As an expert transcriptionist, I have reviewed the dialogue, the provided list of officials, and the context of the meeting to assign the correct speaker names to the transcript. **Note on Identifications:** * **Charles Cadenhead** is presiding as the **Acting Mayor**. * **Matt Hirn** is the council member referred to as "Hearn." * **Nick Dragisich** is the council member referred to as "Drasic." * **Jack Griffin** (City Engineer) is the speaker for the Engineering items. * **Administrator Schroeder** is the Interim City Administrator presenting the contract and financial reports. * **Miss Jensen** is the Planning staff member presenting the variance and CUP items. * **Clarissa Hadler** (Finance Director) is the speaker referred to as "Miss Adler." * **Julie Johnson** (City Clerk) is the speaker referred to as "Miss Gor" or "Miss Johnson." *** **[00:00] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance so please stand as you are able yep okay pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all thank you the second item is the approval of the agenda can I have a motion **[00:27] Council Member Matt Hirn:** support first by council member Hearns **[00:29] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** second by council member drasic **[00:30] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** all those in favor I I I motion approved next item on the agenda is the approval of April 2nd 2024 Council minutes **[00:40] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** so move **[00:41] Council Member Matt Hirn:** second **[00:42] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** motion by council member Dr message second by council member Hearn to approve the minutes from April 2nd seeing no discussion to possibly change all those in favor say I I I none none opposed okay fourth item would be public comments and inquiries so this is the phase where if you wish to speak on items that are not on the agenda for tonight uh there are forms in the back to indicate as such and right now it appears we have two and um I would just remind those who do wish to speak there's six minutes and on the form that you signed there are um some items listed for decorum policies they're pretty straightforward and I'm sure we all are uh very capable of having a good time and just letting us know what your thoughts are I just last item to note is uh it's not a Q&A if there are items that need followup staff will uh follow up and if necessary the council as well but we do appreciate anyone who has feedback for us so first up is Mr burn Fleming if you could come to the podium and please state your name and address for the record **[02:08] Burn Fleming:** thank you for the opportunity and with a six- minute limit I guess I better get rolling um a number of us in the neighborhoods along Inwood had a chance to listen to Rachel development make a presentation for the development of the Abra property this led to a whole Flack of questions in my neighborhood Tory Pines I've also spoken with folks in Lake Elmo Heights and Park View Estates so I wanted to summarize our key points and I've arranged them in priorities let me start with Priority One upscale homes I don't think that's a problem it looks like we're all on board for good quality homes traffic well traffic may seem an odd thing to bring up in connection with eard development it's the one thing I heard from uh Parkview Estates and Elmo Lake Elmo Heights as well as Tory Pines traffic has become heavy it's noisy and it's fast we'd like to make two suggestions a speed reduction to 45 say from 15th up to where the 40 mile per hour sign is now and a turning let's see traffic circle I guess that's what those darn things are called at the intersection of Inwood with 15th Street third item the sewage treatment plant that would go in and that of course is required the one in this proposal would take a fair amount of property and I want to point out that it would be nice if um the primary and secondary sep septic areas had a fence around them and perhaps the use of a burm to improve sight lines fourth item water runoff it looks like this will be pretty well handled as I understand it holding ponds to catch the water that is run off and then that will be recycled to sprinkle on grass and whatnot sounds good that shouldn't be a problem now Municipal Water we're all interested in good pressure Tory Pines has good pressure I know Lake Elmo Heights several homes do have booster pumps I I just want to make sure that g whiz with say 60 some new homes will there be a pressure problem or perhaps when Lake helel Heights is connected to the eart property main maybe that helps their pressure but these are of Interest also that's the five main things priority two um um I get hit with this all the time less density economically I don't suppose that's going to happen but I have to raise the issue um there'll be a building for the controls and monitoring of the sewage treatment system I assume please make it neat and nice in appearance um I'm going to mention burms again this particular proposal proposal by uh Rachel uh States will be at least 300 ft between the homes in the new development and those in Tory Pines and on the on the North side Lake Elmo Heights Third Edition that sounds pretty good but could we maybe consider burms uh I noticed that the uh Southeast corner of um 10th Street uh and Inwood you have a retirement community they've used a lot of burns there to pretty good effect I just want to raise that issue for consideration um fourth item and priority to construction traffic uh this will be of concern to Lake M Mo Heights Third Edition of course and I understand that until the 31st home has a building permit the connection from the road into eart would not be connected to Imperial and Lake Elmo Heights so that helps for a while and I've noticed most contractors are pretty good about that sort of traffic but I just wanted to raise the issue last P last item priority three sequential batch reactor that's what has been proposed by Rachel I looked this up on the internet and I didn't get anywhere if anyone on the city council or the city engineer perhaps Marty powers that wasn't here would know of such an installation within reasonable driving distance I'd sure like to see it we're interested in gee how do they work are they quiet are they noisy do they smell are they reliable that's my six minutes thank you for listening **[08:08] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** thank you Mr Fleming and you are exactly one minute early get back up there next up Ms Susie Dunn **[08:24] Susie Dunn:** I'm back Susan Dunn 1108 upper 33rd Street North Lake Elmo I've got five items on just public comments and then the sixth one I'll bring up separately I was wondering when you're doing your uh Workshop meeting if you could maybe investigate minimum impact design standards it's something some other cities are using to mitigate some of the issues that Lake Elmo is is ex is experiencing and I would try to offer some kind of alternative things to maybe look into number two do we still have the tree City designation I haven't seen any signs around there used to be signs and maybe with the construction and stuff they just got taken down and never put back up or perhaps we're not a tree City anymore Arbor Day is coming up April 26th and I think the Parks Commission is and the and Adam have been coming up with something I haven't seen specifically yet but I look forward to seeing what they want to do number four uh this was a sad thing Dick Johnson a past city council member passed away uh he lived up in the Tri Lakes area up by Lake Jane and he served on our City for many many years in different capacities and I wanted to know if you were aware that there was a recent article in the Pioneer Press on the Krueger Tree Farm did anybody see that uh they put significant parcel of land into the Minnesota land trust and to me that's really good because it's Habitat protection Agricultural and open space values which were very important to the city I'd like to the city to maybe recogn NI at and perhaps honor them for what they're caring and their all that they have done for the city over the years and now to my real my real thing are you ready okay put my glasses on for this one I want to thank you again for allowing me to speak tonight re regarding our concerns during this public inquiry period who was responsible who's accountable an LLC or the city with the adoption of the 24 comprehensive plan our home and other existing single family homes have been put at risk of water damage due to the alteration of the terrain and the intensity of the new type infill products that are being introduced into the city having lived in our city for only 52 years only one time has there been a concern for flooding and that occurred when we had a quick thaw that happened in January the culverts were frozen and unable to handle the water Larry boore of tkda Dan oliger and our city crew council members and other residents all helped open CTS we came together as a city to help our residents flooding did occur and things were damaged not in my home but other homes recently I respectfully request that my elected officials invite