All right, we'll call the meeting to order at 7 o'clock for the February 19th, 2025 Whitebear Township board meeting. First item on the agenda is the approval. I talked to Patrick. He's going to be a couple minutes late. He had no changes of anything. I had no additions or deletions. The only uh addition I'd make is apparently was BBT was reported. Yeah, we'll get to when we do the minutes. Okay. Sorry. All right. Well, if there's no changes to the agenda, I need a motion to approve. Move to approve the agenda. Second. All in favor? I. All opposed? All right. Item three is approval of payment of the bills. Do you sign off? I signed off. Um move approved to payment of the bills. A second. Motion's made in second. All in favor? I. All opposed. All right. Uh item four is approval of the prior minute meetings. This is from February 3rd, 2025. Beth, you have a correction? Yep. Instead of the BBT, it should be the BBT with Do you have a page on that, Steve, or not? Uh it was early on. She can find it. It was actually right, you know, early on uh the last time. Yeah, it's it's in the approval of the minutes of the January 22, 2025 paragraph. That's right. Because we couldn't do it. Yep. Is correct. So, there any other corrections? No. Hearing none, I need a motion to approve. So moved. Second. All right. Motion made second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Item five is the consent agenda items. We have six. Uh, does the board wish to pull any or do they all look fine? They look fine to me. Move to approve the consent agenda. Second. Uh, all in favor say I. I. All opposed. That motion carries. All right. Item six is old business. We are Rice Creek Wershed District Grant application. Dale, are you going to cover that for us? Yes. Uh I we were fortunate enough to be uh we submitted two grants in December. We were notified in early February that we're uh reviewing them and going to be uh approving them for the town here. Yeah, you have to speak up a little. I'm sorry. I thought I was speaking up loud enough. Can you hear me now? Yep. All right. So we we have uh two grants that we submitted for in early dece in December and then in early February we were notified that two Afghans were recommended by the city advisory commission to move forward to the board of managers and last week the board of managers on the 12th of February had a meeting to review and discuss the applicants and there were five from five different five applications from four different cities. The township had two applications in there for a grant and they were uh they were all approved as going forward for the board of managers to to finalize here in the the 20 uh coming up the day 26th of uh February at their meeting. And what is in there is that we have a grant amount. We have a a project that's for 475,000 the total project cost. The Rice Creek uh Board of Managers approved $100,000 grant for that project. And then we had a that is the Bair Beach storm water project which is an underground container storage system under what would be the where the current parking lot is and then and then other improvements along with that within the park. storm water improvements, the pond and um connecting to that. And then we have the other one for the Silver Fox area, Saffle Baffles. Um that was the original amount we requested was 73,250 and they ended up approving 50,000 for that project. Uh I'm here to just get a feel for the board if they want to move forward with these grant applications. Uh, I will then and I'll make I will let the Rice Creek Wershed District staff know that we still want to pursue these based on the projects. Dale, can you uh review the FAF baffle? It's a it's a structure with a baffle inside it. It it captures sediments and floatables and then the water spills over into a another portion that it discharges. See, they're on retention ponds. Well, they're not a a a basin is a structure. Okay. Yeah. That's got a retention a level of retention. Yes. All right. Steve, any questions or comments? Um the one at uh Belair Beach just for clarity purposes. Sure. When you get a grant that's not 100% grant, correct? That is correct. So this would be a cost sharing. And have we priced out? You want to know if we're going to go forward? Well, I I don't know if we know what is what we're looking at. How much is it? A 1/3 or 50/50. The grant is about 20% of the cost. Yes, it's a $475,000 project. I have spoken with our partners that based on the Southshore the project from Southshore Boulevard there was a distribution of the cost for maintenance of the storm system at at Bair Beach between Ramsey County White Bear Lake say White Bear Lake and the township the percentages were Ramsey was 13% city was 29% and the township was 58%. So that if that number adds up to 100, but the the uh I've talked to our partners about participating with it and they I haven't heard back from Ramsey County, but they were they obviously they were in support of they sent letters in for letters of support for the project, but it's now it's just a matter of can they get it in their next year's budget that we could get reimbursed for that portion. So at this point you're you're we're you just have to let Rice Creek know that we're interested in pursuing this, but we haven't got any firm agreements with our partners or will or whether even the township is willing to go forward with it. Yeah. And that's what the reason I'm here to to ask that question of the board is their desire to move forward with that project based on the 100, you know, 20% or $100,000 that Rice Creek is uh grant to help offset the cost. And the main I'm sorry it takes so much time. The main purpose for this is really to improve the storm water as before it goes into White Bear Lake itself. Um and we've looked at this in the past but it was cost prohibitive alone for us alone. Correct. So we look for grant funding and we got we've got the opportunity here of 100,000 which is the maximum that Rice Creek offers on any one grant annually. Okay. Beth, questions, comments? No, I do not. Well, I don't see any disadvantage to pursuing this. Obviously, I mean, these are projects that were slated that were we're going to try to get done anyway. So, any help we can get would be beneficial to us. Uh what is the time table for their grant commitment? Is it the calendar year? This year, 2025. So the project would have to be funded in 2025. Correct. Makes sense. And I've checked with the finance offer and we have funding available to cover those costs for the storm in the storm fund and and the timing for Belair real quickly for Bair Beach is because the parking lot itself needs is deteriorated and we've been waiting to figure out other options before we tear it up and have to tear it up a second time. So didn't want new parking lot in and then have the construction of the storm water and we want to take advantage of this opportunity for underground storage before as an option prior to move moving forward with the parking lot. I know when you apply for grants um and you get them, it's kind of hard to resend after you've been accepting them. What happens if our partners don't want to participate? Do we have to have a verbal or some sort of written agreement before we continue? Uh we technically we have that agreement. It's based on the Southshore model that we had for Southshore Boulevard. The drainage for that they had the that's the county came up with that percentage based what kind of an agreement. It's a a maintenance agreement for that just that system. Yeah. And have you had a chance to look at that or not? Yeah, I've read them. Okay. I'm just concerned because like I said when you apply for grants and if there's any kind of a hiccup we're still on the hook that we would be funding the project up front and then seeking all right as long as we do our due diligence and we've got paperwork in front of us so we know that these parties are committed because like Steve said I know Ramsey County can be kind of wishy-washy on a lot of this stuff. So the conversation with the county representative was good and felt that they both and as indicated in the letter they both level of support for this project. All right. So is this just a u anformational or do you want do you need an actual motion to proceed? I guess I'd like a yes a motion to from the board to proceed with accepting the grant from Rice Creek Wershed District. Well, if the board's comfortable. Yeah, I'm I'm comfortable because, you know, these are both projects that are very beneficial to storm water and the township as in general. Uh I'll make a motion to uh go forward with the Rice Creek wershed district grant application process. And I'd also like this to be an item for the executive meeting next week so we can talk a little bit more of the details. Same time. I can second that. All right. Motion made second. All in favor? I. All opposed. All right, moving on. Items. We have a couple of public hearings. First is I 7A. This is Portland Woods Street Improvement 2024-2. Um, I'm going to need a motion to wave the reading. I'll move to wave the reading that was properly published. A second. All in favor say I. I. I. I. All opposed. Then I need a a motion to open up the public hearing. I'll move to open up the public hearing. A second. All in favor say I. All opposed. All right, Larry, are you going to give us an overview on this? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair and town board. I have a a short slideshow that I'll run through and and then we can open up to the public. Um, so Portland Woods, just to give a little bit of background on Portland Woods, it's uh located off of Portland Avenue. Um, this uh street appears was a was a private street that the town board took over at some point down the line. Originally constructed in 1988, had some several seal coats on it. Um, residential property, all all residential property. It's a real short roadway, just a tenth of a mile. Um, and then it has a a pavement rating of uh 0.8 today. Um if you recall the the pavement rating we the town board rates their streets over once every three or four years they rate all the streets and uh in this case 2025 rating 0.8 eight out of five um from 0 to five. And typically when we see ratings below two, we are looking at uh a larger improvement um that would be needed to bring that street into a um a good condition. Um it has concrete curb and gutter already. Um B612 curb, but it's irregular. it uh um in some cases it's the height is uh it varies. It's a little bit odd type of curb construction when it was originally built. The street width out in uh Portland Woods is 21 ft wide. Um but depth is uh 5 to 8 1/2 in and there's been some patching on the roadway just to keep things together. Um so we did a feasibility study and that feasibility study um first we collect data including geotechnical exploration doing soil borings to see what the soil composition is like pavement cing to understand the uh pavement depths. Um we look at wetland delination. We review all the the storm water um in the area. We look at the utilities to see what um might be needed for utility improvements. Um and then we also take uh public feedback in the form of questionnaires that were sent to the public and then neighborhood meetings for the project. And then we begin to study the improvements and offer um um the town board options to uh complete improvements. We perform cost calculations um look at funding for the project assessments and then a schedule for the project. So based on that uh review and the report the feasibility report we're recommending a reclamation um where we're grinding and mixing the batuminous to the um gravel