e e e e e all right good evening uh this is the February 19th 2 kage city council meeting which I'm calling to order our first order of business is the Pledge of Allegiance so if you'd please rise I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all all right we'll be uh clerk please do the role council member Clon here council member Olsen here council member the here council member Garza here mayor Bailey here uh next on our agenda is open Forum this is the opportunity for anybody that wants to speak on something that's not on tonight's agenda I think there might be some people here oh yep I'll get you um I don't know if you did you sign up out there or no okay perfect um so I was going to mention that we have a sign up out in the uh in the entryway and if you sign up we'll we'll start there but if you're here for the development uh or anything else that's on the agenda I will allow um for comments later okay you're for the development later okay yeah so if you're here for anything on the development we'll uh I will open it up for public comment at that particular Point okay anybody else that wasn't going to be here for anything that's on tonight's agenda all right I will then go ahead and close open forum and I'll move to number five which is adoption of the agenda move the agenda second motion by Council MTI second by Council margara any other discussion seeing none all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed motion carries uh this evening no presentations was which was number six number seven is the consent agenda uh Council was there anything that you wanted to pull on consent and I believe I'd like to pull R okay uh councilman the wants to pull R and I'm going to pull um P just for comment um Council anything else so uh council member the why don't we start with you which is the hulc 2025 mining permit I think you just want to do some clarification right yeah just because there's uh there's both the this permit that's the 2025 permit and then there's also been the environmental study and just to explain the difference between those and that we're just looking at the 2025 permit it really has nothing to do with the environmental uh that went on the backwaters part yeah backwaters part yeah you want to speak to it yep mayor council member THD so the image before you is showing uh on the uh right or the left hand side wholesome current that's the proposed mining area for 2025 mining permit um on the right hand side um is the separate area that they are working on with an entirely separate process uh for an expansion of their mining operation um in the back wiers of the Mississippi River so in the 2025 they're pretty much staying kind of right in that same area that they were in 2024 right okay that good yep all right thank you for the certification um and then for the public uh what I pulled was uh P which is the Minnesota DNR Cooper Cooperative agreement uh for the Mississippi Dunes Pier uh Park fishing pier and I I want to acknowledge the fact that our staff our Park staff specifically does an amazing job of going out there and trying to find funding sources for our parks and our open spaces and um one of the for those that may or may not remember we did have a uh we tried for a local local option sales tax that did not pass uh this last November but that didn't stop the fact that we're going to still go out and you know update parks and so on and uh the great news is that I don't even know that we really originally were thinking there was going to be a fishing pier but the DNR was very excited about this opportunity to get access into the river and so uh our staff has been working different angles and processes and so what this is doing is authorizing approval uh for the city to enter into agreement to have that um I guess you'll say have that fish pure purchased uh paid for by the DNR so I thought I just mention that since I know that's exciting as we go forward um so that was it on the uh consent uh seeing that there's nothing else um I'll look for a motion to approve consent I'll make a motion all right so I have a motion by council member garad second and second by council member clawen uh any further discussion saying none all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed motion carries so if you are here for any anything on tonight's uh consent agenda all of those items have been approved all right uh number eight is approved dispersement or8 a is to pay the bills move the bills all right so we have a motion by council member the I sorry customer Olsson and second by counc member Clawson any further discussion seeing none all those in favor signifi by saying I I I opposed motion carries all right the next item we have is a public hearing uh and this is the public uh property tax abatement for a portion of the 2025a bonds and Stacy is here from uh Ellers uh to walk us through this so welcome back great thank you mayor members of the council nice to see you tonight um as you stated uh this is a public hearing on the tax abatement portion of the bonds uh which you're issuing is about 1.64 million of that this is our statutory Authority in which to pay for those improvements which are improvements to your uh irrigation system for the public golf course that you're reimbursing yourself for uh the requirement is for us to select Parcels that we will Abate the city's portion of property taxes from so the parcels that are listed in the public hearing are the aurilla apartments and a commercial space that's on 95th Avenue there's no Nexus test required for the abating of those Parcels it's just a technicality that we have to have that we show that the city's portion of taxes will cover the principal amount of the bonds uh the public hearing then for you this evening is on granting that uh tax abatement for this project finding that the tax batement equals the principal amount of the bonds and also that it is in in the public interest because it's improving public facilities and services to the residents so with that I'm happy to stand for any questions all right uh Council any questions for uh Stacy at this point none okay um so seeing none thank you um seeing none I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing uh this is the opportunity if anybody wants to speak on this item is welcome to do so at this time all right I just have one Qui question sure I'm glad Stacey's here um I just want oh I'm sorry thank you I knew you gonna do it Bonnie matter 6649 Inskip Avenue South Cottage gr I was just wondering if if um Stacy could just explain how this differs from a property tax levy thank you yeah thank you uh mayor council members um essentially it's it's no different from a property tax levy because it's a a levy that you're uh increasing to Abate your property taxes to go and put those resources towards um something else that you're actually bonding for so technically even though it's called a tax abatement it is a tax levy so I guess maybe maybe I'll I'll say what I think might be the question um so the question is is this isn't a tax on top of are already tax correct mayor cmer that's correct yeah okay I just want to make sure that that was clear we weren't w't adding an extra tax just we diverting if you will or moving the tax from that area to something specific correct okay is that answer it um it's just a different way of looking at it yeah well that's that's why I was trying to say it because wasn't a tax on top of a tax that's already there so ring the taxes that are coming in that would be used that's all okay all right thank you thank you Stacy any other anybody else want to speak on this item I do um I got a public hearing okay so I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and then I'll I'll I think councilman rson has something don't sit down Stacy all right I appreciate your explanation on how the tax abatement process works and the fact that it's not uh an additional tax it's simply reallocating funds right and the comment was made that it reduces our um tax that we collect is that accurate No okay could you explain so uh mayor council members essentially you have bonds that you're paying and you have a portion that you have to uh use your tax revenues that you get that comes in as part of your overall tax levy and as stated it's the same amount that's coming in you're using that portion to pay the debt service on the bonds the reality with these bonds is that the intent is that you'll be utilizing uh revenues from the golf course so you'll likely be canceling that portion of the levy anyway okay thank you what canceling canceling that portion of the levy yeah because it's getting paid off by the golf course correct okay all right thank you thank you all right uh Council um since we have the public hearing that there is a a motion on the screen before you if someone wants to take it sure I'll take it um I would like to make a motion to hold public hearing for did that adop the resolution 202- 018 resolution approving property tax abatement so we have a motion by council member Gars a second by council member the any other discussion seeing none all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed motion carries Stacy thank you for coming this evening all right uh 10 is Bid Awards we have none this evening 11 is our regular agenda we do have one item on our regular agenda tonight which is the Lockridge uh zoning Amendment and pimary plat with a bunch of different pieces to this and so um Samantha I believe you're going to take this through us here for our senior planner so welcome thank you yes uh mayor members of the council this is my first time presenting to you all so I just wanted to introduce myself Samantha pit a new senior planner here with the uh City so let's just get myself loaded up here there we go all right all right so py homes of Minnesota is requesting approval of a preliminary plant in zoning ordinance Amendment or zoning Amendment sorry for the proposed lockage subdivision uh the request encompasses three Parcels totaling approximately 72 Acres currently zoned egg2 agriculture uh to change to R4 transitional residential district uh the uh plat request is to plant 99 single family lots and 84 town home lots uh the town homes would be in groups of four and six units uh situated side by side the property is located south of the Woodberry Border West of Jamaica Avenue and north of The Waters at Michaels Point development out Lots A and B of The Waters at Michaels Point are included on preliminary plat documents um as there is proposed to be a recreational trail around Lake Robert at the time of platting The Waters at Michael's Point Outlaw a was retained by the land owner and planed to be dedicated with future development to the north which is what we are discussing tonight outlots B and E were proposed to be deeded to the city uh Outlaw B continues to be owned by the Walter dorfs and Outlaw e is currently owned by the city Outlaw b as know will be dedicated to the city during this plating process that we're going through um some of the members of the council and the mayor may be familiar that multiple development and plat proposals have come forward for this to uh property in the past from various applicants um challenges to development have included the presence of bedrock and Lake Robert which have restricted the buildable area um so devel the developer has submitted a landscape plan that does meet our code requirements including uh the trees and the shrubs with a buffer that averages about 75 ft along the along Jamaica Avenue behind the proposed Town Homes um this future will similar to that uh at the Kingston Fields development which is just south of here on the east side of Jamaica additional RightWay is also included on the plat at the northeast corner of the development to accommodate a future roundabout at the intersection of military and Jamaica um the developable area was pushed about 150 ft west of Jamaica to meet County standards the lake Robert Wetland and Wetland bu buffer also impacts the developable area here and an area of Bedrock which impacts uh the ability for utility installation and will require some excavation and Blasting due to all of those restrictions the applicant has proposed to include a mixture of single family and town homes uh the R4 transitional residential district is intended to provide these types of transitional areas that allow for that mixing of fam single family and town home units along minor