[Music] all right we're right at 7 o'cl so we're going to get started here this evening Jolan can we get a roll call council members Erikson here Larson here valento here mayor Roberts here can I ask everyone to stand for the pledge allegiance alance to the flag United States of America and to the repic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all all right uh I am looking for uh approval of the agenda that's in front of us I'll make a motion to approve the agenda second any discussion all in favor I great our next item is oath of office uh Chief Peterson I'm honored to be able to do this on my second meeting uh this is quite an honor to to be able to swear to new officers so looking forward to that yeah Mr Mayor and City Council Members good evening uh tonight I want to introduce you to our two recently hired police officers um who started with us in late November of 2024 and to have them officially sworn in by mayor Roberts uh where they will re site the oath of office first I would like to introduce officer Jeremy Peltier officer Peltier worked at the WN Police Department for six years and was a patrol officer investigator a um training instructor and also was on the CNT team uh he just completed his field training and it's been assigned solo Patrol as of last week next I'd like to introduce officer Jake wsman you can come up officer wsman worked at shago County Sheriff's Office and was a correctional officer there for just about a year he is currently in field training and should be completing the program in the next month or so and mayor Roberts if you can come down and the office ask the rest of the council to join me support United States support United States off off support unit States [Applause] we're just going to take about a minute here um unless you want to stay for the rest of the meeting uh you can go upstairs to the community room we have some our light Refreshments for everybody so thanks for comment CH all right uh the next item tonight is the open Forum this is an opportunity for anyone to come up and speak uh on any issue City related please state your name and address anyone else anyone interested in coming up to speak this this evening right uh so next is uh consent agenda um I am going to make a motion that we approve consent agenda 7 and then 7g through M actually o f you can keep F okay so is there a second so are we pulling a through e e yes we're pulling B through through f b through F so or e e e okay I did that opposite the wrong way probably I should have pulled those two instead yeah all right so um well I thought so we were going to proove those but we're pulling those for a second motion okay so so the motion is a and then F through oh oh correct I'll second that okay uh any discussion all in favor I I motion carries right um I will make a motion that we approve 7B through 7e there second second all in favor I I Iain stain exension one exension all right first regular agenda item here uh airport minimum standards proposal Amanda and silus are going to carry this carry this on for us yes thank you your honor councel um so in your packet um starting on page uh 7 is the proposal from um silus um and Bolton and M to do the airport rules and regulations if you recall the states back to this past summer uh when we there was a joint work session with Council and the airport commission and at that time at that meeting it was decided that the airport rules rules and regulations currently called the airport guidelines needed to be updated the last time those have been updated was sometime in 2009 and given their title guidelines uh it's a little ambiguous about their um the the legality of the current uh regulations um fortunately the current city um engineering firm Bolton and M uh via silus has a lot of experience with our airport specifically and does have the staff to be able to do uh the new rules and regulations that we would need that would match what is recommended by mind aeronautical Department um I can let silus speak to what he's planning to do or what he's proposing to do for the scope of services uh and uh and then we can p back to me in terms of what we're looking for from the council tonight sure thank you m Johnson thank you Mr Roberts and members of council uh pleased to offer Bolton and M support to kind of assist the with development of airport minimum standards um so for what airport minimum standards will do is essentially establish the guidelines for all parties operating at the airport so this will include all existing Pilots that are based there U any existing businesses that are based there but also for any proposed Pilots or businesses that desire to base their aircraft at the airport it'll set the ground rules for all parties uh in terms of what the city expectations are for anybody operating at the airport and what this will do is will clear up any confusion amongst Council staff and Airport commission if there is a situation that arises that needs to be addressed uh the council the city staff and the commission can refer certain parties to these guidelines that have been reviewed and approved so that a decision can be made about the type of uh the type of person or the type of action that's uh that's ongoing there so what uh the proposal is kind of a it's a two-part proposal you know there's the development of the the guidelines themselves in terms of what's going to be included in them so I won't go through this but there's you know 13 you know task items that you know Bolton and bank we recommend that are included at a minimum in Forest Lakes guidelines some of the key ones are you know the administration if uh a situation arises where these guidelines need to be imposed what's the process of going about and administering them so kind of uh it give City staff uh some resources to know okay this is the process to enforce these policies um the lease agreement you know there's a number of different lease agreements that currently exist for for Pilots that lease the land from the city but they own their own hair they own their own uh aircraft storage hanger what these guidelines will do is create a new standard moving forward for any new lease agreements but then also include you know with the assistance of the City attorney Miss Johnson some guidelines about you know the current lease agreements in terms of if they need to be modified updated or what type of rules apply to them insurance requirements you know obviously anybody that's operating on aircraft on city property which is the airport needs to have a certain level of insurance and then also for any uh building that's leased on Airport property but is a private private property it's laying out the minimum insurance requirements in case an incident occurs when it when it comes talking to like airport operations you know there's two different types so there's the general aviation population which is let's say I own a an aircraft that I use for recreational purposes and I'm you know purchase and acquire and build a hanger at the airport what are the rules and regulations for me to operate safely at the airport and then there's a separate set of guidelines for any sort of business activity that would occur there so this could be the laundry list a fixed Bas operator which is typically an operator that provides aircraft services so fueling restoration maintenance um charter service those types of things and then a number of different uh different types of a itical businesses flight instruction skydiving um aerial spraying um you know even if there's specialized activities what these guidelines will do at least set up some minimum guidelines for any prospective business that wants to face and operate at Forest Lake to set the ground rules for them coming in there um through the fence is something else that'll be detailed I know there's been some discussions with a neighboring property owner who has explored possibly a through the fence situation so what through the fence means me is that uh somebody that's uh has aircraft off of Airport property is permitted access to onto Airport property to access the runway how it sits right now is if you have an aircraft that's not based at the airport you have no means of actually accessing the airport unless you fly in or fly out this will allow someone who's has property next to the airport to operate freely to come and go off the airport property um and then there's a variance request which will be documented if there's a reason a certain individual has a as a reason to request a variance to any part of the standards that are developed it'll outline the process with which that person needs to come to uh the city the council the commission to request a variance and then penalties you know if there's a need to enforce action upon someone who's not uh abiding by these policies uh that's what these minimum standards will develop I'll pause there if anyone has kind of