I have 7 o'clock. We will call the town board meeting for May 5th, 2025 to order. First item on the agenda is the approval. Patrick. Yes, Mr. Chair. Um staff would submit a change or a suggestion to the board about the order of discussion this evening. I would recommend moving. Well, I don't we don't see the rep here for 8 A and B. I was going to say we should probably move that before the public hearing. I would put that to the consideration of the board uh for uh time management this evening. All right. Um can I make a suggestion, too? Can we pull item 5B off the consent agenda? Can't do that yet. Wait till we get to We'll do it when we go to Cuz I got one to pull too, Beth. Okay. All right. Is that the only change, Patrick? From staff. Yes. All right. Hearing that, I need a motion to approve as amended. I'll move to uh change the agenda items 8A and B and move them up ahead of public hearing 7A. Thank you, Mr. Chair and board. All in favor say I. All opposed. All right. Item three is approval of payment of the bills. Sign up, Steve. I did move to approve payment of the bills. We have a second. Second. Second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Now I need a motion to approve the prior minute meetings from April 21st. Anybody have any changes, corrections? I saw none. Move to approve the uh minutes from the prior meeting. I agree. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Item five is consent agenda. We have nine of them. Uh hearing from the board. We'd like to pull item 5 C and 5 D and B. What was that? And 5B. B is in boy. What? We have 5B. Planning Commission. Okay. So, we have B, C, and D. Yep. Okay. All right. Hearing that, I need a motion to approve the consent agenda minus those three. So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. That motion carries. All right. Item 5B is planning commission uh reappointment of David Connley. That one got pulled. Was it? It's been pulled. B, B, C, and D. Are we going to discuss? We're going to discuss them. Yeah. Yeah. Now we discuss them. Oh. Um, because we're going to change the complexion of the planning competition. I'm think we're going to roll into the the environmental maybe. I I was going to see if we can't gauge interest before we re re-up the uh current members. um his commission expired. Well, okay. When does it just expiring now? Um he applied after it expired. He applied on May 1st. The but the board has not determined we're put going with a different That was the only reason why I wanted to discuss it. Um you don't I don't know if he'll be interested if we do some changing with it. That's the Well, that allows him to back out. I would think if he doesn't want I I don't know um because he is a planning commission member. We have a planning commission. We have no other It's statutory to have a planning commission, is it not, Mr. Attorney? It's optional, but yes, once you adopt it, you have to have it. And I'm not against that other what we've talked about, but I don't think we finalized it yet. So, well, then, you know, no problem. I just thought I'd, you know, raise the issue. Okay. So, we can put it back on then. All right. So then I need a motion to approve item 5B. I'll move to approve uh item 5B. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. I'll oppose or that motion carries. All right. Item C. Steve, you wanted I I did because uh in reviewing the material, uh I did not see proof of insurance as required. the uh one gentleman, his first name is MAP. His uh liability policy that he shared with the township expires July 30th of 2025. Well, just for the audience, this is for moing option. It's a moing option on White Bear Lake. I'm not against the mooring of the boats. It's just I we need proof of insurance and the material that was provided by the other gentleman. There's only two people uh his name was Steve. There was no insurance provided that had effective or expiration dates unless you've got something. Yep. Subsequent to our discussion today, uh Steve, we did reach out to that vendor and they are going to comply with their full policy. Okay. Then as we have done in the past, I will move to approve. Uh Mr. Chair, if I may, I would have a suggestion in terms of the u the per or the identification agreement. It should be expanded to include not just the township but also the the board and all employees and agents of the town as well. Okay. Um well now it just got complicated. So do we have to bring that back for for another uh No, you just make that a condition that they sign a Yeah. sign new agreements including the uh staff board and and employee. Yeah. Staff. Yes. So I'll make a motion to approve uh the the consent agenda. I item 5 C that we took out subject to the uh uh conditions we just talked about providing the insurance and then enhancing the hold harmless agreement to include uh the board and uh all employees etc. I'll second. All right. Motion's made and second. All in favor? I I All right. Moving on to 5D. This is a national police week. Was that you? That was not me, Beth. No, it wasn't me either. Well, who won it? Me. I thought I I got it on the notes here to pull. Well, maybe that's just a good time to recognize our police force. There you go. It's a mystery because it is an actual resolution recognizing our uh police week for all officers, but uh we use Ramsey County Sheriff's for Way Township and we're more than happy with their uh contract. So, all right. I need a motion to approve that. So, moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Moving on. Item 6A is the Rice Creek Wershed District uh grant application. Dale, are you going to take that? Sure. We've got that's all. Yeah. So, we've uh the two applications were approved. So we were just looking for board approval or signing of the agreements of those two grant applications. One was for uh Safo Baffles and the Silver Fox Street project and the other is for the underground storage at Bair Beach. Um both worthy projects and we certainly will accept funding. We got a $100,000 for that project for the B air beach underground storage. And then the Saffle Baffles 437 something like that. Yeah, we've been over this a couple of times at our exec meeting. So, uh what's the timing on this? Saf or I mean that'll be with the project that's probably going to be later summer with that. The grants go through the end of 26. Yeah, the grants are good for will be covered on that end. It's just a matter without the we haven't bid them out yet. The projects are going to be soon receiving in for the street project, but the other we haven't got ready for bids. So, uh, the Bair Beach project that will occur after the, uh, Southshore Trinity, uh, service or will it affect their their, uh, Sunday worship service? We're kind of waiting. The idea would be to wait till after the swimming season. Okay. So, we should be all kind of dovetails there, the Southshore masses. And all right, Beth, any questions, comments? No. He recalls discussing this. I'm No, I'm good. All right. So I is this just an update or you need a motion on this, Dale? A motion. Need a motion. Motion to Okay. I'll make a motion to just update the Rice Creek Wershed District grant applications for both the Silver Fox area saffl baffles and the number two, the Bair Beach project grant, or do you want them separately? Actually, I would do them separately. In addition, they're not applications. They're agreements. Agreements. Excuse me. All right, we'll do the first one first. The Rice Creek Wershed District Grant. It's agreement. Is that what you said? Even though it says application for the Silver Fox area saffl baffle project grant agreement. I'll second. All right. All in favor? I. All right. Then the second one. I'll make a motion for the Rice Creek WHED district grant agreement for the Bair Beach project. I'll second it. All in favor say I. I opposed. All right, that motion carries. Item 6B. This is a North Oaks joint powers agreement. Uh Chad, you going to take this? M sir, Mr. Chair, I have copies. We received it today. So if you there are copies of the red line, if you'll recall, the board did approve um this JPA. Oh god. November. Yes, November. Uh, and we've been waiting for our partners at uh, City North Oaks to uh, approve it on their end. There are comments here from both attorneys uh, regarding the language uh, that's in the JPA. And just to highlight the the important thing is they've there's an agreement on the rate to be charged 125%. 25%. The question that the town the city attorney had was is it based on tier one and I believe it is based on tier one. That was the understanding. And then the other only other question she had, and I'm assuming the city council had it too, was what are we what were we talking about when we mentioned large capacity water meters? And u while the group that met and negotiated this understood exactly what we were talking about, no one else was really clear on that. So just so we're clear, apparently I talked to Dale. It's we're talking about 11 different large water meters that'll have to be installed and maintained. the city installs them and then the township maintains them. Other than that, the agreement is pretty is is uh as is as was agreed agreed upon and approved by the town board. Now, this one went in front of the North Oaks City Council. Yes. Okay. It did, right? Yes. Yep. And any idea what what's happening with the install of the 11 meters? I can give you an update. they're uh they lost their uh or they had a retirement in their engineering consultant engineering firm. So there's a slight delay here recently on the the work and there's been a young engineer working on them now with new city engineer at North Oaks and they're hopefully in the next month they'd have them ready out for bids to be installed when that will be dependent on what bids they get and the contractor. You still think it go this year? Yeah. Road is going to be a mess. Yep. Meter pits are all on the west side. West side. So, okay. Going back to the question of the there clarification on the meters large capacity. Is that def I I without going is it defined in here as to what? So you don't you really have a objection one way or the other as long as I I look I like to have clarity and definition. So is there such is there a definition for large capacity meters in this agreement? No, there's not. Uh but not necessary or well I believe they're all based on the the size of the main well if they're questioning it now it's I think they're questioning what are the large meters the meter pits I don't think they were as informed their council as to what the interconnect pits and the large meters and I think the real question was also how many of them oh 8 inch main still I area 12 down to eight. So, well, it actually wouldn't be a bad idea to have a side agreement define, you know, setting out the specs for the uh for the for the large meters. Yeah. And the the engineer has that. Yeah. Well, people come and people go as we know and sometimes ideas change. So, it'd be better to have it clarified in a side agreement if that's what it takes in my So, we would we would do an amendment to this JPA Yeah, I was amended. Yeah. Okay. But include but we are the board is approving the JPA in general this evening. Correct. Correct. Yes. Correct. Okay. Okay. Thank you. So you need a motion tonight to Is there a final date on this? Yes. I don't see anything on here, Chad. I I think it was new actually it's in there um executed as the day and first year you written but I don't see it where it says that but anything other than that or is it effective the minute we sign it and date it I'm really interrupt proceedings but none of us can hear you and the there's feedback from the monitor out there um so can I close the doors no I can't turn off the monitor open meeting the try and talk louder. How is that? Apologies. I don't No. Good feedback. I don't see a date. So So Chad, is it ratified once we sign and date it or how does that work? Well, actually was is effective January 1st of 2025. Well, it it states that this commencement this agreement between the town and the city shall commence on the date on which the last party to the agreement executes the agreement. There you go. So that okay if you execute it today we're the last party. It's today that's on page four. Thank you. All right. Anybody have any questions, comments? No. Hearing none. I need a motion to accept. I'll I'll move based on the town attorney review and recommendations approve the joint power agreement with the city of North Oaks. We'll second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Item 6 C. This is a surplus property at Stackard Boulevard. Uh we have it up for sale and you want to extend the agreement with the