We're live. Okay, great. Well, we will call this meeting to order of the Grand Marray Planning Commission. Um, first thing we have our uh consent agenda here and then that's our roll call, the agenda as it is and the minutes. Do does
anybody have any thoughts about the last minutes? Did we look them over? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. Okay. Motion. We have a second. I'll second. Motion and a second. All those in favor? I I. All right. So, now we are
on to our public hearing. And the way that this will roll is the first thing we're going to do is we'll have Patrick read any of the the um messages that we got uh in the mail. and and then after that it'll be the opportunity for the community to make comments and then
we'll hear from the bure folks and it'll be over to the commissioners. So with that, you ready Patrick? Yes. Okay. Okay. This message is from Jennifer
Schultz. Unfortunately, I will be unable to attend the meeting today regarding the Bjorkberg project. I would like to make the following comment. In the Bjorkberg plan, I did not see potential pricing listed for any of the housing units. Is there any attempt here to meet our community's need for affordable
housing? Uh caps, all caps. Affordable housing is housing that helps us draw and retain working families. If we continue to build more housing units that are not affordable, we are drawing more seasonal
residents and adding more infrastructure pressure on roads, water treatment, etc. More housing is not better unless it also meets our community's needs. What are the projected prices? The next
letter is from Eric Humphrey. Please. Uh oh, sorry. Uh, dear mayor, counselors, and board members, I am writing to express my strong support for the Bjorkberg 2.0 project. As a resident
who grew up and currently lives in that area of town and who cares deeply about our community's future, I believe this carefully designed development addresses critical housing needs while respecting our community's character and values. I appreciate the restraint of the project
only developing a total of 21 units and preserving over 50% of the area as green space. I also greatly appreciate the dark sky lighting compliance. Our 2040 comprehensive plan specifically identifies Grand Marray's need for
diverse housing options, particularly given projections showing a large increase in our senior population. This project directly addresses this need through accessible design features and maintenance services that enable aging in place. My family has been part of
this neighborhood for three generations, so I understand concerns about change. However, Bjorkberg 2.0 represents a thoughtful compromise that balances housing diversity with neighborhood preservation. The energy efficient design, single level living options, and
moderate scale demonstrate how development can be done responsibly. Respectfully, Eric Humphrey. Got two more here. Um, this is from Autumn Bonner. I want
to write in my support for the Bjorkber development. My husband and I are new residents to Grand Marray. We value living in higher density housing in order to minimize our impact on the environment. This project seems to us to have seems to us to be a great fit for
the Grand Marray community because it fills that housing need without being too large of a complex. We would also value purchasing a town home like this if we're able to garden as we like in our yard and or have a community garden.
We can't make the zoning meeting, but look forward to hearing more. Feel free to share my email with developers. And finally, uh, from Nancy Evans, as a resident of Cook County who pays taxes to support EDA and HA
initiatives to develop housing solutions for workers and residents, it is fair to ask, why has John Peters chosen to speculate on real estate in Grand Marray? Grand Marray is a very expensive place to build due to difficult terrain and a shortage of
construction workers. The project proposed does not serve the housing needs of the community. The buildings are designed to look like a commercial resort you might see at Blue Fin or Steamboat Springs. Although Peters has uh although Peters has difficulty
providing a final cost per unit, it is fair to assume that each unit will cost an average of $450 to $500,000. HOA maintenance fees of $600 per year minimum plus insurance and property taxes for senior citizens to
age in place add 25,000 to $35,000 a residential elevator and 500 per year elevator maintenance from a duth provider. Do these pro prices allow grammar residents to purchase units or
do the prices appeal to investors and high income visitors? Number two, Mr. Peters and his partners have chosen to turn to the media and a Minneapolis newspaper to cry foul and paint Grammaray as a
provincial and unfair to outside developers. The expectation is that the city or county or ILE Irb will subsidize streets and utilities and ignore environmental impacts of a project of this
size is unrealistic. The county and city relationship with this developer is adversarial before the project is started. Will that relationship improve? Calling the community member's names i.e. Nimi, not in my backyard, and
