Well, I Let's call the fully city council meeting of April 21st to order. Please rise 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. Looking for a motion to approve the agenda. It's all moved. >> Second. >> Motion's been made and seconded.
Any further discussion? In favor? I. >> I. Post. Same sign. Motion carries. Looking for a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> So move. >> Second. >> Have the revised version. >> It's got both.
>> Yep. We just had the the changes right here on the screen. >> I just want to make sure that everybody has that. >> Everyone has that. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Uh motion made and seconded. Any further discussion? All in favor? I I post same sign. Motion carries.
>> Moving on to mayor's comments and open for quum. Chief Katie, is there anything? >> Okay. Uh, moving on to item number six, public hearing for the vacation of alley on existing government center property.
>> I don't think it's in there. We'll just recess the meeting. >> I will uh recess the meeting uh the normal council meeting at 5:31 uh p.m. and open it up for the public hearing again for the vacation alley on vacating
the alley on existing government center property. Is there anyone uh here for or against wishes to speak against that matter? Is there anyone present that wishes to speak for or against that matter?
Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for or against that matter? Hearing none, going to reconvene the normal council meeting at 5:32 p.m. And I would be looking then for a motion to adopt resolution.
>> I make that motion. I'll second. Motion been made and seconded to adopt the resolution 2026-15 vacating the city right ofway. Any further discussion? All in favor? I. I. Post same sign. >> Motion carries.
>> Moving on to the public hearing for the South Fairway Estates resoning. I will call the regular council meeting uh to recess at 5:32 p.m. and open up the public hearing for South Fairway Estates resoning. Is there anyone present who
wishes to speak for or against this matter? Anyone present who wishes to speak for or against this matter? Anyone present who wishes to speak for or against this matter? Hearing none, we'll reconvene the
regularly scheduled city council meeting at 5:33 p.m. And looking for then a motion move. >> Second. >> Motion's been made and seconded to adopt
resolution 2026-16 approving resoning of South Fairway Estates. Is there any further discussion? In favor, I >> I oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. >> Looking to get an update by our city
engineer, Jared Griffith. Take it away. >> Good day, Mr. Mayor, member of the council. Um, tonight we have two action items for your consideration. Uh first being the 26 lead service uh project and awarding it to our contractor, our low
bid contractor, triple E. Um uh on the April 15th, we had our bid opening for our project. Uh there were four bids ranging from $360,98.50 to $839. Um, and sorry, $839,381.70.
Um, like I mentioned, um, that low bid, uh, being triple E. Um, based off of conversations we've had with that contractor, um, I don't see any issues with why we want to award that that contract as low bid. Um, we we I haven't
personally worked with them. They are out of Crystal, Minnesota. Um my understanding is that they have done multiple lead service projects down in the cities. Um had hundreds of services in place. So um sounds like they know
what they're doing. Um but I don't see any reason why we would award to our own triple. >> Just out of curiosity, did the company that did uh the last lead service, did they put a bid in? >> They did. Yes, they were I think third.
Second. They were second. Y >> and who was that again? >> Uh 11 underground. >> What was their bid? >> Uh 412 >> 43. So um Lesie, any questions for me tonight? We're looking for your
consideration on awarding the project. >> There's a motion. I'll make the motion to award the project to triple E water and sewer. >> Motion's been made and seconded to
approve triple E as the provider for Lord SE lead service lines. Any further discussion? >> Also they start >> uh he wants to get as as soon as we can. Um we have to through this process. We'll start the contracts paperwork
after today if we choose to move forward with them and then get start I would say end of May early June that kind of thing discussion hearing none. All in favor I oppose same sign motion carries.
>> Thank you. Uh the next item for consideration tonight is the um construction services for the South Fairway estates. Um this is a similar to what we services we provided for the north side project last year. Um slight
differences on this one is that um we've kind of separated things out a little bit from you know the public infrastructure to kind of like site ridding work and then everything other than public in infrastructure. Um full-time work for SH inspections
would be for sanitary water storm seal installation road building activities but then part time for the site grading and more the development aspect of like seating and stuff like that. Um essentially
the same contract we had last year as far as the bones of it um and our service provided same RPR that we're thinking our inspector as our north side project we're anticipating to have him down the south side as well. Um, so
other than that, um, any questions you may have on on our proposed contract for construction services? Um, what is this compared to the north side project? >> Um,
I don't have that answer for you. Um this is less than the north side because it's a shorter duration. Um but I don't remember what the overall north side project was to be honest as far as our total contract. >> Is it just based off time not based off the size of the size of the contract or the size of >> agreements are hourly services and so um
if the contractor themselves takes shorter shorter than what we think it might take then our services are less. Okay, >> I can get Sarah that answer for you as far as comparison. >> All right, there any other questions,
parents, comments? >> Okay, I'll uh make a motion to approve the 2026 South Fairway Estates Construction Services with SE. Motion's been made and seconded. Any
further discussion? All in favor? I >> I oppose. Same sign. >> Motion carries and then uh yeah. Yeah. Um thank you. Um just a quick update then. Uh no action items remaining on my on my to-do list, but
just update. We did have our uh kind of spring walkthrough last week. Uh staff, city staff, county staff also was involved. Thanks for letting me take along for 15 minutes. >> And um so essentially, you know, as as
you guys can tell when you're walking the site, you know, there's some items that we have as far as, you know, punches goes. Turf is always the big one that, you know, people first start calling about, right? Um all that's all on our punch list, adding some top soil behind curb, things like that are are on our punch list. Um so the intent is we
we're kind of coordinating with the contractor right now to schedule then our spring kickoff meeting which will go through the purchase items the remaining items that are left to you construct and then obviously the schedule for the summer so or spring summer um
>> when will the top layer be put on the asphalt? >> Yeah, so that's that's one of the things we'll decide at our spring kickoff meeting. Um I anticipate probably early June by the guess. >> Okay. Is that something that takes place at the end of everything or is that just done along with all the other punch
items? >> Yeah, it will be they'll come in and do probably the site work cleanup first and then they'll come in and do that that final lift. There are some things we have the head ramp on the north side of of P Street that needs to be done still. So, there's some construction items that still need to carry on from last year
that we need to do. Um, but we'll do all our kind of site work, punches, top soil, kind of the dirty stuff, right? um and then do the final paving and then we have strengthening left to be. >> Yeah. >> Great. I'm assuming that there's going
to be parking on Broadway. Who who does the lining? You guys do that also. Put in the parking lines. >> The prime contractor has a subcontractor that that will do the parking stalls in front of the church and then also the >> center. Thank you. Just because I'm making that the wavy
areas on some of those streets will get they're marked out with the pink areas. There's some way couple 500 block and 500 block >> those be addressed before we put that final up there,
>> right? Yep. You you explained that that process how basically we'll carve it out and and redo it essentially. >> That will be addressed. Yep. That's good. And I in my walk with you guys, I mean I I would say you're you're pretty detailed and I mean in some cases even nitpicky. I mean you guys pointed out a
lot of just things which is good. I mean that's I mean that's what we want. So I was uh glad I could take along and see what that process looked like and that you're you're definitely doing what you need to do to address right putting it all back together again and hopefully better than where we found it. So
>> yeah and if we have that spring kickoff meeting before our next council meeting which is pushing it, but if we do, I'll come back with an update on that. Okay. We'll also be providing kind of a our our newsletter again, you know, once we get going, have a schedule. >> Oh, sure. So, >> good.
