[music] Roll call. >> Council member Erikson is absent this evening. Council members Larson >> here. >> Miller >> here. >> Valento >> here. >> Mayor Roberts >> here. And if you're able, please join us for the pledge of >> allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all [clears throat] right so we have an agenda in front of us tonight is anyone willing to make a motion to approve >> I'll second >> a motion to second any further discussion >> Mr. Mayor, if I may just there's no change to the agenda, but I'll just note that there are additional documents related to the airport uh work that's on the regular agenda. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. We have an agenda. Item five, uh, awards and presentations. Uh, first item is the 2026 Lake Siri TV budget and Paul Peterson. >> You're going to award me something? That'd be great. I didn't know that was part of it. So, hello all. Thanks for having me here today. I apologize. Normally, this is this budget should have been approved last year, but we have three big things that are our whole everything that costs us money and one of them is health insurance and we didn't learn what was going to happen with that till halfway through December and your December meeting was booked up. So, I'm here in January. So, hopefully you approve it. We'll see what happens. Um, I can kind of go over really quick highlights of what we do. Um, we build our streaming a little more each year. We get it bigger and bigger. Right now, we're mid hockey season. We just had a hockey game. We had 1,600 people watch. That's best for us for hockey. We usually get between 500 and a,000. And so, with that, we're going to try and work towards sponsorships and help make a little more for the station off of that. Um, this year, we are on track to have close to a quarter of a million views on our YouTube channel for the year, and that goes up every year. We gain about a 100 subscribers a month pretty consistently. So, that's kind of cool for a town of 20,000. That seems pretty cool. >> Um, football, I think I brought that up. Before football, we had a 9,000 viewer game. That was kind of neat. Um, I still work with the schools a lot. I have a studio in the school for for those of you that don't know. I work with students. I work with teachers. Just had a teacher reach out a couple of weeks ago and help them with a production. They were doing a live production that was half recorded, half live. I help the students work through all that and they kind of all know that they can call me for anything video, audio, production, streaming related and and I love doing that. I still maintain the system I put in there like three years ago that is 100% studentr run in the auditorium. They record and stream their own performances, concerts, everything. Streams through my YouTube channel. We take it off that we put it on our channel. Um last year I had a kid wanted to get into creating video games. So I created an independent study 3D animation course for him and work through him and work with the teachers for that. This year I had another student wants to learn film editing. So I created an independent study film editing course. This is all with free software. So they they unfortunately they usually have Chromebooks. It doesn't run on that but any other computer I do it so there's no cost to them. 100% online. They only email me when they get stuck and I go meet with them and kind of help them out. And other than the school, I just kind of look forward to working with everybody in the community and the partnerships with government, with businesses, with with community members. I I try to make myself accessible. So, if anybody needs help with anything, they know they can call me and I will if I'm available, I will be more than happy to help. For our budget this year or next year, now this year, as usual, we have a decline in cable subscribers every year. So, our dollars go down, we cross that line, we will be in the red every year. And that's just how it is. And I make it up with doing production services for the channel. Last year, I had to make up $9,000. I made up $9,000. This year, I make up a little bit more. So, we're going to get a little more aggressive with our sponsorship programs and stuff. And I don't really see a problem with that. Mainly with our live streaming stuff, I I can guarantee people, you know, 50 60,000 eyes are going to see their commercial. And a couple years ago, I actually got nominated for an Emmy. I made commercials for 30 years, and I can make them a crazy high-end commercial. So, I don't think we'll have a problem with that. Working with MACDA, talked to Mark a little bit about this. There's a cable station in Woodbury that just signed a broadband franchise agreement. It's always been cable franchise agreements since the 80s, and they had an agreement. So their cable or their cable whatever channel there has to access them and they came up with a broadband agreement so they get a percentage of their broadband dollars and that's kind of what MACDA who is the organization that works with all the cable stations. We're trying to figure out ways to incorporate that into us. So hopefully within a few years I come to you and you can help me go to state legislature and hopefully we get some agreement with that. Um, for expenses this year, we cut our expenses down to nothing about six years ago. We literally our operating expenses, our office supplies are 150 bucks a year, you know, other than insurance, rent, and what was the other one? [laughter] Salary. >> So, those are the only three things that cost us money and those unfortunately go up a little bit each year as our income goes down. So, we just kind of work with those. Um, one side note is we have had the city of Scandi doing our bookkeeping since as long as I've been at the station and the bookkeeper there retired in 2025 and the new bookkeeper that came in didn't really want to do our books anymore. So, I looked at a few companies in town here, but our cable commission wanted me to see if Columbus or Forest Lake was open to taking over our books. And Cheryl Jenkins in Columbus was very open to it. She used to work at the IRS and so we've been working with that transition. It's probably going to finalize this month. So she's working with the bookkeeper there and they agreed to take it over at least for the first year the same amount we've been paying in Scandia forever. So if it goes up, we'll see. But they were willing to just try it for that. She didn't think it would be that tough. So we will have a new bookkeeper next year going forward. And that's about it. I love doing this. I have a ball doing this every day. I love going out and talking to people, meeting people. I get to play with super cool toys and just make stuff. So, if there's any questions, I would be happy to answer. >> Any questions? >> Not at this time. Thank you. >> No, >> no, just just some comments. Your your team does a great job and we're so fortunate to have you in the community and and so as long as we can sustain that and if there's different funding mechanisms that we need to look into similar to that broadband, I' I'd be all in favor of that. So, thanks for everything you do. >> And I might try and get creative in the future and see, we talked about in the past of maybe just partnering with the city of Forest Lake and us getting kind of wrapped into that somehow someway. I don't know what the options are for that, but eventually it's going to tip a little too far where we can only make up so much. And the rule is we're not supposed to take away production dollars from other companies in town, but right now it just isn't even close to that. So, I appreciate you guys hanging with me. >> Thanks for coming tonight. >> Yep. And I think you have to at least vote on giving us the same percentage you give us every year. So, and I don't know what I think it's like 79% or something of what comes in. Do you know what that is now, >> Mr. May? >> So, there Yeah, there's a mid fee. Go ahead. >> I just gonna say my apologies. They didn't note on the agenda that there was an action requested for this item, but it looks like Mr. Peterson is requesting an action related to this item >> of approving the 26 budget. >> Correct. Yes. Okay. >> It's just not noted on the agenda itself. >> Okay. All right. Okay. Uh any other questions for Paul? With that, I'm willing to entertain a motion to approve the bud the lakes TV budget if anyone wants to make that. I'll make the motion to approve the 2026 Lakes Area TV budget. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Any further discussion? >> I just have one quick thing. Um, similar to I believe it was last year, the year before, I discussed with Amanda on the record since I'm on the cable commission and I do vote on um the budget if I should abstain and then it was just quickly discussed on the record that I should abstain. So, my motion tonight will be an abstension. So, we still have it. Okay. All right. Um, all in favor? >> I opposed. Extensions. >> Abstain. >> All right. Motion carries. >> Awesome. >> Great. Thank you. >> 5B. Uh, annual parks and recreation report. Kyle Young and Don Thson. >> Good evening. Thanks for uh thanks for having me here. looking forward to another year with the with the parks. Obviously, first first year for me. Um commission pretty new starting in March. I think we had uh maybe a couple folks that were part of the commission in prior years, but all in all, I think uh in my opinion was great. There's a lot of things to do in parks. There's a lot of things that, you know, maybe haven't been done in the past that we're we're we're trying to tackle, and I think the the commission and and myself were pretty pretty excited about all the things that came way. Um, so we're we're looking forward to another year and hopefully just keep things moving forward. So, we're we're all excited and it's been a it's been a good experience so far. >> Any any questions for for Kyle? And then go ahead, Don. >> Thanks, Mayor. Don Tyson. I'm chair of the parks and recck commission and also we have our vice chair, uh, Karen Morhead here tonight. Also, u, as Kyle said, it has been a great year. uh in the annual report you see a lot of things that were accomplished and looking forward to next year. I do want to thank four groups specifically starting with the staff. It's been great working with the city staff, community development, public works director Dave, and certainly Kyle. Uh every member of the commission comments is how many more staff does Kyle have because he gets so much done and we know he's a oneman band right now. So, uh hats off to Kyle. Uh certainly my fellow commissioners, it's been great working with that group. Uh we're certainly coming together and we are all excited about next year. You as the council, we appreciate your support and uh what we really try to do is look at every issue thoughtfully and thor thoroughly. So when a recommendation comes to you, you know, we really have vetted everything. Doesn't mean you don't have to you're going to agree with every recommendation, but in fact, we'd be surprised if you do. Uh but we do uh we do take our the work seriously. So appreciate your support on that. And then finally, the residents. We've had residents show up to our meetings with issues, questions, and it takes time to show up, but we do need residents to show up, and we need to hear from residents. That's what we're here for. And so, I want to thank those residents in the last year, too, that have come to the parks commission for whatever reason for us. So, but thank you. We're looking forward to 26. >> Um, quick question. Do we have an opening uh for the on the commission or we fully I thought we had >> If I may, Mr. Mayor, we had two commission appointments for the initial appointment of this commission that were one-year appointments. Um, Miss Morhead and Miss um >> Madson >> Madson. Yes, I was going to say herina. Um, Miss Morhead has expressed her interest in continuing her service on that commission. And so we do currently have one additional vacancy and I have submitted information to Chair Tissson and Council Member Valento about that um resident who's interested in serving on that commission and we're working through a process to bring forward a recommendation to council for appointment. >> Great. Anything else council? Any questions or thoughts? >> Thank you very much for all your hard work for all of you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yeah, I would just add, you know, this these commissions are invaluable to us and to help out the council and make these decisions and it's great to have as much community involvement as possible. So, thank you for your service and Kyle for all you do and and uh look forward to another good year. >> All right, item six, open forum. This is an opportunity for anyone to address the council. Uh please state your name and address and limit it to around three minutes. >> [clears throat] >> All right, Susan Young. >> Hi, my name is Susan Young. Uh 9950 199th Street North here in Forest Lake. Uh and I am currently the