questions or comments about what the airports standards will include any want have any questions yeah a couple questions um I've been in meetings about the airport and there's been a lot of parsing of words over guidelines versus policy versus standards will whatever this becomes will that mitigate all that ambiguity yeah your honor Council yes uh that is certainly the hope these will be rules and regulations as opposed to guidelines they will be clearly adopted by the Council um the current guidelines we don't we can't find a formal action that actually adopted those um so these will be formally adopted by the council as the airport's rules and regulations in every lease that is currently uh at the airport right now they have a section in their lease that they will comply with the rules and regulations which unfortunately because we're calling ours guidelines it's not entirely clear if you know that's the same document so it will definitely clear up a lot of that ambiguity yes okay then the second question as the last year's project was being done out there there was a lot of discussion around the use of those new hanger spaces uh whether that should be general aviation or business there was some argument to be made that they should be business- based I think on that document um there's my understanding a greater market demand for general aviation will this scope of work address any of that so oh go ahead Mr to no go ahead so what the with these documents are it's it's ultimately the city council that'll decide what happens with the Lots out there these documents won't say unless it's desired by the council that let's say those lots are numbered one through four Lots one through four are reserved for business purposes or Lots one through four are reserved for general aviation activity that's still a decision that that can be made you know by the council in terms of what to do with the lots that were constructed as part of last year's project So to that point I think I would like to see that that be part of something that's decided in this is are we going to designate certain areas commercial as opposed to general aviation and my thought behind that and willing to listen and learn more about it is that you know your your Prime spots like your downtown which should be where the commercial lights lots are and general aviation should be offset a little bit I agree with that but I don't know that this project I mean obviously this project isn't intended to address that element so where does that get addressed at the airport commission level or the maybe the steering committee as a separate project I don't know I I you know it could be part of this if we wanted to Define where these commercial lots are I think it could be part of this could it not certainly yes there's an Airport layout plan which identifies you know all the existing and future hanger lots that uh could be developed on city of forest lake property at the airport it certainly could be included here to designate which Lots would be set up for business use and which slots would be set up for general aviation so I'd be fine see that be included I guess the thing I'd look to uh from us silus is as I understand it minda AV Aviation um really wanted to see these Lots develop before they were going to perhaps invest more in Forest Lake is did I understand that correctly or am I speaking on a turn no that's that's correct council member Ericson so there was a number of discussions about where where is the ideal location to develop additional hanger Lots uh for the new council member Mr Larson uh before last year's project all the existing hanger lots available at the airport were either already constructed upon or leased upon so and there was a waiting list of Pilots wanting to build a hanger here so the city and the airport commission had had numerous discussions about where best to develop the next row of hangers U the first location that was explored was further south of the existing hanger area but when you looked at the development cost for extending sewer and water plus the Civil infrastructure cost it was more costly than just extending to the north where the existing hanger number one the large hanger is so ultimately just because of cost purposes alone mindat made a recommendation to the city that we could fund you know four lots to the North once those are constructed and built upon then they can entertain again development of lots to the South so that's what council ER and council member Ericson is just trying to state that that once those four lots are are built upon or leased upon then we can re-engage mindat about development of additional lots to the South thank you and so you know that steering committee could help decide how much weight we want to put on that specific item on this I guess would be my my and mayor Roberts addressed uh the second part that I wanted to discuss was kind of a steering committee here so to to best develop these standards what uh what's been recommended in my proposal from Bolton a m is to develop a steering committee so you have input from all parts of the city members of the city council members of the airport commission and then me also members of City staff along with the city attorney if uh if you get represent ation from each entity you know we believe that it's going to result in the best guidelines that everybody is on board with so there's uniformity across the city of Forest Lake all parties to to development and then enforcement of these because without a steering committee to really provide feedback and some guidance for us you know it's really uncertain what the final decision would be for these so it's also included to to develop a steering committee and then have you know four meetings just throughout the process just to Ure sure that the the items that are addressed in the guidelines are the ones that the steering committee desires to be addressed and then just to review the content as we go so that ultimately these guidelines can be approved by the steering committee and then ultimately adopted by the city of Forest Lake City Council anyone to have any thoughts on the steering committee you looked at the makeup so like I think SS mentioned two council members two airport commission and then staff uh depending on what subjects being discussed at that particular meeting with that yeah I'm in favor of that yeah I'd be in agreement with that so my my thought then would be since I'm at the lays on to the airport commission it would be myself and it would be determining then who else would want to be in that role um obviously we have a new council member that's going to be appointed no later than hopefully February 10th and so it could be that person but anyone willing to uh volunteer and we can not put any pressure but if no one there no one real strong on it we can you know we'll sign some up someone up for their job right away as soon as they're I guess people left uh and and so I the other part of on the staff thing when our new city administrator is comes in maybe he would be part of it but then decide what other additional staff would want to be or needed to be part of that committee if that makes sense if no one else from Council wants to be on it I'd be fine joining you okay I enjoy that stuff so I'd find it fun thank you so should we do you want to wait till we appoint someone or do you if you willing to take it on that's great too doesn't matter to me I'm not going to sit here and run to to do it but I'd be fine if no one else wants to do it okay I don't think we need to have a decision on that tonight do we the actual on the council side of it because we still have to decide who's going to be on that on the airport commission side of things too correct I mean my assumption is it would take some time to develop the steering committee and assign the persons to it okay so I mean our goal is to try to get the first steering committee you know sometime in the March April timeline that would be ideal to to start running through it and if the proposal gets approved you know we're going to start on the draft for each one of the items that I discussed earlier but we'd like to kind of know who the steering committee is to kind of start gauging and put from them up additional items um that we might need to address you ready for motion are we so we do need to make a motion on this and an approval this um I I just a couple comments I think this is much overdue and and needed it's going to straighten a lot of things out there and get that airport to be as efficient and and generate some revenue for the city and the taxpayers so I think it's Nob brainer so with that I am open to a motion I'll make a motion to approve the airport minimum standards proposal as presented uh should be completed and actual cost not to exceed $330,000 is there second second any discussion all those in favor I opposed motion carries thank