All right, I will call the April 14th meeting Dayton City Council. Please stand for the pledge. I >> aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. A motion and a second for the agenda. >> I'll make a motion. A second. >> Okay. Scott and then Dave, any adjustments? >> Uh, yes. Mayor, members of council, one item tonight. Item K has been removed from the agenda per the applicant's request. So, we are going to strike item K in total. >> Okay. >> So, item K is struck. >> Is it being rescheduled or just? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Um there will be a from our understanding from the applicant there is a new request in total. So that's why we're not asking to table it. It is a pure removal and future meeting. So >> any other changes? All those in favor say I. >> I. All those oppos say no. >> That carries four to zero and we are on to consent. I need a motion and a second. >> I'll make a motion. I'll second. >> Dave Scott. Okay. Discussion. >> Why don't you go ahead? >> Um well, start with an easy one. In the minutes from the last meeting on page four, item O um Dubet Lake preserve concept plan. The last sentence in that says that uh Sevald stated that the 2030 plan will be submitted to the Met Council by December 28th for review. Won't be the 2030 plan be the 2050 plan. >> Thank you. >> Um item B uh that is the transfer of funds. Yes. >> I was um I guess I'm I'm curious why we're why we're moving 34K from the temp fund to the 2026 general fund. >> Is it 34K or 134K? >> 134. I'm sorry. I can't read my own writing. >> That's okay. >> You have 34. >> Thank you. Um so yeah, so mayor, members of council, what happened as the audit was completing this year, we did a reconciliation of the general fund as we do every year. um it was realized that we did not receive $260ome thousand dollars worth of revenue that we had anticipated to receive and so the budget came in under budget for revenue. Um there was an underbudget of expenditures of roughly 130,000 or so give or take and so that difference ended up being the 140 or $134,000 request to be able to transfer funds which was 100% related to revenue not received. The main revenues that we did not receive that we had planned on were building permits. So we only had 134 building permits last year. We budgeted for about 205 or so 200 somewhere in there depending on the type of home that comes in there based on valuation. And then also property taxes. So property taxes were $100,000 under um budget. Um that's related to either people not paying their property taxes, delinquent taxes, what have you. So those are the three main ones that are related to what caused the revenues to be under budget. So >> yeah, and I guess and it was 34,000 that I was asking about um where it says with the increase in the budget for 26, there's an additional 3447. >> Oh, the additional Sorry. >> Yeah. So that is related to So as the budget goes up, we have to keep a 35% fund balance within the general fund to be able to suffice um expenses for the first half of the year while we wait for our so we have to expend 2026 before we get 2026 taxes. And so we have to keep a 35% fund balance based on our fund balance policy. And so that additional $34,000 is related to getting our general fund from it's definitely 34% to 35%. >> Okay. And that's basically holding that fund for Yes. >> the money dries up for some reason. >> That's correct. Yeah. So, if we had no revenues come in whatsoever, which is typically not the case for the general fund, typically there's building permits and so on and so forth, which have been pretty healthy this year overall, knock on wood, and and good for the overall economy, but um that is why the the need for the additional 34,000 is >> that's the part I didn't understand. Thank you. >> Oh, yep. Thank you very much. >> How are permits doing? >> Good. >> As compared to last year, >> we So, last year we had 134 to date, John, do you know? I can give an estimate. total. >> Okay. Total I um the last I heard we were about 68 to 75 somewhere in there. Um as of today and last year we had 134 total. >> Right. >> So um I know this and that's the ones that we have approved. I know there's about 30ish or so that are sitting as not approved andor pending. So >> I I'm just wondering I mean you you know when you watch these over the year they they do this thing. >> They do. It'd be nice to know, you know, where we're at, you know, April of last year. >> We are far above where we were last year. >> I would say we are probably double where we were last year and in terms of permits and where they are at. So >> I would suggest or probably anticipate us to be somewhere around if it continues the rate it's going probably around the 200 >> something 225 mark. >> Okay. >> That was all I had on consent. >> Okay. Anybody else? >> No. >> Okay, we motion second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those oppos say no. Motion carries four to zero. Um, open forum. Open forum is limited to three minutes for non-aggenda items. State your name and address. No council action will be taken and items will be referred back to staff. Do I have anybody here for open forum? No. Oh. >> Hi, Stephanie Carol. I'm from Grandstrom. Duck lady. I always have to say that. Sorry. Um, so I think together we all need to take a moment and pause and breathe. um maybe set the phone down and practice some self-care. Um why am I saying this and what am I referring to? As you probably all know, there's been heated debate that's been causing inflammation in our community and in the neighboring city of Champlain. Basically, there's community conflict and lots of differences in opinion. There is a special election on May 12th for city council seat in Champlain. Paul Hagga, Rachel Wales, Travis Perkins, Tim Hutner. So, how does this relate? How does Champlain's special election, how does that relate to us here in Dayton? Well, the candidate Tim Hutner is the chair for Dayton's Economic Development Authority, also known as the EDA. He also serves as a member of the EDA for Champlain. At last night's city council meeting, Dayton's city council member Scott Salonick, um I did notice that you spoke at open forum. >> Yep. >> And um you said that there's no conflict of interest with Tim serving as both Champlain and Dayton's EDA while also campaigning for city council. Um, I'd like to suggest for the city council members and the mayor to please clarify um Scott's uh city council member Scott's um comments about yesterday at the meeting. Um was that comment at yesterday open forum? Was that >> So this is this is Champlain discussion. I think >> here is the place for that. You can you can ask you know staff if we can for request towards the city of Dayton, >> right? >> But what happens or >> call me and tell what do you want to know? Just call >> I just wanted to know. >> Um are you speaking on behalf of the city of Dayton? >> You weren't listening to the deal, right? Did you listen to the the event? >> Right. Yeah. >> Did you? >> Yeah. >> Well, then you would have heard. >> Yeah. Right. >> Right. >> Yeah. I was asking about a whether or not there's I was asking for clarification on >> We don't we're not going to clarify anything on something that happens outside of the city. >> Right. I'm I'm just asking about clarification for how the community is communicating some concerns with uh conflict of interest with the EDA with Tim >> being part of Dayton and Champlain. Okay. >> And I'm just asking for clarification because there's a lot of >> we did when we >> polarization in the >> So, right now we're getting into a back and forth and I'd rather not do that. We did discuss this when we appointed him. >> It was it was discussed. >> Okay. >> I understand. Um, so I would like to request that the city makes a formal public statement regarding the public's concerns. And I would also like to request that there's a formal public statement from the city of Dayton to clearly state that the opinions and the hate on the community page does not reflect the city's >> Dayton Dayton. >> Okay. This is >> that is not run by the city. It is not managed by the city. It is not >> Okay. >> Right. I understand. So the Dayton community page is moderated by Tim. >> It doesn't matter who it's moderated by. >> His views and his conduct on the page. >> Do you have something? Do you want to have the city do because then you can get staff to do that. >> Okay. >> And it's got to be something that's under the city control. >> Okay. Um, so the Dayton, um, community page has has notable signs of extremism and hate. And, um, that's why I'm here talking is because I'm uncomfortable with the >> Well, then don't look at it. >> Yeah. And I won't I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that, you know, there's extremism and hate and, you know, I am asking for the city to please come up with a with a formal statement that whatever is said on that is not what you guys believe in. It's a is not our culture is not welcomed. That's what I'm asking for. Um, I think it's important for the city to address the hate because it's affected me. I recently was approached by a male who yelled at me because he called me an illegal. He told me to leave and go back to my country. Um, just because just in case anyone's wondering, I'm wondering, I was born in Crystal. Um, I am I'm an American and I'm not illegal. Just cuz I know how to cook a mean kungpow chicken doesn't make me illegal. So, I told him that we aren't that far apart. We both want good jobs. We both want good economy. We both want an affordable cost of living. We had a good conversation and he apologized for assuming that I was an illegal. The conversation ended with hugs, peace, and well-wishes. This is an example of how we can come together as a community and stop the hate. It starts with the little things like waving hi to a neighbor who might not share your views. It's about pausing before you post something online and asking ourselves, is it really necessary? Is it going to solve anything or make anything or make it worse? And it's about forgiving ourselves for not being perfect. There's going to be days where we all slip and get reactive. We all need to give ourselves grace, give our neighbors grace, and give our fellow community members grace. Practice kindness over hate. This is what healing our community looks like. I'm asking the city council to please consider a formal statement, please. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Is anybody else here for open forum? Keith Grover 113th in Fernbrook. Good evening everybody. Um couple of things I wanted to bring up. Um, I'm not sure if this is the right forum or not, but I think um enough people are here. We'll direct it to wherever it needs to go. Um, Elm Creek Road every spring seems to like people like to turn it into a racetrack. And it it really scares me that people it's even worse than 121 to me because the the sight access along Elm Creek Road going through the park and over the hills and around the corners. It's horrible. You have kids out there on their bikes riding on that road instead of riding on the trail or doing both. You have people jogging along that road. You have people on these ski things or I don't know what they call it, but they're rollers on skis that are running on that road. And then you have people flying by on motorcycles, these little crotch rockets. They're going so fast they're actually getting air in front of our farm. And I just I don't maybe we could swing by, you know, that road a little more often. I realize we have a big city and we have a small police force and I'm sure they're stretched to the max and doing the best they can, but I just wanted to bring that up. The other thing that just popped up um yesterday and I didn't have my phone with me or I would have made a call. I was on um Dayton Parkway between 117th and County Road 81 and that nice little roundabout we got in there seems like it's a great place for these little sports cars to practice their drifting on. They're going down around around the roundabout, drifting around that, flying back up to the the turnaround that's just before that goes into the cube just before you get to 117th and drifting through that and flying back up the other way. I I wasn't able to get a license plate because it was raining out and there's mist behind a car. I just couldn't read it. But um I'm not sure if the police department is aware that these younger folks in these little sports cars like to do that in that area. But I just wanted to bring that up so that that that could get passed on. The other thing, um, one of the other things, every spring, Marty and the crew puts up the weight limit signs, and Marty and I have talked about that before, and he explains to me it's per axle. Um, I can't help but see what's going up and down 113. We've got a 5,000 lb per axle on that road. I got here to tell you that no one's paying attention to that. There's no different traffic going in out of that road. We still have cement trucks going in and out of there every day. There's we still have full semis going in out of there carrying full houses. There's no way that those trucks loaded beat that weight requirement. And I guess my question is I mean are we actually monitoring that or is it something that um you know that the maybe the police could look at a little closer at least tell the developers hey you know once we have the weight limit signs up you need to bring smaller loads in. That's just my thought on that. um Fenstra Landscaping on 113th. We had um quite a few issues with them last summer and the summer before with them having brush piles and a burm pile in the in the back of their lot as it faces Dayton Parkway. that looked like crap and and they did clean a lot of that up. But if you go by them on 113th side and look back in there, the whole brush pile and garbage pile, they seem to be downloading it there and keeping it there for days. I mean, I know we don't let the we don't let curbside do it on their property, even if it's inside. It's against the ordinance. And I got to believe that it's against the ordinance for them to be piling that stuff up in their parking lot and hauling it away when they want to rather than paying to haul it away when they when they get it. They're using their their yard as a dump site. I just wanted to bring that up. I know Hayden has talked to them several times before about that and u had to kind of put it put his foot down to get them to to fix what they were doing prior, but I think they're kind of sliding back into that same that same issue. The last thing I wanted to bring up is that when folks, you know, bring issues up before the council, and I know you're not going to take action on any of those things that people brought bring up on that day, we've talked about this before. Do we have a procedure where there's actually a follow-up so that at some point in the future the city can either post it on the website or maybe an an announcement at a meeting or whatever that these were the things that were brought up last week or last month and these are the things that we've done to try to correct that or if there's something that we just can't fix. But just someplace where uh where the city can get back to people that bring things up and tell them the position that the city has on those things. >> That's all I have. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Hello, city council mayor. Uh my name is Alyssa Seniscll. I'm 121st in Fernbrook. Uh I am just following up after our last city council meeting regarding the flock safety camera system. And I just have a few questions. Um as a resident of Dayton, I'm requesting clarification on several points to better understand how this program is going to is being implemented and the how it's going to be overseen in our community. I know we had a m a meeting about that, but I I'm asking on the record here, who specifically approved the adaption of the flock system for Dayton? And was this decision made solely by the police department or was there a formal vote or approval process by the city council? How are the camera locations determined within Dayton? And what criteria, data, and policy guide placement decisions? and and is there any opportunity for the public to have a transparency in that process if we wanted to request those cameras be put in a certain location? Um during that meeting it was spoke uh talked about Paul Ingga said that it's $3,000 annually to maintain this this equipment. Um because it is leased rather than owned um because and there's seven cameras currently in the city of Dayton. how many more are expected to go up in in the city um to be added to Dayton and then how does the city plan to justify or offset these ongoing cost because it's not an asset to the city um we can't resell it if expenses exceed the stated annual maintenance fee which is the $3,000. Who's responsible for covering that cost? And then on to the HOA. Uh, we talked about the HOA having homeowners being able to install them in their neighborhoods. Does the Dayton Police Department have access to that data? Under what circumstances can that data be accessed, shared, or retained? And then on to the policies. Uh, Chief Eningga had stated um at the last meeting that his officers know that if somebody asks him for data that they can't give it to him. And we said, "How do you how do they know that?" and then he said because they would be fired. But if there's not a policy stating that anywhere, how does that officer know that they their job is on the line if somebody comes and asks them for that for that information? So, I'm just wondering um when these policies will be updated and if they'll be publicly available and then um just given the financial uh privacy and the public trust implic implications of this technology, I believe it's important for the Dayton residents to have a clear and transparent answer. I respectfully request that the city council provide written responses to these questions prior to the next scheduled city council meeting so residents have an opportunity to review and engage in an informed and transparent discussion. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else? Anybody online? >> We don't have a line. Mayor knows. >> Oh, that's right. We went toast on that. Okay. We will move on to staff consult and council updates. Sorry, my clicker's dead, so that's good. Um, yeah, good evening, mayor, members of council. Uh, a couple of quick updates for you. I do want to shout out our public works crew and their ingenuity for making our new placards in front of the city council and the staff. Came up with a great solution that looks really good and uh minimal budget implications. So, um, it is very important that residents when they're coming into council, which we have seen more residents come in, know who they're speaking to with mayor and the council. sometimes as staff sits up here or the attorney sits up here, they don't know who they're talking to if they just have a name and they may not pay attention to those things. So, I thought it was very important. I saw this at another city um council chambers as I was visiting with other ones and they said, "This is what we use." And I said, "That's great." So, um, other thing that I've just been recently made aware of by Safewise, who does an annual ranking of 2026 safest cities in Minnesota, I am proud to announce that we are ranked third on that list >> um by Safe Wise. >> Huh? >> How big is the list? >> Uh, every city in the state. So, they rank every city in the state and they say we are number three. First is a tie. So, we are technically second if you look at it in that rank, but Montivido and Elco New Market rank higher than us. um a tie for first and then we are third. So, >> congratulations to us and thank you. Great job from the police department and our residents. So, thank you. >> Sweet. >> Anything else? >> That's all I got. Thank you. >> Um I have been contacted by Henipin County. So, just as a reminder, um I think it was the end of last year, I sent out information on the new um ordinance that they have in place on recycling and organic recycling and there's different thresholds of things that will be required as we grow in population. Um so, they have requested as they've recognized that we're um getting to that point where we're reaching the 10,000 population mark. Um so at that threshold um we'll be required to offer curbside organic recycling and so the drop off site that we have had in place to suffice um that part of the ordinance will no longer apply to that. So we are exploring what that looks like um what that will affect. But uh just in general another thing to keep in mind as we grow in population there are other things other than just recycling that we'll have to change or be impacted by. What defines the official population? >> I can ask that in our meeting. Um, so I think I think for their ordinance it goes off of the census. So we might technically be higher than 10,000 right now, but it wouldn't take place then until the next census 2030 census. 