Based on the context provided in the transcript and the names mentioned during the meeting (which occasionally differ from the provided list, likely due to a change in personnel or year), here is the transcript with speaker names added. **Note on Identifications:** * **Mayor Sors:** Presiding officer (the list provided mentions Michele Hanson as Mayor, but the transcript clearly identifies the Mayor as "Mayor Sors/Sar" and Michele Hanson as a Councilmember). * **Adam (City Administrator):** Referred to throughout the meeting (the list mentions Matt Kline, but the speaker is addressed as Adam). * **Connie (Councilmember Carlson):** Identified via roll calls. * **John (Councilmember Doll):** Identified via roll calls and his stated employment at Anderson Corp. * **Michelle (Councilmember Hansen):** Identified via roll calls. * **Andy Pratt:** City Attorney. * **Chief Eisinger:** Fire Chief (transcript name). * **Chief Eastman:** Police Chief (transcript name). *** [0:00] **Mayor Sors:** Okay. Would someone like to make a motion to approve? [0:00] **Councilmember Hansen:** I'll make a motion to approve the agenda for this evening. [0:00] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you, Michelle. Is there a second? [0:00] **Councilmember Carlson:** I'll second it. [0:00] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you, Connie. All in favor? [0:00] **Councilmembers:** Aye. [0:00] **Mayor Sors:** Opposed. Takes us to our proclamations, accommodations petitions and announcements. And the September recycling award recipient is Aaron and Ben Crowder at 244 North 6th Street in Bayport. And they will be awarded for their recycling efforts by a grant made possible from Washington County. So, thank you very much, Crowders, for your recycling efforts. This takes us to a very special part of our meeting this evening. We are going to celebrate and acknowledge 20 years of service from firefighter Chuck Oswald. And I'd like to call on Chief Eisinger, please, to come forward. [0:57] **Chief Eisinger:** Thank you, Madam Mayor and council members. At this time, I'd like Chuck to join me up here. And Chuck, if you want to introduce your family. I know you've brought quite a few here. [1:13] **Chuck Oswald:** Yeah. My wife Janet, her mom Dolores, dad Woody, my daughter Jennifer, my other daughter Jessica, and then my grandsons Levi and Brody. [1:23] **Chief Eisinger:** Well, thank you, Chuck. Um 20 years of service at the fire department is a significant event. Um and we appreciate everything Chuck did for us and a few stories about Chuck. Um Chuck was a member of a team that pulled a person out of a burning building, rescued a person, and he received a life safety award for that. We commend him for that. Also, Chuck was a part of a team that recovered somebody from the river. Uh he got wet in that case and was hospitalized for a little. But one of the things that really makes Chuck, you know, unique is he's been a key part of the Santa event for that we go through the day after Thanksgiving and lighting of the green. And so we appreciate that. So we really appreciate all the work you've done and on the committees, especially for the building committee. He helped us with that. So we're going to miss him. So with that, I'll ask the mayor to come up. [2:30] **Mayor Sors:** There is a certificate here. Can't acknowledge everything you've done for the city, everything that your family has done for us. You've all served and sacrificed on our behalf. Thank you so much for everything that you've done. 20 years in an all-volunteer fire department is just unbelievable commitment and thank you so much. So the certificate um just reads Chuck Oswald. Thank you for 20 years of dedicated service to Bayport Fire Department and our community 1999 to 2019. Thank you so much. [3:17] **Chief Eisinger:** As you know, the fire department's rich in tradition, and a member with 20 years of service, we give him his helmet. Present you your helmet, Chuck, and your badge. Congratulations. [3:17] **Chuck Oswald:** Thank you. Thank you very much. [3:50] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you. And thank you all for coming and supporting Chuck in his celebration. So, and if you feel like coming back, I'm sure they'd let you. So, okay. Well, now we're going to switch gears a little bit. We're going to go to our open forum where we set aside 15 minutes of the meeting to take in comments or questions from the audience on topics that are not on tonight's agenda. So, would anyone like to come forward? Okay. If not, then we'll move on to our consent agenda. We're going to pause just a second to allow... um, we got fire calls. Oh, fire calls. Oh wow. That's a good excuse for them to leave, right? We'll just pause for just a second to allow people that are celebrating and our firefighters who are responding to exit. [Music] Okay. All right. So, that moves us to our consent agenda and we'll consider a resolution adopting items 1 through 7, which includes the September 9th, 2019 city council workshop meeting minutes, the September 9th, 2019 city council regular meeting minutes, the September payables and receipts, including checks numbers 011504 through 011614, September building plumbing mechanical permits report, the hiring of Travis Lenander as our part-time police officer and PERA declaration, the renewal of a boat trailer parking permit with Anderson Corporation and grant agreement with the Department of Natural Resources for volunteer fire assistance for the fire department. Um are there any questions or comments or changes to the consent agenda? If not, would someone like to make a motion to approve? [5:47] **Councilmember Carlson:** I'll make a motion approving tonight's consent agenda 1 through 7. [5:47] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you, Connie. Is there a second? [5:47] **Councilmember Doll:** I'll second. [5:47] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you, John. [5:47] **Adam (City Administrator):** Thank you, Madam Mayor. Council member Carlson, I. Council member Doll, I. Council member Hansen, I. Mayor Sar, I. [6:03] **Mayor Sors:** Great. So then we also have the pleasure this evening of another fun event, and that is to swear in our newest officer, Travis Lenander. And I'm going to call upon Chief to tell us a little bit about Travis. [6:03] **Chief Eastman:** Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council. Mr. Lenander, as you might know, um applied for this position December of 2018. Um he was part of the eligibility list and went through the interview process and scored among the highest. Uh he passed all the required medical and psychological tests and I think he'll be a great asset with his crisis intervention experience. Just a little history on him, he's currently employed with Regions Hospital as an emergency tech technician. Mr. Lenander comes to us with a variety of experience both with Washington County reserve and Savage community service officer as well as a licensed position there. So, we're really excited to have all that experience, especially the emergency room technician portion. He's going to be a great asset. So, with that, I hope that you'll swear him in at this time. I'll have him step up. [7:25] **Mayor Sors:** So, um Adam, we don't have any other business. We just get to go forward with the swearing in. [7:25] **Adam (City Administrator):** Yes. [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** I, Travis Lenander, do solemnly swear... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** I, Travis Lenander, do solemnly swear... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** That I will support the Constitution of the United States... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** That I will support the Constitution of the United States... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** And of the State of Minnesota... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** And of the State of Minnesota... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** And faithfully discharge the duties... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** And faithfully discharge the duties... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** Of the office of peace officer... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** Of the office of peace officer... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** Of the city of Bayport... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** Of the city of Bayport... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** And the county of Washington... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** And the county of Washington... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** And state of Minnesota... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** And state of Minnesota... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** To the best of my judgment and ability... [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** To the best of my judgment and ability... [7:42] **Mayor Sors:** So help me God. [7:42] **Travis Lenander:** So help me God. Thank you. [8:23] **Mayor Sors:** I'm going to have his Father Roy step up. And I also want to thank our cable staff that works so hard to get us live streamed because his mother Michelle with one L is at home watching. Very much. Why don't you step up here, Roy, and pin on his badge. Thank you sir. [Applause] Thanks to our other officers for attending as well. Thank you. Okay, we do not have a public hearing this evening and we do not have any unfinished business before the council. So, our first item of new business is to consider an application submitted by Anderson Corporation for a variance from impervious coverage requirements for a parking lot and storm water improvement project at 104th Avenue North. And Sara please. [9:31] **Sara Taylor:** Thank you, Mayor. Uh the Anderson Corporation campus is zoned industrial and guided for industrial use by the comprehensive plan. The proposed project involves resurfacing two existing gravel parking areas with a new bituminous surface and installing two rain gardens to infiltrate storm water runoff. Because Anderson Corporation was developed prior to adoption of the city zoning code, much of the plant does not meet current standards, especially in regard to lot coverage requirements. For this reason, Anderson is requesting a variance to allow flexibility with impervious coverage to facilitate this project. Um this is a picture of the project map here on the screen. Um, as depicted in red outlining, the project involves a north area located adjacent to Point Road and a south area located adjacent to the public boat launch off 4th Avenue North. The north parking area consists of approximately 1.4 acres. It'll be converted from gravel to a bituminous surface and the remainder will be converted to a vegetative green space to decrease the impervious surface and reduce storm water runoff. Um this will result in a net of 1.3 acres impervious. The south parking area consists of 1.7 acres. This will also be converted from gravel to bituminous with an additional 150 square ft added to expand a drive lane and improve traffic in the area. Two rain gardens will be constructed near the south parking area adjacent to the St. Croix River resulting in a total reduction of .02 acres of impervious for the overall project. Uh state statute dictates that a variance shall only be permitted by the city when in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance consistent with the comprehensive plan and practical difficulties prevent compliance with the zoning ordinance. In this specific case, staff feels the intent is to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance. Uh there are circumstances unique to the property and the variance will not alter the overall character of the neighborhood. As proposed, the parking lot improvements will not substantially alter the appearance of the site and actually result in increased compliance with current city code, which does require that off-street parking areas be surfaced with either asphalt or concrete. The rain gardens will also help enhanced treatment of storm water runoff, which is a positive improvement over the existing conditions. The planning commission did hold a public hearing on this application on September 23rd. Following discussion, they voted to approve the variance subject to findings of fact and conditions of approval recommended by staff. A resolution outlining the conditions of the variance is included with their packet tonight. Um, now I'd like to call on city engineer John Parr to review his comments on the project and then following John's comments, staff and Todd, a representative from Anderson Corporation is here to address any questions. [12:09] **John Parr:** Great. Good evening, Mayor, members of the council. Um, there is a memo in your packet that should summarize the status of the engineering review. Uh we had done an earlier memo. The applicant had made some revisions and uh we subsequently revised the memo to respond to those revisions that were made. I think uh it's going to be most helpful if I just step back for a minute and address some of the most common questions that come up with an application like this. It was something that um was well-received at the planning commission meeting. And so if you don't mind, I'll just take that approach here this evening. Again, uh the upshot is that um Anderson Windows needs to comply with their industrial storm water permit which is issued by the state of Minnesota. And uh that permit requires them to implement certain improvements over time to increase storm water treatment, to decrease runoff, and to treat the runoff that does discharge from the site. Uh we're looking for them to treat for things like total suspended solids, and a gravel parking area is considered in terms of impervious surface. It's considered impervious, just like an asphalt or concrete surface because when they're compacted and driven over, the runoff volumes coming off of those surfaces are about the same. Um, having said that, water that runs off a paved surface tends to be quite a bit cleaner because it doesn't pick up as much fine sediment that is inherent in gravel surfaces. So, if you took side by side, same size gravel and paved surface and monitored the runoff, quite a bit more sediment, fine sediment would come off the gravel surface. So, um, Anderson's project is seeking to improve the quality of the runoff from their complex by paving gravel surfaces. We generally accept that that is an improvement