or major collector streets of which Jamaica Avenue is one uh this slide in front of you shows the proposed roundabout in conceptual phase for Jamaica and Military intersection construction is anticipated around 2028 for that uh as mentioned the design does require additional RightWay in the northeast corner of the development um the slide also does show an aerial view of the Jamaica Avenue corridor from the Woodbury border at the North to 70th Street at the South all right an 8ft wide Trail will be constructed on the North and South sides of the new Ravine Parkway extension and an internal sidewalk will also be constructed in the development access to the proposed development will be via Jamaica Avenue from the East um Jamaica was designed to handle approximately 15,000 vehicles per day and currently there are approximately 4,200 trips taken per day on Jamaica at full buildout the lock rdge development will add about 1500 trips per day so adding the 4,200 and, 1500 for 5700 is well below that 15,000 that Jamaica was designed to handle um the developer will be responsible for installing right and left turn Lanes on Ravine Parkway to access Jamaica and a Northbound left turn lane and southbound right turn lane on Jamaica to access the new Ravine Parkway uh the developer will also be required to deposit escrow funds for future construction of the trail along Jama Avenue going north of the new Ravine Parkway extension um this section of the trail will not be built until that uh rebuild of Jamaica happens around in 2028 all right uh during our Planning Commission meeting there was some discussion on the difference between the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances um so just as a reminder for everyone uh the comprehensive plan and land use um or the difference is that the comprehensive plan does guide the actions of the community by presenting a vision for the future as well as the permitted density ranges for each land use type all land use decisions must be consistent with the comprehensive plan while the zoning regulations specifically defined how land can be used to implement the city's Vision found in the comprehensive plan um on this slide it does show that the comprehensive plan designates the property as low density residential and parks and open space um the parks and open space will be achieved by the a proposed Park on Outlaw G of the Lockridge development and that proposed Trail around Lake Robert and the dens the low density residential will be achieved with the proposed density of 3.2 units per acre um low density residential allows for two to four units per acre as designated in our comprehensive plan um as a comparison for the council um uh the Summer Valley development uh was approved in 2024 with a net density of 3.14 units per acre and the greymont Village Development had a net density of 3 .47 units per acre so very similar to this proposal in front of you today the preliminary plat does not is not requesting uh planned unit development or PUD it is intended to meet all of the standards found in the R4 zoning District um py homes will construct the dwellings north of the new Ravine Parkway extension Lots south of Ravine Parkway will be retained by Rachel development with a builder yet to be determined uh the developer must also design the site so there is no increase in the 100-year high water level of Lake Robert storm water from outside the development does flow onto the site but it will be accommodated by the proposed ponds and storm sewers out Lot G as I mentioned before will be established as a new neighborhood park which will include play equipment and a shelter and parking lot the parking lot will be constructed during phase one of development construction uh the timeline for the amenities is dependent on funding of course all right so kind of getting into the history of the trail going around the lake Robert um in 2007 The Waters at Michael's point was approved for a preliminary plat and at that time the city was operating under our 2020 comprehensive plan um let's see at conversations at the time were being had to include the trail around the lake as seen in the 2007 staff report excerpt on the screen um one section of the report does state that a trail around the shepherd's Woods Pond as it was known at the time was not proposed however later in the same report it was recommended that a future public Trail be constructed around the pond at that time the property owner wanted to retain ownership of Outlaw a a which restricted the city's ability to plan for a future Trail around the lake however the city was did know that a trail would be planned for construction at the time the land to the north would be developed um continuing the final plat for The Waters at Michael's point was approved in 2011 after a few extensions were approved at that time the city was operating under its 2030 comprehensive plan which then showed the future Recreation Trail around the lake um today we are considering the Lockridge development under our 2040 comprehensive plan which also still shows that planned Recreation Trail around the lake um just as a few examples of similar trails in Cottage Grove that do get um kind of close to some of the dwellings we have Rolling Meadows hawor and Pines and the karosa second and fifth editions um a couple few of those are on the screen for you um the trail locations closer to dwellings around the city are the most practical locations to meet the needed Trail connections all right so after the Planning Commission meeting staff did investigate various Trail Alternatives as seen on the screen uh we have the blue line which shows constructing which is alternative one constructing a binous trail on the east west and southwest sides of Lake Robert with a boardwalk in the southwest corner um instead of continuing the trail behind the homes at The Waters at Michaels point the trail would continue to the existing Trail and sidewalk system on 67th Street Bay South users would then continue using the sidewalk system there to Jamaica Avenue which would facilitate a connction ction uh to the lock rdge development and the new park the green line on the exhibit shows alternative two which continues the trail on the east west and southwest sides of the uh of the lake with instead of running behind the dwellings would include a boardwalk being installed within the Wetland to to construct the trail that would connect to the east side of the lake and then the red line shows the approximate location of the trail as it was originally proposed uh the original intention of the development was for the blue and red lines to be constructed um during the Planning Commission meeting it should be noted a few of the members did only support construction of the blue option um it should be noted also that construction of boardwalks does come at a cost boardwalks can cost up to six times more than asphalt Trails per linear foot um and they cannot be m maintained year round since plow trucks cannot drive on the boardwalks um staff also acknowledges the impacts of the original trail location on the westernmost lot where the lot would have had a public Trail on three sides of the lot this one right see uh and so staff has shifted that trail uh from directly behind that lot um instead to run diagonally from the existing Trail stub to the blue uh Trail as seen continuing to discuss the proposed Trail there was a boardwalk proposed on the northwest side of the Wetland as well um staff would prefer to see that this uh not be a boardwalk in this area instead have the trail constructed around the Wetland within the Wetland buffer um the trail around the Wetland would avoid directly impacting that Wetland and as discussed previously would be a less costly option um no Wetland credits would need be needed to construct the trail on the land around the Wetland the boardwalk on the southwest side of the Wetland that I've mentioned a couple times uh will need to be constructed to avoid negative impacts to the Wetland uh the alternative here is to obtain Wetland credits and permits to fill the Wetland and install a binous trail in that area all right this image shows the existing uh neighborhood of The Waters at Michael's Point uh with the proposed Trail in Gray um I will acknowledge that the Trail does show behind the westernmost lot however that would be uh situated differently as discussed earlier um there are some distances in red that show the proposed Trail would be no closer than 10 ft from the nearest rear property line about 16 trees will need to be removed for trail construction mostly consisting of unwanted species such as Ash or boxelder um the parks department does typically remove trees within 5 ft of a trail however the path may be able to be adjusted to save some higher quality trees um during the Planning Commission there was also some discussion about possibly adding some screening to city property or private properties um to minimize the visual impact of the trail on these existing residents um coniferous trees or coniferous shrubs shrubs could be added Behind These Lots either on city property or private property um depending on the distance from the trail um the city and the developer will work with individual Property Owners on the best options for location of screening um there are some small sections of the trail that are lying in areas that are low-lying that may be inundated with water for short periods of time with storms of 4 in or more uh this is also not uncharacteristic of other trails in the city such as those at Hamlet Park Pine Tree Park and Pine Tree Valley Park all right various personal property has also been added to lot a over the years um as Allowed by the property owner uh the city will not accept Outlaw a for public dedication until all personal property is removed the development is also adjacent to the Shephard Woods farm and its Wooded Trail system uh there's currently not a planned Trail connection hikers May wander through the Shephard Woods Farm to connect to those Trails um at just under one mile long the trail around the lake will be a great asset to the city of Cottage Grove and will facilitate a connection to the trails along Jamaica Avenue uh Ravine Parkway um and it should also be noted that the city acquired out lot e at The Waters at Michaels point in 2012 with the intention of constructing this Trail around the lake all right and just one last slide about the proposed development for everyone to see uh the town homes will be slab on grade single family homes would be a mixture of walkout split walkout split Lookout and a full basement all right and with that uh it is recommended that the council adopt ordinance number 1093 and adopt resolution 20250 020 I will stand for questions thank you thank you Sam uh Council first um any questions council member Olson first thank you sorry for my voice everybody I'm fighting the grunge like about half the public right now in the state of Minnesota so um if you didn't hear what I said I'll certainly repeat rep myself first I have a question for Corey as it relates to the slide that we saw that stipulated in one portion of the slide that there would be no Trail and then later on stipulated there would be a trail so how do you reconcile that de honor REM of the council I actually had to read that several times and as you know uh planning reports are not always written uh precisely and so while I think the way I would have interpreted that is that is to insert which I think makes the most sense there is no PL Trail planned yet because then in the following paragraph it said we do plan to have a trail around the pond right we just don't know when and then it was followed up in the comp plan with a proposal that there would be trails around the pond so this clearly was intended for future yep Trail it was not articulated that it as well as it could have been in the planers report but it just wasn't planned yet is is the way I think the only way that an interpretation makes sense and was there any signage that the city put out in the portion of this property that's the city owned indicating you know future Trailway or anything like that because uh when we do Road stubs as an example we put signage that says this will be a future through road kind of lets people know at some point this will happen did we do that with this area does anybody know no we did not we did not okay all right so it was in the comp plan which maybe 