the Planning Commission and others to actually visit the new style products and review you what can be done better when you're reviewing the Old Village plans 33rd Street North that's a place I'm talking about were the first new infill product introduced into the city the Old Village area what might have sounded like a good idea and a revenue generator for the 2040 plan in actuality may not have been a safe wise sustainable choice for our city please take the time and interest to investigate our concerns in our city this is so others may be protected I appreciate your time and I would like to just put up with one the magic thing Julie showed me how to push the button here so we'll see what and this is just our our area and I've got like three feet that that might might contribute to something so here we go we'll see if this works does it work kind of kind of crooked but it just kind of shows the area the blue is our boundaries and there's one little area on the northeast maybe 10 ft 4T that water would actually leave our premises everything else stays on our property but with the increase in elevation of the the part under the trees to the to the downside there that's where this fourplex went it covers almost the entire 410 of an acre please come and stop at actually visualize it's one thing to do a Google map or look over from the thing but I don't think the city realized the impact it had to the older established homes our residents were made where we supposed to have air flow this is all blocked our residents had Sunshine that's all going to be blocked so it is a real heartache and it's a real disservice to the residents to have this happen in close proximity when other alternatives were available and I realize all the developers are going for the High Buck they want to fing as much as they can but it would be nice if you have one area that does that but not any the established areas so please consider my thoughts make a make a comment and look at those minimal impact design standards if you have time thank you because we all want a better city thank you Miss Dunn how many minutes do I have left 30 30 seconds oh God **[14:15] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** I do not believe we have any presentations tonight that brings us to item F which which is the consent agenda and as there are three items I can go for that number two approve payment of dispersements number three approve Public Works operator job posting four approve resolution of Municipal support for the preferred alternative for the casa 15 Manning Avenue improvements 10th Street to 30th Street resolution 2024-046 with that is there a motion for the consent agenda **[14:48] Council Member Matt Hirn:** motion to approve consent agenda **[14:49] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** support **[14:50] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** motion by council member Hearn seconded by council member drasic all those in favor I I consent agenda is passed that brings us to the regular agenda number five accept bids and award contract for the 2024 Street and utility improvements resolution 202 4- 045 Mr Griffin **[15:15] Jack Griffin (City Engineer):** thank you acting mayor and councel I'm here tonight to present the uh the bids for the 2024 Street Improvement project and ask for the award of the contract um start with the project schedule of where we were uh we started this project with a feasibility uh report being authorized on April 18th um then presented that report in October um that move moved us to a November or or November was just a minor revision to correct an error um and then on the 21st we had the public Improvement hearing following that hearing the council ordered the preparation of the plans and specifications at the March 6th council meeting we came back and the council approved the plans and specifications and we ordered the advertisement for bids uh we did receive bids on April 4th and so tonight we're here to award the contract and tonight's um action would be the final action to move the project forward into construction and this is all with construction then starting and being completed this summer so the the street Improvement project 2024 Street Improvement project includes two neighborhoods one's the Carriage Station um neighborhood up in the northeast corner of the city and then one is Jamaica court right off of the roundabout on Stillwater Boulevard they're both full depth Reclamation projects The Carriage Station Improvement is just spot curb replacement um then installation with just that installation of that parking Bay next to the park um everything else is is pretty minor um improvements to storm sewer and hydrant and and so forth um we did not do the water main Improvement in that neighborhood which would have resulted in uh a larger one of the streets being fully reconstructed so as you'll see that will play out when I get to the budget part of this presentation you'll see we're well under budget and that's one of the reasons that explains that uh Jam ports really the pretty much the same project we started with it has a full depth Reclamation it's a rural Section Road so it's a ribbon curb concrete ribbon curb that's going in on the edges of of that pinus um they do have existing 4-in water M it's getting replaced with 12in water M um and then that current that road currently terminates in a hammerhead turnaround and after working with the public works department and the fire chief we're replacing that with a circular called AAC it's a undersized one but they preferred the smaller diameter culd toac to the Hammerhead that's there right now so as I mentioned April 4th we received bids we we got three contractor bids with the low bid being Northdale construction company in the amount of 1 m965 312 bids were fairly close uh between the three biders so we felt good about that we take then the construction cost of the project we look at the total project budget and I've presented two columns there one was when we presented the feasibility report and then one's the post bid so you can see the construction cost has dropped from 2.8 down to 1.9 million and that has to do with the water main uh savings and the Reconstruction of a portion of that street and in addition to getting um good good bids on this project as well um so then the rest of the cost we roll in there and we're um running at about 75% of the total project budget cost from when we presented um the feasibility report and that's with carrying a 6% contingency into construction um then I have listed the the funding for the project about just under a half a million dollars will be paid from the water fund and then the street and storm sewer fund is about 1.5 million and then the assessment revenue is coming into about 662 and that's based on the potential of lowering assessments so when we adopted the feasibility report we had uh a preliminary assessment role and um generally by the end of the project if we're under budget we are able to follow the same assessment methodology and lower those costs so you can see the total assessment Revenue will will probably come in lower which means each assessment will be reduced so in the in the red there I've presented um you know in carage station we're looking at a unit assessment of about 6,000 that's projecting about 4600 at this point um the still and then the Jamica Court was projecting at 8,500 and that's looking more like it would be around the 7,000 so those those aren't officially changed at this point that'll happen at the end of the project but it just gives you an ni a sense from a a budget check on the project so with that um and being well under budget we're asking the council to accept the uh the bids and award a contract to Northdale construction company in the amount of 1,965 31231 um and then we're also asking um for a motion to authorize material testing contract with a and a not to exceed amount of $29,400 for for the project questions for Mr Griffin **[20:50] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** we do have a uh resident who would like to speak on this topic before there are any motions uh same same stuff six minutes deorum applies Mr cliff not can get the last name right there we go **[21:10] Mr. Cliff:** thank you thanks for the opportunity to come and speak I appreciate that so I'm here to talk about uh a minor modification to the design of curb that's to be replaced as part of the 2024 Carriage Station Street rebuilt project recently I emailed the city Engineers Jack and Chad to understand the status of the Carriage Station project as well as understand if repairing sunken concrete in front of my home and my neighbor's home immediately to the east of me would mean the curb in front of my driveway would be replaced uh if so I wanted to request that a standard driveway approach be installed instead of just surmountable curb I call uh I'd like to call the council's attention to pictures of Street projects completed in the tamarak farms and Tanner Ridge uh developments these pictures show what a driveway approach is so the first picture that you have is from Tanner Ridge shows surmountable curb with the driveway approach that I'm requesting the second set of