real. Yep. We've gotten um interest in the property uh by several parties. A lot of comments that uh the asking price might be out of line with the market. Um our agent is suggesting that we adjust it down a little bit too. Well, wasn't there some stipulation that we're we were marketing it at appraised value? We were. Yes. And we don't have to take appraised value. Correct, Chad? I mean, it's Well, no, we we whatever. If the if we receive an offer that we deem is Yep. Correct. And Mark and reflects fair market value, we can accept that even it's below the appraised value or you can sit on it for a really long time. Was there a neighbor that was interested? There was. There's been several neighbors who have been interest and contacted our agent, but nothing okay concrete. I'll just make a general statement. You know, periodically there are pieces of property that for whatever reason are on our books, but we're not in the real estate business. So, this just happens to be one that uh the board has decided we wanted to see if we could sell it. That's what this is all about. Um, we've obtained a realtor to help us with that project and they're advising us that it's we want to renew it. So, and taken. So, I would I would recommend renewing the contract with the agent. Um, but to reiterate with her that, you know, whatever official offers that we're going to get, we can at least field in front of the board. Um, I think, like I said, there's been a few hits on it, but nothing formal has come to us. How long has the contract run for? A year. All right. board have any problem with that? No. No. All right. Then I need a motion. I'll make a motion to con to extend the contract with Coldwell Banker Realy for the 2569 Stacker Boulevard property for one additional year. I'll second. Motion's made in second. All in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. All right. We're going to jump to a new business 8A. This is a proposed resolution in support of township relations with Canada. Uh Patrick, you going to give us an overview? There's a gentleman here. Yeah, I don't see a representative for this point on the agenda, but um we were approached at open time at our last board meeting requesting that the township um make a resolution in support of Canada um and relations with them. And then we were also we had a more extensive discussion uh on this topic at our executive work session last was it last Friday, two Friday? No, two weeks ago. Two weeks ago. Um with the direction to the person who has requested this uh that it would be t or be discussed further at a regularly scheduled board meeting and the board would deliberate upon what they would like to do. So, unless there's anybody here who's representing this point on the agenda, I don't see anybody. Steve. Well, as we discussed at the workshop meeting, um I think we have to start off by saying, you know, I applaud the civil engagement of a of a citizen that's taken it upon himself uh to point out that he believes there's inequities going on between the United States and Canada. However, I think it's outside of our real world of local government that has no direct relationship with Canada in trade uh to take that stand. We're just I don't think we do that personally. So, I applaud it just like I applaud citizens that come to our annual meeting in March and our budget meeting in in December and be civily engaged that way. But there's other avenues hopefully. Beth, I'm in agreement. That's, you know, we kind of try to stay apolitical. So, you know, we deal with business of the town. And I think we try to make it clear clear to him that, like I said, like Steve said, there's other avenues that he could take to to pursue his cause. I I feel that even when say the school board comes to us and looking for a proclamation for us to uh give a an affirmative action to the levies, I don't feel comfortable telling anybody in the township how to vote or how to feel on a political issue. I think this board tries to stay neutral and all that. So when he, like I said, it it that's up to his prerogative, but I just felt this board really shouldn't be in that position. Plus, I don't want to feel calls from for or against because that's what's going to happen. If you make a stand, then you're going to have somebody who disagrees with you and then you're going to be taking on a battle we don't need. So, but actually, we would we need a motion to deny that. Correct. I'll make the motion to deny. I'll I'll second that. All right. Motion made second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Then item 8B. This is an automatic generator purchase for the administrative building. This was brought up only because of all the things going around around the country, storms and disasters. Um, we've been working on our emergency management plan for the township and if if worse comes to worse and the town has to go into any kind of emergency mode, we need power and our town facilities are powered up at our public works but not our offices. So, this is something we've been pushing off for 10 years. Yeah. So, we're playing a game here. We need to get this up and running so the actual township can stay mobile and working if we go down. So, I think uh Dale, do you want to uh just give us an overview? I would mention too that this has been in our capital improvement budget for seven, eight years now. This is something we've been kicking down the road that we we can't we have to pull the trigger. And as you as you mentioned, Mr. Chair, we're working through our emergency or hazard mitigation plan. Um, and this fits into several components of that. So, Dale's got some. Nope. Okay. I was going to say it goes under a lot of different names. I call it disaster recovery. We got to be in the mode to if anything happens, we we need to be in a position where we can function. And power is what we have to have. Bless you. All right, Beth. Got anything else? Nope. Thank you. All right. Then I need a motion to approve the purchase. I'll move to approve the purchase of a generator. I don't have the exact word on there. Um, I don't either. We flipped this agenda around. So I unfortunately you're I'm trying to pull up too many pages. So So many pages. Yeah. Anyway, yes. Move to approve the uh second agenda of the generator. Thanks, folks. All right. Uh all in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. All right. This just brings us up to our public hearing. This is for Endeavor Development. I need a motion to wave the public or wave the reading. I'll move to wave the reading that it was properly published. I'll second. Motion made a second. All in favor say I. I. I. Then I need a motion to Oh man. Open the public hearing. Open the public hearing. I'll move to open the public hearing. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. So we're going to go through staff and the presentation from our uh engineers and then I will open it up to the public. So please hold all if you have any questions or comments. We'll wait till we get it open. So you have to come to the mic and get your name and address for the record. So all right, who's going to run this? All right, CJ. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chair and supervisors. Uh before you is our three applications. Um in total, there will be five motions uh made this evening. Starting with exceptions, also known as variances from ordinance number 87. That's the storm water management ordinance. There will be three of those. A preliminary plat approval or denial and permitted use standards permit. The subject parcels are located on the west side of the township between Centerville Road and Interstate 35E. It it includes three undeveloped lots, one of which is addressed 35000 Centerville Road and two are unadressed, located in the light industrial zoning district. The applicants are proposing to subdivide 53000 Senville Road into two lots and two outlots for future development. Lots one and two are to be used for industrial buildings, both of over 100,000 square feet each, designed for future development as well. On the northwest corner of the property, there's there will be a 5.87 acre conservation easement that will protect a wetland area. And then outland outlot A will accommodate two future buildings. and outlot B will consist of existing wetlands and drainage easement. Proposed lot one and two would have access to Centerville Road. A proposed access easement would provide access to the site through those proposed proposed lots. The western 2.47 47 acres of the site is dedicated to county the county for additional right ofway for Centerville Road and a future trail will be shown traversing through the site as designated through your comprehensive plan. As I stated, the site is zoned for light industrial and the applicant's plans show that the proposed buildings would be used for office and warehouse and light industrial. So that is in alignment. A permitted use standards permit is required for any permitted use per your zoning ordinance. There's a list of permitted uses in there and the applicant does meet those permitted uses. Um on the screen you'll see the proposed building locations lot one and two. Those build things are proposed as buildings one and two. And then in outlot A, there's future building three and four. The proposed trail, as I stated, was required by the 2040 comprehensive plan. Um, there is a future trail connection from the north end of these properties to the south. It was decided that in lie of parkland dedication and parkland dedication fee that this trail would serve as such and the trail should be constructed concurrently with development of each lot. The permitted use standards includes uh numerous conditions which are included in your staff report on page five. These conditions go with every permitted use standards permit that you would review. The application states for offices and warehouse and warehousing. A landscaping plan was also submitted. Lot one and two show the proposed landscaping that is being reviewed here tonight. Outlot A, the northern lot, shows future proposed landscaping. Any landscaping requirements for those future buildings would be reviewed during those applications when they proposed to develop outlot A. So, tonight we're focusing on the landscaping of the um primary two buildings in the center there. Ordinance number 87 that goes over your storm water management regulations. It the application will need three variances from this ordinance. Um we're stating it as exceptions because it's treated a little bit differently than variances that you'll find in the zoning ordinance. In the zoning ordinance, there's a little bit more structure to how those are reviewed and necessary public hearing and steps. As such, these would just need a town board approval without public hearing necessary. The first variance is related to the proposed trail in the northwest corner and the existing retaining wall. Exception two would be the southern driveway access and the related retaining walls. And the third is an existing retaining wall on the southeast side. Um the image shown in your staff report and on screen now was provided by the applicant uh in with their submitt as well as at the executive board meeting a few weeks ago. The yellow is representing the where they've filled or the approved fill approved by um related agencies. The blue is they label it as buffer impact. So the sections of buffer or wetland buffer that are within those setbacks that will be affected. And the green is where they are providing additional buffer mitigation. Um, so they will go in and do some I guess reconstruction of the buffer to provide that extra drainage area. Excuse me as I go back for a moment. These um exceptions are required due to the minimum 20 foot buffer that is regulated by the ordinance. There is um also buffer averaging allowed. However, the buff the minimum 20 foot buffer is required um no matter what uh method of averaging you use. A statement from the attorney is included in your staff report regarding such. A grading plan was also um presented. Larry? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair and town board. I'll walk through a few of the engineering items of this uh proposal. The grading um has already been the mass grading has already occurred on this site as you know um to prepare the building pads for commercial construction. Um also as you know the site sits higher than some of the adjoining properties including um the Interstate 35, the property to the south, Centerville Road, and the properties to the north. Um wetlands as um CJ mentioned are located to the north, northwest, west and south. um erosion control as part of the grading. Some of that erosion control has already been in place, but um there's erosion control plans to help protect those wetlands. Um including perimeter self fence, um double layer self fence at uh at uh wetland areas, rock construction entrances. Um and then the site would be stabilized um using erosion control blanket seating for sight stabilization. Um, utilities include uh a sanit sanitary connection to an existing sanitary sewer that um runs across the site. And so they would be uh extending um service to the buildings into that sewer system that's already located on the site. I'm also extending the water man and looping that water man to the north as well and then water um service lines to serve those individual buildings. As a part of the project, uh, as CJ mentioned, there'd be some widening of, uh, Centerville Road to provide for turn lanes, um, for the site access. So, there'd be widening along Centerville Road. Um, and the developers working with uh with Ramsey County on permitting for that for that work. Um the as a part of the process uh engineering has provided a memo which is included in your packet. Um a number of items have been either addressed or will be addressed with uh with final plat. Um a couple other comments. We would encourage all public improvements including the the turn lanes, the trail and the utilities to be completed with the phase one of the um development. And we'd also encourage some um modifications on the north end. Um we believe there could be some additional buffer to uh provide for screening of the properties of the north. Thank you. Thank you, Larry. As I stated at the beginning, this will require five actions tonight. Um we can go through them one by one as they come up to keep them all organized. In general, you have three options for each action to approve of the request with a justification with findings. You can deny the request with the findings for denial or you can table the request for further review and study. The Before you go any further, CJ, is is this the correct order, Chad? Yes, it is the variances before the permitted use standard. Well, yes, it would be because if you don't prove the variances, that's going to affect the plans. Okay. All right. Sorry. Go ahead. No worries. And one other point, too. We'll we won't vote on anything until actually the public hearing is over with. It'll be all one series of five votes. Yep. With that being said, we will we can take after the public hearing go through each of these actions separately. Following the meeting tonight, the next steps would be a final plat should this preliminary plat be approved. The final plat will need to address the conditions and or requirements that are noted tonight with approval of the preliminary plat incorporated. A final plat public hearing may be held at the town board meeting on 519 if this moves forward um and if all those conditions are in fact incorporated adequately. Finally, phase 2 applications uh need must be submitted for consideration. The next planning commission meeting is on Thursday, May 22nd. If those applications are deemed complete following a final plat um approval, that would be the meeting that they'd be at. That application would not require a public hearing at the commission level. However, then it would go back to the town board here. Lots of moving pieces, but that second phase of application, those second buildings, those would be the buildings or building to the north. Um and that would come at a later time. Does the board have any questions for staff? Uh, you want to go back up to the first or second one? Yes. First or second action? Yeah, sure. Um, when we start talking about buffers, I know at our exec meeting that got bounced around so much I I gave up. I was hoping staff and the developers would be able to work this out. How did how did that come out? um the buff the buffer averaging following that meeting there was a meeting between staff uh including our attorney discussing how the ordinance was interpreted um Chad has included a memo Chad would you like to mention it's my interpretation of uh again we're looking at ordinance 87 paragraph 6-2.9 and as I interpret that ordinance there's a minimum buffer of 20 ft. Now that the language also calls for an expansion of the buffer for one 40 ft for every 1 ft of slope. Now there is in the next phase the next portion of that of that uh ordinance talks about averaging and you're allowed to average if it's to the benefit of the property. In other words, if it if it enhances uh the environmental uh if it enhances environmental protection, you're allowed to average. But it's my opinion that in no event can the buffer be less than 20 ft. But so are almost all three of these uh would require variances because they're all within the 20 ft 20 foot. You remember at the me at the exact meeting the issue was brought up by the developers expert was whether or not they could income they could average it down to less than 20 ft and based our ordinance your your decision is based on how or our ordinance is written that's my interpretation yes you have to again as I said in my memo you have to interpret the ordinance as a whole you can't uh can't exclude one portion you can't ignore one portion and just focus on on um on one one portion of it and Larry I want to be sure uh phase one all public utilities um the trail the turn lanes that must all be completed with the first I'm encouraging that I it's not a requirement I think it's C CJ mentioned that it um with uh each phase those improvements would be completed. I just I just would encourage the developer to consider that. Well, I I think it's a town advantage only because then we know it gets done if phase two 5 years down the road. We'd like to see this other stuff done before that. So, and Mr. Chair, if I may, that's how I drafted the development agreement to have the trail done as part of phase one. All right. Beth, questions, comments? Not yet. I do have uh again the very northwest corner um with the landscaping there as part of the phase one. Some buffering put there. Is that is that in that development agreement, Chad? The development agreement simply adopts whatever landscaping plan the board approves. But I don't I don't really have a great landscape plan for what's up there. And Mr. Sure. To be honest with you, I don't either. And I came and looked at it today and it's not very helpful. Can you elaborate on that, CJ or not? On what? On the the northwest corner of landscaping would be the phase two part of it, but that that's all to help buffer the whole project for the uh residents to the north. That is correct. Um, it's my understanding that landscaping requirements for those lots would be triggered as they are developed. Um, I'm open to other staff interpretation as well. Well, you're saying when phase two comes in, they'd be landscaping there. Yes, that's my understanding. And I thought we had the understanding that it would be done as part of phase one. I did I missed. So I I view this as a a preliminary plat for the entire site and I don't I it seems like they focused a lot of their landscaping on the southern two lots. I think uh they could have shown more on the northern two lots. And then when you get when when it comes down to final plat, you're reviewing those specific sites um that are that are part of the the next final plat. But so if phase two does not occur for several years, it's kind of landscape bare to the north is what you're saying. Um you'll get your chance to help us with this. Um again, the more in phase one the better on the landscaping plans. We'd agree. I we encourage that. Well, is that something we would be looking at on at the final plat if we recommend that tonight we get a better landscape plan for in two weeks? Mr. Chair, actually that should be part of the preliminary plat approval, but we don't really have any landscape plan for that for tonight. There there is a landscape plan in the packet. It does show some landscaping on that north end. some it's not really very detailed and I I actually went when the um I went through a lot of the meeting minutes going back to 2015 there is always been buffering mentioned in this project and it was supposed to actually be done with the residential portion so you know and then apparently I don't know who did it but they took out a lot of that buffering which I don't understand why so I think you know we need to see more about what they're planning to do because it's quite dusty. I mean, I think they suffered quite a bit, you know, when they were doing the the grading. So, I think we need to see more. Mr. Chair, if I may, I think I can answer that question. Initially, prior to this project, the grading plan was all part of the of the plinary plat approval. And so therefore the uh the landscape and the buffering you're talking about was all part of the plumary plat process. This time around the North Oaks company decided to do the grading first before any plat was in report any plat application was in front of you. Therefore the issue of buffering the issue of landscaping and the buffering was never was was never addressed and you know as part of the grading plan. That's the problem here. And again, as we've talked about before, the grading plans were were reviewed and reluctantly approved because they did meet all the minimum requirements of the township and the state building code. So, we had no choice but to approve the grading plan. But that's what happened here. And and as a land owner, they had the the right to take all them trees down. That would have been buffers that they would have but will ever enforce what happened for I mean I've got you know statements by Mark Hogi where he indicated that he had a tree farm right on the site. There was going to be 30 and 40 foot trees that were going to be put in and if you remember cuz I know you were there then we had actually asked him to buffer with three rows of evergreens to buffer literally around this the entire project. The problem is that was from the first plan which has gone away. Mr. Chair, so I'm so we're clear. I'm not saying you can't require buffering. I'm just saying the reason the buffering doesn't exist is because the way they North Oaks approached this property. That's the problem. Well, it just seems like they made promises on one hand, then they to, you know, they did it and then they took it away and that doesn't seem reasonable. I I don't disagree. But the plans were never gone through. So, they could have said anything, but it never came to fruition. So, they withdrew the preliminary plat application. It it's it's clear the current developer it's in their best interest to have an improved landscaping plan versus wide open prairie uh and work with the neighborhood. I mean that's that's what the whole issue is whether it was before I I understand what happened in the past is not we can't really hang her hat on that because the the land owner was North Oak's company there was a developer didn't get past the first round new developer has has to deal with what is in front of us the land owner was the same but he chose to take it a different direction and take the trees down yes that's not theirs just We're clear on explaining why it happened, not what you can do tonight. I understand that. And I again say it's in the best interest, and maybe I'll just say it now. It's in the best interest to come up with a better landscaping plan that helps in phase one to address the problems that are going to sit there for years. All right. Well, that's a question for the developer when we open it up. Um CJ, got anything else? I do not. You want to go back up to the the five um motions we need? Yeah. Uh the first three are variances, correct? That's correct. And then number four is what? Number four is the preliminary plat. Okay. And number five is the permitted use standards for office and warehousing. Okay. All right. Uh, staff have any other comments, questions? Nope. All right. I need a motion to open it up for public comment. I'll mo make a motion to open it up for public comment. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. I. I understand the developments. You guys got a PowerPoint presentation you wanted to run by us. Yeah. Why don't you do that first before we open or so we before we go to the neighbors? So, my name is Evan Madson. My address is 6317 Mildred Avenue. You might want to speak up. All right, I'll try and talk loud. Um, so we're here rep I'm here representing Endeavor Development, the applicant for Park 35e. What you see in front of you is a rendering of the project. A little bit about us. We're a locally based developer. Uh, we were founded in 2020. We've done a lot of projects in Minneapolis St. Paul as well as in De Moine, Milwaukee. really excited about this project and about um starting a development in Wart Township. Uh CJ did a really nice job highlighting and overviewing our request. Um so we can probably skip to the next slide. Uh here is an aerial of the project. It's highlighted the entirety of the site. Um we're zoned I1 light industrial as well as guided for industrial in the 2040 guidance plan. Here is our proposed site plan. Um the focus for us tonight is on building one and building two. Um our involvement in the site really comes with the platting of building one and building two. That's when Endeavor would purchase uh the lots and then construct building one and building two for development. Um the future phase shown there um we're showing two buildings, but as we've kind of shared at the town board executive meeting, um we're we're planning on having a subsequent application for that area. Here is a a figure that I think kind of clearly defines the lots. Outlot A on the north um will be planned for future development. lot one and lot two will be set up for uh immediate development following approvals. Um the landscaping plan I think in particular um and some of the reasons why um landscaping on outlot A for example um isn't as defined is because um we would be purchasing lot one as part of our application. We are proposing to plant trees on land we don't own. Um, so I think CJ tried to zoom into it, but there was uh 12 foot tall Austrian pines. Yeah, 12 foot tall Austrian pines planted on the northern portion of the property. Um, but our landscaping plan for lot one and lot two does satisfy all town requirements. And then out lot, sorry, outlet B is set up for uh a storm water management. That's where the storm water pond is. Here's a rendering of the building from the southwest corner. Um, we're working with a group on building one that would occupy this entire space. We're really excited about the opportunity of bringing them to Wiper Township. They're located in a neighboring community right now and we feel like they'd be a really great fit for this project. Here are elevations. Um that starting from the top that is the east and then moving down that is the north, the west and then the south of building one. Uh CJ covered the variances. Um this was a figure that we put together to kind of outline and define how we were wetland buffer averaging. Um we're requesting three variances, one along the northwest, one for access to the site, and one along or in the southeast corner driven by uh topography. Um so those are the three variances that we will be requesting as part of this application. Um this slide here is what we're really proud about the job creation and uh the bolstering of the tax base as well as the economic growth that this will provide for the township. 2025 is a year where there's a lot not a lot of development happening and throughout the whole metro and we're really proud of the opportunity that we have a a group like we do looking to relocate to White Pair Township and so we wanted to share that with you all. Um sorry we didn't talk about seizure but if you could just go up a little bit I wanted to talk a little bit about the phasing of the improvements because that question was raised but not directly answered. So, uh, to Larry's point, as part of our application, we would be proposing to construct the turn lanes, construct both drive lanes, as well as extend the 16-inch water man, looping the water between the existing water man and then the connection on the north. So, that is um what we're proposing as part of this application. And then we'd be proposing to construct the trail in phases. So essentially bringing it from the south up through lot one and then when the future development of outlet A happens u constructing the rest. So it' be dedicating the easement up front but the construction would happen uh as CJ mentioned in those two phases. Uh so to summarize, we're seeking subdivision permitted use and variances to the storm water ordinance. Uh proposed development is consistent with the underlying zoning and guidance. Uh we're really excited about this project and the economic growth that it'll bring for your community and we're looking forward to working with the township. All right, questions. Steve, so I am clearly you are the only owners of where lots one and or lots one and two or A and B sit. That's what you're talking about, right? That Yeah. So upon even though you're quasi quasi in agreement with North Oaks company to purchase the remainder, that fair correct. We upon platting, we would purchase the property. So on that figure there, we plat lot one, we purchase lot one. We don't own outlaw a or we wouldn't upon platting. Um so that's part of the reason why like when the landscaping question got brought up, we're posing to plant trees that isn't our property yet to kind of ease some of those um tensions. But we wouldn't own that portion of the land until we went through the application process once again. And that depends on when you find a user. Yes. I mean, outside of this hearing, we're we submitted an application and are working towards that. But yes, uh maybe a question for Chad. If they don't own the property, why are we granting a variance to that piece of property? It's a very good question. I'm wondering myself because that's so let me understand something here. North Oak still owns the whole 56 acres, correct? Did they sign the application for plat for plat application? Correct. As part of this development approval, did they? Yes. Okay. And we're not out of out of sequence by doing that. No, we're not. As long as the as long as the fee owner executed the application or consented to the application, it's okay. But I was I had the same question myself when I was listening to the presentation. That was part of our application. Okay. I never saw the original application. So, okay. That answers that question. Thank you. Yep. Well, and Evan, I'm still concerned. Um, obviously you heard that our discussion. We'd like to see all the improvements done beforehand. Obviously, like I said, if you don't own the property, but is that something that can be handled through a development agreement through North Oaks Company? Sure. Could because I I don't feel comfortable going on uh okay in a plat here if we don't have guarantees that all this stuff's going to get done. Yeah. And as part of application, we had sign off from North Oaks company to construct those portions of public improvements being the the turn lanes, the water main extension. So that is all included and it's part of our phasing exhibit that we submitted, but that still doesn't address the trail. So the trail is an item that we'd be dedicating and then as we discussed with the township, we'd be constructing it um alongside the development. So the easement would be dedicated day one that's being recorded as part of this plat. The trail will be constructed up until lot one with this application. So you'd have 50% of the trail constructed alongside these approvals. All right, Steve. Any other questions of the waiting? If North Oak still owns it, can't we ask them to fulfill their obligations for the buffering? That's a question for Chad. Yes. If you make it if part of the plenary plat approval, you make that buffering an obligation or a condition of of plat approval. Yeah, it'd have to otherwise the no final plat approval. That' be blunt. Okay, but that's a final right. Right. tonight. Can we do it and get that plan for final plat or not? We can make we can make the buffering the landscaping a condition of final plat approval as part of the approval of preliminary plat landscaping for outlaws A and B whatever they're called there in the north end. Exactly. Can you tie it to the fact that the buffering was supposed to be done in the projects previously that they handled? Okay. Not if I may. If I may again, yes, buffering was part of the part of the original or proposals in the past, but those proposals were withdrawn. So, at this point in time, they're not in front of us. No, it was part I mean, according to the meeting minutes, it was actually part of they were supposed to do this. We had put it as a condition of those projects. So, the thing is if they took it down, which they shouldn't have and they didn't, it doesn't seem to me they fulfilled their obligation that they owed the neighborhood except they withdrew those applications. So they were they no longer had those that obligation because they withdrew the application. Those that buffering we're talking about was all part of that application for the house for the residential portion. Well, no, I don't know. But the residential I don't know about. I'm talking I'm only talking about the the uh the proposals for the industrial development of this property on their property. Yes. Now again, I have not reviewed the development agreements for the residential. If they violated those, that's another issue altogether. That's not a part. No, it's not necessarily if they uh I think I got it right here for you. It's a separate issue from tonight, though. Okay. Yeah, it would have to All right. I may be confusing things, but if the buffering was part of the original approval of the residential plan, stop using buffering. Land landscaping landscaping because two different things here. Okay, we'll just use landscaping. If landscaping was part of the original approval of the u of the residential plat and they didn't do it, then they bre they violated their agreement. But that's on the residential. That's on the residential on their property. On their property. This is something different. Dealing with something else tonight. All right. I'm gonna open up for the public. Um, I know Wait, he's not Oh, sorry. Go ahead. So, my name is Joe Bergman. I'm also with Endeavor. My address is 885 Lynwood Avenue. The one point I wanted to to just touch on briefly. You mentioned at the executive board meeting, we kind of went back and forth with town staff about whether we whether there was a variance for the for the the retaining walls and the buffer wetland buffer impact. So, just to clarify, we were discussing with the town whether or not a variance was required or whether it was covered by the provision. And now that we have the decision from the town attorney that in fact a buffer, I'm sorry, a variance or an exception is required. The reason we're requesting that, and I want to make this clear, is so that we put in retaining walls to minimize the impact to the actual wetlands. So, while there's the buffer area that is is not up to the town's ordinance, the reason that exists is because we're trying to reduce and mitigate and minimize the impact to the actual wetlands. So, if we were to go back and create more buffer, we would have to impact more wetland to do so, which is why we were requesting the variance so we can avoid sort of doing more harm to meet the And I think that's why the board feels more comfortable doing it that way than you encroaching more into the wetland. I I had a long talk with Brian from Balamo about this. Okay. I just want to make sure I felt pretty comfortable after talking to him. So, good. I just want to make it clear. I know there was a lot of terminology going back and forth. I want to make Thank you. All right. Now, I know we have residents here that want to speak to this. Um I don't want to be redundant here. So, if if everybody's going to talk about trees, we know what landscaping we're talking about. So, if you want to talk about parking or lights, if it's something new, that's great. But I don't want to hear two hours of trees. So, but approach, you got to give your name and address for the record. All right, diving in. Okay. Uh BJ Schultz, 1108 Pine Hill Lane. Thank you guys for letting us do this. It's okay. I'm going to read this just because it's hard for me to come up with all these thoughts on the fly. But, um, okay. To start, I wanted to respond to a couple things I've heard throughout this whole process uh coming to meetings. And I hope this doesn't offend anybody, so please forgive me. It's not my intent. Uh one, you guys have I've heard some expression on how people have experienced homes being built in your backyard, and that's how life goes. Let me tell you, I wish we would have homes being built in our backyard. It would make a lot of people really happy, and it would totally change the dynamic of the this discussion. Secondly, I want to follow up with the township's efforts to change the zoning back to light industrial from plan use development. I understand why you did that and I respect that decision. There's wisdom there. But installing an industrial park with this size and nature in our backyards changes the game, especially with how they graded the land and developed the retaining