order the May 4th, 2026 meeting of the Bayport City Council. Um, we will all rise now for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay, Matt, would you please call the role? >> Council member Bliss, >> here.
>> Council member Gilmore, >> here. >> Council member Kip, >> present. >> Council member Hill >> here. >> Mayor Hansen >> here. orin has to be different. Okay. All right. Do we have a motion to approve tonight's agenda? But is this where I'm Oh, yeah. I'm supposed to
announce I would actually like to make a change to the consent agenda. Um item number seven, the lease extension with the Department of Corrections for the old fireh hall building. I'm going to move to new business. So, I'd make a motion to do
that if anyone would second that. >> Second. >> All right. Thanks, >> Madame Mayor. Just to note, we'll be moving it to number five. >> Oh, number five of new business. Good point. So, it'll come at the end. Okay. Thank you. All in favor of doing that?
>> I I Anyone opposed? Okay. All right. um proclamations, accommodations, petitions, and announcements. I had one written on here and then I left my sheet at home so I don't remember her name,
but I wanted to make um say thank you to is it Ula J. Reeve? Is that the name of the person? Did I remember it correctly? We received some donations from a trust
for Ula J. Reev and she passed away. She was in her 90s. She lived at Croyale and she was kind enough to give $10,000 to our police department and $10,000 to our fire department. And I just thought that was amazing. And we should make sure we
say thank you to she has relatives out there that listen or anything. I don't know. Um and just, you know, plant a seed. If anyone else loves Bayport or our fire department or police department at that much, you know, put us in your in your trust, right? So, thank you.
That was that's all I wanted to announce. I don't think there's any we don't have anything else for that. N >> Okay. So, next is the open forum and this is a portion of the meeting to address the city council on subjects that are not part of the agenda or part
of the agenda. I told some people they could still come up. The city council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the comments that are expressed. A total of 15 minutes is allotted for public
comment during the open forum. So I know for sure, let's see, maybe we should go in the order who's going to do theirs first. Let's see. I guess Nathan, you want to I know you wanted to come up. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. >> Want to state your name and address for the record, please? >> Uh Nathan Jesperson at 317 Lake Street. >> I'm just going to plug this in here real quick. >> Okay. Harrison, if we can get the podium
camera, please. >> Do you have internet? Yep. >> Yeah. Does he need to access the Is it written on the Is there something on the podium about how to access the internet? >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Which one did you take out?
There we go. Okay. All right. Well, good evening, uh, mayor and council members. Um, thank you again for your attention here. Um, I'm going to keep this focus and respectful, I know, of your time here tonight. So, my goal is simple and uh it's really just
to align where we are today, what was already decided on June of 2023 and show that we've done u exactly what was asked of us to move forward with a safe and compliant restoration of our boat house. All right. So, let's just start with the
foundation here. Uh this was the uh and I'm sure you guys have looked through this. I'm not reading every line. So, um at the June 5th, 2023 meeting, the council made a decision. The motion as clarified by the city attorney was that the boat house would remain and that it would be restored and the motion passed
4 to1. Um the reason why that decision matters is because everything we've done since then has been in response to that direction. Um these are just some quotes from the line meeting or the line meeting the
June 5th meeting. Um it was uh Eric Larson, the city attorney at the time said, "Don't make a decision because you're afraid of the DNR DNR to go in to sue you. Make a decision based upon what you might what you think is right." Um you keep the you can keep the boat house and have the east edition. That is
within your discretion. Um Mayor Hansen, um why you had a voter to approve, uh you felt that it didn't feel right to uh it didn't feel right to me to make him take it down. It was important to you. Uh and and it helped me to go with the
way my gut was leaning. Um some of the other council members, I just noted the ones that are here still. I know there's some new council members, uh council member Hill, um she said, "I I don't want to go against the DNR." Um but in my heart, I know it's right. Uh Gilmore,
um Ethan Gilmore, um he said, "I'm okay letting the vote house stand." And then council member Carl Car Carlson at the time, Connie, uh she felt like um uh she, you know, we had the support of our neighbors here. I don't have neighbors here today, but they did text me. I said, "Don't come because I don't want
to make a big fuss. Last time it was a big big to-do." Um so, uh but I'm tending to flip. She said, "I feel like they're fighting so hard to keep it." So, that's important. Um she said, "I'm not worried about the DNR. That's not my concern. I was more concerned about how the neighbors felt." Um, and so we do
have I do have text from all my neighbors on that. Uh, I'm not going to mention this. I'll kind of skip this slide here because I just want to be um kind of move a little faster. But essentially, this is the uh precedence
piece. And um, wait, this slide three. Yeah. Um, so the the part about the precedence was that basically the boat house that
exists in Bayport wouldn't be a problem because it is the last boat house in Bayport. Um, really there is no precedence after this. Um, it'd have to be a very similar situation. Um, and uh, like I said, I have messages from all my my neighbors who are are totally comfortable with it as you guys know.
Um, I think there's going to be some concern about the DNR letter in when you guys uh come up with that. And I see we have Dan Scon here today. Um, the DNR concerns presented in the recent planning commission discussion. They're not new. Um, I think the planning commission only had three people here uh
at the planning, I think two of them were sworn in. Um, I I don't think they had the uh wherewithal to make that decision with the DNR. Um, and we kind of knew that I think once we arrived here. Um but you know again the these same considerations were reviewed and
discussed at length with legal um legal on our side and legal on the city side already. Um at that time the council made a fully informed decision to approve the project understanding both the context and the constraints. Um the current review is not about revisiting that decision I believe um but rather
about moving forward with a practical path to restore and repair the boat house in alignment with that approval. Um I think the uh big the big bullets here is you know obviously uh the DNR said that there's a concern
about doing what's right. Um, wait. Sorry, DNR. Okay. So, um, I think the findings is a fact. That's where I'm at. All right. I jumped off my my uh my uh writings here from this. So,
the DNR's position focuses on three things. That's that it's not compliant with current code. um and that it's beyond repair and that it impacts the river. Um but those don't uh override the legal framework here from what I believe. So um this is a legally
nonconforming structure as we uh pointed out. Um it has not been abandoned or destroyed. Uh it continues to be used u and restoration both improves and worse uh not worsens the site. So this is not a new use. Uh it's a
continuation of a long-standing one. And uh I just want to point out that just as a comparison um the beach house uh I just obviously I just want to highlight something that here talks about other structures that I
believe are are important on the city. Um uh the lakeside beach house was significantly rebuilt. Um it the roof was lifted. There's a patio expanded. Structure improved all within the setback. Um that project shows that there is flexibility when it comes to
restoring riverway structures. Um I do want to point out that I grew up uh boating on on uh St. Cro and I specifically in Bayport. So I used this this old uh what was really a bathroom and a storage house. Um and so I know this thing. They spent $800,000
rebuilding this and it's beautiful and I love it and I would I would never take it back. Um, but I think it's just it kind of sends that same message that hey, it's cool to sometimes update things and and make them nicer and that there is, you know, and I think it's
fair to ask like was the DNR involved with that decision at that point. This is just uh from MLA architects who who built the u master plan for this. The the existing beach house is located on the scenic central riverway and was
in was in need of major repair and general building upgrades. MLA architects developed a new design image with durable materials. Um that obviously must have met code at the time. Um the flat roof was changed to a new slope roof and also new stone base
and shake siding throughout. And they provided a patio and observation area which is an update. You guys can see the the what it looks like here. I'm sure you've been there before. So, it is within the 100 foot setback. Um, yeah, $800,000 uh in 2007 is probably $2
million today if you get done any recent projects. So, I know it's a lot. Um, the uh the next item here is um a little bit about the the uniqueness of my property. Um,
the boat house is, like I said, legally non-conforming. Um it it wasn't abandoned. You can see this is a picture from 1967 of our boat house. And um and we have pictures throughout history of that boat house from 1967 all the way to today.
Um the DNR letter suggests that no unique physical conditions exist. However, this property is constrained by the combination of Sanker River shoreline, the bluff line immediately adjacent to it, and steep slopes exceeding 12%. These natural features significantly limit the buildable area
between the bluff and the river. Um, in addition, the boat house has existed in this location for those, you know, basically 70 years, predating the riverway ordinance adopted in 1977. So, these are inherent physical characteristics of that land, not conditions created by uh me as the new
owner. Um, as you guys know, the entire road was lifted 8 ft in 2002 and uh, homes were given uh, many variances. Uh, this is just a picture before it was lifted. Um, and uh, just to kind of show you the progress of my house
um, as it was happening. You can see the road was lifted 8 ft, but my house was also lifted 12 ft. About 14 variances on this house. One of the things you'll notice is that the boat house remained throughout all this. So, there was never a question asked about the boat house. In fact, you can kind of see here it's
it's sort of leaning in this picture. And then in a later photo photo, and this is actually you can see it's mid construction. Um, this is actually corrected before I bought it. Um, the city asked me to uh provide a landscape plan and uh
to put everything. I actually started I already started doing all these things. Um, this is the work that we've done. Um, and this is 1991. This is 2023 when I was here. You can see what the property condition was at that time. This is what I had proposed to do to the
property uh to clean it up. This is our our layout um of what is planned right now and actually uh largely what it is. Uh this is our our current house layout. Um trees here. We've got one uh shed
that's also a sauna and then we have the boat house. So two uh accessory structures which is allowed. on the city of Bayport and um and just want to show you what the house looks like today. I know that photo is a little dark, but um you can get an idea
of like what kind of work that we've done already on the property to clean it up. Uh we've taken out this big deck. Um that's all uh now trees or sorry, yeah, it's trees and bushes down here on this level. Um, and then we've kind of we painted the house to a really dark color
so that it really blends. Um, bottom line is is that the council has explicitly approved keeping and restoring the boat house under the following conditions. It was to meet building code. Um, the plans were vetted and of course um we met with the city,
we met with uh civil engineers u and we do have stamp drawings stamp drawings. Uh we obviously have to get permits. That's what we're here for. Um and then restoration was was required not expansion. So um that was part of what we followed here based on the permission
from the city. Um this is our signed plans. You guys will see this. Um this is it right. And um and this is our our basically our layout. The one thing that the city asked us to do was to move the boat
house just slightly off of the setback um which is what we did. But in the planning commission meeting, they they actually held that against us, which I thought was odd. Um, the only reason why we moved that was because the city asked us to. Uh, we could we'd be fine building it in the same spot if that is
a problem. Um, yeah. So, I guess in in conclusion here, you guys, um, I I truly appreciate the DNR, just so you know. Um, I love the river, love the work that they do. The St. Croy is
special because it's protected. Um, but we also value the structures that allow us to experience it. Um, I grew up here. I use that beach house as I said. Um, that's part of why this matters to me. Uh, places like downtown Still Water could never be built today under the
current rules, but we don't regret them, right? Um, we value them and boat houses were part of that history. Um, they were mostly there for commute. Um, there wasn't roads at that time, 70 years ago. there wasn't roads that made it easy to go up and down the river. Um, this is
the the last one in Bayport. Restoring it isn't just legally sound. It preserves a small piece of that history. And um, I feel like, you know, we've done our part over the last two years to to get to where we are today. Um, now we're simply asking the council to
follow through on what um, was really already approved. >> Do you have anything to add? >> If you do, can you state your name and address? >> Yeah. Jennifer Peterson with Kates Fine Homes. I guess I guess my question would be um
and I don't know if anybody can answer it tonight, but how does it work with the scenario we laid out with the beach house in comparison to what we're asking? Can anybody speak to that? Um, we can talk about that when we get
to that part on the um maybe Amanda could is the attorney talk about how that has nothing to do with this specific thing. Right. >> Okay. But >> super. >> Yeah. All right. >> I think they kind of addressed that at the planning commission a little bit
from what I remember from watching that too that it is a totally separate >> but anyways I get your point. >> Clarity going to be great. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, Nathan. Thank you guys. >> Can I ask one quick question? That's something that Nathan mentioned before
and we'll get into the discussion. >> Yeah. Okay. I was trying to avoid like Yeah. having a big discussion with him up at the podium. But >> you mentioned the uh the planning commission uh being short a couple members. It's still a quorum, but short a couple members with two of them new. Are you concerned that you didn't get the process you needed from the planning
commission to get to this point? uh was I I was more concerned that the council would see this because the council was here for the original thing. So I didn't I really didn't expect the planning commission anyways to push this through because I feel like it's a little scary
having a DNR letter like that and I don't see how they could have come through on that. It would have been great to discuss the boat house but they just couldn't go there. Um there was only three people and again two of them got sworn in at the right thing. So I'm like I I don't I it was an organic
conclusion. I thought thanks. >> If I answered your question, okay, but >> it's just opinion. >> Okay, I know there was someone else who would wanted to speak for sure. Want to come on up and state your name and address. >> Okay. >> And we're seeing a strange screen now.