two is from tamarak farms and that shows surmountable or excuse me barrier curb with uh driveway approach um just to talk about that for a minute one of the things I was told was that the city's standard is surmountable curb so I don't understand why we've got two different curb options in two developments that are right near Carriage Station it just kind of baffling when supposedly surmountable as standard so during a phone call last Thursday the 11th I was informed that a decision was made to replace all curb in Marquez Lane Cove North which is my street I live on the south end of that culdesac and that uh replacement of all curb was uh to be done versus spot replacement that was the original approach um to repair the sunken curb and the drainage issues in two spots on the south end of the culdesac further I was told replacing all curb was less expensive than the originally planned spot replacement and side note I wouldn't be here tonight uh if spot replacement was still the decision in that culdesac no one's really been able to tell me what the cost difference is to do the spot replacement that was originally planned versus the full curb replacement on the perimeter of that culdesac um all I was told is it's more cost effective to do all of the curb in that culdesac um that is running around the perimeter along front footage and driveways in two separate discussions I asked the engineer to provide a standard driveway approach for the driveways in my culdesac except for one driveway with stamped concrete which I understandably uh realize they want to stay away from that and one driveway with pavers twice the engineer declined to consider the request first I would assume that since equipment will be used to form an install new curb on the entire perimeter of the culdesac that set equipment can also create a standard driveway approach without that being labor intensive it's my assumption uh if my assumption is incorrect and the equipment is not that sophisticated uh I guess I would ask for an explanation on how it was done in Tanner Ridge and tamarak Farms so uniformally second if I'm uh going to be assessed for a PO portion of this work that cost at 4600 or whatever it turns out to be dollars why won't my minor reasonable request be granted in summary I look at this as something city government could easily say yes to but is choosing to push back for reasons that are not clear and have not been verbalized isn't government supposed to work with citizens when requests are reasonable don't create safety issues um and aren't burdensome or costly why is it that two other established housing developments have standard driveway approaches as part of full curb installation and Mike cesac is being told no also why is it that the engineer said the city's standard curb install was surmountable and yet we see barrier curb installed at tamarak Farm two years ago I don't know if there's been a change I'm asking this Council to revisit the project specs and if my request for driveway approaches for five driveways is not onerous or cost prohibitive to please take action to direct a design change for Marquez Lane Cove North slightly different topic uh also I was told there is a strong likelihood that this project May begin in my development in early May that's about two and a half weeks away I also understand that there is to be a homeowner session held separately or before the council I have not seen any any communication scheduling that homeowner session to address outstanding questions like project start project duration project schedule for the various components sprinkler head removal timing and mailbox impact if any thank you for your again your opportunity to uh speak and address the council thank you and I lost the cap to my pen actually it's oh thanks **[26:35] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** than can you go back to the previous slide just with the timeline um as that was one of the questions um what other just so for the record and for those watching what other um communication steps are there between then and now **[26:55] Jack Griffin:** um there's a every year we we do Street projects of course we always have a construction meeting um held virtually with the property owners before construction starts um so after the award of the contract then we begin working with the contract so right now we don't have a Contractor on board so we don't have a schedule I don't know where he came up with the schedule or where they're starting because I haven't had any conversations with the contractor at this point it's possible Chad's had some informal ones um but you get the award of the contract we send out contracts that usually takes about two or 3 weeks to process and get signed we ask for material submittals and things like that from the contractor we asked we um we schedule a pre-construction meeting with the contractor and we have that meeting they deliver schedules at that meeting and then we have a meeting with the property owners and we begin to talk about what to expect during construction and who to contact and and how we'll work with them through the construction process **[28:00] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** and at that point that's when a homeowner would know for example sprinkler heads and and timing for that **[28:06] Jack Griffin:** well they may not know at that meeting they'll know how they're going to be communicated with at the time because we don't always know at that point either **[28:13] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** y any other questions for Jack **[28:16] Council Member Matt Hirn:** maybe just talk a little bit about the curb issue um still I haven't looked at the plan so little confus about at all **[28:22] Jack Griffin:** yeah we've had a lot of conversations um with the gentleman um I've overheard my my colleague have conversations with them um it's it's not as simple it's not a simple difference and the projects are very different so we're doing what you have is you have existing D4 curb it's not surmountable curb it's not highback curb it's a it's the V curb it's a d it's called a d412 curb so it's a different curb than what we've have in most of the neighborhoods but it's an existing curve it's already in the neighborhood and we're doing spot replacement so we're putting putting that curb back um the only reason the curb is being removed throughout the most of his um the culdesac and it's there's two cacs in the neighborhood is because the cacs have drainage problems on top of it so it's not just find the crack curb and spot repair them but we're having to replace the curb to fix drainage issues the the drainage designs are very precise the plan sets show are loaded with spot elevations and loaded with drainage grades if we change the curve now we change drop downs it's a it's a full redesign of the culdesac so we have to go back to the design team re-engage the design team and then figure out if it is possible um one of the things they're asking for is we have some grades we have some driveways that are of the steeper nature in that neighborhood and if you start to do drop down curb it's three in and then you start chasing that three inches back into the driveway toward the garage right now the project is replacing the curb and matching into their into their driveways so any lowering of that means we are now redoing driveways on top of it so you're going to see increased cost increased scope and we don't know what we're doing to the slopes of their driveways um at that point in time so we don't there's we don't know how far back into those driveways we have to go so it's it's a it's not Apples to Apples to our previous projects or the project examples that um he sent out this afternoon where he's looking at previous previous years **[30:22] Mr. Cliff:** I have a followup question **[30:23] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** at this time the the opportunity has ended you're free to email afterwards with um engineering staff or counsel but the opportunity is as passed **[30:35] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** so the curbing gutter putting will match a curbing gutter that's there existing in the in the rest of the neighborhood **[30:40] Jack Griffin:** in the rest of the neighborhood yes yeah thank you and then and none of the other neighbors they have that existing V curb at their driveway so we're it'll it'll match what's in the rest of the neighborhood so long story short be from the engineering perspective it's they're not comparable they're not similar because of number one the drainage issues but also the the potential to for changing the slope is what I'm hearing yeah it's it's a so to say yes to the request starts with first re-engaging the design team and redesigning the culdesac from beginning to end because you are we're dealing in inches in the in the in the grades of and we're dealing in half percents on the curb runs um and then you're matching into the back of driveways and you're dropping 2 or three Ines if you're if if you're going to drop the curb like they want to and that's going to cause you now to reconstruct driveway which wer which is not part of the scope of the project right now so