[6:05] Anne Burt: Good evening and welcome to our city council meeting for the city of Woodbury. If it's not already painfully obvious, I have meningitis. I will not be able to speak much tonight. So, I'm turning the reigns over to our mayor pro tem Councilwoman Jen Santini to conduct most of tonight's business. As I said in our workshop, I do reserve the right to squeak in and say something when I need to, but carry it away, please. [6:29] Jennifer Santini: Wonderful. So, the meeting has been called to order. Um, and uh with what is our tradition, would you please stand and we'll say the pledge of allegiance. 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. [6:55] Jennifer Santini: Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? [6:55] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris? [6:55] Steve Morris: uh, here. [6:55] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [6:55] Jennifer Santini: here. [6:55] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [6:55] Donna Stafford: here. [6:55] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [6:55] Kim Wilson: here. [6:55] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [6:55] Anne Burt: here. [6:55] Jennifer Santini: Wonderful. Um, we I don't believe have in any special order of business tonight. Um, we also, I don't believe have received any green sheets for open forum. Um, just double checking that nobody's here for open forum. Um, if not, uh, we will move on. I know I did skip what is normal. See, I didn't get a script. So, no, it's okay. I do have it. [7:31] Jennifer Santini: So, which is basically to say that for anybody that is attending, um we are obviously here in person, but this is being broadcast uh by True Lens uh community media. Um people can tune in on the city's Woodbury YouTube uh channel as well as online virtually uh using the link that is on our uh city website. Um there are opportunities to submit public comments using the Q&A feature. Um we will double check again before we move on whether there are any for um online from Ashley. Uh as well as if there are questions outside of this meeting, you can feel free to submit them through city hall um at our phone number or uh our email address which is found on the agenda as well as well as on our website. So back to open forum. [8:14] Jennifer Santini: If nobody is here in person for open forum, is there anybody online Ashley? [8:14] Ashleigh Sullivan: No. [8:14] Jennifer Santini: Perfect. So now we will move on to the consent agenda. Um all of these items listed under the consent agenda are considered routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion um in an affirmative vote by roll call of the majority of the members present. Um there's no usually no separate discussion of these items unless a council member or citizen so request and in the event the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered a separate subject of discussion by the council. Uh so first we'll see if there's anybody from the public here in person that would like to remove an item. Seeing none, anybody online? Ashley. No. Any uh items to be removed by the council? [8:57] Council Member: No. All right. Well, I will seek a motion to approve the consent agenda items. [8:57] Steve Morris: I'll make a motion to approve consent agenda items 6A through 6J as presented and written. [8:57] Kim Wilson: Second. [9:15] Jennifer Santini: Perfect. We have a uh first or motion and a second. Any further discussion? Although we don't have discussion. So Ashley, will you do roll call, please? [9:15] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris. [9:15] Steve Morris: Aye. [9:15] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [9:15] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [9:15] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [9:15] Donna Stafford: Aye. [9:15] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [9:15] Kim Wilson: Aye. [9:15] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [9:15] Anne Burt: Aye. [9:31] Jennifer Santini: Wonderful. Those items pass. Now we will move on to the public hearing portion. Um, so the same thing. I have to read all this. I'm just I'm just adjusting to this this process. Um so in order to allow for uh airing of speaker comments uh we would have if there is anybody looking to speak on any of the public hearing matters um we would ask that you submit a green sheet um I don't know if anybody has any. So assuming none I might skip the rest of this speech. Is that okay? [10:06] Jennifer Santini: I'm going to save you all as I butcher it. So, so we will move on to the uh public or the item 7A on the agenda which is the consideration of approval for the 47 Pines public hearing um and so forth. And I will turn it over to Eric. [10:06] Eric Sells: Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem, Mayor and members of the council. Land and Resources Consulting has submitted an application for a residential development located at 4255 Woodlane Drive. The application is requesting to plat 9 residential lots and is currently zoned R2 single family estate district and is guided as rural estate on the land use plan. This application is likely familiar to the council as this was in front of them in July of 2025 as part of a concept PUD review and at that time council had the opportunity to provide feedback to the applicant. the information provided at that July 2025 meeting is not binding on the application this evening, but it again should be familiar. The application was informed by a number of the comments that were received by both from both the planning commission and city council and that's what is in front of council. [11:23] Eric Sells: The property is zoned R2 single family estate district. that area does uh require a 3 acre uh property because of the uh prevalence of the private well and septic system. The applicant is requesting to modify that through a comprehensive plan amendment to change the land use of the property from rural estate to urban estate. The city historically has used one of two findings of fact. either a mistake was made in the original comprehensive plan or times and conditions have changed. In this case, staff identifies that times and conditions have changed to warrant a a change in the comprehensive plan. The development to the east of the property is called Arbor Ridge. That is an urban development. As part of the development of Arbor Ridge, two significant events occurred. The first was the extension of Hargus Parkway, which you can see on the screen. That extension extended city sewer and water and also added a significant traffic benefit to Bailey Road in the overall area. The second change is probably mo the most impactful and that is the construction of a municipal drinking water supply well. [12:40] Eric Sells: That municipal drinking water supply well is highlighted by the red arrow on the screen. And due to the close proximity to that well, it is highly advised that uh additional u private water wells not be uh permitted. And again, under the existing zoning and land use, that would require private well and septic versus connection to the city sewer and water. So due to the lower density patterns to the west of the property as you can see on the location map on the right hand side. So the west is to the left and the higher densities to the east. This became an opportunity to do the urban estate land use which is a 1 acre minimum lot size. [13:27] Eric Sells: So larger lots than the normal patterns. The application in front of you this evening is for a planned unit development to flex the R2 zoning from three-acre minimum requirement to .74 acres. It's important to note for context that the Arbor Ridge development to the east. Those lots uh range in size from .2 acres to .3 acres. So again, this in front of you is .74 acres. So several times larger than the property to the east. [14:00] Eric Sells: In exchange for the flexibility for the lot size, the applicant will construct the trail along the south side of Hargus Parkway all the way to Woodlane Drive. As we take a look at the preliminary plat, we'll identify nine single family lots with lot one remaining. That is the existing homestead and a single outlot in the southwest portion for storm water management purposes. [14:26] Eric Sells: Access to the property is provided off of two access points from Hargus Parkway. The access point on the left hand or western access point would ultimately be designed to potentially be extended if development occurs to the south. That's why you see a sidewalk constructed on one side as this is envisioned that this would be a longer street. The easterly access point is a cul-de-sac that would serve those four lots only. [14:56] Eric Sells: I'm going to quickly jump back to the location map and you'll see as you start to see that cul-de-sac is generally in this location. There is a stub street located in this location from Arbor Ridge. So the properties to the south are well served by this stub street and the extension of the cul-de-sac that would ultimately become a through street if development were to occur in the future. [15:22] Eric Sells: A detailed landscaping plan has been submitted and as you can see it it highlights and focuses on creating a streetscape uh feel along Hargus Parkway that's consistent with the planting plans to the east uh along the remaining portions of Hargus Parkway. A neighborhood meeting was held as part of the concept PUD in June of 2025 with 16 property owners in attendance. A second neighborhood meeting was held for this specific property in November on November 17th of 2025 with nine residents in attendance. Those uh raised questions regarding the landscaping along Hargus Parkway and also a request to remove some existing barbed wire fence that's uh existing on the property uh today. With that, the planning commission did review this at their February 23rd meeting and Saurin Shaw is here with the planning commission liaison report. [16:27] Saurin Shaw: Thank you, Eric. Uh, mayor and city council. Um, just wanted to give you a brief u points on what the majority of the discussion at the planning commission was. First of all, I wanted to say that the city staff, it's it's a pretty broad ask, right? It's a comprehensive plan, you know, amendment plan, unit development, conditional use permit, preliminary unit development, so on so forth. city staff had done a thorough review and assessment and you know as Eric just explained he also explained to the planning commission the the rationale for actually uh recommending that the times have changed and so um you know the so it should be brought brought forward and so the planning commission actually unanimously approved 5 to 0 uh on 23rd. Uh the key discussion points if I can just touch on that is as Eric explained the key enabler is is the availability of um you know the city water and sewer right uh as from the Arbor Ridge uh parcel. [17:16] Saurin Shaw: Um and the discussion that the planning commission had around this is uh for future if for example the lot to the south also came forward with a similar kind of development proposal would we actually have you know ability to to provide city water and sewer to the new ask that would come and at that point you know what what planning commission was informed is is that that would be reviewed as part of the next comprehensive plan development in terms of what is the capacity for city water and sewer um for further expansion south. Um the second point was on the new walking path. If you if you can just put that slide up, Eric. Yeah, the red one there. Uh so that is actually the new walking path that is uh essentially on the south side of Hargus. There's already a walking path on the north side of Hargus and you know obviously the north of the north walking path is Bailey