underneath to form a new base, remove the excess material and uh repave. We're also um proposing to replace that cer that irregular curb and gutter on the project. Um we looked at increasing the width 21 ft is is under the township standard. Um but when we reviewed the rightway the utilities and you can see on this photograph uh the large trees that are near the road um we're recommending keeping the width as it is. Um, and then we're recommending replacing the the irregular curb with a um kind of a surmountable curb style. You can see a a cut section of what that surmountable looks like. It has a 3-in um um back to it and it's drive over everywhere. So, if if if uh um you know, someone is parked on the roadway, it's it's not a wide roadway. people could still get around with a larger vehicle um getting around that vehicle. Um so public comment, we had uh um we had the questionnaires which we received uh a number of questionnaires on the project. is a small project, not a lot of homes on the on the project. And we held a neighborhood meeting on November 13th and again in February on November 13th, there was one person from the um prop or from the neighborhood that attended. Um for our February meeting, nobody attended. Um but the concerns we heard based on the questionnaires and uh um the November meeting um some specific drainage or no specific drainage issues were reported. Um they were suggesting and encouraging surmountable curb and then of course there's concerns with uh speeds on I think Portland and Highway 96. So, looking at the cost for this project, um we've uh computed the street improvement cost to replace the curb and gutter or repave. Um and we're computing uh 462,000 total for the project. Of course, those those uh there's assessments that go along with street improvement projects in the township, and those assessments are distributed to the property owners um the benefiting property owners on the project. And we're um proposing an assessment at this point of $12,000 for each residential unit, which would be confirmed with appraisals that are currently being performed. Um, and then those assessments either can be paid off or paid down at the time they are assessed, which would be the fall of uh this year if the project moves forward, or they can be rolled onto your taxes for a period of 10 years with uh with interest. All all units are assessed the same rate per unit. Um, and corner locks through the assessment policy are assessed at a half a unit each for for each improved side. In this case, there's there's one street, so half a unit. Um, so kind of looking at the assessment costs of the $462,000 on the project, $369,000 of that is um accessible. Um, we've got eight and a half units on this project. um multiplying 8 and a half by $12,000 is $102,000 of the assessments um um of the of the total cost. This is assessment map for the project. You can see kind of the irregularity of the roadway. Um there are each property again is assessed um one unit each other other than the property at the corner of uh on the south side of that and we're proposing one and a half units based on the frontage and the area of the property that could be it could be subdividable the property. You ask well why why not the property on the north side? Well, that north side there's a a wet land or um storm water pond or I think it's wet land on the on the north side which would consume that other half unit. So, we'd propose a one unit on the north side and one and a half on the south side as at the entrance of of Portland Woods and then the rest are assessed one unit each. So, this is the funding table. Um assessments uh account for the 102,000 uh of the project costs. The rest are come from other funding or township levy, including 267,000 for um township funds and levy funds. Um water utility fund would cover any water um hydrant improvements and valves 65,000. sanitary utility fund would cover the the storm or san storm sanitary sewer casting work and the storm fund would cover 21,000 for storm water improvements. Um the communications on the project is we have a number of avenues to communicate with uh property owners on this project and really our clearing house for information is on the town website which is listed there for this project. there's a dedicated page to this project and so any information um that is uh um for this project can be found there. Um we have we've sent out the questionnaires. We've had the neighborhood meetings. Um if the project moves forward, we will do a a project newsletter which will have a lot of information about construction, um the schedule, um contact information, um frequently asked questions, a lot of information on that um that newsletter that would go out if the project moves forward and it they're we're getting ready for construction. We also have uh daily updates that people can sign up for receiving or they can visit that website to see those daily updates. And then and then of course with these projects, they're in in these neighborhoods and in front of homes. Um people want to know the impacts and um you know there'll be an inspector available to um meet with people, understand their concerns or if uh there's um access concerns, uh deliveries or graduation parties, we want to know that so we can try to work with property owners on the project. Um so project schedule, we're right here kind of in the middle with the public hearing tonight ordering the project and if it moves forward we would hold another um openhouse meeting with the residents to uh view the plans as they uh um are completed and it' probably be the late March maybe even early April at this point to uh view the plans and that would be an open type house type format where people can come in at any time in a in a window um to to view the plans and and look at their property. Um with approval of the plans, we would go out for bid and get uh um bids for the project. In May, we'd um award a a project to a contractor, assuming we get good bids for the project, construction in the summer, and then that assessment hearing in the fall um when the work is completed. So, tonight we're we have several requested actions uh um opening the public hearing, receiving public comment, and then um if appropriate, the board feels it appropriate order improvements. In this case, uh, a super majority is needed. Four-fifths votes. Um, because there's three board members, that would mean all all uh board members would need to vote for the ordering the improvements. Um, and then give any details that you wish um to us on the design and then authorized preparation of plans and specs. So, those are the requested actions and uh I'm happy to take any questions you may have. That's no not right now. Steve, the uh project in and it of itself as far as the street rating, the degradation rating is this fall in line with all of our other projects that we've been doing from year to year to year. As far as the rating level, I mean it's one at point8, it's very low. 0.8 is um is on the lower end. Um so we, you know, when we're doing um reclamation or reconstruction of projects, they're really they're under that two, that level two. Um but really when they fall under one, it's really it's really time. We spend more than it's worth to maintain the street at this point. It's time to make your repairs. And you saw some of the the photograph here with the patching. Um when you're doing the skin type patching on the roadway to keep it together, um now the township is expending funds to hold things together, it's an indication that um you might want to look at a larger improvement. And with that rating and and deterioration with our weather here, it's it's could go rather quickly to even worse. Yeah. Yeah, I mean these these patching doesn't doesn't hold up over a long time. No other questions. Uh Larry, the one corner lot, uh I think you said it was one and a half assessment. Yes. Would that one be stubbed out for an extra lot if they if you figured out where it would be subdivided when all this work is done? Would it be stubbed for sewer and water? It maybe already stubbed for sewer and water. I don't know if Dale if you know that but yeah I don't I don't know but I mean obviously that's the time to do it if there's if if if it's even possible to split the lot then it wouldn't be something that would have to be done afterwards right and then um the cost for the assessments where does that run percentage wise for the the job I know we try to we have to assess at least 20 we try to stay under 30 or so Yes, in this case um with this calculation and again we're hoping for better bids than maybe we're estimating now, but we're right now at 22%. 20 what? 22%. 22. All right. Which which falls in line with our policy. So that actually that's pretty good if we get that bid in. All right. I have no further questions of staff. Um if there's no other questions from the board, I need a motion to open it up for public comment. I'll move to open the uh the hearing up for public comment. I'll second the motion. Motion's made in second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Is there anyone here that would wish to speak to this project, the Portland Wood Street Improvements? No one. Going once, going twice. All right. I need a motion to close the portion. I'll move to close the public portion of the hearing. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. Well, if there's no other questions, what's pleasure of the board? Well, I'll move based on the town engineers review and recommendation adopt the resolution ordering the improvement and the resolution ordering preparation of plans and specifications. Need to separate them or are they together? I would do them separately. Okay. So, I'll adopt make a motion to in recommendation to adopt the resolution ordering the improvements. A second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. And then I'll make a second motion based on the town engineer review and recommendation for the resolution ordering preparations of plans and specifications. I have a second. I'll second. Motion's made in second. All favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. That motion carries. Moving on. We have another public hearing. This one's for Anderson Lane Street Improvements 2024-3. Want to go over this one there? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair and town board. Um so Anderson Lane reconstruction is another short roadway um culde-sac in the township. Um from what we can gather from records original originally constructed in 1986. There was a utility project in 1999. Um several seal coats again in that 20 2005 and 2011 time frame. Again this is all residential property. This one's uh this roadway is a/4 mile in length. um a similar rating to Portland Woods, a 0.7 in today's rating. Um it has uh um a little bit of batuminous curbing I think may have been added later, but that's been failing and eroding. Street width on this roadway is 22 feet wide and the um batuminous is only two inches thick in uh its depth which uh is contributing to the degradation. Uh so again uh you know we do a a study of the area. I won't walk through all these steps again, but um I'm reviewing all the information gathered for the project. Then we perform our um study of the area, cost calculations, funding, and assessments for the project. Um and in this case we're again recommending reclamation for the project reclaiming grinding and mixing that patuminous into the thickness of the existing gravel and uh paving over that. We're also recommending adding concrete curb and gutter which I'll talk about a little bit more here. And then also increasing from the 22 feet in width to 28 ft in width. Um the picture on the screen shows what a how a 28t wide roadway looks with uh parking and maneuvering a emergency vehicle through that through that street. Um we're also recommending addition of of uh a little bit of storm sewer to improve the drainage on the on the project and we'll talk a little bit more about that. Um, and then I I just wanted to mention that uh uh we did receive uh two petitions on the project which uh I'll I have a slide dedicated to that as well. Um so let's talk a little bit about concrete curb and gutter. Portland Woods already had concrete curbon gutter, but I want to talk a little bit about Anderson Lane and adding concrete curbon gutter. Um and we again would be recommending that surmountable style curb um for the area and and really that I want to talk about some of the advantages of concrete curb and gutter. I know with the petitioning some the res some of the residents or most of the residents do not want curbon gutter. Um but really the advantages of curbon gutter are really to protect the road and control drainage. So when we don't have curb and gutter on a street like this, as you can imagine, the the water flows to that edge and you know it sits sits sits sits against the edge of the road if there's not good drainage off of it. Sometimes over time those that area next to the next to the road builds up with uh vegetation and then that water just sits on that edge and um you know then the garbage trucks comes by and and that saturated edge can starts to break off. So really what we're trying to do with uh and recommending concrete curbing gutter is to control that drainage getting it um away from the edge of the road and into um catch basin inlets. And um by doing that and building this road properly um you know we're trying to get a good long life out of the street, trying to get a 60-year life out of the street with proper seal coating, crack sealing, and strategic mill and overlays along the way. And so just building the street properly, getting that drainage off the street because that that drainage is really the enemy of the street. It causes, you know, that freeze thaw cycle to break things apart and um that that edge control and getting that edge to to stay intact is is the advantage. So you know, curbon gutter controls drainage, defines the street, reduces that edge failure, reduces plow damage, and improve aesthetics. So the graphic down below is uh is just shows the uh storm sore we'd be recommending for the street. There's an existing covert on the um eastern edge near the culde-sac that brings drainage or um allows drainage to pass underneath the street. uh we'd look at replacing that and then adding catch basins that are tied into the curb and gutter to get the drainage off the street into the catch basins and then um away from the street. Um, and then we also have additional catch basins that we we would recommend um near Centerville Road that would be added to control drainage and tie in either to the pond or to the culvert that's on the uh um near Centerville Road. And again, we'd have catch basin inlets that would get that drainage into the piping and away from the street. All right. Uh so public comment we had um two neighborhood meetings and the questionnaires as we mentioned with the previous project. Um the both neighborhood meetings were very well attended. Um a lot of good discussion at both meetings and um just walking through the their project and their requests. And so some of the current concerns we heard is um specific drainage issues. Um construction traffic um with uh construction of a nearby development. Some construction traffic may have um um used Anderson Lane and contributed possibly to some of that um degradation in the later stages of the of the roadway. Um the culde-sac uh concerns that the culde-sac is not large enough. Um some early on question the the project need or need for the project. Um, Centerville Road concerns at times taking a left out of Anderson Lane onto Centerville Road is a challenge with the traffic on Centerville Road. Um, we heard some specific utility concerns. Um, concerns about access and mail during construction and then costs and assessments um were a large concern for the the neighborhood. Um so I'll talk a little bit about the petitions we received. Um the first uh or first request was requesting assessments no more than 25% of the project costs. Um with our and we received these petitions before the study was completed. Um the study based on the costs that we are computing now we're about 24%. So, um, it may change, that percentage may change as you get bids, but, um, that's kind of where we're sitting sitting right now. Um, they request a mill and overlay. I think that might have been before. They realize we only have 2 in of batuminous and that really a mill and overlay is not feasible with only 2 in of batuminous. And we are in terms of uh degradation past the point where we could just do an overlay on top of the two inches. Um then they requested no widening and no curb and gutter. Okay, we'll get into some of the costs. Um in this project, uh we've computed costs of 961,000 for the project. Um, and again, this slide is similar to the last project, but assessments are uh distributed to property owners, and we're looking at the same type of assessment, $12,000 for each residential unit. And if uh people at in the fall of uh this year, if the project moves forward, can either pay down or pay off that assessment amount at that time, or it can be distributed onto your taxes for a 10-year period with interest. Again, all units are assessed the same amount of the $12,000. Corner lots are half a unit for each improved side. Um, of this two 961,000, 765,000 is accessible um to the property owners, we have 19.5 total accessible units at $12,000. The the preliminary assessment amount is $234,000 for the assessment portion of the project. This is the assessment map. It includes a basically a per unit for each property other than the corner lot. Um in this case, it's similar to Portland Woods. the the but the north corner is a subdividable and so we have a half a unit for the corner and one unit for another unit for that property. The property to the south has a wetland or ponding on the corner. So we'd be looking at one unit for that property. Um, it should be noted that the township owns a a a piece of property along this uh frontage and one unit is assigned to the township of that of those 19 and a half units. So, this is our funding uh table for the project. Um, you can see assessments 234,000. Um, township funds are levy to the rest of the um township 531,000. And then again, the water fund picks up the water improvements uh for um valves um and hydrant work. Um sanitary utility fund picks up costs for the manhole adjustments and and uh rings and castings. And the storm utility fund would cover the cost for the new storm sewer that we'd be proposing for the project. Um this slide similar to the last project is uh we have a project website dedicated to this project that town um uh residents can review and and gather information about this project. Um again we have our neighborhood meetings and questionnaires. We've been been interacting with this neighborhood a bit. Um project newsletters. Again, if the project moves forward, we um prepare a newsletter to be distributed to all the property owners with contact information, emergency contact information, schedules, um and frequently asked questions. Again, of course, uh individual meetings are always encouraged if there's concerns for the project along the way and uh or if there's special needs, deliveries, or grad parties that are occurring. We want to know about those things. Um, this would follow same similar schedule where uh if uh the project is ordered tonight, we would um work on the plans and specs and bring those back to the the neighborhood at another meeting to for uh discussing how the the plans or how the the plans are shaping up and affect property properties. Um with appro once the plans are completed we'll go out to bid and and look at award word of a project to a contractor in May start construction uh soon thereafter in the summer and then the assessment hearing in the fall. Again uh requested actions looking to open the public hearing receive public comment um order the improvements. Again a super majority is needed four fifths votes in other words all three. um and give us direct give direction on the project details. If there's a um if the town board wishes to change from the re recommendations we're giving you in terms of street width or concrete curb and gutter um sorry about that um give us the give us that direction and then you know authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications and that's all I have and happy to take any questions you might have. Beth, you got to have questions on this one. Surprised at the cost, of course. Kind of shocked. How did it end up being two inches? I mean, it was Yeah, that's spec. I mean, I was kind of shocked at that. I know. Um, that is uh in today's today's world, we use three and a half to 4 in of batuminous and even our our driveway standard is 3 in. So, um I don't think I've ever worked on a project that had 2 in. That's why I was so surprised. Yeah. And it appears that has contributed to the degradation. Oh, I can imagine it would. Yeah. Um do you anticipate that cost would be down? Like what do you think the competition's going to be for contractors? Yeah, I mean we like to think we are um on the higher side at this point with our estimates because um we don't want to give you surprises of a higher bid, but sometimes, you know, at times the the competition um can bring those costs down or if there's too much work and there's saturation um those costs can be more. So, we we like to think that we're on the high side at this point. Um, I re I we received bids on another project in another community this week and um it was a $2.6 million estimate we had and it was uh 2.2 was the bid we received. So something. Yeah. Okay. Well, I can see where you're going with it and I can see why you want to do it. I have to admit I'm still really shocked at the cost, but I guess that's always the way it's going to go. Yeah. As I said with the other project, the the rating is it's in line for absolutely needing work. Second question is going from a 22 to 28 foot width. If you left it alone, does it change the assessment at calculation at all for a house? That's a good question. It was asked at the neighborhood meetings as well. Um, that would be up to the appraiser to tell us that. I don't know that it would change it too much. I mean, these assessment by an appraiser is based on improvement value to the property owner. Mhm. So whether it's 22 or 28, I guess my value or my thought is it's not going to make any difference and it's in our right it's in township right away. You're not taking property. Correct. Correct. Another question I guess. Does the road run right down the middle then? So there's for the most part. Um three feet on each side. That's what we propose. Yeah. And then does this road drain both ways? Is high in the middle going both ways or um it it's high in the middle. It drains both ways down from the culde-sac down to uh um this area and from this high point down toward Centerville Road. Right. And then uh similar to like um Silver Fox Road, those assessments were fairly high. So the board has the privy of looking at some other fundings that we have available to us that might affect the assessment costs, but we're not going to know until we go through this process, get the bids, and then see how we can