18 people read but it it uh it wasn't signed that's that's a little bit of a challenge for me frankly if I'm a property owner um the next thing I wanted to ask is uh you showed a slide with an alternate route would you please go back to that slide this one okay so it might be the cold medicine I want to make sure that I understand what I'm looking at um so down in the lower left I can see there's a Trailway that connects with the red area okay and that that red area is the original Trailway right proposed Trailway correct um the red one and the blue one were originally proposed okay so the green which is boardwalk in the Wetland um I know that that came up in the Planning Commission meeting too and and I think we all know those are incredibly expensive ve very difficult a to put in and B to maintain so probably doesn't make much sense and now I got Emily up so uhoh um I don't I don't feel well so don't beat me up um so what is this blue that uh instead of connecting with the red we've got the blue what what what is that mayor council member oron um we still trust your judgment uh whatever cold medicine you're on so so the blue is identifying a potential option right it would connect to uh the the sidewalk sub that comes through this this called the saac so as Samantha had identified we recognized that we needed to be con cognizant of uh that proposed connection heading I'm going to call it north south right um so then this would take the traffic away from those backyards is that is that what I'm seeing correct okay by connecting to the stub as opposed to running the asphal trail behind the properties okay so um what conversations if any have we had with the property owner the developer um staff Etc about this as an option as far as extending connecting the trail to be the sidewalk it's been a topic of conversation that it is an option okay all right so that could potentially be a compromise to some of the folks who are concerned about traffic in their backyard is what I'm hearing is that accurate that's accurate okay just make sure the badril is not talking to me um one other thing I wanted to ask is um when you look at this body of water it's not really like a super awesome body of water and this this might be a Ryan question but I know that the Watershed is going to have to you know change some things in order to move water um through this property and with the Bedrock that can be somewhat of a challenge um what are they proposing to do here I I saw some of the ponds that were proposed but um would they also utilize this body of water as a holding Pond or what is their thought council member also Mr Mayor so with this development like Sam mentioned there's several points of water that come in from the calarosa to the West two Woodburry to the north it's a bit challenging they do have a series of ponds and larger storm pipes that get that off-site water to this Lake it goes to the lake today it'll continue to go to the lake in the same fashion they won't rake control it because that's not a requirement developers don't have to take off-site water and slow it down that's just not the way development happens um their water this this property also drains to this Lake completely today so everything goes to Lake Robert and then the city in probably about 2021 constructed an outlet this was always a landlocked Lake there was no way for water to get out if residents are here from you know that butt up that Lake they would remember when that Lake kept going up and up and up and the water was in their backyards and eventually used an emergency overflow to the east so the Outlet's been constructed so we now can control that 100-year high water level okay um and the developer has to meet all the city state Watershed rules for their water and then they would just simply allow the water to move through their development to the lake future developments of Woodberry in the Kemp property would have to do the same rate control that they're doing right to make sure they don't negatively impact the lake or the property owners around the lake yeah you actually read my mind because we do share the pipe with Woodbury so um that was I was going to ask that question so I think what I hear you're saying is in the event of a quote unquote 100-year flood um we have uh planned for enough distribution of Overland water underground using piping that will eliminate the possibility that this water would come up right into the backyards or over the Trailway ises that sound about right Mr mayor council Olson so this Trail would if if the trail were to be built behind the homes it would go under the underwater in 100-year flood um which would be expected okay at the Planning Commission there was discussion about the modeling showing the high water level coming up about 6 in now I think that's a little deceiving because there's multiple models and mult multiple phases of development I won't get into that but really this development specifically yeah actually shows about a 1 in increase and we would continue to work with them to get that to no increase okay that 6 in increase was actually based on full development of Woodberry I see but we would work with Woodberry to make sure that doesn't happen I think it's it's there's a lot that goes into a storm water model they're very complicated and this is a very large watered I'm sure and you got to really be precise about the size of your pipe and where you put it and all the rest of it so and that did come up at the Planning Commission meeting Emily Stevens brought it up um two other things real quick one you can help with and that is Jamaica Avenue now uh often times when we have new development we will hear you know um Main Street is a collector road and it can handle this many cars and all the rest of it um and while that may technically be true the reality is there will be a change for uh people who utilize that road to get to and from wherever they're going and that change is going to create um a little bit more difficult ability to maybe pull out and take a left um which is already hard to do over there uh and you know might be a little more difficult for people to cross over I know we've talked about that before doing a crosswalk and some different things so as we're looking forward into the Reconstruction of Jamaica Avenue which has been on the books for quite some time are we confident that they're going to go back to the two lanes on each side and uh the turn Lanes in order to accommodate that additional traffic and hopefully help people uh who currently live in the development um still be able to use that roadway effectively Mr mayor council member Olson so um in terms of Jamaica Avenue I think what what is really important is like you said it is in our CIP the county CIP for 2028 they do have the RFP out right now to select the consultant so that's very much moving forward that's very solidified um in terms of what that road is going to be the county will do a full buildout traffic study and they'll build the road to what it needs to be in terms of the number of lanes that doesn't uh add any convenience for the side roads that's just making sure you have the right amount of lanes to move the through traffic sure um obviously we did build a four-lane section from 70th through Rosa Sharon church right that was so preliminary we didn't want to be shortsighted for the rest of the road the county will look very closely at that it could be what we call a three Lane section with a dedicated left turn lane um because frankly a four lane could just be way overbuilt and way too costly which has an impact on city and county you know ability to to build that road so like I said they'll do a full buildout traffic model they will build exactly what they need to build um it will include turn lanes and it will include a right turn lane into 67 Street that doesn't exist today um that was brought up at the Planning Commission I know as well that's a new standard right that we add those right turn Lanes they aren't even though you can have the feeling of I can be re ended at a 45 M hour road they aren't required and they're not they're not a mandate but it is a County standard now a city standard so that right turn lane would be added at that time this development would build the right and left turn Lanes with the development good and I think that'll give people some additional Comfort um similar to what we had to do down at uh the golf course Etc you want to give people that sense of security that you know when I pull out or pull in I'm not going to have somebody right in my in my trunk so that's great thank you for that and then the last thing I want to ask and I'm not sure who wants to take this is with regard to the screening trees um would the intent be to utilize uh like arborite or kind of more of a narrow taller tree to to screen um CU there's not a lot of space there to be honest with you uh when I went out and looked at the space uh with a couple of the neighbors over there um it's a little tight so I'm just curious what kind of plant species would be utilized or best to give them that that sense of security and comfort I can speak to that initially if there's anything that Emily or Sam would like to add they could but we would want to use a coniferous type tree so it has the year round screening and it is true that it does get you know the trail will get closer to those homes I think what the intent was to work with the developer with the homeowners right if we do want to keep it on private property would have to be a smaller tree which would provide a little less screening um or we could work with them to plant it you know right on the back of their property so you could have more of a standard coniferous tree so I think that's something we would just work closely with each home own own and would we still do that for the other homes affected by the Trailway if we went with the option that's blue yep so if if it was let's say just the Blue Trail certainly that blue Trail is you know behind some home so I think that's something we we could look at I think the focus has been you know next to the lake because it's it's you know Outlaw e was always owned to connect yeah to that cesac I think even with or without the Red Trail um but that's certainly something we could look at all right thank you very much I'm sorry I took all that time but I okay you know I know that this has been bandied about for years and years and years and years and years with different plans and different specs and different developers and um it feels like this one might be a little more real than the others so um I certainly want to make sure if we do it we do it right back to you mayor okay thank you Council M mson uh Council M Clawson I have nothing to add to uh this portion but I do want want to discuss back and forth with us when we when the time comes sounds good any questions down here at all um counc MTI yeah just just one and I I do uh recall seeing whether it was in the packet or that there might be a little bit of uh wiggle room on the uh the Red Trail going back there that it it might be able to in some spots be moved a little further from the from the Lots mayor council member theti uh it's possible that that can adjust a bit here and there uh but this Trail segment was kind of uh chosen to preserve as many trees as we could um the intent as they walked uh physically this Trail Corridor was was with the intention that we could preserve some of the trees with this particular alignment okay thanks anybody else Council sure yeah Council M marara thank you um so after I went and walked the area and got a sense of what what it looked like over there and and how the homes bumped up to the back of there I started doing some digging and um because of what I do for a living I was able to access a lot of records from 2011 when the listings were first put out there um when it was just land and not even the um homes yet and in those listings it stated that there was a future Trailway to be brought there and what I thought was interesting so in 2011 when these these plots were first advertised they were advertised as um a future Trailway to be put there but then after it got sold a couple of them were solded in 2011 2012 they they and they were sold as land they that verbiage was taken away by whoever purchased the land so I thought that was interesting that when it was originally proposed and these Lots were there um this Trailway was