Elementary School. And so the discussion at the planning commission was that you know there could be you know essentially students walking on this walking path to the school because they would not be part of the bus you know pickup area or limit I should say. [18:43] Saurin Shaw: Uh and so so the discussion was around you know pedestrian crossing across you know if they're walking on the red lined and they want to go to the other side to Bailey and so at that point you know Eric had informed that there would be a pedestrian crossing at Woodlane um and and that the uh there would be a monitoring done to see if we need to kind of you know have that as a lighted crossing or just a pedestrian crossing. So, so that was part of the discussion. And then, uh, number three point is, uh, the planned cul-de-sac that that Eric already described. Um, the planning commission was, you know, had asked the question that is it sized for, you know, EMS and trash pickup also because you you would need to have access, you know, all the way down to that. And last but not the least is the storm water uh drainage because that was actually brought up by you know one of the neighbors who was actually attending the planning commission meeting. Uh and and so that was actually addressed by the the fact that there is actually a part of the land in southwest side of this whole plat which is designated as essentially a pond and and an area for storm water drainage which the plan would have to be submitted to the city and city would approve and then once built it would be city who would be actually managing that going forward. So any questions? [20:14] Jennifer Santini: All right. Thank you very much. Thank you S. Ashley, is there anything online? Okay, I would uh make a motion to close the hearing. [20:14] Kim Wilson: Second. Sorry, Kim did second. [20:14] Jennifer Santini: Um, all in favor say Aye. [20:14] Council Members: Aye. [20:32] Jennifer Santini: Perfect. Um, so now I would turn to council members. Oh, we'll go with the mayor first so that she doesn't have to try to insert in the middle of everybody else's. [20:32] Anne Burt: So, can you just explain why the two cul-de-sacs are in different size? It seems to me that you'd want a size of the same or why is it that they're different? [20:48] Eric Sells: The uh cul-de-sac on the west side is a temporary cul-de-sac and so it is the minimum size that we can accept to allow for emergency vehicles, plowing operations and the like. But we do anticipate that in the future it will be extended at some point. The cul-de-sac on the right is an ultimate condition. [21:09] Anne Burt: Okay. Do we just like the bigger one in general? Is that the idea? [21:09] Eric Sells: Yep. It allows for center storing and very efficient. [21:09] Anne Burt: Uh snow removal. So what happens in the little one with snow removal? [21:09] Eric Sells: It'll be pushed to the end. [21:27] Anne Burt: Ah okay. And our new ladder truck can get around the little one? [21:27] Eric Sells: Uh it can back out. like it's unlikely that the investment of that size would be placed in such a constrained area. So, as we have conversations with the fire services, they'll likely they they would be able to maneuver this area. This we do have turning templates that show the ability for full ladder trucks to move through. It would it's not simply as simple obviously as the property on the east side. [21:56] Anne Burt: Okay. Do we have an idea of when the property to the south is developed or is this really just I mean would you just make it bigger to start with and then reduce it or this is whatever give this explain your logic. [22:14] Eric Sells: The the logic is in the future uh and and I believe within the packet uh there was some ghost plots that identified how deep this cul-de-sac ultimately this bulb will be relocated and rebuilt. [22:14] Anne Burt: Okay. And then will become a similar size in the future. Okay. So it'll be extended to the south. [22:32] Eric Sells: Correct. [22:32] Steve Morris: One of the two would have would occur. [22:32] Eric Sells: Correct. [22:32] Steve Morris: All right. Thank you. The property to the south that is still still zoned R2? [22:49] Eric Sells: R2. Correct. [22:49] Steve Morris: Two. Excuse. Oh, it's R2. [22:49] Eric Sells: R2. [22:49] Steve Morris: And this was R3. [22:49] Eric Sells: This is R2 as well. [22:49] Steve Morris: R2 to R1. R R2 to R. It's staying R2. The the zoning is not changing. We're flexing through the planned unit development on lot size. [22:49] Steve Morris: PUD. Okay. Is this inside? I'm trying to look through our maps. It's not here. I'm showing that this is inside the MUSA. [23:06] Eric Sells: This is not inside the MUSA. It would be inside the MUSA after the comp plan amendment because it is currently served. That That's what I'm trying to understand. [23:06] Steve Morris: It's the properties aren't currently served, but immediately to the east it is. [23:22] Eric Sells: Correct. So the MUSA line ends here and that and that's just a a pattern of well when we did that when that was drawn that development did not exist. [23:22] Steve Morris: So okay that's correct times and condition my my point is times and conditions have changed and even though this is not under the MUSA the times and conditions have changed because the development to the east is now able to serve these that is correct. [23:47] Steve Morris: Okay so this will these how it doesn't matter. Okay, got it. I would like to look at and I know we've done this previously in that western um roundabout in that western the smaller one that we were just talking about is that the signage we've done this previously in the past that we would put signage there that says future road extension planned etc that we would just ensure that any of those four property owners that may be coming are aware that this very likely could be extended just so there's no surprises. [24:19] Eric Sells: Yep. that that is a part of our standard specifications, but we could certainly add that as a condition. [24:19] Steve Morris: As long as it's in your standard specs, I just didn't see it in the conditions. Doesn't need to be a condition. If that's part of standard, then I'm standard. [24:41] Kim Wilson: I have some questions. Um, so, uh, building off of the MUSA, I'll just work backwards. Were these Did you say these were going to be well and septic? [24:41] Eric Sells: The current zoning and land use would lead this to be well and septic lots. [24:41] Kim Wilson: Okay. So, let me ask. So, are they going to be well and septic? [24:41] Eric Sells: No. If this approval were to move forward, they'd be hooked up to city sewer and water. [25:00] Jennifer Santini: And for clarity, the desire for us and from public works is is for this to be connected to city water to prevent additional straws. if can you can you expand upon that just for community knowledge for those listening that why that is we don't want well and septic here. [25:20] Eric Sells: Yeah, this uh it's a critical portion of wellhead protection is to limit the number of protrusions into the aquifer. So council member Morris's straws is a good analogy. It is each individual well that goes down into the aquifer has an opportunity for contamination or other um issues to arise and that is the way that the drinking water. The other issue that can come into play is there is draw down in close proximities to uh municipal wells and so adding new can become an operational challenges for those future wells is is another concern. [26:01] Kim Wilson: Remind me about the current home on the property? [26:01] Eric Sells: that would be hooked up to City Sewer and Water. [26:01] Kim Wilson: Um Okay. Um um how do the kids currently uh who live in the development to the east, how do they get to Bailey? Because they don't walk down to Woodlane and then up Wood Lane. There's no Is there a trail on Woodlane there? [26:26] Eric Sells: Yeah, you uh Oh, there is. Yep. There's a trail through. [26:26] Kim Wilson: So there's sidewalks and system connects to the north side. [26:26] Eric Sells: Yep. And they it leads them up to Bailey. Okay. Um and uh there's also a fair amount of cut through that does occur. [26:42] Kim Wilson: Not in the winter though. [26:42] Eric Sells: They're taking the direct route. [26:42] Kim Wilson: Yes. They're deer as the crow. [26:42] Jennifer Santini: Yes. [27:06] Kim Wilson: And then so um two things. Uh number one changing the comp plan. Um, you know, it's it's been said it's very difficult to do it. There's a lot of hassle and council has said in the past that they don't like to do it. And number two, we have a pause, right? I'm looking at the attorney pause. on our development outside of MUSA. And so technically this is outside of MUSA unless until we hook it up to is that correct is that's a correct statement isn't it? [27:28] Eric Sells: So the the application for the comp plan amendment would amend the MUSA boundary bringing it into the existing MUSA. The the current pause is the pause of the our implementation of our subphasing and the pause was for subphase 2D. So this would be brought into the existing MUSA but it is not currently in the MUSA. [27:56] Kim Wilson: Okay. Um and then the only other thing if you can go back to the um maps that show both of them and the lots. Um keep going where the sidewalk and trails are there. Um my only request uh would be that um on the uh road to the west, the future road extension, I would I I think I mentioned this at the time back then also that I would like to see a sidewalk on both sides there because my guess is um those driveways will be accessing off of that main road and uh if a development goes in to the south that will then become a through street which will be um a little more difficult for those people uh those two lots there and people accessing from the south. [28:14] Jennifer Santini: clarity on that we don't always you're talking about where the blue line is right now? [28:14] Kim Wilson: correct. [28:14] Jennifer Santini: okay we don't always put sidewalks on both sides do we? [28:14] Kim Wilson: I know that. [28:14] Jennifer Santini: oh are you asking for both sides? okay we don't normally that's not normal. [29:26] Eric Sells: Uh it's not normal um let me think if I can come up with an So, our pedestrian are are the standards that we just updated. I say just I mean the last couple of years we just updated the standards would dictate when and where a dual sidewalk. I'm asking the question because I don't remember. It would dictate where a dual uh sidewalk would be recommended. The design principles identify the the roadway category or characteristics that would lead to having sidewalk on both sides or a trail and sidewalk on one side. The mayor's correct that in a normal residential street, which is what is proposed on the westerly access point, you would have a sidewalk only on one side is the normal development pattern in its final form. [29:53] Kim Wilson: In its final form. [29:53] Eric Sells: in its final form. So even in its final form, it would not our standard would not be to do a sidewalk on both sides. [30:12] Kim Wilson: Correct. [30:12] Eric Sells: On this, you can see Hargus Parkway has pedestrian infrastructure on two sides of the road. That is certainly a roadway that carries enough volume and also is in close proximity to schools. Those are two of the driving factors to having a robust pedestrian. But generally, and if you look, you can see I think on the air photo, maybe not. um all through Arbor Ridge, those streets are single loaded as well. [30:29] Kim Wilson: But we don't know for sure what the development to the south is going to look like or is there a plan in place? [30:29] Eric Sells: There's not a plan in place, but I would say that the rationale that's being made tonight regarding the