work with that. But so obviously this 12,000 number is a hardcore number, but it can come down. It can't go up, but it can come down. And that's kind of something that the board here can negotiate if we feel that it's necessary to get the numbers down. Myself personally, uh we made a commitment 5 years ago when we started this project that curb and gutter is essential especially for water control because of our lawsuit with this with the lake level. We are under a microscope on how we count every drop of water that comes into the township or leaves the township. And this this is some way we this is the the best way we can to control that. So I I I guess I I I kind of want to stay with that curb and gutter issue. The width once you tear the whole road up, I can't believe it's going to be that much of a saving to go another six feet. You've already got that whole area under construction. So I don't know if it's it it is a public safety issue. I mean, what's our minimum in the in the township? Well, we like to get 28, right? But I mean, when it's available, I I think that's it'd be prudent for us to at least do that. Yeah, there are other streets, as you know, in the township that are under that 28. Well, we've got some areas where they're very narrow, but yeah, there's rightway issues. In this case, we don't have that issue. Right. So, if we if there's an advantage or if there's a chance of doing that, I guess I'd like to see that done. But, uh, I think um I think that's all I had. Uh, did we do this? Did we wave it? I don't think we did it. Why did we know before we I don't know if we waved the reading. We might have jumped right into it. I think we'll go back and uh Steve, you want to make that motion? Yeah, I'll I'll make a motion that the that this uh hearing was properly published in the newspaper and wave the reading. Have a second. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. I. Okay. Move that to the front. I move to the front and and we've opened the public hearing already. I'll make a motion to open the public hearing since we really didn't do that either. I don't believe I haven't been here long enough to help you either. All right. Backwards. We're doing it backwards. You don't want us to start to get into this. So, I'm I'll move to open the public hearing, which we've already had the presentation by our engineer. Um, I'll second it. All right. All in favor? I I Now we can do the other part. All right. Now, we need a motion to open up the public portion. I'll make a motion to open the public comment portion of the hearing. I'll second. All in favor? I. Okay. Now, I can have neighborhood response. You'll have to come up to the podium with your name and your address for the record if you want to speak to this. Who gets the short straw? Back up here. Name is Reed Walstead, 1094 Anderson Lane. And my issue is the road is wide enough the way it is. It might be uh needed as three no parking signs on one side of the road. We've never had an issue and I've been here over 25 years. Got a grad party here at the corner or some car show. But it was pretty much said park one side only. I mean it's whatever. So, I don't I I don't like the idea of it widening out. Okay. Anything else, Reed? All right. Thank you. Hi, Derek Brunson, 1114 Anderson Lane. Um, I also agree with my other neighbor Reed. Um, believe that the road should be left at 22 foot. Never had any issues with the with the width or any traffic in there. Um, as as we were talking before, we had large concerns with the cost of the projects up front. Um, and I believe that's kind of where we went down the rabbit hole of us not wanting the gutters. We're exploring different options to try to reduce the cost of the projects and I think we even talked with Larry about possibly looking at a few of those numbers in the future. So um yeah, that would be it. Thank you. Mr. Chair, if I may, before we get too far into this, under your own ordinance, whenever there's a street reconstruction, curbs, concrete curbs are mandated. The only option is the style of curb and it has to be concrete, not asphalt. Excuse me. Has to be concrete. Concrete. And there's only 10. You have to There's only two specifications. You have an option of two different specifications, but you must when you have a street reconstruction, the ordinance mandates concrete curbs. Okay. Yes, sir. Come on up. Hi, I'm Josh Farmer. I'm 1140 Anderson Lane. Um, just agreeing with with uh Dale and and Derek about the the width. We'd like to keep it at 22 feet. We were under the impression 20 is the the minimum for emergency vehicles. And uh the reason we want to keep it at 22 feet is because it's basically a private drive to us. It's it there's not any traffic, you know, going up and down Anderson Lane just like Peterson Lane used to be. It's it's very quiet. Um, and there aren't any concerns about parking. I mean, we have large enough driveways and there's really no street parking from anybody other than the Anderson Lane residents. So, it's it's wide enough in our eyes. And we want to keep um that small town feel of of White Wiper Township with that staying at 22 ft versus widening it an extra 6 ft plus curbs. I mean, it it seems like it's it's just I know it's within the township's uh purview, but it just seems like it's taking away the beauty of our property in Anderson Lane. So, we we wanted to be effective stewards of the township's dollars. That's why we said, "Hey, let's not do the curbing. Let's do the Millan overlay to try to keep the cost down." I understand trying to keep the road in, you know, perfect condition with the curbing, but uh 22 ft would be ideal just from all the residents in agreement. Thanks, John. Mike McKenna 1131 Anderson Lane. I just want to point out he mentioned uh this project going in uh with other projects going on the state Ramsey County and the county is going to do county road J. They're putting a new bridge on J this year. Next year they'll be doing roundabouts at Centerville and J. It'd be nice not to have this project go at the same time they're doing that project. Well, you got a lot of confidence in the county. As much as I got in township. Oh, hey. No. Don't. It don't. I've been to a number of county meetings and it certainly looks like it's going forward. Yeah, they are. They are slated to start this year. So, there's my confidence and it will be a traffic jam on Senator Bill once an NOA County traffic can't get across the freeway or on the freeway going south. Thank you. All right. Thanks, Mike. Anyone else? Um, okay. Yeah, go ahead. Good evening. Dave Cell, 1155 Anderson Lane. Um, I agree with all my neighbors and everything they're saying, too. Um, yeah, I think part of our concern is really with the addition of all of the other construction that's going to be happening in and about that area. So, the timing of this construction and this road is is a significant effort and concern for us. Um, in addition to that, the 22 feet wide just seems to make sense for us as neighbors, too. Um, we have plenty of uh in driveway parking. Um, don't see the need for the ex the additional width to the parking for the street. Well, that is one advantage of surmountable curves because you still are able to move if if in a case of a major emergency, you're still able to get up over the curb. But, all right. Thank you, Patrick. would you like to uh or or Chad, would you like you want to go over um the process if you want to um dispute the assessment? Oh, yeah. Please let him read Walstead 1094 Anderson Lane. Larry, you mentioned that you're going to mill like two inches and mound it back down and put three on top. Where's the drainage going to change on that and cause issues? Cuz now you're raising the road 3 in over what it was before. Yes. So we would see the reclaiming and mixing that into the base and then feathering feathering out the excess for the extra width if the board decides to go wider and then um then doing the curb and gutter. So if if the board decides not to to add the the width and they decide to keep it at 22, we would have to remove some material to be able to uh fit the curb in there. And then with the culde-sac at the end, what was proposed to bring that out to for width? Um what was the the di or the diameter change? Yeah. Um I'm not certain what we calculated for width on that. Um I I know we can't get too large. We we can only we can we can do what we can to improve the the size for better um turnaround, but we're not going to meet, you know, our normal standards for a culde-sac because of the the rightway we have there. Uh as a retired public works employee, I do realize there's a lot of streets without a turnaround also. So that's my thoughts on that. Thanks, Reed. All right, Chad. Uh, Mr. Chair, we're a bit ahead on that, but what the what the chair is referring to is this that in once a levit assessment is adopted and we are not and the town is not adopting a levit assessment tonight. Simply adopting a proposed assessment, you do have the right to challenge that amount by filing a appeal first with the city, first with the township and then filing that with district court. You have to if you intend to appeal an assessment and again you don't have to do that yet because there's no levied assessment being adopted tonight just a proposed assessment. You would have to first notif uh send written notice to the town saying you intend to uh object to the assessment. You then have 30 days from the date the assessment is adopted to serve the town with the petition uh challenging the assessment and then also file that with district court. But again, we're a little early on that. But there's one point I think we're forgetting here is that because the town bonds for these costs under statute, you cannot assess less than 20% of the construction costs. You have that's a that's a floor. The only way you can go below 20% is to hold a townwide referendum allowing that assessment to drop below 20%. So you are bound to have you have a floor of at least 20% of the construction costs that must be assessed. In addition, you also have the terms of the bonds themselves which normally require at least 20% uh uh assessment. So there is a there is a floor under which the town cannot go if it's when it uh proposes a street a street improvement project in this case a street reconstruction project. Correct, Larry. All right. Thanks, Chad. Uh Larry, can we when we put this out for bid, is it possible to have them bid it as strictly replacement and a cost of widening? Oh, yes. Uh we could um put an alternate in our bid for the widening piece of it. Okay. So, so that's something that at least we would know if if you're not saving anything. Do you maybe want the road a little wider? It would be a discretionary thing. Still have the curb and gutter though. The concrete curb and gutter would always be a piece of the has to be a piece of that. Okay. I just want to be sure under under the under town ordinances. It has to be because it's street reconstruction. Okay. I just want to be sure that's clear. Thanks. All right. So, is there any other comments from the public? All right. Hearing none, I'm going to ask for a motion to close the public portion. I'll move to close the public portion public portion of the hearing. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Any u any other questions of staff? Uh no. Well, I guess the question is that what you had just stated with to if we approve these, it's we're going to bid it two different ways. Yeah. With with with an option or Mr. chair and town board. I maybe want to maybe could go back on that because I think uh when we design it, we're designing those the curb elevations and we basically have to design it two different ways if we wanted to bid it that way. Um, it's not just a simple reduction because we're we're we're we're calculating elevations of that curb and the and the catch basins and the storm sewer. And so just simply bidding a to not pave, you know, the bidding it two ways, it's not as simple now that I think about it because you'd have to design it two ways then, which goes back to the feasibility study and more cost. Well, being more design cost to be able to design it two different ways. We're not going to save anything if it's if it's a difference in cost, but we ate it up with design cost. Yeah. that change your motion, Steve? Oh, it certainly probably will. So, so based on that, um I guess are we going to discuss whether to change the project to 22 versus 28? Oh, what's your feeling? Well, again, that was the question I asked if it was going to if it was going to make a difference in the uh improvement, and the answer basically was probably not. But having said that, with the surmountable curbs and the uh public sentiment, I don't know if 20 makes that much difference personally. Beth, so I have to admit I kind of agree. I'd prefer to see the 22. I think it does keep a small town feel and it is it's all residential so the people who live there drive there. All right. So that's a consensus to stay at 22. Yeah. But still obviously we have to stay with the curb and gutter. Yes. Absolutely. Curb and gutter. All right. Does that uh give you enough there, Larry? Um can I ask a clarifying question? um 22 feet plus the curb or 22 feet from back a curb to back a curb. Me personally, it should be 22 feet plus the curb. I agree. I agree with that. Yeah, that that is going to give you a little bit more of a a feel that the road is bigger, but you're not affecting the actual road itself. Does that work for the board for me? I see. Yep. So, um I guess based off this I'd make based we do this in two parts. Based on town engineer review and recommendations, adopt a resolution ordering the improvements at a 22 foot width plus the curbing some honorable curbing. I'll second. Well, Mr. Chair, I think I got to be honest with you, I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're doing. I think what you're saying is are you going to have a 22 foot wide driving surface with curb on either side or 22 feet from edge of curb to edge of edge of curb to edge of curb? I mean, that's a little Yeah, that's what I thought, but it's a little, you know, I know you think that's what you're saying, but if you read it afterwards, it could be a bit surface. Okay, fine. I would suggest you make that change. I'd recommend that. I'll make that change to my recommendation. All right. You still second it, Mark? I will second it. All right. Oh, all in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. All right. That's where we're headed, folks. Uh and then the second part, uh based on town engineer review and recommendation or ordering preparation of plans and specifications based on this change of 22T drivable surface. I'll second. All right. All in favor say I. I. I. We do appreciate your input and we we understand what you guys are going through. So, we hopefully we got a good accommodation there for you. All right, we're going to move on. Thank you. We have item 7 C, the cannabis zoning. We're going to consider amending the township ordinance regarding cannabis. Who's going to cover this? I'll cover this for you. Lucky you. Uh, thank you, chair. Good evening, board members. Uh, before you tonight is a draft ordinance to consider amendments to your zoning ordinance. That's ordinance number 35. These amendments would cover uses and performance standards and buffers regarding uses for cannabis businesses. Oh, wait a minute. I'm sorry. It is a public hearing. We need a motion to wave. I'll I'll move to wave wave. It's a foggy night. that published. You have a second. I'll second, sir. All favor say I. I. All opposed. All right. Then I need a motion to open up the public. I'll make a motion to open the public hearing. I'll second. In favor? I I I Sorry, Evan. No, you can. No, we're good. We're good now. All right. So, as you may be aware, the state recently legalized recreational marijuana or cannabis, depending on which term you prefish prefer to use. Um, as a result, they also created a state agency referred to as the office of canvas management. Got a little bit of noise here. Um, so you will see the acronym OCM throughout the memo and the ordinance tonight. Uh, that department uh has drafted and released rules that would essentially help govern and regulate these cannabis uses. Uh they also came up with the names of different license types. You'll see those on pages two and three of the staff memo before you tonight. Uh they also include definitions as well as a description of the types of activities or uses that would be associated with each of those license types. Um, I would note that the licensed lower potency hemp edible retailers, uh, typically referred to as a THC retailer, those are currently permitted in the township. Uh, those were recently legalized, uh, prior to this bill, um, a couple years ago. Um, those are permitted currently under ordinance 97. Um, we will cover those in a little bit more detail, but, uh, for reference, those are limited to your B2 zone. So, that's any commercial zone. Um, and then those are currently located in the township within existing convenience stores, off-sale liquor stores, or tobacco shops. Uh, the state under that bill that authorized the legalization of recreational cannabis, uh, they did set buffer requirements that we'll get into later tonight. Uh, but just to give you an overview, uh, they set a maximum distance you could establish from certain properties. Um that would include a 1,000 ft buffer max um from schools um and then a buffer of up to 500 feet from any daycare facilities, residential treatment facilities or um as defined in state statute attractions within a public park that is regularly used by minors including playgrounds and athletic fields. Uh so a lot of communities have essentially uh determined what parks uh meet that definition and then would apply that buffer from there. Um I would note state statute does allow you to have less buffer footage than those maximum amounts. So uh some communities have had say a 700 foot buffer from schools or maybe 400t buffer from a daycare but um they do establish that upper limit for the town to establish. Uh the planning commission did review uh draft language back in December. um based on their review, the recommendation was to create new uses for each of those licenses. And so you will see in the draft as well as in the memo before you tonight, uh those new definitions uh for those uses defined in the ordinance moving forward. Um in addition to that, uh the township should consider how these types are allowed under your zoning ordinance. Um that would be whether as a permitted use or a conditional use. As you may recall, a conditional use requires a cup. Um the planning commission when they reviewed this request, they made all these uses conditional. Um and so the uh more commercial type uses uh in their draft recommendation for you tonight, they recommend those being placed as conditional uses under that B2 zoning. And then more of the manufacturer or industrial type cannabis uses, those are recommended as conditional under the I1 zone. That's the industrial zone within the township. And I can share a map of the zoning for the town just as a reference while we're going through this. I believe Are you sharing still? [Music] There we go. Um, so the screen obviously cuts off parts of the township, but that dark red for reference is that B2 commercial zone throughout the township. Um, and then the dark purple is your industrial zones. Obviously, since these uses are, you know, non-residential nature, this would not be allowed in your residential zones, which are all shown in different shades of yellow or brown here before you tonight. Um, getting back to the memorandum, um, for reference, the town board may want to consider whether those low potency hemp edible retailers should be a conditional use as well. Um, again, they're permitted right now. Is that something you want to see remain a permitted use or would you be okay with that as a conditional use? That's something we discussed tonight. Um, in addition to whether it's permitted or conditional, the planning commission also established draft language for performance standards. So that is um including you know where is it located, how are you conducting this use etc. Um so for these uses specifically you'll have two sections. Uh you'll see the general uh performance standards that apply to all the cannabis businesses. Uh that is 7-20.1 before you tonight in that draft ordinance. Um and you'll see requirements regarding storage. So no outdoor storage regardless of the use. Um where can be conducted um under our draft ordinance that has to be within an enclosed structure. So you can't be um operating or you know running the business out of a tent or some other um open structure outside. Um applicants must also submit plans showing that they meet state requirements. Um so again that OCM rules that have been established uh they would have to prove to us that they're able to meet all those requirements and then any other state, local or county regulations that may apply. Um some of the other uses you'll see further down in that draft ordinance as well as in memorandum uh have their own uh performance standards specific just to those uses. Um some of those are in regards to light and glare. So those apply to more of your uh industrial or manufacturing type activities. Uh some of them also have requirements regarding sprinklers and fire suppression. And then there is some size limitation requirements to ensure that they are meeting state statute requirements. Um those buffers that we had discussed earlier tonight, uh the planning commission did recommend adopting those buffers at those maximum distances as allowed under state statute. Um those are located in 7-20.2 I believe in your memorandum. Um they also recommended adding some additional definitions to ensure that our buffers would be measured correctly from all of those uses moving forward. Um based on the planning commission's review, they also recommended two other buffer requirements. Uh so in addition to the zoning map you had before you tonight, you also had two other maps in your meeting packet. Uh, one showed just those buffers as allowed under state statute. Uh, the other map showed um those additional buffers the planning commission recommended. One, uh, was a 1,000 ft buffer between properties with cannabis businesses or between properties with a cannabis business and an offsale liquor store. Um, that other buffer was a buffer from a cannabis business and churches and that was also recommended at 1,000 ft. And so, um, the one map you can see there is, uh, not a lot of property, but there is some property in both the B2 zone and, uh, the I1 zone that could be allowed, uh, for one of those cannabis uses moving forward. Um, you'll see primarily, um, down by Goose Lake, Otter Lake Road, actually just north here of the building. Um, a handful of industrial parcels would not be impacted by a buffer along Centerville Road. south of H2. Um, north of H2 would be a handful parcels, both industrial and B2. Um, and then up by Highway 61 on the north edge of the township would be um, possibly allowed moving forward. Um, with those additional buffers as recommended by the planning commission, uh, you do see a lot of property then no longer