, who, you know, who are our applicants, who's in front of the city this night, uh, this evening asking for approvals. We have United Properties who's developing the business park portion of this site and they're working with um real estate equities and Quicktrip. Uh Quick Trip, you'll know the that's the gas station use real estate equities would be the multif family building um that you've seen in in the plans and in your packet. So, uh we'll walk through u both part or all parts of of this uh project. Again, there's kind of two portions. The United Properties uh portion of this project includes not only what you see on the screen here, the infrastructure for this general site, but also the utility work to to bring utilities to the property. Uh so that's the uh Bailey Nurseries business park and then the Bailey Nurseries multif family and gas station kind of speaks for itself. So I just want to quickly talk about how we'll get through this kind of complicated review. Uh we just talked about a little bit of the site overview. who will talk a little bit more about land use overview and then I'll start reviewing more specifically the United Properties part of the site. That was the first item in your packet um for this for this property and then we'll talk a little bit more about the real estate equities and quick trip portion uh followed by just staff recommendation for both um both projects followed up by any questions you might have. I will note all of our uh development representatives are here this evening and we'll have um you know short very you know short presentations for you just to get to know their part of the site and then you'll uh be expected to open up for that public hearing. So um that's kind of what this will look like. Just want to quickly go a little bit further into the overview. So this site is zoned uh B1 Business Park. Um the a very small port of part of this site is actually located within the shoreland overlay. Uh that's a a buffer area around Rio Lake. We'll talk about what that means for the projects. And um the comprehensive plan has this site guided the entire property is guided for mixed residential commercial. And I think you're probably familiar with those existing conditions if you've driven past on Bailey Road. Um, generally speaking, the site is currently vacant and it was formerly u part of the nursery operations. So, here is your future land use map. Just kind of again marking that this is mixed commercial residential zoning map. This is currently uh excuse me zoned as business park. And then just a reminder for for everyone here, uh the preliminary plat stage of development is really where we start to get into the weeds with our applications. We start to really look at those details. So um this is a uh I'm trying to keep this uh pretty brief uh this presentation pretty brief, but there will be a fair amount of details. So if you have questions, you can stop me. If you want me to go faster, do what Joe does and just uh let me know. So all right. So, uh, I also want to mention one unique element here is just that coordination that's been happening between the city of Newport and our our partners in Woodbury and Maplewood over the last couple years. There's been really a long kind of lead up up into this project being proposed this evening. Lots of coordination uh between the communities, whether it's shared uh transportation networks, infrastructure, all that. One thing I'll just note is uh Woodbury does have a growth area plan for that this portion of their city that abuts this site. And so early on in their development of that, you know, we did have the opportunity to work with the city of Woodbury staff and provide input on that plan. And so uh when you see uh in the staff report and when we talk about the growth area plan, we're referring to Woodbury's design standards for this area. Um, Newport certainly does not have to hold developments to another city's standards, but given that this is going to be one um continuous project, one kind of neighborhood if you will, uh there will be some expectation from Newport staff just that there's continuity across the site. So, uh that's just one thing I want to note. This this is a rather unique review because of that. So, I'm going to jump into the Bailey Nurseries business park uh portion of the project. There is a preliminary plat, a PUD and shoreland conditional use permit and variances requested. So, uh the preliminary plat is relatively straightforward. Uh what you're seeing is is that is that plat. So, you've got um right-of-way dedication uh to the Bailey Road corridor. So, providing additional uh right ofway to the city and county that's actually a county road for uh potential future roadway improvements where it's needed. There are two new uh north and south streets shown on either side, the east and the west side of the project. On the east side, that would be considered the Century Avenue extension. On the west side, you're looking at um Bailey Court extension. And then there is a proposed street cutting through the site. That would be a Newport Public Street where there's rightway dedication. So, you're seeing uh those streets and dedications for them in addition to um lots one and we'll call them lots two of the United Properties Plat. Those are where their uh business park uh buildings will be located. Outlot G, sorry, B, I read that wrong. Outlot B, that is where you're going to see the um multif family and quick trip proposed. So they would basically they're going to replplat that outlot into their um proposed site plan for their uses. And then outlot A is in the very uh southwest corner. That is the location of a future city lift station to get sewer or waste water away from the site. So uh this portion of the presentation will really just be focused on that business park part of the project as I mentioned. And so uh that's all basically all the review until we kind of flip to the other uh portion of the site will be focused on the business park. So from a land use standpoint uh we do have those requests that I talked about uh the preliminary plat PUD and CUP and variance in the shoreland. The comprehensive plan guides this future land use category for a very wide range of different commercial uses uh that are um allowed in the mixed residential and commercial category. In the concept plan review process over the last couple of years uh the city has effectively kind of considered that these uh uses that are now proposed are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Um, generally the use is uh it's consistent with the B1 business park zoning. And I just for a moment want to recognize that there are um improvements for the U project that are actually off the site. They're not specifically uh just going to be on the 40 acre site. There are the developer is uh going to have to extend utilities to serve that part of Newport. Uh and so what they're going to do is uh bring water and sewer from the current terminus on Sterling basically up the Bailey Road corridor until you get to the site. So they will be u making that utility extension uh to to bring in those necessary utilities. So associated with this preliminary plat is that additional work. Okay, back to back to zoning. Uh I just want to quickly talk about the shoreland overlay impacts. The um city when it revised its zoning code at the beginning of this year. We did um plan for this um particular use. We have what is basically an industrial use or could be an industrial use depending on the type of tenant in the shoreland overlay. And so um we have that permitted through a conditional use permit. And so the applicant has requested that CUP that's in front of you tonight. Uh in addition to the conditional use permit to allow potential industrial use in the shoreland, uh we are looking at uh two different variances, both for imperous surface. And so uh we have a very small part of um this site that's in that shoreland overlay. And so the shoreland overlay is a buffer. It's 1,000 ft from the shoreline of Rio Lake. That red line on the screen now kind of delineates where that shoreland buffer ends. And within the buffer area, we have to have a reduced imperous surface to 25%. So, it's pretty restrictive, especially for the type of development that we