now you're and some driveways you might Chase back a foot some you might have to chase back 20 feet or half half the way if the grades are too steep by dropping that that so we don't know the feasibility of it yet because we'd have to redesign it first see what the feasibility and the issues are that come out of that and then you and then also see how much more driveway work is getting added to the project how much behind the curb is getting added in the boulevard and then we'd have to assess what the costs are so we're not able to speak to the cost but it's not a simple request it's it's a can it be done yes but it's a it's a redesign of what the scope of the work has been to date **[32:20] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** thank you for that clarification any other questions for staff no question if there are none I would entertain a a motion at this time **[32:28] Council Member Matt Hirn:** move to approve resolution number 20244 accepting bids and awarding a contract to Northdale construction company for the base bid in the amount of 1,965 31231 for the 2024 Street improvements **[32:45] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** support **[32:46] Council Member Matt Hirn:** I'll just now there's motion on the floor um thank you for the um the images um for the feedback um this is helpful and and I totally agree that you know being in this position I do want to be able to work with citizens as much as possible and make those adjustments when possible um and we've and we have done that going with the city Engineers um review of this I agree that this would would change the scope significantly it wouldn't be a minor change um I don't think it's going to impact the safety I think it is still it's a it's it is the right plan so as much as I would to be able to make some changes to it I think it is the right one as as it's presented **[33:32] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** anything for my fellow engineer **[33:34] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** no I I would just I would Echo council member Hearn in regards to it there's always that that fine balance between we are here to represent our our citizens our fellow neighbors and then to do it on behalf of the city overall and there try as often as is possible to have that be in the same same Forward Motion because that's that's the goal for everything I I think for this specific request it really comes down to the the change in scope I I think is probably the the lens where I would see it from and I I wish it weren't I wish it were something where we could more easily adapt to a concern that's brought forth correctly and in a fantastic Way by providing comment both by email and in person um kudos for that and that should always be encouraged uh I just don't I don't see this as being something that is within the scope of this this project and as such I will vote for the motion as is **[34:36] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** I would agree if it didn't involve a complete redesign at this point of the project it might be you know might be something we could consider and probably would but we have all the bids are in and going back and redesigning it would potentially Expos us have to rebid the project um depending on the on the amount of the change because this point we don't have an award but it could potentially pushes back it's a redesign of just that call toac or if we're changing drop down curb for everybody or giving that option that would that would be a bigger change but if you were doing just the call toac it's a redesign of that call toac we wouldn't go over the limit or we have to rebid it I I don't think it would be a rebid just be an increased cost **[35:20] Jack Griffin:** it's an increase cost and delay yeah which your contractor could claim an extra potentially **[35:26] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** seeing no further discussion all those in favor of the motion please signify by saying I I I I all those opposed nay we have a second motion **[35:40] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** move to authorize material testing contract with AET Inc and then not to exceed amount of $29,400 for the 2024 Street improvements **[35:50] Council Member Matt Hirn:** I will second **[35:52] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** all those in favor of the motion for the additional authorization for of 29,400 for the street improvements please signify by saying I I I thank you and we are now moving on to item six 10997 32nd Street variances and lot division resolution 2024-25 Miss Jensen **[36:15] Miss Jensen (Planning Staff):** Good evening acting mayor and city council the first planning application tonight is for a lot Division and variances for 10997 32nd Street the property is currently zoned rural single family with a Shoreland overlay and guided in the city's comprehensive plan as rural single family Seward to provide a little history on this request the property was originally platted as lot 9 and Lot 10 of Lake Elmo Park back in 1911 the Lots were Consolidated by prior owners tonight the applicant is requesting to divide the property back to separate lots for ownership purposes the property currently has two single family dwelling units on it and variances are required due to lock dimensions and building setbacks so there are a bundle of six variances before you tonight the first is for lot 9 and 10 related to lot width so lots this lot is required to be 75 ft in width each lot the applicant is proposing lot 9 to be just over 60 ft in width and Lot 10 just under 60 feet in width the next bundle is for Lots 9 and 10 for lot area Shoreland sew lots are required to be 20,000 Square F feet lot 9 is proposed at a little over 177,000 square fet and Lot 10 would be a little under 177,000 ft and then the last two variances are both for lot n related to primary structure setback and accessory structure setback code requires a 10ft setback for both the primary structure is currently set 5.5 ft from the side property line and the accessory structure is 3.1 feet from the side property line and then the visual uh is the proposed lot division the solid black lines are the buildings the red Dash would be decks so variances must meet four criteria in order to be reviewed for approval the first of those is practical difficulties the applicant has proven that strict enforcement of the code would cause practical difficulties the applicants are proposing to split the property and maintain the single family dwelling units on each lot the property already has separate utility stubs and access points dividing the lot would make the property consistent with how it was originally platted as lot n and Lot 10 of Lake ELO Park and clarify the ownership the second criteria is unique circumstances the applicant has established that the plate of the landowner is due to unique circumstances not created by the land owner owner so these current property owners did not consolidate the parcels rural single family zoning does not permit two primary dwelling units on a parcel so by dividing the Lots they would actually make it more conforming with the zoning District the third criteria is character of locality the proposed variance would not alter essential character of the area no construction or alteration of the buildings is proposed with this request essentially it would be adding in an invisible property line uh so essential character should not be negatively impacted the final variance criteria as adjacent properties and traffic again these are going to remain two single family dwelling units so adjacent properties and traffic should not be negatively impacted this application was sent out for agency review on March 1st the Valley branch Watershed District indicated a permit would be required the fire department uh provided comments regarding building addressing the city engineer provided comments regarding utilities and easements and the Minnesota DNR did not provide comments although staff did have a meeting with the DNR to discuss the DNR non-conforming Shoreland lot standards which uh they do meet and then conditions of approval have been added where applicable so staff is recommending seven conditions of approval before you tonight the first is regarding 25% impervious surface which is a DNR non-conforming Shoreland lot standard so we'd be ensuring that stays uh maintained the second is regarding the uh setback variances for Lot 10 or for lot nine uh that those only apply to the existing structures so any new structures would need to meet current setbacks three is a standard condition regarding necessary permits this would include that Valley branch Watershed District permit uh four is regarding the driveway on Lot 10 the removal of that that segment that overlaps the two lots and then five six and seven are regarding building addressing a public heing was sent to surrounding Property Owners on February 28th and published in the local paper on March 1st the staff has not received any public comment and nobody spoke at the public hearing the Planning Commission did vote to recommend approval of these requests at their March 11th meeting with that I can