Harrison, >> what's that? >> Oh, Harrison's just got to fix this >> what we're seeing on the monitors, but that's okay. >> Oh, okay. >> You can go right ahead. Uh I'm Brad Nelson from the uh 363 Fifth Avenue Bayport.
It's a dental clinic and uh and it's uh it's a split building dental clinic and rental space. Uh I just want to express my support for these guys renting their space um to any variety of businesses that
want to rent it. Um, there's already rules in the professional building association that prohibits sketchy businesses. So, um, I'm all for whatever they want to do and
I would just ask that you make it easier for them to rent that space because it'll be it'll be a plus for everybody. >> That's all good. >> Thanks. >> Great. Thanks for taking the time to come. >> Yeah. >> Appreciate it. Hi. >> Hi.
>> Uh, Joe Plac, 363 North Fifth Avenue. Um, I have a little summary here I can hand out to you guys. >> That's all right. >> Is it different than what was in our packet? >> Uh, yeah. It's a little It's just a summary to say right now.
>> Oh, a summary of what you're going to say? Yeah. >> Thank you. >> I wrote things down. I'm an engineer. I'm not a public speaker. So, >> very few of us are. >> Yeah. >> Um, good evening, mayor and members of the council. My name is Joe Classic. I'm
one of the owners of 363 North, um, Fifth Street, uh, unit one. I want to start by thanking the city for their work resolving our condo's existence and, uh, parking variance issues for this property. We're grateful for the continued support and partnership with
the city. Um, I grew up in Stillwater and moved back here three years ago to be closer to my family for a long time. I've been searching for a property to house my architectural and engineering firm, Black Sheep. Um, I fell in love with the 1908 theater building and partnered with my wife Barrett, sister
Annie, and brother-in-law, Nate, to buy the property, uh, the unit one of the property. Nate and Annie are lifetime locals, and Nate's grandparents live just up the hill from here in Bayport. Um, we've already been addressing some of the deferred maintenance and
improvements of the property and we'd like to keep this sustainable and to do that we need to lease out square footage that we don't personally use. Um, under Bayport's B2 zoning ordinance, our intended uses are already permitted. Furthermore, Minnesota statute 462357
subdivision E1 protects our right to maintain established use. And we believe the in interim use permit is somewhat unnecessary for the following reasons. Intensification increasing the number of businesses does not increase the number of people. We remain within occupancy
limits. Historically, this property has always seen client turnover. The previous owner and attorney also leased excessive space to a therapist until they grew large enough to occupy the whole unit. Parking our variance resolves all on-site parking
requirements. Current parking issues in the area are in a result of this building specifically um which has been operational for a long time in the neighborhood well before the restaurants were in the area. Um, we want this eclectic area of the town to thrive, but this won't be possible if
existing properties are forced into interimm permits for every minor change or alteration to use. Um, certainty small businesses should not need to wait for a city-led approval process and mandated hours to make space um hours
make the space unusable for modern flexible workers. Um, we ask the council to allow us to operate under existing B2 zoning. However, if the council deems the IUP necessary, we respectfully ask that you modify and approve it tonight to remove hours of operation
restrictions, remove the city-led tenant approval process to prevent administrative bottlenecks, adopt the tenant restrictions already imposed by our condo association and the B2 code. Uh, thank you for your time and consideration. Happy to be part of the
city and thank you for welcoming us. >> Thank you, Joe. >> May the fourth be with you. >> Quick question. Has the city seen the condo association? >> I believe so. >> So, no,
>> Madame Mayor, we've seen the document, but we haven't looked into the content. >> Okay. I just wanted to know if we had that information already. All right. >> Yeah. So our you the requirement in there is professional office use space of profess I think it says professional nature is what it says in there. >> Oh so it's pretty short. There's not much to
>> it is office use office or retail use of professional nature >> or retail use. >> Yeah. But I we don't have existing history there of retail. So I don't think we can stretch that. >> That's that's what I was curious about. Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. >> Anyone else here that wanted to speak
during this part? I know there's a DNR representative in the back. Do you want to have any Do you want to say anything about what's coming up on the agenda for that because this would be the time to do that. >> I'll just I'll just introduce myself. >> Okay.
>> Dan Scolin. I am area hydraologist for the DNR. So, I serve Washington and Ramsey counties. Um I did write a letter for the packet. Um and I'll be available later to answer any questions. Thanks. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Looks like
that's probably it. Um, all right. So, now we'll move to the consent agenda. We're going to consider a resolution adopting items. Now, it would be only 12 items because we're going to move number seven out. Um, so
the April 6 council workshop regular meeting and close meeting minutes. Uh, the April payables and receipts. April building, plumbing, mechanical, and zoning permits report, the update to the standard operating
procedures for the fire department, uh, donation request from the Bayport American Legion for financial assistance to support the Memorial Day parade for $600. Um, award the contract for well number three roof replacement. That's the well
that is in the village green. Upfitting and equipment installation for the PD's patrol vehicle recently purchased and renewal of boat trailer parking agreement with Anderson Corporation. Approve the safe routes to school grant
agreement and subsequent amendments and award a contract for the safe routes to school grant project. Does anyone >> I move to adopt a resolution approving the consent agenda as noted and amended. >> Thanks Carl. A second.
>> Thanks, Katie. Roll call, please. >> Council member Bliss. >> I. >> Council member Gilmore. >> Hi. >> Council member Kip. >> Hi. >> Council member Hill. >> I. >> Mayor Hansen. >> I. Thanks. All right. Not there. Okay.
So, no public hearings or unfinished business. We'll move on to new business. The first is to consider a final plat for the Bay Haven at Bayport second edition development for new construction of 10 single family villas. And it looks like Dan's here to talk about it.
>> Good evening, Mayor Hansen, members of the council. Daniel Le with the planning company serving as the city's planning consultant and working with city staff through this Bay Haven at Bayport development. Uh I see the screen is coming up in just a second. Uh, city council is familiar with this
process having just recently done the first edition for Bay Haven. Um, but this is basically the dotting the eyes, crossing the tees portion of the project where we're looking to finalize construction plans, uh, draft the development agreement and finalize the
PUD permit so that uh, they can begin process on the site. >> Harrison. Harrison, is there something going on that we can't see his screen? >> Is it plugged in? >> Yep. >> It looks like it.
>> I heard the beep. >> Makes you feel better, right? >> Yeah. It's like It's not just me. This There we go. >> So, where we are with this application then is uh the city council on January
5th approved the petition for annexation of the property from Baytown Township, approved a resolution amending the comprehensive plan to guide the property for lowdensity residential land use. amended the zoning map to establish a planned unit development district. Basically mirroring the requirements
from the uh initial phase of Bay Haven, established the PUD development plan or the layout uh for the project and the preliminary plat subdividing the property. Uh those are the entitlements uh to subdivide the 10 lots that are being uh final platted tonight, actually subdivided. Uh where we are in terms of
this process is the city finally received word from the state court of administrative hearings uh in early April that the property was annexed. uh we promptly submitted the uh comprehensive plan amendment to metropolitan council. Their decision was pending in the end of this month on the
27th. Uh so once those processes are finally complete then the uh final plaque can be recorded uh in the subdivision affected. Again this is 10 single family lots and one u outlot. So the comprehensive plan again designated the property for lowdensity residential
use and zoned uh to PUD district. Surrounding it is Bay Haven. uh to the north you have the park uh to the east and then inspiration third edition to the south. These are basically single family homes adjacent to single family homes and open space. So uh obviously well compatible and fits within the
area. Uh the final plat the PUD district and the preliminary plat established the requirements for the lots basically to accommodate the homes that Pratt construction will developed based on their specific uh setback designs. Rightsway and pedestrian access for the
development was really established with the Bay Haven project platting um Baytown Lane and the construction thereof. There is some modification on the east end to make uh access to those two easterlymost lots feasible off of an eyebrow street with the corner that goes
up Colar Way. Um engineering has reviewed all the plans uh for construction and found them to be satisfactory. Outlot A is the small parcel on the uh east side of the site. It basically accommodates that trail that's being constructed from Barker's Alps Park up to Baytown Lane. That will
be deeded to the city. Uh that process is basically that the city attorney will draft a warranty deed for the project or for the parcel. It'll be signed and then once the final plat is recorded, the deed is immediately signed thereafter. So there's no delay in that transaction or gap. Um there is also the homeowners
association. This will be incorporated as part of the overall um Bay Haven at Bayport HOA including any requirements for architecture that's managed by the developer. We also included as part of that uh irrigation restrictions and management requirements to ensure uh
sustainable water usage going forward. Uh the developer is also responsible for park dedication to be paid as a cash fee in lie of land as part of the development contract uh that they will execute. U there's a landscape plan that's included with the development. It
provides general landscaping for the um project along the street. Uh they did provide substantial plantings on a 7 foot burm along the southside creating basically a buffer between these homes and inspiration third edition. Uh as part of the overall project they did do
a tree preservation inventory uh documenting existing trees specific to this area of the project. Uh there were 111 trees to be removed. 11 >> making up numbers. >> I'm not an engineer or an accountant.