are reviewing this evening on this property. Uh I'll zoom in here. So, uh again, this just shows um generally the location of the buffer within that area. Um the city is required by the basically the DNR to keep impervious surface low. Um really the primary focus of the imperous surface limitations is to protect our uh public waters. In this case, this development site as part of part part of the larger development will have what's considered to be regional storm water management. So the storm water that's generated on this site will not flow towards Rio Lake. It will actually flow north to a regional basin or storm water basin that will treat the the storm water. And so, uh, from that standpoint, we'll we'll talk about variance findings, but from that standpoint, staff are comfortable with the site going over the impervious surface maximum. Um, so in addition, we do have that outlaw a that's the future site of that lift station and and would also need that same impervious variance. So, when we get into the uh bulk standards, these are the things like minimum lot area and setbacks. Um these are really quite large um business park lots. There are no issues from a um lot area or setback standpoint. Um the the only issues or concerns that we have from a setback standpoint are actually from not from the building but from the parking area. And so um specifically the city has more restrictive standards where we've got uh commercial or industrial uses next to residential. Uh typically the parking lots should be set back for a a greater distance. Uh and so the city has 50 feet on the front yard uh from a front lot line to the parking and then um 30 30 ft from the side lot line to a parking area and then 50 on the rear. So um we'll talk about that a little bit more closely on on another slide here. And I've talked about the lot coverage um question in the shoreland. Uh the city code also limits um industrial or commercial sites in this district uh to 75% impervious just given the amount of rightway dedication needed on all sides of the property. It kind of reduces the area that they have to work with. Uh the developers have done their best uh United Properties in this case has done their best on on this site to hit that 75 and so they're at 77.14 and 75.1%. These are very close to that 75% um requirement and um these are PUD flexibilities that are requested and staff do because of the amount of dedication find them to be you know reasonable uh based on all that uh building height just want to note that uh the city's limit or maximum is 40 feet um proposed here with these buildings depending on which side of the elevation you look at they might either be meeting or they might be just barely ly above and so we're taking slightly more rest, you know, conservative reviews of this and saying probably needs the flexibility. It's it's one foot. Staff are finding that to be a reasonable request as well. So, uh, just really honing in on the setbacks, the the two areas of flexibility that are requested are, um, the the southern business park building lot. You've got one property line that's directly abuing the multifamily building. um they have pinched their building as far away from the uh residential uh building as they can, but they do need that uh loading area in particular just to allow for trucks to get out of the site. Um given the significant buffer from the building to the uh from the uh business park building to the residential building, I think staff are generally comfortable with the setback uh request for flexibility on the southern side. Again, just taking that slightly more conservative approach. So you can see a ballpark guess of where the parking would need to be uh in order to be fully compliant. You've only got a a very small number of parking stalls that are within that uh setback. And that is right next to Bailey Road where you have a fair amount of rightway dedication. So again, from from that standpoint, the developer is uh really looking you mostly meeting the standard, but just needs a little bit of flexibility to to make it work. So, uh, building design, uh, these buildings have, um, kind of a design that kind of, uh, is is a little bit more similar to what you saw when the concept plans were submitted, uh, to the city about a year or two ago. And so, um, since that time, the design standards have evolved in particular in this area as the city of Newport has worked with Woodbury to try to create that kind of more consistent theming. And so really the comments in the staff report related to building design are primarily about compatibility uh with the what we expect the area to look like and not necessarily concerns with meeting the city's design standards for this type of building. So the general materials that we're looking at more, you know, they're they're generally acceptable. Um the one thing uh that we did note just kind of speculatively in the staff report is that in situations where we have um commercial or specifically retail uses, there is a a requirement for 40% window coverage on the ground floor. In this case, this is a business park and it's probably the expectation that um whatever if if a retail use does go into this area, they'll obviously, you know, know what they're getting into. And and also u there's not the same design expectation for an industrial building as there is in in for example downtown Newport where you might have um a retail storefront you want to be kind of front and center on a on a street. So, uh, that would be the only flexibility to the city's design standards just to cap this off. And, um, I think one thing that we've noted in the staff report is, uh, that we would like to see some revisions to the buildings to bring them more in line with those, uh, city of Woodbury, those design standards, and I'll say city of Woodbury, but, you know, they're they're, you know, kind of area design standards, right? And so kind of going back again, looking at maybe perhaps the colors of the building could be an easy uh easy thing to switch. There could also be uh certain improvements to the buildings that are kind of strategic at maybe the entry points or areas that are highly visible. We want these buildings to look really good from Bailey Road and other kind of more hightra corridors that you know really represent the city well. So, um, you know, talked to the developer earlier about this and I think they might have some ideas about how to make a few revisions to their building plans. Um, so with respect to tree removal, uh, we reviewed, um, the United Properties proposal for all of the tree removal. The, um, tree removal plan shows a fair number of trees. You can see and and as you remember from the aerial most of those trees are kind of perimeter trees. A of a a lion's share of the trees are along this Bailey road corridor. Um with any future even county projects it is possible that those trees would be removed just because there needs to be grading done in the area. So um the removal probably was uh probably was coming some point down the road. But nevertheless, the developer does have just over 1,800 caliber inches of required replacement. Um that's mixed in that's basically breaks down into primarily evergreens but also some hardwood trees. Um one thing to just note in the staff report we said or I said that um the uh tree replacement is in addition to landscaping. That's actually not the case in our commercial and industrial developments. they are allowed to uh satisfy required replacement trees with the proposed landscaping that they're required to provide. So in this case uh the United Property site is meeting both the tree mitigation requirements and the landscaping planting requirements. So uh landscaping so yes trees will be removed but trees will also be uh being installed into the site. uh these trees that you're seeing uh on the site, there are 244 trees required, there are 244 trees proposed. Uh the trees are concentrated primarily along uh those most uh those street corridors where there's some open space. Uh and so you can see um kind of where the different types of trees are proposed uh both along those corridors and in the landscaping islands that are required for the property. Uh, one note on landscaping planting is the growth area or the design standards