>> But if we have it before the council, I'll provide a verbal one, too. So, >> great. Mark with the tree uh tree company that was here. Old stump grinding done down there that was that was left or Yeah. No, >> on the project. Yes, it's all done.
>> Okay. All right. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Anything else for me to say? >> All right. Thank you. >> Great. Moving on to item nine, which is uh discussion on potential expansion onski.
Uh, we obviously have legal here today to help us walk through this as well. As far as questions, I know planning and zoning spent a great deal of time talking about this matter. I know some of you actually went to the site. Um,
I've been in communication with uh Adam uh via email as I think he has all of you as well. Um, and so lots of conversation around uh this particular ask. And so I don't have a recommendation on where
we start or how we start, but I I will certainly throw it out there to to council as to anything they want maybe to discuss or have answered uh to kick it off. >> Well, I'll I'll start with the situation. you know, we've got a
business uh here since uh I suppose 1975, something like that. The family moved in. They've been here for quite some years. Uh granted, over the years, uh we ran into an itch with what they wanted to do, whatever. However, they worked with this and conformed to what
they're doing. uh they want to I I hate the word add, but they want to add a nitrogen uh tank to increase their productivity and their profits. And I don't I'm not agreeing with the
terminology of expansion. Uh looking at every thing direction or whatever, uh they're not changing the structure of the building. They're not adding onto the structure. They're not creating any floor space. They're
updating an existing uh mechanism of what they use in their productivity uh their improve uh their what do I say their uh the their profit
margin or whatever and however that somewhere along the line that's an expansion. I don't agree with the terminology that they're coming up with some of this stuff. I do not have a problem with them going ahead and doing this for the simple fact that one of the
statements were made if we can continue to work and increase our profitabilities we may be able to move in the next 5 10 years. It isn't that they uh don't want to. It's just a bad time for them now. I
feel I don't know when this ordinance came into play. I know we got to have them. We got to have the laws, but they changed. They got to be updated and changed with the changing times. And I I feel somehow that we can add, subtract,
whatever to make this a done deal for them. If I remember right, 2024, they did come to somebody here in the city looking to buy the Kent building.
>> Uh there probably means what they wanted was probably extreme. We couldn't do that. However, uh nothing is ever made about uh tiff, uh business subsidies,
uh any of the other working tools. I don't know if they're familiar with that at all. Nothing was brought up as such. Uh so they came back and willing to renovate what they've got to increase. From what I understand, it does there's
not going to be any additional uh people hired on as they've uh went from 75 to 40ome. They might add on. They're not adding. They might get back close to where they were.
uh the means of shipping is going to be more product and less trucks. Uh so I I I just don't see a real great problem. And from what I understand, they are providing some kind of plantation of
whatever out there to help cover up this cylinder. So I'm all for anything and everything that we could do for these people. they're paying the rent and all of a sudden we're going to take that away from them. I'm just glad that in the
whole process that we've had that they didn't say goodbye. They hung on in there and I think they're doing well and an asset to this city. So, if there comes to be a vote, I'll for them to update this process.
>> Good. Thanks for your comments. I believe somebody who's been here for 40 plus years get a call month or two. I went and I looked at
paint and identical to what they got. All I can say is >> Do we have a representative from Dumbroski? Okay. >> I would like to have him here. I understand there's >> Is there a reason they didn't come? >> Yes.
>> Yeah, it sounds it sounds like there is. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I would like to have them here. >> My is to uh anything that we can do to help our businesses grow by all means. The current state of affairs in this state where it's hard for a business to
stay open with the u people making decisions in St. Paul. I think it's up to local governments to help our businesses. Um I I guess I'm just a little confused,
Adam, on the state law and and our ordinances. Uh we did have a discussion at the planning commission saying this is an example where we need to look at our ordinances and update them. Um yes. Is this going to set
precedent? Maybe. But we don't know that. But we certainly don't want in a perfect world. Yes, it it would be great for them to expand, get a 100 employees, go out in industrial park. We'd help them out however we can, but
in the current state of affairs, it's not feasible. Um, having a tank outside, I don't have an issue with it. Um, the business has been there. I would like to have had a conversation
with the council way before this got to this point. Maybe there was something that instead of them being under the gun to have money down, things like that. I think open line of communication would have really
helped in this matter, but I'm all for the expansion, the addition, I guess. patient. >> Yes. >> All right. So, we invited Adam in. Uh, you know, I know obviously we we read
your email. We saw the uh the concerns right from the from a legal standpoint and right, of course, we're all we're all uh learning every day on things. Um, you know, there's an understanding that if we reszoned or changed ordinances, we
open that up for assuming anybody and everybody. Uh but if you'd want to elaborate, maybe give some examples so everyone can understand fully what could what could happen if if this sort of take place. >> Sure. So that um legal nonconformity
statute and then the you have corresponding language in your ordinance just like all cities in Minnesota who do planning and zoning. Um you know that purpose is is kind of twofold. Um one it is to ensure that a long-term existing
business that's operating otherwise in compliance and the zoning changes that they suddenly don't have to close down shop and move elsewhere. That just patently unfair and kind of contrary to our ideas of property rights.