there in 2011 it was proposed and the developers then stay at that whoever would would buy that land but then after it got sold and it started being developed and homes were put on there it that mention went away and what started happening after that I noticed um from it being just a simple plot a box um it turned into lakefront property and so as 2015 and so on um those listings started changing um depending on who the listing agent was and it started advertising it as lakefront property but in 2011 it was not advertised as lakefront property so I just thought that was pretty interesting to mention um and that was just looking back at the MLS records of of the listings and and the different homes that were sold there and then while I was out there I um ran into a neighbor that was there as well and they were shoveling and they took me on a tour around that area and they said when they purch in 2011 they were told that there would be a walking trail put there and they thought that um that idea had gone away because so much time had passed and so they just thought well the developer wasn't able to do that so I just thought that was interesting that um this had been told and people were aware of it but not everyone was aware and then anybody that bought after that initial development were sort of um not told the truth I I guess so that's a clarification Council m who the the PE the the the listing agent or whoever that was was who's responsible for taking that out right that's what it looks like to me um when I did the digging initially like I said when they were initially advertised as lots and land they were advertised as um with this verbiage of a trail and I I I have it saved on my computer but that a trail would potentially be put back there but then as it got bought by different developers that line just went away and then when the the houses were actually put on there the the listing changed to waterfront property so that was a marketing yeah that's what was that was but and and it's interesting because those homes are still paying the same taxes as the rest of the people so they're not increased for water front property which that's a notable thing as well so these are the little things that I found while I was digging my P chair keeps going down I have a couple quick questions um or maybe a comment in general but um one of the questions Ryan on that newer development where that pond is I'm assuming if I saw right um on the main development that is going to have access for us to get back there correct yep that's correct Mr Mayor any any of the development ponds we all have to have a a city Outlaw access so there's requirements on how many based on the size of pond and it's City owned property to get to them and do you know because this has come up in other developments too do we know if that that particular Pond is actually going to hold water uh yep that's correct so the ponds in here do all have to hold water cuz it's in our Wellhead protection area so they're not allowed to infiltrate uh there might be some filtration cells that that don't have it but in general they do um and you probably bring that up because we've had issues over the years we we've made changes to our standards to help address that in some simple but pretty cost-effective ways like putting actually top soil down first and the clay liner so we've been trying to make some some small changes to help make sure these ponds are actually holding water okay sounds good and then on the picture I don't know if this is for uh Sam or Emily on the picture with the blue the Blue Trail that you were referencing um the I mean our intent all along I'm assuming please tell me if I'm wrong was to go with the red but the the point is is that you were saying that you know if you decided not to do something in the red you could do the blue is that correct Council that's exactly it we wanted to provide some options okay the other question I had for you though all the second question is all of the land uh Behind these homes will be Park property correct mayor that's correct and so we'll be putting our our markers or whatever that we normally put in to identify that this was a park yep as the outlaw would be dedicated to the city we always Place those markers on property Corners to make it very clear it's park in open space okay and then so that means on some of those other slides that you showed where there's encroachment of items those will be removed one way or the other they'll have to be mayor council y prior to the city accepting that Outlaw do dedication from the developer the developer will be responsible to work with those homeowners to get any of those encroachment items off of that Outlaw okay and I know we've been having as Zach is keenly aware we have these issues in park property all around the city that we require I mean we literally if I recall one particular situation where somebody had to pick up a slab shed or building and move it off of the the park property because it was in park property it was required by law and so I just I throw that out there for anybody that has some of the extra stuff back there no matter what's decided uh from a trail standpoint uh we can talk more about that individually as a group here in a little bit after we hear from the public um but I just wanted to uh make sure I was clear on that okay uh no other questions at the moment for staff I know the developer is here does council have any questions for the developer no okay so um though we you did have the public hearing at the at the Planning Commission I definitely uh appreciate hearing from the public uh on any of these issues so what I would ask I didn't get the the sheet so I don't know if everybody signed up on the sheet okay so what we'll do is if you want to speak on this item I'll just ask that you come up to the podium to state your name and address for the record uh please limit your time to three minutes um and then what we'll do is if there's certain questions that come up what we like to do in these situations to have our staff take notes um and then we'll like answer all of it like at the end so we could kind of hear because there might be some of you that have the same question or same comment so we'll kind of go from there um so at this point if it's not an I could do this but it's not a public hearing but if somebody would like to come up and speak on this topic they're welcome to do so at this time uh Jason Johnson 8714 67 Street course South Cottage Grove mayor Council um you know we uh we purchased our house we're make it clear where I'm at I'm off of uh the block or the E whatever that whatever you want to call that so we back up to that when my wife and I purchased this property we did our due diligence we did notice it's on Park property we started making some phone calls you know it's like hey is this actually going to have a trail what's what is the use of this back here and we were told you know from the city I can't tell you who but hey there was uh not going to be a trail back there we're like hey this is the perfect home for us you know so we purchased it and it isn't because of the lake I mean if you guys if anybody has spent any time near that Lake it is it's it's nothing it's nothing special you know so we didn't buy it for to look at the lake we bought it because of the privacy and what we got for the money we paid to purchase that home um with this happening this really changes everything that we've saved for worked for and wanted to have um so that that trail even though it is par Park property um Cottage growth property it's it's still something that's you know we did our did our research and thought hey we were told by the city I don't know if they looked at the same stuff you did uh Garza but I don't know somebody somebody said it wasn't going to be that and uh now it's changing so that's really a big kick to to what we've we've wanted here so I ask that people really think about what we're spending the time and money to build the trail around and what I find interesting about this whole whole deal is you know it's about the development that's going up there and every this whole thing's really been focused around a trail you know and I get that's part of the development and how to get things paid for I don't know how it gets paid for I don't dig in that deep all I'm asking is to think about you know the homes and stuff that you are affecting in the neighborhoods and privacy and the security that we do have cuz it is a pretty Loop is uh it's going to go back through the woods there and you know anybody can get back there so that's our backyards that butt up to the park property I'm all aware of that but you know just something to think about and my three minutes are probably up so thank you very much thank you is there somebody else that like to speak yes please good evening um I'm Crystal Rogers um my husband Eric and I live in the development and um if you actually could pull up the slide with the housing because I think it'd be easier to just point it out I'm a visual person as atrist so um our house is 8844 67th Street Bay South so we're the house on the furthest down on the left side here um we're by far impacted the very most of all these homes um we purchased our home in 2021 um shortly after covid and a lot of stress as a as a business owner in Cottage Grove and trying to survive um all of that we decided that we were interested in putting a swimming pool in our backyard which originally was supposed to be in our house in Cottage Grove in a different neighborhood and and then all of a sudden um found out from a n from a friend of ours that lives in this neighborhood that this um house was going up for sale and so we looked at it and within 48 hours we had put an offer on it and had a had a house to move into and had to get ours sold immediately um so doing some research after moving in um on the the lot and where the lines were we did come across this proposed 2040 comprehensive plan and called the city at that time and asked them um you know is this actually going to happen that this path here could come up and they said I don't know who I spoke to it was a female um and she said um no that land isn't conducive due to flooding that's happened for a trail there so there's no plans for that so that was just three three years ago four years ago now um so I mean we did know that there was that path that's already kind of started by our driveway there on that South Side Southwest side that there could be a path eventually going through the the wooded area but there was no inkling in our minds that there was going to be a path literally within 10 ft of our property line which is what the proposal is I think 10 to 15t from the start of the path to our property line um so we would be significantly impacted if that red line proposal went in because three sides of our home would be visible so Eric and I um you know we understand we do have to come to a compromise on things as a business owner I've learned that over the years you got to compromise on things um we are okay with the path going along our driveway and along you know the existing 67 Street Bay South the usage of usage of the existing sidewalk um I think the color on the was blue if I if I remember correctly um but we' really really really really ask you to consider um the privacy of our home with our children um teenagers and a lot of people coming back and forth on that pathway I I know that there's paths in the area and there's other houses that have been developed on paths and it's not a necessarily a bad thing I think the difference is that we didn't purchase a house knowing that there was going to be a path versus if you do and there's already a path existing there you you've accepted that as a home buyer and that was not something that was on our radar as being um in the plans so I guess I would just ask you to kind of consider the houses that are already there and that been existing a long time and and think about it if if it was your your own um property that you'd invested in for for some time so thank you for hearing us out and I hope you consider that when you guys make your vote so thank you thank you uh Mike Miller 8860 67 Street Bay South um I have enough to go for about 20 minutes so it'll be hard cutting at three but uh I live right on the lake um I was told directly by the developers I know who told you or put it in the Records who changed the to say lakefront