um and 103 trees to be removed. Some of the trees that are being uh maintained are transplanted, so they're significantly larger. Uh we did include a condition of approval that the landscape plan is subject to uh city review and approval. So that uh there is the difference of approximately there's
eight trees between what they're removing and what's being planted and store and restored. uh so we can work with the developer to add those eight trees and reach that 1:1 ratio that is required under the city ordinance. Uh the planning commission did hold a public hearing uh to consider the final
plat although it's not required by statute that was at their meeting on April 20th. Uh developer was present and agreed with the recommendations of city staff. Um there were some discussion and questions about the phasing of the project and how construction moves forward but no significant concerns. Uh
so they voted three to zero to recommend approval. Uh we've prepared resolution affecting that approval for your consideration tonight along with the planned unit development permit and the development contract. >> Oh, that's it. All right. Great. Okay. Thank you. Um
so do we have any >> There was no public comments either. I don't know. at the planning commission. >> Planning commission. No one came up and was >> Yeah, I think there was some inspiration people there, but they asked about like they were more concerned about the the
if they were going to see this new development from their home and you kind of explained the burn. I think this was outside of the meeting where you talked about it. I feel like that was in notes somewhere. I read it somewhere >> and they seemed satisfied with the response. Um, I appreciate how diligent
you are about the tree preservation. Um, and it was I kind of noticed that the math wasn't really adding up. I'm like, wait, they they're not planting as many trees as are being removed, but and it is you said a difference of eight, but if we can figure out where those eight
could possibly go. I suggested even maybe I know you guys are doing the the trail that's going to connect this development with Parker's Alps. If we could add some trees along there. I know it's outside of the scope of the actual where the project is, but that's also part of what you're doing. So, just an
idea to throw out there as a place because I know you feel like you may have already put plenty of trees on that burm it looks like. But, um, I would like to see us follow that 1:1 ratio if we can for replacing what we're taking out because I think that's important. People don't
like to see all this natural destruction for homes to be built and I think that's the least we can do is to make sure that the trees get replaced that are taken out. So, um, here the other thing I had was stipulation
number 16 and making sure we had a timeline on that and I can't I don't have very good notes right in front of me, but that was that the um, >> mayor, that was the deed for the >> the outlaw a >> correct. So the intent is that is recorded at the same time as the final
plat and the development contract so that it's affected right away and it doesn't linger out there as >> Yeah. because I think we've had issues with that in the past. Okay. So we're feeling good about that now. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And um same with the park dedication
fees. I had a question about that when the timeline is to pay that, but that's right up front. We won't like allow them a building permit until those are paid. So, it sounds like we're already on our way with the the apartment complex paying theirs. So, um that's not this
project. I think that was all I had for notes about this item. Does anyone have comments or questions or are we ready to make motions or how you feeling? >> I don't >> I don't have anything.
>> Okay. All right. I would welcome a motion if anyone wants to make one. >> I move to adopt a resolution approving a PUD permit development agreement and final plat for Bay Haven of Bayport second edition. >> Thanks Orin.
>> I'll second Ethan and a roll call. >> Council member Bliss >> I. >> Council member Gilmore >> I. >> Council member Kip >> I. >> Council member Hill >> I. >> Mayor Hansen >> I. All right. Congratulations.
I heard uh there's already 10 lots in the first phase that are being held. So good. >> Congrats. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you, Dan. >> Thank you, Dan. >> All right. So, now we will Are you still
standing up there for the next >> not going anywhere? >> You're not going anywhere. We're going to um move on to considering variances to construct a substandard accessory structure boat house within the lower St. Cory River Bluffland and Shoreland
Management and Flood Plane Management District located at 317 Lake Street submitted by project representative Kate's Fine Homes and Dan is going to give us the background on it. >> Thank you again, Mayor. Um, so the site
is again located at 317 Lake Street South. Uh, the comprehensive plan guides this property for lowdensity residential. It's zoned R2 single family district, so it's a permitted use within that area. Uh there are a number of overlapping regulations that stack on
top of the zoning ordinance including the lower St. Croy River Bluff line and shoreland management district. Um portions of the property including the location of the proposed boat house are within the flood plane. So flood plane management rules apply. Um but the area is developed with single family homes
along the St. Croy across Lake Street is uh the marina. So the the use of the property fits in well with the existing area. As I said, there are overlapping uh layered regulations on this property. Uh the first being zoning which is established under Minnesota statutes 462
357. Uh then on top of that as an overlay, you have appendex C of the city code for the riverway ordinance established in accordance with Minnesota rules. Uh and then appendix D uh the flood plane management ordinance also implemented uh in accordance with
Minnesota rules. Both appendix C and D of the city code are basically standards set by the DNR uh that the city adopts and administers on behalf of the DNR. So, uh the city doesn't have the opportunity to legislate what these requirements are. We're basically told
these are what are in place in this area and this is what is to be enforced and administered going forward. So, uh Mr. Jesperson spoke briefly to the uh prior variance applications concerning this property. Um the true outcome of that discussion at that point
was to remove a condition on one of the variance approvals addressing removal of the boat house. Um council may have made comments as to uh the appropriate use of the property, restoration of it, etc. But uh that action is still subject to
the requirements, thus the need to go through this variance process. The city council cannot prejudice their decision back in 2003 on this current application. you need to consider the facts being presented with the request and make the decision based on the criteria that are outlined both in
ordinance and in accordance with Minnesota rules. So the proposal is to demolish the existing dilapitated boat boat house. This is not a restoration, it's a replacement. Uh so the existing boat house even though uh the proposed is basically the same side it is shifted
slightly uh more north uh from the current location uh but it is still uh within the setback from the ordinary high water level and it's basically built upon a bluff uh as defined by the riverway ordinance. Uh these were pictures that uh the city
previously had the structure showing its uh condition now several years ago. um the dilapitated nature of the structure uh and the photos can speak for themselves. I believe they're included in your packet as well. So the variances from the uh riverway ordinance include
the uh allowance to put this new structure within the 100 foot setback the ordinary high water level to encroach within the 40ft bluff line. It's actually again on the bluff and then grading on those slopes greater than 12%. With variance applications, there is some discretion here for the
city council. You're basically taking criteria established in the city code and applying it to the request and evaluating and judging uh your decision based on that because variances are treating a certain property different
than other properties under the same regulation. There is more discretion in this action than there would be for a conditional use permit, which is an allowed use for everybody provided the conditions are met. So, uh, that's kind of the the background on the city's
actions. Now, the riverway ordinance, uh, includes a number of statements as to what the purpose of it is. I think the easiest way to think of this, it's the person sitting on the boat, uh, out on the river looking at the shoreline. It's to be as natural as it can be. Obviously, you're not going to step back
to the 1850s and see all natural. Um but the ordinance includes setback requirements, height restrictions, material colors, planting requirements intended to minimize the impact and visibility of any development from the roofway. The comprehensive plan talks
about maintaining these regulations and restoring these areas wherever possible. So, uh, within the context of considering a variance, the council needs to decide whether what's being requested is consistent with the intent of the underlying regulation as set
forth in the purpose statements. So, as to the existing boat house, the applicant and their information and as it's evident from the photos, uh, states that the building is dilapitated. It presents safety concerns. Um, so Minnesota statutes
462 357 does address general zoning authority provision subdivision 1E addresses non-conforming uses and structures, but go to the next paragraph. Subdivision 1F specifically
addresses buildings and structures within the lower St. Croy Riverway Management District. The provisions dealing with non-conforming or substandard structures in the lower St. Croy are different than would apply anywhere else in Bayport or
in any other city along the river. So that's that's significant in that we're not talking about a zoning non-conforming use. We're talking about lower St. Croy non-conforming substandard structures. So the rules set forth in the city code establishes and
includes these definitions for substandard structures, those that don't comply with the ordinance as it was established in 1977. Uh it also addresses rights to substandard structures uh being continued. If the structure needs replacing due to
deterior destruction, deterioration or obsolescence, the replacement must comply with the dimensional standards of the riverway ordinance. What this provision says is there is no legacy rights. There is no grandfathering within the St. Croy Riverway Ordinance
District. The intent is that once this structures had its useful life and it needs to be replaced, that replacement structure needs to u comply with all the requirements. That's also important to consider that talking about variances
here because the St. Croy Riverway ordinance doesn't make a provision for water oriented structures. The DNR has regulations that apply to other public waters outside of the St. Croy River Valley that specifically identify water
oriented structures. So they know how to make allowance for it. It's not included here. It's excluded. It's not an allowed use within this riverway corridor. So the criteria for the uh variance are set forth um both by uh statute or by
rules and by the ordinance. Um looking at uh first you know there needs to be a hardship. Um the intent is that these un these regulations are applied uniformly. Uh that uh in terms of having an allowed use a single family home is a reasonable
use of property. uh any allowance of an accessory structure basically needs to comply with the requirements of the ordinance. It's convenience. Uh it's not necessarily a necessity for reasonable use. Uh and then we've also noted um that basically we have a plan for
placing accessory structure within these required setbacks and on these slopes, but we don't have any indication of why it could not be put in another portion of the property uh in compliance with these regulations. Uh the other criteria is that um the
need for the variance isn't caused by the actions of the land owner. Uh in this case, not necessarily this land owner, but prior land owners as well for as long as this building has been there. The building was allowed to deteriorate. If it had been maintained in the way that other structures along the St. Croy
have been, then you could restore, remodel, etc. But again, we're at the point of uh replacement. There aren't any provisions for boat houses within the St. Croy River Valley. So, this would be allowing a use here, denied other people. Um, there uh also the
physical conditions of the property aren't unique to this property. Every property along Lake Street there and probably other portions of the St. Croy River shoreline and Bayport have these same issues with topography, vegetation, uh, and flood plane.
And then the final criteria, the variance of granted will not alter the character of the area. And then that no v variance would be granted that allows a use prohibited by the ordinance. Um it would alter the character of the area in that the intent is that this be removed
the shoreline restored in accordance with the lower St. Croy Riverway ordinance. U the second criteria is obviously the the structures prohibited by the by the ordinance and the imposition of these setbacks. So our conclusions in our report uh
presented to the planning commission was that the existing boat house is substandard doesn't comply with the requirements of the ordinance. It's dilapitated and presents safety concerns necessitating its replacement. Uh substandard structures are not allowed to be replaced uh in that location.