president of the Forest Lake Rotary Club. And it's rotary plunge time. It is not polar plunge time. It is rotary plunge time. Uh in Forest Lake, this Rotary Club works very, very hard to help nonprofits, clubs, sports programs, groups in the community that are doing good stuff, but who need money to be able to do that. And the Rotary Plunge is quite frankly the easiest way that I know of to raise money for an organization. I was a Girl Scout mom, a soccer mom, a debate mom. Trying to raise money for those organizations is one, really hard, and two, you get a few pennies when you sell one of those boxes of Girl Scout cookies and then mom has them in the freezer for the next six months. Okay. This way, basically what you do is you form a team. You get folks to say, "Ah, we'll watch you plunge." And by the way, LAV live streams it so grandma and grandpa in Arizona can sponsor their soccer kid to jump in Forest Lake and hear them scream. It's great. It's wonderful. It's It's just a phenomenal opportunity. Um we really appreciate the work that the city does to help us out. Um we put that great big old tent there and I make sure that that I'm fire compliant and and everybody's happy with that. Um, we appreciate the the partnership that we have, but I know that each of you and a bunch of the folks that are watching has a nonprofit or a club or an organization that is really near and dear to your heart. And there has been a history of city council and the mayor jumping in the plunge. Now, the last couple years, it's been a little lean, but I know that y'all have organizations. I'm thinking the Legion and the Fourth of July celebration. Um that really could use some money and we have organizations that easily raise 14, 15, $16,000. Um so I wanted to let folks know um on the Forest Lake Rotary Facebook page and our Forest Lake Rotary website is all of the information. We've got a new um organization that we're working this with this year and even I can make the tech stuff work so that I can form a team and get emails out to supporters. Again, appreciate want to see everybody there. February 28th, we're going to have a good time. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. Thanks, Susan. Um [clears throat] Blair Ransau, >> I think he's here for u one of the or for the public hearing this. >> I see that. Yeah. Okay. Anyone else like to speak to council on any matter? >> All right. We will uh go to the consent agenda. Uh council, we have a consent agenda in front of us. I would like to make the motion that we approve consent agenda uh number seven, items 7 A through O and then Q through T. Moving P to our first regular agenda item. >> I'll second. >> All right, we have a motion, a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I opposed and we have consent agenda approved. All right, with that um we will move item P to our first agenda and regular agenda action uh item and that is to accept the resignation of police chief and declare a vacancy at that position. Uh so I wanted to pull this from the consent agenda just to um highlight this. Um after 26 years on the Force Lake Police Department, 15 of those which chief uh our police chief Richard Peterson is putting his recognition for retirement. And so um there'll be time for speeches and different things as we get close. The resignation doesn't go into effect until April 3rd. But again, I just wanted to uh pull that aside and highlight that and give the public the opportunity to thank him for his service here before he leaves us. And I know he'll never totally leave us, but um just an appreciation for all you've done, Rick. Um it's it's uh it's been a quite a quite a career you've had. And so with that, it's I will make a bittersweet um a bittersweet motion to accept the resignation of Richard Peterson and the um also the declare the vacancy of a position and I believe the um policy committee um uh has decided to look in in house first and so with that um is there a second? >> I will second the motion. >> All right, we have a motion, a second. All any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Motion carries. >> All right. 8A, zoning text amendment, wireless communication towers and Abbeby. Thank you, Mayor Roberts. Members of the council, tonight before you is a zoning text amendment uh pertaining to wireless communication towers and applications submitted by Bu Consulting LLC. Um, Bu Consulting has submitted a zoning text amendment. Uh, even though in your packet up on the screen, it does talk about Hosana Lutheran Church. This would be a citywide amendment that would be applicable citywide. However, this is in anticipation of a future um, application coming forward for a new tower at Hosana Lutheran Church. Tonight's request before you is to amend the zoning to allow wireless towers as conditional uses in the single family residential zoning district. And the kind of purpose would be to allow for this stealth camouflage tower at Hosana and similar sites in the future. Tonight before you is to hold a public hearing and then um I put in there I carry over from planning commission but you will either approve or deny a request this evening. So, the applicant's proposal is kind of broadband across our wireless towers. Um, right now the existing requirement in the code is that you'd have to have 10 acre. First off, we don't allow for towers in the single family residential zoning district. In all other residential zoning districts where we do allow for towers, we require a minimum of 10 acres. The applicants are proposing reducing that to two and a half acres and only for those that are on institutionally used properties. Additionally, in our current code, we do require a tower height setback from any residential dwelling on another parcel and a one times the tower height from all property lines. Um the proposed requirement would reduce that to allow for a tower setback one tower height from any residential dwelling on another parcel and then allow for an engineered fall zone. So essentially having an engineers report indicating that setback requirement from property lines. Currently in our code we allow for 100 foot towers with a 15 foot attached apparatus. However, the applicant is proposing to just increase that tower to a maximum height of 125 ft. And then currently in our code, we have a onem separation between towers and they are asking the city's consideration to eliminate this requirement. So, the planning commission did hold a hearing on this um last month. Uh they did make a recommendation to allow for towers in the as a conditional use in the single family zoning district. Um, included on that map there shows all of the single family zoned properties within the city and the purple are those 10 plus acres. The one to three acres in orange is kind of that area where that would be eligible if we allowed for that zoning district change. Um, anywhere that's essentially kind of that orange to purple in the future under the current um proposal. What staff is recommending is that we retain the existing tower standards of a 10 acre minimum. the existing setbacks, two times the height to a dwelling. And in fact, we've expanded that based on the planning commission's recommendation that not just to a dwelling, but any dwelling or accessory structure there, too. And one times the height to um property lines. And then onem separation would be retained and that we would include their existing height limit of 115 feet with that 100 feet plus that 15 foot apparatus. Um, in other words, we the staff has been supportive and the planning commission has been supportive of amendments to allow for towers by conditional use in the single family zoning district, but we would not support many of the other changes that are being proposed. So tonight for your discussion and action um you we staff recommends that you hold a public hearing and receive public comment, close the public hearing and discuss and then take action on ordinance number 765 amending title 15 chapter 153 pertaining to wireless hours. I will say I shortened up that ordinance name there for you so you don't have to kind of go through all those subsections. Um I'm happy to answer any questions now in advance of the public hearing or after there's public comment. And I do know the applicant is here to give testimony as part of the hearing. >> Any questions? >> Any questions? >> I do have one. Um, why did we kick out the institutionalized uses? >> Um, it's not common for cities to tie their zoning district standards to future land uses. So, the requests uh or um uses can change at any point on a property. Um, one of the things that the city could consider, however, is tying it to that future land use of institutional, which would limit properties even more so throughout the city. I'm going to pull up a map here that wasn't included in your packet, but we did do some analysis which does show uh the limitation here of properties that if we did limit them to single family zoned guided for institutional use, these would be the areas that would be um permissible. Uh one thing that isn't shown on here is things like city parkland or other types of publiclyowned parcels of open space or those sorts of things. That could be another consideration. Um, simply put, I think there was concern that uses can change and we've never really tied our uses to the future land use map. Now, that being said, if the city council wanted to strict restrict the, you know, start small, I would recommend that we did reinstate that we would tie those to institutional uses as part of the future land use map. >> Thank you. Uh, remind me, did we approve and is something been put up out at um, Cohen Camp Park as far as a tower? >> No. Um, AT&T had proposed uh, or early conversations with the city, but had not come forward with any sort of plan to um, put in a tower. They didn't move forward with any sort of the neighborhood meeting that the city had kind of asked of them before we'd moved forward. We do know that areas east of probably [snorts] Second Lake on the north side and the south side of the lake have coverage limitations. Um, you know, I hear a lot from residents that they're fine, you know, outside maybe in in the house it gets a little spotty and their vehicles that get a little spotty. Staff is very much in support of expanding our tower ordinance to allow for more towers. Um, but I do think that we should be trying to limit kind of a a wholesale to all single family greater than two and a half acres. That is very concerning of how many towers we could end up having. >> And I apologize if this was in here somewhere. Would would all these in these residential areas be that stealth or camouflaged? >> No. >> Tower? >> No. >> Okay. All right. Uh with that, um we will at 6:25 open up a public hearing, um on this item. Is there anyone here here to speak to this item? >> Uh hi, good evening. Uh I appreciate your time, the opportunity to present our project. um we can uh you know eventually if the text amendment is accepted we would go into more detail with the conditional use uh process in general what we're trying to do AT&T is uh trying to enhance their coverage um and reliability specifically for uh emergency services on the lake and on the south side of the lake in the residential area. Um so obviously incorporating um the need for towers into residential areas and semi-ural areas like Forest Lake can be challenging. Um people don't want to live next to giant towers. Completely understand that. Um in these scenarios what we do is uh try to find ways like churches, water tanks, um you know public parks where you can put up structures that uh you can camouflage and blend into the existing use. So that's in general what we're proposing to do at Hoszana. Um the reason we uh proposed kind of an extensive list of changes is to give um to give us and in specifically in this case you know as much latitude to find a spot on the existing parcel that would work with the church. And then in the future um not limiting uh you know not running into a situation where in institutional use a church might be uh less than you know two and a half acre or less than 10 acres I'm sorry. Um and not you know right out of the gate limiting that as an opportunity when it otherwise might make sense. So that's the reason kind of why we uh um suggested that as part of the text amendment. We understand the planning commission's uh position. So, uh, as proposed, it would work, you know, for our proposed project. So, um, I'm happy to answer any questions that I can. >> You state your name and organization for the >> Yeah. Uh, my name is Blair Ransom. Uh, my company's called Bule Consulting. Um, so we're retained on behalf of AT&T to uh, handle the leasing, handle all the zoning process up through construction. >> Any questions, councel? Okay. Uh there might be some as we go on, but thank you. >> All right. Appreciate it. >> Anyone else want to speak to this item? State your name and address. >> Susan Young, 9950 199th Street North. Um and speaking as solely as a resident, um about 20 years ago, a large tower was put up, not on my property. Um but definitely uh within