property um we were told by the Realtors by the developers that this is lakefront property we were told there will never be a path uh you can tell by where the trail butt ends are that's where we were told the path would go it would come up our street along the park along the sidewalk and go through um the path directly behind our houses takes away our privacy we did pay we do pay more taxes because our houses are worth more because our property the land we bought costed more so we are paying more taxes than most other people in the neighborhood um I'm going to skip around uh this is not a destination path that was sold at the Planning Commission that this is a place where everyone in Cottage Grove is going to walk around this Lake you've all walked the lake it is a swamp it's covered with lily pads almost the entire summer um so I would say if this is going to be sold as a destination and then the city needs to work on improving the quality of the lake water removing lily pads potentially dredging the lake because it's I mean I ice you know I do ice rink on the lake and gosh it's probably five six feet deep at best um waterfall no longer comes to Lake we us when we first moved in in 2011 uh 2014 uh there were all kinds of you know uh wood ducks and I mean we' even we see bald eagles and all that stuff that stuff is no longer present in the area because the lake is overrun uh with lily pads so I strongly my preference would be um like the Rogers the original path that we were all sold on was coming out around the around the on the sidewalks um you know the difference between our path and the path in the rest of the community is when they bought their property it's in their plat they see where that Trails go when we bought ours we were told there's never going to be a path here um it just it it destroys our privacy which is why we live where we live thanks for listening thank you thank you is there anybody else that like to speak this evening good evening mayor and Council um Kim Summerland 87 10 67th Street Court South um a lot of the focus has been on The Waters at St Michael's point and just to be clear it is also impacting our homes that are in preserve so right now our home butts up to the property on Outlaw e um but it also has some of the same impact right I mean we have lived there without a trail for over 12 years and again as some of um our deers have alluded to you know it's different if you're building a development and putting in the trail and people are buying that knowingness there we have bought that and lived without that amenity for for over a decade um other concerns that neighbors have brought up too are the privacy and the safety I mean the area and again all this Focus has been on just that portion there's been no discussion really about how the trail comes around on the west and south sides which would be more of our property and how secluded it is out there um and what's the cost too to put a path through all of those trees there's a number of trees I looked at um some of the information provided by the developer and I have to imagine that's going to be pretty costly it'd be nice um if you are going to make a decision to put that path through that area that you know exactly what that cost is um maybe the developer gets credits but it's still at a cost to the city it's not like it's free to us as taxpayers that just means that they're giving us less maybe it's less for Park dedication money or that sort of thing so you know the parks going take longer to build um another thing that I noticed when I was looking at some of the information is yes um in the comp plan that it indicates that there's a path around the lake and not that it helps um my argument because I don't really want it to go on the south side of the lake but alluding or going back to the um Planning Commission they talked about wanting to have a loop immediately around the lake that's not not what the comp plan shows so I mean there's there's Alternatives right you don't have to follow it per se and even if you were following it exactly as it shows in the comp plan that is not immediately around Lake so you know there's other Alternatives I guess I would just ask the council consider some of those Alternatives you know maybe the path goes along the north side of the lake and up into the neighborhood and loops around that way so you can still have a loop but it's not going through the woods where it's going to be um very costly so uh I would just ask that um the council really consider and explore other Solutions with respect to the established character of our community and be fiscally responsible thank you thank you all right anybody else Bonnie oh we got one more but you that's fine all right mayor council Uh Kevin Summerland 8710 67 Street Court South um my wife just spoke she speaks a lot more eloquently than I so I apologize uh she certainly addressed all of my concerns as well um one thing I would like to add or a couple of things actually in addition to quite honestly opposing that trail going through the the back of our Lots not only in The Preserve but certainly here on uh Michael's Point as well um and this is a very good alternative uh I think to utilize the the sidewalk and avoid the backyards of of those Lots at St Michaels unfortunately there hasn't been an alternative proposed for us on on The Preserve which I would ask that the the Planning Commission look at and bring to you um but also I want to address uh the larger proposal and plat um you know that area that they're looking to put in upwards of 160 homes I believe it is 99 single family and then the uh 84 whatever it was Town Homes huge influx of people um those lots are very small I it it it really should be in my opinion looked at not um just the the density of it is is overwhelming in my mind for an area that right now is is has been preserved and protected um but with that influx of people I know they talked about the the turn lane that would be created into that new development but they I don't know if it was made clear whether or not that turn lane would be extended down into uh uh 67 Street now um so I would I would ask that they if that isn't part of The Proposal that that be added as well to accommodate our access onto Jamaica Avenue thank you thank you does anyone else want to talk on the on your area mine is not Bonnie matter 6649 inip Avenue South Cottage Grove Minnesota 55016 thank you very much mayor and council members I just have a few questions and I think it's more for the uh developer um question number one has to do with the blast plan I know that there's Bedrock up there um I don't know for sure where it is maybe someone can put up a map when they answer this I'd like to know how often they will be blasting and how will the um how will we be notified up on our end and uh uh when you know when's it going to happen how often will it happen Etc where will it happen secondly I'd like to see where the wet land is and I would strongly oppose any purchase of credits to mitigate that Wetland I would hope that that wet land could be kept um I'd like to know where the two exits are to get in and out of this development because it's my understanding you require two exits to get in and out and I don't understand yet after all the discussion tonight maybe it doesn't have to happen tonight and I don't need to know but where the which Trail are you picking or aren't you picking you're just talking about it that those are my questions thank you thank you all right anybody else want to speak at this point good evening uh Tony Kata 7515 74th Street South Cottage Grove uh as I look at the possible options for trail uh I guess my question is the cost of the boardwalk right so the is the alternative option more expensive and you know would you make similar considerations for any other neighborhood so so um I would I would want if I was in any given neighborhood I would want to be treated equally so then I have to ask you know if this was any other neighborhood would we make an exception for them because if you know if you make an exception now or for this one then that sets a precedent so I and and then there's the cost Factor right so does the other option is it less expensive because then that might that's a legitimate reason without making an exception for you know AG grieved property owners that that's a justifiable reason to go with an alternative plan I would I would think um and then lastly is it it appears that you know whoever owns that land now prior to that outlot being dedicated you know their their land is being um trespassed upon so you know I think while if I was in this neighborhood I would be frustrated by this you know I think the the property owner who currently owns it you know if if they had wanted to could have you know made similar you know they could already have a trail back there could be riding dirt bikes back there so I don't I don't think the city wanting to put a trail in there uh adversely affects these Property Owners any differently than if the current property owner were to be us using their land in a legal way that's that's all I have okay thank you all right so uh with that I'm not sure who wants to there was some questions some more just comments but I don't know who wants to take what piece of it before we talk some more Mr Mary members of the council I'll go first with some of the engineering questions and then I think Emily can cover the density question as well so um in terms of uh the cost there's some discussion about the cost of the trails if we did um pick or go with the red alignment um while there certainly is you know cost if you're going to go through a wooded area there's tree removal um that's not unusual or or different than any other trail that we build uh they cost about in general 60 bucks a foot for construction so if this is 600 feet you know you're $ 30 $40,000 so that's your scale right but that is the cost to build Trails right if we want to have trails to use in our town There's a cost to build them nothing here is unusual or different the boardwalk would be right so there's a question of what is that it's times more expensive you're looking at $180 to $200,000 just to have that section of Trail you any of our boardwalks today really cross like a cross this Hamlet Pond right that's the only way to cross a pond is is through the boardwalk so um you know that it is a very much more costly Endeavor uh to have that boardwalk in that situation um the other more I think specific question um regarding you know traffic and the turn Lanes so um like I mentioned before the the turn Lanes would be built that is standard we can require developers to build turn Lanes into their development which we would do even though they will be you know reconstructed in in a matter of three years uh that's not something that's proposed for 67th Street right now that's not something we can really force a developer to build a different turn lane at a different intersection down the road um because like I said the right turn lane it's it's while it certainly has safety benefits it's not a standard a mandate or like a safety requirement you can go all over Cottage grow of Woodburry and find 45 M our roads without the right turn lane because you have the right of way right the unless there's a person in a crosswalk if you're taking that right turn you're not waiting for any you're not coming to a stop at an intersection like you would when you're doing a left turn which is why there is a left turn and even back then there was that left turn built into that development so for 67 Street Bay it would be in 2028 that a right turn lane is proposed but that's why I think I wanted to make sure that that message got across so there is a plan for that that turn lane but it will be as part of the Reconstruction of Jamaica and I did speak with the county project manager and just discussed that I'm speaking correctly and and they they do agree that is something that they would plan to have in the scope of that project in 2028 okay thank you I'll let Emily speak on the density mayor councel I just wanted to go back briefly uh to where we talked a little bit more about density and I thought Samantha did a good job that I thought it should be reiterated um when we look at properties um she had a good image in here uh it might look a little bit more dense because it's uh scrunch due to the additional right of way um we've got a large portion of park