wall. Merging these two types of distinctly different land uses have a different set of expectations when it comes to screening standards. That is common sense. And there's a reason you don't see this type of unique scenario in the metro area. There's a reason you don't see nicer homes next to a food distribution style company. Because of that, this is an unprecedented situation. I've asked many times for you to come out to our house, but until you do, you just won't get it. I know I know that because of the expletives people say when they see the site from our homes. Driving through the neighborhood is not enough. Listening to the planning commission and engineers who are super smart and doing their job doesn't give you the full picture. But please listen and trust the people that this actually impacts. the people that vote for you guys to protect and make good decisions that benefit all, including the developer. None of us are crazy environmentalists. We're common sense people with families who are grateful for where we live. Let me say I'm not against this development, and none of us are. We knew this would happen when we purchased our homes. I do feel the way that they went about approving the grading plan is a little shady. I'm not going to lie. I think you guys could agree. It makes me sad to people to think that people knew this would happen and the plans are set. And I think if you would have stopped looking at plot maps and seeing the major slope issue in our backyards, I think you would re have reconsidered the way the land was to be graded and the implications this egregious wall being built would have on creating opportunities for screening, which are now made very difficult, as we're finding out tonight. This outlaw for future development is a sneaky way for them to get this approved without addressing the glaring issue and adhering to township permitted use standards and ordinances. For example, they're clearly not answering the township's request to address the distance between the drive aisle and the lack uh and the wall and the lack of green space. They say the conservation easement is the green space. The conservation easement is below the wall. So, you can't use the conservation ement as the answer. The aspis for green space above the wall to create opportunities for screening. The conservation easement on the north side where it matters the most is full of a few dead or dying trees and it is at the bottom of a ravine. It is not a suitable buffer or a good base to add any screening. Planting trees there will not block anything, even out basement windows. You'll see right over into parking trucks and buildings. Regarding the northwest corner, the trail that most people don't want in that location, is taking away land where trees could be added at the bottom of the wall, especially if it is a suspended boardwalk. Where are you going to put the trees? You can't put trees in wetlands. Are you going to leave homes on the northwest side high and dry and do nothing? If you look at the plans, there's over 200 trees in the southwest and southern sections adjacent to Centerville, the Southern Wetlands, and 35E. Right now, there are 23 planned on the northern edge, which most of consolidated behind one home with only three on top of the wall in front of the building if it happens uh and zero in front of the drive aisle island parking lot. If you look at the landscape plans in general, most of the plant tree planted trees are in are in a consolidated area to the southwest side, which ironically lines up with the view of Hill Farm condos, which kind of makes me believe uh the the conclusion there is that you need a million-dollar condo to have screening. The developer will tell you that the plans for the northern buildings aren't set, which is true, and the town staff has noted that future development may trigger additional landscaping requirements. This is a perfect way to get out of adding trees on the top of the wall and in front of the drive aisle. Again, like I said, where it counts. But this is what we need for phase one for dust, for aesthetic reasons, for property values, and for the unmeasurable stress that this is putting on everybody. Anyone in this room would feel the same way if they're in our situation. Uh, I'll end with this. The screening is for the site, as you guys mentioned. It could be three to five. It could be a seven-year project. And the trees right now for phase one do nothing. It's not screening, especially in the northwest corner. and um if it just continues, it's just a huge disregard for for the residents. So perhaps the most concerning part of this infrastructure is the direct impact it will have on my family's safety. We're raising it and homeschooling two young girls since the moment construction began last summer, we no longer feel comfortable having them play and utilize our backyard space. Our home is in such close proximity to the construction and the dust, unfamiliar workers, including the guy out there yesterday digging for gold. and persist persistently loud noises have rendered this special space useless. Without screening, we will continue to no longer be able to use our backyard in the way backyards are intended. A girl's hope of one day having a swing set will no longer become a reality. We are cognizant of the fact that some form of building will occur in the next next to our home. And we're asking you guys and begging you guys that our voices are finally heard and the full screening mentioned in our outline proposal would be granted. It is only with that screening that we'll be able to preserve the safety, integrity, and property value of our homes in the neighborhood. Thank you. Hang on, BJ. You want to address any of that or not? Sorry, that was eight months of of two years of thoughts, actually. Okay. I I just want just a couple comments, BJ. Uh I I I take a little bit of offense when you use words like shaky or um shady. We've been above board and very outfront with all of this. Pardon me. He wasn't talking about us. I'm not talking about you guys. No, no, no. I'm talking about the process. The way you were talking about the process. So, I don't think we've done anything remotely close to that. I've been on that site, I don't know how many times. I've been with Dale on that site in his truck driving that site. Uh, so I understand the elevations are high. I've driven on your road a number of times to show what we're dealing with a number of times. Now, I haven't been in your home, but I I get a really good sense of on that road looking down it. I I understand what you're what you're seeing. I had the same problem. I I had a big field to the north of me and when North Oaks came in and put house on one story, but there were 40ft houses that were one story. Their screening was marginal at best. I went out to the expense and bought trees. I bought 40ft trees. I bought some of the trees that came down from that property and put them on my property to help me screen the houses that came in right on top of me. And these were towering over me, 40footers 20 foot off my property line and I got 10 of them right along the north side. So I understand, but I also went above and beyond to help myself with some of that screening. So there are some options for you there. And and I think Beth brought up a really good point that if if Mark Hogy did have some sort of an agreement that they were going to actually plant trees on your property, that's something the township will pursue and find out about. But right now, we can only make them put trees on their property where what under our ordinance. That's why we're trying to make sure that we get it to me. I want it done on that northwest corner before they they start. So, it's at least going to help some of the dust control. So, we're we're doing our best here, but it is an industrial site and there's going to be some some pains. And I I get it. I get where you're coming from. Okay. All right. Anybody else? Lori Winchell, 5350 Centerville Road. So, you're talking about that corner northwest lot, but my house sits down and those trees or that area needs to be protected a little further than just that corner. It needs to come down on the southwest towards the south. What? You you live down in the at the bottom of the hill there. House old house. Yep. I've had such bad exposure to dust when they were building that I actually lost my voice and had to use asthma medicine and I don't have asthma because they don't wet the ground down. They could bring a water truck in there. Well, the problem is that was brought up, but then you're going to be tracking mud out on the center of a road and it makes a mess. Doesn't have to. So, that was one of my suggestions, too. But it it it's it sounds easier than it does. Well, they need to do something. And I would appreciate the trees being extended a little further. You have to understand my property sits down. I'm looking at a wall and then I'll be looking at a parking lot with lights 24/7. And that affects my property value. And I'm real concerned about how many promises we've been given and how none of that has been actualized or really confirmed and addressed and followed through. So, that's what I have to share. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Hey, Spencer Olsson 1131 Pinehill. Um, I would just echo a lot of what BJ said. I mean, you can't really understate the impact on the neighborhood. And I think, you know, you mentioned planting some trees in the backyard. I mean, with the elevation in these houses and back, I mean, that's just not feasible because the ground is so far below the houses. And so, you know, doing that on their own properties just wouldn't make any sense because there's like a ravine in between. So, um that that just doesn't make sense. You would need um trees on top of the retaining wall to really make an impact. Um maybe I had a question though. So, why is the 20 foot variance necessary kind of in the buffer zone? Like, is that because of where the retaining wall is built or can you just help me understand that? Uh Larry, you want to handle that one? Um sure. Yes. Uh well, the trail, the proposed trail um in that corner, if you're focusing on that corner, it's the the existing retaining wall as I understand it is outside of that 20ft buffer area. But to construct a future trail in there, um we would need a variance to to do that. Okay. So the variance is just to support a trail and it would not be a boardwalk. We're we're not going to put a boardwalk in here with a with the with the boardwalk. I believe uh Larry, we didn't need the the retaining wall. Correct. Right. But we're going to we're going to insist that it's a paved trail. So, the developer was was um talking about is um to get a to if variance isn't granted, um filling the wetland to provide the buffer doesn't make sense was what he was saying. Okay. Um I mean is the root cause that the development is encroaching on the wetland or just the plans got too close so that necessitated a variance or it's the the trail location the way it's conceived right now. Okay. Um would cause that variance in that corner? But if they would have built the retaining wall further back, would there have been space for the trail without a variance? Sure. Okay. So it was a decision by them to build it right up to the edge basically mainly because when they were allowed which is their property to do the grading plan we didn't have a a plan for what they were going to do. Basically they were just grading what they could to maximize the situation. Y that's why like any developer they're going to put 100 pounds in a 20 pound sack. So yeah. Okay. Well, I'll just kind of close by saying I'd encourage just any requirements of trees, rows of trees, trees taller than a 4ft tall tree. Again, with the elevations from our houses, like some 5 foot tall trees or something just will not do anything with the angles that we can kind of see into the property. So, um, just would encourage obviously maximum screening, large trees, bushes, a wall, anything that would just kind of create some more significant buffer zone between the industrial and the residential. So, thank you. Thank you. Promise I'm not going to talk about trees. Hi, my name is Diane Pengal. I live at 1120 Pinehill Lane. I do have a couple of questions. Um, just you know, my uh my husband who used to be my boyfriend, we moved into 1120 Pine Hill Lane when we were just starting our new life all nice and fresh. Very excited to move there. Um, when we moved in, we knew that light industrial was going behind our homes. And as I've stated before, looking around White Bear Township, Light Industrial to me was smaller industrial and light industrial design is something that is about 100,000 