limits and uh for the last 20 years I've been trying to grow trees to try and screen that. Um the the problem with with with these towers is they are so freaking huge and and when you have a home or you you you're trying to use your deck or you're you know you're you're enjoying your semi-ural property um they just don't fit. And so having these limitations especially on the institutional sites um I'm I'm also concerned because we're getting more and more wind um high winds and um I think that um it was wise for staff to recommend the two times um the height of the tower from a a residence or a building. Um I the trick is not thinking about who's there now. It's what we're looking at for the future. So appreciate your consideration. >> Thank you. Anyone here to speak to this item with that at 6:30 we will close the public hearing and bring it back to council. Mr. Mayor, if I could just um [clears throat] go over a couple things. One, um Abby, you mentioned that these are allowable or or would be allowable through a cup. I just want to remind everybody that that um is a permanent thing and that cups are not designed for you to pick and choose on a case by case basis whether or not you want to allow any particular I think you asked a question are other ones going to be camouflaged or that. So remember that a CP is not a variance. Um it's something which is allowed in the you establish that it would be a conditional use and then you are required to grant that conditional use permit if people meet the requirements of the code. You're allowed to put reasonable conditions on that cup, but you're required to um if they meet the intent of the code to approve that. Um and again, that is a permanent runs with the land type of entitlement. So, just want to be cautious about that. I think sometimes there's a misunderstanding about CS that we allow them but only under CU so we get the chance to say yes or no and that's not exactly the case. Um and then I think it was important to note here too um Abby you did a nice job here it says um two times power height from any residential drawing on another parcel. In that picture you saw that the the tower is adjacent to or part of the structure. Just noting that the parcel itself on the on the site that would be proposing that would not be would be exempt from that that ring around the structure. So structure on the parcel that's proposing would be allowed to be within that fall. >> Yeah, towers can fall on anything you own. We just don't want them falling on somebody else's property. Abby, I have a question. [clears throat] Is the proposed excuse me, is the proposed uh uh amendment or proposal that you're uh have in front of us, is that what the planning commission sent back to us or did they have other recommendations and then it was changed from what the planning commission said? The only change that the planning commission had asked for is the two currently in our code is two times the tower height from any residential dwelling on another par parcel. The planning commission asked that that would be a residential dwelling in their accessory structures. So essentially that they don't want it falling on somebody's out building their pole barn. >> And so why did it get lowered to one times? Doesn't the proposal? >> This is what they're propo. This is what the applicant is. >> Oh, that's what the applicant's proposing. That's this is an exist that was recommended here though. >> Correct. And the ordinance in front of you has the planning commission's recommendation in embedded into it. >> So to be clear, in the planning commission's recommendation that you're asking us to approve, it's two times. >> Correct. >> Okay. Not one times. >> Correct. >> Okay. because what's in front of you still is Bu Consulting's request, but our recommendation is that we would retain what we have in our code. >> Thank you for clarifying. >> Um Abby, can you put that map back up of where those what this would open up to potential areas? >> Sure. Give me just one second. So, um, right now any everything that's colored is zoned single family. Um, the current code requires 10 plus acres. So, you're looking at the purple parcels or even maybe some of the blue where you might have two parcels of five acres that are touching each other. Um, what they would be proposing is uh you're falling into that orange category. Um, yes, I understand that some of that is one goes as low as one acre, but you do end up having considerably more parcels um that are, you know, meeting that threshold of one mile apart um that are two and a half acres above. So, um, let's say on the north side of of First Lake there with all those orange I mean, could someone seemingly put something there in a right in the middle on the lake in a residential area as long as it I mean >> as long as it met the minimum two and a half acres that they were proposing. Now currently staff is and the way the ordinance is written is staff is recommending you don't change that to two and a half acres but as the original proposal has been made yes if the property is two and a half acres and where they're citing that tower is meets those setback requirements then yes I'd have to do a parcel by parcel analysis to see of which ones are you know right at two and a half acres clearly you get to some of these parcels that start to get much smaller Um, I don't even know if you can see my You can't even see. I'm just like pointing my my cursor and I don't think you can see it up there. So, I apologize. But, and and to make it so that we're not um forced into a different situation. We can't you can't go about this with some type of variance. Let's say since we're using the Hosana, some type of variance to allow this. This has to be a code code amendment. >> Correct. Um the type of variance could be if you kept your 10 acre minimum but you had a property later down the road that was 2 and a half acres you could consider a variance along with that cup but variances are based on practical difficulty and unique unique circumstances. Um you know it's not often that I can't tell you you know we could give some sort of the hypothetical here. It's hard for me to say that staff would say, "Oh, yeah, we should approve a 7.5 acre variance to allow for two and a half, you know, acre sites." I will say this, um, Hosana Lutheran Church, if if they come forward with an application after this, they have sufficient land area to meet the 10 acres. It's just the opportunities that could be available to other properties within the city. And it could be that in the future with adequate coverage maps showing u increased service and filling in gap coverage gaps that maybe that is grounds for consideration of granting a variance that there is uniqueness there that this is really kind of the only place that we can do that to fill in the service gap in that specific area. I'm not trying to set anyone up for a future um variance proposal, but I think that there's ways that you could consider smaller parcels in the future. Just wouldn't recommend them wholesale right now. >> We prefer to stick with our 10 acre minimum. Is that what you're saying? >> Correct. Um and the expansion being allowed in the single family and 10 acres and let's see if we can't get some more coverage in the community before we drop it down so significantly. you mentioned. So there's a public hearing um tonight and there was something there was a was it a neighborhood meeting or just a just a public hearing at at planning? >> Public hearing at planning commission. Neither of these have been noticed of this specific neighborhood. These are city-wide amendments. So we notice it on our website and in the newspaper. Um but no in regards to a specific ask at Hosana, nothing has been notified in that neighborhood. Subsequently, if they want to move, if an amendment is made and they want to move forward with an application, then that neighborhood would be noticed of another hearing required for the future conditional use permit. >> Remember, I'm sorry, that was sort of the point of my bringing up the CU and the nature of it is because >> if you make this code amendment and then someone applies for this and meets the requirements, the conditional use permit. It's not a choice vote, yes or no, but you'll be required to approve that despite public outcry that might come from having neighbors notified of that that potential use. Again, you can set reasonable conditions. You can say it has to be camouflaged. You can say all sorts of things, right? But in general, proposal meets the code, you need to approve that. >> Um, well, so for for me in in a residential thing, I I think it's important that the camouflage or or stealth look is important piece of it. Um, I don't know if any other conditions that council wants to bring up that. >> No. And it seems there's plenty of 10acre parcels that if they needed to get better coverage that they could find a way to make that happen [clears throat] around the lake. >> I I agree. Um I'm tending to agree with the proposal from the planning commission um in that there are plenty of 10acre parcels yet to to search and um just leaving the option for a variance if it comes to to that >> that the height issue crash zone stuff things like that. >> Okay. Um anyone interested in making a motion >> maybe you can help us out with this. pulling up my staff memo right at the moment. So I think um there give me just a quick second. So if the council is favorable, you'd have two actions tonight. One, approve the ordinance allowing for towers uh ordinance 765 and then adopting the resolution 01122607 denying the requested changes to their zoning text amendment. Now again that ordinance number 765 is written for 10 acres in the single family zoning district um with an increased fall of two and a half times any structure on a neighboring property that is not written for only institutional uses. And so if there was an ask uh or if there was a desire to limit them more to just those in institutional uses. So on page 134 is the u motions. You could move to approve ordinance number 765 allowing towers as conditional use permits in the single family zoning district on parcels guided for institutional use on the future land use map. >> I would agree to that. I'd make a motion for that. >> So moved. >> So moved. >> So um this is on the the actual ordinance, right? Yep. Correct. Okay. >> All right. So, we have a motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Motion second. And this has the this has the well the stealth and the camouflage. That's >> There is no stealth and camouflage in this. If that's something that this council wants to put in as a requirement in the code, you what I would recommend you do is um table it direct staff to amend the ordinance to include provisions for stealth camouflaging in this zoning district and bring that ordinance back before you. >> How do you feel about that? >> I I think I'd prefer that. I mean, I I really do think it's important. You know, we just had someone talk about how they're looking been looking at one for how many years. Um to have some kind of coverage around it just doesn't stand out so much. It would be my preference. >> Would council member Larson withdraw his motion. Then >> Paul would make a redaction or >> I think um you would because you've already made a motion in a second. Um, I think you could vote and everybody deny it or else read. >> I don't think there's a sec. Is there a second? >> There was a second. Julie has some >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I would just suggest that um, Council Member Larson move to amend his emotion his motion and then um to table the item with the direction that Abby provided. And should council member Miller agree, he could second the amended motion. Okay, I make a a motion to table the item um for review and to add some other uh wording to the ordinance for 765 to include uh camouflaging uh particulars to that towers. >> Sorry guys, >> council member Larson, can I just ask you to clarify that you're making a motion to amend your >> That's correct. Amending that motion. >> Thank you. >> And I would second that. >> All right. Motion second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. Motion carries. Um then what happens to resolution then that is tabled tabled as well? Yeah, I mean I think we have the resolution on tonight. You want them to also table consideration of that? >> Let's go ahead and just table it just so we have a clean record. >> Okay. >> Want to make Anyone want to make that motion? >> It would be a motion to table resolution 01122607. >> I would make that motion to table resolution 0117 [clears throat] 12 2607. I left my glasses at home. I'm sorry. [laughter] >> I'll second. >> All right. We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. Motion carries. >> Thanks. Right. 