right but when we use uh the land use density that's outlined in our comprehensive plan it's important to note that's how we guide our development that's how we guide the number of units that are permitted um on a certain property as a part of development so comparing to you know a Summer Valley Project project or or gront Village project which uh is is um all single family homes right but that density uh uh equals out between this project and those other two projects Emily I don't know if this was for you or who it was I think there was a question about blasting any who wants to just I I know we had this at least one other time in Cottage Grove it's where I grew up down at the dead end the pet so for May and Council I can speak in general I don't know if there's really any more details at this time on blasting blasting always sounds uh scary it is a very common practice to deal with bedrock we've done it multiple times all over the community um many developments recently um developments in actually much closer proximity Hamlet Heights for example that was down at the dead end of Hamlet Avenue right next to existing homes Pine Hill Elementary all blasting to do the work um we actually did blasting when we put the box covered in under Jamaica uh with The Flume we call it right by Renewal by Anderson so right next to the glass facility that was all blasting um there's proximities right for homes I I actually we would work and the developer would work with the geotechnical engineer um given where the Bedrock is there might not even be notifications needed because the vibrations that anyone even could feel could likely be further away those other projects I mentioned there was home homes within 100 ft of the blasting going on um and actually blasting is a much lower impact than the other option which is a hydr hammer where they're banging away all day on that rock that's actually more impactful it doesn't sound as scary as blasting but blasting is quite often the better quicker way to go because that's one impact and then they're done so like I said I just I can't speak to the details of what this will be that would be further on in the final plat stage but it's a very common practice okay sounds good I'm trying to think there was anything else oh do you want to add something yeah mayor council had one more note that I wanted to make there was a question about uh which Trail alignment per se uh this evening is being determined before you and the plans that are in your staff report as a part of this resolution identify that trail uh to be behind the homes that that red segment that you saw before you so I just wanted to make note um that is what's in the plans as a part of this development current okay uh Council mson can you explain the cost differential between the two options does does that number even exist at this point council mson is this the difference between a boardwalk and Trail or between the blue or the between the red and the and the blue yeah I think one thing that's that's important um unless the city administrator would like to add but staff could you go back to the original slide with the aerial photo further back um with the aerial photo on Michaels point on 67th Street Mayor and Council one clarification as staff has shown you the blue alignment as some of the residents have indicated you can see that the concrete sidewalk is in place that was actually constructed during the Michaels Point development so that sidewalk already exists and it connects out to Jamaica Avenue today so as you can see and I think the resident noted it Where the Sidewalk Ends at the end of the culac where it ties into outlot e it was very clear that it was to connect there um the resident was absolutely correct so if we go to the other slide that shows the shape of the outlot you can see the unique shape of out lot e you can see how the trail was designed to connect to the Blue Line the intent was always for Outlaw e to connect via the blue and the red because you can see we constructed the sidewalk already fully in place so the only thing we have to do is connect that stub as the resident indicated it caused a lot of um hardship for that trail to be immediately adjacent to their side property line and so staff is indicating that we would be happy to relocate the trail and find a path more on that angle but we also recognize that that still may be providing some sight line challenges and La lack of privacy we would be happy to work with that Resident to ensure that those trees um of their liking um are aided to screen their property so for clarity the blue already 90% already exists and was always intended with way of the shape of the outlot for it to connect so it's interesting when you look at this exhibit look at the shape of Outlaw e at the water's edge that is no mistake for that shape to be notched out because the sh the trail was intended for it to go behind those property lines as part of that plat so you can see that it was designed to go there it was just a time until the developer and landowner could come to terms to be able to deed this to the city to facilitate that development so the decision before you tonight isn't where if it's red or blue the blue already exists and was already always intended to be there I think the question that you're asking yourself tonight is is it the Red Trail is it the boardwalk is it no red Trail so I think those are the decisions you have to make tonight so I want to be clear the blue already exists out there mayor okay uh yeah Council M mcara so I'm just wondering if um the homes that are along the um Red Trail that we are um putting it Forward does anyone have a um fence that is already built that is outside of their um their property lines do there is there any irrigation that is outside of their property lines that they've already installed I don't know about fence I know somebody had reached out to me that had no no fences irrigation though I heard one irrigation one okay one irrigation and and I asked this because you when we bring in people to put up fences and irrigation all the things we usually do some type of survey so that we know what our property lines are and so I'm just wondering how that happened that they were even able to get an irrigation outside of their own property line so that that's just a question I just wonder because I know that's expensive right um and then with I see that you know we have jungle gyms out there and some docks and those types of things and even how the dock got there I'm I'm so puzzled with that that someone would install a dock without contacting the city to say hey is this permittable so and that was an expense so these are my questions and I just wonder about that and because these are homeowners and they've been there as long as they have and they put money into these things that they have in their backyard I I want us to you know be understanding of that too but still with the understanding that if I were to install anything in my yard I'm going to call you guys to make sure I know if it's okay or not you know so I you know these are my thoughts on it that's all yeah and I would my one question I may be have for staff on the irrigation do we permit for irrigation mayor's members of the council we do not issue a permit for the irrigation okay so they could put it and that's happened in other where people put that Pro or their irrigation onto the right outside yeah and the fencing though they wouldn't permit for that right there's no permit no no so they would it's up to them and and whoever is doing the fence make sure that they figure out okay thank you yes um in response to council member Garza uh when I went out to visit with some of the neighbors out there I did see one fence for the property with the swimming pool well but but it wasn't a large uh what I would call a privacy fence or anything like that it was uh very nicely manicured looked great um but it was a a lower metal fence it appears to be on the lot line it appears to be by the lot line not extending Beyond it no it's no they're not they're in their own line yeah they're in their own but I think they're required to have around so you have to have a fence pool yeah but they did invest in that fence exactly so that's yeah okay so um we can just talk amongst ourselves can't we we don't have to do a motion thank you so I guess what I'll just um throw out there for the for the council is yeah and I think our administrator brought it up fairly succinctly about you know the Choice it's funny cuz we're here talking about a trail on the south side of a lake while we're putting aund and something homes on the on the North part of the property which frankly I think some of us on the council have been here for many many years and seen different reiterations of what's what was going to be proposed there um I will tell uh a couple comments for the for the homeowners one is um every development that I have seen come forth from Walter STS up to this point had the trail there now I will I will tell you this um Walter stfs could have easily cut those pieces out and sold them as part of the property so I think somebody made a comment about a a u realtor person or whoever made a comment that these were going to be Lake Front properties and I'm sorry that that happened I'll just say that because we try as much as we can to put Road extensions maybe we'll have to start looking at doing future Trail extensions to to to here to that with regards to the Red Trail uh being that the property uh behind you is part will be as this development moves forward uh will be Parkland so as I mentioned earlier because I want to make sure that was very clear so anything that's back there that's currently there that you have out there will have to be removed one way or the other the other thing I'm going to share with you um and I've been doing this for a long time as mayor and have seen different developments I kind of alluded to one on the blasting for my old neighborhood where I grew up everybody on our neighborhood thought that road would never go through and there's homes down there um when I grew up down there there wasn't a trail directly behind my house where I lived there is now a trail that goes from the street directly behind the homes at Hamlet Park and works its way around what will happen in in your area there is no way that there is going to be a person from those developments that are going to go walk down to the blue go through your neighborhood and then cut back up to go to the trail they're going to because it's going to be deemed as Park property they're going to walk behind your house and we've seen it before uh we I I can give another example personally for me Pine Tree Pond Park on the south side of adus street all of the we never had a trail there it was kind of a trail because people made it a trail and we ended up putting a trail there I got my phone blown up people were upset uh that that we were going to put a trail behind their house and we built ended up doing it because it was the right thing to do from a trail connection around that pond and after the fact they literally the majority of them people and I Zach you were there uh we're saying it wasn't as bad as we thought it it they liked it they were actually appreciative they got this access point so I know there was also some comments about um you know possibly crime or something going you know within the woods I would just State um anywhere in our community uh we have numerous trails that go through wooded areas uh Woodridge Park uh up there be I can't remember what's the what's the one up above the hill the development oh it's between Woodridge and above the hill yeah and so we have trails that go up and through there um I'm just sharing with you that this is going to be unique um having the access around with a new park that's going to be there it will be more than just your neighborhood I get it um but I also don't want you to think that if the decision was to not go with the red trail that people are going to be W aren't going to be walking behind your house because I guarantee you they will because they did it pine tree they did at Hamlet and we ended up putting the trail in so it actually got people to stay on the trail and not be wandering into people's yards so I just wanted to throw that out there uh as a comment from me so any other comments you well I'm I have a little little uh different opinion from from the way I