you thanks Sil all right uh our next agenda item is we have two concept plans uh in the city um and aby's going to lead us through I'll just let you take both of them but obviously one at at a time so for sure thank you we had to do a little musical chairs to access into the AV here so should be coming up with our first one um the Serene concept plan so the city has received a concept plan application from Twin City Land Development uh for the plating future plating of the Jeffrey and Barbara Serene property it's shown up there on your site on the um screens for frame of reference we've got County Road 50 or 202nd Street North and then good View Avenue so the property has access off a good View Avenue and connect with the neighborhoods that are developed both to the North and the South um the purpose of the concept plan riew is to obtain informal review comments nothing is binding but this really helps development teams go back and help align their plans with City goals um if there's things that are in conflict with any of our longrange plans they address them this is the time really to provide some of that just informal feedback so I'm going to give a high level presentation at least on the proposal that's in front of you and then turn it over for you folks to chat with the applic if you'd like so um the total property is the 38 just a little over 38 acres just under 20 acres the West half pre predominantly of the properties proposed to be developed with 61 single family homes there's about seven acres of wetland on the property and then the remaining um acreage on the east side of the property is proposed to be undeveloped at this time when it comes to consistency with our comprehensive plan that's kind of our guiding document for all things development the plan generally conforms to our comprehensive plan it's the overall um site though the does not conform to the density standards the area being proposed to to be developed does conformed to our three units per acre um average or our uh minimum requirement um the zoning district for the property is mxr1 that's our mixed residential so it's both single family and would allow for Town Homes one of the challenges is that District does have a minimum lot size of 7500 Square ft the developer is proposing a number of lots that are conforming with that 75 Square 100 square foot minimum but there are some lots that go as low as 6500 square fet and some that go as high as 9700 Square fet additionally we do require a minimum lot with of 65 ft they do have some 55 foot Wide Properties um just just in the northeast corner it's hard to kind of see on the with the aerial um shown on the screen but those lots that are uh at 55 ft in width do um line back up to the properties just to the north that have a little bit more densed attached home um design so the development would be requesting or the developer would be requesting a planned unit development that's an overlay to our base zoning district and what a planned unit development intent really is is to allow for that design flexibility when there's uniquenesses to the property it allows for developers to ask for concessions such as smaller lot sizes and widths to help um promote you know efficient land use preservation of open space preservation of natural features so it does kind of bring in some of the conversations we've had with the development team and the Planning Commission about the East half of the property included in your packet is the city's parks and Trail uh master plan that's included in the 2040 comprehensive plan that does show the city's desire to create um some sort of neighborhood park within this area so looking back at the previous plan City staff has been working with all four land owners and potential developers on acquisition through the planting process of some Park land to be dedicated through this area this is a um the combination of woodlands in the area some of the other natural features the access from many neighborhoods into this part uh area would make a nice neighborhood park so um right now those are things that we don't need to necessarily get into nitty-gritty on but it's worth bringing up the be flushed out at preliminary plat how the developer would like to achieve its Parkland dedication requirements um we talked about Street Configuration utility and Trail connections Watershed and storm water we do have connectivity to the north and to the South that East half would not be connected through at this time but they are proposing to Grant the city future easement for Access through that property if uh utilities roadways those sorts of things needed to be connected in the future Planning Commission reviewed this at their January 8th meeting they had favorable uh reviews of the development even with those kind of smaller lot sizes um the design overall really is working within the site it's respecting those natural resources and allowing for some of those flexibilities that puds um should Grant to be able to offset some of those preservation and natural features open space that sort of thing um I'm available for questions um Twin Cities Land Development is here tonight to chat with you about this if you have any questions for them great uh Council before any any questions initially just one the the narrower lot sizes Abby did you say that those align pretty well with the neighborhood to the north yeah so the neighborhood I'll see if I can zoom in it's the aerial is a little a little grainy so we'll have um a couple single families that will back up to a little bit of a larger lot single family it's hard to maybe see my cursor you can see it at the top kind of screen down but these pink Lots here are those narrower Lots that then back up to this attached um single family design I think those are if I remember right triplexes quad plexus maybe um so it has slightly higher density in that area these will still be single family homes they'll be detached homes so they'll have a lower density than those properties to the north but the smaller lot size isn't necessarily as um Stark compared to some of the other neighborhood the properties platted in the other neighborhoods around here that have a little bit larger of a footprint okay thank you so would the developer like to come up and speak to this all if you would just State your your name and address for the record sure uh Ben Schmid 3 East VI Lane North Oaks um yeah appreciate the time uh I don't have a lot to add candidly other than we think we've come up with a plan that makes good sense relative to the constraints of the site um you know I that East part could we put a road through there and cut all the trees down and put hous in there yeah I don't think it's the right thing to do um and so I don't want to even pretend that's what we're going to do um you know we do need a PUD because the pink lots are 55 Footers so smaller than 65 but not tiny you know I mean they're still a single family home and we uh as Abby said we purposely put them in that uh northwest corner because they would back up to attach products so certainly feels fitting um and then we we transition to the more normal 65 foot wide Lots when we hit the single family lots across the way so we think we've got a good plan uh we've worked with staff here over the last couple of months and we just think it makes sense and we're excited to um you know hear what you have to say and hopefully it's positive and then come back with a preliminary plot with that I'll uh I don't want to waste any your time I'll just stand for any questions you might have thank you anyone to have any questions for Mr Schmid I don't have any additional questions I think it looks like a great project so thanks for the work you put into it thank you what what is your plan plans with moving with the Parkland space at all um as far as Trails or anything like that really we look at that as we'd like to dedicate that to the city as Parkland and have you figure out what you want to do with it I mean there's it's shown as a easement roadway easement through that area um because we fully uh you know discovered if that will be Parkland or not if not then you need that roadway easement but I just see it as land that we would dedicate to the city as Park and recognizing the fact that City staff has said hey you've got a Parks commissioner that might be coming on again um shortly and they have some input um but again we just see it as let's dedicated as Parkland thank you sir y I don't have any questions I I think it's a good plan and um I'm excited to move forward with it I would agree it looks like a great development I would to your point on our new Parks Commission that'll be seated here by the middle of February to have them take a look at that as far as that Parkland dedication and get their thoughts on that but otherwise I I think it looks like a great project great appreciate your time thank you thank you are