8B spikes and hools phase 2 amended site plan and PUD preliminary and final plan. Abby, >> this give me just a second. My settings decided to change on my presentation. me on my computer. Give me a minute. I'm plugged in, right? >> Yeah, you are. Give me just a second. They just changed the display settings. My [clears throat] computer decided to change midscreen and then I couldn't I just [laughter] I just got to actually tell the computer to keep the changes I just made. It's a Monday, right? There we go. Thank you, Mayor Roberts, members of the council for your patience there. So, as I indicated, Spikes and Hools is tonight with you for their phase 2 preliminary and final planned unit development and site plan review consideration. Um, tonight before you is consideration of their final preliminary and final planned unit development. Essentially, Spikes and Hools is proposing to build out the rest of their site with an independent greenhouse outside nursery yard, parking and drive areas, and storm water. This really will help urbanize the site that has been historically underdeveloped um since it was probably first developed. [snorts] So, just giving you um a high level. This is the site plan. I'm get me get my my pointer here. Hopefully you can kind of see. You can't see laser pointer. So this is the existing spike and holes uh facility uh as it sits today. There's an existing building just to the south of the remodeled um elevator site, the expansion and the old I think it's called the pickle building. What they're predominantly looking to do is put in a just over 6,000 square foot greenhouse. This is the existing structure that's on the site that will be um stay in place and a small building will be relocated right here. And then in addition, there'll be a large nursery yard in the to this to the um east. I said uh earlier uh my directions are a little off just to the east of the proposed green uh house. The pre primary ways into the site would be continuing off of Broadway where you could um go up into the um existing building, keep heading do south with angled parking on both sides. You could head to an a parking lot um that would access to third street south west where we would kind of have a a right in right out uh only turn. Also, there would be parking and drive accessed off of Third Street Southwest that would have another parking lot in the back. There's a significantly sized storm pond um in the rear of the property and there would also just be a lot of um atrade landscaping green space in the back. One thing worth noting is that um much of the area in the back of the property on the south of the property um isn't being proposed to be changed at this time. Um I can get into it a little bit more, but um this is an area that has some challenges and has some future development opportunity. So looking at the land use analysis, this is located in the downtown mixeduse district which retail sales and service are allowed. And um then it's just an expansion of the ancillary uses that have been on the site for as long as I think most of people could probably remember. Parking on the site, 88 stalls are required and 51 stalls were proposed. As part of the planning commission's review, the planning commission did require that the developer provide what's called a proof of parking plan. There's quite a bit of discussion at the planning commission um about uh parking on this site and how at times it's been known to be challenging and how um they can understand that it's quite likely the site does not need 88 parking spaces all the time. But where could we get 88 parking spaces if there was a problem in the long run? I'll I'll show that in just a minute. Additionally, additional landscaping has been recommended and then lighting and signage has been discussed. So, here is the uh preliminary landscape plan which shows uh landscaping around the storm pond and in some of the parking lot islands and along the buffers of the property. Generally speaking, the planning commission that the applicant could install more landscaping and at this time the the developer had said and land owner has said they certainly can and certainly will required as a condition of approval at the time of building permit an enhanced landscaping plan. A couple things worth noting. Um enhancing landscaping around the storm pond just to kind of prevent access or any sort of slip and fall circumstances was identified. And then also removing some of the landscaping in this back portion area where there's a existing city waterline as well as that area where we'd be looking at some future redevelopment. Um the area in future redevelopment. So, I've switched my view. North is now up at the top. It's a little easier sometimes. Off of Second Avenue Southwest, there's kind of this historic um gravel path that I think folks in the community are aware of. The yellow parcel is the only parcel uh Spikes and Hools owns through here. Um we do have platted second platted rightway associated with Second Street Southwest through here. And then the city owns this third parcel. This is a private. It's just it is a parcel. It's a tax parcel. The really interesting thing is 207 2nd Avenue Southwest accesses their property and their garage off of this undeveloped land area. Um, additionally, staff has seen a preliminary development plan. Um though I we provided some I would say not favorable feedback to it um for the potential redevelopment of 207 with some town home sites. Um staff is concerned that if we're asking uh Spikes and Hools to expand and improve all of the area through here right now um we're just maybe not quite there. Additionally, I think with the potential redevelopment of 207 2nd Avenue Southwest that we would run the risk of putting in improvements that might need to be torn up in the future if there's some sort of development in this. Additionally, we've been talking for some time about the opportunity that this intersection with the Browns Creek State Trail, not Browns Creek State Trail, >> Hardway Creek. It's only been four years. I'm not sure where that came from. um the Hardwood Creek Trail connection um at Second Avenue Southwest and how this site right in here could serve as a really nice trail head access point onto the Hardwood Creek Trail. developer understands that that's something that the city wants to continue conversations of of the redevelopment of this and to help keep their phased project going staff wanted to encourage them to keep moving forward with this PUB um exempting this portion of it from improvement. The developer has shown remember how I told you that proof of parking would be required. The developer has shown how they can achieve all parking on site, including putting parking exactly where we've just talked about the potential of a future trail head. So, as of right now, we're not asking that any of the yellow red dotted parking be installed, but this is designed to essentially show us how they could put in their additional parking on their site should parking become a problem or a nuisance in the future. So, PUD criteria, what we're looking for is that whether or not it's consistent with the comp plan, zoning code, subdivision code, compatibility with the surrounding area, that we're not going to negatively impact health, safety, general welfare, all of those good things. Um, one of the things worth noting is that, um, the developer really isn't asking for PUD concessions aside from that potential proof of parking, which isn't uncommon in zoning. Um, we're requiring the PUD because they have multiple buildings on one site. So, included in your packet for your consideration, it would be many different conditions of approval. Some of them just worthy of noting is that we would require the developer to combine parcels that this will become one development site. They can't kind of split this up and parcel it off in the future. We'd make some corrections to the final plans including comments from the city engineer and that we remove the private property signs at Second Street Southwest. We also would require site improvements, storm water maintenance and easement agreements to be executed before building permit submitt and an updated landscaping plan for those parking and storm water areas and then additionally an updated lands lighting plan. They do have a lighting plan included but it was just concern of the cutoff at all property lines adjacent to the residential and then included are those future parking improvements if needed. So, um, tonight before you is your consideration of the phase 2 planned unit development and then their proposed site plan. I did mess up in that I neglected to include the ordinance which makes the U planned unit development official. I included the resolution summarizing the ordinance. Um, so I know that I'll have to bring documents back before you, but what I would ask that you would do is approve resolution 01122609 for the site plan review and then um move to approve the PUD, the resolution, and then direct staff to bring back that PUD ordinance and summary resolution at your next meeting. Landowner is here to talk about this if you have questions. This isn't a public hearing. don't have to have conversations with them, but they're here if you have questions of them or me. >> Thank you. >> Any questions, council thoughts, comments, [clears throat] Abby, do we know the size of the building they're proposing for the greenhouse? It's just I think if I remember correctly just around 6,000 square feet. >> So 30 by >> Oh, I could look that up. I think it's 30 by It looks like just under 200. >> And is that a that's a solid structure, not a tent greenhouse, right? >> Correct. This is going to be a permanent structure. um not like the framed structures that are on site now. This would replace all of the temporary structures that are on site um that that they've been utilizing and based on our zoning that would fit into that area. um the the >> greenhouse >> a greenhouse I don't believe that there's anything in conflict with the code uh staff had looked at this from the aspect that this was a use that had been historically on the property that they are yes it was seasonal but that they're just legitimizing it with a permanent structure um I can double check the code I would hope that we wouldn't have gotten this far that there's some sort of conflict with the code. I will say that this was a project that started before I had come here and so um you know we've gone through a number of different planners. I don't believe that there are conflicts but I can look >> what what is the zoning there again? >> The downtown mixed >> mixed use. >> Anyone else? Um, so, uh, in full transparency, I, um, I want to state that I, um, the Girtton's, the family has been a a large supplier of ours over the years and now up until the last couple years a competitor. So, I will be abstaining from either one of these both these votes here tonight. But, I do have just some things that maybe council might want to discuss. Uh, the parking um, situation. I mean, we're we're 31 there 37 um spots short of what what code is. That seems like a a pretty big ask. Um also in that I don't see any loading area down in Inenver Grove Heights. I think um there's about six or seven maybe eight spots for loading and I don't see any loading uh spots on there. So you would likely have to lose some of those spots just for that because that's just the nature of that business. Um, and if we are going to be okay with the um the parking situation, the proof of parking for the additional spaces, are we talking about if we're going to require that at some point, would that just be gravel or are we going to would that be paved? Would that be a requirement? >> Um, if in the future it has to be put in, it would be paved and we would embed that into that site improvement agreement that would come back before you. >> Okay, that's all I have. Does anyone have any questions of of uh developers? Would you like to add anything this evening at all? Please state your name and address. Good evening. Gino Petero with Spikes and Hools. Uh so we've been working on this project for several years with uh uh the city and uh I think uh uh we've made nice progress with uh the upgrades to uh the old Hool's uh uh buildings and try to preserve the heritage of the site. Uh the the greenhouse would be a glass greenhouse. It would be a nice uh structure. I think would be a nice addition to that corner and a way to uh kind of finish uh what's there without it being uh out of character for what the rest of the the site looks like. uh with uh as as for the parking. Uh uh some cities require uh some of the outside space to uh be included in the parking calculations. Some some do not in different places that we have facilities at. Uh so if the if the ask is to uh have the the paved parking that uh is shown and if there's if the city feels in a future date that uh the site is overwhelmed uh then uh we would have uh be happy to add the parking. Uh as a business owner uh the last thing that uh we want is not to have adequate parking for customers. So that that that that pushes the equation the wrong way. Parking spaces pushes the equation the correct way. Uh uh someone mentioned loading uh uh uh uh Mayor Roberts. We do have some loading uh points now uh with the feed operation. uh we feel that with the the parking being uh adjacent to the nursery areas that there wouldn't uh be a need to have like a nursery pickup station. And so, uh, we we have like a drive, uh, through to the south from the from the north, and we would anticipate that things like mulches and feed would still continue to be, uh, loaded in that way. And we think that that would be adequate to service customers without causing a rigomearroll or traffic jam that would uh be a problem for uh uh any of the traffic on any of the adjacent streets. And if you have any other questions, I'm happy to answer them. A couple questions. You mentioned loading unloading. I [clears throat] know the mayor brought it up. So, currently, where do you load and unload your products? Now, >> uh I'll break that in my answer into two parts. If it's inbound freight, it's on the It's on the the second. >> Yeah, just give me just a second. I unplugged and I have to now change my display settings. >> Let's call it the old shed that runs east west. There's two loading dock stations there uh that freight comes in. >> And is that on the south side, you're saying, of the building? >> The the south side of the building. >> So, you back up to the south side? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, if you were to put parking in uh where the red dots are, how would you access that loading and unloading? Would there still be room? >> Um I was referring to the other shed uh across from the bank. >> Oh, the smaller shed. >> Uh it's on the uh >> uh south >> west corner of the site. >> I know. I'm trying. >> Is it the small shed or >> No, it's it's the larger shed. >> Keep the changes. Go back. >> That's a shed currently. That big building there. >> Okay. So, currently they they back up to where the parking lot is proposed. That's where you back up to load and unload. >> No. Abby, could you help me out? Uh, [clears throat] just to the west of that dot. >> If you would, >> you went east. >> So, east of the dot. Okay. So, west of the dot. >> So, on the road on Third Street, you're saying >> there's a >> This is North. >> Yes. [laughter] >> I'm sorry, >> everybody. This is North Third Street. >> Yeah. East. West. >> Come over to Third Street. >> Yep. >> All right. If you go south right there, there's two loading docks. >> So, how do you get in there right now? >> Uh, we the Nope. >> You pull in off of Third Street and drive up where those arrows are and back up. >> Correct. >> And is that a curb all the way across there or is that no curb in there? >> No, that's straight. It's a straight shot. >> And is Third Street paved or unpaved, Abby? I can't remember. >> Third Street. >> It's paved. Okay. And And how big of trucks are you pulling in there? >> Uh, fullsize semis. >> Okay. And so if you build your yard and your greenhouse and people are buying merchandise and trees or whatever you're what types of uh items are you going to have in the greenhouse and in the nursery yard? >> So in the greenhouse it would be things like hanging baskets, tomato plants, vegetable plants, geraniums, flowers, that type of thing. In the yard it would be uh perennials, shrubs, trees. Uh and uh currently we receive approximately three semi- low deliveries a week uh uh Monday, Wednesday, Friday. So that would probably, you know, double or triple. But even at say triple the volume that we would do, it's not a a tangled truck mess that would uh that I would worry about. You know, how do we get our merchandise? Did we leave enough dock space? >> What are the biggest trees that you carry? >> They would probably be, you know, pot we, let's call them a 25gallon pot. So that pot would probably be 24 in in diameter, 1 in. >> And are you delivering those trees or most customers taking them? >> Uh, here it's all uh pickup. >> Okay. So, where would a customer then, how would they get loaded if they >> We would probably just bring it to their car >> with a >> a two wheel dolly. >> Okay. >> We call it a a tree cart. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions? That's it for now. I think we might ask you up in a second if we have other questions. But thanks, Gino. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> Any other thoughts, concerns, questions? I I obviously have concerns with parking. I mean, it seems like every every uh every project we do, every apartment we do, everything we do, even looking at, you know, new stuff coming to us, there's always a shortage of parking. And I know that's, you know, not an easy thing to accomplish. Um, I agree that you may not need all the parking spots that are required. Uh, and there is room if if, uh, they need to add more. It's just a question of do you approve something, you know, with uh if you need more, we'll add it or do you make them put it in right up front >> or >> I mean the code does allow for when you do have a site with multiple uses or multiple structures to allow for that proof of parking to add in parking later. >> It does appear. Yeah. >> What triggers that? What would what would be the proof that there's an issue like complaints or how does Yeah, I mean, we'd be looking at complaints. Um, we're we've I've talked about this with legal counsel of building it into the site improvement agreement. There'd have to be some triggers and mechanisms. Generally, what we're going to end up finding is if there's going to be complaints of some sort of public nuisance, right? And I thus far um in their operations, we haven't heard about them. We did hear about them some at the planning commission when they had a couple special events. Um, but we are also hopeful that designating the parking on site is going to drastically improve any sort of existing parking conditions that are being problematic right now because right now there's no rhyme or reason to the parking there. >> And would that be striped parking? Right now, everything you see in kind of that light gray, >> all of this is improved asphalted striped parking. >> Navy, you had talked about um the road that comes in currently from the south. Um that part of to the west of that, the city owns some property. Um we have a homeowner that's using access off of our city property. Um and then you've got the the yellow line there, which Hoos owns. Would that be part of something in the future? If we decided to as a city allow 207 to be developed, would that piece be part of that or is that always going to remain separate? >> That is all up for redevelopment negotiation. If 207 redevelops, >> right? >> So the yellow piece is Hool's >> and that is theirs. That is where they are showing correct potential for future parking. >> Correct. But then we wouldn't be able to necessarily include that any redevelopment. It would eliminate parking potentially. Then >> we can't include the yellow in [clears throat] any future redevelopment of 207 because we don't own the yellow. >> Right. But I guess my question is could Hools decide to sell that as part of that redevelopment. Let's say the developer wanted to acquire that piece of land from them with those other two parcels in order to develop that and separate it off of their current property. Would that be allowed? >> Sure. Um, one of the conditions of approval is that they do combine all the parcels on their property. So that can include this parcel. So this little leg could in be a part of the entire site. Um, also we own this as a parcel. So if we started to talk about, you know, some sort of redevelopment of 207 and the potential sale of this, first person I'm we're calling is is Gino as part of this. I do will say that >> uh landowner has been, >> you know, we've been discussing this in good faith that we're not doing this here now because we don't know what that future down there is. And we I think for all parties involved want to be able to maximize the development opportunities and achieve everyone's goals. I think the easiest way to solve the concern that I'm hearing you say is just having that combined with the rest of the property so that it they retain the ownership at least until such time as we have another conversation about whether or not it needs to be split in the future. >> Thank you. If if two 207th 207 was redeveloped, that would whatever development there that same policy develop development pays for that to up, you know, to improve that street. >> Yeah. I mean, that would be the time if 207 came in. So, what we've seen thus far is a potential town home project that the driveways access off of that 202nd. that would be a time that we'd be looking for them to improve that as part of that redevelopment project. Thus far of what's going to happen with that, I don't know. Um, and what we saw, at least initially, I would say, was I wasn't optimistic that it would achieve uh some of our development standards, but we might see something come in still. >> Um, Dave, is that graded on a regular basis and maintained? because I just, you know, we're going to be driving a lot more traffic and a lot of people are going to use that that way to get into the site. Um, I know in the spring of the year when the frost is coming out, those roads are typically just an absolute mess. Um, >> yeah, it's kind of a catch 22. Some people want it maintained and then others don't want it maintained to use it as, you know, cut through. We do it weekly and I I know the people at at Girtton as well will come down there and and do some some maintenance as well. But it's typical gravel road that we we do in the spring and the fall and then when we get complaints right anyone interested in making a motion? So you're saying what we you do have to come back Abby on you do have to come back on on >> Yeah, I do think you can take action tonight and then just direct me to bring back the documents memorializing your actions. So at um you know if the council is favorable get my oops we move to approve the PUD and propo as proposed and presented including resolution 01122609 um spike and hool site plan review and direct staff to bring back the PUD ordinance and summary resolution. With that, I'll make a motion to approve the Spikes and Hools phase 2 planned unit development and proposed [snorts] and presented as proposed and presented, including resolution 01122609, Spikes and Hool site plan review and direct staff to bring back the planned unit development ordinance and summary resolution. >> I'll second motion, a second. Uh any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> opposed. One abstension. Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thanks guys. Thanks for your investment force lake. >> All right. HC Minnesota or MIDOT Aviation Grant Awards. And Mark is going to kick this off. >> Yeah, Mr. Mayor and councel. Um we have Silus here, our airport consultant as well to answer any questions you may have. But um we have some good news and bad news. And um [clears throat] the good news is that we were awarded uh grants through the Mindot um for all three of our our capital improvement projects that were have been proposed over the last couple years here. Um the bad news is that the the funding formula changed kind of midstream and went from a 95% participation from INDOT to a 90% um funding level and that meant that the city's share of this these proposed projects went up. Um we had you know sort of budgeted for the the 5% match and um so now we have a 10% match to try to come up with. So um you the first page of the of the memo here uh that the local match now is around 177,640. Um I say around that because that's um in the end the grant numbers will be a little different. Uh as we bid out that apron expansion, as you can see, those are kind of round numbers at this point, but as we do that um design that project and bid it out, those numbers will uh float a little bit. Um and then on the second page of the um memo, we kind of just get into where this money might come from and um whether or not it should be borne by the airport uh itself. Um and as I mentioned, that's a a complicated question and sort of one of philosophical um you know, how does the city approach its airport? Um I think in the past we have um attempted to have the airport land uh leases support capital projects been met with some resistance from hangar owners and um I think this set of projects is similar to that our previous experience there and that the hangar owners um while certainly would like to have this improvement done um they may resist paying for it. Um so I think the approach tonight is to evaluate the city's um position here based on whether or not this investment into our airport is good for the city as a whole u with the cost being borne by the city and um not necessarily um by the hanger owners. Um the airport itself um as you can see you know is functionally um a break even investment at this point in time. Um that does include an analysis that includes counting the property taxes in that equation um that the airport produces. Certainly, you don't that's not the way we look at it in the on the accounting books that property taxes go in with all the rest of the property taxes. And so, you know, you don't have to view it that way. I just thought for illustrative purposes that it would be um good to show that and show that there is that uh contribution to our bottom