buffer transition land use densities, so the one unit per acre would be a highly likely uh scenario that would be proposed by staff in the future for those development patterns. So I would anticipate the developments to the south to be less dense and therefore the traffic volumes would uh also be significantly less than if it were a 3 and 1/2 unit per acre urban density. [31:16] Jennifer Santini: Is there a I guess maybe a question for Kim or I don't know my two questions are and for both sort of of the two of you which is Kim do you have a is it a question more about having it on the west side versus the east side and I guess to Eric was there a reason that it was put on the east side versus the west side? [31:47] Eric Sells: I don't believe there's any reason the designers here that may be able to answer that but I don't believe there's a a magic to the east versus west side. [31:47] Jennifer Santini: And then council member Wilson, were you preferring it to be more that it would be on the west side? [31:47] Kim Wilson: That just goes by. No. Uh my concern was this. Um I know that when we have a lot of uh walkers from the schools, um these these roads tend to get bottlenecked up and I'm guessing this is not going to What's the width of the road? [31:47] Eric Sells: 26 feet. [32:02] Kim Wilson: 26. Yeah. Very skinny roads. And a lot of times parents have a habit of parking and having kids walk so they don't get caught in the school traffic and it creates a bottleneck for and a safety issue for pedestrians and especially these kids coming from elementary school. Um, and uh, sidewalk on both sides prevents these kids, we just talked, cutting through paths, paths of least resistance of having to walk up a 26 foot wide road even though there is a sidewalk on one side with cars parked um, on the road. That's all. It was a safety issue. Um, it was a safety concern. I understand that we have ghost plat here showing potentially extending more, but it is a ghost plat and we have learned from ghost platting that it's not always what it seems. So that was my concern. [33:21] Jennifer Santini: So I mean what a compromise then just to be to flip it to the west side. [33:21] Kim Wilson: Well, no, because then you would have the people on the other side. I mean, it would somewhat make sense to put it on that side, but I still have, um, Valley Crossing is a perfect example of how and those roads are wider. Um, as those kids leave that school and start heading down the neighborhood, it's just a it's a free-for-all from uh, kids walking down there and parents are parked there, there's a lot of traffic. There's and there's a lot of safety concerns. So, just bringing it up. [33:21] Jennifer Santini: Although the reason why I had asked is because I was just thinking like okay well if you did have more possible through traffic and so forth from the south if you stayed on the west and I was thinking if you walked up to Hargus you're most likely turning and walk there and you're going to cross over at Hargus and you know Woodlane and so then you wouldn't have to cross whatever that little street would be west side and I just didn't know if there was any issue you know of reasoning about picking the east versus west so. [34:06] Steve Morris: Um, can you remind me the council has gotten feedback in the past on Hargus Parkway and concerns? Was that parking on to to council member Wilson's point of of pickup and drop off? Is that is that event-based parking that there's troubles or concerns with? Help refresh my my recollection. [34:06] Eric Sells: There have been periods of time where there was uh concerns regarding parking when there was utilization of the fields. So that was a has been a concern in the past. I believe that that issue has been corrected. Um we have not seen issues with parent parking along uh along Hargus. We have had some stacking things that we've worked with the school district on Woodlane but not on Hargus for Bailey because it's a decent distance away. [34:49] Anne Burt: I also want to be careful a little bit of our math and science academy issue. If this if this turns into the street to these are only 26 foot wide deal. So if this becomes the pickup spot we're in trouble. [35:05] Eric Sells: Yep. Bailey is an established school. I if if we were seeing that we probably would see an Arbor Ridge today. We're not we have not heard that in Arbor Ridge today. Uh again, we have seen stacking issues and we've been actively working with the school district to correct the construction activities at the at the school are going to complicate it for a little bit of time, but once it opens back up, I think we have some good strategies related to on-site stacking that's going to allow parent pickup to be efficient. [35:43] Jennifer Santini: Any further discussion? If not, I would seek some motions. [35:43] Steve Morris: All right. I will make a motion to adopt the and approve the comprehensive plan amendment from rural estate to urban estate. [35:43] Jennifer Santini: You want to all three of these separate? [35:43] Ashleigh Sullivan: Do they need to be separate? Probably. [35:43] Jennifer Santini: I think so. Yes. Okay. [35:43] Steve Morris: I will second. [36:35] Jennifer Santini: Mayor Pro Tem, just to be clear, these well the the uh motion for the comprehensive plan amendment does require a four vote to approve and the conditions I mean the conditions were outlined in the packet and presentation of the reasons for the comp. So I have a first and a second. Any further discussion? Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? [36:35] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [36:35] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [36:35] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [36:35] Donna Stafford: Aye. [36:35] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [36:35] Kim Wilson: Aye. [36:35] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris? [36:35] Steve Morris: Aye. [36:35] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [36:35] Anne Burt: Aye. [36:50] Jennifer Santini: That passes. [36:50] Steve Morris: I'll make a motion to approve the conditional use permit view resolution 26-23. Resolution adopting the findings of fact. [36:50] Kim Wilson: Second. [36:50] Jennifer Santini: We have a first and a second. Any further discussion? Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? [36:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [36:50] Donna Stafford: Aye. [36:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [36:50] Kim Wilson: Aye. [36:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris? [36:50] Steve Morris: Aye. [36:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [36:50] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [36:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [36:50] Anne Burt: Aye. [37:07] Jennifer Santini: that passes. [37:07] Steve Morris: I will make a motion to adopt uh to approve 47 Pines planned unit development preliminary plat final plat project number 29-2025-00592 and authorize the mayor and city administrator to execute the developer agreement with the approval subject to the following conditions as listed in the council letter 26-47. [37:37] Kim Wilson: Second. [37:37] Jennifer Santini: The first and second. Any further discussion? [37:37] Steve Morris: Yes. I have a question. Are there really 47 pines there? And are they all stained? [37:37] Jennifer Santini: Why do they keep 47? [37:37] Eric Sells: There's not 47 pines. [37:37] Steve Morris: Marketing. Do you want to stipulate that there? [37:54] Eric Sells: Pure marketing. [37:54] Steve Morris: There's more than 47. [37:54] Eric Sells: Okay. There you go. [37:54] Steve Morris: All right. Great answer. Is that a lucky number or something? [37:54] Jennifer Santini: Have to be his business name before it has started. [37:54] Steve Morris: Oh, translate. [38:13] Jennifer Santini: Uh, so we have a first and a second. No further discussion. Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? [38:13] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [38:13] Kim Wilson: Aye. [38:13] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council Member Morris? [38:13] Steve Morris: Aye. [38:13] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [38:13] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [38:13] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [38:13] Donna Stafford: Aye. [38:13] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [38:13] Anne Burt: Aye. [38:28] Jennifer Santini: Wonderful. They all pass. Good luck with your project. When are we usually ask when are we breaking ground? [38:28] Applicant: Uh, we are as soon as possible. I'd be probably in the middle of summer. [38:44] Jennifer Santini: Okay. It's just paperwork now. [38:44] Applicant: Yep. DA process. [38:44] Jennifer Santini: Perfect. Well, thank you. [38:44] Kim Wilson: Doesn't this have to go to to Met Council? [38:44] Eric Sells: Yeah. [38:44] Kim Wilson: Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Because it's comp plan adjustment. Yeah. Okay. [38:59] Jennifer Santini: Well, good luck. All right. We will move on to item 7B uh to consider approval of the Bielenberg Drive multi-family public hearing. [39:15] Eric Sells: Thank you again, Mayor Pro Tem. [39:15] Jennifer Santini: The hearing is open. I know I didn't do the last time. [39:15] Eric Sells: Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem, Mayor and members of the council. Greco Properties has submitted an application for a multifamily development to construct a 150 unit multifamily project that includes both apartment and town home units. The property is located to the north of Tamarack Road and west of Bielenberg Drive. is currently zone B1 office park district and is guided as places to work. In February of 2024, the council did review the rest of the Gold Line development. The first phase of that development included the Top Golf and main event uses that are shown on the screen. The residential use was also contemplated at a high level at that time. The application in front of you this evening includes a 137 unit four-story apartment building and 13 town homes. The apartment building consists of 43 one-bedroom units, 75 two-bedroom units and 19 three-bedroom units. All of the town home units are two-bedrooms plus den floor floor plans. [40:26] Eric Sells: Much like the last application in front of you this evening, there is a comprehensive plan amendment and the same historic findings of fact are in play here. Uh again, the t the times and conditions have changed. In this case, there was a robust station area master plan that was conducted in 2022. That was after the adoption of the 2040 comprehensive plan. The 2040 comp plan did identify the master plan process and did identify that future amendments were likely coming out of that land use process. So in front of you this evening to implement those changes through a comprehensive plan amendment process. [41:13] Eric Sells: Also in front of council this evening is a rezoning application from B1 office park district to mixed use if council does approve the comprehensive plan amendment. State law does require land use and zoning to be compliant with one another. So that rezoning is necessary to be completed to be compliant with state law. Parking and site access is provided by two access points along Bielenberg Drive. Those are both existing access points that are signalized. They are highlighted by the red arrows on the screen. The parking counts uh are being requested to be flexed through the plan unit development process to uh approve 254 parking spaces total for development. That does include there will be some proof of parking within the commercial area in this location of the site that staff does not believe is necessary, but that is in that 