for this area generally call out a certain um, placement or style of plantings. Um, Woodbury hasn't finalized their growth plan and so there could be some changes especially to the landscaping expected in this area. So, um, staff are recommending that we have general conformance with that area plan, but not lock us into any specific style of planting because we know that we want to be reasonable on our end and maybe not have to fully comply with Woodberry, but also want to do our best to, you know, kind of blend things together. So, that's kind of how we've worded those requirements. Uh, talk about parking for a moment. Uh just as a reminder, this is a what I'd call speculative business park. And so uh they'll be building the buildings and finding the tenants as they go. And so we don't quite know exactly what all the end users are going to be in these buildings. And we can't generate a precise demand. However, uh we do have an idea about what types of different uses we might expect here. And so if you look at retail and office, light industrial and warehousing, uh depending on the mix of those uses, the buildings either might meet the requirements for for parking stalls or they might be uh under the requirement for for parking. I think if you kind of zoom out and think of this as a planned unit development and consider the fact that we've got a couple of really large buildings with a pretty large amount of surface parking generally the parking seems appropriate uh for our expected mix of uses. Um the United Properties is not new to developing these types of u properties and I think they'll be able to find tenants that are able to make things work. So that's staff's perspective and I think the uh request seems reasonable especially if you know they're overparked when they have those lower demand uses uh access and circulation. There are two access points that are wider than the city standard. in conversation uh with uh the city engineer about these. We've both found these to be uh reasonable requests given that the rest of the access points that they're proposing are all uh meeting the city's requirements. These two access points that are wider are appropriately located and they will also have the bulk of those uh semi-truck traffic. So allowing them to be wider does make sense and the rest of the access the vehicle passenger vehicles will be using our uh our meeting. I want to talk quickly. So we talked about vehicle circulation but also want to talk about um pedestrian or other uh modes. And so if you look at the marked up um plan on the screen the red indicates where we will be expecting and are and are being shown trail corridors. So you can see really nice connectivity along this site. Um this site is part of a larger network that's going to be built out uh between the cities of Newport and Woodbury. And so um by seeing the trails proposed in these locations, we are really kind of matching in nicely with the area plans and we'll be providing really good um connectivity to the residents that will ultimately live uh if if if approved. So um you see those red trails and then the yellow is sidewalk connections. I did also want to quickly talk about lighting. And so you can see a snip of what's called a phototric plan on the bottom right of this slide. Long story short, uh the lighting on the boundary between the loading area uh and the residential building. That lighting seems to be just a bit too bright based on uh our expectations for lighting at the property uh boundary of a residential use. And so I think if we're thinking about things we can do to help make these uses work well together, I think a pretty simple thing would be to require that the lighting right immediately near the residential structure be a little bit dimmer. So we'll be looking for that in future plans. Uh other considerations to discuss parkland dedication uh with uh industrial or commercial uh only developments there is a requirement for 5% of the property uh to be uh dedicated for parkland dedication. Alternatively, developers can provide a 5% of the fair market value of the property to help the city um in improve its trail or recreation options around development. And so that's what's recommended in this case. Um other review comments just to note um the city engineer of course provided a memo that's in the staff report. A couple of key um things from that memo. Um there is a uh review that will be done on the regional storm water plan to make sure that um all of these all of the areas within the Newport site are accounted for from a storm water standpoint. So that will be reviewed and verified. uh road dedication along Bailey Road is required and the city engineering, public works administration, everyone has been working with uh Washington County to make sure that we have a workable plan for what's needed from a rightway standpoint in the future. And then uh plan revisions of course uh now that we're really starting to get into the weeds, plan revisions will be required before construction or final plat can be approved. So, uh, that's from a city engineering. Washington County has provided some comments on the site. I'll just note that we're kind of, um, continuing to work with Washington County as this moves forward. So, um, just a note there that we will continue that collaboration and make sure that we work between Washington County and and developer. We did offer uh, the DNR, the DO, the state DOT, and South Washington Watershed District opportunities to review. We haven't gotten any comments from them. So in the staff report I have included a a lot of findings for you to consider. I'm going to kind of burn through these slides unless you have specific questions. So there there are findings to support a preliminary plat approval. Uh there are findings to support a planned unit development approval. And there are specific findings to support approval of uh variance and a conditional use permit. And again, these are uh specifically for those shoreland overlay variants in CUB. At the end of the day, um should the city approve this project, the uh staff recommend 13 different conditions. Many of them are mostly standard there. Uh the standard conditions are things like making sure fees are paid, uh future permits are received, developers agreement, all of that stuff is taken care of. uh from uh more unique standpoint. Again, I think probably one of the uh most unique parts of this is this site is that it's part of a larger area. And so those unique conditions that are found um staff are currently recommending those you see on the screen that are summarized from the report um summarizing them, building facades being revised, uh trail connections being kept to that wider network, making landscaping revisions consistent with the growth area plan. And um specifically also if monument signage is proposed, making sure that that's consistent across the development. Also lastly, a unique condition, just making sure that lighting plan is revised to reduce impacts. So, I'm going to shift gears into the other part of our site. Um, and if you have questions, you can still stop me, but I'll I'll keep rolling. So, I'm trying to keep keep it keep it moving here. So, um, I mentioned that the um this is kind of the second phase. This would be read basically creating a shared property boundary between the the multif family and quick trip site this plat. So again very much this similar um proposals here preliminary plat and pud. Uh in this case we are looking at a zoning map amendment and specifically what that's going to do is um if you recall this overall site is zoned business park. uh staff found it prudent to amend the zoning for the multifamily and gas station to be MX3 which is a land use or a zoning district that actually allows both of these land uses and that right creates standards for them. So we felt that that was the best path forward simply because that district had standards for both of these and allows them both um comprehensive plan. I've talked about that and I just talked about zoning. Um the shoreland overlay again this really causes us to have to take that additional step of review for this site and so with the multif family in particular that's a this is a very unique review that we need to get through. Uh there is