line. Um So again, the operations of the airport as they currently stand are pretty self-sufficient. Um the tough part comes when we have capital expenses and how how do we do that? Um so it's it's staff's suggestion at that [clears throat] point and it was the airport's commission to uh recommend acceptance of the the mind grants. Um and so their motion was fairly simple in that that was uh all their motion had to say about it was just that they recommend accepting the grants. Um the investment in this airport is certainly a benefit to the hangar owners but also it's an investment in our our own infrastructure and again the reminder that the hangar owners don't own that land that their hangers are on. renting that, leasing it from us. And so, um, their benefit is of a limited scope and time. And so, that, um, you know, asking them to invest in permanent infrastructure is a bit tricky as well. Um, unlike some of our, you know, our street projects where we might ask a homeowner to pay an assessment. Um and so tonight um I in front of you I have um a revised document that I want to just look at which is that the um last part of my memo has a recommendation as normal and that recommendation I just um neglected to include some dollar amounts in there and a little bit more of a breakout. Um so the highlighted in red text there that you see uh shows that we would be recommending award of the contract for the uh construction of the runway and taxiway project to force lake contract in the amount of 987,6 and additionally we would be asking that you award the engineering contracts to Bolton and mink for a total of 250,000 and um so so everyone can kind of follow the math here Um, this doesn't change any of the city participation. Uh, the numbers that you saw in the memo. This is still the same overall project cost. Um, you'll notice that 987 and 250 does not add up to that total grant amount of 159. And that's because we don't yet know the construction cost of the expansion that would come later. So that again um depends on the bid. But in order to move forward with the acceptance of the grants, we do have to have the contracts of in place. Um, I don't know Silus if you want to speak to that at all. Just Mindot's process there. >> Yeah, certainly. Administrator Stats, members of council, thank you for the time here. So, the way every state funded project at the airport works is that the city of Forest Lake needs to encumber the funds from the state of Minnesota have a grant agreement in place before any work can be done and reimbursed. Uh the reason for that being is MDOT does not want any work being done before incumbrance. so that uh they can ensure the work is done and approved by their staff. So for this particular project uh as as administrator starts is reporting the next step here is council approval to move forward with the projects and then submit the request to the state for the grant funds uh as nothing can move forward until that uh until those grant funds are in place. >> So just to be clear, there's two contracts there for Balden Mink that are being proposed. Um the one is for uh the taxiway and runway extension. That contract was bid out already and so we were through the design bidding process. Those um funds were handled handled in a separate grant. The proposal that you see in front of you for BMC in that regard is to administer the construction of the project in terms of inspection, staking, um documenting and record plan uh work. And then uh the other contract is for the design um and through construction of the U apron project. And again that's um that project proposal is for the entirety of the process of engineering from design through construction. So those are the two um contracts that you have in front of you there. And then there's a a letter of award recommendation for the construction project itself that Bland make evaluated the bids that we took on the taxiway and runway extension and found that Forest Lake to be the lowest responsible responsive bidder and that's the one with the little table here has 987,000. That's the low bidder. So with that, I would take any questions about anything from the bidding of the project to the construction work to the funding. >> Administrator STS, I'm confused on just some of the numbers. >> Sure. >> Can you go back to the actual cost of the runway? Where is that number? >> Sure. >> So on the first page of the memo, the runway extension, >> you don't have that page. Yeah, this is in your packets. >> Oh, sorry. >> Um, >> all right. Sorry. >> Go ahead. >> Um, the page 177 >> 177. >> Um, there's a three the grant summary there is you have the air apron expansion, taxiway extension, and runway extension. And so the um total cost of the taxiway and runway extension there there are two different projects there but really it's it would be silly to do one without the other most likely you know I think I suppose could but um so you see there's a 304,000 if you look at the grant amount that would be really I'm sorry the project cost would be 338 for the taxi way and 1.1 million for the runway extension and so you're in the neighborhood of 1.4 million or so there. And then um so that project essentially cost about $1.4 million. Of that the city would have to come up with 10% of that. >> So we're looking at coming up with $177,640. And we budgeted how much? >> Half of that. [clears throat] >> The apron uh that was something that wasn't originally in our budget. Is that correct? Uh, no. It was um all three of these projects were in the capital improvement uh plan. >> Okay. >> Seems like an awful lot of money for uh >> concrete slab. >> Concrete slab. Yeah. Um question for you. Uh maybe Silus, you could answer this. The taxi way um looks like the one that's in the middle. A2 is it? Uh that runs right in the middle that's currently there before the extension. Is that A2? I'm sorry. I wish I had my glasses. >> Yeah. >> I believe you're talking about alpha 3. Council member Miller. >> Yes. The one that's right in the middle. >> Taxi A3. >> A3. >> A3. Yeah. Is that planned on st going to leave that there or does that have does that have to stay there or can that be removed? >> That taxi taxi way connected would remain. >> That would remain and then you'll add the other taxi way on the end when you extend the runway and then the end the other taxiway on the north side stays as well. >> That is correct. Council member, >> what would be the uh reason for improve or adding the enlarged apron? >> So, Mandot had a So, previously, as you see from that aerial photo, there's six of those T's. So, those T's are tie down spots for aircraft that are visiting the airport or if any one of the hanger tenants there is, you know, doing some maintenance and needs to move an aircraft out. So that apron expansion project was just completed three years ago. Previously it was just aircraft parking and grass areas there. So mindat state statutes for airports require at a minimum three spaces on a paved surface for any aircraft you know visiting an airport. So that project was completed at the recommendation of Minda which is also a grandfunded project. But the reason why there was six spots included instead of just the minimum three is because of the amount of air aircraft activity that occurs at Forest Lake Airport. It is one of the busier general aviation airports in the region. uh primarily for the number of based aircraft that are operating here and then also folks that don't want to deal with uh the MAC and going to Anoka County. You do get a lot of transient aircraft that come here to also fuel up because fuel pricing here is much more reasonable than some neighboring airports. Um and after we constructed that project, it was also identified that it would be nice to to complete the complete apron expansion to add the remaining 200 ft just because the amount of aircraft aircraft activity here and the amount of parking that's required. >> So would those be anchored spots again like the other six? >> Yes, sir. So, when I was out at the airport not too long ago, uh, getting a little tour and being shown around by a couple of the hanger owners, I noticed there were a number of vehicles, uh, parked out in that area, uh, that don't move. Um, is that something that's allowed in those spots or is it just supposed to be for airplanes? >> Those spots are supposed to be for aircraft parking only. >> And so, this new paved area would be for aircraft only as well. >> Yes, sir. So, some of the vehicles that I see parked out there currently, what would happen with those? >> I uh so for my knowledge of those, uh I believe there's like a fuel tanker um and a different type of vehicle that are out there. They previously were not stored in that area. They were stored behind hanger number one. Um so, I think it's just a discussion that the city needs to have with the owners of those vehicles just to move them um off of those parking spots. And as a city, we maintain those runways and we would we would maintain the plowing out there or is that a cost of the airport? >> Yes, the city maintains the airport for snow plowing, snow removal, lawnmowing. Um, administrator St does have a breakdown. The city does receive some grant funding from Mindot for what's called a maintenance and operations agreement to help ease the financial burden of maintaining the airport. I believe it's about $19,000 a year that Forest Lake receives for maintenance and operations funds. >> The fuel that's out there. Um I I know that basically and I've heard this that actually people in the public drive in there and actually get fuel out of that uh uh fuel pump for their vehicles. >> Yeah. >> Yes, sir. It's a it's an unleted fuel. So, if you have a snowmobile, small engines, a camper, even, it's uh it's a nicer fuel to put in than some of the the leaded fuels that you'd get at your regular gas station. So, you you do see that pretty common at a number of airports. >> So, it's pretty common that that happens. It's something that is not shied upon. I mean, it seems like a security issue of some sort. >> It's a publicly available airport. It's a publicly owned fuel system. So whether it's it's not necessarily yes the fuel there is for aircraft but it doesn't restrict anybody from coming in there and fueling up their vehic vehicle camper boat RV small engines what have you council member there's no restrictions on who can come in and take on fuel >> but okay I understand that but the driving around out there down these taxiways and along the side is that really supposed to be for the public because that's what we hear is happening they're not pulling up behind here in the dirt road behind the building they're pulling up coming down the taxi way and pulling right into those pumps. Is that what that's for? Or is that not supposed to be just for pilots? >> So that that is a future project to kind of address some access to getting to the apron area and the fuel system. Currently, as it sits right now, you are correct, council member, is you know, members of the public have to drive through the taxi lanes where which are designated for kind of the the aircraft owners and tenants there. So there there has been, you know, over the years I've heard some concerns about the public, you know, just driving through there, but right now there's no other way to access the fuel. Um, if you are bringing a vehicle or something of that nature, >> does our city have liability for that? >> There are signs that are posted out there that say, you know, restricted access, but I can't speak to what the the city's insurance policy, you know, covers for the airport. >> Yeah, we're certainly insured, you know, for activity at the airport. Um, can I just kind of add on to that a little bit? Is that through this pro, you know, we started a process of guidelines um out there, a new pro, uh, is that something that can be addressed in those guidelines if there's a concern? Because I I guess I didn't realize that vehicles are using that pump for >> vehicular track. You know, it's it's not as it's not all that common. I mean, we don't go through that much fuel. Um I I have recently uh just in the last month got a couple calls with people who are racing snow wheels. I mean at at four something a gallon it's it's you know not something people are going to go out of the way to come get unless it's sort of high performance type of engines and that kind of thing. Um, but I'm sure it does happen. And yeah, as you mentioned, it is something we're looking at is trying to get better access to where there's the road that you come in on. If you stay right the whole time, you never get on a taxi way. Then you approach the back side of the fuel tanks there. So, with a few modifications to that driveway system there, I think we could get access to the fuel tanks without having people access the taxi way. That's certainly something that um should be addressed in the near future. other questions. So, ju just a a little bit on the funding here. Um over the years, we've been told that this airport is self-sufficient, self-funding. And um when myself and council member Ericson got onto the council, we