2040 census >> 2030. Yeah. >> Okay. So we'd be safe until then. >> Um, is there a list of the other things that are affected? like do do we know what's coming our way or are we not going to find out till we hit it and then we get yelled at? >> Uh uh for recycling specifically, we do know. Yeah. Um >> I can resend out the updated ordinance that the county put in place which does have like >> um guidelines and different steps and we'll have to meet a certain score. So there's like certain things you can do that might have an higher score to get you there. Um, a lot of these things actually don't take place until 2030. So, there's some things we've been doing to prepare. Uh, unfortunately, this one um takes effect prior to 2030 and at the I think we're prepping to get there. I was just curious if we have a list of like these are the other things we're going to have to change when we hit like key like when we hit 10,000 people suddenly now we have to do X Y and Z that we didn't have to do. I'll see if I can come up with a very shortened version of the list. >> Better to be prepared and to plan ahead. >> So, just throwing that warning out there that yields more information. >> Nope. >> Marty, mayor and council, just a couple of updates. Uh the wellhead treatment plant, um we've finally got the MDH approval on the air gap um situation. um they've approved what we uh are proposing. Uh I have a walk through with MDH tomorrow um to go through all the plant and make sure they're they're happy to sign off on it. Um they've been there once and didn't spot anything then. So hopefully this will be just a a rubber stamp. Um there are a couple of niggling little things going on that just need fine tuning. A couple of valves and a couple of pumps need a little adjustment. Um, but we're hoping to be making water this week out of the plant. So, that's where we're at with that. And then at the last council meeting in, councelor Fashant asked about our street sweeping costs for last year. Um, the total for the year was $21,840. >> Thank you. >> Chief, >> good mayor, members, council. A couple updates. Uh this week uh from emergency management perspective is severe weather awareness week. It started on Monday. So there's various uh activities if you will each day of the week. Uh probably one of the more specific and more important is the tornado sirens will sound on Thursday at 1:45 and at 6:45. Um and then an update on kind of a prog progression for duty crews. So, we um initi gave conditional offers for eight uh part-time firefighters. Um unfortunately, um we are down to six currently. Um one um decided not to continue in the process. Um and we fully anticipate the other person to drop out as they've received a offer of employment from another organization on a full-time basis which would prevent them from participating. We received that today. um duty crew will go live for our paid on call staff um starting May 1st. That will go from 1,800 to 2200 and then we'll be training our duty crew members that um six that uh we looking to hire get approval on uh April 28th. Um we will get them started probably on June 1st. >> Nothing to report on behalf of PD tonight. Thank you. The council should have received an invitation from Draco for ribbon cutting in May. So that's all. >> Just a correction to a date I gave at the work session. Brockton Lane improvements are actually scheduled for 2027, not 2028. They were delayed for a year, but it was from 26 to 27. Yeah. >> So, so um I met I don't remember what her name was, but um anyways, she was she was thinking that they were pushed out to 2028. One of the other city mayors that was there at this function also >> just said that he had heard from somebody else at at the county that it was still 20. So >> it it could be their their current CIP still lists it as 27, but okay, it does say estimated. >> It also sounded like they were just doing a I think what they call a full reclamation there where they don't do a rebuild and they don't do a milling overlay, >> right? I think they call it a reconditioning. So there's like minor minor adjustments made um where needed, but nothing significant. They don't remove the entire >> so they just take it down to the dirt >> usually >> and then >> usually take the entire pavement section off and then redo the pavement >> and then okay >> but not excavate all the way down to subgrade. So >> um the other dates were correct. So River Road is still 2029 and then the culberts mentioned on Rush Creek South and Maple Grove is 2028 and that was it. Scott, >> let's see. Um, I have a little item that I want to bring up and I'd like to get some direction on it so that we can have it on the consent next week. Um, as everybody or some people know, I spent a little bit of time last weekend picking up South Diamond and it brought me to a conclusion. I would like to see if we could have an adopt the highway type and I we can call it whatever we want and this is going to take a lot of resident participation to actually pull it off because I've outlined some streets and you certainly can't cover all the residential stuff but our main roadways we have roughly 35 miles of main roadway if you go down and back like I did 1.2 miles so it'll be 2.4 for um to get that picked up. Um and ideally the best date to do this because we have all the dumpsters back there that day is going to be the weekend of May 2nd and 3rd. Uh I talked to Marty a little bit >> clean up. >> Yep. we would need and that the data lions are doing um um Fernbrook on May 2nd from uh Mar Marles and Earl Dean's corner to the Maple Grove Dayton line. Uh so that mile and a quarter will be handled. Uh my thought is if we could get I I have 15 roots lined out here that consists of about 35 miles and in my opinion and don't get me wrong I I know 15 people can do this cuz I did it but ideally if we can get 50 people that would do it and for that and nobody's going to jump at this opportunity because the pay is not real But if if people would do that and we talked to and uh and I've already made the call, they just didn't call me back. If we talk to a uh a a place where people can go and either get a a blizzard or a lunch or whatever and give them a coupon if they participate, all of a sudden Tina and John got five people in their group and they all go out and clean them two two miles up. They get five coupons. Now, I what I don't know is if the establishment wants to mess around with a5 or $10 coupon or if you got to do it in increments of 20 or 25 or whatever the number is. I don't know that answer. Um, and the real important thing here is it's going to take about 45 people to get it done realistically, but I think it's doable. Um, and to fund this, I've got 200 bucks committed already in two phone calls. I have two other phone calls out there that didn't respond back to me yet. So, to me, the the cost on this thing is going to be 4,500 bucks maybe, and we can get it all funded to do it. We just got to all say, "Yeah, let's try it. If it works, it works. If we don't get the residents, it ain't working. Um because I personally am not going to go and cover 35 miles. >> Well, what would the city >> I had all I could do to get two and a half done. >> What would this the city's role be? >> What would what >> what would the city's role be? >> Just to promote it. >> Oh, okay. Oh, on like the website and the app and stuff. >> Yeah, I have no problem with it. I >> yeah I think the only thing that uh needs to be considered or thought about I just know from um being a participant in Henipin County >> um they have attorney opinions and things and when you put on a program like that you're taking on liability so they require you to um wear a vest y >> and gloves >> and I don't know if they supply the bags or not so just um I don't know if things like that have been thought about >> um but just something think about implementing. I think there might be a little bit more to it, which I'm not trying to discourage it by any means. >> We used to do the >> that route, the lines route and yeah, the they will supply >> that. They don't supply bags that I know. They might >> and I don't even know if they supply the vest, but people were required to wear one, right? I don't know the details of that. >> Why are you required to? Do you >> So you don't get hit by a car. So you >> I wasn't worried about it. >> Well, other people are. >> Yeah. Unfortunately, when government gets involved and someone gets hurt, >> problem is if the city promotes it >> and someone gets hurt, we can get sued. >> I mean, I don't know. >> I think and one other thing to to think about with the county roads, the county does run a program of their own for for that. So, Fernbrook would be covered by their program. And I don't know if we need to contact them to say we're doing this or how that would work. I think there would need to be some coordination with them >> or there might be enough city roads that we don't need to worry about the county roads. >> City roads. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, Fernick's going to be covered by the lines already where most of it is, but there's still two and a two and a quarter miles there. That's not >> um That's my thought. >> Yeah. Control line. It's 2 and a half miles from the corner to the Maple Grove line. It is 2 miles from the corner to >> the Champlain line. >> Champlain line. So there you go. That takes four two people really. >> Somebody already got >> Yeah. So the two and a half miles from the corner to Grove is you said covered by the lions. >> Two and a half miles road. >> Right. So the county and they have these signs up that and the lines have that one on that. Does anybody have the the east west portion of it from the county? >> Does anybody have it? >> Well, whoever adopts the road for the from the county. >> Well, we don't even got to adopt a road. I mean, call it private. >> What I'm saying, though, is is is the county might already be covered. >> Oh, I don't think so. I mean, I've never seen anybody cleaning that up. So, I can guarantee you the section that I picked up hasn't been picked up for 10 years. >> Yeah, but Road. >> No. >> Yeah. >> But it doesn't technically have an adopted by adopted by the Dayton horse. >> Doesn't have to be adopted by anybody. >> I'm not saying we have to adopted by anybody. We're just going to have a date and go clean the ditch day. Okay, >> I'm fine with the theory. I think there are some details that need to get worked out and I don't know that they're necessarily going to get worked out by May 1st, but um as soon as like I'm down with the concept um as long as the kinks are worked out and it's safe and we can't get sued. >> Yeah. and and mayor council we can do it where we have a we could try to coordinate we get a dumpster or something from somebody to be able to do it that I kind of agree with council van that I don't think it's going to be done by May 1st to be honest with you as much as that coordination would be great >> cuz the grass is going to be this high by the middle of May >> I sure hope not it's only 3 weeks but um >> yeah the idea would be we could we could do the program just would maybe have to do our own dumpster or whatever which is fine >> I mean yeah sooner better for grass otherwise fall once it's dead, right? Like if if we can't pull it off in spring, fall is another option. >> This is the exact same. This is the exact thing I was concerned about. >> Yeah. >> Once you get city involved now, it's going to take 6 months to get this done. It's crazy. >> I mean, you personally can do it cuz then if anyone gets hurt, they'll sue you and not the city. But but when you ask the city to get involved, that puts the liability on the city. And that's why that's that's where the extra layer of of complication comes in. >> So all of a sudden, if I pull the stage, we're going to have a May 2nd date. You're on your own. Go clean a ditch. But >> if you if you Scott want to say, I will give you person X a coupon and then it's and it's not the city, then then then you can do it like >> I mean any like you could do that, right? But someone gets hit by a car and we just talked about people go real fast on these roads and if someone gets hit by a car and the city was involved in it, they will come back. >> So what the county does is they just provide the safety equipment that they deem necessary and that's the that's really just the best. >> Um so you know if we can get that I have no problem. >> So in other words, you're saying we got to go by 20 years. >> Mayor C, we already have those. We can have them. Yeah. >> I mean, I'm down with it. >> Well, I want it done by May 2nd if we can get it done. I >> mean, it's just cuz it's ideal and if nobody wants to uh enough direction from us, we'll do it. Staff will work together and see what we can and already and Amy and I will coordinate and we'll do what we can. >> Okay. >> Uh there is 200 bucks coming with your to your attention, Zack. >> Fantastic. I hope it says city of Dayton and not Zack. It says for road cleanup. >> That That's good. Glad that was on the record. That's fantastic. >> Thank you. >> We'll see a resolution passing that donation at a >> donation at a council meeting. That's correct. >> That's true. >> He knows that's coming. >> That's all I got. That's enough. >> Okay, Cheryl. Um so uh this is very last minute notice but this Thursday April 16th from 4 to 6 um in Independence there um Henipin County is hosting a thing about improving soil quality um and other water conservation projects and um some of them are cost share programs from the county and regular regular residents can apply and ask and so this is open to all residents um but we are your they have they rank projects about who will get funding and you have to be in some of their targeted wersheds but much of our city is in one of their targeted wersheds. So there's a high likelihood if you are a Dayton resident that you might be in one of the targeted um wersheds and therefore have a better chance of getting some cost share for this. Um it is um like I said Thursday April 16th from 4 to 6 um independent city hall. Um, I don't know if I if I give you guys the information. Can you you know, can you post it on It's a county sponsored thing. Um, but can the can our app post it? Um, and I apologize for the last minute notice. >> Um, my husband and I had a miscommunication about who is supposed to check the mail. So, I just got my little flyer. Um, so, but it is this Thursday if people are interested. And um uh our my we we we were my my my my location um we applied and got some cost share for some things we did on our farm. So um I know they're easy to work with and it's not it's not hard and they're very nice to work with. So and even if you don't qualify for the grants, they have lots of great information and technical like knowhow. >> Can you give an example of what kind of projects? Um so the one I did was um cover crops to protect the soil in winter in between. So cuz obviously once they harvest um you there's a lot of erosion happening in winter. So there's uh we planted a winter rye cover crop um just in between the planting seasons is what I did. But um it's so it's bigger projects like fencing, manure management, cover crops, but it's also just things about um what you can do in your own yard for uh to for soil health. Um and so um native seed packets. Um they also will hook you up with um they have I know I got last time I went I got some free trees. So like like lots of little and it kind of depends on what they have. Um, but they have a lot of people um a lot of people with a lot of information and um and it it ran from like what to do in your own yard to fields but also you know big things little things but it's free. It's 2 hours. They have snacks um and an interesting speaker and um some cool demonstrations. So just a heads up that that's an opportunity for our residents and I will pass I got an email for this. I'll pass it on to you. >> Please do. That's it for me. Okay. I have nothing. Okay. >> Nothing for me today. >> Okay. I'm going to do item F. Nelson Stevens performance area covered discussion. >> All right. Go ahead. >> How do I move this thing along? >> Yeah. Uh, click the >> Oh, >> you're clicking on it. >> No, I think um I'll try it. >> Uh, I >> think that's fine. I think it wasn't working. >> There we go. >> Um, good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, tonight I want to get some direction from you guys about uh the performance area cover Elsie Stevens. There's three questions that I need to um have some guidance from you uh from you about basically the the the correct sizing for the structure um the what material we were looking at at for the structure and um I'm looking at getting to not exceed cost so I can keep moving this project along without having to keep come back to you guys um to get approval every time we have questions. Um, so this is I did a a set of milestones and this is a a different version of that to see to show how we got here. Um, we're looking to get this um up this year the uh the stage cover um and hopefully get the stage poured and all those things done towards the end of the year. Um, so the correct size input of structure, um, we've got some quotes and I think they're included in your packet for a 36x 34 structure. That was our best guess at the time. Um, the structure, um, incorporates a 10 overhang over the dance floor. Um the question is um does council want to keep that overhang or should we remove that and get uh repric the structures for whatever that turns out might be uh a 24 by 36 something like that. Um this um graphic shows the stage area in yellow um with the outline um the heavier outline is the um the 36x 34 structure and that shows the overhang over the possible uh dance floor. Well, it seems to me like 10 ft of overhang is is a pretty small dance floor. So, I don't think we would want to go any less than that. >> It's that doesn't cover the whole of the dance floor is to give some uh shade at the front of the the dance floor. Um, so it Yeah, it won't cover the entire dance floor area. I think the the D was gonna be something like 20 feet. So it cut about half of it and this uh this was requested. Yeah. When we were talking about it before. >> Yeah. I just don't think it should be any less than that. >> No less than that. >> Okay. Did they I guess I didn't see that here, but they did they give a ballpark of savings because it really doesn't look like >> just looking at the structure. I wouldn't think it would be a lot of savings. >> Um they haven't I haven't got um any idea from them yet. I need I wanted to go back to them with a definite idea of what >> you still end up with. Yeah, I guess I'm kind of long days thinking that >> you guys get I got all I don't think anybody knows more than this than me and Marty, but you guys go through it and I've got my two cents whether whether it means anything or not. Who knows? >> Well, yeah. I don't I guess I don't I don't think pulling that is going to save a lot. I don't know. Save 100 grand. for the 10 ft. >> Yeah, >> because it's not supported. >> I mean, because it's hanging out, right? >> Well, I understand that. That means you still got the same for Okay. Well, if that's the number, that strikes me as very odd. >> I didn't see that. >> The the 36x 20, but the 36 by 34. No, >> I believe the number is 260 grand. >> Yeah. For the the metal 161 for the metal one. I don't have the exact change, but >> the and that's whether we go