think the council's going but um I did walk that area back there and most and many people have and and the difference here is that there were plans to do the trail back in 2011 and we're now 15 years later and you can look at all this property in on aerial photos and you look at it on maps but it's very different when you get out and walk it there are some great trees back there um they've lived there many years and you know there's been some talk of you know wasn't a plan wasn't um we'll just move on on from that but um back in 2011 all this went to the to the various um planning commissions there were no objections back then to this probably because no one lived there um I'm concerned about the removal of a lot of very um mature trees uh that have been back there and this was not a unanimous decision by the Planning Commission and that never happens I mean it's very rare anyway the neighbors here have offered some Alternatives and I think it's up to us to give that due diligence and I think um that we should consider an alternate route than what was originally planned um I want the whole project I want the overall project to move forward but I think we can do something with that trail to appease everybody thanks Mar Olson yeah so um I appreciate council member clawson's thoughts um and again I mentioned I had gone and looked as well and you're right it's different looking at a map than it is when you're standing there so what would you propose in terms of an alternate or some sort of um compromise well the neighbors brought forward a proposal of we just call it the blue route and um they seem to be if if there's going to be a trail that seems to be the best alternative that they can live with and I think this I think the city can too so I would I would propose that we consider [Music] coun M Dy yeah so um I did uh I have seen that area back there before um one of the things that uh couple couple lessons learned that I I learned a long time ago is is number one if you if it's something important to you and you're calling somebody like when I have to call Xfinity or somebody like that and get something clarified to actually find out who you're talking to I know it's that was long time ago ago but uh you know you you kind of need to do that because things that are on paper appear to be uh showing that there's a trail there um and there's uh even when I bought my house it was it was it was a uh a spot where the neighbors had actually finished like 10 10 feet into into that lot so to most people looking at it it looked like this scraggly skinny old lot right but uh uh so so they they did that though I mean for a certain period of time they enjoyed a little bit bigger lot right um with the way this development has gone you know you guys have have been able to enjoy some of that that property for probably over you know 10 to 15 years longer than than what was originally thought that that might be but uh so the other thing that I want to just make a point of is that this resolution is a preliminary plat and it uh you know number one is get that uh Locker development moving and the planning associated with that and like I mentioned before we we do have some time to kind of take a look at what kind of different Alternatives that that could be be done so forth for that trail but um so you know at this point I'm I'm I'd be be probably voting to to uh move the uh resolution forward but okay Council Gaza so excuse me thank you um so Tony when you came up and you had some words to say it made a lot of sense and I guess I don't know the answer to that question if we have made exceptions and so I'm intrigued to see because we have so many trails that connect our entire community and we have existing communities and then we put weave Trails through them as you said um and they were established homes and so you've had some push back before from our other community members as well have we deviated from that or have we made exceptions or like you said we've put those trails in and people were happy once they were there um again we walk this land and I I seen the backyards and I can understand not wanting to have a trail up to your house but on the flip side of it I've walked plenty of trails in Cottage Grove that are backed up to people's fences no fences pools all the things and you know I walk with my daughter and we feel safe and so I've not had any concern of these Trails or walking through them but I'm just wondering if if this is something that we normally do would we normally deviate or make exceptions this way or if there's not something of of substantial that could really change this development I can I I'll answer and then I'll um and maybe staff will know this better I am not aware okay of any um we went in back afterwards where there wasn't a trail there um like pine tree and a couple of Hamlet um the the Ravine thing that runs down from Kingston behind that so I just and we've you know talked to the develop or the homeowners such in some of those areas and you know kind of gu in the long but so I'm not aware of any that we've deviated uh and said we're not putting a trail here thank you yeah thank you uh or a city administrator something she want to add mayor members of the council and maybe staff can bring up the image of the northern part of the pond because I want to make sure we're talking about Equity right we had talked about that it was referenced and staff oh there you went past it um the northern part of the pond please I saw the blue there you go see the green trail um there it says preferred Trail route where does that trail go MH it goes behind the new homes mhm one the developer was interested in putting in the purple Trail which a would cost more money but they were willing to put the bill staff is saying no for Equity we're going to put the trail behind the homes the new homes so when you think about Equity of the neighborhood that Northern portion will have the trail behind the new homes same as what was intended on the south gotta now mayor and Council you know as we've been talking here tonight when you've been here as long as I have um you start remembering a lot of of different examples right I'm sure you guys are are running through your mind I remember the time where we got this crazy idea that we were going to build a parking lot at Pine Tree Bond right on the north side of Adia Street do you remember that that was a crazy idea um who would have thought with that slope that was there that we could actually build a parking lot and we were going to build a trail from 80th Street to Indian Boulevard do you remember there were hundreds of properties and there were numerous connections into those neighborhoods that had never had connections before because mayor as you described it there were all those foot paths through there right and then can you remember when the bulldozer started pushing dirt down through that Corridor between 8th and Indian those resident were an absolute shock as we built that B that trail and you mentioned it mayor who were some of the first people to reference the use of that trail it was those very neighbors that had said we don't want the trail but yet they were the first ones out there as their kids were learning to ride their bikes without training wheels they were back on that trail you saw them walking their dogs you saw them enjoying the absolute amenity but here's an interesting thing the mayor also mentioned this Zach can tell you stories when we did this there was tons of encroachment and there were hundreds of properties and I'm not exaggerating so if you look at an aerial photo between 80th and Indian you'll know there were hundreds of encroachment now at that time they all had to remove their stuff the city did not offer to screen their properties to provide trees or to accommodate them so we provided nothing to those residents mayor and councel what we are doing tonight is going above and beyond a to create equity in the neighborhood as you see in this northern part and number two we are going the extra mile to help ensure that that screening and their privacy is maintained which we have not provided for hundreds of other residents in our community so I know that you guys have lived through a lot of Trail Construction in your day and can remember a lot of those conversations but we also remember that we are building trails and amenities for the 41,000 people that live here and enjoy those things and those trails are what make Cottage Grove an amazing Recreation destination okay so at this point uh Council um I don't know if you want to switch it back to the the two items so as uh as was mentioned I think if if I'm hearing right at least um I don't think from a true development standpoint if you will that there's really any any um angst from the council as it relates to the development the only piece that was whether it was blue blue or red um and so I guess um at this point um this is tied up or or the the trail itself is tied up in the in the the two things that are before us in essence correct well not the zoning the the pet plat would be is that is that correct two okay um so at this point from from I'm sorry you want me to make a motion Well yeah if you want to yeah go ahead yeah that's fine I would I would move that we adopt ordinance number 1093 approving the zoning amendment to change the zoning of 72.1 eight Acres from a A2 to agricultural to R4 transitional residential all right so I have a most by council member the do I have a second second second by council member Garza uh any discussion seeing none all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed motion carries uh and then we have the second uh resolution that's there I will make a motion to adopt resolution second second by council member thei um any further discussion council member Olen first yeah go ahead I was um Council I'm just wondering if can we is there a way to move this forward without the trail location or does that muck things up so to speak is that put things put a wrench in things well I think what we heard I'll let staff bump into this is that it obviously the whole development proposal though is part of what the plan is for the trail so where they stub everything in from the new development on the preliminary plat where it's going to come around the lake um into our parcel um is all kind of tied together so that's that's why it's in here um that's why that's kind of what I was getting to a little bit earlier is the first one is is simple because it's we're saying the development the second one has that in there so um we do have a motion in a second the only only one question I'm sorry yeah customer something say go ahead I'll wait um the one thing I wanted to mention before uh the vote one way or the other is um since we're doing the preliminary plat at some point um you you're going to have the you know should it pass um you'll you'll be able to have the conversation with the homeowners out there um looking at uh tree placement whether it's on their proper property off of their property um the one that has the pool who's the one that has the pool that's Rogers the Rogers um you know also in their particular case if there's something we can do around the side even though we're going to take the trail should this all one way or the other we're going to take that trail that way but um if we can do it at that angle I like that compromise that we did there but if we can also look at some of the tree situation to see if uh we can make that happen I will mention to the homers real quick is we have done this before where we have uh done some plantings on private or private property we go we go in and talk to the homeowners we did it with the developmental Walmart uh we did it with the the apartment building along hardwood uh where we'll actually go put trees on property but we also do it on Open Space too so I just want to mention that that that that is not unique we've done that before in in order to help uh any concerns with screening and such so I a question um what what is the dire need to have that trail like right literally next to the water on that South Side is it that like much of a hill to die on to have that path go on the sidewalk City standpoint like why so Cru yeah well I guess what I would share with you is um and again I've been around for a long time it's been in the comp plan um and it's always been meant to have a trail that actually goes around a lake or I know some