we looking for a motion at that point or no we don't that's really all that we need from you um we do so just to follow up with the Parkland dedic potential Parkland dedication and a future Parks and Recreation Commission um we always do when we do have an active commission at the time of preliminary plat we do bring that for comment and then they make recommendation to the council equally as much as the Planning Commission would so you'll see some of that come through uh if the preliminary plat moves forward in the coming months so I don't need anything else we have enough to at least keep them moving forward so great thank thanks for your work on that all right the next we have a secondary one here a second concept plan Abby yeah let me just pull up my um similars to last application concept plan review informal review comments non-binding Sheldon Frank has submitted an application um Sheldon Frank OFA and forgive me I have to stop and think of how to say that every time um for the subdivision of this 10 acre parcel um when you take out kind of wetlands on that area we're down to less than eight Acres you are propos cling uh 27 Lots on this property all single family homes this is also zoned that mxr one with the minimum uh lot size of 7500 Square fet minimum width of 65 the developer is proposing a mix of 45 foot wide and 53 foot wide lots that range between 4700 ft and 56 so there are some concessions being asked for um additionally uh there are other items that would not conform to the city's code including the proposal for some private streets so with this one um it if the city was amendable to the um concessions or the variations in our code this would be another request for a planned unit development in analyzing it through that planned unit development lens um we don't have anything that staff can say that this is necessarily a public benefit other than the increase in tax tax base generally there needs to be more than just we're going to have more homes um taking a look at the consistency with the comprehensive plan the 27 Lots does bring that density up uh I know it seems odd to say quite considerably at 3.43 units per acre but that is actually pretty high in our minimum in our low to medium density residential where we we need to meet three we're aiming for six often times we're barely able to achieve that three um no at this time Parkland dedication hasn't been contemplated no land is being proposed to be dedicated which is okay at concept plan review there's a lot at concept plan review that that we don't ask for um but this is a time to start kind of having at least those preliminary conversations before platting about our desires for Parkland in the area the area doesn't call for any Parkland dedication with our comp plan our Park and trail plan so it's not like staff would be actively um encouraging us to acquire land in this area um I mentioned just the concern for the private Street design our engineering um has reviewed this project um this is the second time it's kind of come around in this last decade and same as the last time it was reviewed we are we are concerned about the utility connections and the ability to service the property without having to put in um certain features um just overall just that there's just a lot more questions than answers now that again being said we don't ask for preliminary utility plans at this time it's just one of those circumstances where we have to call it out and say we have some concerns we might not be able to service the property in this fashion um January 8th the Planning Commission reviewed the request um they did recommend that the council deny the concept plan um um their comments were uh concerns for the much smaller lot sizes and the private roads without any clear necessarily justification of what kind of public benefit there is on the site for this um included in the staff report is the notion that we should probably be revisiting the concept Plan before a preliminary plat and asking for a little bit of additional information including um why we're asking for private driveways smaller roads um public benefits um the smaller lots and then some preliminary utility information for us to really figure out grades utilities easements needed on the site the applicant is able even in concept plan let's just Planning Commission recommended denial even if this C Council says you know you'd like tonight applicant still can still move forward with preliminary plat they just do that at their own risk and so um laying this all out for you tonight I'm available for questions the applicant Sheldon Frank is here as well um if you have questions for either of us thank you uh any any thoughts initially from Council well I mean obviously there looks like you're really trying to do quite a bit with a fairly small piece of land um which you know I apy for that I just I wonder if I mean this is separated by what Headwaters 123 as we go north on yeah here's the site plan just in the north as Headwaters 123 tanbur Golf Course is to the South um some of the uniquenesses to the property are creating this it's odd to have this really weird little triang not even a triangle piece of property kind of just smacked together um I know in previous Renditions of this development the council reviewed requests for land acquisition some land acquisition associated with Headwaters 123 it's my understanding that the uh land owner has inquired about that but has not asked about the with City staff um my concern with us contemplating um piecing off a portion of Headwaters 123 before we do some greater analysis of the site is that we could be risking future development options s just in terms of um how how that all flows through there now that being said I think um in looking at their development plan I've seen many property uh developments that will do what is called like cluster design where you're kind of really making those smaller Lots you are putting them closer but to try to preserve some of the other areas in there I haven't looked to see necessarily how that might be able to be achieved through here um it's not uncommon especially on golf courses to have smaller lot Villa kind of design um I think it's just that how uh Ryan could you maybe speak to just some of the challenges on the engineering part of this that we're might be looking at mayor city council uh just some of the information that we have some uh some PR previous Concepts right in this particular area um halfway 3/4 of way into the developments previously we were under 5 ft uh in depth of the sanitary Superman holes in the road even closer to four you're going to freeze your Lines by the time even the line gets to the house so it's going to be even shallower even if it was a slab on grade but it it runs out of gravity uh grade goes downhill but the pipe has go the other that way so uh long term there is a lift station that would be planned to be way west of here and kind of pick up that area then bring it back to the m Council line line or otherwise they would have to install a lift station for this Western portion of the developments and you know where you got a A lot of lift stations this isn't an area we would have a one that would serve a larger area so that' be a lot of capital up front existing water mains uh just under 2,000 ft away so that would have to extend water main just two almost 2,000 fet to get here and then through the developments so those are some of the concerns on utilities and then right now too uh your memo it kind of talks about what some of the other conversations were in regards to the developers previously and uh finway Avenue in this area is gravel so what would you do with connecting to the pavement to the north to serve this development so those are some of the infrastructure items that have been previously analyzed and discussed and um probably want to be explored a little further what would the city's requirements be on Paving Fenway not fully built out but at least some type of black top or what is standards look like for that well as stated in your memo previously the discussions were that uh the developer would have been responsible for making that road BL top but then 50 responsible of half the cost of fenway's total construction costs part of the development agreement so just as a reminder to the council and then also to council member Larson I believe we briefly talked about it maybe with the Eda is the city the Eda is undergoing a phasing infrastructure study on that Southwest Corridor to kind of look at where some of the roadway alignments will end up specifically with Headwaters Parkway but then also making recommendations for how we amend our standards in this area so um one sole property owner developer doesn't necessarily Bear all of the cost of the parkway but that they might be able to pay for half and make those improvements we haven't adopted those standards or guidelines