254 parking stall count. Ordinance-wise, 274 spaces would be required. It's important to note 180 of those parking spaces will be provided in an underground parking garage. So that will meet the majority of the day-to-day parking needs for the residents within the apartment complex. [42:38] Eric Sells: There are a number of exterior amenities that are proposed with this application including pickleball courts, a swimming pool, gathering spaces, fire pits, and outdoor kitchens. Interior to the space. It is well-appointed on the interior for the 55 plus active adult project. Those interior amenities include a community room, yoga studio, fitness center use, a golf simulator and lounge, hobby room, cafe, pet wash, and club room. So, highly amenitized interior within this facility. [43:17] Eric Sells: A detailed landscaping plan has been submitted that spreads landscaping throughout the development area to soften the impact and also to provide visual interest. As we look at the architecture, the architecture does meet the ordinance requirement of 65% class one material and those materials were carefully selected to complement the adjacent commercial uses that are either existing with Top Golf or under construction like main event. The apartment design utilizes a number of building jogs and material transitions to break up the uh mass of the building and make it feel smaller and more visually approachable. The corners of the buildings also have cohesive architecture language to create a modern multifamily structure. You'll also notice some pedestrian modifications. Those are the features, architectural features to try to enhance the pedestrian experience along the proposed trail that will run parallel to Bielenberg Drive or is proposed to. On the right hand side of the screen, you'll see the 13 town homes that are proposed to uh have similar building materials as the apartment to create a cohesive feel. [44:35] Eric Sells: As I stated, there will be a proposed infrastructure improvements. On the left hand side is from the gold line PUD approvals. It did contemplate the construction of a future pedestrian uh movement within along. On the right hand side, you can see the site plan showing the construction. You'll notice there's very little plantings within this location. That is because there is a pipeline corridor there and we are prohibited from planting within that location. Otherwise, we would have had additional plantings. This does provide high quality access both internally to the site but also connecting to the other commercial uses but and also to the station that is located in the area that I'm circling on the screen. [45:22] Eric Sells: A neighborhood meeting was held in on February 17th, 2026. No residents were in attendance for that meeting and we have not received any feedback from uh residents following the mailing of the planning commission notice. This graphic does show a a different view of the project uh from a rendered perspective and you can see again the presence of the landscaping but also uh the proximity to drive and again planning commission liaison Saurin Shaw is here for the liaison report. [46:01] Saurin Shaw: Thank you Eric and thank you mayor and city council members. Um, so this was also a broad ask just like the previous one as Eric described and I think city city staff had done a thorough review and assessment of the proposal and as Eric explained the comprehensive plan amendment for land use is based on the gold line corridor, right? and and was anticipated at the time when the gold line corridor was uh approved and voted on and with the proximity of the actual one of the gold line you know stops right so the key discussion points at the planning commission where um it's you know the first question one of the questions on the planning commission was do we have a history uh of of having this kind of a comprehensive plan amendment rezoning, multi- and multi-use development, you know, in in historically the staff explained that, you know, comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning are not as frequently requested. However, multi-use, you know, uh development is not new for the city uh based on prior projects. [47:35] Saurin Shaw: Um the one of the discussions was uh and Eric, if you could put up the plan of the site uh then I can talk to it better. Yeah. So the question was actually on the walking path uh from the condominiums to the common kind of uh recreational areas where it's pickleball court or swimming pool and so where would that be because that wasn't very clear and so the developer who was actually in the meeting at the time explained that you know where you see that kind of the turnaround at the condominiums where Eric's pointing right now that's where they would actually create a walking path that goes towards the pickle ball and the swimming pool and then obviously there is indoor recreational also which is part of the apartment building. Uh so that that would be the access path and and the discussion was also to have it wide enough such that you know it will be wheelchair accessible also. [48:21] Saurin Shaw: Um um and then uh the number of parking spaces you know Eric covered that well but the developer on you know on uh when he was there he actually explained that they have a similar facility uh believe in Minnetonka is what what he mentioned uh and based on you know what what they have learned from that uh which is already an existing facility uh he basically said a .75 parking spaces per occupant um is is actually appropriate and the combination of the underground parking in the apartment which actually is enough for all the apartment residents uh and then the outside lot which is right in front of the building as well as the access space that Eric kind of pointed out on the back side of that uh would actually be sufficient um for that. Um as part of the discussion, city staff actually mentioned that the parking requirement you know per apartment is adequate but something that would be reviewed in future planning because it actually you know city currently has a different requirement than what we are approving or we actually reviewed at this point. [49:55] Saurin Shaw: Um and then um number four point was the uh the common areas um uh the access to the common areas which is a swimming pool and pickle ball uh court u by EMS was discussed because didn't you know the the discussion was essentially around saying if you give a street address to someone for on EMS they would probably show up in front of the apartment building and then they to get through the apartment building to get to a swimming pool or pickle ball depending on where the need is. Uh and so at that point it was pointed out that you know the the same area that Eric was pointing to earlier which is the the turnaround at the condominiums that's where the access would be for EMS to access that outside recreational area. Um and and then I think the last thing was I don't know what number it happened to be in in uh the city council document but it was actually the number 16 in the planning commission which is uh the pedestrian infrastructure uh to be included and outlined in detail to be as part of the approval um within the site. [50:34] Jennifer Santini: All right. Any questions? No. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Ashley, are there Eric, do you have anything further? [50:34] Eric Sells: Not at this time. [50:34] Jennifer Santini: Okay. Ashley, are there any uh comments or questions online? All right, I will make a motion to close the hearing. [50:53] Steve Morris: Second. [50:53] Jennifer Santini: Any further discussion? All in favor say Aye. [50:53] Council Members: Aye. [50:53] Jennifer Santini: Any opposed? All right, the hearing is closed. Uh, council members, any questions? [51:09] Steve Morris: I have six, but if somebody else wants to go first. So packet uh indicates that this is these are market rate senior 55 plus the entirety of the project or just certain elements of that? [51:09] Eric Sells: the entirety of the project. [51:09] Steve Morris: So in the entirety of the project if we as approving this does this then require almost deed restriction is the wrong word but is this then forever um is this a forever requirement that it maintains 55 plus? How does that work with this? [51:09] Eric Sells: I I can have the applicant uh address whether they put any restrictions in or whether this is simply marketed towards 55 plus and technically there could be but I'll have the applicant. [51:51] Josh Bransstead: hi Josh Bransstead president owner of Greco. Uh it is a it is a restriction. You're correct. Uh what we've seen on our past projects it has been a deed restriction but it will be a requirement to live there um for the entirety of the project. [51:51] Steve Morris: Okay. But it's not so it's not being memorialized in our approval. It's just in their operating. [52:08] Josh Bransstead: that's correct. [52:08] Steve Morris: Okay. And market rate we just. [52:08] Josh Bransstead: Right. Correct. [52:08] Jennifer Santini: Well actually before you move on to that. So that was actually sort of one of my questions. Obviously, it seems that there is a market for that, but I guess I that was something that I did struggle with a little bit because of its location and possibility. Um, I believe we've tried to address that we might have some other potential housing in this area. Um, you know, I just I guess I you know, I do think that that this is an area where some housing and particularly possibly for some younger people would be desirable. [52:52] Eric Sells: The property across Bielenberg to the east, the southern portion of the Medtronic property uh is uh vacant and has was also identified within the master plan for a change to move to residential housing. That did include uh a some direction to be a little bit lower in density, so a little bit more of a town home type, which likely would bring a a different type of housing product than what you're seeing in front of you this evening. [53:23] Jennifer Santini: Okay, just going back to that, I thought that that on the east side of Bielenberg, it was kind of like we wanted it to step down. [53:23] Eric Sells: That's right. [53:23] Jennifer Santini: Yeah. So, you could have the apartment complex up along Bielenberg, but then step down to match the. [53:23] Eric Sells: That's exactly correct. [53:23] Jennifer Santini: That's right. I don't remember that now. Okay. Um and density, okay, is the step down. And didn't we maybe we addressed it, but maybe it's because when we when we were doing the comp plan, I felt that this section we possibly identified maybe it was just that that in the future it made sense that it maybe be would come mixed use. Um but clearly we had it designated differently. [53:59] Eric Sells: Yeah, there was there was conversation in the land use chapter regarding the gold line corridor and that future land use flexibility is anticipated through a a master planning process and that's exactly what unfolded. [54:21] Steve Morris: building off of mayor prom. It's a mouthful right there. um regarding the um comprehensive plan and the master plan. The master plan that we spent many many many hours on discussing and coming up with did not identify this as a place a resident. It was more of a business uh office use. Am I correct? [54:38] Eric Sells: The master plan identified and looked at the entire property, the entire 500 Bielenberg, and that did include residential housing on that property. [54:57] Steve Morris: question. I knocked one and two out of that, so I'm down to down to three more, but I added one. So, um, pedestrian the Can you go to the pedestrian? I understand. Thank you. There was one that was an elevation. Do you have the elevation one? Is my question that that one will work? So that