to the environment and that it caps the gravel surface and contains all those fine particles that are a part of the gravel. Uh now the gravel will become part of the base of course and then this will be capped. So again the two key points there from an engineering perspective here are that you know, A, the gravel surface is considered impervious just like the asphalt paving will be. So from a runoff standpoint, volume should be about the same. And B, the paved surface will result in controlling some of the sediment that's currently running off the site either directly or indirectly into the St. Croix River. So from that standpoint, we consider the proposed improvements to be an improvement to that condition. So, uh, with that, if there are any questions along the way or at this time, Mayor, I'd be happy to help respond to those. [15:31] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you, John. Is there any questions for Sarah or John? [15:31] **Councilmember Carlson:** Can I just clarify what you just said? So, not only is there going to be slightly less impervious surface according to this .02 acres less, but that impervious surface is now going to not be gravel. So the runoff will be cleaner. [15:48] **John Parr:** Correct. [15:48] **Councilmember Carlson:** Okay. Just make sure everybody understands. [15:48] **John Parr:** Right. And I didn't mention I think Sarah did, but um they did also include in their proposal the installation of two optional rain gardens. And optional in the sense that they're not required by the city or the WMO or the state at this point. It's they're going above and beyond what's being required installing these rain gardens. And those will further help treat runoff before discharges and the rain gardens are on the south lot. [16:13] **Councilmember Carlson:** And the other clarification is that they're still not in compliance with our impervious surface percentages because they were sort of grandfathered in at a certain point or what would you call that? [16:33] **John Parr:** Yeah, that's a good question whether you want to call it grandfathered or you want to call it these improvements were constructed prior to that ordinance being in effect. Some people don't like the term grandfather. I guess I would defer to your attorney if that's important distinction or not, but that sums it up. [16:52] **Councilmember Carlson:** Okay. And so, even with these changes, they're still not compliant with the impervious surface percentages that the city would want them to have. [16:52] **John Parr:** Well, that the city ordinance would otherwise require that they have. [16:52] **Councilmember Carlson:** Thank you for being more legal about it. Yes. Okay. [17:11] **Mayor Sors:** So, um, may I also ask questions of a representative from Anderson? Would you like to come forward and introduce yourself? So, um, I appreciate very much that there's, you know, going to be an improved surface and that there are things that you're doing to help with that, contain the runoff in the rain gardens, even though they're optional. So, I appreciate that very much. Now, as city streets, we typically do street sweeping a couple of times a year to gather up salt, sand, other sediments to keep those from going into our storm sewers and fill up our gardens. Do you do something like that every year? Do you clean off your... [17:59] **Todd Nlesky:** My name is Todd Nlesky. I'm an environmental engineer with Anderson Corporation. Uh, and yes, we do typically every spring have a large sweeping event to pick up mostly all the sand that's left over from our winter sanding and salting operations. Uh, if there is a need for additional cleanings throughout the year, we will do them, but that's not always a routine. [18:21] **Mayor Sors:** Okay. Well, good. Thank you for that. Um, and there's probably limited other ways that, you know, with that amount of surface to, um, add in more green space or more rain gardens and such. But would Anderson consider adding in more screening, you know, to separate the community from the parking lots? You did, you started with efforts along 95. I'm just wondering if that was any conversation because any green additions to our environment are beneficial to all. So, not only aesthetically, but also environmentally. [19:00] **Todd Nlesky:** So I I would have to take that to like our technical services director, but I believe that we have done quite a bit in the past and I don't think we'd be hesitant to doing any additional plantings or or things like that in the future. [19:16] **Mayor Sors:** That would be appreciated. Connie? John? [19:16] **Councilmember Doll:** Um, oh, go ahead. No. Hi. Um, so hi Todd. Nice to see you. Um, so in interest of full disclosure, I'm employed by Anderson Corporation, but wearing my council hat, one of the things that always pops into my head and I'm not an expert in this area. I'd love to hear from the city engineer and or Todd. I know impervious or pervious asphalt is an option. Um it's not a great option where there's heavy traffic area, but I know pervious asphalt is used in parking situations and that can um it's definitely a cost penalty. Um, but when we're at virtually 100% impervious coverage, I feel like, you know, and I again I would completely agree with what the Mayor said in terms of rain gardens and going above and beyond, but maybe there's a little more room to go above and beyond. So, I would just like to throw that out there and um maybe hear from people with more experience than me on pervious asphalt and whether that was considered or not. [20:50] **Todd Nlesky:** Yeah. So, John and I... I don't have any personal experience with pervious asphalt. I don't know if John has any. [20:50] **John Parr:** Sure. Mayor, members of council, we do have experience with porous pavements. Um they come in a variety of different solutions. There's pavers, there's, as council member mentioned, porous asphalt or pervious asphalt and concrete; there are all three available and used to varying degrees of success. Um, you know, I would agree that in the heavy duty traffic areas, they might not be the best fit there for a variety of reasons. One is there's some additional structure needed there and the pavement takes a pounding. Um I just want to say that while trying something like that in the parking areas might be a little bit more appropriate, it is just to acknowledge that there is a considerable cost difference to the applicant for something like that. And it would be great if they would want to look at that as an option and see if it's something they can incorporate into their project. Maybe in the parking areas that are just exclusively commuter vehicles, that sort of loading would be a place that could be done. And in some areas we've seen where for instance the drive aisles are not pervious, but parking spaces themselves are. That would be an option. But again, just knowing that there's a considerable cost difference, um I guess I would have to defer back to the Anderson Corporation as to whether it's something they feel like they can absorb. Does it help? [22:28] **Councilmember Doll:** Yeah. um yeah, I I just feel like, you know, it would be one thing on our impervious coverage, but understanding they've been there for 100 years and it's been built over all those