stand for any questions we do have the applicants here tonight **[41:15] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** any questions for Miss Jensen none for me I mean my curiosity do we know through the process why it was combined back in the day **[41:26] Miss Jensen:** I do not know **[41:27] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** time machine sounds good any interest in hearing for the applicant or would we like to just move forward with a motion so we can have discussion **[41:35] Council Member Matt Hirn:** I'm okay with moving forward with a motion yours **[41:39] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** yeah uh motion to adopt resolution 2024-25 32nd Street North with the conditions listed in the staff report I apologize if I got the name wrong **[41:55] Council Member Matt Hirn:** support **[41:56] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** there is a motion on the T on the table to be discussed I I'll just I'll keep mine pretty short and sweet here I just think the analys the analysis of the variance criteria I completely agree with as well as the recommended conditions um this seems like a pretty straightforward one to me um so I I I think this is a I I have no issue with this variance at all **[42:20] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** I have no issue at all my my guess would be at some point in the past one person own both parcels and combined them for convenience but I think the analysis was very very good and the recommendations are consistent with our requirements **[42:35] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** I would concur with my fellow council members and what I really was focusing on especially was it fits with the shoreline requirements and we're not looking at a variance for improv and that that to me is a very very important thing for our Shoreline um seeing no further comments I will call the question all those in favor of the motion please signify by saying I I I motion passes 30-0 thank you Miss Jensen next up would be not being loud in the mic number seven animal inconditional use permit Amendment and variance resolution 2024-25 and resolution 202 24-44 me again miss Jensen **[43:18] Miss Jensen (Planning Staff):** all right the applicant for tonight's applications are Corin and Katie Chang they are the owners of animal Inn the property is located 8611 34 Street North just south of Stillwater Boulevard the property is just over 14 acres it is currently Zone limited commercial and guided in the city's comp plan as limited business the property has been in operation as a commercial kennel since the early 1970s in 2019 the prior owner cleaned up the property to list it for sale which included a rezoning lot consolidation and cup Amendment the requests before you tonight are twofold the first is another cup amendment to expand the facility and then the second part is variances for The Limited commercial setbacks and off street parking regulations for commercial kennels so the applicant is proposing three site improvements with these applications the top picture is for the expansion of the kennel facility the bottom picture is for the new animal daycare building and then they are amending fencing location which we will show in the next slide so again uh the picture on the left is the building floor areas and that points out the fencing location and then on the right is the structure locations which include the kennel Addition and animal daycare so diving into the variance requests the first part is for the limited commercial setbacks currently structures need to be set back 50 feet in the zoning District the applicant is requesting a reduction to 25 ft and then off street parking for commercial kennels requires one space per six animals and in one space per employee on the largest shift with So at their with their addition that would require 63 spots uh currently they have 38 and they are proposing to maintain 38 spots the site is currently under a conditional use permit from 2019 the applicant is requesting to amend five of the existing conditions that regulate the site the first two are related to capacity so they'd be expanding from 160 animals to 330 breaking that down would be 15 50 dogs to 300 dogs and 10 cats to 30 cats condition four is regarding consolidation of the parcels originally it was five Parcels uh it was Consolidated to three Parcels those remaining three Parcels are Torrens and cannot be Consolidated any further uh so with that they'd be signing a restrictive covenants which requires all three Parcels to remain under common ownership condition eight they are proposing to amend fencing uh so that needs to be reviewed by city council and then nine they would be increasing the number of primary buildings uh to four instead of three and then the name of that new building would be classified as animal daycare moving on to the variance findings uh so I'll I'll break down all four of them and then uh kind of talk about each request within those main four categories so practical difficulties the applicant has proven or would be using the property in a reasonable manner for setbacks the property has constraints with the septic location pet cemetery and flood plane the the proposed location is the only feasible location for the addition and then the off street parking finding the applicant is not proposing any additional parking with the facility the property has significant slopes that are not suitable for parking or adding additional impervious surface the second criteria is unique circumstances the applicant has proven that PL of the land owner is due to unique circumstances not created by the land owner for the setback findings the applicants are not responsible for the current layout of the facility the E expansion is not viable in areas that meet setbacks due to grades Wetlands septic location uh in the pet cemetery off street parking finding the applicant does not utilize all the parking currently in place due to the drop off and pickup nature of the business the grading of the property is not conducive to adding additional parking and is not permitted in the fire lane additional parking would cause flooding of the existing structures the third criteria is character of locality so for setbacks the setback request the variants should not impact essential character the facilities are to remain the same and meets the overall design intent of the area and then off street parking finding I should not impact character of locality the site would remain the same in terms of parking and then the fourth criteria adjacent properties and traffic the request should not negatively impair adjacent Properties or incre increase congestion on a public Street this area has natural buffers from residential areas and then off street parking again should remain will remain the same so the the character uh Jason properties and traffic should not be impacted staff is recommending 12 cup findings we can Circle back to these in depth if there are questions but at a high level these are related to health safety welfare consistency with the comp plan consistency with the geographic location and Site Area consistent with the zoning District permitted use in the flood zone compatible with the general vicinity uh buffering and nuisances adequate Services Public cost traffic and environmental impacts and this application was sent out for agency review on March 15th we received comments from the fire department regarding fire water connection Drive Lanes fire detection and fire suppression the city engineer provided comments regarding impervious surface water connection gradient and storm water they will want to review plans in detail if the water connection moves forward uh Washington County Department of Transportation provided comments regarding future intersection improvements and then the Watershed and DNR did not provide comments so staff is recommending 15 conditions of approval uh the first is outlining the number of dogs that are allowed at the facility which would now be 300 the second is regarding number of cats at the facility which is now 30 three is noting that the old cup would be null and void uh four is regarding the restrictive covenant agreement for those three Parcels to remain under common ownership five and six are related to water connection seven is related to necessary permits eight is related to testing of the sep septic and ensuring that that has capacity for the expansion nine is related to addressing 10 is related to boarding uh structures 11 is related to outdoor kenneling 12 is regarding the fencing uh layout 13 is outlining the principal buildings versus accessory buildings that would now again be increased from 3 to four 14 is regarding caretakers quarters which is the same as the the previous cup and five is definitions so public hearing was sent to surrounding Property Owners on March 13th published in the local paper on March 15th there were no uh public comments at the Planning Commission meeting but after the public hearing is closed we received 12 written public comments in support of the business and the applications um the Planning Commission did vote to recommend approval of the cup Amendment and