The flip side of that is um that expansion prohibition is intended to serve all of the the neighbors who make investment decisions based on what the
zoning allows and some reassurance that um if I have a legal nonconformity next to me, fine. I don't have to worry about it expanding because the ordinance doesn't allow it. And so it's really uh intended to kind of freeze the status
quo. Um you know I want to comment a little bit about the commentary in the emails. Um it is not to say that the answer has to be no. It is to say that if you're going
to do this there is a right way to do it and it's the council's prerogative but if you who decide to ignore the ordinance um creates some liability for you. Uh ultimately that's your call. Um and so
you know there is what is the the expansion or definition of expansion. Um your ordinance doesn't really have a great definition for that. Neither does state law that gets fleshed out in court cases. Um and that
definition is really The easy one is the footprint. You know, you make the building bigger or taller or something like that. That's the easy one. Um, it's also the addition of things. So, you've got an addition of a tank here. Um, could be the
intensification. So, more employees, more traffic, that kind of thing. Um, you know, you're adding a physical structure here. You're adding the tank. So, it feels difficult to say that's not an expansion. the building itself is not
changing. Um, so one of the ways to do it is reszoning. You could make that industrial. I think that's probably a very bad idea for a number of reasons. Once once you make it industrial, then
you open it up to any use that's permitted in the industrial district. It's also um, you know, you have to have some compatibility or consistency. comprehensive land use plan in your zoning code. And right now your
comprehensive land use plan doesn't doesn't foral within the downtown area. So one of the other options would be some kind of um ordinance revision. Um I think probably the cleanest way to do it would be to do
some kind of plan unit development. Your ordinance does provide for that but in a very constrained manner. You have to have two acres of property in order to um be eligible for a planned unit development PUD. And what a PUD is, it's kind of
like a a special conditional use permit where um the council has some flexibility to allow something above and beyond just the permitted uses. You can put conditions on it. Um you can make
accommodations for use that aren't specifically listed. And so it's a tool that does provide some flexibility for you. Um, and why why I suggest you go down that route if if you're looking to accommodate this um is
anytime you take an action that might be construed as ignoring your ordinance um it just it's very easy for somebody to contest that and it's very difficult to defend that in court. Um, and so I
understand timing is a concern, process is a concern. Um, but really that process of thinking through things in an orderly manner, having your planning commission involved, having a public hearing and making a change of
the ordinance, that's intended to protect the city and protect that decision making process so that you can you can go back and you can point at the record and say, "This was not act of favoritism. This was something that we thought out and we clearly provided a
means to do it. And so, um, I don't want I don't want those communications to be construed that council has to say no. I'm saying if the council wants to accommodate this, there's a best practice to follow or not. I mean, ultimately, it it's it's the council's
prerogative on that. But, um, you know, I I think just letting it happen without any further input. from the city. It it does does create some liability. >> When you talk about conditions, what
kind of conditions are we talking about? I mean, I look at it and even Adam mentioned it as in 10 years we'll probably be able to afford
to park. right now. So is a 10year point to staying there. Does that kind of thing count?
>> So um just kind of take a little step back and talk about building 101. So a conditional use permit is something that we you know there are certain uses that we might be okay, but
we want to have a say so before they are allowed. And we use a conditional use permit for that. And once a conditional use permit is granted on a property, it's permanent. Until that use stops or they violate some condition, they have a vested right to continue to do that
forever. Essentially, the other tool that we have um and it is allowed for in your code, it is much less frequently used. is called an interim use permit. And that's something where you can set a time constraint up. You can say this
permit's good for five years or this permit is good for 10 years. At that point, we want to re-evaluate the condition of the surrounding neighborhood or whatever. And then you can ask to re-up it at that point. And so if you use a PUD, a plan unit
development, you can you can do conditions that are more like you could put some time constraint on it. And really when we talk about what kind of conditions the city can think about and and require, sky's is kind of the limit.
The only real limitation is it's got to be tied to some concern with that site, that use. Um, you know, a gravel pit's a really good example that the county deals with. They usually issue those as an interim use permit because in five
years or 10 years, development has has gotten so close where okay, enough is enough and we need to stop that gravel permit because now it's conflicting with these other uses. And so, you know, if this city has concerns about that related to timing, you know, if you're
concerned that there are plans in the downtown that might be impacted by kind of a forever permission to continue, you you certainly could, you know, make some uh conditions
Does that help? >> Could we do like an interim use permit until we have a chance to review the ordinance and like put a time constraint on that way? >> Um, unfortunately,
no. So, um, you can only really issue a conditional use permit or an interim use permit for those kind of itemized uses in the ordinance. You know, we have a set of things people can do whatever they want without approval. And then
those conditional uses um technically you could convert any conditional use into a interim use or an IEP. The way the B1 zoning is I don't really see a clean use that you could do that
now under your B2 zoning district some food processing use. I think that's defined that could be conditional use. Again, you need to think about reszoning, though. You know, you don't want to you don't want to create an
island of zoning in the middle of of inconsistent ones. So, you know, we don't put industrial in the middle of commercial or commercial in the middle of residential. That that might be called spot. So, with the whether it's PUD, CUP, IUP,
that's an ordinance revision, correct? >> It's it's both an ordinance revision revision and an actual application. My understanding is right now you don't have any application pending before you. Um and so, you know, short of just ordering staff
to do nothing, you don't really have any action you can take until you have an application. And if I could just clarify, we didn't I didn't find out about this until they requested a building permit from Nancy and she kicked it back because she's like, "This is an expansion. This needs to go
through zoning. This is, you know, so she kicked it back to me and that was the start of the I think you got those emails a couple weeks ago." >> So, I think we got those emails a week ago. >> Yeah. I got I think I found out about two weeks ago and you probably a week ago. Yeah. >> So, just to clarify, we didn't know
anything until that happened. >> Yeah. >> So, We don't have an application process for PUB, CUP, IUP. >> Oh, we do. >> We do. >> Yep. It just requires an application, >> an application though from >> there's a public hearing. Yep. That's a process. Y >> and you would need to tweak your
ordinance to accommodate this. It could be run together at the same time. You could have >> sure approve the one then go into the next, >> right? But you you would need to follow that ordinance change than an application process. And so the, you know, let's call it a, let's call it an
IUP. We if we went down that road, we ordinance revision IUP, there's an application. The IUP is specific then to that applicant. Or is that or is that IUP then for anybody in that? >> Well, uh, that is the one quirky thing
about an IUP. You can add a time constraint that you can't in the IUP or in a CUP. You can add it specific to the individual instead of the property. The general that it's attached to that property, but the council has that flexibility under IEP or a PUB if we
want that route to make it specific to the the actual operation. Okay. Uh you know, I I will say I'm I'm in line with uh you know, what do we do to accommodate? There's two schools of
thought. one, we're taking a a very vested interest as as as well as many additional um new uh property owners taking a a vested interest in our downtown and beautifification. I I will
point it out. A big giant tank is not beautifying downtown. Uh so that is that is my conundrum with with this tank beyond just the idea of it being an addition or an expansion or whatever you know vernacular you want to use. I want
to be careful with what are we trying to do with downtown here as we're trying to invest. We have new people coming in to invest and we're wanting people to do more with downtown and make downtown thriving again. I don't know if Giant Tanks delivers the the message that we might
be trying to deliver to our recent property owners and the investors and the things that are going on downtown. That aside, I agree that we shouldn't not allow it and allow them to continue their business and their operations.