years... um we're not close. So, I I guess I feel like um it's not an unreasonable expectation to want them to go and and frankly I understand I want to be business friendly and friendly to neighbors but the cost quite frankly isn't a consideration for me. That's the price of doing business, I guess. [23:13] **Mayor Sors:** So, would you be asking us to maybe postpone this and ask Anderson to come back with a slightly varied proposal? [23:13] **Councilmember Doll:** I think that would be fair. At the same time, um I will probably be abstaining from the vote based on any perceived conflict of interest. I don't know if you have any thoughts on that, Andy. Um and I don't know what you'd think about me even offering this kind of thing up with my councilman hat versus my Anderson employee hat on, but I certainly don't think it's unreasonable. [23:51] **John Parr:** Mayor, just a thought. I don't want to leave out important information that could weigh into your decision one way or the other. Um, just so council is aware, porous pavements under our regulation don't offset your impervious surface calculation. Um, our ordinances don't really allow that. So in other words, if if the hope with the pervious pavement is to decrease the overall imperviousness of the site, it doesn't do that from a regulatory standpoint. Now, understanding that there's a bit of a tradeoff... I mean, you may not get to say instead of being 99%, now we're 98%. You don't get that kind of credit. But we also understand that implementing something like that does change the run characteristics. So it does act for the life cycle of that pavement. It will act a little bit more like a lower runoff site than it would otherwise, but it will not decrease the overall imperviousness from a calculation standpoint. [25:20] **Mayor Sors:** Do you know how close to pervious surface it actually is? Like does the runoff is it like 80% the same as if it were like grass? [25:20] **John Parr:** Yeah. So that's a good question and um you have to chuckle every time as an engineer, you've probably heard an engineer say a thousand times: it depends. And that is the answer. It depends. We can do very aggressive porous pavements that store a lot of water and infiltrate a lot of water and would act very much like a green space. When you get into that aggressive a build of course the costs are really escalating. So, some of those pavement designs are not intended to completely mimic the green space, but maybe they're just intended to reduce the runoff by 20%. Or, you know, something along those lines. So, it runs the gamut in terms of what your options would be there. All cost more than what we're talking about with the current proposal, but the more you want it to act like green space, the costs go up. [26:14] **Mayor Sors:** Is there space on the edge of these surfaces where we could buffer? I know again all green plants and matter will help aesthetically and with absorbing runoff and chemicals and sand sediment etc. you know, and it's not very friendly to look at a big mass of black tar. So, whatever we could do along Point Road, down by the park... is there room along these surfaces to leave a bit of space to add some of that green? [27:01] **Todd Nlesky:** I think in especially in the north parking lot improvements, there is green north of the proposed parking area that is currently and will be grass. That's an area we could do some additional plantings there. Um the area on the south improvement. I don't think we have space to do anything south of the south improvement, but we're fairly close to the lot line setback there. But we would have to look back to our consulting engineer to have them look at where we could add some features. [28:21] **Councilmember Doll:** Yeah. anything along Main Street, along Point Road, along Highway 95 that helps with that buffering would be appreciated. Okay. Well, and especially I'm very familiar with the south lot. That's when I drive, that's where I park. Um so the the red outlined area you can see is gravel and that red line on the east side virtually goes to the river. There's no area for any sort of runoff to be absorbed before it flows into the river. Is this slanted in some way? [28:37] **Todd Nlesky:** It's pitched a little towards the river there, I would say. [28:37] **John Parr:** Yeah. Will it be pitched in the opposite direction to go toward a rain garden in the future? [28:37] **Todd Nlesky:** In the future state, it'll tip towards rain gardens that are going to be installed along the east between the parking lot and the river. We will have the two rain gardens that will receive most of the runoff from the paved areas, the newly paved areas. [28:37] **John Parr:** Mayor, again, sorry to interrupt. In my engineers memo, there's comment number 11. And in that comment, I had suggested the applicant slightly depress or grade the area along Point Road to provide a little bit more storm water infiltration. That is an area that as I understand it, is slightly depressed now from the parking lot and from the road. Probably acts a little bit more like a big old wide open ditch to convey runoff from both Point Road and from the parking lot to the north northwest where there's some storm sewer. But if the applicant was willing to lower that area about a foot, maybe 18 inches, then we could create a location where water can go and hopefully then infiltrate within 24 to 48 hours. It would provide some mitigation for some of the pervious surface. I think it would be probably a better functioning, easier to maintain option than like a porous pavement would and I think there's room for it. I in fact sketched out a design if you will that I'd be glad to pass along and it's I think something that if Anderson would be willing to consider would be a relatively inexpensive option for them to construct. [30:39] **Mayor Sors:** And what is your timing? Were you planning to get this done before winter or is it a next spring project? [30:39] **Todd Nlesky:** Uh we hope to do it this year still. [30:39] **Mayor Sors:** And so this is just a suggestion that you had that you just discussed point 11? [30:55] **John Parr:** Mhm. Yeah. It's been in both of my memos. [30:55] **Mayor Sors:** What did Anderson say to that? [30:55] **John Parr:** Uh well I don't want to say word for word but I think the initial response was well we're not interested in that at this time. I think yeah that's good. Did I summarize that? [31:13] **Todd Nlesky:** Okay. [31:13] **Mayor Sors:** So you suggested it and they said no thank you in effect. Yes. Um but you know as these things go there's there's give and take and you know offering suggestions and if you will negotiating at some point too. [31:30] **Mayor Sors:** I think we are missing a page. [31:30] **John Parr:** Mayor they on purpose. Okay. Uh, so what I do, and I know this can be confusing, but from my first memo, I like to retain the same numberings. So I remove the comments that have been addressed between the first and second. Gotcha. And so that's why the numbers jump. I apologize for the confusion there. [31:30] **Mayor Sors:** So if they said not at this time, is there going to be a time? [31:30] **John Parr:** Well, that's up to you. [31:30] **Mayor Sors:** Yeah, I think if you want to make a condition of approval... um, is