a conditional use permit uh requested for the gas station the quickrip and the shoreland overlay. There are a series of variances uh impervious surface variances similar to the other side of the project and then a density maximum to the city's shoreland PUD standards. That would be a variance for that and a variance for open space requirements in the shoreland PUD. Um, of course with the shoreland land use actions, the city has provided the DNR opportunities to comment and like I said, we haven't gotten any comments from them. So, just to really quickly talk about that uh density variance that's needed when we review a multifamily project in the shoreland, we have to do what's called a taring analysis. And so, basically, um the city has a set of rules that are compliant with DNR standards. We're required to have these rules by state law. um we have to do this taring analysis that basically allows us to um concentrate density as far away from a water body as we can. And so there's there's effectively a bonus a density bonus uh to projects that are located as far from the you know in tiers three and four. So uh there are tiers of a set distance in this case it's 320 ft uh for each tier. So, uh, we the shoreland overlay ends roughly here. Long story short, uh, we did complete that taring review. Um, the table in the staff report summarizes it. If you read the letter of the law, the basically the rules would only allow for less than 10 units to be located within the shoreland overlay. And so, um, given the nature of this overall development site, given that it's really quite far away from Rio Lake, um, staff were and have been supportive of this request for a variance. Um if you looked at other projects that uh were shoreland um PUDS, you would likely see a lot more of the property located within the shoreland, which would give the based on the math we used to create this table would give the developer the ability to construct many more units. But because such a low amount of the site is located within the shoreland overlay and most of the you know many of the buildings units are concentrated there just the math is kind of working against them. And so if you kind of zoom out like I like I've said before uh and just look at what's being requested staff do find it to be reasonable based on the location of the project. um bulk standards uh lot coverage is really the uh primary uh thing to look at here. Um both parts of the this um the multif family and the quickrip site are all are both meeting the uh lot coverage but that shoreland lot coverage is the issue. So those variances are requested and building height again uh just barely exceeding that 40 foot maximum uh of 42 and roughly 42 and 1/2 ft for the multif family building. So those variances are or PUD flexibilities are generally supported by staff. Again the developers are really you know doing their best to make this make this tight site work. From a building design standpoint, uh you can see in the packet what is proposed up and up on the screen. Uh we did ask uh since the packet was published, we asked the uh real estate equities team to provide uh calculations so that we can really understand exactly um how their building is um reviewed against our city code. It looks like they're just short of the 30% brick requirement. Uh, and so, um, I think there is an opportunity to kind of work together and I think some flexibility might be warranted in this situation if they're able to really meet that area design expectation, right? So, if we have something that's consistent with the broader area, there's there might be a reason to be flexible. Uh, the Quick Trip site, um, Quick Trip, generally this building is kind of what you would expect there. Many of their buildings are themed the same. uh and their building is generally consistent with the uh Newport and area design standards. The only uh flexibility that they would need is simply for that retail 40% window area is a lot for a gas station. Staff find that to be reasonable request. Landscaping. Um I'm nearly done by the way, so thank you for your attention. Uh landscaping, long story short, um generally the site's really close to meeting. The only uh site that's falling short right now is the QuickRip site. We did confirm with the uh project engineer though that they did not ex exclude the storm water pond from the calculation which should actually help them. So they're going to recalculate and then we'll see exactly how short they are. I suspect it will be either conforming or very close to um again just thinking about that area plan. Um there could be some changes that are expected to the landscaping location along both the road corridors. I just want to note the the monument sign as well. Um this is particularly the location at Bailey Road and Century Avenue. That will be a really kind of key gateway into this development on both the Woodbury and Newport sides. And so, um, the developer is prepared and has heard from us that, you know, we're going to be looking for some really good, you know, consistent theming, particularly at the entry of the of the project, parking and loading. Um, so from from a parking standpoint, uh, Quick Trip, their site is providing enough parking for their use. Um for the multif family, the real estate equities building uh their site is low uh on parking based on the calculation uh that the city code creates. The real estate equities building is quite large. There are 184 units in that building. And so uh from that standpoint, the the way that the parking standards work kind of inflates the number of parking stalls required. So if you look at exactly what's required by code for 184 units, that'd be 532 stalls. That's quite a few. Uh especially because I think that visitor parking requirement really kind of um increases the more units you have. Um what's being proposed here is 360 stalls. That's roughly 1.9 stalls per unit. Um so this is a PUD development uh flexibility request uh for this project. If we consider other projects the city has had with uh similar parking ratios, you would actually look at uh Red Rock Square 2, just as an example, has a ratio of 1.7 stalls per unit. And uh they have not had fixed route transit service in that location for years actually at this point. And so that site has been working fine at that ratio. And so we do have examples within the city of Newport that we can rely on to say, you know, this is generally reasonable. But the developer is kind of ready to speak from their perspective to why they think that flexibility is okay. Access and circulation. There is one shared access between the multif family and quickrip. Um that that access would uh require reciprocal easements to make sure that both sites have equal and shared access at that location. Uh then the Quick Trip gas station would have their own um access. That's a full access to that future street. That would be primarily for passenger vehicles. Uh I just want to point out to you again the uh sidewalk network in this case is pretty significant. uh this sidewalk network will help connect the um real estate equities building, the multif family building to the broader transportation network and I think support um the fact that you know it's um going to have better access to all the amenities in the area. So uh just one last note on access, the shared access is slightly wider than the city's maximum. Again considering the uses and location of that access both uh planning and engineering staff have identified that as being a very reasonable request. So 32 is the standard uh parkland dedication. So in this case we do have a residential development or mixeduse development. So 10% is required by code and again staff are supportive of a cash in lie of land. um uh review comments, the city engineering memo. There is a specific memo on this site that helps you know has helped support uh my review and uh what's in in the staff report online. Uh one thing we've talked about is just rightway dedication on Bailey. Um and the building location of the multif family building. Um so we're working through a lot of different comments including those from Washington County. So, uh, as I mentioned, findings are provided for supporting basically all of these different requests. They're, uh, generally