My concern is, and I think you identified it, Adam, is we we put this tank here, we figure out ordinance, we do something. What I don't want is another tank to show up and another tank to show up or or whatever it might be. You know, I mean, they
might want to move down to the industrial park someday, sure, but that might not happen and that's okay. They shouldn't have to feel forced to move to the industrial park. >> But I do want to keep an eye on though if we make changes to the ordinance,
what power do we have to truly, you know, yep, sure, you get one tank, we change ordinances, here's UIP. they can't two years later say, "Oh, by the way, we're adding two more tanks. We we've grown really well and we need two more tanks now to to continue this this uh what we got going on." Would we be
able to stop those two tanks or would that at least elicit another conversation or would they just be able to do it? >> Yeah. So, you bring up um you know this idea of president and that's an important thing to understand. So, u from a purely legal standpoint,
every zoning decision stands on its own and what you do does not technically obligate you to do the same thing in the future. But reality is a little messier than that. Um, you know, if you allow
one person something and then you don't allow the next person, you open yourself up to some claim that your decision is based on some discriminatory purpose. And that's very, again, very difficult to defend. Um, and
quite frankly, it whether it's the five of you sitting up here or another council, it it creates a tremendous political pressure, too. Um, and so while while you're not technically bound to repeat that decision, from a practical standpoint, it's very hard not
to. And so you do you do create this um kind of monster in terms of if you allow something you're kind of almost opening up to anybody. >> Yeah. It's not just them. It'd be anybody.
>> Yeah. I mean if somebody across the street decides that they want to add a tank and maybe you know they're a member of a protected class or something you're you're going to really struggle to say no and and not, you
know, risk some kind of claim. >> If that was to happen, those people would still have to go through the same process what we enact. >> Yeah. And that's why I say process is really important. I understand it's really frustrating for property owners
and business owners to have to feel like they're jumping through hoops or going through an process, but it is it is kind of uh the backbone of good planning and zoning is this is a process. Everybody follows it. We don't skip any steps in
this. And that helps ensure that your decision making process, whatever it is, approval or denial, is easier to justify and defend, whether it's the applicant or somebody who is upset about, you know, a neighbor who's upset that you allowed something to happen. that
process really is your your biggest protection. So, just trying to think big picture because I'm I'm sensing that we want to try to figure something out. Um,
but to to your uh good judgment and advice is make sure we're protected. So, I mean, I wouldn't feel comfortable waving a wand today and making it so. I mean, that doesn't sound like that's even an option, at least not for me. Um, I think
following the process and and doing what we need to to to get to a point where this can all happen, is certainly uh uh in in in good faith, a reasonable option and expectation. But I I'm worried about
Yeah. just what happens. You know, we talk about the, you know, we do these it's flexible and we can do these things with these ordinances. I mean, there's nothing we can do specifically to just that property and just that
property owner and just allowing that one thing to happen. >> No, I think you can if if you go through the the process of adop adopting some revisions to your ordinance to create that process. It's kind of there, but it's not there enough for this specific
instance. we would have to reduce that 2acre restriction um and probably um add some clarifying language that talk about uh because right now right now it's very simple that PUD language uh in part
because you just I'm not aware that fully ever done one in my 20 years working with the city. So um probably there's some best practices that could be added to that. Not that it's got to be some big elaborate thing, but we could we can make that work better
particular to this situation, but in in the entirety too, so that going forward that is a tool that serves the city better. >> Sure. >> I have green space.
It's still privately owned, but his intention is to install a religious monument, >> right? >> Yeah. That will be for I I think he's going to welcome people to come in, but it will be privately owned. >> So, he will ownership
>> and it will kind of subdue the new tank structure of some >> it won't be sitting there all by itself. It'll be >> kind of what >> that's behind what we saw when we But yeah,
>> already fencing. >> Well, bards and fencing for for protection and safety. >> He said he wanted to put fencing up to keep skateboarders out. >> Yeah. And the drawing for the garden
looked like it would kind of cover from one side the tank. But >> uh Mark, I know you got some information around the materials and and I mean it's nitrogen, but any concern or anything I mean that we would need to update or do
from a safety standpoint? uh you know maybe an action plan of sorts if something like this were to be hit, struck, damaged, whatever where there was a leak. >> I don't think so. You know, if you look at the fort,
it's 003 uh 003 so it's just it's a freezing agent chemical what it is. >> So >> is that this one? >> Not really an explosive on the bottom. It's uh
mean basically refrigerated raw process of it. They're going to get some off. That's what kind of tells first responders what's going you know when you have big numbers or you know whatever there's a three on the red is a flamable. It's not a cruel. So the truck
is not um truck that'll bring it is not even you know it's not post flammable. have a green green uh sticker on it which is you know different as so I'll be honest I did talk to which I do several times a counterpart from a city
Wesley here who I talked to and had him look at everything from the safety side and he also you know went through it with me and we felt it was you know like he would not have an issue with that
>> from the safety side I'm speaking Okay. Um, you know, so again, Adam, I want to reiterate my my comment. There's something that we could do to update our ordinances, and rightfully so, it sounds like we need to update some things anyways. So, we can go through processes
like this maybe a little bit easier. But if if in changing this ordinance and I'd imagine the way we word it and and everything else, if we approved this tank, it would not open us up for allowing him to to do more him or maybe
the next owner or whoever. I I just want to be able to still control, you know, whether it's this council or future council, um additions or expansions, right? all that that same vernacular, you know, with with making an exception for this.