or anything yet those would all be flushed out through each individual development however um north south of the Fenway Headwaters roundabout is gravel um shortly thereafter the roundabout the roundabout approach um the development would be required to make those extensions of those Urban amenities All the Way South is what the city's current requirement would be would there be any exception or thought of exception s that's most that is a fronting City loaned land I definitely think that through the development process and development agreement we can have those conversations about the city eda's kind of obligatory portion but that being said um if that was any other private land owner we wouldn't they'd be obligated to make that Improvement fly uh any so Ryan and nard Dave thoughts on these private roads and concerns I I I know we been deal with these occasionally but I think that's a challenge as well I think we had a group of people here a few weeks ago that had a a private road and and wanted to make it public um I think I think you're better off having public roads and then you know you don't have to worry 30 years from now HOA dissolves and then nobody's there to plow the streets and then we have to come in there and plow it or vice versa that you know it's cwood is a good example it's a public street but it's privately maintained they they plow the roads they do all the maintenance outter but it's a still a public Street that's on our CIP that we seal coat that we patch that we do all that stuff so we you also run into when you have utilities running underneath it sewer water storm if one of those has an issue and we dig up the road then who's responsibility is that if it wasn't a driveway a private driveway would be the homeowner's responsibility to clatch the that back together getting some issues there we run into issues already in Gateway green where it's all private roads in there and we have all public infrastructure underneath the streets so it's a nice tool that you can shrink down your size of your roads to be able to fit stuff in but I think the you and I and the rest of us 30 years from now would would be more happy if we uh had them all public roads and then through the development agreement or through the HOA figured out who is going to maintain them uh Mr Frank would you like to come up and speak to this state your name and address for the record name is Sheldon Frank from Hugo Minnesota um appreciate the feedback on it it's kind of been an uphill battle on this parcel since I bought it uh four years ago was aware of some of the constraints and stuff with it and been working with uh with uh planning over the last few years on it and you guys the guy that was here originally I was talking with is no longer here and then I think he went to a third party system and this is my third concept plan I brought forth and I'm been trying to battle to figure out what would fit best in here and originally it was set up as a just straight single family we're getting like 19 homes in there and I just it the feasibility didn't really work um just because of the amount of lots you're were getting out of and doing all the added stuff with bringing in uh gra um Paving the road and dealing with the utilities and stuff like that so I switched venues to well let's do uh row homes or or quads uh and I kind of got pressure back from the uh Golf Course owner uh on what was going in there because it obviously affects the look of his golf course and stuff like that and I just kind of tabled it at that time uh just because it just didn't seem like there was something that would work and I got Robert Thomas Holmes came to me asking about the land asking if they could possibly acquire it and kind of stem me to start thinking well maybe I got something here that I can start reworking again now it's 2 three years later and basically what we have up here is is what Robert Thomas was kind of proposing to put in they gave me specs of their homes that they've been having a lot of success with and I thought would fit the area really well um the the lot size are smaller than what to the 7500 is minimum requirement but uh it's something that's uh been desired and and being done in multiple other areas so I didn't think it was uh too far off but obviously the private roads are a concern I understand that but you you you you're basically dealing with a like Abby said a regular lot and it's it provides some challenges on what you're going to fit in there so to to get enough Lots out of there to make it feasible that's why those private roadways are put in um the I mean I looked at it different ways if if the city was willing for me to acquire some land to the north maybe you change it up make the lot sizes a little bit closer to that 7500 can get rid of the private roads and maybe you do something kind of more u-shaped throughout it so you have stuff on all four sides and then a row of homes all long whole 16 but uh uh last time I inquired about purchasing puring Land from the city they had no interest at that time um because it was reserved for a tech property which I don't know what the what your guys's thoughts are on it at this point in time four years later but um I probably wouldn't need much to uh get that done and it definitely would help me out in the process of putting something in here that would work for both parties all you guys questions or comments on it or no I mean I appreciate you you know contining to explore explore ideas um I mean it sounds like feedback from Abby and Ryan that maybe it's just a little bit in advance of getting this southwest area developed um you know so I look forward to the continu conversation at the Eda level about that work plan and what that looks like and and exploring you know know what what do the near-term future hold for Headwaters 123 because it has been a few years yeah I will say that the Eda does have in their 2025 work plan the first quarter um probably with our new administrator coming on we'll give them a hot second it might be that April timeline my goal was to have a joint workshop with the Eda and the council just focused on23 I think a lot has changed since it's been was added in the Tech Corridor Tech Corridor was cre created there's been a number of different things that have happened there and we do seek a lot of inquiry for residential development of the site I would not recommend that the city reconvert this back to Holy residental but I do think that we need to have some conversations about whether or not we need to continue to reserve that parcel for the intended or the desired hopeful use of a data center do think that there's the possibility for some mixed use through there but I do think that those are conversations that Council and the Eda should have before we really start kind of looking at how would we want to parcel this off for a specific development such as this nothing against this development but it is a Leap Frog development and we want to make sure that we preserve whatever we can the most that we can maximize the 123 site for the whole of the community not just this one development so I can appreciate that in the in the staff's thought I'm wanting to hold that as you know and do more study on that I think because we had a developer five six years ago come to us with the same thing and if it's a mixed if that's property the site the 123 is mixed use I see this southern part being this residential and um especially along the golf course there to to peel back five acres or whatever it is I would be open to at least the conversation and and see maybe with the develop what they would need and make that part of what was presented to the Eda to see if this is something that they would be interested in doing I don't know if any the council would be agreeable to that or pretty staunch on holding holding that for now no I'd be open to that conversation yeah I think it's talk of all you know something we can mention or run it through the mill and see what we can come up with yeah I think we can have the conversation just as long as I think it's would be important to have that conversation side by side with um the bigger conversation of Headwater 123 to see kind of first get the broad ideas and the broad pictures of what that looks like and then bring this conversation with that yeah uh what was the time frame Abby on that your once uh city um it would be kind of the end of the first quarter start of the second quarter haven't really scheduled anything out we I was thinking that that late March early February was going to be more in line with when we can get mark up to speed um kind of get us prepared for it to really have a meaningful conversation about the site that we could really walk away with some good clear Direction what we're going to do with 123 this year so I think um it's a little ways off but I think uh Mr Sheldon and I can sit down we can kind of talk about