summarized in the staff report. Um, reszoning findings are made, uh, findings to support preliminary plat approval, PUD approval, and the variance variances in conditional use permits. So with this uh this real estate equities and quickrip project, we're looking at 15 recommended conditions if it's approved. The unique conditions in this case are pretty similar to the United Properties proposal. Uh thinking about conformance with the area guidelines. Um in this case we do have um this part of the project is actually reliant on the United Properties part to go first to to bring in the utilities to create the outlaw that this will plat. So um there is a condition that this is reliant on that. So, uh, next steps for both of these projects following this evening, um, and a recommendation from the planning commission, the projects will go to the city council for a review and and a decision. Um, following potential decision on that. If if approved, the developers would uh, come forward with final plats and final plans in the coming probably months uh, following an approval. So, uh, I I have a couple of example motions on the screen. The motion on the top would allow the planning commission to make a recommendation for approval of the requests by United Properties. The motion on the bottom of the screen here would be for the real estate equities and quickrip requests uh to be approved by the city council. So, um that's staff's recommendation to you. U but before you make a decision on how you make a recommendation, you'll likely want to not only um hold that public hearing, but also hear from the developers. And so I guess my recommendation would be to um hear from United Properties and then the real estate and Quick Trip uh folks and then open that public hearing. >> Okay. Um do we have any questions before? >> No, I'd like to hear from the developers first. Great. >> Okay. Um developers, if you want have something to add to Nathan's presentation, please um come up to the podium and state your name. Good evening. I'm Nicole Fontaine. I'm with United Properties. Um I also have my civil engineer here to answer any civil related questions, but I just wanted to start out and thank you guys for being here this evening. Um, and to Nathan and the staff for being great to work with throughout this process as we've refined uh the project. Um, Nathan, if you could go to the next slide. So, as a brief reminder to, we were before planning commission in June 2024 and then in council July 2024 for concept plan approvals and again in January 2026 for our EAW approval. So, we've spent a lot of time on this project. A couple years have been put into this, but we remain excited to be a part of the master plan development and develop in Newport. Um, so turning to a quick overview of the site plan here in the screen, we're proposing two buildings, 105,000 square feet, which is the one closest to Bailey Road, and one that's 189,000 square ft to the north of that. We are hoping to break ground on the first of the two buildings in spring of 2027. that will be dependent on likely the Bailey family delivering um mass grading and utilities to the area to deliver us a pad ready site. Um and out of the two buildings, we haven't determined which one will go first yet, but typically we'll plan for the second building to start once there's leasing activity and momentum on the first building. And then can you flip back to the first one? Yeah. So here, if we go back to the rendering on the first page, um I'll just note that between now and the time of final approvals, we'll be working with the city to get this design up to standards. We did have a call today and we realized that this design was submitted and done prior to the growth area plan that Woodbury sent out and there's been a lot of changes since that time. So, we plan to work with and actually today sent out an email to our architect to work with the city and their requirements and hopefully bring this plan to conformance. So, our ideas, we don't have a plan yet just because we got this today, but our plan would be to add some warm colors to the plan like the Woodberry showed. Um, and hopefully have something that matches the neighboring development. And then can you go to the last? Yeah. Um, lastly, I'll just touch on the master plan that I'm sure you've seen before, but that yellow square just kind of orients us as to where we're talking about. And the blue portion is specifically the industrial development that we're talking about tonight. Um, yeah, that's all I really have. I'm here to answer questions and excited to keep this project moving forward. I don't have any questions, commissioners. >> No, it's pretty straightforward. >> I have one. Um, for the the building that would be in the bottom left corner, um, the one that butts against the apartment building, I know you don't know what businesses would be there at this point, but knowing what types that you expect to to try and recruit in, is there any idea times of day that that trucks would be loading and unloading against the back of that apartment building? >> Yeah, it's hard to tell. I mean, because we don't know the user yet, but typically it's going to be someone with a small percentage of office requirement, small assembly, and some backend warehousing. And typically, we'd see that just being daytime hours for trucks, but I don't think there's a way that today we can guess what type of user that we're going to get there, but I would say typically it's daytime hours. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. Hello, commission chair, members of the planning commission. Thanks for having me. I'm Alex Bazans. I'm a partner with real estate equities. Um, and we also have, by the way, our architect team is here from Cass Wilson. We have two architects here as well to comment, uh, provide any feedback for any questions that come up related to design, too. So, And then Samitech is also our civil engineer. Um so just to start just the first page here is just kind of a little bit of background on real estate equities. So um real estate equities is a St. Paul based property management and development firm uh that specifically develops multif family housing um and really has a specific focus over the last 10 years on developing workforce housing. Um we currently own and manage about 5,000 apartment units in Minnesota and Arizona. Um, real estate equities will manage the property with on-site property management and we will own the property long term. Next slide. Uh, this is just an example of a couple of projects that we've recently done. Uh, Decator Landing is a project in Brooklyn Park that we just completed that's um almost fully occupied. Uh, Arbor Court is in St. Louis Park. Uh, Landing at Amber Fields is in Rosemount and Springhouse is in Rapids. Those are just examples of uh kind of the exterior look of some of the projects that we've done recently. Um again, this is uh more interior finishes of some of those projects. Uh Aster House, Arbor Court, Landing at Ember Fields, Indic Decator Landing. This is just representative of the finish levels that we're doing uh you know in the kitchens as well as the uh common area amenities of the buildings. uh proposed apartment site plan. Uh as Nathan had showed in his presentation, we're proposing 184 units. Uh it's 36 one-bedroom units. It is 100 two-bedroom units and 48 three-bedroom units. Uh parking. Um again, we have uh 374 stalls total. Um is it 360, Nathan? I'm sorry. >> Yeah, we went back and forth on that like between publication of the staff report and and today. So I think it's we landed at 360. >> It's 360. So the parking ratio is just under two stalls per unit. And just to speak to that, so we have a a level of underground parking. And then we also have surface stalls and we have just north of a 1:1 surface stall ratio uh which is actually a requirement of Washington County um with the balance of the parking being underground. So that parking ratio actually for the projects that we've built is actually quite a bit higher than we've been doing. We've typically been building projects and designing them that are probably in the 17 to8 stall per unit ratio. So we feel pretty confident that 1.95 stalls per unit um is ample parking for the project. Uh next slide. Uh this