square feet. What is coming behind us is 400,000 square feet, which is large industrial. Yes, it's been divided into plat so that this big conglomerate of buildings is now light industrial. My question is for lot A. So you guys are looking at lot one 100,000 square ft. Lot two 100,000 ft. Lot A is I believe in the north where buildings three and four will go if I'm getting that right. And lot A would have the two buildings that are un unknown right now. Correct. Three and four. So if that's the case, those would be over 200,000 square foot. 200,000 square feet. So when you're talking about um the subdivision dividing and plats, all your legal words, is light industrial actually, does that sustain plot A? Is that the right terminology to use for plot A? If it's over 200,000 square feet of building, it it's all zoned the same. It's all zone the same. Even though when you're getting over 100,000 square feet, you're starting to look at um no longer being light industrial, but large industrial. It's the use, not the size. It's the use and also the size. No, it's the use only for zoning purposes. The use only. Okay. But if you think what light industrial means, as somebody that's moving into White Bear Township, who is examples of light industrial have been of a smaller scape, it does seem to us as residents when we are moving in there that having a 400,000 400,000 square foot existence behind us does seem shocking to us, which is why we are pushing this as hard as we are. So, I understand what you're saying, but all I can tell you is that zoning code determines the use and as long as the size of the buildings conform with the others requirements in terms of density, they meet all the requirements of our ordinances. Mhm. Okay. Just a something for thought that what's behind us is not something that fits into the size of a light industrial, but something that's more along the size of 400,000 square feet. And then in regards to the path, I brought this up before. Yes, we know in the comp plan the plans have to connect between Heras and Pinehill Lane. Both Heras and Pinehill Lane end on the east side of the properties um which runs along 35WE North. And it sounds like there's a lot of work going into taking them um I'm not good at directions. Taking them west around the buildings. You have to deal with the easement and the buffers and pieces like that and taking them that northwest corner. It sounds like it's it's pretty tight over there and it's going to be hard to do screening with taking the trail that is part of the comp plan that direction. I have mentioned before if we could actually the distance of taking it just from Heras to Pineh Hill Lane along that back it just seems a much more direct route to do it. You don't have to worry about building a special boardwalk. I know you've talked about truck traffic back there and the safety, but you look at the safety of taking the plan all the way around crossing through the entrance, truck traffic coming in and out and the amount of work that's going into the easement around the northwest um the north northwest buffer. The original plan did run the trail up along the freeway. Yes. But that's gone. Right. So, I'm just saying it's something when you're considering looking at all the work that you're putting into this trail that could easily go just along the backside. Well, it can. No, that not not the way it's been developed and graded. Mhm. But again, we had these past plans that are no longer in effect. And so, as residents, you know, we don't feel like we've been heard or protected. So, I will not talk about um any um screening, but I just will let you know that we did send the proposal that some of you received from BJ out to the residents. Um we have 29 residents, including Lori and Pine Hill Lane, and 19 of them did respond um asking if that um um requesting to postpone the approval of this project until all necessary standards and regulations are fully met. that we get more information, more transparency about that what that screening is going to look like. Some of the comments were um the screening needs to be addressed before any approvals can be considered. We are not asking much to be shielded from development. Please consider what little we are asking from the township and take care. Please rethink how this has played out and how this will impact our neighborhood for the worst. The township needs to stop placating and enforce the established standards, regulation, ordinances and that protect the people living in the township. So, these are just some comments. I do have people's signatures if you would like to see those. Thank you for your time. Uh, just for the record, I little history on this property. Uh, originally when the first development came through, there was a buffer between the late industrial and those homes and it was multiple housing and it was slated for I don't remember the units. I think it was 180 unit and it was a big four-story building. So we felt that that was not a good buffer between the residents and the light industrial. That's why we pulled that out and reszoned it all industrial because just in elevations and size of the buildings that to me didn't seem like a good buffer between residents and industrial. It it would have looked peculiar there. So we took it out just to alleviate some of that height problem and traffic and whatever. So that was a compromise that the board came up with in good conscious to try to make this more palatable as a light industrial site. And now that it's light industrial, that's what you live next to. I some of the stuff we're trying to handle for you, some of the stuff is just they have the right to develop this property in the way they want. And if it's as long as they hit our ordinances, we can't say no. Now, I know that I I gave them a kudos because at our exact meeting, they have they may have a different design for that northern part, and I think that's also going to help the uh issues with the town residents. So, and but until that comes before us, it's it's just speculation. All right. Is there anybody else? Yep. You got to come back up. You're on camera and we all want to know what you're saying. Lori Winshell, 5350 Centerville Road. I just want to say I appreciate protecting the wetlands. I have my wet my piece of the wetlands are protected through the federal government, the state and Ramsey County and um to the point where I also because it's a main watershed through my little pond in that area. And so I appreciate that you're concerned and protecting those eight whatever 7 something acres of the wetlands because mine adjoins into that. So that I do appreciate and I I would like to not see more of the wetlands used for the project. Any else? Hi Karen Bakus 11:04 Pine Hill Lane. Um BJ's my next door neighbor and I'd like to uh say that we agree with everything he said. This has been a a long process that one morning we woke up and uh hundreds of trees just fell that were massive trees that blocked our view of 35W or 35E and was a buffer from the sound from 35E. So, um we have contacted uh the state highway department and asked for a a retaining wall there along the highway told that sorry when you moved in there wasn't a a retaining wall and so for therefore you do not get any kind of a sound buffer but the sound buffer and the visual buffer we had is now gone. When I look out my back window, I see 35E and I know in the future I'm going to look out my back window and see a building with cars and lights and uh sounds of trucks going up and down that hill. And um I do agree they own the land and they have the right to develop it as they wish. But I do feel that North Oaks has not been a very good neighbor to us as because all of a sudden one morning we woke up and trees were falling and we weren't notified. I don't know if they needed to notify us. That's probably the pre-plan that was approved that we didn't know about and I didn't even know when it changed to light industrial. So, um, it just feels like we are not in a neighborhood with a good group of people that would just not even consider the residents that are next to that property. And the effect of this, we spent, my husband and I uh spent yesterday powerwashing our house because our house is filthy. Our windows are filthy. I spent last fall in my house because like Lori, I couldn't breathe. It was dusty. It was dirty and I just don't feel like we're being heard. I I I I I take it you can only do so much. Um we've tried calling North Oaks. The last couple calls have gone unreturned. So um who is your contact now with North Oaks company? I want to make that clear. North Oaks company. Mark Mark Hogy. You still All right. And so, you know, we're we're older people powerwashing our house because, you know, North Oaks, are they going to pay to powerwash our house? I don't think so. But this the screening of the trees, the lights shining in our windows, and the noise, and I don't know if this is going to be a 24-hour operation, what effect that's going to have on our property. But I just want to let you know that BJ is not alone in this, that there's many homes that back up to that project. Well, just a little history, too, that they had a a nursery up on that hill. In fact, that's that's where I bought most of my trees from, but and they were, but they're almost getting too big to transplant. That's part of the reason why they couldn't even sell them. They were going to have to take them down. We do know that they moved a bunch of them over to their new development that's across Centerville for us. The smaller ones they tried to say. Correct. I beautiful trees. And so, it was not only heartbreaking to watch massive pine tree after massive pine tree go down, one right after another. And I'm talking hundreds of them that screened. And I know BJ has sent pictures to you guys of what it looked like out our back doors before they did that. And what we look at right now and we look at a dust bowl that has a wall and we're not even I don't know if any of us has any confidence when this is over that our concerns will be met with some kind of a screening. I I just feel abandoned and and where do I That's the process we're going through right now. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? Going once. Going twice. All right. I'm going to look for a motion to close the public comment portion. I'll move to close the public comment portion of the hearing. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Um staff or uh Steve, you got any other questions or concern? I I still I'm a little confused here on how we can I don't want to say make the developers put trees up over there, but I want to make sure it's in the plan on the phase one. Is that that possible with the development agreement? To the extent we require landscaping be done for this plat approval, you can make it part of phase one. Okay. And then we would have to see some sort of plan on the uh actual type of trees and how many to the extent we're allowed. Yes. And that would be done in two weeks when we do the final plat approval. Actually before you do the final plat approval. Oh, correct. All right, Steve. Well, again, I was going to say that the the biggest hangup is is this fine line of who you are and who owns the property and and the process from your phase one to ultimately phase two, which may or may not ever happen. And that's the the the worry is that it may never happen or may not happen for 5 to eight years. And it it's a barren wasteland sitting there. And you know the to the best extent as possible. I want assurances that it's going to be addressed in a better form than it currently exists. Forgetting the fact that, you know, that they knew upfront as owners of the property to the north that there was going to be some light industrial activity. I mean, I don't think that's a surprise. to what extent it's turning out might be a different issue. But I think as stated, everybody in this room realized or anticipated that there was going to be uh a buffer of sorts to the north that disappeared by the owner and and it's it's a sore spot. So, um is it you know, we get back to who owns what. So, because for now, Endeavor only owns the southern portion and North Oaks Company owns the northern portion. Actually, Endeavor is going to have to answer that question because what I'm hearing is that they don't they don't own anything yet. They have a purch for lots one and two. Correct. And with a option or probably a um a long-term purchase agreement for lots three and four, all probably contingent upon getting plat approval would be my sus my expectation. If North Oaks company is an quasi owner at this moment in time on the application and they own the property to the north, should