would we wouldn't want full engineered plans on any of this but kind of just napkin sketch some of that site out the Eda did do a little bit of ghost platting on the site it hasn't been that public um a couple years ago and so but again that was all for non-residential so we might be able to see how that potential roadway design and those sorts of things could blend right into this one so I think it would give us some time to kind of vet through that to bring that into that conversation is what I'm hearing is that time Line work okay with you it's completely fine I mean I've been sitting on it for a while right now so it's it's something that I was hoping to try and get moving forward for 2025 um my current Wetland delineation expires at the end of 2025 but uh obviously you're going to need to get a new Wetland delineation done if there's more land acquired anyways so um it it'll definitely help me in working something out that might be a little bit more beneficial for everyone yeah I I just think that you know the concerns that Planning Commission had um are about the same here and if we could stretch the footprint a little bit bigger larger and possibly make something work we we'd love to be able to work with you all right appreciate it thank you ABY yeah than cc memb is in honor thanks right uh next item Abby you're earning your paycheck tonight uh approving uh well City initiated comprehensive plan Amendment thank you mayor Roberts I didn't say that with a question mark but I think that's the first time I've said that um tonight before you is a city initiated comprehensive plan Amendment uh as the council is aware we've had this conversation ongoing for a little while in 2023 it's some kind of uh land use changes along Highway 61 being contemplated which really led us to look at our comprehensive plan and our zoning code and having conversations with the Met Council we've learned that we placed quite a bit of emphasis on our residential density requirements along the highway 61 Corridor and that mixed use land use category so and uh I had asked Bolton and M at that time to do some preliminary analysis on the housing density requirements that we have to see if we might be able to pull back some of those density requirements along the highway 61 Corridor since we're seeing such an influx of high density residential wanting to be placed along that Corridor I don't think it was the city's intention to necessarily have the entire Highway 61 Corridor develop as high density residential we wanted to maybe see that mixed use and really try to figure out how might we get back there so in 20124 we did two comprehensive plan amendments unrelated to this one but that kind of set a new Baseline for us but it also shed some light on the fact that we have some inconsistencies between the city's comprehensive plan and the Met council's comprehensive plan so we knew as a city we needed to update our comprehensive plan and some people would ask well why would you not just take the Met council's data because we don't want to we want to make this the most favorable to Forest Lake so that we can have the most control over our numbers in the long run so the goal of this is to establish a new Baseline so that the Met Council data and the city's revised data are consistent with one another this kind of midcycle planning update really allows for us to have more realistic conditions our data is better even things like our GIS is better than it used to be and again it just makes it more favorable for us in the long one run all of this is kind of leading up too to what would be the 2050 comprehensive plan was it that's a big overhaul not big overhaul it's an update but it's a big plan um a planning process and the goal is we want to have as much housing data as we can as possible to to better really make sure that we're guiding our community the way we really want to guide our community in the long run while also achieving those M counil Council pesky density requirements so I do want to note there's no future land use map changes with this there's nobody's properties are going to be affected it's just tweaking the overall aggregate numbers if that makes sense and then there's no changes to the uh Metropolitan or Urban uh statistical area not none of our um urban service requirements at all will change so I'm going to run through these in your packets there's a lot of tables uh track change versions um are never fun to take a look at but the first table is the net residential table and that's going to give us the picture of the overall density um for the existing conditions our change really was we wanted to start to look at some of those properties in our rural residential area our agriculturally zoned area that were 2.5 acres in size or greater and had an improvement of $300,000 because we're making the assumptions those are never going to develop for anything other than what that property is it's just going to be one of those things that those are going to become some highly desirable lots of the urban bized forest link of the future so those that's the existing table that's the table with the changes I wouldn't get too much into the numbers here because even I could look at these and start to think that none of this makes sense so um the planned land use characteristics this is summarized as the total and then the percent of land area by each one we just adjusted those gross Acres slightly because we have better updated GIS data so again that's where those sit guided land use acreage that's the summarizing the developable versus the undevelopable land this is changing to display the developable and non-developable acreages in a communative manner breaking down the developable and non-developable areas by development decade so again this is saying here's where we anticipate residential de Development A lot of it in that that low to medium I guess you can't see my my pointer here um that low to medium density resid resal um areas really where it's being contemplated but updating that table residential density calculations uh again the purpose is to try to attain that minimum three units per acre in the urban uh service areas so that's the changes to the 2023 standard or timeline um employment density there there's not much that is changing here if I remember nothing it's very nominal doesn't affect the housing aspect of things it's just when our numbers in agregate slightly changed so did those and then future land use units jobs and Acres again this is just really um recalculated to reflect existing density expect in the future decades didn't change the job units then an affordable housing allocation again when our land uses our land areas change where we're guiding land or how we're going to achieve a able housing in our community gets has to be addressed as well so that's the changes there um so the approval steps the city has conducted the adjacent affected jurisdictional review that's letting all of our neighboring agencies know including Washington County that we're doing this thing everyone's come back says that's great Forest Lake we don't care uh Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 11th public hearing nobody came in comment there were no official written com no written comments in t testimony Planning Commission does recommend approval as to City staff Tonight Tonight uh your consideration would be to move to approve if there's a resolution I apologize I don't know my resolution number at the top of my head 01 27255 um and upon the city council's approval then we would submit formally to the Metropolitan Council any questions this is kind of of those big trust me guys it's going to say can we take another look at those tables flash on flash off any any questions at all or comments no if the Planning Commission gave it the green light I know that they're a very diligent Bunch so I will make a motion to approve resolution 01 27255 I'll second a second um discussion at all I would just thank you and staff for taking the initiative to do this um I do you intend that there would be any push back by med Council through this submitt no we've been in contact with them in fact we were in contact with them well over a year ago about this it'll actually be a staff admin oh no this one will be full met Council approval but their staff understands what we're doing and why we're doing it so um this again it's just really is setting us up in a better position to have these future conversations about land use and housing density and so they understand that and are in support of that so great well again thank you for the work on this so we have a motion in a second all in favor I I oppose motion carries right uh item 8e a council veny applications that have been received and discussion and jooling is going to lead us through this thank you mayor Roberts as you recall on January 13th council did declare vacancy to fill the remainder