variance requests four to zero and with that I can stand for any questions we do have the applicants here tonight **[51:14] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** any questions for Miss Jensen **[51:16] Administrator Schroeder:** I have none would anyone like to hear from the applicant **[51:22] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** I have a question Mr schroer in the um play area for the dogs with that many dogs outside is there any concern about runoff or um you know contamination from the dogs going into the pond and is that a concern at all or does that water stay outside of the ponding area **[51:40] Miss Jensen:** I believe it would be naturally filtered but um the DNR and Watershed did not provide any comments or concerns related to that **[51:48] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** okay I assume it would functions similar to how it does now okay **[51:52] Council Member Matt Hirn:** I wouldn't mind just hearing from the applicant um just a little bit about parking maybe would be in my request just to kind of get an idea of um with the increase in animals what that might look like it sounds like it's not again just probably due to the nature of the business it's probably less of a concern but if you can just speak to that a little bit **[52:13] Corin Chang (Applicant):** yeah absolutely so um parking obviously I can see why that would be a very big concern because it looks like we're adding a ton more animals and not any more parking uh I don't know did did they receive the parking study okay so we did a parking study during a spring break week specifically because that is one of the busiest times of our year so we went out every 15 minutes during our busiest times we took photos of all the cars of all areas on the parking lot and we counted cars how many were staff clients all those different things uh so because of the nature of our business we really strive to have very quick drop offs and Pickups especially with predominantly what we're looking to add is daycare a daycare drop off people are going to be real upset with you if you take more than about 30 seconds to get their dog they have to get to work and they got to go um our drop offs are very fast uh and that's why if you were to look at the average the even with um like for example on 319 uh we had 116 drop offs and Pickups that day 37 134 the biggest amount of cars in our lot um was 16 only five of those were uh clients uh we're very like so we really tried to be very efficient um like I think worst case was today like those rains we were trying dogs off as they were trying to go and I think even then we had like eight cars that were clients in the lot and that was like oh my gosh there's so many people uh so we really won't be adding a ton if that makes sense **[53:50] Council Member Matt Hirn:** yeah that makes sense it sounds like it's more of like a it's a line drop off with doubling Capac or increasing capacity significantly I mean would there be any concern that I mean is that accurate is it like a line drop off at Max **[54:05] Corin Chang (Applicant):** so not really I know it kind of it feels like you'd have like this big line of cars you really don't we have our ranges so everybody goes to work at different times so we start droing offs as early as 6:00 in the morning our last daycare dogs generally get there about 10:30 so even though we have a large amount they're kind of like 1 one one one five one one one5 so it just is random **[54:30] Council Member Matt Hirn:** and that makes sense I think in my brain I'm thinking of the kids school drop off where we get the giant line oh yeah where it's everybody different giant line yeah so that is just I just wanted to kind of just verify with that you know there be any concern of all of a sudden because now we're increasing the capacity significantly a line of cars is coming out into the street and it sounds like from how the the flow of it works that's probably not the case **[54:55] Corin Chang (Applicant):** and especially as well um where we're looking to add I know it's probably hard to picture if you had an overhead view uh our existing building you drive down the lot and it's right in front of you that is where all of our cars are currently concentrated pretty much entire parking spotty no one is in front of our suets building that's actually the area we plan to put this building so even if we keep the existing areas we plan on having a check and checkout spot in that area so we'll be dividing the cars up throughout the lot so we'll help with that as well great thank you **[55:28] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** yeah can you repeat that so essentially there'll be two different areas for check-ins or **[55:34] Corin Chang (Applicant):** correct y so we'd have a daycare area for checkin and then our existing front desk staff and obviously would there be then additional signage as you're going in to make sure that drivers know or they are in the right place and they're not crisscrossing and having yes and so one big thing with that is I know like Alia took about that is actually working on revising their signing I sign areas if I understand correctly um we aren't allowed to have really big signs we would love to have really big signs telling people where to go uh so we're really kind of we didn't put that in here specifically because we don't know what the new requirements are going to be **[56:15] Administrator Schroeder:** any any feedback in regards to administrator Schroeder's question about um runoff from waste **[56:22] Corin Chang (Applicant):** sure absolutely so that really so our two Retention Ponds are at the bottom of the hill this would be obviously more towards the top a couple of things one we're very cognizant about picking things up especially us stools you do not want those sitting out where the second uh anybody goes potty we are cleaning up pretty much immediately so you don't really have to worry about that um also there's natural drainages in grass but we do also have turf which has a natural it has rocks underneath and different layers uh that would kind of filter things down as it goes so you're not really it's not a true filter but it's not like you're just going to have 300 dogs peeing in one spot does that make sense it's kind of over this big area um where we would have different Turf and different areas and things like that **[57:15] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** I'm looking at the overhead of the your uh site just for my own information where is the cemetery where is the septic the cemetery oh Cemetery so if you are you going to bring it up thank you I just just for curious **[57:33] Corin Chang (Applicant):** so the cemetery is a huge chunk of land so if you look uh so where it says 8611 y that whole area from there over to that entire section of property is all Cemetery so the cemetery is about 5 Acres so it's over it's actually just over a third of our property **[58:00] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** okay uh move to adopt resolution 202443 approving variances for the animal in property located at 8611 34th Street North with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report **[58:15] Council Member Matt Hirn:** support I'll just I'll just say I'm I'm excited for you as a business in Lake Elmo it's great to hear that things are are going well and growing obviously with Lake Elmo growing I'm sure there's much need for this as well so um I I again kind of like with our last one I don't see any concerns with these and um obviously with the residents nearby 12 of them coming and and support of it that's obviously a big thing um and then with the the recommendations um just again I I agree with all of those and I don't think any of them need to be changed or modified or removed **[59:00] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** I would Echo that and I I take joy in the fact that there is a a business in Lake Elmo that wants to expand and has a need to expand and it's in in part well hopefully based upon residents bringing their dogs to hang out and it's not we're not having those people from Hudson using our services but um Wisconsin joke but you know it's it's a great thing to be able to do that and in this case is being able to do it with something that is reasonable this is to me this is not a unreasonable ask I had the same concerns about the parking actually when looking through the packet and wanting to make sure that that is a a reasonable request and based upon the variance process but taking the time to do that parking study is a very good data point that really helps to make the analysis uh much more clear from on this end to know that it is a definitely doable and it's it's not going to hopefully back up on the 14 I I appreciate the feedback from the county as as well and knowing that yes there will be some improvements to that intersection and that is a known thing so the business knows as well that that is coming uh but I I do not have concerns with the cup **[1:00:15] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** I the same concern Related to the parking then I read the parking study in the packet and saw that that