>> Yeah, 100%. So, um you know, when we do that, um sometimes sometimes we get loose with the approvals in terms of making findings, that kind of thing. Something like this,
it's really important that we work those findings in. basically tells the story of why this is unique, why there's a desire for the council to accommodate this, and why we think it's not going to create a larger problem. As long as we do that, yeah, I I I don't have concerns
about that. >> I would like to go down that road of trying to help them, but to follow the appropriate channels. >> Uh, from a timing standpoint, what does that look like? >> Well, um, you're going to have planning
commission and you're going to have a public hearing. Public hearing requires uh two consecutive weeks of notice. You know, the application itself would would require a public hearing as well. So again, you could run those at the same meeting, but I don't know your meeting
schedule. You're probably talking a month or six weeks at the shortest. >> Yeah, it's going to be six probably eight weeks. There there's quite a bit that's required for that application as well. They have to prepare all those materials, too. It's not that they can just fill out a form and here you go.
They have to provide a detailed list. I What section of code would I follow? Would I follow the cup code >> um >> for an IUP? >> I mean, that's where I usually would, but >> right um and I think the PUB language
um basically follows the cup application process. And so obviously we'd be drafting the new ordinance as they're applying, but I think we could give them some pretty clear direction that we'll use the CBP
application process. Um, and that should be adequate. I mean, I think folks understand the situation. So yeah, you're talking about a couple weeks or two months probably. >> And you know, they're going to have to
provide some detail too on that what they're doing. Um because you know, one of the things that we have to justify in that process, too, is it's not going to cause an issue on traffic. And we get complaints on those semis are already. So I don't know how we're going to handle that um because that's a bad
intersection already. And so we have to we're going to have to get some more detail from them on that. I've heard we're adding employees. I've heard it's a hu I've heard so many different I don't know what is what to be honest. I was hoping they could be here just to clarify that. But >> that's the value of going through the
process is making people have an application. Then you have a set of facts that everybody can agree on and you're not having to rely on conversations at council meeting or outside. Yeah, >> everybody's concerned about the traffic
thing. They are not adding employees. They're not even going to bring it up to where they were at. They were at 75. The pandemic and everything changed a lot of things. They're down to like 25, maybe 30 people. They may add
>> 10 or so to bring that back up. uh their shipping process was a lot of trucks, small shipment. That's the way their product was had to be sent out. Now with this refrigeration update, they
will ship bigger loads and less truck traffic. So it would be an advantage for this process to help out. You won't see the truck traffic that you did before. They did say that the truck to fill the tank would be coming after hours
to help with the traffic thing because that was one thing I did bring up. And that's great. That that needs to be put on the record so that we have a verification. There's protection to you too. So if something is different, you know, people are complaining, there's a problem, you go back to that record and
>> you know, that's how we handle that. >> I feel we have us remembering what we heard. I heard different than Stephanie and and Mark. We all need to have a physical person
here at least >> because there's a lot of stuff that has not been clear right now. >> Well, unfortunately, they couldn't be here tonight, >> right,
>> because of a very serious uh emergency. And I'm willing I'm willing to bet that they will come any time and whatever sit down and work with us. I think the ordinance can be adapted to answer any situation
like this that may rise again without setting a precedent or whatever. I don't foresee any other big industries and wanting to build up here. And if that happens, we're not selling our uh
industrial lot properly. Uh I don't think in the future uh I vision that they will get to the point to where they move and maybe sell, but I look for be out there
sitting on two maybe three lots. Uh probably I won't see that, but that's my business. In the council's conversations, did anybody ask them about an application at all or they
how did they get to this point? >> I I just assume they did >> the building the building permit. >> The building permit >> because they went through the Nancy. >> They went to Nancy. Nancy said, "I can't permit this. This needs to go to zoning." So that's when it kicks to me.
um when he made the request to me, that's when I requested to be asked attorney because I wasn't quite sure how we could handle it because it was, you know, flagging with what I could read in the code. And that's when I sent him the letter just saying, "We can't allow you to do this right now at the advice of
the attorney." Um and then I said, "Would you" and he said, "Well, can I talk to the council?" I said, "You're always more than welcome to talk to your council members." >> Um and then that's where we're at. I I just look at something as big as this and putting money down on something
on this. I think the time frame should have been we should have had more time to work on this. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, >> I I honestly I I don't I honestly don't think he thought it was a big deal.
Okay. >> I think he just thought it was no biggie. I can do it when when I talked to him. That's I really do think he didn't think it would be a big deal. >> I I mean I wouldn't have probably wouldn't have even noticed >> that it was there.
>> I mean uh besides the height of it, I mean I think that would have stuck out a little bit, you know, what's that new top there, but >> um I to your point, Gary, right? Expansion, you know, but to Adam's point, it's also additions and this would be an addition
to um what they have going on. And so again, Adam, to reiterate, uh you mentioned if it was the council's prerogative to just say let it let it ride and just go ahead and let them build it, uh without
identifying uh ordinance revisions and and such. that's where we're opening ourselves up for precedence. Um or or you know possibly not protecting ourselves if somebody else came along or or even if they came along two years later and said we want to put
another tank up >> or if a neighbor gets upset and makes a claim now now you've you've not done anything and so you're it's difficult to defend. So, I mean, it won't feel like it to them, but going
through the process will protect them if they get what they want at the end rather than just doing it and asking for forgiveness later because that mean that can result in having to remove stuff. Nobody wants that. >> Could be one year from now, could be 20 years from now.