has some for lack of a better terms or is that planned or is that just aesthetically on the picture here or is that actually planned? [55:30] Eric Sells: That's planned. That is planned because of the lack of ability to put plantings there instead of just having flat. We wanted to add some level of visual interest. [55:30] Steve Morris: Okay. So the the the concern I have is now south of this is the pedestrian movement off of site. So, if they're going to and again, we're marketing to 55 plus, but we're on a on a transit quarter on a what do we call that? A gateway corridor, the gold line BRT like right off of this there's no there's there's what is the pedestrian movement south of this to get to Tamarack to get all the way to Tamarack i.e. to the grocery store. So if I have to go to Cub or to the whatever grocery store, is there any pedestrian movement off of site that allows them to move around the area? [56:33] Eric Sells: There is now a trail along the entire portion of the west side of Bielenberg as part of the gold line with the exception um where you get to the Tamaracks, right? that you understand that um and or they could cross in front of five in front of the 576 building there is not. [56:33] Steve Morris: there is now there was not. [56:33] Eric Sells: okay I believe you I will verify. um parking so the parking they're asking for flexibility there can you go back to the parking please. So on the guest parking is going to be the surface parking and that's there we're talking about how many units in the apartment complex? [57:18] Eric Sells: Uh 137. [57:18] Steve Morris: and there's how many surface parking spots? [57:34] Eric Sells: Uh total number of surface parking 37 parking stalls. [57:34] Steve Morris: Okay. So the my bad math is that so my question to staff is that sufficient for what you're seeing from a guest parking unit. Let's assume that no residents will park on the surface. Is that sufficient enough to for what we've seen in previous? [57:34] Eric Sells: That is consistent to what we've used for guest parking ratios. [57:58] Steve Morris: Okay, that wasn't the question. That's such a yes is the answer. [57:58] Eric Sells: Yes. Yes, we we have consistent. And a example is the City Place project which has very limited guest parking. Uh on that project, same ratio. [58:14] Steve Morris: Those town homes there. Okay. Uh the apartment? [58:14] Eric Sells: Aspire. [58:14] Steve Morris: Oh, I was thinking the town homes across the way. Okay. So then my next question, this is question 3B. town home product. There are no are there driveways in front of there? [58:55] Eric Sells: Yes. the the length of those driveways were uh designed to allow for two vehicles to comfortably be parked there. [58:55] Steve Morris: Okay, that answers my question. [59:11] Jennifer Santini: So, to piggy back on that, which was one of my questions, how many parking stalls are there in the town home project? [59:11] Eric Sells: Uh the there are guest parking spaces within this location here and here, and then at minimum four spaces per unit, two in the garage, two out front. So there's a significant amount of parking within. [59:30] Jennifer Santini: Can people park on that? Are you calling that South Drive? Is that a real name? the road. [59:30] Eric Sells: Yes. that no. This there there would there's no parking there. [1:00:07] Jennifer Santini: Well, and so what I was going to say is so the area now I don't even know what direction we're This is facing sort of this is north, right? All that. So, it would be um to the west would be some like parking lots. Um I don't know if there's anything from like a cross easement or something, you know, or if there was overflow parking maybe not allowed. I thought I read in here not allowed like overnight parking. [1:00:07] Eric Sells: There is cross easement parking along the north area here. We do anticipate for peak events that it would not be unusual for parking to happen in the commercial areas. This is the furthestmost parking for the commercial uses. We would not anticipate that to be a regular issue. [1:01:02] Anne Burt: Can I since we're on the parking topic? I would like to bring up a topic. This is a little bit on the side, but it's related to legislation in front of the state that the state is looking at right now. The state is looking at restricting parking even further. We're sitting here talking about worried about is it enough and the state is looking at doing what, Eric? [1:01:02] Eric Sells: One stall per unit. [1:01:02] Anne Burt: And I would like to ask the applicant just off while you're on the record, but how would that work when you're trying to rent units? [1:01:02] Josh Bransstead: Yeah. Not not in a suburban set. In an urban set, you can get to 0.8 per bedroom. So the per-bedroom counts are a key statistic. We've got roughly 2,000 suburban units and then we're just selling our last urban unit in Minneapolis. All of our suburban projects are parked one per bedroom um is our key ratio. And there's always a flex, right? Because the building's really never 100% occupied. Um so you're, you know, you shoot for 95 and if you're holding there, you're doing pretty well. And then you've always got that flex in the parking. Um you know, in Minnetonka at Ensley, we're parking right now. We're subscribed at .67 stalls per bedroom there. Currently, we're building underground here .75 per bedroom. So if that ratio were to continue here too, we have about a 20 stall garage surplus at the end of the day plus all the surface I would have access to as well. But no, I think to your point, one per one per unit I would say is insufficient. [1:02:15] Anne Burt: Okay. So that's just a tangent I'm making right now because this is a huge argument that is happening right now at the state capital that they're going to restrict this. So there are many legislators who believe you could just get away with one per unit and this is what they're pushing for and you all need to have a voice at the capital and say that's not going to work. We're not going to build any more housing if that's the case. I would highly encourage you to have a voice in that discussion because it's coming down the pike and it's going to hurt all of us there. Sorry it's my little tangent. [1:02:47] Jennifer Santini: Very good point. Back to parking kind of sort of the underground parking. Eric, where's the ingress and egress off of? [1:03:05] Eric Sells: I'll bring up the traffic off of this access point. So, you enter the building off the north side of the site. [1:03:05] Steve Morris: Okay. [1:03:05] Eric Sells: That's the signalized access onto Bielenberg. [1:03:05] Steve Morris: It's technically you're saying the west you're saying upper on the upper right corner into the actual parking parking. [1:03:05] Eric Sells: Yes, that one. [1:03:05] Steve Morris: I want to know the parking underground. Also the exit. [1:03:40] Eric Sells: That's correct. Two-way. [1:03:40] Steve Morris: So they're not coming out in Bielenberg. [1:03:40] Eric Sells: No. [1:03:40] Steve Morris: Correct. Good. Okay. more questions. [1:04:22] Kim Wilson: I do. Okay. You good with parking? I do have concerns about parking. Um I think I always raise concerns about the parking. Um I think for the most part, we can guess most people are going to have two cars um even in a one bedroom. So I I don't know how 55 plus and a three bedroom works. I'm trying to figure out how something like that would work on who's who's utilizing the three bedrooms, but if you have a model like that, I'd be curious. [1:04:22] Josh Bransstead: Yeah. Um well, they're occupying at a .67 per bedroom at Ensley. So, we do have um you know, we have Oh, I suppose between two bedrooms and three bedrooms at that project, it's about 45% of the unit mix. Um so, we do have some folks that do have two cars. But we do have a lot of couples that have a single car is what we're finding. We actually probably overparked at that project significantly by the time you add in all of our surface as well because we had the same that was our same thought going into the project. So we built for two per two stalls per uh two and three then a single for the ones and and we're finding that we're a little heavy in our parking. [1:05:14] Kim Wilson: And at your other location, do most of the residents also have an underground parking spot or is that optional? [1:05:14] Josh Bransstead: Um, it is optional, but every unit gets one parking stall um built into their rent, which would be the same here as well. Um they have the option, yeah, to take another stall if they wish. They could have surface or underground there as well. [1:05:39] Jennifer Santini: Okay. I think a little bit where I'm coming on parking and it's certainly not a a a consideration for guest parking is where my concern is for for resident parking. I think the intent for us during the TOD conversation and the intent that that we had with this because it's it's direct proximity to the the transit lines and and transit options was that this would be the opportunity where we wouldn't necessarily be overly concerned on on parking per unit because the the proximity to the to the transit. And so I I'm not as concerned in this particular project on the parking side because of that because that certainly is also the intent. [1:06:12] Jennifer Santini: I don't want to say that that that was my desire and the intent when we were reviewing the TOD and the the master planning for this. Um I'm a it's not for us the project we're going to on its face. I'll just say this just to say this is that I'm a little disappointed that it is 55 plus targeted. Um I'm I am disappointed because I I would like this to be an opportunity. These are this is a great product in its market rate. Um that targeting disappoints me a little bit because wherever we are access to transit this this housing is direct access to transit. So I I'm I'm disappointed that it's not available um overall, but that's not for the project is the project. It's not a condition that we're being asked to review. I'm just disappointed. [1:06:58] Kim Wilson: I'm not going to get into the transit issue. Everybody knows because I don't know where people are going to hop on and go. I mean, it's either here or St. Paul. I mean, there's not it's not like we're hubbing out to a lot of other places. Um, we are we are getting a Sunray is a hub and Woodbury is starting to be somewhat more of a hub as we're starting to get more access to the Mall of America and things like that. I I I know we have grand I'm not going to I'm not going to rehash the busing issue. It's here. It's done. But I am going to look at the proposed site that we did adopt in the Gold Line master plan. And I'm and I am confused on I don't remember this being part of residential. I know we talked about residential on the east side and on the left side we talked about a lot of things and it I feel like it's we put so much time into it and it it's really not coming to the fruition and the the thought that we had put into what it was going to look like down this corridor. And so now I'm trying to figure out, you know, what do we do now? [1:08:10] Kim Wilson: Um things are going in. We needed proof of parking because we don't have a lot of those businesses aren't uh uh what's it called? Main event, right? And we wanted proof of parking. We weren't sure what was going to happen there. We weren't sure what was going to happen with the is it West what's the name of the building? Hartford building and now all of that parking has been taken away and what's going to happen there. So, so in terms of of residential on this side and proof of parking for those businesses and future development, I I have concerns about that because that is not looking at all like what we had discussed in in our um master plan for this corridor. [1:09:00] Jennifer