viable under those buffer requirements. And so, um, in consultation with legal counsel, um, we're not sure if that would be a wise move moving forward just given what is outlined before us under state statute, but, uh, we did want to prepare prepare those graphics to show you kind of what the different impacts are uh, moving forward. Uh, so tonight before you do have that draft ordinance, uh, you do have the option to adopt it or uh, deny the request. Um, you could also table the issue for further discussion. Steve, where do you want to start? Well, you know, this whole business of cannabis is kind of a a loose process at the moment. It doesn't have a lot of answers. But, you know, we have we have to move forward. There's time time to uh move and time not to move. But Chad, you looked at these after the planning commission made some recommendations and that's how we got to this concerns on the second or the uh bottom graph. Correct. Yeah. Okay. and and um being that is what we know today. I mean, I think the planning commission did a very decent job of going through each one of these different types of businesses and putting these ordinance in place with your your assistance. So, I I think we should adopt them. Personally, I do want to echo what Evan said. I have a concern about the buffer for churches. The statute chapter 342 is rather encompassing and under under existing law when a when the state adopts a u a statute that is so encompassing it's got to be you have to consider to be occupying the field which in other words which by that what that means is that you have to conform to the statute. You can't be you can be less you can be more liberal than the statute, but you can't be stricter than the statute. And my concern is when it came to buffers, they mentioned one thou the statute says 1,000 ft from schools and 500 ft from daycare facilities, residential treatment facilities, and again any attractions uh that are regularly used by minors within within a public park. I really there's no the statute is silent about churches which leads me to believe they never felt a buffer from a church is necessary. So I have a I am concerned about the about 7-2.2D which talks about 1,000 ft from uh from from a church. I don't think that's sustainable. What if those churches um run daycarees or that would be okay because of that business being run out of the church. So if that being the case then you would have to say contain a church that runs a daycare facility because we have what three churches in the township. Mhm. But then it would only it could only be 500 feet though, right? But I'm pretty sure they all run some sort of of uh care facility them. So I know Bair does and I know Eaglebrook does. Mhm. So to actually it's a good point. So I would recommend to avoid any any confusion. You simply delete 7-20.2D and rely on the fact that they're operating daycare centers. Yeah. So right now um we did propose a new definition for daycare. Um, it would note any location licensed by the Department of Health uh to provide care for one or more children outside of their own home for gain or incentive or otherwise on a regular basis for any part of a 24-hour day. And so that was intended to encapsulate any daycare. And so whether that's in a church, in a house, school building, wherever daycare is a daycare. Yep. Chad, do these buffers run similar to a a sex offender type? I can't remember. I know we went through that some years ago. Yeah. Um geez, it's been a while since we talked about that, but yeah. I mean, it's a similar concept, right? Well, we had to designate a district for right those sex Well, not so much where they live, but we had we have a district for adult entertainment. Adult entertainment district. Yes. There's sex offenders. Adult entertainment. Yeah. adult entertainment, liquor stores, gun, you know, there's a lot of buffers out there. But but again, because this statute is meant to be so encompassing, I think you have to consider it to be in be occupying the field. We're pretty much bound by the terms of the statute. And since it's silent on churches, I don't think we should include churches. So, we have to change one of these. I again just delete uh 7-220.2D and Chad to clarify would C also be up for deletion? Another one I was about to talk about that one. Thanks Evan. You know if I was jumping ahead of you there. Yeah, you did. Well, no, no, I'm glad you reminded me that because we can forget things. And Evan just brought up 7-20.2. 2C that talks about 1,000 ft from u between cannabis businesses or off sale liquors uses. Again, the statute is silent on that. And since it's silent, you have to cons you have to assume that they never meant for a buff for those buffers to be in place. So, I think we also have to would have to delete 7-20.2 2C. Can we catch them all, Evan? Yeah. I think one other point, um, and it's up to the board on whether they'd want to include it in ordinance 35, so under zoning, or if you want to include it under a ordinance that encompasses licensing. uh but state statute did allow uh cities, towns, and I believe counties as well, but you can set a limit on the number of retail locations to one per 12,500 residents. And so if you want to include that in the zoning ordinance, that would be uh one way to limit those retail locations in particular. The confusion of 50 applicants, we Right. So if you know you have a lot of people come in um we'd only be able to allow one to get a license for retail location. Now, um some of those other uses, whether it's like a um production or a transporter, um you know, those still could move forward, but uh those, you know, retail like a dispensary um is what a lot of places refer to them as. You know, that would be limited to one in the township. And then um Chad can correct me if I'm wrong, but if there's enough licenses issued within the county um ahead of us, you know, getting a request, uh we would not be obligated to issue a license. Is that correct? That's exactly right at all. Uh the way the statute reads is it's one license per 12,500 uh population. So at this point in time, you'd only have to issue one license. And also, but and Evan's exactly right, the statute does state that if you take if you take the population of the county, divide it by 12,500, that determines number of licenses, retail licenses. Now, retail license we're talking about that are allowed and the minute you have in this case the based on the population of Ramsey County which is 552,350 the maximum number of units or the MAC the minimum number of licenses is 44. So the minute there's 44 licenses issued by in Ramsey County the town would not be obligated to issue any licenses whatsoever for retail establishments. Seems to me St. Paul would take up a big chunk of that. Yep. It's entirely possible. Yeah. And understand the 12,500 is really a floor. If for some reason you want to issue more, you have the right to do so. But you're you if you don't have to go below 12,500. Is that retail license? We've had conversations about this in the that retail license can have multiple locations within that license though, right? Retailer. That's true. Oh, so the counts as one retail license, the same license a like a LLC that has two different incorporations could have and that two licenses. No, no, actually locations. The statute does say however the statute re as I look at my memo here, the retailer can can have multiple retail locations. So that is a problem with the statute. Mhm. If they, you know, not surprising. Uh, but that doesn't count against the the number you're in. No, I don't think it does. It's retail licenses and the licenses are issued to a retailer. So they could have multiple locations in the same jurisdiction. In the same jurisdiction. But that that's only that I'm thinking maybe that would be holiday. Okay. Yeah. Circle K. Yeah. I think the intent is like you'd have a chain potentially. Yeah. But each of those little individual stores is owned by or managed by Right. Oh, but I would say I'm looking at my memo again. The Office of Cannabis Management has interprets the statute limiting it to one retail location for 12,000. So I I have to correct myself. It wouldn't be per jurisdiction. Yes. It's per population. Per It's It's based on population, but also location. So, while you can have So, while a retailer can have multiple retail locations, the locations are limited to 12,500. I apologize. I was a little off on that. Well, it would probably be the first thing because this thing is kind of shady or cloudy in certain spots anyway. So, take it out. I don't want to use the word shady. That's not it right. And understand that's the Office of Canada's Management's interpretation of the statute. doesn't mean someone's going to challenge it and say their interpretation is incorrect. But right now, you can you can presume based on the OCM interpretation that it's one location per 12,500 and we could end up with none. You could end up with none if there are 44 locations already established in Ramsey County. What do I do? By a lottery or I mean how does this essentially essentially that's what they're doing really it's just and then there's um there's a an aspect of uh oh what's the term I want to be careful here uh the disadvantaged population has an inside track for licenses there's a social equity equity yes thank you avenue that you can pursue that Yes. Um they have an lottery. Well, they were doing a lottery originally for the licenses due to the number of demand. Cannabis management. Yeah. Yeah. Are they accepting applications as we speak? Reopened it. They reopened it to have a lottery sometime this summer with the first retail operations in the fall hopefully. Okay. Yeah. So, I don't want to get too deep into the weeds on this one, but pardon the pun. That wasn't intended. Um, so or a cannabis growing business as opposed to just a retail business. There's still only going to be one license. No, there's what's one retail location. Okay. Per 12,000. In terms of cultivation, transportation, storage, there's no limit on the number of licenses that can be issued in a in a municipality. Oh, okay. Other than the fact that you they can you can limit the districts and you can um Yeah, I get that. Yeah. Do they still have to follow the the borders the uh the buffers? The buffers. Buffers. Oh, yeah. So, under our proposal, those would apply. Yeah, that's correct. Okay. So, Evan, under this map you've got here, how many spots do we actually have and still clear the buffers? I think it's the yellow dots, isn't it? Well, uh, so the yellow dots, that's the current THC retailers as of uh December when we made this map. Um, you'll see the cross-hatched parcels. There's like a light blue crosshatch. I can zoom in here on the big screen for you. Um but so if we're just looking at the buffers established by state statute, you'll have a handful parcels up here by Highway 61, uh the north end of the township on the other side, northwest. Uh again, you have two existing THC retailers. Uh you have two B2 zone parcels here. Um then a handful of industrial. Um, all those are developed except for uh one along Highway 35 uh by Schwing and then a vacant parcel that's undeveloped owned by North Oaks. Uh moving south uh you do have um one currently uh undeveloped industrial parcel here. Uh further down, so this is south of Heras, there's another uh already occupied industrial parcel. Um across the interstate, there's a couple parcels. Uh this would be on parkway. Um there is a parcel here. This is actually a storm water retention pond owned by the township. Um there's a small parcel here. Uh this is southwest of White Bear Parkway that is occupied by