with the polygon or the fifth room. They're they're both pretty close. Um I guess I'll go ahead and go then give you guys some information. >> The biggest difference though in the cost was the between the the wood and the steels, right? >> There's some cost there. It was $2,500 difference, which isn't a ton of money by no means. That was on only on the fifth room. I don't know what Polygon did. I don't >> Yeah, >> I haven't personally been too involved in the Polygon thing. I was on the fifth room to from the get-go. The wood one from Polygon and they are local which does make a big difference. The wood one from Polygon is the cheapest cheaper option I believe. Uh the only problem that we have is and we've all seen these. We have a uh roughly $110,000 30 by 20 from fifth room. Then we went to a 30 by30 which was 160,000. Marty's got a quote for the 36x 34 for 261. >> Mhm. >> Um you go back to that uh yellow square. >> The yellow square. Yep. >> Right there. um the measurements for just say this is the current stage that we have. >> Y >> now from here to this front corner this is rounded in here. It comes out it technically is kind of got a rounded shape here. This distance is 15' 7 in. The distance from this edge to the sidewalk is 32 ft 9 in. Theoretically, if we put the footing behind the stage and try to stay in this area, we put this footing here, this footing here on both sides, that is probably the least expensive option that we can do because then we're not busting anything up. and we can and it'll actually work. What I what I don't know and I don't think Marty I don't think you know either yet. We don't know how big the footings even are. >> No, I don't have it. >> So, what I don't know is from 15'7 in this is squared off and that's really not what it is. It's it's rounded in the front here just a little bit. I don't know the exact measurement from the round here and the round here. >> It's immaterial really. It doesn't matter. >> It's around 20 ft. I think there I measured it up. The area out here is going to be dance floor. To me, this footing needs to be right here and another one here. So, a 20 and just say these footings are 2 ft. 2 ft by 2 ft. I don't know how big they're going to be, but a 20 by the 32 or 36x 20 fits to bring the the shelter and cover the entire stage. Does not cover the dance floor. The original thought on the dance floor was, and I was the one that brought it up, it would keep the sun off the band. However, if anybody's ever been to Mississippi Crossing, that one faces the south also. And their concerts are always at like 6:00 or 6:30. The sun is always in the west. It's going to be the same way it's even. So, the sun really isn't going to factor much. Now, will it look more elegant and bigger if we go with a an overhang? Yes, it will. >> But that'll bring that footing. It'll still stay here. And then the overhang comes out about uh roughly all the way down into about here. >> Yeah, that's where it is. >> Yeah. Um so the to me the big discussion is do you want to spend the extra it's 100 grand roughly 100 grand for the for the 36 by 34. >> It might not quite be that. Maybe 80. >> Wait a minute. Restate what you just said. the the 100 grand it's an extra 100 grand for what >> for the the 36 by 34 that 14 foot >> as opposed to >> as opposed to I know the fifth room 30 by 20 was 107,000 because we don't pay tax. We don't have a quote from Polygon on a 30 by 20. We don't. >> No, I don't. >> I know we don't. >> No, but >> I I don't and I don't think Marty does either. Guess I'm not tracking on because the numbers that we have in our packet and the slide you were just on the >> don't I guess but this one >> but the in our packet all the numbers are 36 by 34. >> Yeah, >> we don't have the smaller options in there. We do have them Marty and I have got we have quotes on them >> but not from all all three vendors I think just from Prew. >> But what I wanted to do from tonight was get the size that we're going and then get comparison quotes um for for all these structures. Polygon's got a quote for a 20 by 20 for 59,000. So if we go with 36 by 20, you might as well say it's going to be I mean it's going to be somewhere close to 100 grand or 80 grand or somewhere in there. You can use ballpark numbers for now. We don't have to be right exact for 10 or 20,000 off. So what? >> Mayor Celtz, can we go back to Can we go to number two? >> Can you guys select Sorry. >> Can you guys select which one you want out of here? >> That would maybe help us all. Well, I just want to make sure that I am on the on the same page because we got numbers thrown around out here and they don't mean anything if we don't have a >> Okay, the WWA is the wood one. That's very similar to the fifth room run on the right. So, the WWA >> fifth run is on the right. The WWA one is on the left and the top. >> Yep. Paulie, I don't care who the vendor is. >> Which one is the wood? >> The top one. >> Top one is WW. >> And that's 100 grand cheaper. It's $116,000 for the 36 by 34. It's >> more than 100 grand. Yeah, it's likeund. >> Well, and maybe this was just my confusion, but when we were talking about steel, I thought we were talking about the roof material. >> Uh well, the one this one here is Well, both of these are roof material that is steel and they got steel beams. Um so that was you know, >> I believe the WWA has a steel roof as well, correct? >> Uh >> or is that shingle roof? that I think I asked them to put a steel roof on that one. >> So the main difference between the WW the left one you're looking at with polygon the WWA is the top one the WBA is the bottom one. >> The difference is the amount of steel utilized versus this has got eight post >> that does that is correct >> which personally I don't like but >> sure >> that's me I'm one guy >> it's just more posts are in the way. >> Yep. >> So it's far more expensive and it has more posts. >> Yep. Yeah. >> This unit here is 261. >> That unit is roughly 100 grand. >> 116. Yep. >> So, >> yeah. >> Okay. >> And the fifth room one fifth room one is roughly the same number. >> It's 223 >> uh in a in a larger size. I mean, if we go back down to the smaller size. >> Yeah. So, you'd have to go you'd have to change the size of the structure to get the same price of the fifth room one to the polygon one. Does that make sense? So you can get a 36x 34 in the WWA from Polygon for 116. You can get a 30x 20 or some other number in the fifth room one for the same 116,000. >> Personally, I think we we go with the Polygon just because they're local and I mean I don't like their number to put it up, but it's with the way it is to me. It's the finished number that matters. Well, just the difference between the polygon wood and steel. It's almost double. >> It is more than double. Yeah. >> What's the downside to the wood? I mean, what? >> Only the only maintenance aspect of it. I mean, but it's >> you're going to have to stain it here and there. >> Yeah. I mean, >> it's not going to stay that nice red. >> It's really just the beams. I mean, they both have steel underneath them. >> Steel difference. >> Yeah. >> But >> is there a lighting difference or is that just in the picture? There's no lighting in them. >> There's lighting on the on the quotes, I think. >> So, they will all come with lights and I think they quoted them that way. >> Okay. >> So, but the steel one is still wood. It's wood slats or what what >> that's a that's a wood lining under >> wood lining. So, you got to treat that. >> Yeah. >> So, but that's going to be the same on all of those anyway. >> Okay. Yeah. All right. So, it seems like that's an easy one. >> Great. Yeah. Not I don't have a problem. >> Would Okay. So then the next question is >> size >> size. But what I was hearing you say wasn't just the 10-ft overhang. >> Sounds like it's got to come in on sides also >> cuz >> I think that we want to put it outside of the um st the exact stage area. >> If you put it on the back side, Ryan, Marty, right? >> If we put it on the backside, I think when you and I were out there, if we put it here where this X is, there's that electrical box got to move. Not that it's a big deal, but you can put that footing on the back of the stage here >> and here and here and here >> and accomplish the exact same thing. >> And you're not going to have to take any of that stage out. How big are those footings? >> They can be I haven't got the exact be 5 foot diamet by Okay. >> 6 foot deep. Um, and just for reference, MSA sent me something this evening. Um, about the sizing of it, um, front and back, they're saying the minimum that they can do is 25 foot6. Um, and then 30 foot width would be they could fit it in there, they think. But I'm thinking that >> I don't think 30 ft quite >> I'm thinking we would go 324. >> Yeah, somewhere somewhere in there. >> I mean, that that exact size can be figured out. >> Yeah. Once we figured out it would >> Okay, >> so 34 is the width. 36 is with the with the >> 34 is the depth north to south >> front to back and 36 is how wide it is wider. >> Yes. >> Okay. Got it. Got it. Got it. >> Like I said, this is >> and that's >> this is from here to here is 329. >> Okay. So 36 ft gets us clearance on either side. Okay. And so the and from the back of the stage to the front, it's 34 is including the 10 foot overhang. >> 34 is a 10ft overhang. It's actually about a 14t >> over. Okay. So we could drop it to 24 ft and >> I think Marty just said >> 25. Yeah. >> 26 ft. >> Yeah. I mean, >> so it really depends on if you guys want the overhang or not. >> It's whether or not you want the overhang. >> Yeah. >> I don't see that the overhang does anything. Um because like I mean most these I don't think this is the appropriate place in the city for this in the first place. So, >> where would you put it? You've said that now before. I don't know where where would you want it? >> Um, right now, no place. I don't I don't think there's a place currently in the city where it is appropriate. I think in the future when we have like >> um >> So, you don't think this is the the premier park in the city? >> It is. I just don't think it's for concerts. I think it's a premier like there's no restaurants, there's no bars, there's not good parking, it's surrounded by residents. I don't think that this is a concert destination. I think this is a like a chance to interact with the Mississippi River destination and go kaying and biking and like that. So, yes, I think it's a destination park. I don't think it's a destination park for concerts. So, >> that's okay. >> Have you been to the Elk River one? >> Not the Elk River one. No, I've been to the Maple Grove one and the Champlin one. >> Okay. Champlin. That's on the river, too. >> Yeah, I know. But it's not in Yes. I'm not saying that that's not cool, but my point is it's not there's restaurants and there's parking and it's not surrounded by residents and there's highways and it's just more appropriate and I just don't think this is appropriate for this location. So, >> okay. >> So, that's why I'm staying out of the conversation. I don't My vote is no, period. So, it's up to you three to decide >> because you three want it. So, my note is >> I'm okay with losing the overhead um if especially if it's that expensive. I still don't get that, but that's okay. >> So, mayor and council, if it's Do you want to go with the WW, the polygon one? That's wood. All wood. >> Yes. >> That's the direction I'm hearing from the council. >> Okay. So, that is currently $116,000. >> What makes sense if we get a quote back same from the direction your comment related mayor is, >> okay, if it's X dollar amount, it makes no sense to do the 10ft overhang. If it if it does, then >> I think it if we have a good gut feeling, >> it's not 100 grand. I can tell you that right now because I don't I do not think they're going to put the whole structure up for $16,000. Just there's just no way I can I can promise you that one. >> So you said it was 100 grand less cuz we're salonic when you said >> 261. >> That one's 116. >> It's 116,000. >> So if it's proportionally it's maybe 50k lower >> for 10 ft. Yeah. So my question is council, what number makes sense to put the 10 foot overhang in? Does that make sense? That's what I'm asking. Is it 10% 20% of the cost? >> 20,000 or less. >> The only other thing the overhang may do is affect your sound. I don't know if it will or not, but I don't I'm not sure that >> a sound guy. >> What one advantage that it does do, and I'll say this just to screw it up some more that you guys aren't thinking about, when this thing is not used for a concert, it'll work very nicely for a picking shelter. So, it gives you an extra. >> That's true. Yeah. Well, >> yeah, there's >> and in the whole scheme of things, 50 grand ain't that big a deal, but >> Well, I don't know. I Dave just >> something that makes sense to me because he Yeah, right. You might want to record that or get that on. >> Well, I've got a number. I've got a I I've got a max number and I know it doesn't come close to your >> Well, mayor council, it sounds like 20% of the cost, which would be about $20,000. >> Yeah, let's go with that. >> Like, if it if it varies, >> if you aren't saving that much, it's not worth it. >> Yeah. If we're not going to save more than 20%, leave the 10 foot overhang in, which is about 20 grand. If it saves more than 20%, then take it out. And I'm not looking at insulation costs. I'm looking at just the structure. Mhm. >> Which is 116,000 bucks. >> So basically, if it's under 100 grand, probably got to do the no overhang. If it's the 116, >> then do the overhang. That's what I'm hearing. >> Yeah. >> Sounds like I get a quote from Polygon where the the smaller size without the overhang. Compare it against the the bigger size. >> Now, you could still get a surprise here when the foundation has to be >> right. The pylons have to be this cuz >> Yeah. Although >> it's not going to be that big, is it? The quote they gave you that must include foundation. >> They Yeah, I think that it include I think they would guess the guest >> the polygon. No, it doesn't. The the quote that we had >> 20 by 20 unit, Mark, >> it specifically says on there that >> Yeah, she said something about >> it says the uh the footings are not covered. Yeah, that's extra concrete footings and whatever else. Okay. The re the reason I say that is because well then whatever the savings is for the overhang has nothing to do with the current >> the concrete footing. >> Yeah. Concrete would not change. >> No. No. >> Okay. >> No shelters separate. The structure is separate. The footings are another deal. >> An installation >> would mean putting it up and getting it all. >> But that also doesn't include correct the pylons >> does not. >> Who does it? Okay. I will clarify all of these points >> because I think we may have a spread. We'll see. >> But I've got a concrete number in my head. I mean, okay, >> I think we have good direction. So, we're going to go with the WWA. Just a scroll back one. >> Oh, sorry. Scroll back one. That' be the top left structure. >> Yep. >> And then we will analyze the cost between the 36 by 26 or whatever. >> Or whatever it is. Yep. or the 36 by 34 which it is today. >> I think Marty you would look like they just said we we could get by probably with a 34 foot wide. >> Yeah. >> If we go back to back on the footings and not on the sides. >> Yeah. >> The reason I say that on the sides is because the sidewalk gets it only on each side. >> Yeah. >> So to me, you're better off putting that footing on the back and the front. >> Yep. We're trying to avoid the that sidewalk. >> Otherwise, you got to bust some concrete up. >> Has MSA looked at this yet? Yeah, they they just gave me some pricing this evening on it. So, >> but they were also gonna they were going to look at the engineering, right? So, they would be able to tell us >> where these pylons need to be or >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, they will work with Polygon. They they'll work together on that. So, we'll get that >> finalized, but they're saying, you know, from what they're looking at and this uh the survey that they did out there, that size will work in there. I think that we do need to be a little bit bigger, but >> yeah. >> Okay. Okay. Keep in mind your overhang. We got to do some kind of rock or something so that the log doesn't get all beat up from all the water running off. >> Okay. >> Micro work. >> Okay. >> And then um the dollar amount. What do we want? >> I think the 116130 is your top for the structure. Look, not looking at installation cost or anything else. Just the structure itself. >> And that was a pretty strong bid or was that kind of a loose here? >> That was a quote. That was pretty strong. >> Yep. There there's a put a an erection cost in included in this bid I think is there >> installation cost the installation cost we already know that number >> yeah so the only number we don't have is the >> concrete pylons okay >> the electrical >> and yeah bits >> so our max number is >> are we looking for just the structure Marty or you looking for >> no the whole thing right >> yeah I would like to have a whole thing so I can keep the going to be able to guesstimate How you going to do electrical and concrete? I have no idea. >> Well, electrical's you can almost >> I've already talked to a concrete guy, so I kind of know what I But that's me. That's a local contractor. It's not using MSA's guy, >> but >> what's your all-in number, Scott? >> 250. >> I think it can be done for that. That seemed reasonable to the council. >> And here's my number here. Here's my number. Given this idea, the shelter, I got 110. >> Engineering, we already know that number. That's 372. >> Your 250 includes the engineering. >> That's all in 250 is all in. >> Now, it could be 275 just because I don't know exactly. >> Okay. >> What kind of pylon the engineer wants? >> What are you estimating on on the footings? >> Concrete. I got 20 grand. Just because I know I talked I had a concrete guy out there. >> Yeah, but he didn't Okay. Did he know what the pylon? >> Okay. >> All right. 250. >> I'm okay with that. >> Some of this we're still going by the bid process as well. So, we would get other concrete costs as well. And we would get, you know, your guy to put a bid in on that as well. >> Okay. >> So, everybody's bidding from the same bid package in two >> 250 to 275. I think that's where it'll be. >> So, what number? That's two numbers. >> Yeah, those two numbers. >> What's your max one number? >> Is your max 250 or is your max 275? >> I'm going to say 250. I think it can be done to that. >> All right. >> Two. >> That's your number. >> 250. There you go. Okay. Thank you. >> All right. I think that's all I need. >> All right. >> All right. >> I don't want that, Marty. That only took two years. >> Oh, it ain't done yet. >> We're not even there yet. Item G. >> You didn't give me your items for G. >> Sir, they're in a different meeting package. >> That's great. Happy to have that, but I need this one. >> Okay. >> Happy to go off of me. >> Let's see. Did you put it on the 20? We have the 24th of March meeting that you updated. >> Um otherwise we call up commission bracket for March. But I'm going to start >> um that's going to difficult. So okay. >> Okay. So this project is in the council packet. So please refer to the the staff report on this. >> Uh this is a a concept plan for the Stenley Sterns by David Weekekley. Uh the St. Stley Sterns property is located off County Road 81 in Territorial Road. Um a concept plan is a high level review. It's not intended to have the same detail that you would expect to see in a preliminary plan or site plan. There's no formal action. There's no approval or formal approval or denial. Uh the council members are asked to provide their own individual comments and recommendation. And it's fine if you have one council member that says one thing and and another council member that says something else. It's up to the developer to interpret what does that mean and then come back with a formal preliminary plan project. Um the project area is 25 acres in size. Uh David Winkley is proposing 172 units of town homes and apologies I can't remember how many units are in per building. Was it between six and eight units per building? up to six >> up to six units per building. Um it would be on uh I think staff is recommending private streets versus public streets. Uh one of the reasons for that Oh, you're doing pretty good. >> I'm doing good, huh? >> I'm doing awesome. >> Yes. >> Um you sent all the plank commission meetings. >> Yeah. Great. >> Oh, there you go. >> Which one are we on here? >> Uh right here. No, two down. Yep. >> Perfect. Look at that. >> Okay. I want to start over. Um, so again, ju just for orientation, this is County Road 81 and then Territorial Road and this is the Stenley Sterns property. Uh, critical topics in here. I I've got six le listed on each slide. I'll go through what each one of them are. First one is what is the highest and best use. So, as I think the council is probably aware, we've had a a number of projects that have been proposed for this property that have not gone through for various reasons. Um, being that is on County Road 81, there's a lot of flexibility to what could go here. So, the first big question that I have for the council is what is the highest and best use? So the comprehensive plan guides it as mixed use which really could be you know residential, commercial or industrial or combination of of two or of three. In this case the proposed use is entirely residential. Um so just comments of uh the council's opinion of what is the highest and best use for this property. I think every one of the proposals we've seen has been residential. Is that >> Yes. Is that >> correct? >> Yes. >> And so in my mind there's some market forces at work here that nobody's bringing anything different than that forward. >> Yeah. We as staff we've had conversations with developers on industrial and industrial use, but it's never been moved forward to a concept plan. >> What about any other sort of business use? any other >> um not not for commercial. >> Well, I think part of it is the difficulty getting in and out. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> I mean that's cuz like if it was a coffee shop or something like your traffic I mean and that's that's the concern is even with residential getting people in and out is going to be a challenge. >> Any sort of commercial is just not not feasible with that intersection. So I'm guessing that's also why they're not coming forward. Um, >> yeah, until it's controlled >> and it might never be, >> right? >> Um, so, so I think I don't think commercial will ever happen. It's going to either be residential or industrial. And I think of those two, I'd prefer residential from personally. But um so so I don't think that I I think we could say all day we want commercial and I don't think anyone in their right mind would do it and I think the county would not be happy with this if we plowed a bunch of extra traffic there. So >> well this resident 172 town homes is going to bring a lot of cars. >> Yeah. But not as much as like a coffee shop or like I mean if you had because not just one but like if you put like a little strip mall your area there. I mean >> Yeah. I think way back we were originally thinking like a business park which wouldn't bring >> a lot of traffic. >> No, that wouldn't. >> But yeah, I understand what you're saying. >> Yeah, >> I suppose. I wasn't thinking business park. I was thinking more like coffee shop, restaurant, um strip mall, little not the right spot for you. >> No, it's not. I wasn't thinking business park. >> Yeah, >> the triangle piece. >> Have any business park people come forward? You said you've had industrial come forward and obviously you've had residential but >> so business park it is I'm going to call light industrial. >> Okay. >> Or it includes light industrial. >> Okay. And h and have there been people interested in that in this area. Okay. >> Okay. >> Why haven't they come forward? Why haven't made a pass? >> I could only guess that they found a better place. So, >> but it wasn't us saying no. Okay. It was them saying >> no. Thank you. Okay. >> Okay. So, I'm hearing majority opinion is supportive of residential. >> Yes, sir. >> Uh second topic is zoning standards. So, um the comprehensive plan intends for this project to be reszoned as uh general mixuse one. It is would be the first and only GMU1 district in Dayton. Um in looking at the town home project, I'm questioning if if the zoning is appropriate or not. It may be that we had um I'm going to say it um high high standards or high expectations of what would go in here for a mixeduse project and that's probably not the reality of it. So um this isn't something that needs to be answered now but uh the general question of the GMU1 zoning standards might not fit for this project or fit for this property. So I think maybe that's where I was because I saw this mixed juice >> in my mind that makes me think of like little restaurants and coffee shops below and apartments above. >> That's what I have in my head and that's what I was >> Yeah. And nobody does. >> Yeah. But I mean that's what when I hear general mixed use that's what my brain thinks of. What what does what what was the plan though, right? What was general mixed use in your head or the head of the council when you guys created this? >> Not sure. we didn't create. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> You know, and the way it's written, it it could the general mix use could be in one building or it could be just, you know, part of the project. So, you'd have a commercial building and a residential building as part of the same development. >> Um, in practice, that doesn't happen very often. So, it's either all residential or all commercial or all industrial. So, it doesn't it's hard it's difficult to mix it. So that seems more like a note for our next round of the comprehensive plan of whether or not this whole mixed use idea is even worth having on. >> Well, I think what it does is it lets it lets the options kind of flow because even though you wouldn't necessarily combine them, you could look at >> commercial or residential. >> Got it. Okay. >> But yeah, here >> Yeah, because of the constraints to the roads, commercial just doesn't make any sense. I think business park probably makes some sense, but I'm hearing that demand may not be there. >> Um, >> good. So, one of the options on here that I've got written on here rather than zoning, it's a general mixed use is to reszone it to the uh the RM medium density. Again, that's not a direction that council needs to to provide, but it is an option. So, uh the RM medium density does allow I'm going to say mixeduse residential. In this case, it's a mix of single family and town homes. Um, architecture. So, this is relating back to the GMU one zoning standards is it provides a a menu of items and then the developer can pick in this case uh four out of I think it's 10 different options, you know, of what to how to dress up the buildings. So u on the left we have two plans that were provided by David Weekley as far as options of what could be placed here. So is my question for the council is if you have any comment or recommendations on more of the exterior of the town homes. >> Do you want that now or later? >> Um now. >> Okay. Um I have feelings. Uh I do not like a sea of garage doors and pavement. Um I think it looks boring and terrible. Um, but that's on us because our requirements for parking are ridiculous. Um, I lived in some beautiful town homes in Golden Valley for 13 years. Um, and if I could have had my horse there, I would have stayed. Um, but they didn't allow horses. So, couldn't even have a dog over like 30 lbs. So, the horse was not going to fly. Um, but I was like, why were those so much like just more aesthetically pleasing? And it's cuz they're parking requirements. So, in Golden Valley, it's one space per unit for town homes. Um, it's not two in garages and two surface spots per unit. Um, and I will say in and we happen to have two. The way our unit was laid out, we had two underground garage spots and then some like shared parking for guests. And in 13 years, we had I won't even call it an issue, but one holiday party, we had a friend who had a park like two blocks away. So in 13 years, two spots was fine. Um, so this is not on you guys. This is on the city. I think we need to revisit our parking standards and think about parking based on who lives in these places, right? Um, and so yes, I I hate that look, but that's our fault, not yours. Um, if we can change our parking standards or find some way to allow it, I'd really encourage. So, like ours were gorgeous because we had the underground parking. So, there was one garage door um and then everyone else got to like everything else was beautiful front doors and um nicely landscaped p patios and decks and these beautiful green spaces and trails. Um, and it was like we had our own little private park that was surrounded by the unit like by our buildings. Um, and so, but then again, we're forcing your hand on this because we're requiring this. So, um, that's on us and I'd like to revisit that. >> Um, can I just ask a followup question? So, you know, you I'm trying to picture kind of what your townhouse look like. >> Is there, you know, with this one, you know, yes, the attached town homes and everything kind of, you know, you have your unit and everything is yours between those two sidewalls. What I'm picturing is your former town home unit has been underground parking garage and then your space is your space above it. Is there any preference or opposition to something like that? >> I don't know if anyone's >> an underground park. >> Um, yes. I don't uh >> I don't know if the site will allow that though. >> I'm trying to think it it would. I'm trying to think of a mayor council. I think we had um the last project done by Enclave who had an apartment building here. So that the water level so they you could do it but the cost of doing it was extremely large compared to a normal site that would not have water table issues just because of the one that I remember. So >> yeah, me too. Even if it's not an option here, the point is that they can't even explore that because of our zone, like because of our code and our parking requirements, which are ridiculous. It's not even an option. >> There's too many parking. >> Yeah, this is ridiculous. Um to have this many parking spots. I mean, you yourself said it these like first off, you got to think about who's living in a town home. You are not you don't have big giant families. You've got like two people, maybe three living in a town home. You're not hosting your whole family for the holidays. you live in a town home, they're not going to fit. Um, also, you live in a town home sometimes because you don't want them to fit. And when they say, "Hey, can we come to your house?" You're like, "Uh, I'm so sorry. You can't." Um, I will come to you and then I can leave when I want to. Um, so like, you might have just sold me on a town home. Town homes are amazing, right? I have two distinct lifestyles I like to live that are completely incompatible. I got to live one for 13 years. Now I'm living the other one right now. And when my body totally breaks down on me, I'm going right back to my town home. >> Did they allow on street parking or was that ever >> Yes, there is on street parking. Well, there's there is dedicated Yes, there is on street parking and there were some dedicated guests like lots for all the units to share. Um, I guess my point is the way our code is written, it's not even option you guys could pursue. And I would like it to be an option that maybe not this particular location, but other locations could look at so it's not just a sea of garage doors and pavement. Um, it can be a sea of trees and shrubs and green space and beautiful patios, which is much more aesthetically pleasing to everybody involved. Um, so, but that's on us. That's not on you. Uh, that being said, I'm also unhappy that the only options are three-bedroom options plus lofts. Um, you yourself said that this is for starting families, people downsizing, right? Like we had two bedrooms in a loft, which was more than enough space for us. I'd like to now the corner units had three bedrooms. So, I'm not saying there can't be three bedrooms, but I'd like to see more variety in like onebedroom plus loft, two bedrooms, two bedroom, like more options cuz that would also go to the planning commission's comment of how it's so uniform like it's just the same. But if you had different sized options, they could look different. You could have it could bring some variety in there. Um, >> cheaper to build it this way. Well, I appreciate that, but our job is not to make sure they make as much money as possible. Our job is to meet our residents needs, and having more variety would meet more people's needs. Um, as someone who had to fight hard to keep my house as small as is against everyone. Um, there are lots of people who either live by themselves or just live with a partner and do not want three bedrooms and a loft. They want two bedrooms or, you know, two bedrooms and a loft. And that's the whole point, right? is to meet more needs and smaller units can do that. Also keeps costs down which is one of the things we need to do. Um let's see here. So those are my big things um about the aesthetics and the appeal and this is still everyone's just giving their own feedback and so I don't know that I can get our code changed on parking by the time you guys need us to but I'm going to be trying. So Golden Valley is too low. I will say that. What do we do for I I don't remember this come up recently, but for apartment parking, >> what's the requirement? >> Um, two and a half. So, you have one garage stall and then one and a half surface stalls. >> So, when enclosed in one, >> not necessarily. >> And does that have any bearing on how many aart how many bedrooms are in the units? No. >> See, and that's stupid. >> Um, it should be proportionate to the number of bedrooms at the very least. um which is what other places have. So um it should not just be a blanket thing. >> There's 17 172 units here >> and I believe there's 76 exterior parking stalls >> but every unit has two covered and two surface and guest parking on top of that. That's stupid visitor >> parking >> and that's what I noticed. We don't have the total parking requirements in here, but it is >> two enclosed, two surface plus the half, >> which >> is insane. >> Insane. >> Yeah, >> it's just ridiculous. >> We'll fix I will try to fix that. I don't know if I can fix it in time, but >> didn't Hayden review this before he left? Did we go >> We did We did commercial. We did So, >> we did we did we did commercial. >> We didn't do resial park and we we kind of discussed this a little bit in the workshop. So park the parking ordinance is difficult because you have you know like signage it's very different if for a single family home versus a hotel. >> That makes sense. It's just >> this seems like it should be closer to an apartment than >> a single family home. >> A single family home. So >> yeah, I don't know. That just seems crazy. It's it's four and a half. >> Four and a half per >> We'll look at uh the parking ordinance. Um I don't think it'll be done in the next month. >> Yeah. No, which is why I'm saying we might not get it done in time for this project, but for future projects. Um, but I would like to see more variety in options and I don't sorry I don't care if it's more expensive for you. That's what I want. That's the building. >> So, >> can you you know what? You guys might as well come on because it seems like our >> mean you can get this done in a month. >> We're just unfortunate government. You can >> Yeah. Yeah. >> You guys just kill everything. >> Um, thank you. Appreciate the comments. >> That's positivity. parking. So, let's get this out of the way right away. Did you guys b when you've seen the parking requirements or is that I mean, you guys do this, right? You do this in other cities. >> Are we overparked? >> Oh, sure. >> Okay. Thank Mr. Mayor, members of the council, first of all, thanks for entertaining uh our concept plan tonight. We really appreciate it. We know you you cover a lot of ground and um I used to work in local government myself, so I was reliving some old memories, listening to your previous conversations and appreciate the time you put in. I'm Dean Lauder. I'm the director of entitlements with uh the Minneapolis St. Paul uh office for David Weekly Homes. This of course is my boss, Joe Flynn, our our division president. >> Could you put your address or just spit out your address because I forgot? >> 12,900 Clearwater Drive. >> Okay. um in Minnetonka. >> Yes, >> I know where I work. >> So, I know that and where the paper clips are stored. So, that's the important part. >> Yeah. Uh so, anyways, to to your question, to the parking question, I appreciate it so much. Thank you for asking it. And I think I know the town homes you're talking about in Golden Valley. I'm pretty sure my wife and I shopped those once upon a time. Um yeah, the the parking requirements are sometimes excessive, frankly. Um and we we see that in a lot of cities. I think there's a a a thought process that when you have a denser development like uh you know medium density development like a town home development um that there's a need for parking because what if what if everyone's entertaining on the same night at the same time. Um, so generally speaking, you know, the fact that we have two covered, we have two stall garage, we've got two uh parking spaces in the driveway, uh, then a half, we're we're about 10 stalls short of your code requirement is where we're at. >> But so, let me maybe >> and you're comfortable >> merge this over. If you didn't have the the two covered, i.e. a double stall garage, >> if you didn't have that requirement, would you still have a double double double stall garage? >> Yes, we would. Yes. >> So that's the issue is because people have junk. >> Well, not only that, people in Minnesota, people like to have their car undercover and uh climatized. Well, they don't want to come out to ice on their car. >> Yeah. But would it be double wide is what I'm asking. >> It would accommodate two vehicles, >> right? >> Side by side. Double wide. >> Okay. So like the Golden Valley ones, the issue is not we had two covered spots. It was that we had a shared garage. So we had one garage door that pulled in and then the the spots were under. So our units were like this, right? And so you pulled into the garage and then >> this this way. So I had two covered spots under my unit. So >> just a single door. >> Just a single door. So from an aesthetics, you're not seeing a sea of garage doors. There's one garage door on the end. Um, so, >> so if the requirement was that there would not be so so the the uncovered stall requirement was one, would your driveway be thinner? >> Probably not. >> Probably not. >> So, so this doesn't have much effect on you. >> Okay. No, >> it still seems crazy, but I and it and the effect is minimal. It sounds like >> for this possibly for this one. My point is we're not even giving builders an option. We're forcing them into this. >> It's just like the double Yeah. The double >> I would just like to point out, m Mr. Mayor, that and members of the council that we have like some some parking that's kind of notched in different spots, but then we're also looking at some on street parking in order to try to meet that that code requirement. And we're still 10 stalls short. I have I have no issue with that. >> Yeah. >> I mean, it's already more parking than it needs. >> One other thing that I'd mentioned, too, just if I could respond to maybe the kind of the architecture or the aesthetic visibility of of the neighborhood. Um, one of the things that can help with that a little bit too is um, and this kind of conflicts with the parking requirement because if you have on street parking, you need a wider road. >> Yep. >> And and so if if we didn't have to have the on street parking, we could actually have a narrow road. And if we were to bring the town homes a little closer, it would actually provide a traffic calming and a cozier feel um while basically reducing costs and maintenance issues within the neighborhood. So that's just another point that I'd want to share with you for consideration. >> Sure, makes sense. >> And then