Santini: Anybody else while I'm typing and looking at something? I mean I I definitely agree about the concern but that's a problem is not being able to necessarily control with regards to the age restriction. I think as long as there are more opportunities to bring other housing um and that's what I know I do remember when you refreshed my memory about that site and um and sort of as you said sort of stepping down with that I feel a little bit better because I do think it is important to have um more opportunity for that housing to try to encourage more of that um from a transit standpoint. [1:09:46] Kim Wilson: Well, the step down site was on the other side, correct? But it's still within proximity to the gold line and um I I guess I'm not, you know, now just realizing I again I wasn't actually as concerned about the resident parking. I was thinking more about visitor parking and again thinking about it as sort of the senior, you know, a senior building where from a visitor standpoint. So, I think knowing that there's some access next to it and so forth, I'm okay. [1:10:07] Steve Morris: Okay, I'll move on to additional problems. Let's talk about screening. Um, if you can go back to one of the elevation ones that shows I think the larger elevation as we're that'll do fine. Um, I know that we these are going to be shoe box style lights. They're going to be screened, so they're going to be dark sky compliant. And we have this there's I mean, we are in the parking lot of commercial. And so typically residential, what are we doing from a screening standpoint? What are we doing? Uh that's a lot of traffic in and out to these commercials based on the the two uses that are existing, the main event and the Top Golf. We know what that traffic is. The I'm asking about five questions in one here, so just follow along. That northwest building that's not there's no application for that. That's not being built. We don't have anything for that or is that is correct? [1:11:08] Eric Sells: We do not have an application. That is a anticipated to be a commercial use. [1:11:08] Steve Morris: Okay. So now that we are backyarding residential and high density residential or medium density residential to commercial, what are we doing from a from an ordinance standpoint on screening and and I don't know that that was addressed? [1:11:34] Eric Sells: Yeah, within the existing project areas. Um so the walking through what is approved main event this that is this box here. Their lighting fixtures are capped at 25 ft. So they're not significant height from a light standpoint. They are LED, so they're directional based. We have a long history of working with commercial property owners if there's spill and other things to put and install shields if that were to become an issue on the main event site. Obviously with the future application depending on the outcome of this evening and the status of this this project this would then be a known and accommodations would be made with the development of the commercial site to be forward looking at impacts on lighting um from that future application. But the same tools would be used um shields and hoods for the light poles and they have been proven to be effective. [1:12:34] Steve Morris: What about other shielding noise parking lot stuff just I mean having residential literally in the parking lot of commercial just is not especially top golf is right there right to the on this on this picture it would be to the left of that picture. [1:12:34] Eric Sells: I think this is the challenge of mixed use development. The pro is you get accessibility. You get the ability to walk from you know the integrated network in the con side of that is you within that environment where there is parking and there are other things. I think this from staff standpoint, we did think hard about that and it comes down to that's really going to be the individuals who move into this are going to different cuz residential is coming last. So they're going to say this needs. [1:13:24] Steve Morris: it's like when you move next to an airport. [1:13:24] Eric Sells: That's right. So our opinion was those that are going to live here are going to embrace the opportunity to walk to the Top Golfs the main events potentially as as a recreation activity. [1:13:50] Steve Morris: Yeah. I mean it's not a grocery store commercial use. It's not an I mean if they're going to Top Golf every day main event every day. That's an awful lot of. [1:13:50] Jennifer Santini: Well, they'll have a golf simulator in there. [1:13:50] Kim Wilson: Help our local businesses. Um, so from a screening standpoint, the landscaping plan, the substantialness of of the screening to buffer, I mean, I did see the I looked at the landscaping plan and you know, how dense is that the screening? [1:14:26] Eric Sells: We did increase the number of of plantings uh within this area as part of the development review process. This is as dense as it can be from a successful implementation standpoint. [1:14:43] Jennifer Santini: Eric, go back one the other no one more to like that overview shot that you had had. um that one I mean some I just think it's also just worthy as I mean maybe it is all sort of built out I guess but thinking just continued through the parking lot too you know as if that sort of continued to add in some additional I think would help. [1:14:43] Eric Sells: this area is so these islands are in place this is on the future so we'll we look we will look to implement this kind of softening in this area. [1:15:41] Donna Stafford: I have a question about the town homes. Um, this is a 55 plus community and these appear to be two story units. That is correct. Is there a reason why they're not one level? [1:15:41] Josh Bransstead: I knew you were going there. Yeah. So, the primary is on the main level. the primary suite is and then the guest and a potential office den are on the on the secondary level. [1:15:41] Donna Stafford: So there's like a sun room, den, master suite on the first level? [1:16:00] Josh Bransstead: Yeah, correct. There's a living room, kitchen, um and then the primary suite with a bathroom, walk-in closet, and then the bedroom. And then on the second level, we'll have another bathroom with um two bedrooms or a bedroom and a den. [1:16:16] Donna Stafford: Okay. And then the town homes, I'm assuming have whatever their rent is, they also have use of all of the amenities? [1:16:16] Josh Bransstead: Correct. Yeah. When we laid out this project, you know, the the whole theme here was creating this backyard concept where the two uses come together at a central focus point so that they can use those outdoor amenities. And so yes, so that they will have a full access to the interior and exterior amenities uh that are shared in between the two concepts. [1:16:46] Josh Bransstead: Yeah. And I think, you know, I just offer up to the screening. Um, we share the same sentiment. Um, we've done this in another project, the Shore View Corporate Center where we took down the Deluxe Checks original corporate headquarters. We integrated 600 units across three phases of housing. It's all commercial uses. It's in a parking lot just like you're talking about. Um and we adopted that that model with BKV architects who we've worked with for about 25 years. They originated kind of this model here central um um locally at one southdale place where they integrated a little over 200 units in the southdale mall parking lot along York. so that it is a concept that's why you will see some of the berming here we also don't bring in you know a lot of the little trees that need the the stake tied to it. We we spend a lot of money on our landscaping and and we did that in Shore View at the corporate center there and brought in, you know, our pines were all between 15 and 20 feet tall. Um so we're bringing in larger mature trees so we get that immediate impact because we know it will be very very important to the residents, the success of the site. [1:18:05] Donna Stafford: Knowing that this is 55 plus, um do you have a range for what the rents are going to be? [1:18:05] Josh Bransstead: Yeah. Yeah. So, it'll be between 2400 and roughly uh 6,000 a month between our largest penthouse style units. And the penthouse style units on the high end, you know, they'll have wolf ranges, hoods, uh full, you know, that full, you know, a full primary suite with soaking tubs, showers, uh those types of finishes in there. And uh and then all the units really are are finished at a a very high level, premium uh level. That includes the town home rentals. Correct. town home rentals will have a they won't have a penthouse style uh finish uh but they will uh they will have a a premium level finish. Yes. Our town homes I think are priced at roughly 4,500 a month right now in our current underwriting. [1:18:54] Josh Bransstead: Yeah. And I think um you know I would just also offer up too on the market rate housing side. That is how we evaluated the site at first. Um what we're seeing with where construction costs have ran over the last six to seven years is there just a significant gap. So all of our new market rate suburban product we're doing is requiring anywhere between 40 to $60,000 a unit TIF um to really just to offset a lot of those costs. For instance, that first phase we built in Shore View in '18 um that project when we fast forwarded to our last third phase, we built that first phase for you know 155,000 a unit in construction cost. We just completed the third phase and that was 224,000 a unit in construction cost in just seven years. So that you know that what is that almost $70,000 a unit that's close to 50% increase in construction cost in just that short period of time. Rents aren't obviously keeping up with that. We've seen rent growth but that's one of the one of the reasons that we've led this way is this is a you know it's a project that is financially feasible without um needing assistance to get it across the finish line as well. [1:20:09] Steve Morris: Thank you. Mhm. And just building off of that, there is an abatement district. Correct. Is this in the abatement? [1:20:09] Eric Sells: This is not in the tax abatement district. [1:20:27] Steve Morris: Is this the first time that we've done uh condition 15 in here? Is the the sodded or seeded Is that is that the first time that we've allowed either or seeded is I mean I know we've had discussions about requiring sodding versus seed. [1:20:52] Eric Sells: No, we have been moving towards seed or sod uh for watering purposes. Most projects are selecting sod still but if they can establish turf seed is allowed. [1:20:52] Steve Morris: I would love the seed. Yeah. So I'm my point is great job. I would love to I'm glad that we're not requiring sod anymore because obviously it is better water-wise. [1:21:13] Donna Stafford: What? Nothing. I just prefer the sod and get it established. [1:21:33] Kim Wilson: I'll just I'm just going to make a couple comments so people have an understanding uh with my struggle on this issue which is valid points on glad that that the commercial is already there and that we're not building commercial around it. Super point on that one. um that we're not surprising the people as they move in with Top Golf netting and lighting and main event traffic and whatever else is going to go in back there. Um I do have concerns uh that you know that we did spend so much time on what we wanted this corridor to look like and it is not looking like what we had planned on and it's just frustrating on why do we take the time and all these council meetings to do all this stuff and then go down a path that just does um exactly uh opposite of what we said we wanted. Not okay maybe not opposite. It might not be opposite, but we did talk about how we wanted this to have a Main Street feel. We wanted it to be uh