>> But once we start this process, it's going to open the eyes to everyone as to what's happening that they can commit as to whether they want to see this or not. Yeah, >> basically >> that's the, you know, >> great thing and bad thing about
government. It's got to all happen out in the open. >> I know. Well, >> and there's a public hearing. >> Yep. >> So, we will personally serve notice to I think it's 350 ft or 500 feet, whichever one it is. Yeah. Um, so there will be lots of people that will get a mail
notice on this, >> but we should be able to give them that that prerogative if they want to move forward. >> Then they can do the application public hearing. We can look at the the ordinance revision and do it the appropriate way so we don't get
ourselves into a >> Exactly. I I'm enlightened with a lot of your definition. I agree with that. But I think our ordinance can be adapted legally to make this work. Right or wrong.
>> Um >> we'd have to change >> but but not but not within not before two months time. Well, yeah. Right. I mean, we have to go through the process, but we should change some wording in there that >> per item that we have the ability to
adjust, amend, or assist anybody. >> Yeah. >> If this should ever come up again, I hope not. I hope not. But, uh, I don't foresee anybody coming into >> Can I ask a question? Even this with
this road, is it foolproof or is there still some risk? >> Well, you can't you can't eliminate any challenge, but this is the route to go to make it as bulletproof as possible. Yeah. >> Okay.
>> I mean, that's how we defend ourselves, >> right? Right. I mean, this is any of the regulations that you put into ordinances. It's kind of our our best effort. It's not a guarantee, but it's our best effort. Well, moving forward, I think that's our
best bet because we all know sitting here that we're paying the price for past decisions. >> Well, yeah, I'm 100% we got to do it right, but we got to be able to do it.
>> Well, I think we could do it, Gary. >> Yeah, we're there. >> I mean, if we we come in and say a flat no, I don't feel like I'm doing my job for the city. Uh >> but we're not saying no. We're saying >> more so for the taxpayer and the and the
business owner. You know, I uh I think that we should be able to reach out and help them in any way that we can assist legally with protection. >> Correct. >> Can can I just one more thing? Um, so you know, one of the reasons too that we
checked and stopped this too is is we want to make sure we're following our code and and reducing the risk. But also, I have in my 20 years of doing this, I have heard so many council members come to me and oh, we we let that happen. We let that happen. We were
too lenient on this. We were too I've heard that so many times. So I think it is very important to follow the process and to really think these through care things carefully through because I have seen it and and a number of you have probably even said to me like we shouldn't have never let that happen. we
made a mistake. You know, we weren't Sometimes it is it is worth it to look and and take your time before making the decision even though there's all those pressures because I've seen it in just my time as staff on staff here so many times where we've looked back or it's
the past council that did that and now look what we have to deal with. So that's if I can just say one thing, >> I appreciate that you are at least looking at this and taking the time to do that. Um because if we don't, I think we find ourselves come coming back so often.
>> I agree 100%. Uh we've got to do it the right way. It's the right process. You're right. There's a lot of things done in this city that can't be undone and it makes you mad that it got done in the first place. But maybe sometimes it shouldn't be up to the council to
actually without having the taxpayer the the friend out there paying the bill having some uh voice in in the decision we're looking at. If they don't come about I don't
feel it's our problem. We offered it to if nobody comes in a bait this I I can't feel sorry for but that's the way it should be. >> Well and and if you for the public hearings you'll find out what people you know how they feel about it and that's the point of it.
>> Okay. Uh, so I'm hearing that we would like to uh have staff along with legal to help
do something along the lines of an ordinance revision. So like the PED, sounds like the CUP, uh, application process. we'll call it six to eight weeks from now, whatever that might be.
>> Um to go through the process of of doing this the right way. Um not to add add more work. I know you guys have like seven projects. >> So um if that's the direction of the council, I want permission to utilize
our attorney. Um because we're down a member of our staff right now anyways. Um, I know that you don't have much time, but otherwise hopefully another colleague or somebody who who can get it done >> and that will cost more. You understand that? I just want to make sure you do understand that, you know, having him
draft it, >> right? But this will this will help with other applications throughout the downtown area with looking at some of these resonings and the PUDC or is it only specifically going to be for that
property? No, I I would always encourage the council when you're doing an ordinance revision, you need to think about wholesale application across the city. If you're doing something solely for a particular use or property that you're probably not doing it right and
so the intent would be that this is a process that would be adapted to be useful for the city going forward, not just >> Sure. I just want to clarify that just to maybe uh
um understand the expense better, right? I mean, at least it's it's for the bigger picture, not just for this isolated incident. >> Um as we know that we need to update uh >> Okay. Do we need a motion on this s? >> Well, I am
>> Well, I I have you have given me the option to utilize the attorney. I just want to make sure you understand that some more of the leg work might go on him where I sometimes do some of them on my own. >> Right. But and and I normally you guys are juggling one or two projects. You're currently juggling six.
>> Well, right now we're covering for another person. >> And and you're covering for another person. So, >> yeah. No. Um I just want you to understand I'm going to tap into him more than I usually do for this. >> Well, I think on something like this, we have to >> I think it's >> and and I also want to make sure it's
done right. And he's going to know better on how to do it. And I think even if even if you know, right, worst case scenario, this doesn't even come to fruition and the tank thing doesn't happen, whatever it might be, we're at least we're updating our ordinances. >> Okay, that that was my next question. Do
you want to wait till an application comes through or do you want to do this? >> No. Well, I think we should wait for an application otherwise. >> Well, yeah. >> Last time we did a we did a lot of things and then we it never happened, right? And so I just wanted to, you know, make sure >> it has to be explained to them what
we're going to do or what they have to do. >> And I I feel too that we couldn't go ahead with this. If they say no, it's not going to work. >> Well, I I don't if they proceed with the application, then I think that's a goal for us.
>> Okay. the consensus here. >> But would so let's say I don't know nine months down the road workload looks different, you have more capacity, you have a new person. Would we still not want to look at updating our ordinances? >> Well, I think just in general
>> I still say we should update the ordinance itself that we don't have to run into this situation ever again. >> That's not >> careful. That's exactly what you don't want to do. You're you're supposed to be changing it for the whole >> for the not for one >> for the greater good.
>> Well, I'm not changing for one. I'm changing for a situation. A particular situation, not a particular person. I mean, there's a difference between expansion and renovation. I'll go to my death. >> Oh, all right.