industrial building already. Um and then a handful of industrial parcels over here. So this would be uh north of the town uh building here actually. Um east and west road. Um the only other parcel of note um there is a uh warehouse building that's used uh for different commercial businesses located along 61 in uh Buffalo. That's the building that's across the street from Eagle Brook. Right. Correct. Uh all electric or something is it called? I don't remember. It's a dance studio in there. Yeah, there's a couple couple different businesses there. I think they've got some kind of furniture stuff going in there, too. All right, Beth, got any comments or questions? I find it very daunting. It seems like it's kind of clear as clear as mud in a way because you really don't know what's going to happen, right, with the lottery. may not get a that's why I'm glad that we've been kind of deliberate in our approach with this. It's just I mean it's going to the direction is going to change every 90 days I think but we got to get some we got to get some foundation in place for us uh at least for a starting point here and you definitely have to have it because one of the requirements of issue of a license application is that there is a zone that it meets zoning requirements of the municipality which is located. So you have to have you you have to adopt zoning to deal with these issues right now. So that when the application comes in there's a certification that it does meet or does not meet zoning. Right? So in the situation of let's say we didn't adopt anything someone could apply for any property and we would have no regulatory ability to say you can't do that or you know you have to store something within u a building conduct within a building because we would just have nothing on the books. So uh this would give us as Pat said a position moving forward. You have to be proactive on this one. So essentially you have to make the motion according to the corrections we made. What was it on 7-2 C and D? Yes, Steve, I'll let you make it and I'll second it. We're not there yet. Nice idea, but we're not there yet. Okay. I'm not in favor of that. Um I think I've asked all the questions I guess. Well, if there's no other questions of staff, I need a motion to open up for public comment. I'll move to open it up for public comment. I'll second. All fair say I I I. Anyone here wants to discuss this hot topic? Yes, there is. Just I just need your name and address for the record. Uh good evening board, staff, and consultants. My name is Jim Faulner and I live at 2622 Wester Grand Court in the township, but I'm here this evening um to uh discuss the potential for operating a cultivation and additional associated services at my commercial buildings that I own at 2340 and 2350 County Road J in the township very norththeast corner on the on the map with all the red on it. Uh so primarily here to address ordinance 35 which you've discussed you know prior to the public hearing uh a business partner and myself would like to own and operate a cannabis uh manufacturing facility um which is a growing and as part of that we would also do the uh manufacturing portion and the um distribution or I'm sorry the packaging and the wholesaling portion of the of the business. Um it's called a micro grow operation. It's specifically the smallest of the grow operations which has a a limited uh plant canopy of 5,000 square ft which actually is quite large. Um the space that we have available in my building uh of which our grow corporation our micro grow corporation uh would lease uh is about 1300 square ft with a small potential addition. So our grow area is rather small even in the terms of the micro grow. Um I uh unfortunately missed getting to the planning commission. My fault. I I'm I'm sorry to come here without being in the proper order, but I did miss getting to the planning commission for this. Uh while we have in fact been working for quite some time on the legal and the application aspect of the um of the project uh we we've run into a situation where under um item C which you have discussed a second of your location items item C um of about a thousand square foot or a thousand lineal foot uh distance distance from cannabis businesses or off sale liquor. Um, it's a little difficult to, at least for me, a little difficult to establish exactly what the distance was, where it would go to. There are multiple ways. if you took it from the property corner that's the furthest or closest if you took it from the front door if you took it from the crow flies but nonetheless I am um 900 plus feet from the liquor store bald eagle liquor and from the closest licensed uh load dosage which is the holiday station I am somewhere around 500 square feet give or take corner to corner or something like that or I'm feet I'm sorry so um the current proposed ordinance would preclude us from obtaining our zoning and um thank you uh Mr. Lemon for bringing lemons for bringing up that as part of our application which is quite detailed and complicated um is that we have to have zoning to be able to obtain our license. Uh so that and I think that's a good part of the state statute. uh and what it also does is it brings to all communities that you have to you need to act on this otherwise you will not get anybody in the business. So uh what I would like to to uh discuss or propose is or review of those uh distances and one of the things that that we noticed as we reviewed um the uh 7-20.2 two is that is that on each one of the um items A, B, C, and D, they're all referring to a um the whole group of licenses that OCM will be issuing. There are nine to 10 individual licenses um that encompass the the grow operations, which there are three, and then there is everything from testing, manufacturing, so forth and so on. uh all the way up to dispensary which is which is retail and um I I believe that um you know I don't believe any or I don't believe anybody is going to try to uh swing the bat for a home run and open up especially a a mess grow me business or micro business small business with all of these elements um highly unlikely just because of the uh square footage requirements and the capital outlay and the staff and all the things that go along with that. Um we have studied this and looked at this in about 20 of the 23 states that currently have the legislation and um for the most part their licenses are pretty much segmented into a grow operation that that may may encompass all the way through transfer transportation um or stop short of that but into full production and establishing a product that will go to from a wholesaler to a retailer. and then jumps to the actual retailers. So um what was a little unusual in in this zoning ordinance was that all five all four of the distances um be it from 1,000 ft to 500 ft were were encompassing all these broad uses and um um I can't speak to zoning ordinances in other locations but it would it would make some sense if it was you know uh looked at in a more individual basis for the uses. Um I understand and I I I don't disagree with a separation from certain uses although I am a little bit confused on 720.2C of uh how planning commission got to a,000 ft to those two listed uses which are licensed cannabis businesses which would be basically a convenience store that is selling a low dosage. You can Evan, you can help me out here a little bit. You know more about this than I do, but um that are selling uh those those prior approved low dosage products um including uh gummies and so forth. Um I don't know. I understand they Holiday and Bald Station both have purchased those licenses to my knowledge. Uh they have the THC license currently that and and then the liquor store is the liquor store. Um I I'm not quite sure where I I can figure where a a grow operation um is quite as related to to to those uses. Uh nonetheless, the planning commission looked at it that way. Um I would like to request that there be some consideration for the distance um from my one of my one or both of my buildings uh on my property uh there 33 and a half years now. um to these two other uses, Holiday and to Bald Eagle and the Bald Eagle liquor. Is are you talking about the upstairs of that of that strip mall? What what area you talking about here? What? I'm talking about my 2340 50 County Road J buildings in the I1. Oh. Oh, okay. All right. I'm sorry. I was think around the corner. All right. Yeah. Yeah. They're um Yeah. The two convenience stores which are Holiday and Bald. All right. I got you. And um and then the the Bald Eagle Station liquor store, a separate building. Okay. So um and um so with that, that's that's my my request for consideration. I realize you have a little bit of a challenge ahead. Um and uh then I'm ready for any any questions. Well, Evan, would this be something that would have to go back to planning commission again? So I guess uh our discussion earlier about the buffers and um when you discussed removing 7-20 C uh that would get rid of that buffer between all the businesses. So just to make that clear u what we had discussed earlier was to not have that buffer apply. And so that's the map you see before you tonight. um this other map also in your meeting memo um as Jim is alluding to when you do apply um those buffers between businesses and off liquor stores um you do encapsulate uh his property and then a bunch of adjacent properties as well. And so um I think that's addressing your concerns. Is that correct, Jim? Right. Correct. the the the distances, I guess, no matter which way we measure them, would preclude me from operating in my in my building. Um, and and why we're there is because I've been there a long time. I have many tenants. Uh, I have vacant space. Um, and I had a desire to um, you know, move into some different ventures and businesses and had this opportunity to work with a a very fine partner um, who is also um, a business owner in the township currently. as we get more more and more confused. So we what you had recommended was already to get rid of C and 2 C and 2D. That's what we had discussed prior to and so that would help address correct your issue. Okay. There's another little Sorry, I was going to say and your further thing is if if there were to be limitations it shouldn't be a broad spectrum of all the types of cannabis operations you want you said you could live with retailers etc. but not necessarily growers. I think um uh Councilman Rusk what I see coming down as and you mentioned you know a lot of there's a lot of balls in the air and a lot of things going on is that is that as somebody may come to the township to talk about a retailer and so forth. All of these uses that are listed in the statute and listed in your zoning are all part of the buffer. But with respect to the entire um proposed township ordinance, um many of those elements pretty much only apply to one or more of these um uh different uses. An example would be a transporter is nothing more than somebody that has the appropriate license from OCM, the appropriate vehicle, and a computer in and an office. that's that's all they have because they're going to pick up from a wholesaler and they're going to take it to to another processor manufacturer or they're going to take it right to a a dispensary a retailer. So there there's there's the one the one issue is all these things are kind of all listed under 720.2 too. And it might be worthwhile in addition to dealing with A, B, C, and D, and distances is to take a look at how they apply to not just the distances, but to all the rest of the all the rest of the ordinance. The rest of the ordinance is is is fine. I I have no exceptions. I think with