is just a representative rendering of what we're proposing. Um, again, Nathan had showed what this looked like as well and showed I think the build building elevations that specifically kind of laid out some of the building materials, but this is just a representation of what the exterior facades proposed to look like. Um, this is another um kind of snapshot of that, the Quick Trip prepared actually that shows kind of the the view turning into the project of Quick Trip with the building and the backdrop. And then the next slide is just another uh representation from the other angle as you turn in to the uh project of what it's going to uh potentially look like. Uh building details. So, um community amenities. Uh we're proposing a fitness center, a club room, uh enclosed parking, uh an outdoor recreation area for kids, uh a dog run, and also an outdoor patio that'll have a barbecue area. That'll be kind of an extension of the uh community room. Unit amenities, we do stainless steel appliances, in-unit washer and dryer, granite countertops, uh high quality cabinetry, uh and also luxury vinyl plank flooring in the units. Uh this slide kind of shows some examples of some of the sustainability elements of the building. Uh for design standards, uh we have to meet Energy Star certification for these projects. uh enterprise green communities with the Minnesota overlay as well, which is uh just some additional requirements to Energy Star. Uh some of those design elements, and there's quite a bit of them. This is kind of a recap of some of the the main elements, but again, Energy Star appliances. We're going to have some EV charging stations at the building for the residents. Uh solar ready roof, uh high efficiency mechanical systems, continuous exterior insulation, uh motion sensor activated lighting, lowflow plumbing fixtures, and low VOCC paints and adhesives. Um this slide is just kind of uh emphasizing some of the benefits of a plan unit development. Um you know we're proposing a project that is really um you know the unit mix that we're developing is more family oriented. You know 75% of the units are two bedrooms or larger. 35% of them are three bedrooms or yard larger which is different from some of the market rate projects that you would see getting built today. There are a lot of studios ones with a few twobedrooms. Um we're really building projects with larger units um you know for families uh sustainable design again energy star uh EV charging stations uh again that's a little redundant from the last slide but um and workforce housing you know the median income family in Newport uh you know will will actually qualify for this housing um and improvements for to the housing stock of Newport um you know we're proposing to develop a market rate quality housing product on this site which will just kind of elevate the overall you know multi multif family housing stock because new new construction of new apartments um you know just requires I think other landlords frankly to upkeep their buildings to be you know competitive in a marketplace and with that I'm happy to you know answer any questions and again we've got a team here and I know Scott's going to do a presentation as well so Uh, with that, Scott, do you want to come up and >> Well, I don't have any architects with me. I don't have any engineers with me, and that's why we keep the price of donuts down. >> But, uh, Quick Trips, a Wisconsinbased company. We started in 1965 with one store and uh, today we're at about 928 stores. And I've been around for 900 of them. So that's why my hair is kind of gray. Uh uh today we've got about 40,000 co-workers. Uh one thing that's very unique about QuickTrip is we share 40% of the company profits back to all of our co-workers. So we all share in the profits based on our pay. So it's LA last year they received we received approximately just shy of 20% of cash bonus and what went into our profit sharing plan. So that makes us very unique uh because the c the co-orker that's treating you as the customer is going to give you a little special treatment because they're part owner of that b of that business. And if another co-orker is eating a doughnut in the back room, the other co-orker is going to say, "Knock it off. 40% of that donut's mine." So, uh, when you got owners running the company, it works better. >> And it's we we're owned by a strong one single strong Christian-based family. And uh, and that's just the way they believe in doing business. Uh, I'm lucky to tell you tonight, this is the first time I've been able to make this announcement. Um, we were voted today, just this week, it's not even been published yet, USA Today, seventh year in a row, Quick Trips, best convenience store company in the United States. Seven years in a row. We weren't hearing from them. We weren't hearing from them and we thought, "Oh no, what's happening?" But we got we did get it again. Um, you you all heard this speech from from me a year ago, so I I won't go on and on, but uh we are great community supporters in the towns that we're in. Uh, and of course with 900 some stores, we're in probably 500 different communities. Um, but we do support the towns that we're in. One one thing I always get asked is and I did make this statement a year ago, but I'll I'll redo this one. In why in Iowa and of course now in South Dakota and North Dakota and Illinois aren't you Quicktrip? We're Quickstar there. So in 1988 happened in Waterl Iowa. Kind of a neat why it would happen in Waterlue. We ran into Quickrip with a queue from Tulsa and we were both in the same town and we would because we have our own dairy plant, we'd advertise milk 99 cents a gallon at the time and bread for 49 cents a loaf or four for a dollar and the customers would hear it on the radio and they couldn't tell the queue from the K. So we had to change. They were registered five days ahead of us. So, we're that's why we're Quickstar in all these other towns. We get asked that question all the time. So, um so with with our development, um we've got our typical 10,000 just under 10,000 square foot uh convenience store. We've got 10 gas pumps out in front. We've got a a car wash which is right on this part of the building and the cars circulate from the west side come out to the east. So the noise is away from the apartment and going towards the street. Um, this is our storm pond here with a with a nice sidewalk going around here. The the trail and sidewalk system is is very neat. This is going to be a very nice almost like a park-like setting. It's going to be gorgeous back there. A lot of grass to mow, but we'll keep it nice. We pride oursel in keeping our facilities nice. Uh there there are two diesel lanes on the back side of the building. We did have them originally when our first presentation we had them over here. We moved them over here to get the trucks away from the apartments and the residents here. This would be screened so that the neighbors across the road and this is not a truck stop. There'll be semis in here once in a while, but it's only going to be the ones that are traveling in this part of the of the community. It'll for the most part it'll be straight trucks with vans and that sort of thing. Um, but you know, it's built for a semi, but there's no semi parking here. It's only to service that part of the community, and there's a need for that out in this this part of town. Um, and w with that, I'm here for any questions as well. Thank you again. >> Commissioners, any questions? >> Now, I want a donut. >> I have I have one question. Um, and maybe I just missed it. I'm not sure who would address it. I saw that on the the commercial buildings, the warehouses, um it needed a wider entrance for the semis, but I don't see that on the gas station part. >> Oh, uh yeah. So, I can chair, members of the commission, I can address that really quick. So, I'll bring the site plan back up and just narrate over that. Um so you do have one shared access that both Quicktrip and the multif family building will share. Uh you can see that they both generally um you know connect to this private drive at the same areas. And so those are those are welllocated access points. We want generally access to line up because that makes movements more um common sense. And this this access