There is no legacy right to that uh area of the site to reconstruct. uh and that there isn't um finding that the building couldn't be built at another location in compliance with all regulations. So the request varants are not consistent with the
policy of the comprehensive plan. They're in confl conflict with the requirements of the riverway ordinance. Uh they in they violate the specific plain language of regulations for substandard structures. Uh and then they would allow a use not permitted for other properties under the same
regulations. So, planning commission considered the letter from the Department of Natural Resources dated April 10th, which was a nice succinct summary of the issues uh before it, which was about half the number of pages of my report. So, well done. The planning commission did hold the public
hearing April 20th. Uh there was one resident that spoke in favor of the request. Uh the applicant was present and addressed the planning commission as well. Obviously, they did not agree with the recommendations of city staff. Uh but the planning commission did vote 3 to zero to recommend the city council deny the request and I think it was
informative as part of their discussion is they all agreed that it would be nice if you could have a boat house along the St. Croy there is a definite purpose for that type of structure but they also acknowledge the fact that under the plain language of the ordinance it's not
allowed and in specifically it says when you replace this structure it must comply. So, they didn't feel that approval of variance was warranted or the criteria satisfied. Uh, you have our report from April 27th as part of your packet and included therein is a resolution adopting findings and denying
the application. >> Thank you, Dan. Nicely done. Very nicely summarized. >> Um, comments, questions from council. I know I have some comments I'd like to make.
regarding the the Riverway ordinances. This may be a question for either the attorney or the administrator. As a council, what are our responsibilities to uh enforce that those ordinances or to issue variances that are in line with
those ordinances? Um is it our responsibility to issue a variance, you know, that's in line with that ordinance? Mayor. So, the council does have the discretion to issue a variance if you make a finding that the criteria for doing so have been satisfied.
>> Okay. >> Good question, Carl. >> I uh I'd like to just unless someone has something else they want to say. I'd like to just clarify some things. >> Yeah. I have I just have one quick question. How many structures can you
have on your property >> in our ordinance, Sarah? Like >> accessory structures. Um, Council Member Hill, there is an allowance for one accessory detached. >> That's what I thought. Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. Good question.
>> Yep. Because there is one there already. >> Yeah, there is. >> Um, I just wanted to clarify what happened at the June 3rd, 5th, I can't remember, the 2000 June 5th, 2023 meeting and what we
approved at that meeting. Um just to be clear, um we were given a presentation by Nathan Chesperson, very detailed. Um he presented one of his slides was um about the appraised value of the boat
house to repair it and many many many references to repairing the boat house. Um and that was our understanding at the time. I know a couple of you weren't on the council at the point at that point. Um the conclusion even of the slideshow
was that he So we were the point of that whole conversation was that we had originally the city staff had um attached the the boat house to some conditions for another variance that we
did pass. So we kind of went against the DNR. He's not mad at us for that. let let the Jespersons expand their third floor towards the river. Um, and part of that was to the city staff recommended that he remove the boat house in order to have that variance approved. He came
back and said, "Can you please take that out of the conditions for the other variance?" And what we said was, "Okay, he convinced us we will remove it from the conditions for that other variance."
Um, and this is what the stipulation was. The boat house would be repaired within 12 months of that approval. It is now 3 years later and we are getting a request to totally demolish it and
rebuild it, which is not what we had agreed to. Whatever he might think we agreed to, that's not what it was. I rewatched the meeting a couple times, that section of it, just to make sure. And there was many many cases where the attorney even said here's a quote the
intent is just to repair. This is not to build a garage mahal down by the water. This is just to repair it in accordance with the statute. That is what we approved. That is not what we are being asked to approve today. So I just wanted
to make that clear to if you didn't get a chance to watch the June meeting. So, I have more notes, but I think >> I have one other question. Is there a spot that he Well, he already has a building, so he could expand that
building, >> right? >> Because it's his intent to put his boat in that building. >> I don't think it's the boat. I think it's accessories for the boat. So, those could be, >> but I don't think it matters. >> I don't think it matters either. No, but he could. There is no nothing has That's
the other thing. There was an hardship supported by the applicant that that it couldn't be built somewhere else. >> And I was just on the St. Croy last night and I didn't see one boat house besides that one. And >> you did see one. >> I didn't want on both Wisconsin side and
Minnesota side. And then it was brought up about like Still Water and how you couldn't make it now, but we wouldn't make that now knowing all the things that we know about keeping the St. Croy beautiful. >> Mhm. I mean, we're on I'm I love the sacroy. I grew up on it my whole life.
So, it would be hard to >> Yeah. Yeah. think that I don't love it. >> One thing to keep in mind is with the lower St. Croy River ordinance, it has several districts within it. Bayport is a certain type of district. Still Water might be a different type of district
>> up and down. So there might be different regulations that apply that maybe in certain parts there are boat houses allowed, but yeah, >> within what's allowed in Bayport, it's not an allowed structure. >> Yeah, I don't go on the other side of the Hudson River, so I guess I don't know that. Or the Hudson Bridge. Can we
talk about uh the beach house cuz I know that was brought up and I know we talked about it. Um Sarah talked about it the that the beach house was built in 1971 before it and then it was remodeled. It was only remodeled. it was not torn down and rebuilt.
>> Yeah, thanks for reminding me that. Yeah, they wanted an answer to that. So, are there and I think it was Ethan that I was talking to earlier like are there rules for what like how can you say that the beach house was just rebuilt? Is it because we kept a certain wall, we kept
a something? Are there what constitutes it being not rebuilt, repaired or restored or whatever versus being rebuilt? Can you explain a little bit? Oh, Madame Mir, specific to the beach house, it was a concrete block building um that underwent a cosmetic remodel.
The roof was failing. So, the roof line was changed because it was a flat roof. Um but the concrete block structure remained intact. That was not the footprint wasn't enlarged or altered in any way. Okay. >> There were new windows because the windows were failing. Um, and we did
work closely with the DNR and knew those same restrictions and parameters um that we needed to work within that would apply to this project, too. >> Okay. And regardless, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about tonight, but just to clarify that we did
abide by those ordinances at the time that we remodeled. >> So, you mentioned the rule. You mentioned the person in the boat and not seeing something. So the front of this boat house is 10 ft wide. Correct. >> Mhm.
>> If you start going north of Bayport, you get Anderson windows. You get a waste treatment plant. You get another bunch of stuff. So it's like, are we really worried about 10 ft? I understand why they put it in there. And we don't want to build all this nasty stuff all over
the river. But this is literally 10 ft on property that's way set back. And if they do it in a way with the colors and all the other stuff, I still again I'll go back. I was in support back then and I still am. I think it's ridiculous. There's way too many rules and
regulations and I understand it's on a waterway and I mean the guy is not trying to make something ridiculous down there. Especially people say to me and say, "Oh, it's the it's the beauty beauty of the river." Are you kidding me? That stuff up north. I mean are it's it's asinine to me. But that's just me.
So >> when when did the city >> um request the the setback or or the move? Where in the process did that happen? >> Uh Nathan said that you guys asked him to move it further north or whatever. Was that
>> part? >> Mayor, the intent was to avoid another variance. Um because the existing boat house is 7 feet from the property line, 10 ft's required. So if you move it to the 10 ft, that's one less variance on top of the three.
>> So it wasn't north, it was west that it got moved away from the river. >> No, moved north from the side lot line. >> Oh, the side lot line. Got >> my question is like river wing. >> When did that request? >> So mayor, it was sometime between when this current application was submitted
and my recollection it would be last fall. Okay. As part of their revised plans. So that was something that staff specifically asked for and the applicant provided >> and went through went through city engineering to get the plans reviewed,
right? The the stamp and the signature. My I think my biggest concern and I think point of empathy for the for the applicant here is um the perceived comments that were made. I think you you clarified uh the
the language and the intent behind them, but did the council say something that could reasonably be interpreted as a request to repair or replace? And then as these as these discussions continue to happen, certainly when we're asking for a
setback uh in conversations with the applicant on behalf of the city, not not necessarily in front of the council, but um you know, were we continuing to warn that you if you're going to apply, can
you do this? But there's still a concern that that variance can't be requested. And then when we approve the the plans, there's a number of points here where we let this process continue to go or allowed it to continue to go. Were we clear or did we
>> we say something that could reasonably be construed as you're kind of heading down the right track here. >> Mayor staff was always clear that there were the three key variances y related to I would consider the sideyard setback to be a secondary issue regarding this.
And again, the the basis of our recommendation is that this is a replacement, not a restoration. Even if it was still at that location and hadn't been moved, they're still planning on clearing it off and building an entirely new structure. >> Okay?
>> And staff doesn't have the authority to tell them that it's not going to be approved by this city council. They can just give them the here's all the rules and >> Right. Yeah. I mean, right. I mean, that's how you guys would proceed, right?
>> Mayor, the intent is always, you know, you don't want to see something come forward that needs half a dozen variances. >> What can you reasonably eliminate from the discussion? So, okay, move the structure slightly. Now, that's where we don't have to deal with the
sideyard. We're really focused on the high water level, bluff line, and steep slopes. Is that why there was the shifting of the project? Okay. Any other discussion or questions? It's hard. I don't want
It's nothing personal and I'm sorry that you guys have gone through all of this effort. It was obviously what we thought we were doing that night versus what you guys thought. Seems like they're two different things, but it was seemed very clear to me when I went back
and watched the video that it was just a repair which would have been within the means of would have fit within all of the ordinances that we have to follow if you're going to repair it only. So it just
and within 12 months and now it's three years later. There's So both of those things kind of rubbed me the wrong way. >> It even said if you went back and watched it, it said repair or restore, not redo the whole thing. Tear it down and build again. It's just
>> that's a rebuild. You know >> what's the difference between repair and restore? >> Well, you're restoring what's already there. >> Sure. You know, like you're making what's already there >> not fall apart. >> Which is obviously different than a
replace. >> Yeah. >> Can you hear Orin okay when he sits that far back? I'm just curious. Like I just want I just want to make sure heard. >> These are pretty good mics. >> Are they? Oh yeah. >> I think it's echoes in here too. But
>> Katie already muted me anyway over here. >> Oh Katie. Just kidding. >> Yeah. Yep. Okay. >> I'm sorry. Can we request to talk though or >> we're not? No, we're we let you talk at the beginning. We're going to try to keep this more streamlined.
>> We can't give you any kind of feedback from this. >> I think we've I feel like I have adequate feedback and >> I don't know. >> I I'd be open to hearing it, but I'll >> be open to hearing it. >> Leave that to your discretion. I don't
think we need to, but if you feel like it, I mean, I just feel like it's going to be the same thing over. >> Yeah. I don't know what could be added to convince me. >> If I can hear something new, I don't think it will change, but >> something different that I didn't already hear. >> Yeah. Do you have something new you'd
like to add? If it's just reiterating what we've already heard, I would say no. >> Well, I I kind of feel like I want to give background on. We were requested to get engineered plans of it. That's why it's new. I can restore that. We can
restore and repair that building. We can restore and repair that that structure. >> Okay. Can you please now come come to the podium and tell me why why this is different. >> So point what's in front of you right now is a variance to replace. So what
you're going to be going to decide right now is a variance to replace. If somebody wants to bring forth a new application to do something different and that application is completed deemed complete by city staff and then it would come forth in the
course of the ordinary course of of how that would work. That would be an appropriate time to listen. This is you have a question in front of you that the council needs to answer the question in front of you. Sorry guys. And then there's a new question that comes forth later and you can just muddies. We can't Yeah, we can't do that.
>> We we got to stay on the question in front of us. Sorry. No, I'm glad you redirected us. Thank you. >> I just wanted to keep on that Carl brought up. That was that's new if if you ask me. I wanted to comment on what he was bringing up as a concern of his.