of the council term left vacant by now mayor Roberts it was decided at the meeting on the 13th that applications would be solicited from qualified residents we opened the online application process on the 14th that remained open through the 22nd and that resulted in 11 applications being submitted copies of these applications were provided to council ahead of this meeting but they're also up on the dis there's a public copy um with redacted private information available for public consumption this evening too um tonight I'm asking that Council discuss the desired qualities for the appointee and to review the submitted applications following this discussion um I would suggest that Council proceed with an action to advance selected applicants to an interview stage um and then we would kind of narrow down an evening or an afternoon to conduct those Council interviews um I did submit to you a doodle poll which gave me some results it looks like Thursday February 6th from 3 to 5: PM seems to be the best time slot to conduct these interviews once we get to that point so I'll turn it over to council for further discussion all right great thank thank you I so I I want to start by just saying that with these 11 applicants um I I think any one of these people would could be good potential city council members uh most of them if not all are very active in the community some are relatively new to the community some have been here for quite some time and I just appreciate their willingness to to take the time to apply and when I want to give back to the community in in this way so with that um I I I think the the thought was to get it down to interview in no more than three I mean maybe we don't land on three maybe it just becomes two uh for finalist uh and so to jolene's point about conversation of maybe what we're looking for to start with and we can go into individual uh thoughts and then do a poll of some sort here a straw poll and see if we give our everyone would submit their top three uh individuals and then W it down from there that sound Mak sense Jeff we'll let the new the new guys start on thoughts on who maybe you think would be good as far as just traits and qualities to be on the council after reviewing some of the applications based on just the general information that we got um gives you a little bit of perspective but I think there's a lot more I think that we'll gain from this when we do interview our chosen candidates I don't know you want my three we'll I think what we'll do is we'll just write write it down and submit it Jo yeah any uh councilman Eric any other thoughts on on what you're looking for as an individual to yeah yeah thank you um you know I think the right person will I mean certainly number one have have the time and and passion which I think you know many of these people do couple of them called out that they are already really well committed in the community which I appreciate um and and know what that's like um I think having a fresh set of eyes you know there's a couple of candidates in here that are relatively new to the community but have integrated themselves already through whether it be through business or just Civic involvement um you know I I kind of put some weight on that I think that that's valuable for for the council to have that perspective um those probably a couple of the top top items um know I guess the other thing would just be um you know I think this this Council and past Council has been very focused on wanting to see Forest Lake continue to develop we know that we're you know that that is coming our way and so somebody that is you know like-minded in that direction I guess I would value as well thanks thank you for that Council so I I think um I would agree with you guys that my kind of looking at this I created a visual because I'm a visual person so I my biggest thing my biggest takeaway is for the application which some people were very um had short answers so I felt like I couldn't really get a sense of their um like background and their involvement which was kind of difficult but um from what I could get from the applications my biggest takeaways were um folks who lived in the community a little bit longer um and showed that commitment in the community and then um their community service and what that looked like with the balance of making sure that they'd be able to also spend time on city council because I think of few of our applicants were Allstars in community service like they were above and beyond I don't know how they have work life balance good for them like it was amazing um they should get an award but um just trying to find that balance of community service but also someone who can commit their time to city council because we as we all know it's not just Monday nights for a couple hours so just finding that balance and um yeah thanks for those thoughts I so I Echo the same things that all of you set up here uh I go back and forth a little bit on that new perspective of some someone relatively new is based on someone that's been in the community for a while I think um we do have with with at least three of us uh representation of people who have been in the community for a number of years uh Jeff you're relatively new to to the city which is great and so maybe a balance of some new voices to to to both people have been here for a number of years and some newer res might be a good mix to get that outside perspective so to speak and then also to your point uh council member U Ericson just that the development I think that's important uh the previous Council uh we we've Pro development I think this council is as well and so someone that uh is open to that opportunities that Force sake is going to have over the next couple years is someone who I'm looking for correct so right with that uh if we have a should we just use these p pads up here if everyone wants to list uh three I don't think J We're not asking any particular order just top top three in general and then yeah I think that would be appropriate just top three they don't have to be numbered so just three names it take a little time if you want to look through those at all um quick back for all right I think we're is everyone ready to yep okay and again I just want to add once more that know any of these individuals uh could could be on position to be in this in our seats and give value their willingness to to put their name forward and give back in this way for okay um mayor and council members we actually have a four-way tie um so Kevin Miller received two votes Renee Fagan and I hope I'm pronouncing that correctly received two votes Jonathan Wright received two votes um I'm sorry if I vo TI Larry klecker received two votes and Jeff Klein received two votes who's the second person Renee Fagan I'm open to bringing it up to five if that's desire if we want to try to get it down to to three here we can but um what for me what does the interview process look like we don't have a it's it's not predetermined there's nothing in statute that tells us what we need to do so we will have some general questions but I think really it's going to be an opportunity for conversation with the council and the applicant to really kind of vet out um what the the applicant's desires are for the city and moving forward the appointment I I don't see where that hurts me too uh councilman Larson's Point like really kind of hard to get a real feel by just this uh so other than the additional time which I think I'm willing to spend the rest of the council is I'm fine with W in uh to five finalists for for an interview I would agree with that I would agree as well I mean with the there was 11 applicants so and down the less and a half yeah yeah so I think that's fine okay so we'll forward with interviews for Kevin Miller Renee Fagen Jonathan white Wright Jeff Klein and Larry cler correct right and you know after reaching out to them maybe if there's a change of mind maybe that doesn't end up being five but yeah okay and um is Council still agreeable uh Thursday February 6 from 3: to approximately 5:00 pm we might need to move that end time a little bit just to allow for five interviews not rushing people out the door um that time frame still work y okay good thank you work thank thank you last item on our planned agenda is as a resolution for donation um so there are uh couple of people have donated here and this would for the veterans memorial uh we all know this is happening down Lakeside Park we've had some real generous people in the community giving giving back and and putting money towards this this great project I'll just fre so Jack and Donna Maas Oscar and Val Carlson Ruth miles uh the American Legion and the VFW so I will make a motion to accept uh these donations in gratitude resolution 0127 2501 again accepting these donations with gratitude do I have a second I'll second all in favor I that's oan carries okay so