that something that's not as... I mean, it sounds like the pervious asphalt is expensive and maybe not as good at infiltration as this other option could be. [32:41] **John Parr:** Yeah. So they probably would do it considerably cheaper in an open green space both short-term and long-term costs than you would in a porous pavement situation. They're just tough to... they perform really well if constructed well for the first number of years and if they've received real good maintenance it might be a decade or 15 years or so that they perform well but you can't see really what's happening below the surface whereas with an open green space you can see that and you can see when the water's pooling too long and for instance go in and do some sediment removal to restore function. So they're just a lot easier if you've got some room for them. The open spaces are a better option. [33:20] **Mayor Sors:** Well, it's it's set to be surface turf anyway. So if we... and grading when you're moving that much equipment shouldn't be a real hardship. So is it a matter of just losing space or is it the same space only grading it differently? [34:19] **Todd Nlesky:** For us, it was just a matter of having an additional area to inspect and maintain in addition to the two that we're already adding. [34:19] **Mayor Sors:** Okay. I think that that would be a nice option. So, what does our legal council think about us putting something like that into the... like would we do that to someone else or are we just doing it to Anderson because we know they're a big corporation? I mean, I just want to like I don't want to put a mandate on them that we wouldn't put on somebody else and get in trouble for it. [34:19] **Councilmember Carlson:** Well, you'd never get to be at 100% improper coverage on at your residence, right? [34:19] **Mayor Sors:** Right. So, I know that's true, but I just I'm just asking because I don't... Great question. I mean, I'm not... I think it's a great idea. I'd rather see them do more, but I don't want to set a precedent here that we aren't going to do other places. I don't know if we have any other places that are 100% impervious right now. Connie, did you want to... [34:19] **Andy Pratt:** Mayor and council on that question and then I'll also want to answer council member Doll's question earlier. Um on the first question, conditions on variances need to be roughly proportional to and sort of equivalent to what the variance is requesting. So for example if you put on a condition that has nothing to do with anything the project is asking for—like to put a clock tower on one corner of the lot—that wouldn't fly. But this one, and I'm certainly deferring to John on the engineering points, he identified that in his memo and so I think that is definitely appropriate to include as a condition; it doesn't violate any direct link to what the project is doing. So the question is you know would there be some negotiation that Anderson would do with the city that come to a good conclusion for what everyone's looking for. Um now if you add a condition I would recommend that it gets very specific as to what we're asking for and what the company knows that they need to comply with so they can maybe come back with an alternative or or just comply with it. I don't remember if I recall the time limit on this if there's plenty of time or we get an extension or something. So while she looks at that, council member Doll's question is a good one. Since you work for the corporation and I have no problem concluding from a legal standpoint that there's no conflict for you to engage and vote and and do all that. Um from a legal standpoint, the statutes around conflicts of interest for city council members typically revolve around are you gaining a personal financial benefit to you or your family by voting on this? Well, this to me is a just a straight variance application, land use application that I don't think it's going to put $100 a month in anyone's pocket necessarily. It's not like that. It's just getting the land use approval that the city code doesn't allow for. So you are not gaining a personal financial interest by this vote. Now, how it looks or how you want to engage on this is really up to you. If any council member works for any company that comes before the council with a land use application, that council member has to basically make that his or her determination on that. And so it's entirely appropriate for you to recuse for sort of non-legal reasons. Okay, that's what I'll say on that. [37:42] **Councilmember Doll:** I appreciate that explanation. Thank you Andy. [37:42] **Councilmember Carlson:** So, I have another question. Instead of requiring that they go onto some type of different surface, I think John's number 11 is a good compromise and I'd be okay with requiring something like that versus making them go back and put a whole different surface. [38:13] **Mayor Sors:** Michelle, so if I'm understanding the map, the area that's gravel is right now the area that we have agreement with them to have boat trailer parking. Is that correct in the south lot? [38:29] **Todd Nlesky:** Correct. Correct. [38:29] **Mayor Sors:** So, how does... will that affect that if it becomes turf? [38:29] **Todd Nlesky:** We don't intend to touch the boat parking area. We're going to leave that as is. [38:46] **Mayor Sors:** Oh, okay. It looks like it's part of it from this red marking, but it's hard to tell far away. Okay. So, isn't that where the boats park though on that gravel? [38:46] **Todd Nlesky:** Yes. [38:46] **Mayor Sors:** Okay. So, you're planning to just leave all of that as it is. [38:46] **Todd Nlesky:** Our plan parking will be paved up to the gravel for trailer parking. [39:09] **Mayor Sors:** Oh, and so what John is suggesting is that we convert that over to something or because I thought it says area north. Sorry, I was reading about the north parking lot. I thought we were talking. Well, my point was that the boat trailer parking... and I don't know how many feet. It obviously depends upon how high the river is. It's pretty high right now, but it's if you've parked there before, it goes right on top of the river. [39:09] **Adam (City Administrator):** So, point 11 is only about the north parking lot, right? Doesn't help with that runoff that's coming right off the gravel. And where exactly are they going to place the... this is hard because we have one very small drawing. Um, members of the council, there are more detailed engineering maps of both parking areas. And on the second one, the south parking lot, as you can see, there's a call out for protecting the existing boat trailer parking. So that's the part that'll be left. Uh that's kind of cut out there with the dotted lines. Um just on those on that point, the city is currently in discussions with Anderson regarding assisting with future land water legacy project. And part of the concept plan that has been discussed when if the boat launch is moved to the city property that boat parking area will go away. And there's proposed improvements—greenery space. So there's an opportunity for future improvements regarding the storm water management. So that's just something to keep in mind. They did have additional improvements proposed as part of the concept plan for that area. So that