this is a private access. Uh this access is exceeding the width um to the width standards that we have by about 4 feet. And so um again that will help accommodate those those diesel turning movements. If you think about how they'll come into the site, they'll likely, you know, turn here and then come around and go about out that about that shared access. And so most most of this uh use of this access will be those passenger vehicles where a right turning movement is just a lot more quick. >> Um do we have to hold the public hearing separately for the business park? >> I would recommend just to kind of keep it clean that way so that we published a notice that had both items on it. I would recommend you open one for okay the business park project and then close it open it for the other project. >> Okay. So, we will um open the public hearing for the Bailey Nursery Business Park at 7:32. If someone has uh comments, um I invite you to come up to the podium, state your name and your address. Um with the public hearing, I do want to remind everyone that that's not um the public hearing is not meant to be a back and forth. Simply uh you you state your concerns or comments at that time. So, we'll give it a a minute in case someone would wants to come make an a a statement. >> My name is Neil Nage and I live at 310 Bailey Road, which is directly across from the road between the apartment building and Quickrip. So, my concern isn't necessarily the development of the lot, but the traffic on Bailey Road. I am not seeing a lot of information regarding that. I don't know if there's any maps that show any changes to that like stop lightss, roundabouts, new road additions. Uh I'm just curious to see if there's anything that's more information on that. >> Nathan, is that something that you can address? I'm pretty sure we did some kind of study. >> Chair and members of the commission, um I would recommend that any residents that have questions certainly should be reaching out to staff. Um okay. Specifically, the city has processed a environmental assessment worksheet that did have a traffic study. So, the city um has worked with um city staff has had an opportunity to review for anticipated traffic impacts from future development, not only on this site, but also in tandem with um the community of Woodbury on shared development traffic. And uh city is continuing to work with Washington County. >> Okay. So sir, if if you'd kindly reach out to staff and they'll they'll be able to to talk. >> Planner would be the best one to contact. Um doesn't make a difference. >> Yes. Okay. City. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. My name is Jerry D. Um we're on Bay Court. Uh I have >> Sir, what was your address? >> Huh? >> Your address, please. >> 280 Bay Court. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. >> I have a few specific question. You talk a lot about the zoning the maps. >> Um when you talk about the trees, you want to cut down the trees and plant new trees. Which side of By Road the trees are? >> Um for specific questions like that, sir. Um it's kind of like the gentleman that just came up. Um if you have really specific question, we invite you to to contact city staff. Um the public hearing is is for for uh residents to make like general like state their concerns or make any comments. But for very specific questions like that, we invite you to to reach out to city staff. >> Okay. Okay. I hope the next question not specific. So you talk about the 115 ft from the central bay road. Can you explain to me what that means? Um the >> that's another specific question. >> The rightway is >> chair and commission. I'll I'll I'll jump in and you know if you'd like me to answer that question specifically uh we're looking for 115 ft from the center line of Bailey Road. When the city uh reviews developments on a county road, uh the city needs to be taking into account the future needs of that road that are planned for in the county's comp plan. um specifically if the city does not require right-of-way dedication, it would have to basically purchase that land in the future should a county project occur uh to improve the road. So, by making sure we're getting rightway dedication in an appropriate distance uh which we've certainly been doing and working with the county on uh we should be set up for that. >> Okay. Thank you. Is is that from center by little on both side? 150 ft on both side of center line. >> Yes. Center line. >> Oh, okay. Okay. A question on the building. How far is your building from the Billy Road? You give me a map. >> I don't know. >> Here's your building. Your building is here. Do they have >> this is inappropriate? None of these questions are pertinent to the comments in regards to the development. They're very >> sir um uh your your questions are very um they're not very general. So they're very specific. So um that's something that you would want to either address with staff or after the meeting. Um the developers are here. I'm guessing that they're going to stick around for some of those more specific questions. Okay. >> Thank you. Sorry. Um any other any other comments uh community would like to make? Okay, we're closing the public hearing for the um nursery business park at uh 7:37 and we will open uh the public hearing for the Bailey Nurseries multifamily and gas station at 7:37. If someone would like to make a comment regarding um that portion of of the project, I invite you to come up to the podium, state your name and uh your address. Just give it a minute. Okay. Um the uh public hearing for the Bailey Nurseries multif family and uh gas station is closed at 7:38. Um commissioners, do you have any questions on on any of these two projects? >> What is the difference between the trail and the sidewalk? >> Great question. So, uh, the city has a sidewalk requirement in new subdivisions on at least one side of the road. You have to have a concrete sidewalk. So, sidewalks typically will be classified as a concrete sidewalk. Typically, that's going to be five five feet in width for a public sidewalk. So, um, that's what when we say sidewalk, it's that concrete surface. Typically, an important distinction to be aware of is that concrete sidewalks are maintained by the abuing property owner. So if anyone has a sidewalk in front of their house, um they'll know that it's kind of their responsibility. Uh you know, I have a sidewalk in front of my house. I have to shovel that when it snows. Uh the batuminous the the trails, they're a batuminous. They're asphalt. And so they're going to be a wider uh they're going to be wider. They're typically going to be a standard of eight or 10 feet. That is a asphalt. It's a little bit more of a smooth kind of continuous surface. Um, and those are nice for, you know, connecting people who are riding bikes, um, or, you know, pushing strollers or whatever through a development. And so trails typically, you know, through our trail network plan, we're really trying to connect different destinations as opposed to simply provide an option to, you know, circulate around your immediate property. >> I have a question. Okay. So, um, with like comp planning kind of on the horizon, I just was kind of curious with the, um, the multifamily, um, development, does that meet like kind of like our future density standards? >> Yeah. So, uh, that's a great question. Um, the we've been working through that on with the Met Council and specifically as it relates to uh, this project would actually be um, really increasing the city's supply of affordable housing. And so, um, we're working with the Met Council to help them see the reason for us to have kind of, uh, some extra, I guess, credit, if you will, because we're really, uh, if the city approves this project, we'll be, um, providing a very, you know, much more than adequate supply of housing for the for the community's needs. Um, the from a density standpoint, part of the reason you saw the project come in uh, in this manner is to make sure that the density uh, works for the multif family site. So um the net density that the multif family and quick trip um development has is is meeting the city's requirements. >> Okay, thank you for that. Um I think that's all the questions I had. >> I have one more. So and I apologize if this has