we have the discussion item here and um Dave's going to lead us that I don't if anyone's been down to the the park and seen all the ice heaving it's it's amazing it tells you the power of Mother Nature uh and so uh we put this on here just to talk about that and then maybe a little bit about the the plan that we have in place for the shoreline and uh and how maybe we might that speed this up based on the damage that's that's happened yeah so if if you haven't if you haven't been down there I definitely recommend you driving and taking a look it's it's to the point now where it's pushing over the light poles in the in the park and just talking to Al before the meeting he said it was heaving on Saturday too the traffic was P pounding down the heaves with that snower rents but it was it's definitely moved staff was out there today uh just taking more pictures and it's definitely moved even more just since last week um that the park was put in in 2005 and there's some public work staff at least here that's been here since it was built and uh they've never seen it like this I would say since my ten years's here there's probably six out of the 10 we've had to do minor work down there resetting Boulders and minor Hees but I mean it's it's shifted the path and heaved on both sides and tipped over street lights so it's and it's and it's still going to it's not even I mean Lakeside it's you know our city amenity but if you look private property owners both directions all the way around I mean it's colossal damage for everybody I mean we have an issue but there's a lot of property owners that have a a major major problem come spring too so our our plan right now is to just keep letting it do what it what it does um we might have to make some decisions before the frost comes out whether or not we want to try to rip out some of those big chunks before the ground thaws and then bring them to a different site and let them thaw out and then try to replace them um a lot of thoughts are going into this I I don't know exactly what we're do we're going to be contacting uh our insurance uh company I I know for sure like our street lights will be covered as infrastructure but I don't know what they'll consider the path or or the actual ground so we'll we'll have our our rep come out and take a look and gather his his pictures too to see see if anything qualifies for um Insurance claim it hasn't moved the beach house yet so that that has that has stayed there uh the beach itself though I mean if you look at that that's pushed up a 5 foot wall of sand too so it's it's crazy so if you haven't been down there take a walk just walk down that pathway and to Mayor Robert's point it's Mother Nature it's crazy what that can what that can do um do you have any questions about that or timeline or what you'd like to see or anything just about what's going on right now I guess one question you referenced um maybe future project we had the shoreline study done and part of that was to put in major slabs that was would mitigate this sort of of work um I I wonder if that that were done would we be would it would it be doing its job is it is a question or would we be dealing with an issue I I believe what was in the plan was a concept I don't even know for sure if it was used anywhere else other than using physics and how it should work I don't know if there's he has a a place that he could show pictures of how that broke the ice off so I I don't to answer that question I don't I don't think it was a set in stone this is uh what we if we do this we're going to solve our our problems so I I don't think I would roll the dice too much much on that until you knew that you saw some some examples of that that working cuz that's that'd be a lot of stuff to put in and if it didn't work and push all that up then we'd have a whole another mess on top of our hands on top of if that was you know you're finishing off your your Park and then you had to come back in there and try to redo that I know uh Abby and myself will be trying to work with the DNR to ask them for different Alternatives and solutions we had suggested uh being able to drive in shuring there pilings to try to reinforce that Shore and then you know pour concrete behind it and that would be your sidewalk to kind of hold off that ice they were firmly against it because it gets rid of Shoreline um I think we'll revisit that with the pictures and the Damage that we have we have damage pictures from previous years but I mean we controling that it's not just uh this is the only year that's happened so that'll be ongoing as well just we have to discuss with them future docks and all that stuff too so I think that'll all be part of that conversation well on a personal note from living on the lake um I had round Boulders and I took them out last year and we put in slab Boulders at a 45 degree angle the ice is riding up that but the frost is going underneath that and coming up on the other side of that and rolling the sod and everything so I have a probably two to three foot high burm of sad so it's just it's there's I don't know there's no way to explain it there I don't think you really have too much control over it so I guess it's a kind of a yearly thing and lately it's been worse than most according to my neighbors who's been here 20 something years and he goes I've never seen it as bad as like last year and this year is even more so Troublesome so I don't know so likely Dave are you expecting this would be a temporary fix for this season in all likelihood I don't think we're GNA we want to do something too major I think it's to try to get the rocks and get you know on the lake side all the water goes to the lake so we have to try to level that back out so when we get our storms in the summer that we can get the water back out of the out of the park something temporary to try to still get some Bowlers back on that you know the the slope going down but I I would hesitate to try to do something permanent without first talking the DNR and and trying to maybe talk to more people than just the consultant who did this work to to reach out to a bunch of people and I think the DNR would be is going to be a great contact for the two because I'm sure they work with a lot of different places that have tried a lot of different things so I would hesitate to spend a lot of money on doing something until we have a a lot better plan together so yes I guess I would Envision that we'd do a temporary fix try to you know obviously get the street lights standing back up and and and you know level everything back off even the paper path that shifted if it's still flat we just probably leave that alone and not not touch it to it will make more of a mess uh the your boat club entrance too all the conduit pulled out the water lines pulled out it ripped the fuel line out we have pictures of that we saw that this morning so I contacted your vot Club this morning to let them know that they got a lot of work ahead of them in the spring too just so they have a up that it's not going to just be put in the dock in this right yeah crazy well any any other questions for Dave on that thanks for the update on that and um if we can get those conversations started with the DNR sooner than later that that would be be great right uh so we are at uh staff updates we'll start Jolene no updates this evening a any additional nothing else to that no okay Abby nothing no thank you no updates Chief Peterson no okay Ryan mayor city council just make sure you have on your calendar we're going to have a public open house for Northshore Trail maintenance project uh February 18th up in the community room 4:30 p.m. to 6 PM so that's prior to your city council Workshop that night just uh answer any questions or concerns that residents might have with the project or some of them probably will just want more information since it's by house so so that isn't in because well on a road Improvement like that since it touches somebody that is that a mailing at all or not we're sending mailers out plus we'll work with the city and getting that on their website we'll just pull all the addresses off GIS okay yeah and mail it out or that we can get a hold of people and get them in there get their feedback on that but I think most people are going to be pleased with the with the fix there uh Amanda anything Jeff do you have anything uh nothing nothing further no updates tonight no updates I don't really have anything uh other than uh you know and I'm going to make the statement whether uh uh Pete Heth was a Republican or a Democrat but I I think I can speak to most people in the city that were very proud of our Native Son to get to the point where he has to be in the cabinet of of a presidential cabinet and the next secretary of defense so we wish him the best and welcome him always back to Forest Lake anything else motion to adjourn so moved second third I I Carri [Music]