is a future opportunity. Not to say that additional improvements or requirements or conditions can't be imposed by the council on this project. Um, but that boat parking area will be impacted in the future. [42:16] **Mayor Sors:** But is this the appropriate time to talk about that because we're actually talking about impervious surface right now or... [42:16] **Adam (City Administrator):** I think we need to keep the two separate but just to keep in mind that there will be potential opportunities. That portion is being left. I was just explaining why that portion is being left because there's potential for it to leave it as green space. [42:16] **Mayor Sors:** Right. So, that's... I just wanted to make note of that. And I guess what I'm concerned about is that down the road when we if this comes to fruition and the boat launch is moved, is that an appropriate time for us to talk about the fact that they have impervious surface over here to deal with? feels like now is the time for us. [42:16] **Adam (City Administrator):** That'll be another part of... I mean that'll be a separate conversation, just another future opportunity to come back. I imagine that there'll be more projects with Anderson as we have every couple years. Um so it's an ongoing conversation. Um as staff has pointed out, it's 20% is where they're supposed to be if they were to build today. Clearly they're over 100 years old and it's grown and it kind of is what it is. So, we're trying to make the best of it when staff has the opportunity and we do this with private residences as well where if they're getting a CUP or some other improvement to their land and we do have a non-conforming situation, we try to improve that. The current code as pointed out just doesn't really have any additional teeth to have specifics. Um but it is within the council's purview to add these conditions where they think appropriate. [43:25] **Mayor Sors:** So the south parking lot will be structured so that the runoff is going into the two different rain gardens instead of going into the river. [43:25] **John Parr:** Sort of. I mean the runoff from this big paved area is generally west to east and the rain gardens are north of the boat parking and south of the boat parking. So there will be a certain amount of the parking lot that'll sheet flow across the boat parking as it does today to the river. But I it looks like they're going to do a nice job of capturing I'm just going to estimate say 40 to 50% maybe even more of that parking area in these rain gardens. And then there'll be a certain kind of swath down the middle there that'll run straight off. And that's just the nature of how it flows today. [44:36] **Todd Nlesky:** Just for reference, this is our south parking lot. This feature up in the northeast corner here is one of the rain gardens. And this feature in the southeast corner is the other rain garden. Uh I think John was referencing this northern maybe 40% will be concentrated into this rain garden and the southern 10 to 20% will flow into this rain garden while the central some of the water from the middle of the parking lot will sheet flow over the existing boat trailer parking which is right here and then down the bank into the river. [45:15] **Mayor Sors:** There's nothing we can do to keep it from going down the bank into the river as maybe John suggested in the beginning. So why is it being designed where you can't do the shedding of the water to each direction? [45:15] **Todd Nlesky:** I believe it was designed to minimize the volume of grading that we have to do. Um, if we were going to take this central area and discharge it to one of these two features here, then we would have had to either excavate these deeper or bring fill in here to make those grades work. [45:15] **Mayor Sors:** But is it... I mean I'm trying to figure out minimal ways to do what we need to accomplish that are not... I mean digging a hole deeper doesn't seem like it's that challenging to do. I mean I can see where maybe grading the parking lot in different ways is more challenging and more expense. But digging a rain garden or maybe making it just slightly bigger to accommodate doesn't seem like it's that much of an ask. just as the other on the north side where you're going to have green space anyway to make that a larger depression. Again, it's a bit of an inconvenience and it's, you know, probably added expense and but it seems like these would be really good environmentally friendly things to do. [47:28] **Todd Nlesky:** I think the biggest bang for environmental buck in this project is to put asphalt over the gravel. Personally, it is a 90ish% reduction in total suspended solids runoff into the river. Uh but you know, if the city puts additional conditions on us, we would be happy to go back and design those in. [48:05] **Mayor Sors:** I'd like to see that. I'd like to see that effort and at least have the conversation. [48:05] **Councilmember Carlson:** Yeah. It's kind of sad that we're not even trying to do anything with the runoff from the middle of the parking lot. [48:05] **John Parr:** I feel that the proposal is already a vast improvement. I don't hear him suggesting that we're necessarily going to pave those boat parking spaces. [48:05] **Todd Nlesky:** We don't intend to pave the boat lot. Just going back to the fact that we are even doing this project is better than it was before. [48:05] **Mayor Sors:** Right. And I will attest to the fact that in that gravel area it's bad in there. I thought he had a suggestion. But I think that we possibly do have an option to have these two rain gardens maybe with a greater depression and potential to capture more rain runoff and then an additional depression rain garden on the north side. So what do you guys think? [50:07] **Councilmember Carlson:** So you're reiterating the plan as it is as well? [50:07] **Mayor Sors:** No, I'm adding making these two rain gardens on the south side larger to accommodate. Does it take away parking spots for them by doing that? [50:07] **Todd Nlesky:** I think there could be an opportunity to push them further towards the river to the east. [50:07] **Mayor Sors:** And then also the one on the north side north parking lot instead of just grass to maybe make it a slight depression. [52:12] **Councilmember Carlson:** Well, I guess my main thing would be that north end doing something down on that end. And I guess if they've improved that, I I'm okay with the way they have this, but I would like to see that north end something done down on that end, the north parking lot, that depression, making that green space into a more of a depression as outlined by John in item 11. [52:12] **Mayor Sors:** I guess I feel more urgency with this runoff that's going directly into the river. So that's why I'm proposing all three. [52:27] **John Parr:** So the infiltration practices we're talking about are here and north. These are the two infiltration practices. And then we have this middle area here. And I think what I'm hearing is that we're talking about possibly trying to improve something in this area here. [52:27] **Mayor Sors:** John, and I suggested that would be ideal. [52:27] **John Parr:** So, this is the area that's already starting to go down the slope. And so, I don't think we'll get this to tie into these