>> Well, and if this is a note today, I'm just >> Okay. So, right now we are not in a public forum right now. And so if the if the council could decide what they would like to do and then again if there's new new decisions that need to be made by by the applicant on something different
that's obviously well within their legal right to do so they can come forth with whatever that might be. >> I agree. I would I do you want me to make a motion? I can do that to move this forward.
>> Yeah. I move to adopt a resolution denying variances to allow construction of a detached accessory building at the property located at 317 Lake Street based on what we've been presented with. >> I second.
>> Thanks, Katie. All right, I think we need a roll call, right? >> Council member Bliss, >> you have to go alphabetical, don't you? >> I, >> Council Member Gilmore, >> nay. Council member Kip >> I.
>> Council member Hill >> I. >> Mayor Hansen >> I. >> Sorry that's we had to vote the way with what we were presented with. >> Okay. Now we're going to consider a variance to allow expansion of an
existing parking lot located at 146 Fth Avenue North. Submitted by property owner Anderson Corporation. And Sarah's going to present the item. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Eristine, if I could get the click share
on the monitors, please. Madam Mayor, members of the council, uh the project area is located at the intersection of Main Street and Fifth Avenue North on the periphery of Anderson Corporation's main campus. Use of the compact area is intense with the existing building located less than 5t
from the front property line accompanied by off- streetet parking um in the front and in the rear. The building has been vacant for 25 years and increasing in disrepair. Due to its proximity to Anderson's new hire and talent acquisition facility located to the
east, the building is proposed to be demolished and the area repurposed for additional and more accessible off- streetet parking for employees and visitors. To meet the parking stall and drive aisle dimensions required by the zoning code, Anderson is requesting a variance
to allow the new parking lot to be constructed at a similar setback to the existing building. The parking on the right ofway will be restored with sad complementing adjacent boulevards in the surrounding neighborhood. A retaining wall and fence will be installed on the south portion of the lot to create an
appropriate grade as well as a screen and buffer from the surrounding residential properties. A new stairwell will also be provided to direct employees and visitors to the new new hire uh talent and acquisition facility. State statute cites that variances may
be granted when it is established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance which are outlined on this slide. This language establishes the criteria by which the city council is to consider the variance application. As we know from Dan's presentation, um if the
variance is determined to meet the criteria, a request for the variance should be granted. As outlined in the staff report, the proposed parking lot expansion is reasonable to create safer, more efficient off- streetet parking for Anderson employees and visitors. Uh like many other commercial and industrial
properties in the city. The existing building does not comply with current setback requirements. However, it should be noted that these circumstances were not created by the land owner and were in existence prior to adoption of the zoning code. Finally, the additional off- streetet parking is of the same character of the existing adjacent
parking lot and will be less noticeable in the existing building. Rightway landscaping and buffering will be more compatible in character with the surrounding residential neighborhood. The planning commission held a public hearing on April 20th. Public comments
were received on the application, mainly related to concerns with the proposed two-way traffic circulation and Anderson Corporation employees not complying with the 2-hour on street parking requirement. Following discussion, the planning commission voted 300 to recommend the city council approve the
application subject to including conditions in the resolution to address the traffic and parking concerns as well as requiring the planting of boulevard trees. staff finds that the criteria for the variance has been met and therefore is recommending approval with the conditions that stated in the staff
report and outlined within the draft resolution. The city council is asked to take action on this application. Um we'd be happy to take any questions from staff and the applicant and representative from Anderson is also present for questions. >> Okay. Thank you Sarah. Welcome.
Right. Anyone would have anything they'd like to say? >> No, but I was there. So, yeah, you were there. It made sense to me. >> The main thing was with the right the map. >> Yeah. So, right now you can only go in
here and it stops here. So what the guy who lives right next door to here is concerned is people are leaving from this parking lot right up here on 95, you know, and is going to >> try to come this way instead of waiting for all those people.
>> So she's pointing at things, but she's saying there's a parking lot to the north. >> It's a very very large parking lot and people will there's fear that they will come from that north parking lot and come out cuz right now they can't. It's a one way in >> only
>> and I I understand that concern and I am also a little nervous about that and cuz >> yeah they're going to want to try to take that short way out right >> so the employee said they at um let out time let out time I don't know >> yeah whatever change time they're
wanting to have one of their security guards there cuz there is a full-time 24-hour security service >> that will just kind of sit there >> sit there and be like no you can't go through this Okay. But also I I mean >> but they can't be there all the time.
>> Correct. Cuz there's things going on. >> Yeah. Is there anything else we can do to deter them from coming that way? Um >> like barriers is what the resident was saying. Like could you have a barrier there?
>> I don't know why you couldn't. I guess >> would you mind coming to the podium to address that specific question? Uh David Ripley. I'm representing Anderson Corporation and the request at 146 Fifth Avenue North. Um so yeah, all great comments at the planning commission. We
talked in depth with Katie and the other individual Joe. 100% agree. The main intent and fear, right, is the 300 plus parking stalls to the north of our door plant and the funneling down um to this pinch point off of Fifth Avenue, a residential street. Um, couple things
like Katie said, the 247 U security monitoring. Um, we do have staff to do that. Now, there's always fear that, yeah, you're going to have someone there and how often they're going to be there. Um, especially the door plant, the north end. So, the what I'll call the
additional 300 400 parking stalls that would come down. The most frequent um times in which cars are either coming on or out are at normal shift changes. So we feel it's very doable on our end to place security at correct times of our shift our shift changes which are set in
stone each day. So we have three main shifts right. So the tent is at those three main shifts we will have security present there um to abide by only the stalls that is in this parking stall um which I know I've provided with Sarah and Madden additional conversations
leading up to this. So it would be that 37 total. Um, just a little history, right? There's 19 total right now. We're proposing 18 additional with this expansion um through site signage and arrows and mark and markings on there um
along with the 24/7 security um personnel on site helping flow traffic or deter anyone else coming. We feel very confident that um we'll be able to I'll say restrict any unwanted access additionally coming off the fifth route. That's going to be only permitted for
these applicants that are in that 37 stall column. >> Okay. So, you'd prefer that over the barrier. Is it just like an is it a safety thing to not want to like block that off or why would >> I guess by barriers are we referring to
some sort of access gate >> that >> or even those u cement? >> Yeah. like cement things or even just >> what we have for the farmers market that block the street, you know, like street blockers. >> Yeah. >> But those might fall over in winter.
>> Are you saying just on the north side where that curvy arrow is things there? Snow removal, right? We got a big campus there. We got to be able to properly snow removal. So that's consecut that's one whole big push for our snow removal services. barricades, things in that
nature just adds added complexity um to that kind of separating off where do we push snow. I the thing is this lot it's so small too. There's no staging areas there. We actually have to haul off snow. So just having added barriers there is going to be uh I not going to
say impossible but darn near impossible for us to get this new removal services figured out. >> Okay. All right. And we can always revisit it, right? because I think that was part of it is if we find that there are issues with the traffic, we can >> Madame Mayor, members of the council, we
we've worked closely with David and his team on this design and this project. We would like to give them the opportunity to >> try >> try to educate and do their own enforcement. I I would like to read the clause that we included in the resolution to address those concerns. >> Um there's more that leads up to this
sentence, but this is I think key. Should the two-way drive aisle or related traffic circulation become a nuisance, the city has the discretion to require modifications to the parking lot, including but not limited to barriers, signage, staff security, and/or reconfiguration or removal of the
two-way drive aisle. >> Perfect. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. >> I like it. >> I have a question about what that why there's that notch kind of. So, we've got it looks like what? Three parking stalls on the southern end south east
corner and then there's this weird notch where there aren't any parking stalls. >> Oh, just up north of there. Yep. Right there. So, that's our actually our electrical service that currently >> feeds you. Okay. I'm like, there's got to be some reason why there's no spots there. Okay. >> So, that actually will feed our electrical for those adjacent buildings,
those other off buildings just to the west of there. Um, plus we have an employee sales um rep um that sits in a guard shack kind of right there that kind of does all our employee sales. So um with lamp roots going away, we lose
our um ability to house our electrical that we still need to support our other off building. So that actually will turn into an outdoor panel electrical panel that would be part of the screening. It's set back. >> I just thought of another condition. >> You know what I'm you know where I'm
going. Oh, >> an EV charging station, right? >> A public one. >> Public one. >> A public one. Oh, we get a lot of requests just for the employees. Um, >> I know. What do you think? >> Right by the electrical. >> We're open to have
>> That seems like it could be really inexpensive if it's right there. >> Were you talking specifically? >> I don't know. One of those stalls right by the electrical. >> Behind the electrical panel. Um, >> we're always open to discussions, right? >> Okay. Let's talk about that later.
Okay. Um, yeah. And I am very happy that whoever on the planning commission, I can't remember, came up with put trees in the boulevard. Like, well, duh. That was a great idea. >> I know it says up to three though in the thing. So, I'm hoping it's not just one. Yeah. >> But, okay.
>> My one comment on that, and once again, we're we're willing 100% to work with you guys on that. My only concern and after the fact, and I um put some thought to that, is just sight lines um with any potential trees. So, I think we need to be thoughtful. Um, what type of whether it's trees, shrubbery,
landscape, I I think it needs to be an open discussion a little further and I know we've talked to Sarah and Matt about that. Um, TKDA, our uh engineer of record, we're holding off on our final drawing sets until we get some sort of landscaping plan. Okay. >> Um, so I do want to have still an
ongoing open discussion um like I said, just take in consideration sight lines um with appropriate safety not only for our folks but also the residents coming out on the field. Sure. >> Make sure there's adequate sight lines there. >> That's a great point. >> Yeah. Okay.
>> Any other comments, questions? >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you for clarifying things. Anyone want to make a motion? Don't keep making me make motions. I move to adopt a resolution approving the variance to allow the expansion of the
existing off- streetet parking lot located at 146 5th Avenue North. >> Second. >> Oh, I think Carl beat her. >> Oh, I think you beat him. >> Okay. >> Sorry. Okay. So, thanks Katie and Carl. Uh, roll call, please. >> Council member Bliss.