been addressed in in past meetings. I'm I'm newer to this project. Um obviously all the sewer and water infrastructure going in is brand new. Um you mentioned a lift station. >> Yeah. >> At some point does that tie into our older systems in Newport? >> Absolutely. Yep. That that's a good question. So, um what what effectively the developer is doing in partnership with property owners and you heard this is kind of a you know unique uh you know um partnership between a lot of different private developers but essentially the utilities are going to be extended at the cost of the developers primarily uh from the current terminus of the city's water man and sewer main on Sterling. they're effectively going to generally go uphill uh to um to the development uh site. Now, that being said, there's there's a really large there's a really large hill that you then kind of come down into the development site. And so, the lift station will be a city sewer lift station uh to be constructed by the developer and then owned and operated by the city. uh that lift station will be uh getting the waste water uh to go, you know, into the city's network, which ultimately does feed into the Metropolitan Council's sewer system. >> And are we concerned with our older systems bringing in all that additional waste and a joke? >> Uh chair and commissioners, there was concern. Um we have an older section of the line on Second Avenue and it was kind of a choke point. Um and uh thankfully uh the mayor and uh staff went out and got some money from the Met Council and we just replaced it. So um we're very very happy with our ability to provide additional development throughout our community. It would have been a major issue and that's something that we knew uh over the last four or five years that this could be an issue. So, we wanted to upgrade that and uh if folks want to drive down Second Avenue, you can see the work that uh the city did and we paid for nearly that uh that that whole project with grants and bonds. Uh so, it's uh just been great work and we're continuing that uh with additional funds for on Third Avenue and then on 12th Street um in the next year and a half. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, J. Are we done with questions? I think we're done with questions. Um well I mean the recommend this the staff recommendations seem really reasonable to me. Um so you know if someone wants to motion um >> do we motion these separately? >> I would recommend separate motions. >> Okay. If someone would like to motion um the staff recommendations for the nursery business park. Um >> yeah. >> Okay. I'll move to recommend the city council approval of the preliminary plat planned unit development and shoreland variances NCUP requests by United Properties for the Bailey Nursery Business Park project with the findings of fact and conditions proposed by staff. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I um the second part uh can we get a motion for that? I move to recommend city council approval of the reszone preliminary plat planned unit development in shoreland variances and cup requests by real estate equities and quickrip for the Bailey nursery's multifamily and gas station project with the findings of fact and conditions proposed by staff >> second. All in favor >> I thank you all for your patience tonight. It's been a long one. Okay. Um, next agenda item is the bluff definition ordinance update. >> That's why everyone's here. >> That's why what? >> I'm sorry. >> For for folks, yeah, the we're move we're shifting gears to another item. So, I'll uh I'll give folks a minute if they're looking to uh take off or or go into the hallway and talk to the developers. just last night. He didn't ask that question, >> but me, it probably came up last night at 4 a.m. >> Wow. >> Okay. Everybody bluffs are important. >> I just want the commission to know bluffs are important, aren't they, Nathan? >> I'm really upset that no no one stayed in advance, frankly. And >> yeah, >> bluffs are important. Not even our representatives. >> So, this is uh this is an item that's kind of coming on the coattails of the update that the city did in January for uh repealing and replacing the the zoning ordinance. As you remember, we had I think between like literally 14 and 20 different code sections that each had their own definition section. And so we went through this pretty big effort to just consolidate. If you need a definition, you're going to find it in one section and then we're going to, you know, have just each term is going to be defined only once. And so, um, that's been working generally speaking pretty well. Uh the DNR did provide some I'll I'll say kind of late comments on on the update that um called out the fact that we chose to use the shoreland overlay definition of a bluff and not the Mississippi River critical corridor Act definition. >> Um >> how dare you? So we effectively we were were required by state rules to have both uh ordinances kind of match the state model and effectively we just picked the one that we thought would be uh best for you know our development community to work with and they said no we want the more strict one and so completely reasonable um and so that's why the staff report has been prepared for this update and why we did post a public hearing um for this item. So, I'm going to scroll to the end of the packet and just walk you through a few things on this one. >> Keep on scrolling. >> It's kind of it's kind of buried. >> So, this is being >> So, yeah, and this is kind of the, you know, kind of what was in the report. Um, there are a couple of different figures that will remain in the city's ordinance. The long story short of this amendment is that the bluff definition will become slightly more strict. So in other words, slightly more of our steep slopes in the city, particularly on the east side of 61 in those areas, we will have a slightly higher standard for maybe including more of these sloped areas. And so I think that's definitely um reasonable considering the terrain in that area. We do have a Bluffland overlay district and that's primarily what this will affect. So I uh to be honest, I think this is a good change. Um I don't think it's going to be inc, you know, incredibly impactful to development. I don't think it's going to make development more difficult necessarily. Um but developers will have to as they have done identify what areas meet these definitions so that we know what areas uh we need to require that be protected. So that's kind of the long story short. U this will simplify things instead of creating two different definitions just having one. And so staff uh I asked Madison uh on my team who you I think some of you um most of you know. Uh Madison helped me with this review and ended up looking at a couple of other neighboring communities. There really aren't many in the area that have a specific bluff uh definition because there aren't many communities with this amount of bluffs. There are a couple in Grove Heights and South St. Paul uh both are appearing to use the the most strict uh definition. So generally speaking, this would be consistent with the practices in other communities. And I I again I think it's very reasonable. So, we actually did get um some comments from the DNR today. Very, very minor language changes that we will incorporate into this um proposed ordinance moving forward to council. So, these are not these are really just grammatical changes that won't impact the interpretation of the code. >> Do we have any questions before I open the public hearing? Okay. So, the time is 7:49 and uh we're opening up the public hearing for the bluff definition ordinance update. >> And there's nobody in the audience. So, we will close um the public hearing at 7:49. Um commissioners, any questions or concerns? Uh we can no >> welcome a motion. >> Yes. I need apologize. I apologize. You need >> I need a motion to recommend approval. City administrator >> Hatch. Oh, my apologies. >> A motion to recommend approval. >> I second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I. And last on our agenda is um a motion to adjurnn. A second to a motion to >> second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Good job. >> Thank you. Thank you so much. You all rocked it.