would you would you make the units bigger or would you have more green space than in between the units if the roads were smaller and they could move closer? Um, you know what I would actually want to explore is what I would call lollipop parking. >> Okay. >> Where we could have like a little inlet drive into a green space area and maybe have like a a circular parking area that would help meet off-site parking requirements and keep them off the road. >> Gary, you're not going to want too too narrow a road though. >> Mayor, members of council, that was going to be my comment. My preference is no street parking. >> Yeah. Um, there was a question about the size of the units. We wouldn't want to make them any bigger. This is about the size that we see the market, the sweet spot in the market. >> Are you willing to make some smaller? >> Um, I I heard a comment before you were talking about um maybe having two-bedroom uh units. What we found is when we have two-bedroom units, they stay in the market longer. Even if people don't feel they have a need today, they want the flexibility of having a three-bedroom. And it doesn't mean that they utilize all the rooms as bedrooms, uh, a lot of people nowadays utilize them as studies. They may even have two studies. I I I don't know if if any of your families have two studies. I know that we don't in our home, but I wish we had two studies because it's hard for me and my wife to work at the same time. But uh we find that the threebedroom is the highest demand. >> Okay. >> Any other questions for the developer? >> I had just >> I can I don't know how much more you had left. >> A couple we've skipped around a little bit. >> Yeah, we did. >> Okay. >> Back on track. The the only thing I'm not real wild about and tell me if John if this is the uh the uh setbacks on everything you're not not meeting too many of those. >> Oh I got to look at it. So um you know I'm going to say this is a relatively tight site and things are crammed in to maximize the number of units. So >> I can't speak to the setbacks quite >> maybe we could just >> Mr. surveyor, if I could >> go ahead. >> Maybe we could just review kind of the the site constraints. Um, I know you've looked at this site many times, but just so we're all on the same page, obviously the county roads constraint. There's a very large wetland on the east side of the site uh that we're doing our best to not impact. Um, along uh the northern side, you have a more intensive use that we would want to screen effectively. Uh you do have a gas man uh running kind of east and west through the site. Um and then you've got a a sewer easement that drops down north to south. And so um and then there's some flood plane mitigation or compensatory area there kind of the west portion of that wetland right there. Thank you. Um, so it's it's what we're trying to do is thread the needle um and and try to marry up as many of the ideas as we possibly can to get to a yes on the application eventually. But those are all the constraints that really make it a challenge to thread that needle. >> John, did you want to >> Yeah, I ask you a question. So, we talked a lot about parking and and the idea of of or concern of just driving down the street and seeing garage door after garage door. Um, the way this is laid out, it it's a little it's kind of a combination of I'm going to say one side of the street you'll have garage door after garage door. On the other side of the street, it it's the side of buildings. Um, and that's it depends on the street. So, it's kind of give and take. Um uh you know question for David Weekley if if there would be opposition to having a you know essentially a larger building and and underground parking >> I think water table is going to be an issue. I don't think you can do it. We >> it' be a a completely different product. I mean essentially you'd have a a sl you know it the garage would be at the the natural elevation and then it's above. >> Oh I see. I Mr. Mr. Mayor, members of the council. So, I know it's a concept and generally what we want to do is remain as flexible as we can to ideas. I'm I'm going to have to >> I'm going to have to go after that one and say no. Probably not. >> Can I ask why? Just curious for my own >> table is an issue. Our whole plan set would have to be um redesigned potentially for that. there would be a cost level added to underground parking that would probably make these un unobtainable to the market. >> I think what John was saying though is that the parking is not underground. It's that instead of a twotory basically you have three story is parking and then >> so it's a three-story building. Not anything underground. >> Y >> just >> I'm going to take a swag at it that you would probably be adding between 30 and $50,000 to the unit. >> Okay. if not more because it's going to have to be foundational. >> And you still get a garage door even though it's it's been lifted. Yeah. >> No, they do. There would still be the shared. So you'd have one garage door. So potentially like prettier landscaping and more green space because you would have all those like driveways leading up to it. >> So how would you do that though on some of the disconnected buildings? >> You wouldn't. Each each unit would have so each of the disconnected buildings would have a single garage door that leads into a shared parking space for that building unit. >> Yeah. The these would be much larger buildings than what it is. Yeah. Six unit buildings. It probably be a a full block. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, if I go back to setbacks, John. >> Yep. >> And uh side building setbacks. So the minimum required is 35 ft. They're proposing 20 >> 20 correct. So between buildings >> and that's 20 at the smallest and I couldn't tell you which building that was. >> So why do we have a minimum of 35 if we're not >> I couldn't tell you. So again, this is on the GMU1 district which we've not used before. >> Okay. >> Um so this this would be the test project. The other reason that I I would like to stay at the 35, and I know you guys don't like to hear that because that means less units. Um, when one burns, they all burn when they're too close together. >> May I respond, Mr. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Uh, a couple thoughts. So, uh, one of one of the ideas that John suggested earlier in the presentation also was a potential for reszoning to RM. I believe the side setback between buildings in that district is 20 ft. Um >> okay, >> not 35. And um code requires that town home structures such as this are sprinkled. Um so the the concern uh I believe before that code was was amended to make that happen. Yes, I think your concern was very valid. Um but the the town homes we build today actually are sprinkled. Um, so if there's a fire in one of those units, it's probably out before it really ever goes anywhere. >> Um, depends on how it's built, what it's built out of, everything. Whatever burns faster. >> Yeah. Do you offend know what the uh RM setbacks are? Cuz >> I I not off hand. >> Okay. But it would not surprise. >> And this 20 though is the the minimum of of all of them. You don't know like what the average is or >> No, I do not. >> Okay. >> And that's just uh end to end between the units, I think, is what we're talking about there. >> I do have somewhere. >> Okay. Other comments on the general design? Otherwise, I've got a couple targeted questions. Yeah, I I'm not an architect, so I don't I try not to get into the, you know, you should use more brick, you should have more >> of this or that. I I mean, you know, it's kind of like art. I like it when I see it, but I it's not the business I'm in. Um, it if the goal here is to to bring these homes in at a more affordable price point, then I think we have to be willing to accept some things about that. What does that mean? Um, you know, I get concerned that if we're if you're trying to aim too low, then not just the appearance of the home, but the quality of the build goes downhill. And that that I wouldn't like to see. Sure. >> Um I I would rather have us um provide some some room on the parking requirement to avoid the on street parking. I think that that can get to be hard to manage um you know when you've got when you've got that allowed uh both for emergency vehicles and then just routine snow plowing and stuff. And I know these would be private roads, so that would be the the HOA that would have to deal with that, but it's still going to be a headache if people are parked on the road. So, I don't I don't love that idea and I would encourage you to stay away from that and ask for the variance on the parking. Uh the other thing I know from there's been there was discussion at the um parks commission and the planning commission regarding a park um in this area. And I I think that you should do everything you can to, you know, accommodate or take advantage of the of the wetland. You can't put houses on it, but you can put trails through there. The Rush Creek Trail is going to come down Territorial Road. That's the Three Rivers um regional trail, which leads me into I know it's hard to get timelines on on any of this because we've got to do something with that intersection. We've got to do something uh with how the exiting comes from anything that goes into that space, but it's also Three Rivers plan to go under 81. >> That is correct. um to continue that Rush Creek Trail and where that can be a benefit to this or any development in this area is there would now be a safe way to get across that road and the railroad and we do have parkland on Holly Lane right well 900 ft away. >> Yes. >> And that to me could um although it's a little bit farther out there it could cover the needs for parks for several of the neighborhoods that are right in that area. Um, I do have one piece of information for the council. Um, if this the sides setbacks for RM are 10 ft if they are single family dwellings, which I do not believe these are, it's 15 ft if they're multif family dwellings and if they but a side street, they are 20 feet. So, >> okay. >> Just want to know why. >> I just found that beat you. Okay. Uh piggy to piggyback on the parks parks and trails comment. So this is in a search area for uh a neighborhood park. Um when this was this was uh reviewed by the plan or discussed by both the park commission and the planning commission. Um the staff had recommended that considering a neighborhood park in the northwest corner. uh the park as well as a trail that would go around the wetland. In this case, it it'd only be half a trail because the other half is outside the project area. Uh the park commission recommendation was to consider it. The plan commission felt that this was the wrong area for a neighborhood park. Um, you know, so again, with a concept plan, you it's okay to have conflicting uh opinions and reviews and advice, but um it'd be appreciative to uh get comments from the the city council on this because this does have a big effect on laying out where homes go. >> So, the parks commission wants the upper the north wooded area. >> Okay. And this is a small area and we've not done a park layout and I have no idea if this would how this would fit. Um, you know, it's also a question what would be in there. Um, the thought is it might be, you know, maybe part of the park is on this side and then the other part is on um the other side of this um wetland complex. So, we'd have to spend some time at that. And this um this area, this is kind of a general neighborhood of the uh area 20 park search area. I kind of I'm kind of with the planning commission that I don't know that this is the best. That being said, I would think somewhere more in the like I could yeah kind of where your mouse is right now. I think that makes more sense. So like thinking ahead about connecting a trail to it so that if a park gets built there that you guys can connect your trails to that park would be good. But I don't necessarily think that that little this goes back to the large area planning, right? Like >> Yeah, >> maybe that little bit of that corner should be it. But there's not enough here. >> Yeah. >> To take Yeah, >> I I agree. I tend to think that this is not a good spot for Grand, >> but I think it would be not I think it would be reasonable to think that there might be one just north of y'all and that to think about having where a trail could possibly connect into that might be a good idea. I'm also thinking that would be right next to that industrial area and I'm not necessarily certain I want to park that close to that industrial area. So, >> sure. If the park is on the I'm going to say the east side of this wetland complex, the complex becomes the buffer from >> That's what I'm thinking. So, like that seems like a more reasonable spot to me personally and then you have Yeah, you have a natural buffer and so >> Okay. Other comments on parks and trails? Oh, okay. Uh, roundabout. So, um, with the last project that we had, and I I apologize. I don't remember what year it was. So, um, we had a project, it it went through concept plan. It didn't go over well. Um, the residents or the owners kind of came back and saying it wasn't fair. They're frustrated that it was that there was so much flexibility. There was no direction from the city of how to develop this project. Um that led to uh incorporating this part this uh intersection into our our intersection study um which came back as there's a need if this is developed as residential. There is a justified need for a roundabout at this location and then the expectation is there'd be some cost share that the developer would would contribute to the city to pay for this roundabout. Um which makes it more complicated to develop a project here. So, >> y >> um I just want to be upfront about that as this is being one of the more one of the complications of this project is the cost of a a roundabout. Um at the planning commission meeting, there was some discussion of uh one of the commissioners had suggested that maybe this should be more of a cost share by the city versus just the developer. What does that mean? >> Um that the developer shouldn't have to pay for it all. Well, I thought when we and Jason, maybe you remember this, but we did talk about how those costs would be distributed. Um, when Yeah, go ahead. >> Oh, yeah. We did go through a couple different scenarios on how that would be. So, the realignment of the existing roadway and the improvements at 81 would be needed regardless, if you will. So that would be a city le project most likely with regional and local benefit both. The roundabout would be exclusively for the access to this property. So one of the scenarios used as a preliminary guide would be potentially the road realignment and again the intersection of 81 is not the developer's responsibility or at least not in its entirety. Maybe they pay a small proportionate share, right, >> based on traffic levels, but then the cost of the roundabout itself or just the additional cost of adding the roundabout to the inter or to the realigned roadway would be born by the developer. So that would be a potential guide for a starting point. >> Yeah. And that's really driven because the stack up you have a you'd have a a left-hand turn and right the the theory behind the the roundabout is for vehicles exiting off of 81 onto territorial. Um instead of having to wait for a break >> to turn left into the development um especially if the vehicles are stacked um such to prevent it. The roundabout would allow that to free flow, if you will, and keep that lane clear so there's no backup and congestion into the intersection of 81. >> And that roundabout cost >> um the only >> is it going to be similar to the Pine View one? >> Um I would expect it' be somewhat less. Um we have convenient for we anticipating we can add the storm water to the existing pond. So that would be a smaller cost. we had to >> purchase land from the park district for Pine View. Um we haven't run updated numbers. Um just looking at what's up there, we had a cost of just under two million. Um so that sounds pretty light to me. >> Yeah, I was going to say the PU one was about 2 million and yeah, things have gone >> gone up quite a bit. >> Gone up quite a bit. >> Yeah. Um so I I would I would think that's probably pretty light and that was actually intended to cover the realigned road as well. So, we'd have to revisit that to get a better cost together. >> I am not a traffic expert by any stretch, but when I was at the Dayton Day Drayton River Road thing in Champlain, um, and they were talking about possibly I can't think of the name of the There's a currently a four-way stop shortly before the light on 169 and the River Road, right? >> Yes. Um, and one of the options is putting in a roundabout there. And I feel like he said that would actually cause more problems because right now when it's backed up, people let them out cuz they're not like they let them go out to turn left away from the intersection. where if it's in a roundabout and that light is stopped, the roundabout >> I think they actually stay in the roundabout and congestion >> and there is potential risk for that. Okay. >> Um I mean no different there would have to be accommodations made with the the vehicles or the drivers in there. But the the thought is there is the ability for continuous movement and a simpler method for lack of bettering just alternating cars. Right. >> No, I'm just saying that at that meeting he said a roundabout would actually make it worse than a four-way stop. And I was >> I want to say Valley Forge, but it's not. It's >> Yeah, >> but make French Lake Road. >> No, it's further It's further east. >> Yeah, it's in Champlne. It's not inner city. So, like I wasn't paying 100% attention because it's not us. I was waiting for the stuff in Dayton. I just have that memory of some >> Thank you. Yes. Um, but I just have that remember of that conversation cuz I cuz I was like I thought a roundabout would make it better and that's what people in the audience and he was like actually it might not. >> Yeah, that section gridlocks often. Okay. >> Um, and there's two lanes of traffic as well which makes it even harder to leave the brakes for the vehicles to move. >> Yeah. Okay. So, I was just curious if if that was because this is a different sit situation clearly. Um, but I just wanted to clarify that. >> Okay. And again, not my field of expertise. >> So, do you have comments round, right? >> I'm sorry. >> Which means you're good with the round >> came from the roundabout. >> Well, uh, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, if I could just speak to that. Um I think part of what uh has fed in and I haven't studied this thoroughly. So what I need to do is actually work with our engineer and um look at it from from our perspective as well and maybe to provide um our information that's backed up by an engineer's traffic memo. I'm not questioning Jason by any means in that respect, but I do believe that one of the things that was looked at if the site were to develop industrial. Um, there was a a a thought that there would be an access provided out the north of the property to 113 and then going beyond that, which would then alleviate the need for access on the territorial and then a roundabout. There would still probably be uh right in right out on County Road 81 at that time, but um there's no guarantee if the site developed industrial that that northerly access would come to pass. You would have an applicant would have to secure the land from at least two other property owners. So, um, one of my thoughts on that is I if if we could maybe punt on this for now, I'd like time to work through what our options might be and also visit with with city staff about it and see if we can't come up with a win-win for this site to pay the entire freight on the roundabout makes the project tough to pencil. >> And so, >> and this has been one of the hurdles, I think. >> Yeah, I you know, that would surprise me. So, um, I might have a few ideas that I'd like to further investigate and then bring back to you for your consideration if that's >> Thank you. That's fair. >> Yeah, it would be good if you had a solution. >> I'll look for that bag of pixie dust that Joe promised I'd have in my second month. >> By