started asking some of these questions similar to what you're doing, council member Miller, which makes a lot of sense um because a lot of it doesn't make some sense. And so what we found was there a lot of um staff time that wasn't being accounted towards the the airport fund. The legal wasn't uh our our airport manager who was the assistant city administrator was his time wasn't being accounted to. So, we started doing that and that's why we've end up from a I think at one point a $200,000 surplus to $19. Um, which that's fine and I'm fine with that. It's it's it's about transparency and and that when the public does come to us and say, "Our taxpayers paying for this," we can certainly tell them, "Yes, you're clearly subsidizing this airport." Um, I don't like the idea of calling it out or denoting property taxes going to that. Um, that's a slippery slope. I understand why it was done, but you know, all of a sudden, if you start doing that, then the weed harvesting program, people on the lake are going to want more put towards that based on their property taxes out on the lake or whatever area of the town that a project's going to happen. So, I'm I'm not comfortable with that. Um, and I'm fine on this project here moving forward in using city general fund dollars. I would like to have that memorialized so that when this and hopefully with with additional sales of of hanger or leases of hangers lots uh fuel sales which I understand has been increased we've gotten more competitive and we're watching that and adjusting the price to be you know what market price is in the area that we can get this um fund solvent and that it's actually can pay some of this back. So, I would like to have that memorialized somehow that that at some point. I don't know if there's an option that it could be paid back. I don't know how you what triggers that or what is, but I just at least that it's memorialized somewhere. Um, and with this I really uh my it would be my wish that we don't go forward with any more grant requests that we don't ask mindot for any more grants until we get this account in a better financial situation because that's this easy slippery slope. It's like my gosh for 1.4 or whatever we only have 177 into it. Why wouldn't we do this? And that ends up next thing you know it's another 177 another and that's 200. So, I really think that we need to put a pause on grant requests to to Mandot avionatics um until we get this funding figured out. >> Do our current leases give us any opportunity for any type of an assessment where it's a shared cost with the hangar owners in addition to the city? >> Um, Council Miller, I think that's um a question for our attorney that I'm not going to put her on the spot to answer right now, but I'll just say that it's not 100% clear. Um there certainly there are a couple different leases and so there's a little bit different language in each one, but in general um a staff believes that both hangar uh rent rates and um assessments are options. Um but it gets a little bit hairier and I I'll I'll not speak beyond that without um our attorney maybe weighing in. I think what What [clears throat] the general thought is is that um there to avoid um that issue um it's best if the city just decides whether or not you want to to use the mayor's word to subsidize the airport and I think that is um a fundamental question that we're asking here and as you mentioned without those property taxes another way of saying that in this graph here would be that the city is subsidizing it by $15,000 the operations right um I think hangers might argue that you subsidize playgrounds and you subsidize lots of other things in town that don't make money. Um, and so there there's is that counter argument. I think the to speak to the mayor's question about memorializing um this and and could this paid back. Um, one of the things I think you could say with your motion here just is that u in the event that the airport operates at a a profit, we'll call it, um, that those monies did not necessarily mean that those will be reinvested into the airport. If we sell enough fuel and have enough hanger rent um that is raised at the typical levels that that excess those excess funds coffers and and we hope someday that the airport is more self-sufficient than it is today and that we're not going to necessarily reinvest those monies into the airport. Um, Council Member Miller, if I can add, so at at the last um airport commission meeting, some of those ideas were brought in to help uh pay for this and even from our chair, uh, legal action was basically threatened if we even considered that. So, um, I think that would be a challenge and and I I'd rather not go that route. Um, I think we can again with additional uh leases and fuel sales and some other things we can make up this money some point. >> Is it likely that looking at other airports in in the surrounding area that they're self sustaining? >> I think most airports are are about where we're at right where they're about a break even proposition. I don't think a lot of them enough to be more than self- sustaining like a profit center. Um, you know, I do think that um we're in a good spot here where we've got with this project we would have a pretty robust set of infrastructure. Not much left to do. Silus, would would you say there's not a lot of the next set of projects are maybe a little bit to service the back side of those commercial lots that we have put out there. Other than that, we've got a pretty nice looking airport here with this project in tow. >> Yeah. To kind of add on to answer council member Valentto's question. So, at with Bolton and Bank, you know, in the state of Minnesota, I work with 31 airports. Forest Lake is the only one that even comes close to cash flowing. Um most every other airport is subsidized by city council for improvements and that's primarily due to um less amount of hangers that are there that are uh land leased and uh from the city and rented out by you know private hangar owners. So Forest Lake is uh from just the airports that Bolton Bank you know supports is the only one that comes this close to actually cash flowing with you know the land leases, the fuel sales and things like that. And that's primarily due to just the interest and activity that there is at Forest Lake. Um, you know, we did some analysis during the master plan project to identify how much more activity occurred at the airport after council made the decision to pave the runway and pave the parallel taxi way. I mean, I don't quote me exactly, but I think there were 11 aircraft storage hangers in 2018, and now I think there's 31. So there's a significant amount of interest in the airport that has grown just over the last, you know, seven, eight years. >> And um to piggyback on that, we do have a list of at least a dozen people who are have some level of interest in either renting hanger space or constructing their own hanger as soon as we can make that accommodation. Silus, would you you mentioned some of the benefits to mainly the expansion of the runway safety things, noise that kind of can you speak to that a little bit just just for the public's knowledge? >> Yeah, certainly. So, when uh when runway 1331 was a paved runway was 2700 feet in length. Um so with with that there are some limitations to um the number of aircraft, the size of the aircraft and then particularly the weight of the aircrafts that can operate at the airport. And as interest in the community of Forest Lake is growing, interest at the airport is growing, there are u certain businesses and also some some pilots that want to base at Forest Lake, but they do require a little bit longer of a runway just for the safe operation of their aircraft and the people that they're loading. Uh but unfortunately the airport is also kind of landlocked. You got Fenway Boulevard on the north, you got 61 kind of on the south. So this project would extend the runway out from 2700 ft to 3,000 ft. And that is very likely going to be it for for sure my lifetime unless there's hundreds of millions kind of poured into the community. But getting to that 3,000 feet is kind of a big number in the aviation community primarily for insurance. Insurance kind of runs in, you know, thousand foot chunks. So there are certain, you know, business aircraft that their insurance will not allow them to land at the airport with the runway length of less than 3,000 ft. So getting to 3,000 is a nice number for business pilots, but also just for uh the the members of the uh of the airport there that are based right now. It's going to increase their safety and operation of operating at the airport and then also for others that do come here. Um, so after this runway extension, if council does elect to move forward, there's not going to be, you know, another runway extension or associated parallel taxiway extension at the airport. >> Is it I'm my understanding is that that longer runway they don't have to power up as much and it's mitigates sound as well for the neighboring homes. >> Yeah, there has been, you know, some noise complaints particularly for residents that live off of Clear Lake. Um, and with this with the way the runway extension is set up now, pilots if they're taking off to the north, they'll be, you know, recessed 300 ft further back. So, they will conceivably be in the in the sky quicker and then elevating higher, you know, if they are taking off over to the north. So, the there I can't confirm for sure there'll be, you know, less noise complaints, but there there will be some, you know, residents that do notice a difference. Anyone interested in making a motion? >> So, we need more than one motion here. >> Um, it's a bit of an extended motion there on the the revised um one, but you can break it into several motions, but I think probably um it all unless you were of a mind to do project but not the other. I would suggest just the one motion that I've got recommended here. I'll make a motion to accept all three grants from MINDOT totaling 1,598,761. Award the contract for the construction of the taxiway and runway project to Forest Lake contracting for $987,000 987 and $6. Award the engineering contracts to BMI for $250,000 and fund the projects through the city's capital improvement fund in parentheses street fund. Motion. Is there a second? Just if I can mention some on that, you know, the capital improvement fund street fund. Is it is it have to be specific to that one mark or is it is it and it doesn't mean we're going to do less roads. is going to take that the those dollars from that street fund. Is that what was there? >> Yeah, I mean that's staff suggestion would be to take it from that fund. You could take it from any of your capital funds. Um simply spend it out of the general fund levy um and reduce your total general fund fund balance. Um, we would suggest taking out the capital funds because they're set up to do this type of thing, capital improvements. Um, it does just reduce that amount in there. It doesn't necessarily mean we do fewer streets next year. It just means there's a little less money available in there to to do those projects. It's something we adjust each and every year as we get the bins in for the street project, move things around a little bit. I'll second. >> We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I >> I >> opposed. Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> All right. I have lost the agenda here, but I think the next item is stay in street uh street signs or >> saving the best for last as usual. uh 2016 we started uh our replacement policy for street sign blades. Those are the well actually the entire all the street signs throughout the city. It was amazing. Some of them were still made out of plywood and and with embossed lettering and spray paint. So it was an adventure going through the entire six mile city uh replacing them. What we're going to do is we do them every 10 years now. So 2026 will be the start of the next round of replacing all the street signs, street blades, stop signs, all that. And going to have a sequence how we went through the last time. We'll kind of repeat that again over the next 10 years. Um it was brought up a couple years ago of putting logos on the street signs. Um you see that around other municipalities have put on uh their logo on on city city street blades. And at that point I said this is hold off. let's get through the city one time because we had all different sizes. We weren't up to code. Um so we up to that point now. So that's why I brought that back. We typically order and in February, get them delivered and then um seasonal and fulltimes will put them up throughout the summer months. Um I attached five um options of logos. I I also brought a poster boat so you can see them in real life too and provide somewhat of a vision test to see where far away it can get before you can read the signs. But makes a lot of difference looking them on a piece of paper like in here than than looking them on, you know, an actual street sign from a distance. So that's kind of why just the color part is is you'll see when I put these up that some sometimes the color looks really nice on here, but once you you put them up, but I will take a second. I'll put them up. But really want tonight discussion if number one we want logos at all on the on the street signs. And if we do, then I'm looking for direction on which one of the five that council will support or direct um myself to start ordering with that. And that would be our that would be our template that even city engineer would have as well for upcoming developments that those would be put on this. >> Give me a moment. I'll just >> [laughter] >> Dave, if you stay here long enough, we'll name a street after you. [laughter] >> Memorial at the end. [clears throat] >> Any thoughts? >> One thought I have Imagine number one concern we put signs up become sales we can get them. So these logos sign overall cost $10 per sign. multiple colors. >> Some of the public works departments that we looked at uh a while back, they had way to manufacture their own signs. We don't do that. We order all of our signs. everything [clears throat] >> and to add logos. Would you say how much more would it be on average or if there's You must have an idea to replace all of our street signs and add a logo versus just replacing the street signs. How much more is it? >> It's $10 Street. So probably 500,000 go back on the future be able to come So you the recommendation from public works is they're shorter. So like two or number two or three if you're going down. >> Yeah, it's it's all up to preference. I think you can white a lot better. The top one and the middle one. If you like the color, then I would try to lean towards this one. that size in these are >> I I noticed so we've had the county coming and putting up new signs along Broadway and 11th Avenue and it seems like so it doesn't what they're they do and neighboring cities almost have they have two blades that are kind of pinched on the ends with the with the pole in the center. Um obvious is that double the cost because of the two blades? Uh does that help from this the concern of them spinning and not being as sturdy? >> It won't change it won't change the size of it. The price it's not quite a little bit more. These are a little thicker. It helps for people that us numbers on the right. Dave, what are those? The 22 2025. Is that just a year or >> Those are your block numbers. >> Block numbers. And are they are they required to be on our street signs? >> We did have 16 look up. It is as a a floral delivery guy. It's very helpful to have those on there. So, Well, I I personally like the color and if you know if it is better to do the shorter. So, three would just my opinion. >> Yeah, I like the color too. Um the second one is easiest to see, >> but it's not as pretty. Yes, I did say pretty. >> Mayor Roberts, I just um a point of just something to for consideration for the council. I uh wasn't here when we created our as good as it sounds tagline and our branding efforts, but it sounds like this will be the sign we'd be using for the next 10 years. Okay. >> You'd be we'd replace them all to look with that logo the next 10 years. If the logo were to change over the next 10 years, you would simply buy you could buy stickers that would pull back over top of them to to rebrand. I know of one city that changed their logo twice over the 10 year pan. So, the public works guys are really happy that they had two sets of stickers that they get to go. So that make that does make it easy that you can go over if if that ever happens to change or locally changes. >> You can disregard my comment where I was uh suggesting that >> we could end up having a pickle if we rebranded in the next decade. >> Yeah, we just we to that point we'd make sure that we know how many we've done through that plan and know where they're at and then you just go back through as part of that that change. Well, I I this is something I've advocated for for quite some time, so I appreciate it coming forward. I think it's a great idea. It just adds to the branding. We've talked about maybe doing some monument signs to to enhance that even. So, I really am open to to either one of those two that of the shorter signs. So, um wants to be the one to make the final decision on that, but Two or three. Either one. >> They're both very, very nice. Four bleeds out. >> Too big. >> I think the color one just does people can might recognize that more is that is our logo. That's, you know, similar to here and and other on the trucks and that just it has the as much as it's hard to see, it has the tagline, too, which I think is important. It's a neat a neat tagline. Do they fade? >> That's why you have that every 10 years. They the reflectivity will will go away after so many years and the signs themselves will fade. So some smart person somewhere realize that at 10 you're still good up to 10 years and that's when you should replace them. So that's actually make things you can look through to test as to testivity. The other test is that a 60y old person has to be able to see them at night with the standard beams on. That's not a joke. >> That's the test alternative. >> Right. So, when making a motion um for the option number, do we go off of the PDF online? >> So, what I did is I put them in a different order than what they're on the PDF. >> You did. Yeah. >> Just to see if you're paying attention. >> Thank you for that. [laughter] >> So, want to clarify Do we do off the PDF? >> Yes. Alpha PDF that. So that'd be number four. >> Okay. Um I'll make a motion to include option number four logo on all the street name signs. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? >> All in favor? >> I opposed. Motion carries. Thanks, Dave. >> All right, we have no items under discussion. Uh 10, number 10, staff update updates. Uh Ryan, we'll start with you. >> Uh mayor, city council on all specific updates unless you have any questions >> questions. Jolene, I'm not going to touch this mic and adjust it again. So, I hope you can hear me. Um, I'm excited to formally introduce Amanda Mils, our new SI deputy city clerk who started with us in January 5th. This is her first council meeting. So, hope we haven't scared her off. Um, but we're really excited to have her join our team and start uh in her new role here with the city. Secondly, just want to remind council and the public that next Monday is a holiday. It's Martin Luther King Day. So, city offices will be closed. This also means that our city workshop will be held on Tuesday. So, um please don't show up next Monday. We won't be here. So, we won't be having a workshop on Monday. >> Um finally, I just wanted to note that um I hope that we will be able to bring forward recommendations for commission appointments at our next meeting on the I think it's the 26th and at that time we can certainly go ahead and confirm liaison designations as well. So, that's all I have, but if you have any questions for me, I'm happy to answer them. >> Abby, thank you. I do have some updates. Um, I think all the council heard them last week uh on Friday in the weekly update, but some for the public to be aware of. Starting in February, Metropolitan Transit Service will start operating a local ondemand dialer ride shared service. So, a bus door-todoor bus service in Forest Lake. It's not all of the city, but most of the city. It'll run Tuesdays and Thursdays between 10:00 a.m. and 2 pm. That's going to run through the transit link app. Um, so we're going to start rolling out some more information. It's going to be a slow roll. Um, they just so that we know that we're trying to get the right information out that will also be available to anybody in the city. There's no income limitations, but that is a fee for service um for those coming out. We also have released an environmental assessment worksheet for Tims Marina. The council is aware that Tims Marina would like to expand um their marina operations to add additional docks and slips that does require uh that's a DNR mandate mandated environmental assessment worksheet. So there's comment period between now and February 5th. Um, this week the planning commission does meet and we're going to start talking with them about city initiated zoning text amendments. Kind of picking up where Ken and I had left off before Ken had left us, but trying to get back into streamlining some of our zoning ordinances just so that they're a little bit easier to administer. Um, we did conduct abatement of a hazardous structure at 21164 Everton Avenue and we should be proceeding within the next week or so on the one on 17th Street as well, 820. And then you may have seen December stats. In December alone, we had 70 complaints um on different properties. It was mostly snow and ice. Um but with our new um our code enforcement officer position moving to full-time, he's getting caught up on all of those and it's our hope we won't have such a lag anymore now that he's not um restricted to kind of that quarter time um position. So lots of things happening in the community development department, lots of them that the public should be aware of. >> Thanks Dave. >> Yeah, going up that's Noah and Ice. We've had a lot of trouble troubling weeks here with the rain and then the snow and then the warm weather and the cold weather and um we're out there trying. So I know you probably gotten calls and concerns about some of the roads, but we're we're trying our best without getting rid of all of our salt with four months to go in the season. So uh we've been out today and it'll be out tomorrow and then there might be snow again this, you know, this weekend. So it's not for a lack of efforts. Uh the guys are out there all day long trying to get as much as we can off the roads, but I just I know you've probably heard from residents about that, but it's we're out there trying. Um second thing is is in between the last council meeting now, um Kyle received notice that he received a $200,000 grant for the Veterans Memorial. Um that will fund the rest of that project. Uh specifically that center monument. Um so they have um the grant hasn't been completely um followed through with yet, but they've already met with the sculptor and working on an agreement for that sculpture. Um it will be going to the planning commission or the parks and recreation committee at the end of this month and then bring coming to you at the end of this month for your approval. But um he put a lot of time in that. I I was watching him and he kept asking me for edits. I felt like he was writing a book and he was asking me to [clears throat] proofread everything. spent a lot of time and it was it was a great um grant to get and it's one of those projects that were so far down that we just wish we get it finished off and this is this will get it to the finish line. So that's just wanted to thank him for putting all that time and that's it's really great. >> That's great. Yeah, it's awesome. >> Chief Peterson. >> Yeah, Mayor and city council members. Um no updates from the police department, but I do want to mention it's been an honor. >> Sorry. uh serving the citizens of Foresight for 26 years and five years prior to that with Washington County. >> Absolutely. Thank you. Thanks, Chief Newan. >> No updates, >> Amanda. >> Mark, >> um just a couple of updates uh for uh some opportunities through the League of Minnesota Cities. We have the um both a incoming or sort of a newly elected leaders institute that's available and then also a calling next level leaders um so program for folks that have been in the office for a bit longer. Um registration closes next week so or at the end of this week so anyone is interested in attending those u please let us know and we can help get you registered. And then um coming up um in March, I believe it's March 11th, we have um the day on the hill, capital day on the hill. Um I've been to the that uh meeting the last two years with my previous employer and then last year I attended um on your behalf and um just an excellent opportunity to meet with our legislators, hear about the upcoming legislative session. Obviously, lots of impactful things that are going to come in front of our our state body there as well. So, um, it's an excellent event if we'd like to try to send a delegation to that. So, March 11, I guess, uh, is the date you want to maybe put on your calendar for that. >> Council member Miller, >> uh, no updates, [clears throat] >> no updates, >> member. >> Um, as Abby said, Wednesday is planning commission meeting starting at six o'clock. Um, also I'd like to also congratulate you, Rick, on your years of service. It's been a pleasure working with you at Washington County and also here at Forest Lake. Wish you all the best in your retirement. And with that, happy new year to everybody. >> I really don't have anything. Just uh welcome to Amanda. We're glad you're on board and welcome. I'm join the team here. So, so thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Right. If nothing else, is anyone willing to make a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Second. I'll second. >> All right. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. We're adjourned. Thanks everyone.