all of these changes that that occur, there's always there's going to be some refinements. I mean, I don't think you can write a perfect ordinance, right? when when we don't have a clear vision of what what the cannabis rules are. So, I mean, it's it's going to be revised. U just as the legislature has been talked about that they are going to have to relook at a lot of the cannabis activity because it's not there's a there's a lot of things that are not clear. So, I your point being I I I get it. I Yeah. An addendum to the statute is forthcoming. Yeah. Chad, you had a comment you wanted to make. Well, actually, I was it occurred to me that all the licenses that we've already issued for cannabonoid products, they become void now that OCM is issuing licenses because OCM controls not just cannabis products, they also call cannabonite as well. Correct. But they haven't issued their licenses yet. So, we're in this weird limbo. They haven't. So, that's the problem. Yeah, it's kind of like this is unbelievable. Yeah, it's don't even have a license arguing about. Yeah, it's it's just go up. It's really what's going to I can see what what I foresee happening is this is that someone gets a license to sell cannabis or cannabon products. Actually, take that back. Someone applies for a license and we tell them at the location doesn't meet the zoning requirement. Yet the minute they start issuing licenses, the licenses become and let me back up that we we state we tell the OCM that no this not it's not allowed under zoning because it's within so many feet of an existing cannabonoid license. Yet once they issue the licenses that license ceases to exist. Therefore it's not it doesn't violate that the the buffer. But more importantly, you know, again, the statute's pretty clear about what buffers are allowed, right? So, I think going back to our earlier discussion, if we just get rid of it, it would save us and administratively a headache. Chad legally doesn't have to deal with it and it would address Jim and deal with something. But yeah, it's got to make sense. I mean, there's a lot of circular arguments here. Yes. The more we talk about it, we're trying to blaze a trail forward here somehow. Yes. We're all getting educated. Yeah. But I don't want to reinvent the wheel here. No. And but I do believe that in terms of buffers, we are limited to schools, daycare, the you know, mercs and resil. Yeah. Maybe I'm being a little bit restrictive, but I don't think so. I don't think so. But All right. So, so how does the state view a grow production or grow facility? Did you look you looked at that plan? Yeah. So, um you could just do growing and that would be a cultivator license. Um what Jim is looking for himself would be a micro business. And so that would encapsulate uh as he noted um cultivating so growing uh manufacturing and then packaging and then having that be available to sale to uh whether that's a wholesaler um or you know a retail business of some sort. Is that correct? Yep. Yeah. Y retail you know factor in there. That's one where the buffers come into play. But the immediate concern for you disappears if if we delete the the buffer. That's it. Between businesses, between the businesses, then then I then I could meet you could issue me a zoning certificate and I could put that in my application and they say, "Wonderful. Get the first shipment." Me. I know what to do with it. No, we for we'd forward it to your house, Ralph. Yeah. Ralph will send it to you. How's that? Thank you. One sale made. All right. You got anything else, Jim? That is it. Any questions of Mr. Fal? Are you growing this stuff hydroponically? I'm just curious. Hydroponically? Are you growing it hydroponically? That's That's a good question. We have been studying this for about a year. And um we have determined that the hydroponic drip system is the way that we would set it up and we would operate. We're studying those. They are the least amount of water and they're the best. They're to me that's the best systems and we're working on as part of our application our water usage. Um you know our electric usage is very minimal because the lights are LED and probably going to be 12 volt. So they're don't even measure on the scale. um the uh the waste is is is controlled and actually would go to to a certified waste um company as far as the stems, the vines, and the rest of that. So, so our water usage, we've drilled in on the best grow operation, and that's the way that many of the growers around the country are going now is on a on a a drip system as opposed to a flooded all and pump the water back through on a in a reservoir. Um we're working on those numbers, trying to get some more data. We only have the space for 330 plants at this time, which is a rel relatively small grow operation, but that's a good that's a good question. How many different varieties? I'm curious. Water's expensive. It is. I'm curious. How many varieties are you going to grow? Oh gosh, that's a good question. You're pretty. Probably four. I love growing plants, but not marijuana, right? Four on a cycle. um you know that that's um I'd say four but probably not more than six but depending on the market conditions and the sales and so forth it could be one I got to go back to one thing Evan uh square footage there was a minimum correct so I think it's a maximum isn't it Evan in terms the Yeah. So, for the cannabis cultivator, I should say it is a maximum as Chad noted. Um 5,000. So, canopy of 30,000 square ft uh would be the max uh for cultivator use. Um, if you are a mezzo license, uh, you'd be limited to 15,000 square feet. Um, then for a micro license, uh, you'd be limited to 5,000 square. Well, there's no minimum. There's a maximum. I know. Okay. Yeah. They they refer to that as a grow area, which is a whole another calculation, which we we worked on and done because we've measured plants and we would be at my space that we would be occupying. we would have a maximum of 334 uh plants which is is um uh under 500 square f feet. We're allowed 5,000 so we'd be at 10% you know possible small expansion from that but generally speaking that that would be where our grow area would be. Would that building require sprinkling or not? We are sprinkling. Okay. All right. Any other questions? All right. Thanks sir. Thank you. All right, Ralph, you want to speak to this? Any other public for this topic? I'm not. Is that a no? All right. There's no one else here. Uh, I need 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. All right. What is the pleasure of the board? All right. I to make this short and sweet. Are we just considering approving the township ordinance 35 and and deleting these two? I mean, is that what we're up to? Yeah. So, we're proposing or we've discussed removing 7-20.2c and 7-20.2D. Yep. And then adding in the limit on the number of retail licenses as one set out in state statute. Um, at one point you had asked if if we were going to talk about conditional use or permitted use. Do we have to do if you So, right now it's proposed as conditional. Um, if you guys want to change that, you can. Yeah. And that's the way it's we've proposed it. Correct. Okay. Boy, this is going to be hard. So, I'm proposing that well, I make a motion to amend uh township ordinance number 35 regarding do I say regarding cannabis. Okay. And deleting section I'm going to have this right wrong numbers. Uh 7.20- C 2 C and 2 D. Correct. Is that And you want to add in a statement regarding the limit on retail licenses? Oh yes. And limit the retail licenses to one. Uh actually I would recommend instead of saying one that you follow the that you limit it to one license per 12,500 residents. Uh so amended. You might want to reference the statute. Yes. That's based on the statute. Good point. Good point. Reference the statute. statute is uh statute 342.13 H in parenthesis. Small H in parenthesis. You were going to say that anyway, right, Steve? Sure. That's that's I go right along with that. Right at the tip of your tongue. That's right. I'll second it. Hey, motion made second. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Until the state changes something again. It's a hitting a floating target. I think you did the right thing tonight. Uh, and we actually will probably Evan and I will have to come back and talk to you about what conditions should the conditional use permit should contain. For example, you can restrict the hours in which the retailers locations can operate. Okay. Hey, please give us some guidance. As much as we're allowed under the statute. All right. We have no other new business, no added agenda items. Open time. Ralph, got anything else? Name and address. Ralph. Yep. Ralph Tilma, 4294 Oakme Lane. So, we've had a really big discussion about buffer zones and you got to be this far away from church and this far away from um a daycare. But right up here on Highway 61 and 96, we have four liquor stores and they're all within a th000 ft of each other. So, it seems to me kind of ridiculous that we have to set up all these buffer zones for cannabis, but we don't have anything like that for selling liquor. It's kind of ridiculous. Then the other question I have is for the engineer, have we had any water mane breaks this year because of the cold weather? I ask Dale while not because of the cold. Not because of the cold. Not because of the cold. because I remember in the past we had quite a few in the city of Whitebear Lake was out there every day fixing water manes um but we haven't had that don't change we had we we had a water break but I don't it it has not been said that it was caused by the cold okay so and can Mr. Sure, if I can address one question come up with right now. You know, Ralph, you raised you know this question about buffers. You raise it's an interesting point of law is that in the Minnesota statutes get so detailed that they preempt an area. They preempt an area for discre they leave no discretion for the town for any municipality. That's called occupying the field. But they don't occupy the field in every area. I don't I don't think there's any statute that sets a buffer for liquor stores. No, there can't be. No. Which actually because the statute sets no buffer for liquor stores, that would allow local municipalities to set their own buffers as long as the state doesn't preempt it. And as long as there's an a statute that is allow a municipality to issue licenses, they could make those kind of conditions. So that's why you have to read these statutes so carefully because the minute they start preempting things, we're bound by their pree we're basically hemmed in. But the township's pretty much built out. I don't think we ever have to worry about that again. Yeah. But my point being is that that's why you read these statutes so closely because if the preeemption is so important, they don't preempt it, you have flexibility, right? as long as they give you statutory authority to issue the license. But the minute they start setting out details such as this issue about buffers for cannabis products, then our hands are are are more or less tied. When I say our hands, I'm talking about the towns. Yeah. So, yeah, you raise an interesting point. All right. Thanks, Ralph. Can I ask a question? We're still in open time. Um, if this is published in the next couple of weeks, then I can go ahead and submit a zoning application. Excellent. We will. Thank you. Great. Thanks. All right. Seeing no one else, I need a motion to receive agenda material and supplements. So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I need a motion to adjourn at 954. So move. Yeah, you're right. All favor. I What were you saying? Sorry, I missed it.