month three, it should be there. Right. >> Right. Right. Right. It's on order. >> That is all that I have. >> Okay. Any other questions for staff or applicant or any other comments? Okay, sounds like >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I appreciate your time. >> All right. Um item H current sl Good evening, Mayor and Council. Uh, tonight we're discussing uh engineering standards and detail plates utilized in the city, and I'll get into what exactly those are for your information. So, just a little background what led us to bringing this item before you tonight. Um, as st council is aware, developments that come into the city are often responsible for constructing infrastructure that is l then turned over to the city for ownership and maintenance. uh in the future um public works and engineering together with planning, administration, emergency services, um review plans and verify that our standards are met and that we're getting the infrastructure, you know, that we want um for the future. These requirements have historically been done by presenting with uh standard detail plates and I'll share more on what exactly that is. Um but a lot of the direction is communicated either verbally or through just comment review comment memos prepared at the time of the the submittal of the plans. So to help I guess provide some transparency and provide information upfront for developers and consideration when putting their documents together. We formalize these standards by preparing a reference document or it's about a 70page document that just has a ton of information as far as what materials, what kind of structures, what we want for standards for infrastructure as it goes in. This is posted on the city's website and we are now directing applicants and their engineers to reference these documents as they go through their plan preparation. So just a little bit of what the document itself is. Um I didn't include any pages or clips from the document other than the the cover just to show what it would look like. And then the the table of contents just to show there's a number of categories covered in it. And then just to highlight right in the forward so first page of the document is is the intent of the document and as highlighted it's that this document together with the standard detail plates which again I'll describe on the next slide are intended to be what is required for consideration and the preparation of their plans and specifications for the infrastructure. And again, as I mentioned, the standard detail plates and these have been prepared and around for the city. I think they were originally done in like 2006 or 2008. They have been continually updated and and modified since. When we see things that have materials changed or we just find a better way, if you will, um to do something, we'll update these. So, um there's about 115 of them, I think, total. Um the table of contents are the the pages on the left side of the screen. And then I just picked four random examples of standard details. Um, this is for a commercial driveway apron, just the dimensions and the materials to be utilized. Our hydrants, what they look like, uh, storm sewer manholes, just structure dimensions and requirements and silk fence for erosion control. We also have them for landscaping and um, some street lighting and street signage, a number of other categories as well. So, the situation why this is being brought to council tonight and hasn't been in the past, but um in some situations there's been some contradictions pointed out by applicants um between the city code and what we have listed in these documents. So, they reference city code, they prepare plans based on it, we give them these documents, they say that's not consistent with city code, and of course, they choose whichever one is cheaper for them. So if ours are more lenient than code, they'll they'll say, "Oh, that's fine. We'll do it. If ours are more stringent than city code, they're saying we're not doing it because city code says we don't have to." So just to point out that the standard detail plates here, we we update these every year. We make notes throughout the year if there's any changes and then every usually January or February, we'll go through and we'll physically update the pl the plates to match what are what we want them to be in the future moving forward. Um typically not a lot of changes maybe two three four of them will change with minor changes but there are a few each year um similarly the engineering design guidelines now this is a new document just put it together last summer um but that will be reviewed and noted and updated continually as well so we we do keep up on these um we work closely with public works to make sure that any standards that they want to change or see differently are incorporated um >> as needed. >> These inconsistencies you're talking about, are they typically stuff that so it seems to me that these these these requirements should be either in code or in the engineering documents, not both. >> We agree completely >> and I'll kind of get to that with the recommendations, but yes. Um no, I think very much so. Um >> that should be the case. Um and and I will definitely come back to that. So with these discrepancies as I mentioned um and this actually happens very rarely but it does happen occasionally that the applicant will come back and again they'll pick and choose which one they want to follow based on usually based on cost or ease of implementation. So what we'd like to do is, you know, formalize the ability for staff to say, "No, these are a requirement and you do need to follow these." So the request for action that we're considering tonight is that council actually formally adopts or makes a a formal um action to adopt these um as standards for the city that we can use as enforce enforceable documents when reviewing applications that come in. And to the mayor's point, um a future action consideration here is we do suggest going through the city code um and finding any of these discrepancies and getting rid of them. And to be honest, I I completely agree. The efficient way of doing that is only have the information listed in one spot. And our thought is, and this should be probably reviewed with an attorney before we go all in on this, but that the city code would reference these standards because these standards are updated routinely and closely watched. Um, and that is a less formal process, if you will, to go through an actual change on it. So, it would just be, yeah, referenced in code, changed here, and then that would be updated. Then we do have a revision block so we have everything noted what revisions were made when and what the latest uh final document is. >> Do you have a feel for what other cities do cities typically go that route? >> They the ones we work with do this and they probably more often um more often than not they do do a formal adoption of them. I was going to say how do you get around the fact that the council has >> Oh, as far as the reference >> co here's where I can see a conundrum in other cities hopefully a panelist but you don't generally want so pick you know I'll pick on the federal government um you'll see laws enacted that says that this group over here is in charge of doing X and suddenly this group gets to basically write law. >> Sure. And that's my concern is is that is there any statutorial problems with doing this? >> I I do think there should be discussion with the attorney. I suspect this could be done, but I I would suggest reviewing with an attorney for that exact reason because I mean another very similar thought process is if a applicant came in and said, "Here's what your code said that refers to this." But then we we can change that quickly. >> Exactly. So did we change it specific to theirs or not? >> Um whether >> perception is that or not. Um >> because these concern >> become these become the law, >> right? >> And so what does that mean from the change standpoint? But >> yeah, and and to be honest, so this has way more information than what's in your code. So it's not like we're doubling up on all of this information. There's just some references. I'll just right away with being an example. We would have that called out in both. Yeah. >> And we and and maybe that does stay in code and maybe we update our plates to say, >> you know, it's probably not too dissimilar from the building code because we don't approve that. We just approve that we're going to >> Right. Yeah. That's a good example. >> Pull in the building code where >> in some other >> Yeah. >> say, oh, could be changing that. But >> the other difficult part is the developers early on are reviewing code and then when it goes into the technical side or the the plan development, that's all engineers. So they're they're they should be the same discussion, but they're often not talking. We're talking on our end, but they're often not talking on theirs. So there's and maybe that's a reason it's not pointed out that often, too, is the def the engineers come in and they just understand that this is how cities operate. So >> I guess that's where my a little bit of my confusion comes in here is that codes change. you know, all all of the codes I'm familiar with are on some kind of revision cycle, three years, five years, whatever >> it is for that code. So, if we're referencing a code, >> it's not just I'll use a hospital one, the life safety code, NFPA 101, right? Which year are we applying and who adopted it? So, in hospitals, they're still working on the 2012 version of the NFPA 101 life safety code because that's what Medicare adopted. >> Mhm. >> There's been four or five revisions on that code since then. So, I guess my question is when we're referencing a code, we wanted to it needs to be adopted by somebody or are we just when it's published, then that's our new code, too? >> So, I I I would think it'd be simpler to reference these documents in code. So the code actually reference and potentially and again I don't want to speak from the legal aspect of this. I think this should be reviewed but it would reference you know potentially the you know latest revision of the standard detail plates you know perv those >> so are they >> yeah so each one >> okay >> I don't know if it's >> one or kind of is there >> both actually so we do I know you won't be able to see this I'm sure but there's there's a revision date when the >> I think it's there's two spots I can't even so there's one spot where the the last time the code was or the individual plate was done and then there's another one when the whole thing was looked at. >> Oh, so so we know both >> because again I referenced the building code Dave was talking about that that building code we're not up to the latest city is not it's same ideal. So if you have a set revision it seems like we can always reference that then we don't have to worry about >> so we >> we always have to adopt. >> So we one date will be the last time that one changed and the other one will be the last time it was reviewed. So, we'll we'll always have those two dates. It's on every plate individually. >> Okay. >> And then we do have an AR I guess we haven't done we haven't done a method for because we haven't had any revisions yet to the to this part. Um we do have it's the second or third page. We do have a revision block that has you know first draft which is the the one we have now. Um, oh, maybe it's right. Oh, it's right on the cover. Last updated, but then there's more detail on the second or third page. But, um, >> well, one thing I would think is that >> once obviously we have dates for when people have submitted things, right? And so, if someone has submitted something with this current version, that would be the standard we would hold them to. And if like if they're in the middle of the project >> and we change our mind about something, I I feel like we would hold them to the one when they started and not like >> we we do that often and that's a good point because a lot of times this will be a one to two-year process. So and again there's usually not many revisions and they're usually very minor but we do have exactly that >> where what we do is we have them update. That's one of our comments before the final version is make sure they have the updated uh plates um into it. We haven't really got push back because again it's not like we make changes and it added $50,000 to the project. It's >> they're they're usually very insignificant for that matter. Um >> but there could be that situation for sure. And to be honest, if it was a change I I'll mention one that we actually did have and this became an issue. We started lining our drop manholes and sanitary sewers which added about $10,000 of structure. Okay. Just to help with the longevity of it. We did get push back and we allowed them to go with the last one on that project. >> Yeah. So, >> and that that's what I would assume we would do like they're in the midst of something happening. >> Yeah. We did actually have that specific one >> because then no one can come back and be like you did this just to screw me over. >> Right. >> And and if it was something significant enough, we would have pushed for it. But it's something that we've been doing that way for 15 years. We can >> probably let this project go and we'll update it on the next one. >> Yeah. No, I think that's a good idea. That's a good idea. >> Yeah. >> And then, you know, as far as I don't know that we have to make a concerted effort to walk through all our code and make sure it it seems like we could when we adopt this, we could say this overrides code. That's and we'll we'll talk more about that because I I had that thought too is and somewhere in code do we put like a governance list and and hierarchy of the governing documents. Um >> I think we we it's worth a discussion. I don't know what that should look like now or what it's appropriate for code, but um >> and would it be reasonable when you guys update it to just have maybe on the consent agenda for one of our meetings, >> these are the changes we're making. So that technically council is still approving it to the mayor's point of like here you guys go make law. It would come back to us, but just on a consent agenda item like these are the changes we're making for this year. >> We could I actually had a bullet that I deleted that said exactly that. This could be an annual update process like routinely every February or >> usually we get to him January or February before the next construction plan >> and then here are the updates for the year and we get to say sure great. So then we are still technically accountable >> to the back to the lawyer and he gets to make the laws. >> It's just we don't have to go into all of our code every single time the code would reference this thing but we are still having that oversight of it. Yep. >> Not that >> I would trust your judgment anyway. I'm not going to care. But but >> in case, you know, if you guys all retire and we get a whole new staff of people and we're like, "Wait, hold up. This is unreasonable." So, it does have that extra check in there. >> Okay. >> I'd be fine with that. I mean, >> we actually need a >> we need a formal approval. >> Yeah. >> And yeah, I said this is mostly mayor and council. This is mostly related to because of the push back we get from developers. We want to have a concrete council's aware of this thing. You guys are back in this. We want to have it. We're inconsistent. I They should guess. >> And that's what happened. It's happened a couple of times since Jason and I have talked and I'm like, we got to get this thing on the agenda just to approve it so that we have some >> backup. So, >> um Okay. So, >> okay. Scott, >> I'll second. >> Any more discussion? >> All those in favor say I. I. >> I. All those oppos say no. >> Carries four to zero. And the code updates will come at a future meeting then, right? Where the code will be updated to say this >> once we check with the wrong order. >> Um, apparently, yeah, known that's not our very well cuz G was after H. So, that's always great to know. >> Alphabet is hard. >> Alphabet's difficult >> except except after Y. >> Um, yeah, I'll just mention in the city code does have lots and lots of inconsistencies, you know, probably 50 years worth. So >> um >> you will see something mayor council it won't be next meeting but it will be soon coming saying this is what we're looking at doing and so you guys have a reference point to it. >> Yeah whenever you mention something in two spots it at some point it will be wrong. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Item I may roa council um 2024 the city council approved the community survey. A little background, understanding, give direction to the city staff and council. That 2020 survey was a good baseline and we are looking to redo the community survey. Um, we did send this out multiple times. I got multiple comments back. We adjusted, we amended things. I think um, every one of the comments that was heard was adjusted. Um, I know I got a couple comments back of like just different wording, different processes. We did adjust most of the wording. The one request that we did have to add that um and I talked about today was we forgot to add the app in in as a question about based on social media posts and whatever else we'd like to add something about the app as there was a question similar to the other posts with social media but um I'm anticipating just based on growth that we'll probably have to do this again in two to three years depending on how much this council wants to try to you know understand what trajectories we're on but >> so did you want to go over the changes or when were you going to >> um I I did send out the updated Oh, you did. >> Yep. Um survey would have been last even I think it was even two weeks ago. Um I did put the updated questions in the packet as well and those are all updated. I know some of the comments related to we removed Dayton heritage days because it's not a city function. So we went and focused more on the rec um community events andor um wreck programming and trying to understand what the community is looking for from WCK programming and community events. There was a doubled up word related to all in all and generally. So we removed those couple awards there. Um took some direction out based on some of the things we had heard from the past related to police stuff that we had removed speed limits and stuff. We haven't heard anything about those. >> So you Okay. So you still left the prices though at a monthly. >> Yeah, we left them monthly and we had a comment of um so I talked to Peter Leman with the Morse Leatherman company and he said I don't care which one you do. It doesn't matter to me. We left him as monthly. I'm happy to switch to annually, too. I don't People do budgets on an on monthly basis, but they look at their taxes annually. So, >> you pick one and don't >> I don't like the monthly at all. >> Yeah, I don't either. >> I don't. But I the >> Well, you're fine with either one. Doesn't matter. >> I don't know if it's an either one for me in that >> you could flip a coin. >> Well, you can say, well, you don't pay your taxes monthly, but anybody with a mortgage, >> can both numbers be provided? Like it'd be this monthly and this annually. >> You could do both. >> Yeah. >> Would that make more sense? >> I think that would be helpful because when you say 10 bucks a month, that sounds like nothing and people don't care. >> See, that's that's my concern is you kind of minimize that cost and Yeah. >> Right. But it's really 120 times 20 years or whatever the >> So Peter has seen has seen both in both >> used so he doesn't care. He's like I doesn't matter to me and I don't care either. Neither does city staff. I mean, I'm fine with having but like $10 a month or $120 annually is not that much more to say. So, because this is a phone interview, correct? >> Yes, this is a phone interview. So, how this works as a generality, if you weren't here last time, which I think council van was the only one that was not, is that the um call is made to say, hey, we're we're selecting you for a community survey. This is going to take some time. Um are you available today or can we set an appointment to call you in the future so people have because everyone's busy. um it is set in time so that you have a general idea that it will take some time. Um there is not a definite amount of time and the reason for that from my question to Peter was I don't want to give a set amount of time because people will rush if they feel like oh it's only supposed to be 15 minutes and I'm on 15 minutes and I'm on question 30 or whatever. >> But at the same point they also don't want to say well if it's been 15 minutes and it takes them five minutes they don't want to feel like well what did I miss? >> Um in the fact that it should have taken me 15 minutes and now it be five. So they say sometime and sometime is that's why it's used. But >> I will say I mean I thought this looked insanely long but >> it does. >> Um but >> if they're professionals and they say that this is >> the question goes quick. So if I said how do you feel about or do you want Veterans Park? Okay. Give me a 1 2 3 four or five. Okay. And Okay. Do fishing. Great. So that question took 5 seconds and then one of the next questions. So they don't take that long. The average for the last time we did this questionnaire was about 14 minutes. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> Mhm. >> And there was good response. >> Okay. >> Y >> and that was my next question is how did they So my my con so Okay, it's a phone interview. >> Yes. >> Is it landline or is it >> both? >> Okay. Because I we're not getting a a very representative sample if we're doing landline only. >> Yeah. Can you guess both? >> Okay. is both the if you look at the spread in demographics from the last survey, we had almost an even spread between ages, time frame being in Dayton, um income levels or your comfortability with finances, >> um how many kids, um you know, it was a general very even or very similar evenly across the board. It was amazing how how much information is out there on you that you don't know. >> It's amazing. >> Lots of us know. It's just depressing and scary at the same time. Correct. >> Um and makes you want to crawl into a hole. But um okay, as long as the sample is a is a representative sample, I just I tell my students if the survey is landline only, you want to think hard about who has a landline at this point in time. >> No, it is it is both. >> Because of everyone in my family, my 90-year-old mother has a landline and nobody else does. So, >> I will have them do annual and monthly costs. That's what it sounds like from the council. They were okay with doing both of those. So, $10 a month or $120. We'll add that 5 seconds to the 14 minutes or >> Yeah. May and maybe it might take 16 minutes this time. >> There's two questions on there that I want to know why we put them on there. >> Yes. >> When it comes to affordable housing. >> Okay. Um what question number is that? Do you remember? >> 8 81 and 87. >> Okay. >> They're almost both identical. One's called affordable housing and one one's called a start home. >> Start home. Yeah. >> Um they are very similar. So, we we did add some dollar amounts in there because $50. >> There's depending on who you are. If you look at move up housing for one person might be a different number than somebody else or if you look at high-end housing, that might be a different number than somebody else. Happy to adjust those numbers if you'd like to. >> How are you going to build a $300,000 starter home? >> You're not. >> You're not. So, why have that question in there? >> Um, >> we went back and forth in this and that's cuz that's what we feel like a starter home is non-existent these days. So >> 50. >> Well, I'd love to see uh >> Good luck with that. >> Well, starter starter homes aren't new homes. >> So, wait, we can strike one of the questions. We're happy to adjust to whatever you want to do. >> Yeah. What do you say? >> I think starter homes aren't new homes. >> They are not new homes. You can't make them affordable. >> You can find a $300,000 home here, but you're not going to find a new one. >> Right. >> Well, this isn't asking about new. It's just asking about price, but maybe correct me if I'm wrong, Scott. What you're saying is 81 and 87 are basically the same question, right? I wouldn't have that number in there personally. So >> they're the same question and >> wasn't one. >> Yeah, I'm not >> one is related to so the first squad 81 for everybody who can't is starter homes under 300,000 y and the 87 is affordable housing defined by the MAC council as a single family home costing less than 306,500. >> But how do you >> and so we added that definition of affordable housing because if you just add affordable housing for you Scott it might be a different number. This is no different than anybody else. Sarah's a different number. Dave's a different number. Dennis is a different number. So, I'm fine with scratching one of them. It doesn't bother me either way. So, would you rather have affordable housing or starter homes removed? If you want to remove the question, >> I'd rather have the starter home than versus affordable housing. >> Oh, okay. >> Cuz to me, there is no such thing as affordable housing. >> Okay. So, you rather have 817 built house. >> Okay. So, you'd rather have 81 over 87. >> Yeah. >> I don't have a strong preference. >> I don't have a strong preference. I don't still don't see that. It's the same question. So, cut one of them. I don't care which one you cut. >> Yeah, let's cut 87 then. I I I think that same question. Yeah. >> I mean, it's off by $6,500. >> Well, that was not known prior to I mean, maybe it was known, but we were working the questions. >> Affordable housing. >> Okay. >> So, we'll replace 87 and then add 87 somewhere else back in with apps. So, be saving more questions. >> Yeah. Yeah. There you go. >> Replace the question. Anything else? >> That's all I got. >> There was some minor things, but I think we're good. >> Yeah, I I agree. I mean, I think you could word smith this thing to death, but >> I think it's important since we have a baseline that we not change too much of it because we want to be able to compare last time to this time. >> Correct. >> Yeah. These questions were not derived by staff. These were all derived by the Mors Leatherman Company. um we reviewed questions or had comments about dollar amounts or whatever else, but that was it. These are not crafted by staff. And then um with requests for the approval, I would also say that I will apply for the grant >> um related to the office of the I think it's office of state auditor. I'm fairly positive that um to see if we can get this thing paid for by grant dollars. >> It's in my other notebook. >> I was going to be good and have one notebook for city council. >> I'm pretty positive it's off of state. >> I've already failed. It's April. >> Okay. Yeah. Yep. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. >> Oh, wait. Were you motioning, Dave? >> He did. >> Okay. So, second. >> Any more discussion? >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed say no. Carries four to zero. On to J. >> Thank you, mayor, members of council. Um, that will be back to you second meeting in May. That's the goal. >> So, >> the survey. >> Yes. >> Okay. That's the as long as we can get responses and whatnot back. But that's any claims uh city staff's answer for any questions. >> So um I have a question and um Zach I already kind of reached out to you about this and so I just want to preface that I'm not I am not saying that anyone in the city has done anything wrong. But um at the I had recently been made aware of an a scandal I guess you could say in Austin, Texas where city staff were going out to eat on the city's dime like almost every single day. Um and uh and it blew up. It was a huge scandal. Um so I had that in the back of my mind. And then on this particular statement of claims, there was over $1,000 on food spent. Um, and those two things coupled in my head to be like, okay, do we have some guidelines around around meals and I would also like to reference that I was just fed by the city 3 hours ago. Um, so so again and at my own job, my work fed me last Friday. Um, and I uh am a leader for a tutoring program for students and I get to feed my students on the college's dime, right? Like, so I'm not saying that it is not appropriate for workplaces to to feed people. It absolutely is. Um, I just want to make sure like for for my student meal, we have a dollar limit. It's $14 per person per meal period. I can't go over that. Um, and so I was just curious, having seen that we spent $1,19212 on food in this payment of claims, do we have such guidelines? Like is there a cap to a per person per meal? Are there guidelines for like what is what triggers the yes, we're going to feed you, no or not? I know for city council it's if it's 5:00, we'll feed you. If it's later than that, you're on your own, right? So, I was just wondering if there were other guidelines for when the city chooses to pay for meals and when the city chooses not to pay for meals. >> So, councly do not have a policy. I did look in the personnel policy, which I didn't think was in there anyways, but I wanted to verify. So, it is not in any policies currently. Um the direction that we've always utilized as staff um along with my direction has always been if we could not do it any other time and or required everybody to come in or skip a lunch period or whatever then we would pay for the meal. If not then it's all on you. Um and so there was a number of trainings that happened in February. Um February typically ends up being a very slow month for both public works and police and you know various lawyer departments just because of the time frame of the year. And so we try to utilize that time for trainings and for um you know I would say um trying to get get the team together and stuff. So it happened to be that February is a busy month for us. Um I would say that this is not the norm. So but it was noted by myself and understood there is not technically a policy. I'm happy to put something together if the council would like to do that because we don't have that one technically. But that's been the direction is that if you could not do it any other time. So a department head meeting we would have okay we couldn't get anybody together. We're going to do it over lunch. We're going to feed everybody because everyone else has got too busy schedules and typically we could try to squeeze an hour in and it's normally around lunchtime because everyone tries to not schedule other meetings around lunch. So, um that's been kind of the direction at this time. But again, >> for me budget being Yeah. It's not like it's unlimited money. You still have to pull it out of your budget um within the department whether that's out of training or out of um supplies or wherever you're pulling those monies out of. it has to come out of a budget. It doesn't just get free willy-nilly and then you don't get to do anything else. So, >> and I don't and I'm like I said I it just happened because there was a lot all in one month I've seen this thing. So, those two things joined. Um and so I'm not saying we necessarily need anything. If there is for me it would probably just be a dollar limit per person per meal just so that like >> sure >> yeah we'll feed you cuz we're asking you but it's not going to be like $30 meal like um and >> I didn't serve steak tonight. I'm sorry. >> Yeah. I was hoping for some lobster. I was deeply disappointed. Um I mean we got the morale mushrooms that one uh what was >> that's not on those same time teasing you Scott. >> That's on my hard labor. >> So but um so I don't know if that's but if if this was a one-off and it just happened to be February and like I said I just happened to notice it this month because there happened to be a lot in this particular set. It might not be an issue but I just was curious what our process was on that. I don't know if anyone else has any concerns or wants to >> I don't. >> Okay. think, you know, I think as long as it's occasionally looked at, >> okay, >> we do have the guideline that says, you know, if you have to be working over lunch, we're going to cover it, I'm okay with that. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, so yeah, and as long as there's a budget for it and occasionally looked at and um then I'm fine with that. That was Oh, the other thing was just more out of curiosity, we had Adam's pest control out a couple times. So what's what tests do we need control >> related to okay so what is the line item on the paper claims say sorry what is the description >> I only ask cuz I want to >> I know you were right and I okay give me a minute someone else go I got to find >> so I will answer all the questions just in case um there's so we will always do um pre proactive management of whether that's some sort of pests related to uh bugs or whatever else around city halls and public corks and PD reason I asked the question is because we recently put Adam's Pest Control for our rental house. >> Okay. >> And so I wanted to make sure that that wasn't the question you're asking. Okay. >> Because that is related to a residential one and that will cover everything related to rodents and ticks and whatever. >> I think we had some additional treatments at the PD um with some ant issues. >> Yeah. Pass in the PD department. Okay. >> 90. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Yeah. So we get we get charged per time they come out. They typically come out four times a year. That's typical and it's like >> and residential is more expensive than >> and residential is commercial. So we pay $1,400 a year give or take for all of the city facilities for Adam's pest control and it's $650 for the one residence. So >> okay >> don't tell me how that math works cuz it doesn't matter and I already asked >> it doesn't math. >> So no we're good. That's I was just >> come up for one. It was in multiple places and that's why I was like wait why >> probably the different location different location >> I'm fine my questions do you answer them >> um just a couple and uh one of them was uh a couple here public works I guess that uh one of them is just curiosity Marty there's a $24.99 purchase of a knot brush I've never heard of a knot brush I'm just curious what it is. >> You know, I'm not being sponsored. >> Not urgent. >> Find out. >> Also, there was a for public works, there was a a $1,200 charge for conflict facilitation. Was that at training? >> Yes. >> Yes, that was training. Correct. We had um gentleman by the name of Dave Webb. He's been in here a couple times. She did some training on conflict management and and resolution for Marty and I. So, >> all right. Then the then the other one that I was just curious about um we've got that um leasing program through Enterprise and I know Paul's not here so he may not be able to address this but there were um two payments to Enterprise for PD lease payments. One for 19,600 and another one for 8,000. Seems typically we only have one of those kind of charges a month and >> yes so councelor fashion great question. So the reason why there's two on there if you look at the dates of when they were paid one was actually in March one was in April we missed the invoice that came through via it just comes through EFT automatically gets pulled out of our bank account and then I get the statement and I forgot to give the statement to accounting to put it in the system. So technically still got paid but now you saw two of them. Um the difference in the price is related to sales tax on the new vehicles that we got. So, we got two new vehicles in April and or end of March, one of the two. And you have to pay sales tax on the vehicles when you get them. And so, you pay them all up front. And so, that's why the difference in price between >> That's why that one was higher. >> That one was higher as a partial month for the lease and then the sales tax on that same vehicle. So, whenever you get it in a partial month, they charge you the partial month per day. >> I thought for that lease. >> So, is this a weird lease agreement where we're paying sales tax? >> You always pay sales tax on motor vehicles. we pay on them if we purchase them as well. So when we go to title them, we have to pay leasing, right? >> Leasing you have to pay the sales tax as well. They just bake it into the price and the lease payment normally, >> right? >> We don't have baked into the lease payment. We have we just pay it up in front one time. And >> I mean, I don't care either way that the numbers are going out. It's just >> so the reason for the two is because of the timing of going to a county, not necessarily that we we still paid them only once per month. Once in March, once in April, just happened to be timing that was related to why there's two on this bill. >> Yeah. and thanks for the explanation about the difference. So, um that's all I had. >> I did find my Adams Pest one. So, one is on page 90 and it's the number. It says 12260 and then on page 94 there's three. It says PWPWAC. >> So, I'm assuming PD police PW public works AC >> activities. Okay. So, that and then the other one must have been the rental on the 12 to >> either the rental or city hall because city hall what CH was not listed. So, one was on page 90 and the other ones were on page 94. >> Yeah, I'm assuming it's the rental house then. That is separate from the other. >> Yeah, because the other ones were all closer together. So, okay. >> Ch. >> Oh, 12 12260. That's city hall. >> Okay. >> That's our address. 12260. >> Okay, that's >> $149. That's right. >> Okay. Yep. Yep. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. >> Thank you for the Anybody else? Okay, we need a Oh, a motion and a second. >> Motion. So moved. >> A second. >> Any more discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. Carries four to zero. On to item L. >> Um yes, Mayor members of council. Um, you have in front of you the agreement related to action steps between the city of Dayton and WME. I'm going to forget what that stands for right now. Whitney Elafon Company or something like that. I'm going to I'm going to butcher what it was. So, that's what I'm going to say. This agreement is to memorialize decisions that the city council has already made. So, there's nothing new within this agreement um over the last several months into one document for the developer to close on the property. So, this is needed because the developer needs to close on the property or would like to and the lenders that he's using need to have some sort of documentation from us to to basically memorialize everything. The agreement notifies the council that the current accessibility to public roadways does not exist. So, I want to make sure that that is aware. The council has authorized the use of domain if through negotiation for purchase of the rightway is not successful. Um, and this requires the authority of the city council based on my conversation between the city attorney and myself. Um, again, I went back and forth with the city attorney of I I don't want to sign anything I shouldn't sign. So, >> yeah, this whole thing kind of seems odd. >> Um, it's a little odd only because typically we've already given plat approvals and stuff for a developer before they'll close on a property. However, um, we have a landowner I don't know if I have this in here. Um, we have a landowner who is looking to um, not move forward if we're not going to do anything for a while. So, we have an ANC land owner who is pushing the developer to close on the property. The developer won't close on the property because they technically don't have physical approvals like a normal plat process would >> and they want to, I don't know, provide their lenders with as much assurance as possible. But does does this tie does this tie us to are we going to be liably responsible if this doesn't close? If we don't get the uh >> if we if this does not get approved tonight, I do not know if you will have a Parkway neighborhood development that is >> and guess what I'd be asking and I think Scott is let's say we do approve it. >> Yes. Does this >> does it bind us >> bind us to do anything >> to eminent domain to go all the way through >> if a negotiation can't be reached >> here are we tied to the locking so that this is going to happen >> because it's technically out of our >> I don't know that answer and that's a great question for the attorney who I didn't have here um >> so that's my concern is is that and it seems odd to me that that the developer would close on something that he doesn't know he can go forward with >> right >> and I understand the home the the pro >> he has utter confidence that our process will be followed to know that we will move forward he has the confidence in the city of Dayton to do move forward on his behalf but I cannot I will tell you that I'm not going to be able to answer your question related to does this bind us or not because I don't know >> and I'm not going to answer a legal question that I don't have >> going forward may not be up to well >> so yeah there if if this does not get approved approved. Like I said, I'm just going to let you know that likely the landowner will pull out of the deal and then we will have no neighborhood, which is maybe what we don't have anyways. But it's us. Yeah, we're at the 11th hour doing trying to do 11th hour things. So, >> I personally can't go along with it. >> I uh I don't know what it's saying. It's the problem. I don't know what it means to >> I think this is a from my understanding this is a document again to memorialize that we've authorized imminent domain proceedings >> that if they >> that doesn't mean anything >> but we >> because we did that the council approved that on February 24th >> but with the understanding that if it reaches a point where we don't see success at the end we would pull back and does this make us not be able to pull back >> cuz that's really >> I see I see what you're saying is I mean we we >> yeah so what happens if we go through those processes and we are unsuccessful and or we pull out >> um does this then bind us? >> It's a great question that I can't answer and I know that if I don't answer right now which I understand I I just don't >> I understand this guy wants assurance he's going to sell his land. I get that. >> I get that. But >> because he's and I know why he wants that assurance. I talked to him about it. >> Yep. I I >> but I don't want this to tie the city into well all of a sudden we have to buy his land if it doesn't happen. >> This we would not have to buy his property. There's no ramifications if we would have to buy the property from the current >> or are we going to make sure that we have to have the >> what I don't know is if it binds us to the requirement to getting public access to that I don't that I don't know. The way I understood it is we're essentially memorializing decisions we've already made. >> That's what I understood it to be. But again, >> and I think that it is, >> you know, it may end up being important to ask the lawyer, but no, there was no timelines given. >> Authorizing, >> which I required them to not be any timelines because I did not want to have a timeline given based on the fact that I didn't know timelines based on information. >> Right. But ultimately it would take a a separate vote to actually um use eminent domain >> and we've already done that. >> Y >> we authorized the process but my understanding has always been that there's there's still a >> an additional one >> additional step that okay ne all of the negotiation possibilities have failed and now are we going to go to court essentially? Um, so you based on the decision made in the February 24th meeting, you have given the ability for me to go all the way to the end. >> That does not mean that I will go all the way to the end without talking touching base with the council. But you guys authorized us to use all the way to the end and using eminent domain at that February 24th council meeting. >> And I told you and will continue to tell you that I will do everything I can to not use eminent domain and make this work for everybody. So my my concern is if >> but yes I think hopefully I addressed your point of >> on page 115 it says now therefore the parties agree as follows sheny property the city shall acquire expeditiously either by voluntary sale and purchase or by its use of its powers of eminent domain such portion of the sheny property as is necessary for completion of the SWDIP and the public right of way. >> Right. >> To me that sounds binding. we're binding >> and that we are going to do this one way or the other. And though we want to, I don't like that it is binding in this document. >> Correct. >> Because we have no control if we're going to win the other. >> Well, that's just it. Like >> you could conrue the use of its powers to mean assuming we prevail in court. >> Yeah. But that also then assumes we will go through the court process >> even if we realize >> even we're going to get whacked. >> Yeah. >> Um >> Yeah. >> I mean to me this should have been here by both parties before this ever we ever got here. >> Yeah. We know that >> we're here. >> Speaking of but we're here and I can't do anything about backwards and I can provide you what I can know on my end. I know >> that that one line is what I I'm hanging up on. >> Well, and that is the the entire issue is that >> that single sentence >> is that single sentence because >> everything else I'm fine with. >> I mean, it's a no-brainer that if we had control of that, >> of course you would. >> Of course. Yeah, we we we and and >> so I can make you can make So what I would recommend if you guys are not comfortable with that language, I would ask that you guys look at some other language if you want the Parkway neighborhood to move forward. If you do not, then you can just leave it as is. And >> on page 115, >> I can we can try to do strongly or I'm just trying to >> I'm trying to provide the council with enough direction here to >> see this whole thing seems odd to me though because is this satisfying a bank or is this satisfying a a lever on us? Because >> this is the bank. >> Yeah. If this this is if this is just kind of agreeing to what we've already agreed to bank already can get at those motions, >> which is what I suggested, >> right? And so the bank I don't I don't buy that this is for the bank. I don't know that, but I have a hard time with that. >> So what I've been told is this is what the bank needs to memorialize it all in one spot. But again, that's what I'm being told. >> Yeah. Who wrote this this up? The Shenies. Um, no. The developer and then it was reviewed by our attorney. >> Okay. So, our attorney did look at this. >> Yes. >> And she was >> okay. >> She's okay with it. Yep. As it sits. >> I would approve it if we scratch that sheny property underline part. >> That is my hand up. Um, >> so would you scratch the sheny whole line or would you >> that whole paragraph where it says sheny property the city shall acquire expeditiously either by voluntary sale or purchase or by its use of powers of im imminent domain. Such portion of the sheny properties as is necessary for completion of the SWD in public right away. The thing is scratch that whole thing >> if this is the the Hank effect will be requirement requiring this. >> They want that line. They want that one. They want >> That's what they want. That's what That's >> because that's the whole hang up. >> Could something be referenced to the February meeting? >> We did that. I did that in item F. >> I should say I didn't do that. >> So, the attorney and I reviewed it together to put item F in there. >> Yeah. Um >> and we removed I mean >> removed as much as I possibly can to get >> the most bare bones. I obviously, you know, if this were to say something along the lines of this the city will here here's a squishy one try its best to get to get the right away. I'd be okay with that, but um >> I don't think they're going to think that's good enough. >> I don't think they're I think I this kind of seems like a lever. Again, honestly, >> I'm more if we could do the city authorized. Well, >> I'm trying to fix. So, the city I'm using item F is the city council authorized eminent domain proceedings as kind of the because that's what you guys did. That was actually at the meeting. >> We did, but that was with the understanding that you would use >> I will use >> some judicious thought. Stop at the right time. >> Yes. >> And we put that, you know, that trust in you. This kind of would bind your hands. >> Great. You say give me fired. Beautiful. That's just that's what I'm looking for. >> No, I I like I said, I can't give I'm not going to give you legal advice because I don't know, but I know that our city attorney reviewed it and she was okay with it. But again, >> that's as much as I have. >> Yeah. So, just you know, if if you did delete the the shady property paragraph, the next one is public rightway. >> Uh the city shall provide the property. This is the development project. >> It's rightway access to Dayton Parkway. It doesn't say how or through what property is. We're going to provide access somehow. >> So, I mean, that's more of a >> a gray area that we're we'll figure it out, but it may not go from the way. >> Yeah. May not go through shady. >> Well, >> that would give you that would give it enough. I would I would think. >> Wait, say that. >> So, instead of just strike just like council had mentioned, >> just strike the whole sentence of sheny property. say we will provide access if needed. >> Well, except can we? >> We can't. >> You can't. >> Well, we can. We provided a so um Jason provided a comment to the council that we can. It's not a cheap option, but it is an option >> to remove the median within and shorten the parkway and then come right off of the city parcel. That >> is that binding that you're going to have. >> And what happens to the preliminary and final plat? They are already they're the preliminary and final plans for the Dayton Parkway neighborhood are already passed their time. >> I know they're passed, but weren't they passed with an assumption of the road being >> No, no, sorry. When I mean passed, I mean they are no longer valid. >> They they are expired. >> They They're going to have to start everything over again. >> They have to start over again. Yeah. >> Um my question is in this public rightway, it says we'll provide it, but doesn't it does not say we'll pay for it. >> Correct. Well, it kind of >> and if it flies, >> how you going to provide it if you don't own it, >> right? >> We own we own property up to Dayton Parkway >> in the portion that we own between the between the Sheny portion and the Ro portion. >> If I'm somebody reading this provide tells me you're going to get it, >> but we already have it technically. >> No, but we're going to give it to >> Michael. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> Well, then how would we do that if we went with this route though? >> Um, sorry, the >> this other point adjacent the alternative >> the buku million dollar access. How's that? >> So, how would it physically be accomplished? >> Well, if we provide that >> Oh, >> see, I read if if I see something in a document that says you're going to provide me with something, >> that means >> I'm not paying for it. >> You're giving it to me. Yeah, >> the way I the way I'm reading this is that does obligate the city to provide the means for the access, not necessarily the access. However, it says necessary for the completion of the Southwest Dayton infrastructure project, which two paragraphs down says the city will pay for a caution. >> So, basically, you're providing >> means for the project and you're doing the project. That That's how I read it. I think we had a problem. >> I mean, okay. So, I would be okay if we take out the shinny property paragraph and the SWDIP, which says that we're going to pay all costs. If we take out those two parts that we'll help you get the public right away, that doesn't mean we're like you could because providing the public rightway does not necessarily mean we're putting the light in, right? It just means that there's separate from separate separate >> but like right now isn't that part of we had agreed to pay for the like >> not yet. >> No, but I mean like that has been in conversation. >> Has been a conversation but we have not agreed to it. >> Separate future separate project. >> Separate future project. >> Yes. But I'm saying like if if we have to pay some of this upfront cost then all those other things come off the table as far as I'm concerned. As far as like >> Sure. As far as I'm concerned, Michael and the the uh these people should have had this worked out before. >> Well, they thought they did and >> Well, that's not Yeah, that's their issue. >> But I mean, I think that's why this is coming up is because they thought they had it in verbal agreement and then it all fell apart and so they've learned their lesson and they don't want to go with that because they've learned that verbal agreements can be gone back on. >> Yeah. >> Hence why we're here. >> So, if it gets no motion, it does. You got it. >> It's true. >> So, all right. Well, do we want to talk about this a little bit more or >> So, I'm a no. >> I will >> no with as it stands or no with >> no as it stands. I mean, I'm I'm not going to approve this. Me personally, I'm a no. >> And my problem is I'm a little bit uneasy about altering language. >> I would rather have you if you're going to do something because we don't we don't have another council meeting. And um the closing of the property is scheduled to happen following this council meeting. >> Oh, okay. >> If this um it's been extended numerous times and we are at literally 11:59 before the pumpkin turns from a carriage into a pumpkin. >> I mean I would be okay I would say if we took out the sheny property paragraph and the SWDIP paragraph. I would be okay with that then. And how do you handle the city shall provide the property right of access, >> right? We already have >> we have an option and it was it's an expensive option but then we but we've also up to this point talked about forgiving some fee like >> there are things that we have offered that can come back like so that we can offset our costs I guess is my point is that we do have >> we had we had already we had tentatively agreed to some things that we were going to financially whatever and we can take those things back and so at the end our financial There is >> how much was that that how much did we basically allow them over and above what we normally would have hit with bees? I thought it was closer to u >> so >> when you counted for the I that was closer to like 600k or something like >> oh uh so we had verbally well we had agreed in the first phase to have them pay all fees and then in that first phase so this is the previous ones that are no longer valid but um the final plat had us have them pay all fees and then we'll be relieved of all fees in phase two as in you pay them all on phase one get the project moving and then we will leave you in phase two actually to the project um kind of I'm going to say some onus into the project and that was about a million and a half dollars. >> Oh, was that much? >> Yes. >> That includes the the road. So a million half dollars was the development fees and then the other half of it was supposed to come and the reason for that is because if you remember back in the agreement there was 150 units and that was based on um Jason Arzvald from Ellers and myself reviewing okay how many units would it take if we were to say you need to make this much money per year based on a tax abatement bond for 10 years and it was a million half dollars. So between those two things it was a $3 million roadway which is what was able to be paid for which is how that got paid for. So you pay fees of a million and a half dollars on the first phase. We leave a million half dollars on the second phase. So their net cost is zero for the developer and then they have to put in 150 units within that first phase that they build. So that we can pay for the roadway on a tax abatement bond for >> So now all of a sudden you go back to Michael and say all of that's off the table. Now you're paying the 3 million or million and a half. >> There is nothing currently approved right now. So >> worst case worst case scenario we end up with 50 acres. He uh well, we don't have to pay for the property anyways, but >> you know, some either you're paying for the road, you're paying for the the million and a half. One way or another, if this agreement right here, if we get hung on this deal, we either have to provide the road >> Yes. >> or somehow figure out how we're getting the uh the easement across it. >> Yes. Well, the easement across our property already has >> Yeah, but it's still costing Bu money to get it done. >> Uh oh, you mean the prop the project itself? Yes. I mean the project to get the access off of the parkways. Yeah. It's not free. >> It's not free. >> So even if we were to >> This is one of them things that why did we wait until uh the night before we have to have it done? It should have been done two weeks ago. >> I wish it could have been but we ended have a council meeting since 3 weeks ago. So >> well then >> gotcha. Um we had >> Yeah. Well, I'm guessing that when did you guys get this the gray back or when did you get this request? two and a half weeks ago following the cult meeting on the 24th. >> Well, that's by plan design. >> I got nothing for you. >> I'm uncomfortable changing the wording in something that the lawyers >> hasn't seen. >> Yeah, the attorney has seen this. >> Yeah, but if we change it, they won't see have seen or changed version. >> I'm not comfortable the way it's written. >> To me, that says we're paying for it no matter what. >> It does. It seems like that. And that's why I'm a little I I wish kind of wish she wasn't here to explain that cuz it seems like >> Me too. >> Seems like seems like we're on the hook for this. >> Okay. All right. >> You don't have a personal cell phone, huh? >> I do. >> Caller, if we beat this thing, >> I can. >> Well, you ain't. >> All right. >> It's either that or no. >> I need a motion. A motion on item L. I'll make a motion to decline. We can't do that. >> It has to fail three times, right? >> Yep. Action item is to approve the agreement. >> And I'm not hearing a motion. I'll ask for a motion again. And one more time. Okay. And that all fails. Well, from stem to stern, this whole thing's been kind of a unpleasant mess. >> All right, we are on to item M. >> So, you just have to read that. >> Um, which one is this? >> I'm going to go see a man about a pony. >> Yeah. You know what? Why don't Why don't we take a five minute? Um, cuz one of these was for >> second one goes. >> Oh, okay. So it seems we can talk. >> Um so we'll have to go into open read to go into close session and then start close session. >> Correct. I will epigen. >> Oh, he's still recording. >> Okay. >> Um, we'll come back on recess. Uh, pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D05, subdivision 3C3, a closed session shall be conducted to develop or consider offers or counter offers for the purchase or sale of real or personal property P32-120-22-23-00004. That's a motion. We need a second. >> Second. S. >> Um, all those in favor say I. I >> I all those oppos say no. Four to zero. We are in close session. Pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D05 subdivision 3C3 to develop or consider offers or counter offers for the purchase or sale of real or personal property ladder truck. I need that was a motion. I need a second. >> Second. >> Uh all those in favor say I. I. I. All those opposed say no. We are in close session. Okay. Okay. Now we have to open. >> No, I >> We're open. >> We need a motion, right? >> Yes. >> I need a motion. >> I make a motion to that our all in price is up to $550,000 for the purchase of a ladder truck. >> I'll second. Um, okay. And all right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> I. >> All those opposed say no. There's no grown. >> A grown. >> We're successful. I >> Okay. Now pursuant to amendment statute 13 DO5 subdivision 3C3 a closed session shall be conducted to develop or consider offer counter offers for the purchase of sale of real or personal property PID 31-120-22-33-00009 >> so move are you that was a move second >> all those in favor say I >> I all those opposed say no we are in Close session. So if there are no objections, we will be adjourned. We're journed. >> Thank you everyone.