call it a pond frankly I think i' call it upon um we don't really have many of these options around our community right now eventually maybe more as we jump across County Road 19 and get out more towards the Ravine there's a lake back there um and so it it's it's a unique uh feature along with the wooded areas and such like that back there so it is very unique that we don't have a lot of options in Cottage Grove for residents to be able to go walk um in an area that's as beautiful as that area is by and I know you guys are beautiful I know the area behind you I've been over there I've seen it I know council member the has skied it uh behind that area so it's it that's that's the reason it's it's there's been a plan for it all along there's the goal is to connect directly around the lake so you have uh proper and and then as I mentioned you earlier and I'm very sincere about this you will have people walking back there if you do not have a trail they will walk it because I'm just telling you if it's me and the trail is going to cut this way and I know that that's Parkland I'm going to walk the Parkland because I want to be by the water all those trees no yeah it would it would typically be similar to what you see like at Hamlet there's still going to be some trees back there but you're going to see the water um anywhere that you go around there so I just wanted to mention that okay C Mar Bron thank you um with regard to the tree thing uh one of the things we have in an ordinance is a tree mitigation ordinance so whenever a development goes forward um there's an inventory done on all the trees and they're given a value um some of that stuff is pretty scrubby some of it's pretty nice so they'll all be given a value and then um the intent would be for tree removal to really focus on the not very high value stuff um and then when you plant new stuff you plant good stuff and we have a list that our city Forester um you know can share with developers and Property Owners Etc about this is what we recommend for our Urban Forest as opposed to what we what we prefer not to have um you know asht trees are an obvious answer to to that because of the emerald ashb but um that's how that works um mayor what I was hoping for is um maybe uh Emily or Corey can talk about the difference between a preliminary plat and a final plat and kind of how that process works we flip for it uh you're honor members of the council this is one of the stages the preliminary plat is obviously something that must pre uh is a precursor to the final plat there can be changes between the preliminary and the final plat the developer may make changes obviously with some of these conditions they may have to go back and make changes before you see it as a final PL y this is the public hearing the plan Planning Commission held the public hearing so there isn't another public hearing although you are always so kind to open it up to comments from the public so if this is still happens to be an unresolved issue there's always another opportunity to talk about it at the final plat okay perfect and I think it's important for the neighbors to know that you know their voice will be heard throughout this process um to help mitigate any concerns that there may be Etc um Ryan you mentioned that the pond which I think one of the uh neighbors talked about it kind of gets Lily P or lily pads and it's you know kind of kind of gross it's going to get more water uh in it now because of the Overland um Drainage Field is going to become a piped Drainage Field will that have an impact on the quality of the pond Mr mayor council M Olson in terms of the the lake itself or the pond there was reference to dredging lily pads it is a public water that is permanent by the DNR so some of those improvements are not something the city be able to do this development specifically does have to reduce the phosphorus that goes into the lake um so they do algae less green stuff yep so that's the main thing is developments have to leave it in a better State than than it was so that does do help you know over time have less algae things like that I don't want to make big promises but they are required to reduce that into the lake and I know the watered District gets involved in this as well and you know there's a lot of science behind it but I just wanted to ask if it is going to get more water is it going to be better in general so thank you for that that's it for me mayor all right so we do have a motion in a second before us um hearing no other discussions all those in favor of adopting resolution 2025 020 approving the plary plat for a subdivision to be called lockr which will consist of 99 lots for single family homes and 84 town home units all those in favor signify by saying I I opposed no motion carries 4 to one okay thank you thank you thank you everybody thank you all right uh next on our agenda this evening uh we're down to council comments request um so I will start down with uh council member Garza sure thank you mayor so it looks like we have some fun stuff happening but I will not steal Strawberry Fest Thunder and I will only talk about our 2025 Easter egg hunt that's coming up on April 12th that's going to be at the Cottage Grove Ice Arena and it looks like you can grab your tickets online at on our City website so that should be a lot of fun happening in the neighborhood in the next couple of months and I will pass it on all right thank you uh Council marara Council yeah I guess I I'll go ahead and then mention the you know strawberry F we had mentioned this last meeting too that there's a purse Bingo on February uh 22nd fundraiser uh at River Oaks at 11:00 a.m. uh tickets uh there's tickets online at strawberry fest.com and uh there's also if you uh um Strawberry Fest Ambassador scholarship program candidate informational meeting um March 4th uh at uh 6: pm at carbonis again the ambassadors uh they represent the city of uh of Cottage Grove we uh we provide a scholarship for them too um and they go around and and represent the uh the city at a lot of the different uh parades and festivals and things of that nature so uh so that's always nice so um other than that I'm good I thank you all right coun M brls you can speak hopefully I'm going to do my best um for those who are not aware tomorrow night at the cottage girl ice arena the park boys hockey team has a home uh sectional playoff game they'll be playing two rivers uh starts at 7:00 you can get your tickets online if there are any left you can get your tickets online going through the ice Arena's website um last year I had the opportunity to go to the ceton uh Park playoff game and I got to tell you it was Pandemonium the place was packed um Zach and his entire team including you know Molly and Jordan and everybody else were working really hard uh mopping floors working the concession stands making sure that you know people were getting taken care of making sure that the event went as well as could be expected uh there were a lot of long lines and and that happens when the place gets super busy so if you're going to go I would encourage you to get there a little early um but if I can shake this nasty cold enough I'm I got my two tickets so I'm planning on going um let's go support our Park Boys hockey team second year in a row they've been in a playoff game and prior to that zck uh not often um if at all for like 20 years so this team is really coming together uh coach corkish doing a great job so let's support him second thing is um one of my favorite times of year uh starts February 28th over at River Oaks and that's our annual fish fry um you can imagine I don't look like this because I miss many meals so uh you know definitely get in there and enjoy the opportunity to um you know connect with your friends and your neighbors Etc River Oaks is a great facility we've got a a really good chef and a good service staff there so get out and enjoy eny the fish fry and I will encourage you to make your reservations early because if you walk in you won't find a spot you you need to either call the golf course or make your reservations online and again that starts on February 28th uh somebody mentioned scholarships earlier if you have a senior who lives in Cottage Grove from uh either um Park high or Eastridge High School I would strongly encourage you to let them know that the Cottage Grove Lions Club is giving away um uh5 $2,000 scholarships this year um we love to support our local Youth and uh you know their application deadline is April 4th for that I believe so um please let people know to apply it was a lot of fun last year standing on stage at Park High School handing out scholarships to kids who had no idea they won they just we called their name and they walked up uh additionally at our first meeting in um March uh we will be doing the annual donation here to the Craig willery scholarship for Public Safety um Craig unfortunately won't be able to join us this year he's going to be uh somewhere in Colorado skiing um he's a big skier but uh um The Cottage Grove Lions approved a donation of $2,000 um my wife and I started the scholarship several years ago when Craig retired we'll be making a donation of $1,500 all of these donations go to The Cottage Grove Public Safety Board and then they choose the winners um I believe last year it was three winners of $1,500 each and these are for young people from our community who want to go into the world of Public Safety whether that means uh being a police officer a firefighter or um working EMS as a medic as my colleague did uh here for many many years so um again make sure that uh they go talk to their guidance counselor if that's something they're interested in we need good people in our public safety departments across the state and across the country and this scholarship is intended to help people who um are interested in that you know maybe get a leg up with books and those kinds of things and if you're interested in contributing to the Craig Willer scholarship you can certainly reach out to me you can reach out to anybody here at City Hall I know our Public Safety team is keenly aware of it uh or the public safety board and with that may I'll turn it back to you fantastic thank you Council M rson uh Council M Clawson I have no additional comments to all right thank you so I just have one item I just want to mention which is kind of exciting I'm just going to kind of read my little I'll call a little bit of statement it says um I have I am honored uh to have recently uh filmed the 2025 state of the city speech highlighting obviously some of the key accomplishments uh from 2024 and also providing an update on where the city is regarding our overall strategic plan and giving a vision of the city's priorities uh both in 2025 and Beyond um I will say no one speech could ever fully encapsulate all that the city and our community does but I'm always humbled by the work our staff and our dedicated residents due to make our city a wonderful place to live work and play uh that video will soon be available I think it might even be out there tonight um uh on the city's website at cottager mn.gov back stateof thee City but I also let you know that there will also be a link in the upcoming edition of The Cottage Grove reports newsletter and obviously on social media so there'll be a of ways for you to uh to view it and again I want to thank all of our residents our commissions our staff my Council colleagues up here and partners all the partners both elected and and outside of our our city and um obviously the citizens of cottage grow for uh your dedication to our amazing Community it has been an honor obviously to serve alongside all of you here and I'm absolutely looking forward to um our work together in 2025 and Beyond so I just thought I would share that with you and it is out I got a chance to view it today um and so hopefully you'll like it and if there's questions obviously you can bounce bounce those off myself we one of our council members here um if they can't answer it I I'll try to so uh with that um Workshop open to the public we do not have one this evening uh 14 was Workshop Clos with the public we don't have one this evening so we are down to adjournment move to adjourn second we have a motion by council member the second by council member Garza they didn't even let you guys talk down in this end no no all those in favor signify by saying I I I opposed motion carries we are adjourned