they not be here tonight to make assurances to both parties that it's going to be taken care of? As been exp was stated, they consented to the application and there's no reason why you cannot bind. you know, you have every right, you have every authority to include some kind of landscaping plan, buffer, whatever you want to call it, uh, as part of the plenary plat approval tonight. How who pays for it, who installs it is between Endeavor and North Oaks Company, and that's probably part of their purchase agreement. All right. Well, Beth, you I guess I'm not I'm sorry. I'm hope I'm being clear here that you have the right to include a landscaping plan. The question of who does it is strictly between Endeavor and North Oak Company. All right. Is that something we would what is it action number four under the uh flat approval? That's correct. Okay. And uh Beth, would you feel comfortable if what we recommend would be township ordinance for landscaping for a light industrial or or are we going to have to get more specific? And do we have that opportunity to do that before the two weeks? Nope. We got to do it tonight. No, you can't. You can't. If you're talking about changing amending the uh light industrial to include landscaping now, it's too late. The application's in front of you. The plans are in front of you. You cannot change the rules now. Chad, if I may, Mr. Chair. No, I'm confused. This is This is awkward. Um, it feels it feels wonky to me that especially the relationship between Endeavor and North Oaks and tying either one of them to an agreement or an arrangement with the pre preliminary plat with the township beyond good faith. What do we have to enforce that between an agreement between two private parties? I we have the preliminary plat approval. The preliminary plat approval says And I get that, but I I it just it it seems apart from what it is we can or can't do. Well, okay. And maybe I'm over complicating it. No, I I I understand what you're saying, Pat, and I understand what everyone's probably thinking out there. Mhm. But it breaks down this way is endeavors come before the the town board for plary plat approval. You have the right to condition landscaping to an extent on you know as part of the plary plat approval. Now who pays for it is an issue between Endeavor and North Oaks and who executes putting it in. Well understand it's part of the final plat approval. You don't do it. You don't get your final plat approval. It just it still feels odd to me. But if you're confident in it it's not unusual. Okay. for land owners and developers to split certain costs. Now, I think I've heard some of that tonight already. Okay. So, it's not, you know, the the town can, again, you can put a landscaping plan in there. Who carries it out? Who actually pays for the price, not carries it out, who pays for it is between the private owners, the private parties. But that is part of the preliminary plat. And what you can do, we can do in the development agreement is include financing can you know a financial guarantee that if it's not done we will do it and then they will pay for it out of their letter of credit. Okay. So it's not one of these I guess my point being is financially it can't be escaped. We can design it that way. Well I I understand the developers issue. We're asking them to put trees on property they don't own. I get that. That's I think that's where but that but that's why if it goes back to the North Oaks company and they're not here to represent themselves it's and we can still put that as part of the PL. You can. Okay. That's because the it's up to them guys to figure it out. CJ, just so we're clear the we're platting the entire 56 acres while the north portion is an outlot. It's still part of the preliminary plat approval for tonight. So, we have the right, okay, we I just keep these term we. The town board has the right to condition plat approval to the extent we're allowed to for landscaping and that includes the whole site because we're platting the whole site. What's the address of this? Well, I hate we closed it to the public, so I hate kind of hate to bring it back in because we'll be here again with debating here. Um, I I think we're going to pursue what we think is right for the neighbors and let North Oak Company and Endeavor work out the the details. It's between them. And if that if that means uh extensive landscaping on that northwest corner, that would be put as a a use under the plat approval. Correct. Yes. Okay. Can I say one thing about this? You can say anything you want, Ben. All right. Well, the only thing I'd like to say is literally whoever pulled out all the trees that were behind their houses, it was far too aggressive. It could have stayed and they wouldn't be talking about it. That's the sad thing. I mean that the truth of it is cuz I've been out there, you know, there's a big drop and it's like had they left what was on the hill, they wouldn't be talking about it. It wouldn't be a problem. So, this is kind of a self-inflicted injury by North Oaks, it appears, or whoever pulled out that landscaping. It didn't need to go. I mean, I was in construction for 26 years, commercial construction. I know it didn't have to happen. Well, you're right. It's a self-inflicted wound. But keep in mind, and Jim knows what I'm talking about, and Larry too, is last summer when they brought the GL grading plan in, we put every condition we could on that grading plan that we were allowed to under both ordinances and state law. And one of the things we couldn't stop is the removal of the trees. It's their trees. It's their thing is North Oaks Company promised them a buffer and they tore it out. So it's like and you know like I said I remember the discussion and I know Mark and I went around we asked for three deep evergreens to buffer I mean the whole residential so it's like they're owed something and I would recommend that we take a look at the development agreement for Einhill and see what they agreed to do and if they breached it we'll take it from there. But that's a story for some other time. We That's exactly right. That's a story for another another night. We're already knee deep into this one. All right. Are there any other questions or comments for staff or Chad? All right, CJ, you want to start at the top with these uh five first three or variances? Yes. The first is a variance to section 66 6-2.9 of ordinance 87 for a proposed hard surface trail and retaining walls located on proposed outlot A. You may approve, deny, or table the request. And again, my opinion is no boardwalk. This is less intrusive. Um, it's still even Dale will agree it's it's better for maintenance, uh, especially long term. This variance, I guess I don't have an issue with, I don't have an issue with it for the same. So do I. All right. I need a motion for approval. I'll move to approve variance. Call it number one for the uh, trail. Is that is this resolution? Is it? It's Yeah, I would read it off the resolution so we have it exactly right. Do you want it, Steve? If I'm wrong, it would be resolution resolution approving an exception to section 6-2.9 of ordinance number 87 for 5300 Centerville Road. And I think that's enough. I know you good enough. That's for the retaining wall. Oh, excuse me. I guess CJ, I believe we have findings that support that. Yes. The following justification. The retaining walls for the trail and the proposed trail location are necessary to install the trail in a location that's outside of proposed development of future buildings on the site. And I would recommend the board when you p adopt the resolution adopt the findings as well and move to adopt the findings as noted by the engineer. Do I have a second? Second. All in favor say I. I. I. All right. Then you don't take the next one there. V a variance to section 6-2.9 of ordinance 87 for a proposed driveway access onto Centerville Road County state aid highway 59 and related retaining walls located on proposed lot one and again that there's another one that you have to have two entrances. Yeah. The findings for this um variance would be that two accesses are warranted for this site based on a traffic study of the subject property dated 48 2022. Denial of the variance would prohibit the applicant from installing a second access to this property. Well, I'll make a motion to um approve an exception to section 6-2.9 of ordinance number 87 for 5300 Centerville Road to for the proposed driveway access onto Centerville Road uh/CSHA59 and related retaining walls proposed for lot one with justification as noted. That is warning. You're adopting the again adopting the staff findings. That's correct. Adopting the staff findings. Sorry. All right. Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? I. The third is a variance to section 6-2.9 of ordinance 87 for existing retaining walls located on proposed lot 2. The finding for this would be the retaining walls are existing on the site and do not appear to have caused any issues since their installation. I'll move to approve an exception to section 6-2-.9 of ordinance number 87. Uh that uh that to ex for a proposed hard surface trail. That's what this says in retaining wall. No, that's the wrong one. That's the same one. Sorry. Yeah. You threw me in a picky one. You gave me the same one. Well, it was two of them in a packet then. Forget that one. It's the same. Uh, approve. That's a major subdivision. You What are you doing? I took it out of the package. Anyway, we're going to approve. There we go. I should have had it printed out, but it's too hard. Uh, approve exception to 6 point 6-2.9 of ordinance number 87 for 5300 Centerville Road uh for the buffer requirement as outlined under section 6.29 29 of the ordinance for existing retaining walls located in proposed lot two uh with staff findings in the justification as noted in the uh resolution acceptance. The retaining walls are existing on the site and do not appear to have caused any issues since their installation. Second. Second. Sorry. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Moving on. Number four. Fourth action is for a preliminary plat for a major subdivision request. Your options are the same. Approve with or without conditions, deny with findings for denial, or table the request for any further review or study by the township or the applicant. I think this is where uh we need to require that um screening up on the northwest corner. And I I think because if that's going to throw North Oaks company and Endeavor into a I don't want to say a fight, but who who's going to pay for what, I still think I would like to see that trail finish, too, as part of they're going to have to do screening. They finish the trail. That way, all the utilities are done, the trails are done, the screening's done in case that place sits empty for two or three years. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would suggest you do each one of those conditions separately. One is a screening, two is condu uh construction of the trail and part of phase one and the third would be utilities. So I do each one of those separately. You want to take I'd be happy to read through the nine conditions. And actually if I say when I say separately I mean as separate conditions. Absolutely. Um there are nine with your additions recommended conditions of approval. The first is the preliminary plat for park 35e is approved subject to revisions as noted in the engineering and public works memo dated 417 2025. Outstanding items required for review for final plat as noted in the engineering and public works memo dated it would be 417 2025 shall be addressed prior to the final plat approval. The proposed conservation easement and trail easement shall satisfy the parkland dedication requirements as outlined under section 9 of the subdivision ordinance. The proposed access and turn lanes off of Centerville Road 59, excuse me, shall be approved in accordance with the requirements of Ramsey County. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the township as part of final plat approval. Um under five recommended approve recommended condition 5A uh we will amend that it currently states portions of proposed trail through outlaw B and lot one shall be constructed during construction of phase one. The amendment as suggested by the board would be to complete trail construction totally with phase one. Additional agreements such as operation and maintenance and encroachment shall be approved as part of final plat. The proposed access and turn lanes shall be completed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy of building number one on proposed lot one. Condition six, the applicant shall acquire all applicable local, county, state, and federal permits for the request. Condition seven, the applicant shall pay all fee in escrow associated with this request. And an additional condition eight, landscaping plans shall be submitted for proposed outlaw A prior to final plat approval. Did I cover that last one accurately? Say that again. Landscaping plans shall be submitted for proposed outlot A prior to final plat approval. You have to specify where northwest corner uh north boundary line. I'm not sure. Well, your outlot A is the northwest corner, correct? Right. So, just you you've got it covered. I would also add and that the de applicant the developer will provide adequate financial uh guarantees that the landscaping plan will be completed. Would that be a part of the development agreement? I would say so. Yes. Oh, it would be part of the development group necessary. Yeah, it would be, right? That satisfy the board. It does. I know it's not going to satisfy the neighbors, but we're doing our best here with the motion. The findings would be findings 1 through 8. 5A is amended and 8 is amended as well. Right. Now, how do we Is that your motion, Steve? I was gonna say I'll make that motion based on what the uh town engineer just laid out as the conditions. I have a second. Um, just out of idle curiosity, would we not want to table this till we get it all ironed out? We can't. No. No, you don't. Well, we could. You could. You could, but you don't have to because you're you're conditioning preliminary you're conditioning final plat approval upon a landscaping plan which the town agrees to. So that's the condition of final plat approval. So everybody's got a shot at they have exactly they have to come with a they have to come up with a landscaping plan that satisfies the town with but within the boundaries of our existing ordinances. So, we can't we have to stay within the within within the within the boundaries of our existing ordinance, but we can require that the company landscaping plan as a condition of final plat approval. All right, then I'll second it. All right, motion made second. All in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. All right, last one. TJ. Your final action item is for the permitted use standards permit to allow for offices and warehouseing uses to be permitted on the site. Any questions with that one? No, I'm fine with that one. The findings for this resolution are listed in your zoning ordinance. Findings number 1 through 15. Finding I'll read finding one because it has specific dates. The following plans are incorporated by reference. Exterior render renderings dated 1312025. Preliminary plat dated 44 2025. Civil plans dated 44205. Landscaping plan and details dated 4425. Centerville Road CSH59 improvements dated 10 to 2024. If you'd like me to read the next 13, I can. No, as long as we have them in the record. They are in the packet and provided to you in the ordinance as well. Okay. Simply adopt this the staff findings which we have this one through 15. One through 15. Exactly. Thank you, CJ. All right. That's a motion, Steve. You bet. Beth. Yes, you can make it and I'll second it. Don't make me repeat it if you mind. And that includes a development agreement. Correct. The township shall receive a signed maintenance agreement prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy. Oh, maintenance. This is a permitted use permit of security. Yeah. A you'd like to add that as well? A development agreement. Yes. Additional finding number 16. Um the applicant shall submit a shall execute a development agreement uh in the form provided by the township. That would be findings 1 through 16. Your motion I'll amend that my motion to include up to 16 is second. All right. Motion made second. All in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. All right. Thanks everybody. Um going to move to close this whole thing. We have no added agenda items. We do have an open time. We didn't close out. You got to close that. Did I? You forgot to close the whole thing. Oh, all right. I need a motion to close the public portion of the hearing. Open. Just wait a minute. I'll I'll make motion to close the the uh public hearing. I'll second. All favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Now we're done. Now, if you had open time, if you want to come up, name and address, please. Uh, Olivia Delaney, 3983 Wiper Parkway. Okay. Um, I volunteered as a preliminary representative to kind of figure out what the request process would look like for this um for myself, my husband, and our neighbors on Parkway. Um the railroad continues to bulldo the area in front of Parkway which I understand is within their control. Um when we've called the township to understand what can be done what we have been told is that the area that is mowed in front of Parkway is within the township's control and everything beyond that is the railroads. What we would like to request and what I'd like to understand what would be needed to submit that request is that trees be planted along Parkway to cover up that section that continues to get bulldozed and is a big eyesore. I just came that way on my way here. How far down is that? I guess um right around the curb. Okay. All right. I was more concerned looking at the the the big buildings here. All right. So, I guess I didn't even notice. It's around the curve around state tool. So once you get into the kind of the straight shot, that's the entrance to the Oakme neighborhoods and whatnot right across from railroad tracks. Um there used to be a lot of mature um kind of bushes, trees, wild flowers. Um and I think just because of the maintenance that they've started to do more regularly, they've continued to bulldoze that and every couple of months it looks like crap. Um, and we would like to request putting in trees in intervals to beautify that road basically. Um, it's an effect on property values. Um, we're not requesting that any mature trees be put in. Um, they have an a a near identical situation in Roseville across from the oval in the police station of there's a not so good-looking railroad track uh section of mowed grass that I assume belongs to Roseville the city and they've put in flowering trees that look really nice. Yeah. What's Yeah. What's the rightway of the road would be about 15 ft behind that curb that would be in town and then it's all rail. So you do you have any idea how much the town owns from the rightway up to their rightway? Well, typically it's 15. I'd have to verify. I was going to say why why don't you staff just take a look at this and see what makes recommendations and bring this board. the park board. Correct. And yeah, I think it belongs at the park board, but um you're more than welcome to come and and do that, but I think he's public works director, so he he could look into we get some more information on it because it's a little vague as to how much we really own there in my opinion. So So who is the park board not a part of? It is. It's one of our it's one of our advisory groups. Okay. Uh they meet the third third Thursday, second or third. But if you talk to Patrick, uh, he can get you the the information on it. Sounds good. Yeah, it's it for the argument of property value. Um, same argument that was made when the curbs got put in in 2019. Um, and what I believe will be significantly less costly, especially when we're talking about small trees um, that we let mature. Um I know there's power lines overhead. Um and there's only the 15 or so section of curb. Um but I actually went out to Roseville. Um it's the same amount of space um that they have those trees planted and they have power lines overhead. So I think it would be um a really nice addition to not just Parkway, but for all of the folks that live in the neighborhoods back there where that's a part of their daily commute as the We appreciate you bringing that. That that's good. We have an arborist we'd work with to you know if it's heightwise of things and so so I should take that to the parks board can set you up decision on bring back to this group too if if the park board agrees that it's something we should look at then obviously it would be coming here for ultimate approval but the only thing I can add when you're under power lines they generally require you to be ornamental can't grow over 15 and that's the flowering there's a restrict really big it'll mow them down to I would almost I would almost assume not Uh, miniature is the wrong word, but the ones they have inar. Yes, dwarf. I kind of think they're uh, if I were to take a guess, I think they're dwarf apples. And they are. And they're He's right there. 15 ft. Prairie fires are probably the best most resistant to Yeah. So, there's an example of this being done with a type of tree that it's a great choice. Yeah. I would say if we move forward with this, we just had a a we just purchased trees. Residents had a chance to purch fires were one of those. Oh, okay. And so if that goes if it they agree with it, might include it with our plans for next year and have the township just get into that if we're going to buy them. Okay. We'll talk to the park. Um and I'll get the information from you because I'm assuming that will probably be the meeting then that the neighbors will want to go to since it sounds like that's kind of the first gate. If you decide to come take you if you got a picture of what went on in Roseville, that's visualization always helps. Yeah, they're they're really good looking. they're not taking up that much space. And again, you know, we've kind of talked as the neighbors along that stretch and um not trying to make this too costly, but we would really love to make it happen because we're going to be living there for a while. So, all right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Anyone else for open time? I got comment to make it. Oh, Ralph is here. Okay. Ralph Tilma, 4294 Oakme Lane. Uh, I know what she's talking about because I've talked directly with Minnesota Commercial who owns or leases that track. And what they put in there was an access road, but they did a crappy job of it. What they did is go in there with a front end loader and push along like this until they got a big clump of dirt and grass and uh brush and then just push it into a pile on the side and then keep going and do that over and over again. And I said, "Well, why are you doing this?" Well, we need an access road to get to that switch. And I said to him, you can't walk to it or can't drive down the end and just walk up and get to it. No, we got to have an access. Remember who you're dealing with, Ralph. You remember who you're dealing with. Railroads do what they do. They have every reason to do it. They just did a crappy job of it. That surprises you. They I know why they did it and they have every right to do it. It's their property and whatever. Um, I just have a question about the legacy owners of the property that is turned out to be such a contentious thing. Does this go back to the Hill Farm? Is this part of the Hill Farm originally or is this property that North Company bought or um you talking about the park 35 that we just discussed? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That was all that was all Hill property. So, it was Hill property and then it moved over to the Well, I think maybe you could explain a bit, but I think North Oaks LLC is a subsidiary of the Hill um foundation or whatever it is. So, it wasn't something they bought on speculation. They were Okay. No. Um and there's only one more large chunk on Centerville Road that is still up for development on the township side. Yeah. on the township side. Okay. Thank you. North of H2, if you're interested. Okay. What? Checking with you. Thanks, Rob. All right. Anyone else? I I got one comment to make to the students. Um, for the students that are here tonight, you it's a rather long meeting compared to what we normally have, but thank you for taking the time to show your civic interest in local government. Township government is different than city government. Uh there are three members of a elected board that represent the entire township, not different sections of of an area. Precincts. Yes. Like city has precincts. Townships do not. It's a grassroots form of government. So you saw grassroots government working tonight. So thank you for attending. And you picked the wrong meeting. I didn't want to say that, but that's true. You picked the law wrong. No. So when we're all done, if you want to bring your papers up, we can uh we'll sign them for you. All right. All right. If there's no one else for open time, I need a motion to receive a general material and supplements. So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I need a motion to adjourn at 855. So moved. Second. All in favor? I. We are journ.