>> Believe in this. There's a difference there. And I understand that we're doing this for them to make more money. And when they make more money, that's an expansion. It's against the law to to help them do that. I don't understand
the system. Am I right? That's an expansion. >> I I appreciate your passion. Yeah. >> It just doesn't make sense to me. >> But >> I tell you what, I haven't slept for three weeks now. It'll probably be
another three weeks and I can't wait till my tour is up. Uh this is a battle. This is too stressful for the average person my age. Yeah. So to clarify, we don't we do not feel that there needs
to be any enhancements or changes or or otherwise to our current ordinances beyond that. >> So we can do this without changing the ordinance.
>> I just want to be legal. >> No, no, no, no. I if if they don't if they don't end up applying for this that's that's their prerogative that's fine >> but isn't the language and you know some of the PUD stuff and everything is still a little vag probably hasn't been
updated in the you know 60 years ago that it was set or whatever it might be is there still not a necessity for us to maybe take advantage of relooking at the ordinances and making enhancements or adjustments so that if any business
has requested or applications that we might be in a better position to work through that application process without having to make adjustments or or is it that we're making adjustments to ordinances specifically for this particular
property? >> I'm really glad that you clarified businesses because I was going for the small animals increasing the number of small animals You're talking ordinance ordinances citywide and not just one particular
>> well to to the business own are you I I think your point is specific to the PUD stuff not necessarily the current business issue but the PUD doesn't that wouldn't revision make
sense there is that what you're asking regardless of whether this application comes And um for what it's worth, I the PUB is a tool that um provides a lot more flexibility than the standard conditional use permit
permitted use. And so it is something that cities seem to be more and more utilizing. So if that is something that wants to do, yeah, I would suggest you update your PUB language in your
>> Okay. Maybe nothing we would do right away if there isn't going to be an application and and such with with this project, but maybe something we would want to look at just in general. You know, maybe workload is a little bit lighter, we're staffed or whatever it
might be, but something we may still want to address down the road um to update our PUB um which is understandable. We would wait and not make it a rush. >> Okay. >> Okay.
So then the next step would be informed meets on the decision of the council that we would go through the appropriate process of updating ordinances and revisions
uh specifically PUB sounds like CUP and there would be an application process and there'd be public hearings and all of these things would have to happen we'll call it over the course of the next six to eight weeks. And if they so choose to move forward with that understanding,
then we would move forward with sure if you needed to use resources such as Adam or or his staff to help with helping this process along. I think we're in agreeance that that would be okay. >> But if they are not, then there we go.
>> I would agree with that. Is that fair, Sarah? >> Yeah, I just that's my I got my direction. >> So if they so they don't want to do the application and go through the process then
>> then that's that. If they do, then like any application, you know, a lot of things can't start until after after there's an application, right? >> And so there would be a sense of urgency and timing. um
they have to get they have to get if they get us an application six weeks from now. Well, it's going to take six weeks from there before anything would happen as far as >> So, my first step is going to be to reach out to them and I will email them all the stuff that they need, which is what I typically do when somebody makes
a request. >> Okay. >> Yep. Is there a reason they didn't have a conditional use permit? Did they ever file for >> You know what? That's a very good question, Gary. and Mark and I did some digging and I found they had so many other ones in town, but they had nothing
on this. The last thing I found was when we tried to do that expansion in 2005, which I sent you a little bit of the minutes, so you kind of knew what happened there. >> Um, and that was kind of a mixed of of opinions on that. There was, you know, you saw read through probably the public hearing.
>> Um, there was a lot more complicated things with that street closure, but that's a good question. I don't know. I found I found stuff all the way back from, you know, 30 40 years ago. And I have other cups, but nothing on that.
>> It would be a CUP specifically around having a tank. >> Well, I just thought there would have been something from how many years ago on file, >> but um I don't now that I think about it, I mean, they probably haven't expanded for 20, 30 years. It's probably been >> it's probably been that long. So maybe
there wasn't, >> you know, and our new our new zoning went in in like early 2000s. >> Okay. >> So >> yeah, good question. But we can find nothing. And I mean we have most of our old old stuff digitized. So you can usually just scan by keywords, too. And
in addition, >> and so after the fact, they really can't apply for what to where they're at now, can it? >> Well, no. I mean that and >> they've kind of been boxed in for a long time. You know, really there zero lot
lines. They're kind of boxed in. There isn't much. >> Any further discussion or comments or asks of Adam or staff? Okay. >> Thanks, Adam.
Nothing else on that unless there's anything else. >> She's here. >> She is here. >> If you I mean if you have something. Yeah, absolutely. >> I don't know if your stuff was dependent on them being here or not.
>> Uh no, I wasn't. Um, actually I just kind of reviewed mayor and council. Um, thank you for having me this evening and you know I've been just kind of following um this project and and I I just want to say a couple things. Um, number one, it's really great to have a long-standing business like Dimski meets
in the city of Hoy. Like it is um incredible that they're here and um we enjoy their business and um they've done a lot for our community. Correct. Um you know when we take a look at a project like Um,
>> I'm sorry. Is it okay? Everybody can hear me? Um, so when we take a look at a project like this, uh, illegal non-conforming use, um, it's, you know, clear that the business knows that they're illegal non-conforming use, right? Um, so they're, uh, they should
be aware that, you know, adding on expansions, things like that, um, does, uh, they're not allowed to do that in that type of situation, right? And that goes across the board whether it's this community or another community. Correct.