necessarily. It can provide its own treatment. Um, but there's going to be some tree removals down on this end. There's a few here. Um, but are there like better grasses or anything that can keep this runoff from going in? [58:43] **Todd Nlesky:** We could consider removing the turf grass and planting it with some sort of a buffer strip. More of a robust planting John's referring to. [58:43] **Mayor Sors:** I think that that would be really appreciated. [59:29] **Councilmember Doll:** Todd, are you guys... and I'm going to maybe sound foolish here... do you guys deal with the Middle St. Croix Watershed management organization at all and Matt Downing? [1:00:16] **Todd Nlesky:** We've mostly worked with Mike. [1:00:16] **Councilmember Doll:** Okay. Mike moved on now and Matt Downing is our interim. I'm the council representative. They're an outstanding resource for any of that kind of stuff. I would ask that we reach out to them. [1:00:16] **Todd Nlesky:** We actually in 2015 Anderson partnered with the watershed organization and wrote a storm water master plan for our site. This was actually one of the projects identified was to pave this area and install some rain garden features. [1:00:16] **Sara Taylor:** Madame Mayor and members of the council, we're bumping up against the 60-day review timeframe. I think by adding John's condition number 11 and then with the message to add some a buffer strip there along the boat trailer parking, I think those are things that we could work through at a staff level. Um just adding those conditions and the council would be recommending approval contingent upon those items and then we could handle the review administratively rather than extending the application another 60 days. [1:02:02] **Councilmember Hansen:** I'll make a motion to approve the variance from impervious coverage requirements for parking lot and storm water improvement project at 100 4th Avenue North um with the condition as outlined in the engineers memo point number 11 for the north parking lot and also a condition that our city administration will work with Anderson to upgrade the buffer between the existing gravel parking spaces and the river for the south lot. Um and also adding conditions of approval as stated in section C of the staff report. [1:02:02] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you, Michelle. Is there a second? [1:02:02] **Councilmember Carlson:** I'll second it. [1:02:02] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you, Connie. Um, with this, do we need a roll call? [1:03:42] **Adam (City Administrator):** Yes ma'am. You do. Council member Hansen, I. Council member Carlson, I. Council member Doll, I'm going to abstain. Mayor Sors, I. [1:03:42] **Mayor Sors:** Motion passes. Thank you. Thanks everyone for working through that. Okay, so now we have our second item of new business to discuss residential solid waste recycling and yard waste collection proposals. And we're going to turn that over to Adam. [1:04:00] **Adam (City Administrator):** Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um, I just also want to point to the council, Franklin Roach from Republic Services, our current trash hauler, is here this evening. Welcome. Roach, was there anything that you wanted to speak to the council? [1:04:24] **Franklin Roach:** Hello, Franklin Roach with Republic Services. Madame Mayor, members of council, thank you so much for having me. Republic Services has enjoyed working with the city for over 15 years. Uh we just again would like to share that we've been working very diligently to respond to your questions with regards to customer complaints. Um we've been doing much better. The complaints that we have had over the last 3 months has been one; and that was in regards to a customer who said that we missed his house. So we did go back out as soon as it was brought to our attention and we did get that serviced and taken care of. So, I just wanted to keep you abreast of what was going on and let you know we do enjoy the partnership and we'd like to continue to work with the council and work with the city. Thank you. [1:05:47] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you. We appreciate your willingness and in making those efforts. [1:05:47] **Adam (City Administrator):** Yes, ma'am. Members of the council, the city issued an RFP in July and in August we received back three proposals: one from the current hauler Republic, one from Waste Management, and one from Highland Sanitation. Council member Buckley is out of town for this meeting so that ultimate decision will be postponed. You can see that there is one option that will actually be a price decrease. One of the areas that the proposals came back regarding the yard waste... the current contract proposal from our current hauler is substantially higher than the other two. [1:11:24] **Councilmember Carlson:** Excuse me. Are you talking about organics? [1:11:24] **Adam (City Administrator):** No. For Republic, they only do commercial. Waste management does not either and nor does Highland. Highland sanitation was the lowest overall proposal. Both Waste Management and Highland do offer organic disposal but it would be at a city facility. [1:14:16] **Councilmember Carlson:** What does resident user expense mean for cleanup day? [1:14:16] **Adam (City Administrator):** It depends on what they're bringing. It's been several years since the city has operated a cleanup day. Highland offered where you could also have a citywide curbside event. [1:22:28] **Andy Pratt:** I wanted to remind the council that the actual RFP submissions are still considered to be private data under the data practice act until the completion of the evaluation process. [1:23:27] **Mayor Sors:** I like some of the things that were being offered by Highland. I like weekly recycling. I think that is that we've been asking for something like that for quite some time. [1:25:48] **Councilmember Carlson:** Um, the current numbers... do they include state or county taxes for our current provider? [1:25:48] **Adam (City Administrator):** No. All taxes have been removed. [1:25:48] **Mayor Sors:** Personally, I wasn't impressed with how a recent complaint was handled. I was disappointed that it took a council member for some action to actually happen. I'm glad that we are exploring different options because we should be able to expect a really high level of service from whichever vendors we're using. I'm not keen on engaging in legal activities if that could be avoided. [1:29:44] **Councilmember Doll:** My family started recycling our organic waste. I would encourage people to look at that option. I know there's other families in Bayport that wish they had an organic recycling option. [1:33:31] **Mayor Sors:** It's going to be a dumpster and it's going to have an odor that would need to be accommodated. I'm not sure where that would be. [1:33:31] **Councilmember Doll:** For us, we have it in the freezer and on collection day it goes out. [1:34:17] **Councilmember Doll:** Pickup times... I have no interest in somebody driving around with a garbage truck after dusk. [1:34:17] **Adam (City Administrator):** Our current ordinance dictates the 7 to 7 as the hours. Highland did request a change to 6 to 6 to get the trucks off the streets earlier to deal with morning