>> Hi. >> Council member Gilmore. >> Hi. >> Council member Kip. >> Hi. >> Council member Hill. >> I. >> Council Mayor Hansen. I All right, that is approved. Thanks for coming. Yep. And thanks for working
with staff so nicely. Appreciate it. All right, now we're going to consider an interim use permit to operate a multi-tenant office co-working space located at 5635th Avenue North, unit one, submitted by property owners Joe Classic and Nate Johnson
and Sarah again. Madam Mayor, members of the council, uh the property contains an existing office building consisting of two separate units. Unit one was formerly owned by Dwight Cumins of Cummins Law Office
operating as a law firm with multiple lawyers and legal assistants. Unit two is owned by Brad Nelson, who is here tonight of Bay Dental and will continue to operate as a dental office. The applicants recently purchased unit one of the property with the intent of operating an engineering consulting firm
and one office space with the potential of subleasasing the remaining office space to individual professionals, remote workers, or local startup businesses. Office use is a permitted use in the B2 central business zoning district. However, the property does not comply with minimum lot requirements or
design and performance standards to accommodate multiple individual businesses. And this relates most mostly to off- streetet parking. The applicants have acknowledged the acknowledged the lack of non-conformity and are therefore requesting the city to consider an interim use permit to allow a
multi-tenant co-working environment. As proposed, the applicants would sublet seven existing offices within unit one to individual professionals such as legal, engineering, administration with a maximum building occupancy of 15 persons. Tenants would generally remain
on site in half day or full day increments as opposed to retail or clinic use which typically generates traffic turnover in 30 or 60 minute increments. General businesses business hours of operation would be weekdays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. And two off- streetet
parking stalls exist behind this property for use by one unit one and unit two. However, tenant and visitor parking will be limited to on street parking along Fifth Avenue North and adjacent Fourth and Fifth Streets North.
An interim use permit is typically granted for a temporary period and allows a basis for the city to determine whether a use is appropriate for the site. At a workshop this past December, the city council expressed support for an interim permit to allow multi-tenant use of unit one. As proposed, the permit
would be issued for a period of one year. The planning commission held a public hearing on April 20th and no public comments were received at that time. Following discussion, the planning commission voted 300 to recommend the city council approve the application.
And finally, staff finds that the criteria um has been met and is therefore recommending approval for an interim permit. The city council is asked to take action on the application. Um, as noted, the applicants are here in the audience and we'd be happy to take any questions.
>> Thank you, Sarah. Welcome. Questions, comments? >> I just hope we can make it as smooth as possible for them to get a tenant in there. >> It's not like >> like it's it's so hard to already
get attendant, I feel. So, why make it harder with having to jump through all these holes? like just be like these are the people you can have here you go and then them can find one of those people on the list like let's have a list of like the be you know there's got to be a
list >> I was asking for that list I have asked for a list >> because I think it would be so much easier to get it rented out >> yes I think >> and just anybody having even the renter the person renting from them having like
oh I can be here just the reassurance of oh well maybe once this happens I'm going to get kicked out and then I'm going to have to find someplace to bring my bu business because I would like businesses here and pay for it. It would be great. >> I agree agree with everything you said Katie.
You want a list of what can go in there >> or what can't at least I mean something instead of them having somebody come to them and then be like hold on I got to go wait and ask the city to see if I can have them move in there and then they ask the city and then by that time that person already found a new place.
>> Yes, I actually felt the same way and I wanted to just remove that part from >> where it says um >> subject to approval by the city. Like if we can just get rid of that because I feel like we've already outlined they can't have more than 15
>> um >> occupants including the people the clients of the people. >> There's already rules around what goes into that kind of a district and now I've learned there's rules about what the condo association will allow. So, I
feel like we need to trust their judgment, especially if we're going to put them under an interim use permit to say like, let's see how they let's see how it goes for them, you know, and they're going to run into enough problems with um okay, we approve this now, maybe they
get someone that wants to lease it in two or three months and then in another eight months or whatever, we might come back and say, oh, never mind. you know, and they've signed a year lease and I mean, it can get pretty complicated for you guys. So, >> there's I feel like you have enough
stuff to worry about. It would be nice for you to be able to go, "Yeah, that seems like a good fit. We understand the criteria, which I feel like you do. You kind of know what we're looking for." >> Yep. >> Um I I feel like we need to give them that flexibility. I understand it's nice
to have a little bit of control from the staff to be like, "Oh, what if they put something crazy in there?" Um, that's I guess why we have the interim thing. Absolutely. We can either trust them for that interim or not. And I feel like I'm leaning towards let's trust them.
>> Um, I'm not sure though about the other they're also asking to remove the hours of operation. I don't know if you guys saw that when I'm speaking. >> I I would rather agree with that. I my office building in Woodbury, we're open 24/7. I've been in in my office at
midnight >> and I mean unfortunately that's just the nature of the beast. So I I'm fine with removing that or even making it just you know lengthening those those hours but the restrictions I mean 8 to 5 is kind of an antiquated hours of operation at this point. I think life
>> I think so too. >> Yeah. Especially if you work for a company that's in like California. So you're on California time. Well that's till 7 then. >> Yep. Madam >> anywhere else in the world where it's completely different >> crew anywhere. Yeah, you could. Yeah.
>> Yeah. I would remove I would remove the the hours of operation. >> Restaurants over there are open till 10 anyway. And I think that's exactly why we were trying to have them be more daytime hours sort of like Cumins was, right? Because that seemed to be working. Okay. And now like, oh, if we
have everyone coming to the restaurants, >> I'm not sure that it's going to be I mean >> at most what 15 cars that would be there in the evening if everyone that's allowed to be in that building at one time was there. I can't imagine that happening. People might have to start parking two or three blocks away. They
do it in Still Water. Maybe they'll do it here. I don't know. >> You can't like Okay, I see what you're saying with the restaurants being then why don't we tell the restaurants that they should just be open for lunch and not at night so they can That's why I mean I'm just telling you the why behind I
think why it was set up that way to start with. But uh Sarah, did you have something to say that? >> Sorry, Madame Mayor. That's what I was going to comment on. That's why we came up with those original hours and the the applicants are the ones that propose those hours. >> I know. I did see it in your original proposal. Then now you were saying that oh maybe that's not going to work. But I get why you probably rethought it.
>> Rushed it through to get this in front of you guys as fast as possible and didn't put a lot of thought in the initial application. >> Okay. >> Whole cycle of stuff we got to get. >> Well, you better put a lot of thought when someone applies cuz we're going to trust you. Maybe. >> Yeah. I' Yeah. I've worked at co-working sites
and like 24 hours is pretty typical. And at 10:00 at night, they're you know, it's dead. It just depends on what the what the tenant needs and >> and the situation. Mhm. >> Madame Mayor. >> Yeah.
>> So, just uh toss out there. H >> how will you guys regulate if you plan on being open 24 hours? >> Regulate what? >> Who can come and go out of the building essentially? >> I mean, does everybody have keyed access
at that point? You haven't thought that far ahead. >> We haven't really thought that far ahead. I don't plan on I mean I don't know of anybody that's asked us that wants to be open all night. I mean sometimes I show up there at night and work cuz I got a deadline to get out. But >> um right now it's keyed. If we get some
people in there I'd like to add electronic access to the doors at some point so we can >> not lose keys and we can regulate it that way. >> Okay. If he couldn't hear because he we didn't make him come to the podium. He No, I'll just reiterate he's it's key to access right now. Now he's thinking in
the future he'd like to have electronic access for people. So um >> and he doesn't know of anyone that wants to be there overnight. >> That's all right. >> Ultimately, Madame Mayor members of council, ultimately you would have the front door open a certain amount of time then the dairy would be and then after
that amount of time it would be key access. >> Yes. Generally, um, when I get there around 8 or 9:00 or the dental office is open around 8 or 9:00, we unlock the front door and then at around 5, we lock the front door and then anybody else
that wants in after hours would have to unlock and lock it right now until we can find a way to solve that. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Is that what you're getting at, Matt? Is that the front door is just not open all the time? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Got it. Stuff would get stolen if it was. >> Um, just to touch on the parking part of
it, too. Um, I know that it says that there are two spots and behind the building. Um, from what I looked at, they would have to park like one behind the other. >> Correct. >> Um, so really it's more like one spot unless you guys coordinate that and go,
"Oh, I'll park in and whatever." Um, and I think clearing and and making that back area look better would be >> Yeah, we're planning on doing that anyway, actually. So, we we don't >> we're not opposed to doing that. >> Okay. because that's part of the conditions is to clear that to make sure that
>> I know we had a condition on there to fence the garbage in. >> Oh yeah. To like screen the the bins. >> Screen the bins and we're fine with doing that. And if there's a way to coordinate with the library, I think that might help too. >> I actually brought that up to Jill and she kind of laughed at me. I'm like, you
should coordinate with the building behind you on getting >> I mean maybe that's where we take one of those parking stalls and put the library bins over there. I don't know. We can talk about that further too. I'm we're open to it. Okay. I like that. >> I got talk to Brad. He took off already,
so we need his approval on that, too. >> Oh, yeah. That's true. >> Number two. >> I'll ask him next time I go in if he's clean. >> I mean, so there is more space back there as well. Um Pam's garage is actually on our property, so we can't
That's why those if we did two parking spots, they'd be stacked. If her >> um garage happened to fall over or you guys forced her to move it, we might be able to get some more parking in there. I'm not 100% sure, but >> Matt and I talked about that cuz you had said that there's potential for future
parking and figured it was because it looked like that garage was maybe on >> I think it's on our on the property line. I don't know if there would still be enough room to put another spot, but might not be a battle worth fighting, but >> No, it's not. Pam's a nice lady. We like her. >> Yeah, but there are, I think, like power
lines or something that come down and restrict anyone from parking to the north of that opening from what I remember. There was something blocking it. >> Yeah, there's a power pole on the corner right there, but I think that's pretty close to the building. >> Okay, so that's not But then there's
like a big cement thing that I don't know what it was. storage. >> Oh, on the back of the building or >> Yeah, like a back like it looks like it could be a little stage. >> Well, it used to be a historic building. It was a theater. So, I think they had like some backstage access back there
where we can either store props or something. I'm not really sure. There were two of them >> and Brad had his filled in and ours still exists over there, which we actually have to go through his condo to get at. So, it's pretty much useless space for us, but >> Oh, okay. >> It's there. Whatever you can do to
>> improve that backside would be awesome. So, >> okay. >> So, if we approve this, can we take out the hours of operation and the city led tenant approval? Can we do that? And then >> we get to >> All right. Well, >> that's our that's our prerogative as the
city council. >> Is everybody good? >> Go for it. >> All right. Right. Then I'll make a motion with those two modifications uh to approve a continue or a interim use permit period of one year to operate a co-working office building within unit one of 363 5th Avenue North.
>> 563 >> or 563. No 363. >> Oh, it says five on here. Oh, >> says 363 Fifth Avenue North on here. >> I'm just reading the >> Oh, it says up here says 563 down here on the motion. >> Madam, I apologize. It is 363. >> Okay. Yeah,
>> I was right all along. >> I read once. >> You were, but I'm just reading the agenda. >> Exactly. >> All right. Thank you, Ethan and Katie. Um, roll call. >> Council member Bliss. >> Hi. >> Council member Gilmore. >> Hi. >> Council member Kip.
>> Hi. >> Council member Hill. >> I. >> Mayor Hansen. >> I. >> Thank you. >> Congratulations. >> Welcome. Good luck. >> Yeah. >> We're trusting you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I know you will. All right. Thank you so much. Thanks for waiting through that whole meeting, too.