Um so for this particular project um you know adding a tank and um doing all the great work that they do but adding that tank really does change the aesthetics of downtown and we really do have to take a a a strong hard look
at that and what their future plans are. So I think you know um having a conversation with the company itself and and um realizing what their future plans are for this site is really really important because um
you know what all of the great things that you are doing as a council as an EDA um for our downtown businesses is extremely important. We want that traffic. you want that those people to to patronize businesses and stuff like that. When it
starts looking a little bit more industrial, it just feels different in the downtown setting. Um for um this particular use and you know what they're planning on doing, we have a the city of Foley has a really really
great asset and I think it's um you know something that the council really needs to take a look at too is does it make sense um to take a look at the industrial as a location for this particular business because they're um
doing industrial things in a downtown location. And there's ways that the council um and organizations like Benton Economic Partnership can help them with um securing their capital stacks for um a relocation of their business if they
ever needed to to go along that route and um and do more expansion. So, I really think that With this particular project, it is very important to understand what their long-term goals are and if their goals
are to expand. Do we really want them to be expanding in the downtown area? Do we want them to be looking at um you know an industrial use and an industrial location of the city? And there's tools, again, financial tools to help them with
all of those things. But I really want the council to to um take a really hard look at at what their um future plans are for the site. And that's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Have they talked to you at all, Amanda? >> Um mayor and council, we did have conversations um maybe a few years ago and talked about um a possible expansion of the business in a different location of So, the industrial park,
we've talked about stuff like that. Just informally, nothing um you know, just laying out the options essentially. But, um you know, continuing those conversations, just understanding again, um they're they're a very much valued
business in our community and we want to see them grow and expand and how can we best do that and support them all at the same time, >> right? >> Yep. Uh so just highlighting the fact right the aesthetics of downtown and what and what that can do granted it
doesn't seem big now but I think more importantly what does it look like three years from now 5 years from now 10 years from now what are their true plans and what's the expansion look like and how do we protect ourselves if we again we want to help and this seems like a it seems like a small ask today but what
does the next ask look like and the next ask look like to the point where you know is when is it too much and when is it gone too far and when does it make more sense to how do we help how do other resources help get them into a a situation that just makes sense for
everybody? Um, and there are options out there to to assist with that. But that's a conversation for another day. All right. Beyond that, thank you. I know item number 10, uh, Sarah, you had
put some adjustments requests to city hall hours. you want to make a comment or or can we just jump jump right into it? >> Yeah, you can just jump right into it. I mean, I kind of Did you guys get the memo? Read that. >> That's um kind of one of the things that
we talked about it. Yeah. I guess the other questions. >> I I will tell you right now, I have I have no quarrels with it. I have I see no issues with it. >> Everybody's doing it. It's It's the process that you use. Uh I don't have a problem with it. >> Yeah. and and you know I just we're a
small city so it gets a little um light staff sometimes and and I think as we've talked about which we talked about many meetings is just our project loads and what we've had going on we have a lot of people and it's also secondary to let you know that we have a lot of people with big vacation
>> yeah my concern is the is the amount of people that we have which we're a small city so we have we actually have a small staff >> but the amount of vacation I remember the hours just you want to sheer days Y um and then on top of that and ESSL and PFMLA,
>> uh I think it goes back to, you know, when we talked about this, we need to look at adding more staff to public works. We need to look at adding more staff to to the police. Uh because we are growing, we are having running into constraints and problems. Uh and it and
it's not going to get any better. It's it's only going to actually just compound. Uh so I I think I mean >> you want to close early, you close early. Okay. and we will advertise this to make sure that's why I don't have it to start until May 1st so that we can properly notify people and right
>> um and then the other thing we do not plan we we've talked about it at a staff level even with refilling our position that left we do not plan on requesting additional at this time um because we're truly trying to use to our software and our technology and trying to do things
that way to help um the precedent that they really need more people in the other departments and that's that's why we you know are here with that other request So we have no current. >> So you're not looking to fill the vacancy we got though just >> we are we are going to fill that. >> Okay. Nothing in addition.
>> Tell us by next but have you got somebody looking at that? >> Yeah we we've sat we sat down and talked about that and some different workload things and and we think we're we're situated the best out of the other departments. So we wanted we think that >> that's more important moving forward. Um and we have like tried to help those
other departments administratively too. um just because the workload's pretty high. But um I'm hoping that you know we can close a couple projects here soon and then that will help with with the other. >> Um and then and also just so you know it
may come up in in the audit presentation because um when I did speak with the audit manager, she said it's been high for a couple years. It's really getting high now compared to my other cities, our our comp our vacation comp. So that's something that you need to be aware of because that's a liability for
the city. Um but right now when we don't have enough people, you know, somebody has to go public works, police, somebody has to go, you know, odd hours or whatever. So >> no, it makes absolute sense. So I think yeah, you got the blessing on that. >> Um yeah, do your communications. Uh
would you add for new business next meeting? Um something exciting and a little more uh a little more light and fresh. The pool opens soon. Mhm. >> We got to we got to plan our big uh shindig for >> Oh, your pool your big splash. >> The big splash event. >> I'm working on it.
>> Um I see it's a really good opportunity for our community to be able to to join us and and just have fun and and you know again take advantage of one of our uh one of our greater um >> and you wanting the same day the day it opens. >> June 3rd is what I came up with with
>> other Sarah. >> Okay. June 3rd. >> Perfect. >> That'll be here before you know it. So, and then I will I will say um you know uh if you haven't seen we've got a few of the banners up downtown fully. Thank
you Mark and staff. Uh and I know they're going to get the other ones here going soon enough. So I I think even just those few. Uh I can't believe the size of those um or being 2x4s. They just look they're so high up in the air. They look really good. I was expecting them to be way too big but they're like
perfect. So, it worked out really good. So, thank you for putting the ones at the entrance. I mean, a little pop of color and and excited to see what it looks like when it's all completed. So, >> uh that being said, I would make a motion to adjourn. >> I Oh, sorry. I reached out to Stone Creek on our walking path
>> to talk to >> and uh he said, "Well, let me think about it." >> Okay. >> So, I will talk to him again to contact you or Mark or >> Yeah, we can meet up there, too. >> But yeah, he just said, "Well, Let me Yeah, let me think about it.
>> Sure. >> You already talked to him about >> I did go out and meet with him too. I want to deal with Jared since we moved that out lot. >> Yep. >> I want to redo the trail on there sometime. >> Okay. >> Do that. >> Sure. >> So you can incorporate all that together with
>> waiting for them to get that then that closed out more important. >> Sure. No, thank you for doing that. >> Yeah, not a problem. >> There's one more thing here by >> just shout out. Thank you. Uh we finished uh through a shout out goes to
the fully school district uh community education and the volunteers for our youth firearms program. We put it on again this year. We had 75 students. Um, I'd like to thank Travis Swo, Mark of
course, uh, Chris Heron, Tyler Palm, and Alex Wilson for coming down and doing a safety uh, first aid class with the kids and along with Jesse Rail. He's been an instructor with us for quite a while. Um especially in these times when we have
when we're able to educate the youth about firearms, especially in a high school, that shows that this community works together. And I just want to say thank you. >> With that, I'll make a motion to adjurnn.
>> Second. >> Motion made and seconded. Any further discussion? All in favor? I. I. Oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. Meeting adjourned.