traffic and schools. [1:37:34] **Councilmember Carlson:** Like John, I guess we've never had an issue with our collection. I'd like to see what John Buckley has to say. [1:38:47] **Mayor Sors:** I'm leaning towards Highland. I would say that that's guidance to Republic: that if we continue on for another year that to be in the running things better improve. Thank you. Our other item of new business is also a discussion topic for this evening and it's consideration of short-term rental ordinance amendment. Um currently there's been several different conversations on this topic. I'll turn it over to you. [1:43:49] **Adam (City Administrator):** Thank you, Madam Mayor. In January 2018, city council voted 4 to 1 to prohibit short-term rentals at the time and continue researching the issue. I've been discussing with the council just to try to get to some format that we can get to. I have three specific questions: whether the council wants this to go back through the planning commission, what additional public engagement is desired, and what is the desired timeline? [1:56:41] **Mayor Sors:** I personally think that it takes... we'd be in our best interest to get make this more clear. I would personally like to see the opportunity to just have something in a newsletter saying this is an important rezoning. I don't know it needs to go back to the planning commission. I would like the opportunity to have more communication and more input and if nobody still shows up so be it. My preference is to push this vote until January. [1:59:42] **Councilmember Doll:** My gut kind of told me yes on the planning commission. I think we got a couple new members that maybe haven't been involved in this yet. I'm definitely in favor of the public engagement aspect of it. [2:02:00] **Councilmember Carlson:** I was fine without the planning commission, but I'm strongly in favor of getting more public engagement. I disagree with you guys on the timeline a little bit. I think the people that are waiting for an answer... I think we owe them a little bit of consideration not to drag it out too long. [2:04:30] **Councilmember Hansen:** If there's this huge opposition out there, we haven't heard more say. [2:04:30] **Mayor Sors:** I have had people on the sideline come to me and ask. I've had it on both sides. I just don't want them to come back and say, "Well, you didn't give us a time to come back and have a special meeting for that." [2:08:16] **Adam (City Administrator):** At least the city had the forum. They can't say they didn't have the opportunity to be heard. [2:20:06] **Mayor Sors:** I'm not saying it'll change my mind one way or the other. I'm just saying you're giving those people the right to come in and be heard. [2:21:52] **Councilmember Carlson:** I think we do have to have that one more opportunity for engagement. [2:22:24] **Councilmember Hansen:** If we're going to have a public hearing, I'd rather just have us have the public hearing instead of going through the planning commission again. [2:24:31] **Mayor Sors:** Enforcement would be pretty key. [2:24:31] **Chief Eastman:** Prior administrator had me working on some ordinance and I have some stuff prepared because we'd be enforcing it. I already have some council review. [2:27:48] **Councilmember Doll:** I'll make a motion to untable the short-term rental discussion. [2:28:07] **Andy Pratt:** Can you make it into two motions? It's non-debatable to take it off the table. [2:28:24] **Councilmember Carlson:** I'll make a motion to take the short-term rental proposal off the table. [2:28:24] **Councilmember Hansen:** I'll second. [2:28:24] **Mayor Sors:** All in favor? Aye. Opposed. [2:28:43] **Councilmember Carlson:** I'll make a motion to take the short-term proposal back to the planning commission for a public hearing. [2:28:43] **Councilmember Doll:** I'll second that one. [2:28:43] **Mayor Sors:** All in favor? Aye. Opposed. [2:29:05] **Mayor Sors:** That takes us finally to our city council liaison reports. Michelle? [2:29:05] **Councilmember Hansen:** The cable commission did meet on September 16th. We also got to see the new Valley Access Channel website. We spent quite a bit of time discussing some new FCC order that is kind of going against the contract that we have with Comcast. [2:31:49] **Mayor Sors:** I did not have any outside activities as Mayor responsibilities. Connie? [2:32:15] **Councilmember Carlson:** I did not make the last library board meeting. I have nothing to report but what was in Jill's report. [2:32:48] **Councilmember Doll:** I was absent from the September Middle St. Croix Watershed meeting. Something pertaining to Bayport is the inconclusive test results on the E. coli in Perro Creek. [2:33:49] **Chief Eisinger:** For the month of September, our call volume was 97. Hopefully people saw that in our fire prevention week calendar. We have an open house this Saturday. [2:35:45] **Chief Eastman:** Derby Days was excellent. BCAL did a wonderful job. Qual shoots coming up on the 17th. Halloween... just want to remind everybody we are not having an open house this year. We will have officers in reserves posted in quadrants throughout the city with glow necklaces and candy. [2:40:06] **Councilmember Doll:** I just noticed a lot of vehicle traffic in and around school during that time. Chief Eastman and her staff really stepped up and made it a much safer situation. [2:40:06] **Chief Eastman:** Thank you. [2:40:06] **Adam (City Administrator):** One item I just want to refer to in Chief Eastman's report. You'll see the call log there. We're still trying to narrow down format-wise. [2:42:21] **Joe Hansen:** Public works staff is working towards fall preparation. Street sweeping will be starting. We also did some street patching lately. The river is back up—it'll reach 685 feet today. Finally, at Lakeside playground update, the equipment will be shipping October 18th. [2:46:57] **Mayor Sors:** Thank you. Sara? [2:46:57] **Sara Taylor:** The term expiration for Colleen Siegfried and Aaron Oaks expires December 31st. I submitted an application for the water efficiency grant program. I also attended training on preparing for the upcoming presidential primary election on March 3rd. [2:52:21] **Adam (City Administrator):** Staff also met with MnDOT last week to discuss the median in front of the school. We are going to have soil in the middle instead of concrete. Construction will start in May. We will not be able to have a permit for the Memorial Day parade on 95, so we'll be rerouting it. [2:57:20] **Councilmember Doll:** In terms of the public having any interaction on possible changes, will that ship kind of already have sailed? [2:57:37] **Adam (City Administrator):** Yes. We're well past the public input point for the actual project. [3:00:27] **Mayor Sors:** Anything with the railroad? [3:00:27] **Adam (City Administrator):** It's being processed. Hopefully, we'll hear something soon besides a train. [3:01:05] **Mayor Sors:** I'd like to congratulate Anderson Elementary on their 100 years. And to all of BCAL, once again, thank you very much for the effort. If not, would someone like to make a motion to adjourn? [3:02:04] **Councilmember Doll:** I'll move to adjourn. [3:02:04] **Mayor Sors:** I'll second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed. Adjourned.