was not going to be an issue um the only only comment I would add is that perhaps we could check you into daycare from time to time because you do tend to get out of hand **[1:00:30] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** well I I think this is a great addition to the city because you know speaking as an owner that has a 85b German shepherd and we are always sometimes we need to shop different spots when we're going because they're full they can't take it and I think an amenity for people moving to the city is not only you know pet care but also dayc carees we have two dayc carees coming into the city as we speak um one building right over there right now um so I think this is a good addition to the city and I'm I'm excited to see it seeing no further questions I will call the question all those in favor of the underlying resolution please signify by saying I I I no opposition it passes 30 and move to adopt resolution 202 24-44 approving a conditional use permit Amendment for animal in property located at 8611 34th Street North with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report **[1:01:30] Council Member Matt Hirn:** support **[1:01:31] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** seeing no discussion all those in favor please signify by saying I I I motion passes 30 thank you Miss Jensen and thank you animal in for your for your services to our residents got new customer in there only if I can use like play time and get to hang out with the dogs and that'd be really fun the Mr schroer item eight City administrator contract **[1:01:58] Administrator Schroeder:** acting mayor city council I appreciate the opportunity to address you tonight tonight is the uh is the end of our search for a city administrator that we've been looking for since basically the week I started and first week in December we for the residents and citizens we hire we put on RFP for search firm we have four or five applicants the companies that would provide this service for us the city pick paa public Associates admin public administrator Associates they've been working with us ever since then they sourced out advertised did a profile did a video um we basically received 25 applicants that applied for the position the city council narrowed that 25 through many resumés down to seven applicants for semi-finalists the semi-finalist uh submitted six minute videos and answered a number of questions in addition to more detailed background and information from the search firm the city council picked three candidates for final interviews which happened on March on April 9th and one of the candidates had dropped out due to medical emergency so the city council interviewed just two we went through a whole day of Tours uh interviews with the department heads interviews with city council uh questioners emotional equivalency or emotional quotient tests writing tests and then we the paa helped us evaluate those on a point scale and the city council picked a candidate the city council directed the uh mayor and myself to work with paa and negotiate a contract with the new uh City administrator and so tonight before you you have a contract for Nicole Miller who will be starting on June 3D and I as I've said before I will uh be here for a week or two uh for full-time um overlap and acclamation to the operation in addition to uh part-time after that as needed based on what she's interested in what the city needs are so with that I'd be seeking a motion for approval of the city admin City administrator contract questions for administrator Schroeder **[1:04:15] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** I'll start uh clarifying question so page three uh section 5B is not out of concern it's just to to clarify um annual increase in compensation commensurate with other non-un representative employees to the city city council may consider a merit increase based upon employees performance so is that second sentence may consider a merit increase base do we have anything in policy right now as to how that could work so it's a standardized consistent way or that be something where we might need to actually create a policy **[1:04:50] Administrator Schroeder:** we do not have a policy in place that was a recommendation of our legal council so maybe you have a recommendation on how other councils typically do the Merit increase **[1:05:05] City Attorney:** Mr acting mayor members of the council um the other cities that I've worked with I mean usually it's kind of up to the council and the administrator and their discretion as to whether a merit increase is U being requested and and what amount is that's being requested there's no policy just because it kind of depends on the circumstances and the performance of the of the administrator **[1:05:25] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** we could retroactively apply one to me if we have if we okay that's not happening but I do think you need that discretion I mean it shouldn't just be like every other employee where it's a step increase and that's just what they get and that's it I mean and that was going to be my followup was is it the Norm to not do that and sounds like the norm is to not do that correct if you want to retain your administrator and then clarifying question page four section 12 uh for travel and and registration expenses we have a phrase as will pay up to that amount to me that infers that we would never consider more than that if there's like opportunities that may arise I assume that's not the in 10 correct um I have to pull up the contract I'm sorry can do you have un unless that is the intent and it is no it's this is the cap yep **[1:06:20] City Attorney:** that is the intent that that would be the cap all right um that includes all of those fees um so the fees for the IMCA and the mcma are covered so the $22,000 is kind of extra like up to if they find a different conference that they want to go to or a different training it's like an additional 2,000 **[1:06:40] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** gotcha thank you and I have not received any emails regarding this item for discussion I don't know if anyone else has has staff received any items from the public that we would want to **[1:06:55] Administrator Schroeder:** no comments have been received I did talk to uh Miss Miller yesterday she seemed very excited uh and eager to join the operation her intent is to give notice to her city tomorrow which would be 30 days her last day at the that City most likely would be May 17th and then on the advice of paa and myself it's a good idea before you jump into another job like this to take some time off because you're going to be drinking out of fire hose when you get here so she's going to take two weeks off uh get her Affairs together not that life will end when you come here but it's going to be a lot to learn and uh she probably won't have much time off um coming to her during that period so that is very wise advice **[1:07:45] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** that is appreciated if there are no further questions I would entertain a a motion **[1:07:53] Council Member Matt Hirn:** so move **[1:07:54] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** second **[1:07:55] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** the motion is to extend this agreement to sign uh for our new city administrator to a term that shall commence on June 3 2024 and we have the contract in front of us **[1:08:10] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** question for staff then um presuming if Nicole signs this then tonight tomorrow when when is the contract become public when is when do we start to have these discussions in public like what documents could make public I a couple people had asked that I would uh address the City attorney **[1:08:35] City Attorney:** it Mr acting mayor members of the council the document right now is public um it should have been in the public packet but um no we didn't we didn't have it signed and negotiated in time to get it in the packet so um you know if anybody requests it they can have a copy of it um the fact that she's been named the lake ELO City administrator is public so you can share that with everyone obviously you know as a result of this public meeting **[1:09:00] Administrator Schroeder:** yeah when you when you hired me my my contract was in the packet on December 7th and my fellow council member corrected me to show that M Miller has already signed it so yep thank you for pointing out my flaw **[1:09:16] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** there is a motion on the table it has been seconded any further discussion I would um just like to say I did look over the the contract and it seemed fairly standard I didn't find anything that you know was out of the ordinary on there uh the last thing I was just everybody is we'll have the new administrator coming in and let's all support her let's get behind her and and if if we can help her be successful will' all be successful here here couldn't agree more **[1:09:50] Council Member Matt Hirn:** I it's um you know going through this entire process there was a lot of great candidates um uh Mrs Miller uh really