eyes on stations, commercial, and instead we've got, you know, I'm I'm not even going to say because I it sounds like I'm bashing businesses, and I'm not bashing businesses. Top Golf is a great amenity, but it but the fact is is it it is a entertainment. Yep. Well, correct. But it but it is netting along the Bielenberg corridor that was supposed to be our main street feel. So um I guess my concern is that we we put all all this time and energy into coming up with a plan and then it looks nothing like what we planned. [1:23:15] Jennifer Santini: anything do you have do you have more comments? No, I'm I'm done. That's all. Any other questions? Okay. Would anybody like to put forth a motion to approve? I do think it I know that we've talked a lot about ensuring that there would be some housing in this area. I agree. You know, it's the whole main street feel. Yes, I could see. Unfortunately, those aren't the ones that are before us right now. Um, and some have already already been improved, but I do think that this area was identified to have residential. Um, I do think it brings a good opportunity for that. Um, I do think the project the the layout is a beautiful layout. I agree with Steve. there's a part of me that wishes, you know, um I know obviously certainly our seniors from a housing perspective as well and wanting to support it. It's just hard having it limited um to um but I'm sure you're going to probably have great success, you know, with in terms of occupancy. [1:24:38] Anne Burt: honestly that surprised me. I mean they're they're they're not going to make an investment if they don't think it's going to work, right? So it just honestly surprises me that that the restriction on 55 plus because this would you know, I just honestly feel open it up would would be a much better benefit from a a mix for us than than simply seniors. And [1:25:23] Jennifer Santini: well, and I think I mean again I by no means again I don't want to I don't want to go off on the the tangent. I mean I I do think it is very important because I know that that is obviously an area as well in terms of senior housing and making sure you know we we have enough um availability. I do think on the flip side, there is an area of our community that is really struggling in terms of younger adults graduating, starting out with jobs, um, wanting to stay closer to where they grew up and not having any availability of, you know, what that feels like or what that looks like versus having to go into like a St. Paul or Minneapolis, you know. [1:26:08] Steve Morris: and I and I think that there there in lies again when we did the TOD and when we did this master plan of understanding what that was going to bring and generationally speaking um those homeowners, those renters, etc., and their desire to not have automobiles. I mean, as we sat through the decades worth of of pitching for the gold line itself, of understanding the demographics of that, I guess that's that's what I'm just most disappointed in is that and a little bit to council member Wilson's point of that was the the housing on the west side of this was not was not the goal, was not the intention, was not the vision. [1:26:32] Kim Wilson: Sometimes I do remember at one point we were actually going to think about doing housing on the corner of like Tamarack and Bielenberg. [1:26:32] Steve Morris: I remember that you know that's not the plan we approved though is is the point. I remember those discussions and but this whole quarter I will say is not taking on the feel that we had spent hours and hours and hours on discussing. Um and and so that is I mean there's there's not much we can do about that at this point. Um, I just want to say, I think I've said this before, um, that if we put time into deciding what we want things to look like, what our plan is, what our vision is, especially for this this investment into this uh, gold line. I I think I had said at that time that if why do we do it? And I would have a hard time. I do think there's still future opportunity. I mean, again, you still have the Hartford site. You do have still have some of the stuff on the east. [1:27:18] Steve Morris: Are you talking about redevelopment of the Hartford site, though? [1:27:18] Jennifer Santini: Eventually. I mean, I do think only because if you do think about the fact that um you do have the tavern restaurant that's right there across the street. You do have This is what I was looking for. Thank you. so there This is my futuristic view of that. I'm still hopeful, you know, that there is still room for that evolution. [1:27:54] Eric Sells: Mayor and council on the screen is the massing exhibit. These are descriptive. These are not what's approved, but it's showing some direction. And as you can see, there is residential that was contemplated along Bielenberg on the west side of Bielenberg Drive as well as the step down development pattern that council member Wilson identified on the east side. and this was discussed as part of the Top Golf and main event. That use was not contemplated. [1:28:30] Jennifer Santini: Yeah. Right. That is a different type of use and that then has an impact not only on the Topgolf use but also what happens downstream from Topgolf and that was what was was contemplated as part of that gold line development approval. But I do want I did want to bring forward this was what was shown within that adopted master plan when was this one adopted? [1:28:55] Eric Sells: This is within the 2022 master plan, the gold line. [1:28:55] Steve Morris: So, we were just doing pops back then on council. bottom line, you'll get there. Don't whisper it. Just whisper it. [1:29:15] Jennifer Santini: So, you know, we do have residential on the west side as was shown. [1:29:15] Steve Morris: Yeah. And instead of the light industrial, we now have entertainment complexes. So, this is not too far off from what was planned. And on the east side, there still is that opportunity to have the residential or the step down that we talked about. [1:29:31] Kim Wilson: Yeah, I think there's a there's a difference between the entertainment complex and I I understand we did envision this. So, it is kind of with that plan, but then we had we adjusted from a light industrial use to an entertainment use, which is frankly a little bit more use. You know, the light industrial or office use would have been Monday through Friday certain key times. So when we thought about residential use in that spot, there would have been a time of use and some complementary uses versus um contradictory uses. I think just from a timing standpoint, this is going to be nights and weekends and but again, they were there first. Anybody renting here or purchasing these units is going in there fully fully aware. [1:30:09] Steve Morris: no complaining uh on noise because you you're moving in next to it. So, and these aren't these are rental units, correct? Yeah. Okay. Topgolf is open till 2 a.m. [1:30:26] Jennifer Santini: I don't I think midnight is their norm. [1:30:26] Steve Morris: I didn't think it was that long. [1:30:26] Anne Burt: Originally, when I looked at this and and you all know how I feel about seniors and senior housing and being affordable, I went, "What?" While I appreciate the landscaping piece, um, and I wouldn't want to be on my deck looking out over Bielenberg Drive, I've completely changed in that we do need a community for 55 plus who want to stay in this community. Um, and if we look at the young people, if it ever changes, it's easy for a young person to afford 2400 a month and a roommate upstairs. I mean, there's a lot of options that are available here, but I like the start of a senior community for us. We also have the metro micro, so if they want to come to the other end of Woodbury, they can do it. One other question I had, are there any garden plots planted? There are. [1:31:33] Applicant: Yeah, there is a garden plots and uh as contemplated as part of this project. [1:31:33] Anne Burt: Thank you. [1:31:33] Jennifer Santini: All right. Well, I will move to uh approve the comprehensive plan amendment uh from places to work to mixed use. [1:31:58] Donna Stafford: I'll second. [1:31:58] Jennifer Santini: First and a second. Any further discussion? Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? [1:32:17] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris. [1:32:17] Steve Morris: Come back to me, would you, please? [1:32:17] Ashleigh Sullivan: I would. Council member Santini? [1:32:17] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [1:32:17] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [1:32:17] Donna Stafford: Aye. [1:32:17] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [1:32:17] Kim Wilson: No. [1:32:17] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris? [1:32:33] Steve Morris: No. You can come to me next. Don't say maybe. [1:32:33] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [1:32:33] Steve Morris: Yeah, but it has to be a four to five. [1:32:33] Jennifer Santini: I know. [1:32:33] Steve Morris: I know. I don't. can staff help me page that talks about the conditions for change on the comp plan on the letter. I'm trying to run through it. [1:32:59] Eric Sells: Yeah, that is within page two of the staff report that the times and conditions have changed that the master plan identified the mixed use aspect including the residential uses with that is being page two of the staff report. [1:32:59] Steve Morris: I don't have access to I annotated so I do not. excuse me. I think 97 of the PDF. excuse me everyone one. Um, can I um what is the term I want to do if I want to change my vote, but I would like to make a statement before I change it. Do I want to recall my vote? [1:34:09] Jennifer Santini: You might be able to do that. [1:34:09] Steve Morris: Rescind your votes. Yep. That's the word. And then I mean I we could do it until the meeting is done tonight. I could ask to rescind my vote. So, um I want to say that um I like a 55 plus community being in 55 plus. and I love the plan of this but I am thoroughly disappointed in the way the gateway corridor is turning out. Um it is not following along at all with what we had talked about. And yes, we have mixed use and slashes and hashes and pink and purples, but we had we discussed a specific idea of what it was going to look like. And this is not what it is going to look like. So, do I take out my frustration on a building that again doesn't follow along with our plans? No, I'm not going to. I'm going to rescind my vote and I'm going to say yes. I think it's a good plan. I think it's a good community. Uh but I am disappointed in how the city is pursuing forward um with this gateway corridor. [1:35:17] Kim Wilson: So yes. [1:35:17] Donna Stafford: Yeah. And I'll I'll say yes. [1:35:17] Jennifer Santini: Did Did you capture all that, Ash? [1:35:17] Ashleigh Sullivan: All 5 is what I heard. [1:35:33] Jennifer Santini: All right. Put that in the record. Wait to see those minutes. Um we'll move on. I will move to adopt the attached ordinance uh 2075, an ordinance rezoning certain property from B1 office park district to MX Mixed-use District. [1:35:50] Steve Morris: I'll second that. [1:35:50] Jennifer Santini: We have a first and a second. Any further discussion? Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? [1:35:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [1:35:50] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [1:35:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [1:35:50] Donna Stafford: Aye. [1:35:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [1:35:50] Kim Wilson: Aye. [1:35:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris? [1:35:50] Steve Morris: Aye. [1:35:50] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [1:35:50] Anne Burt: Aye. [1:36:05] Jennifer Santini: That vote passes. Um, I'll move to approve the conditional use permit via resolution 26-24, a resolution adopting findings of fact. [1:36:05] Steve Morris: Second. [1:36:05] Jennifer Santini: We have a first and a second. Any further discussion? Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? Oh, sorry. Well, usually. Wow. Move to discussion super quick. [1:36:22] Steve Morris: I'm optimistic that No, no, yes. I do have discussion on this. So in a in the findings of fact, we are not requiring the the 55 plus in the findings of fact or in this conditional use? [1:36:42] Eric Sells: That is correct. [1:36:42] Steve Morris: That's a that's an applicant decision on whatever they choose to do with it. [1:36:42] Eric Sells: That is correct. [1:36:42] Steve Morris: Okay. And there's no ability for us to prevent it. [1:37:04] Kim Wilson: Why would you want to? Cuz I want it opened up for everybody. I don't want it just 55 plus. [1:37:04] Steve Morris: Oh, I see what you're saying. So, you're saying you don't want a 55 plus community? [1:37:04] Kim Wilson: No, no, no. Don't put words in my mouth. [1:37:04] Steve Morris: Oh, tell me what you said. [1:37:04] Kim Wilson: You're not wanting it to be restricted. I don't want it to be restricted to you. And if the whole and everybody that rents it happens to be 55, so be it. But fine, but I just Okay, now hang on a minute. [1:37:20] Jennifer Santini: There are some people that just want to they want to live without children. [1:37:20] Kim Wilson: Correct. I I don't disagree that there's a reason. [1:37:20] Jennifer Santini: They know your product. They know the market. That's what they want. But here's my concern with that again with what we what we wanted out of this TOD and we wanted out of this zone and that the what we're asking for and were taking an entire demographic as one of the two of you just said too of people that want to live in the city and want to live close to transportation and we're saying no you can't in this in this. [1:37:54] Steve Morris: Are we saying that 55 plus people don't want to live near transit? [1:38:15] Jennifer Santini: No, I'm not saying that. But we're saying you can't. If you're 45, I can't. This this project someone who's 55 or older. You could go bunk up. Oh, I'm already moving to my mom. The amenities at her new place is going to be way better than I have. But but my point is is that it doesn't prevent somebody from 55 plus of renting this fac. They want to live close to that. It's the preventing of anybody else wanting that. And that's my lifestyle choice. [1:38:32] Kim Wilson: It is a lifestyle choice, but it's not one that I can make. I know because I can't I I'm not allowed to move here. And that's my point. I am so disappointed in what we're putting out in this transit corridor that we're restricting that housing. [1:38:32] Anne Burt: But if I were to express disappointment, it wouldn't be at a 55 plus community. It would be how how this whole thing is starting to look. [1:38:32] Kim Wilson: Well, that's a I mean, that's all I'm trying to say is we had we had plans of eyes on the stations. We wanted businesses and homes up along Bielenberg and instead we're ending up with something that doesn't look at all like what we had planned. [1:39:29] Steve Morris: We did high density residential plan for this. This is at least somewhat of what we talked about. Uh, but it's the rest of it that is not nothing else is falling into what we had talked about. And so, and so to say now at a 5, I think it's okay to have a 55 plus community. I think for those of us who are 55 plus, I'm god dang tired of kids. Love mine though. Love my kids. Is that on the record? Can you make sure that that's in? I don't want to move into a a community that has kids and I'm dealing with that kind of stuff. It's there's a lot of 55 plus communities that I can't wait to explore. Um, I will go on the record and say any additional housing in here that restricts to aging, I will be a no vote for. [1:40:16] Jennifer Santini: So, I will say that I do think it's important. I mean, again, we restrict the other the other the other residential areas to this entire area to being 55 plus. I'm not going to be for that. [1:40:16] Steve Morris: We won't because I know that there's a plan that we talked about for the east side of Bielenberg. My guess is that'll be the one section that ends up looking somewhat like we talked about. [1:40:16] Jennifer Santini: Okay, there's a motion in a second. I'm good. That was the discussion. And are we sure we're done with that discussion? [1:40:16] Steve Morris: I'm done. Yes, please. [1:40:16] Jennifer Santini: Ashley, please do the roll roll call. [1:40:16] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [1:40:16] Donna Stafford: Aye. [1:40:16] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [1:40:16] Kim Wilson: Aye. [1:40:16] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris? [1:40:16] Steve Morris: Aye. [1:40:16] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [1:40:16] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [1:40:16] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [1:40:16] Anne Burt: Aye. [1:40:55] Jennifer Santini: That was loud. That was good. That motion passes. And finally, I will move to make a motion approving the Bielenberg Drive multi-family plan unit development preliminary preliminary plat and site and building plan project number 05-2025-00594. All subject to the conditions outlined listed in council letter 26-48. [1:40:55] Steve Morris: And I will second that. [1:40:55] Jennifer Santini: Any further discussion? Give a pause. Ashley, will you do the roll call, please? [1:41:10] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Wilson? [1:41:10] Kim Wilson: Aye. [1:41:10] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Morris? [1:41:10] Steve Morris: Aye. [1:41:10] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Santini? [1:41:10] Jennifer Santini: Aye. [1:41:10] Ashleigh Sullivan: Council member Stafford? [1:41:10] Donna Stafford: Aye. [1:41:10] Ashleigh Sullivan: Mayor Burt? [1:41:10] Anne Burt: Aye. [1:41:26] Jennifer Santini: Wonderful. All of those motions pass. We do welcome you to Woodbury. I'm excited to come see it. We are. Yes. Um maybe there will have to be some pickle ball breaking ground with these two despite ages, but so and then when I guess would this be breaking ground? [1:41:43] Josh Bransstead: Yeah. So we're planning for October. So that would put us for a May 2028 opening, which has kind of a key season of the opening for this demographic. [1:41:59] Jennifer Santini: Okay. Right. 2028. Exact. Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you. Gotcha. Thank you. Yeah. Not May 28th. So much for I was trying to if I could beat the meeting clock it would be like um there is no discussion items. So we are on to city administrators report. [1:41:59] Jeffrey J. Dahl: Mayor Pro Tem. A couple things tonight. Uh I think the last several council meetings there's been a recognition uh of famous or up and coming Woodbury related sports figure. uh don't have that tonight, but I do want to recognize um some staff, but real quick dovetailing off the comment Mayor Burt, you had mentioned about the housing legislation right now. Um that is a real thing. It's the starter homes bill that's moving through the various committees before it goes to a vote at the House and State Senate office. But ultimately, the intent of the bill is good affordable and attainable housing. Um the city of Woodbury as it relates to our um legislative priorities that were approved late last year still do have concerns. The bill has come a long way than previous years, but we still do have concerns primarily with preemption and requirement of lots of units on one AC one one lot essentially. Um, we have the best staff working on it and because of the leadership of assistant community development director, city planner Eric Sells, uh community development director, um, Janelle Schmitz, uh, Shelley Schaefer, who's our community relations manager, Mayor Burt, and all this council. Uh, we are at the table, um, to make an impact and hopefully get the bill to a better place that really works for the city of Woodbury. [1:44:17] Jeffrey J. Dahl: Um our concern primarily in addition to preemption and um density is not the right term, but just mandating, you know, a certain amount of units on on a property is um is really just the way it's come about. And um really not um appropriately um um mitigating the concerns of a growing community. I think small towns and and urbanized communities are are less impacted. It really is going to impact us. So, I want to acknowledge that that's going on right now and kudos to our representatives uh Representative Cha, Representative Bakke, and Senator Hemmingsen-Jaeger for for advocating for us. There's still more advocating to do, but just again wanted to recognize our staff, uh Mr. Sells, Miss Schmitz, uh, Miss Schaefer, and Mayor Burt especially for being at the table. we are making a difference and uh probably a couple more weeks of of fighting and trying to get it to uh a place that we think will work for the city of Woodbury ultimately creating attainable and affordable housing options which I think this discussion shows uh earlier this evening and years before this that we've done a pretty dang good job of creating attainable affordable life cycle housing for our community members. [1:44:44] Jeffrey J. Dahl: So, want to acknowledge that's going on and then the hard work that our our our staff and uh officials are putting out there. Um, two uh important dates coming up. We have the Woodbury Community Expo led by the chamber. That's March 28th, Saturday, 10 to 3:00 p.m. Over 175 local businesses and organizations will be there. It'll be entertainment, exhibits, food vendors. Uh great place for kids. Uh, and I know council member Wilson, I think probably everybody loves a bounce house. [1:45:46] Kim Wilson: I love kids, too. Everybody, the minutes of the record will reflect differently. Do you want to talk about it's a location change? [1:45:46] Jeffrey J. Dahl: Yes. Thank you. Uh, this year it'll be at M Health Fairview Sports Center. Much more room. So, uh, it's going to be a great event and I look forward to seeing all community members there. Uh also just announced uh I believe publicly today, but our our uh groundbreaking ceremony for the new public safety building is going to be held on Friday, May 8th. Uh I believe it's at 1 pm. Um really celebrating a long process, decades long process to to plan get funding, engage the community, um all sorts of pro uh steps along the way culminating in a groundbreaking the official commencement of construction on a brand new public safety building that will serve our amazing public safety staff for decades to come. Um, it's going to be a two-year project and there's going to be a lot of inconveniences along the way, a lot of sharing of spaces. Uh, public works and and our public safety teams are going to be very familiar with each other over the next couple years, but it's all for a great cause and I know we're all excited for that and uh, mark your calendars for that day. The public's welcome to attend um, that special event. Hopefully, we'll have good weather. That's all I have. [1:47:20] Jennifer Santini: Great. Hopefully have good weather. It's awful negative of you. [1:47:20] Jeffrey J. Dahl: Ground will be frozen still, but [1:47:20] Jennifer Santini: I think that that is it for today. So, I will move to adjourn the meeting. [1:47:20] Steve Morris: Second. [1:47:37] Jennifer Santini: Motion a second. All in favor say Aye. [1:47:37] Council Members: Aye. [1:47:37] Jennifer Santini: Do you want to hit the gavel? No, you go for it. You can do that. I usually don't. That's what I was going to say. Our meeting is adjourned.