>> Interesting stuff you learned today. Right. >> Okay. So, now we have to do the lease extension for the um DOC quick. Um reason I pulled it was I just wasn't comfortable with the way the 2-year
extension was put in there. And then I'm not even sure that I want to have that ability to have a two-year extension with the same rate of increase. I feel like in four years or whatever from now, 2% increase
every year just seems so small and I I just wanted to keep it at the three-year. That that was why I pulled it. So discussion if you have any other thoughts on that if you're go I don't know if you guys understood it, but we had the regular three-year lease and then they wrote in well you can extend
it a year and then you can extend it another year. But it didn't really have first of all any kind of stipulations about how that is how the council or the city staff is going to approve that extension and then it was also set at 2% every year. So that would make it five
years at 2% increases and I just thought maybe in three years we want to revisit that. I still I even feel like 2%'s kind of a meager >> rent increase as it is. So >> that's what is um ins how much insurance has gone up on
that building? Do we know that? Is it significant or no? Because I know a lot of places are having a big jump this year. >> Yeah, our our insurance wouldn't be significant on it because none of the material on the inside is ours essentially. So
>> So our building insurance, the property insurance didn't go up really where we would need. Okay. >> The normal amount went up. You're saying not like a big jump like some people are seeing? No. Yeah, I think setting a standard of 2% I
guess I think it should be more like you know what's happening at the time, you know. >> Yeah. And I mean we we could still agree to like the three-year contract, which is what we've been doing in the past, 2% each year, but then it also had two more years added on to that that made me
nervous. So, I guess I'm just proposing that we go with our normal three-year contract and not include the two separate extension years at this point. So, we can revisit in three years instead of >> three years instead of being locked into that.
>> Yeah. >> I mean, I get you're trying to like make it easy, but I'm not sure we need that. It's easy enough, I feel like, to do it in three years. So, so >> I agree. >> Nothing huge, but just Okay. Carl,
>> concerns from the city? >> Uh, absolutely not. They are a great tenant. Um, no issues with them. Um, and they want to be there. Um, they don't plan on moving out when the prison closes. They're they provide services
for in fact every DOC prison in the state. So, um, yeah, it would be their intent to stay there long term. In fact, if we offered for them to purchase it, they probably would. So, >> we're not selling.
>> Um, I am also happy to see that we had in there some conditions to I'm sure they're happy to see it to improve uh at least carpet and painting. Um, hopefully Jay can find some time to figure out if there's other things that would help the PD in their that area that are we
calling it a conference room. I think that's what it was referred to in the >> the specs, but yeah. see see if there's anything else we can do in. Okay. So, um I'll make a motion to approve the
lease extension with the Department of Corrections for the old fireh hall building with the amendment of um omitting the two extension years from it. >> Second. >> Thanks, Orin.
I think Wait, do we have to do a roll call just because we Why not? >> Uh, council member Bliss. >> I, >> Council Member Gilmore, >> hi. >> Council member Kip, >> I. >> Council member Hill, >> hi. >> Mayor Hansen,
>> I passes. Thank you. City Council liaison reports. Let's see. Is anybody just dying to go first? How about Orin? Do you want to go first? Did you have >> Go first. Mine will be pretty short. >> Okay.
>> The So, we met. You got to tell what you what your meeting thing is because not everybody >> the mid uh the middle san watershed. >> Awesome. >> On the 9th of of April have to excuse my voice. I was at a soccer tour coaching all weekend and screaming a lot. So
>> Oh, does that mean they were doing good? >> We did well. >> Okay. >> Um >> and uh so a lot of more talking points during the meeting rather than like action items. Um some of the things that were discussed for the contributions that have been received by the wershed so far from the surrounding uh municipalities
uh what had been contributed by Bayport so far was $20,59921 um and discussing the uh monitoring report there is a lot of concern not a concern but people are interested to see what happens with the not only the decommissioning of the prism but also
with the the Stillwater Hospital as that is going to be, you know, taken down once the new hospital is finished, which apparently is going to be done in 2028, which seems impossible, but um and how that's going to affect the water flow coming down into the river. So, um I think there will probably be a lot of
monitoring and and kind of discussion on that over the next couple years. >> Um that really was about it. Um there is that July 30th, 2026 riverboat event to discuss erosion
issues and conservation. >> Oh yeah, in conjunction with Angie Hong's agency, whatever it's called, East something. >> Yeah, I'm planning to go. If anyone >> great event >> Yeah. anyone hasn't gone, it is a great
event, so you should try. Okay, Katie. Yeah, >> big big bar crawl weekend coming up. >> Big bar crawl weekend sun or Saturday, sorry. Starts at noon at Woodies. Uh you can still buy tickets on their website
or their Facebook page you can jump on and there's a link. Um it's $15 if you buy them in the vans. It's $20 at the door. So they'll start at Woodies and then they'll go down and then they'll make their way down to Fifth Avenue and
then go back to Bayport American Legion for karaoke >> and NJ's I think it's in there too somewhere. >> Yeah, NJ's is after Woody's. >> Oh, it is too. Yep. Then go I remember. So Bayport uh the Legion will be shut so
no one can get in there as they're going in between Woodies and Majesta >> until their time. >> Until their time. Correct. >> Awesome. And then they're going to have karaoke at the Legion and not live music. >> Not live music. Yeah. >> Yep. >> Is anyone else doing live music? I thought Langford was maybe going to, but I didn't see it.
>> It didn't say it on there, but you never know if they will. Yeah, >> there's little game, but I don't know what that is. >> Oh, yeah. And there's usually prizes at the end. It's a fun day. I don't know if you have time. >> You're not going fishing. You can go >> What time did you say it starts at noon?
>> Starts at noon. >> Yeah. Yeah. There's a lot of Yeah, it's a lot It's a lot of fun. >> It is. Everyone control there. A couple of the women on the bal will press the yellow button and make sure all the everyone gets through safely. We don't
need the PD for that. >> No, we just >> Oh, that's awesome. >> Uh the next thing after the um bar curl is the ice cream social uh which is on June 3rd. at 6:00 p.m. Um
there >> we'll be hearing about how when we're supposed to be there to scoop. >> Yeah. When to get Yeah. They'll reach out to us like they I think they emailed us last week like the week before. >> Um let us know. They would like us to wear our >> name tags. I don't know if you have one. Maybe. Are you going to plan on going? Maybe.
>> I think so. June June. >> Maybe we can get them a little Hello, my name is Orin. I'm on city council's thing. Uh garage sales are that weekend then. Um the first weekend of June the 5th and 6th, you can sign up at city
hall or online if you want to be on the map. >> Um farmers market will start June 15th. >> Woo! All righty. >> Uh they are actually looking at maybe a paid position for the farmers market if they need someone to like manage be the
admin of the fire of the farmers market. It's a lot to do. is >> um paperwork, emails, making sure everyone has their insurance and they pay their deposit. So, if >> and showing up every week to make sure everyone's everything gets done. Yeah. So, that's a lot. >> If anyone wants to reach out to them and
looking for I'm assuming it will be a little part-time job, not a full-time job, >> but yeah. And they also said if the police or fire ever want to come to the fire or to the farmers market and do a little like if you want to bring the canine or the fire truck and then they
will like put it on their Facebook page and then you know bring people around out. So and then uh with derby days things are going good. I do want to meet up with Joe because there's been some things that public works do for us and
we don't know if you guys know that anymore because of the person who always took care of it might not >> Yes. You know, >> there is a list of a list of things that I want to make sure you get done. >> Nice. >> So, we'll meet up I'll meet up with him separately instead of now. And then I
was at the planning commission that we all talked about already. The only other thing that was at the planning commission was we had to update our cannabis sign ordinance and that got approved as well >> and we'll be seeing that next month because we missed the publication deadline. So, okay,
>> Mr. Bliss, Council Member Bliss. >> Yeah, Lake Airport Advisory Commission finally meets again on Monday. >> Oh, >> so I'll be there for that. And I think Chief Kenny will be joining as well. >> Oh, nice. >> Uh, but I don't want to steal his thunder with other airport related stuff. >> Okay. All right. I think has the cable
commission met? >> We have met. Um and there's a bit of legislation in right now about cable like broadband and whether or not cities can start charging for that. This cable comm this they're in dire straits. They
have to cash in all their all their uh CDs right now. Like it's pretty much >> oh >> it's bad right now. So they're trying to figure out ways and they thought this new legislation was going to come through, but Comcast isn't involved because they're still a cable provider. >> Oh. >> And so they're getting out from under
being able to charge these and I think Woodberry is charging now like a fee for broadband fee for the broadband companies to come into our cities and lay it or whatever. And Comcast is doing it, but there's still cable so they're not they got a pass on that. and with
all like the peg fees and everything else going down because nobody's using cable anymore, it's uh it's bad news over there. So, >> they're trying to continue to do everything and raise money and everything, but it's it's not looking great. So, that's that's the one thing was asked for all the cities was to go
and look and see. And of course, that'll be something that it would be another fee that we'd have to charge residents, which, you know, that's not always great, but >> that's that's where we're at over there. >> Wow. >> Yeah. So, >> okay. Thanks for the bad news. >> Yeah, sorry.
>> Yeah, >> they did redo their logo though with a potential name change the timing of all that, but that's what we're doing. >> Why a potential name change? >> I don't know. Just cuz it they're trying to do something to reflect more of like the city or like the
>> So, are you talking about Valley Access or the cable >> right? Okay. >> Oh, okay. But anyways, yeah, we've got a meeting in July and hopefully we'll have some better news on some of this legislation stuff and
>> and we don't like cities, you know, though we get great service from them, we don't have like a line item where we donate to Valley Access, do we? >> I don't know. >> They should maybe come and ask us for money. >> Well, if they're So, this it's it's all confusing and I'm I still am confused
about some of it. And if it gets to the point, the guy will come in and explain this broadband fee thing, you know, that we potentially put on. I don't know what bill it would even be on, you know, >> can I help with that? >> Oh, Manda knows. >> Yeah, it's it's the I do. It's
franchising. Yeah. So, what they what they're looking at is possibly franchising. And what has been determined is that broadband fiber is considered cable versus telecom. And you can't franchise telecom telephones but you can franchise and most people have
franchised cable and as as mentioned the the fees from cable have rapidly decreased and so now is trying to figure out how to sort of recoup those costs under broadband and fiber and so yeah um Michael Bradley is the attorney who uh
has who facilitated the franchise agreement with Woodbury and there have been several other cities now in the metro area that are also trying to franchise It gets a little bit tricky if you've already issued a lot of rightaway permits for franchise or for a broadband or fiber. So, for example, if they've
already built out a portion of your city, how can you franchise them for the rest of the city? It gets it gets a little bit um complicated and certainly if that's something the council wants to learn more about, Michael Bradley would be the person to come in and speak. >> That's what I asked when we were there. I said, "If this guy's going to do this
and they wanted to sign a retainer and all this stuff, I'm like, well, then he needs to come and present it to us." >> Yes. if we want to go down that route. That's that's that was my feeling on it to explain to everybody because I can't explain. >> Good. Thanks for advocating for us. All right. And thanks for the explanation.