stood out I think there's a lot of great things um that the City of Lake Elmo um is going to benefit from as a result result of her being the city administrator so I'm really excited about this um and I couldn't agree more that you know we want to do whatever we can to support her and um make her feel part of the team right from day one **[1:10:25] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** and I would just add she's got a terrific staff to work with **[1:10:28] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** yeah I would say ditto to both those comments we are all here for the same goal which is to serve our residents our property owners our businesses our kids today and the City of tomorrow and council member hearn's point that we had a great list of candidates and um we were able to get to a group of finalists where all were fully qualified but I we made a decision that this is the best fit for the city and I couldn't agree more and I'm very happy to know that Miss Miller agrees and wants to come on board I look forward to uh the opportunities that will come up in the future I I know that she will be very um as as she gets to know the city more I hope she'll be very proud to know the the staff that she has to work with the quality that we have uh but this is going to be a very good opportunity for a city and with that I will call the question all those in favor please signify by saying I I I seeing none opposed motion passes 30-0 thank you I I did have one question for the uh City attorney um Can the acting mayor sign this tonight so then she can have more we can just send it to her tomorrow then **[1:11:45] City Attorney:** yes **[1:11:46] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** I appreciate that thank you item H first quarter dashboards and financial reports do we have any questions that we want to have for staff in terms of our financials it again i wasn't the one who pushed for these back in the day but I'm loving that we have them they are extremely valuable I don't have any questions per se unless uh f Council does **[1:12:15] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** I look through them very carefully they're very good and well done um no questions from me **[1:12:20] Council Member Matt Hirn:** no questions I maybe a a comment just uh to reiterate that you know like when you look through the budget for the um revenues just to again and it was noted in there that the revenues come at very specific times so just to make it aware of why there's some um maybe what would appear as a mismatch or misalignment it just has to do with when the money comes in **[1:12:45] Administrator Schroeder:** so yeah that's for to when you look at that from the city perspective you haven't got those property taxes yet and so the revenues always look you know kind of funky early in the year so yeah just a not even a question just just a comment for the public **[1:13:00] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** okay Council reports **[1:13:02] Council Member Matt Hirn:** I was hoping to keep this me short I have about five hours of report so I'd like to over with you I sure you do and we will adjourn right now no report **[1:13:10] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** uh no report from me **[1:13:12] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** P nothing has happened currently um actually no something major happened so uh last week the EPA updated guidance well it's not guidance it's requirements now for their mcls their maximum contamination levels uh for the set of pollutants in the family of posos and this directly impacts our city uh we were notified soon after as we had known was going to happen uh this has been in the works for a year this process we do have a a well that does test above that limit It is Well number to but that is why we are in the process of getting a filter on that well it's near Carriage Station and for those who have been watching our meetings you would be aware of some of those discussions we will be using settlement dollars for that I know there have been questions raised within the community I've got got plenty of messages as well remind me administrator schroer we are having a work session on that topic on May I believe 14th 14th second Tuesday so there will be much more discussion on that this is not just impacting Lake Elmo it's not just impacting the East Metro is impacting the entire country uh the good thing is we are ahead of the curve in terms of knowing how to handle this having the tools in our toolkit having the settlement dollars having the communications plan having having uh the subject matter experts in the room here who know how to help tackle us so I'm very grateful to have the resources that we do for that **[1:14:50] Council Member Nick Dragisich:** I would just like to add that the water in Lake gble hasn't changed the standard has correct so someone doesn't misunderstand that message that somehow the water got worse it didn't get any better but it didn't get any worse **[1:15:05] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** and and the last item to clar last item to clarify it is not a the way the the science works it is it is a long-term issue it is a lifelong years and years and years of ingestion uh in the amount of time between now and being able to put a a filter on that is not the issue the issue is years and years and years of ingestion so please uh do not have concerns for your family for your children for your neighbors the your water will be safe continue to be safe **[1:15:40] Council Member Matt Hirn:** um I'm sure we'll have more opportunities for this but I just want to thank administrator schroer and the staff for all the work it and like I said we'll have more opportunities for this but just feels right with the employment agreement being in the contract coming tonight it's been a long process I've really appreciated all the work that you've done throughout all of it so I just wanted to let everyone know um that all your efforts are really appreciated by myself and I'm sure the rest of the council as well so thank you **[1:16:08] Administrator Schroeder:** um to re iterate what I've had before the posa information is on the city website we post that I just added some more things today it's under helpful hints water topics and you'll see more information and educational opportunities to learn more about Posas and the long-term exposure and risk to that in addition I did get a nice tour of our wellhouse number two today from our Public Works director Marty powers and this is a we're going to be putting these filters these containment vessels inside this building we're actually going to be lifting off the roof on part of the building and uh dropping in these filters and keep and building up to meet it it's a very very impressive what we're going to be doing in that that particular outfit in addition uh Jack and Marty and a couple other staff are meeting tomorrow with me and the mpca to go forth with the um basically the next stage of the projects um that Jack has presented uh maybe a few weeks ago and that you have kind of approved so we're going to go to them to try to get approval to you by May 21st so we can get in the next phase of of design of these different new wells and new treatment facilities trying to move the get the ball forward and going as fast as we can on this so thank you **[1:17:40] City Clerk Julie Johnson:** Miss Johnson um just briefly since it was brought up earlier the city is is we are still a tree City and part of that process involves um the Arbor Day Proclamation that the council approved at the last meeting I believe and then um with that we also have a tree giveaway for our Arbor Day celebration and our public works department is um putting that on at the Public Works building Saturday April 27th from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. City residents can come and receive a free tree so if everyone wants to get that on their calendar and uh we love to give away the trees I think they usually get about 500 trees and they're usually gone by what time **[1:18:25] Administrator Schroeder:** well it depends on the year and the weather but um they do go yeah I would get there early thank you **[1:18:30] Julie Johnson:** Miss gor no updates **[1:18:32] Administrator Schroeder:** Mr stopa no updates **[1:18:34] Miss Jensen:** Miss Jensen no report **[1:18:35] Clarissa Hadler:** Miss Adler uh just a reminder that we switched uh payment portals for utility billing we're up to about 55% of our Auto pays signed up on the new system so we're happy about that but uh just a reminder to everyone to to get over there we're hoping to shut the old system off um before the next pay cycle gotcha **[1:19:00] Fire Chief Dustin Kalis:** Chief no report **[1:19:02] Jack Griffin:** Mr Griffin H just one comment to round off the the water topic I guess and that is just a reminder that well to is only being used on a very limited basis and it's it's a it's for the most part offline unless we get into Peak water demands as well so thank you for that **[1:19:25] Acting Mayor Charles Cadenhead:** Miss no report with that at the time of 819 this meeting is adjourned for