>> All right. Um I So early in April was Allen's retirement party. So I was able to show up there for a little bit. I don't know if anyone else made it, but it was really nice. He had a good turnout. Um I'm sure he's enjoying his retirement. I'm sure Gab's enjoying
having it all to himself now. Um, and so that was the seventh. And then on the 13th was regional council of mayors and uh, the speaker for that one was um, I can't remember what I think it was called Minnesota Sports and Events. I think that was literally the name of the
company and she discussed um, how it's so important to have sporting events coming to the Twin Cities and that they're working really hard to get the NFL draft in 2028 and that they're like one of the top contenders, that kind of thing. And then the more fun part for me was that mayors um shared a bunch of
different ideas. Um just kind of interesting, impactful things that their cities have been doing. So I jotted some notes about that. Um some things to look into. Nothing that I want to throw out there yet, but ideas. Um
the fire relief had the shortest meeting ever and we're going to attribute that to the new chief. No. Uh so nothing really to report there. I don't It was pretty typical. Um, I did attend my first Stillwater Area Foundation board meeting on the 14th. I think it's
good for us to have some Bayport representation there just to keep us top of mind for things. Um, and it'll be fun to see what kind of um requests come in for the foundation. You know, they do the Great Idea Grant and I can't remember what the name of the other one
is, but that'll be a nice group. And then on the 15th, I met with Kim Borton. She's the president of the Fred C. and Katherine B. Anderson Foundation. Um, just kind of wanted to check in because she started I think a little over a year
ago and we met then, but she wasn't didn't really know much about her role yet. So, I kind of want to check in, see how it was going. I think it's just really good for us to keep that connection between the city and the foundation. So, now we know each other a little bit better. She's going through the leadership in the valley program
right now and is getting more connections locally. Um, there were only a couple chamber things that I went to. Um, a ribbon cutting and mixer at Senior Helpers in Stillwater. I don't know if there was really much
else. Um Matt and I, as he mentioned in his update, met with Josiah Hill, um our representative, and Karen Housing, our senator, uh two separate occasions just to talk to them a little bit about the prison closure and where we're at and
what we're thinking and kind of what our desires are around that and how we want to stay involved and if they could advocate for us, that would be great. Um, we also then talked a little bit about getting a lobbyist and trying to help us with things, which is going to
cost us some money, but we do need to talk about that eventually because this is bigger than Matt and I can handle, I think. Um, library board meeting was on the 21st. Jill does a great job of summarizing kind of what's going on with the library
in our packet. And then on the 22nd, um Chief Kenny um invited the chief of Lake Johanna's fire department to come and speak to the fire advisory board. So that's um representatives from our partnering
cities that we provide fire services to and us. So it was me and Matt and basically just Oak Park Heights. The townships couldn't make it for some reason. It was very informative though. We learned a lot about how a joint powers might work.
Um we'll learn more at the next meeting. But yeah, so that's kind of what we're up to to so we can inform hopefully our next steps with how we're going to do that contract that's coming up in what do we have two years
renewal of that. Um, and then on last Friday they had the school carnival and alumni history room and everything. Did anyone get a chance? Did you stop in? You're an alumni, aren't you, Carl? >> I am. I I didn't. It was really nice. They did a nice job. um had cake and a
whole room of photos and old you know those you know how you get your class photo with all the kids faces and um yeah my um mother-in-law's mother was a teacher there back in the late 40s and she was in one of the photos so that was
kind of cool but yeah that was my month so Matt your turn uh introduce from Chief Kenny. >> Did we steal all your thunder?
>> Not all of it. >> Okay. >> But enough of it to make mine super short and sweet. >> Madame Mayor, city council, city staff, uh Gabith Fire Department. So, real quick, since you guys took everything
that I was going to talk about, I don't want to talk to you anymore. Uh we ran currently 390 calls this year compared to 374 from last year. We ran um 94 calls in the month of April. Uh we had
three fires uh utility infrastructure fire, uh grass fire, and vehicle fire. Um, I was not able to meet with the Washington County uh chiefs, but they were able to elect a new vice president,
so they got that. We did have the fire advisory board meeting. That was the first one so far. We do have another one coming up uh the 21st of May. That'll be with uh Chief I forget his last name. He'll be talking
about a fire district. Um, and then the month of June, we'll be having uh Chief Dustin from Lake Elmo talk about their transition from volunteer to duty crew to full-time. Um, couple anniversaries.
Dustin Vincent is got his 11-year, Brandon Johnson hit his 20-year, and then Allan Eisinger hit his 25 years and is retired. Um, we do have a meeting with the Washington County Chiefs this Wednesday
coming up. So, I'll be there. Um, I do have a joint training coming up like what uh Council Member Bliss talked about with Lake Elmo Airport. Uh, Lake Elmo Airport. The MAC will be there. Uh, Washington County Sheriff's
uh Sheriff Stari will be there. We also have joint training with Lake Elmo air uh with Lake Elmo Fire Department and ourself think oh uh Lake View Ambulance will also be there. >> So little bit about this training. It'll
be area familiarization. Then it'll also be part of um getting everybody on the same page of if and when an incident were to happen where everybody's supposed to go and area familiarization for a lot of people because coming from the airport I know
it's kind of uh scary for a lot of people and there are a lot of go no-go type of areas and I don't want anybody to get hurt any more than what might already have happened. Um, yeah, send me an email on the request of
whatever you'd want with firetruck because we don't want the police officers there. So, send me an email. >> Um, I have a couple questions. So, was that your you initiated the airport meeting, everybody need training and all that. That was your idea. >> Yes, ma'am.
>> Thank you. That that was very smart. >> Yeah. I also am in the process of working with Excel Energy >> to do a joint training with uh Oak Park Heights Police Department, Bayport Police Department, US Still Water and then um also the sheriff's office office also.
>> Great. >> That'll be later in September. >> The fires were they uh mutual aid or did were they all literally in within Bayport? >> They're all ours >> or in our service area. Uh, West Lakeland had the grass fire, car fire
was uh 36 in Stillwater Boulevard and I believe the other fire was I believe it came in as a fire, but it was a truck hit a power line pole and sparked and took that out up uh by Lowe's.
>> Oh, yeah. So, Oak Park Heights, they're keeping us busy. >> They are. >> All right. Thank you. Nice thorough um presentation. >> Yeah, >> I appreciate it. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Wonderful.
>> Chief Jackson. >> Hello, Madam Mayor. Council. >> Hey, Jay. >> Uh a couple things. The mayor also stole a little bit of my thunder, but my sincere appreciation uh for the $10,000 donation that we received from the uh Reef Trust. Uh had no idea that was
coming. Literally just an envelope showed up and so very thankful to uh um her for thinking of us. And our body camera audit is completed. There were no issues. I believe I for that on to the council. You should have all gotten that. Um
the other audit is currently still in progress for our criminal justice information system. And then on May 6th, we will be escorting the Anderson Elementary uh kids to school. Um mostly down Second Avenue. That seems to be the best route for us. Is that the bike to school day? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. >> And then uh safety cap July 13th and 14th applications are under the police tab on the website under forms. So if your kids are looking at attending that then please get those in. All the information is on the website. Um other
questions can be um emailed to officer Leovsky. And the golf cart permits are being accepted at city hall here. We have seen some golf carts out there. I don't believe we have any actual permits that have been approved. We have one
application, I think. So, if you have a golf cart and you want to drive it on the streets, make sure you get that applications. Um, the officers have been um directed to have applications and make contact with anybody out there that is driving a golf cart just to point
them in the right direction so that we get compliance gain there. And then, council member Hill, I will reach out to you. Often times with the farmers market, we try and watch the pedestrian crossing during that time, but we could certainly set something up. >> Okay, great. >> And I stand for a question.
>> Do you have any concerns about um they're not ebikes, but they're almost like little mini bikes that are electronic that I saw Stillwater was having some. Just kind of wanted to reiterate to people that if you have that, you still have to have a motorcycle license and all that. Do we have an issue with that here?
>> We have some. It's pretty localized to a couple of residences that we've had to make contact with. Um there's all kinds of you know different rules regarding CC's and you know the dirt bikes that are mostly the problem are the ones if you see a bike that doesn't have pedals
on it that's not allowed um >> on city streets. >> Correct. >> Or even the obviously the highway >> on the sidewalk. Correct. Um so I think everyone's kind of dealing with it as you become more popular and the prices come down on them. So yeah, >> um there's been some cities that have put out guidelines that have a nice
poster. So >> we may uh take that uh up as well. >> Okay. >> Um and then we'll probably posting something on Facebook, too, uh about the solicitors. We've had some concerns about that. Um >> so I think what we will do is I think we're just going to either put on our
Facebook page or work with Sarah with the city's page to just list who our solicitors are. >> Oh, wow. >> That's a great idea. Because right now there should be, you know, outside of like religious and, you know, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, that kind of a thing, people who are allowed without a
permit. We only have, I think, one application currently. So, but we'll get that information out there. >> Yeah. Yeah. There's quite the hubbub that weekend when they came to our house. >> They came to our house and answer the door >> and I asked for their permit and oh, well, the boss has it. Oh, he'll send me
a picture of it. Oh, yeah. But and I said, well, >> yeah. And that's the case. It's >> We had the concern. >> Don't you know who I am? >> No, I did not pull the mayor card, >> but it did look like they were kind of scoping out the place, which I didn't appreciate.
>> Oh, they were sitting in their van and just with their doors open, sat there for a while, and I was vulnerable and I was like, I am not answering my door when they come up. >> We were outside. >> They didn't have a doorbell. So, >> yeah, we were outside. So, they had to I couldn't run away. >> What were they selling? >> They're trying to like redo siding. I
looked up the company. It's a real company. It is. I did look it up. >> It seems sketchy, but yeah. So, anyways, if those people come around, ask for their permit, call the PD if they don't have one. Yep. >> I didn't, but I saw online that everybody was all in a tizzy about it already. >> Yeah, certainly give us a call. Often
times, we can just go make contact with them. And very similar things to what you've said is, "Oh, the boss has it." Or, "Oh, I applied." And, you know, I remember those when I did those background checks. And it's like, I did the check. I know you don't have a permit. So, yeah, >> get lost. So, It's kind of how we handle that.
>> All right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh Madame Mayor Sarah and I don't have too much um since most of it was covered in the meeting, but we'd be open to questions if there are any. >> Thank you for what you do. >> Thanks. So, yeah, thanks you guys. It
was a It's been busy. >> Well, I have one question for Sarah actually. the newsletter. Would you want ECAL to send you like maybe their PDFs of their events that you could put in newsletters? >> Sure.
>> If you need like spots filled up somewhere or something, you know, always like put a little thing on there. They were asked wondering that too. I forgot all about it till just now. Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Any other questions, announcements, anything? Otherwise, we
can >> I didn't know we had a city newsletter. >> You are so funny, Ethan. I love it. Anyone want to make a motion? >> I make a motion to adjurnn. >> Thanks. >> Second. >> Thanks, Orin. All in favor? >> I.
>> We are ajourned. >> Make tip off. Too bad.