unfriendly to all developers, does not create goodwill or hope for a good working relationship in the future. Please vote against this proposal. The community needs additional economic housing, economical housing, but Peters
2.0 is not a good solution. Mr. Peters has speculated by purchasing land, drawing up plans, providing romantic images of fishing villages at his own expense. But this project does not meet the community housing needs. I question if Mr. Peters wants what is best for the
community. Nancy Evans, Cook County resident. Great. Thank you, Patrick. Appreciate that. Um, so u for folks who want to to speak now will be your time. One of the basic rules is you get to speak once and for less than five
minutes. So, any members of the community who would like to speak, please come up here to the microphone, state your name, and tell us what you're thinking. Go right. Yeah. I don't usually like to go first, but I have another meeting to get to, but um I
just wanted to say it was really interesting. Could you state your name really quick? Oh, I'm sorry. Jan Sverson. and it was interesting to hear the others comments and it speaks to the diversity of people who live here clearly. I just want to say I'm very much in favor of this project and I'm
really excited about it and um most of the comments that I've heard so far ah never mind doesn't matter. Um I just want to say I'm really in favor. I'm excited to have this new creative energy brought in. I'm excited for the thoughtfulness and the aesthetic that it
brings to um Grammar. Um, we are not known for our great buildings in Grammaray. We just weren't built with aesthetics in mind. I mean, we were built with aesthetics all around us, but we were a hardworking um
um town when it started. So, any aesthetic upgrade that we can um invite is very exciting to me. So, thank you very much. Yeah. Thanks, Jen.
Richard Olsen. Um, I live in Hovindland. I happen to be district one uh commissioner on the housing redevelopment authority board. And in that capacity, I'm here to support the project. Um, I'm also interested in the project as somebody who might want to
live in Grammar soon. I this would be the project that I would want to invest in and I believe that there are many like me. We need all kinds of housing from the attainable on any level of in
income and it's really I don't think the place of anyone questioning this board about what the cost is going to be per unit. It shouldn't play a role in your decision. I believe that
Appreciate it. My name is Bruce Slooh. I live on AWS West. Um I'm close to the neighborhood where it's going to be uh what we're going to be put in. The I the biggest concern I have is the traffic flow. Uh if you look at the plat where everything
is, there's no streets leading into that. There's a temporary street on Third Street. There's nothing on there's nothing on Fourth Street that comes in. You can't access it because of the topography on Fifth Street. So that's my biggest concern is what are we going to
do about getting people in and out of that 19 that one that one block area with, you know, 20 20 home units. Uh the other concern that I have uh and it was echoed up in that first thing I heard was the overall cost of that. I don't
I'm not sure how many I've only lived here for three and a half years, but I'm not sure how many homeowners associations are here, but who's going to cover the cost of the homeowners associations as the first residents come in if if it's whatever it's going to be?
$600 a month was what his estimate was. And I you know this county from what I understand the city there's not a whole lot of homeowners associations. So we're dealing with a developer that is that's a common practice for them to deal with homeowners
associations. The the the project itself would be attractive to me personally would be attractive to me. We spend about 75% of our time here. So I have to deal with you know snow removal and cutting my grass and all of that. I would gladly pay the homeowners
association, but as we're trying to attract new families and affordable housing, um, can a new young family afford not only a, again, I would have to, uh, my projections would be something similar
to the 400 to 500,000 range, afford that mortgage in addition to an additional $600 to $1,000 of owner association on top of that mortgage payment. Are we attracting the people that we want? Again, it's very attractive for me. It's
a very attract I moved here three and a half years ago. If that had been available three and a half years ago, I might have jumped right on board. I spend again, we spend about 75% of our time here. And I call it home. You know, my wife still calls Kansas City home,
you know, but you know, we I still this is where I call home. And we move back and forth because of family commitments. Um, so I'm just I'm really concerned about those two things. The accessibility with the current infrastructure we have, the streets surrounding it, and then the
affordability, you know, the affordability for for whoever buys it. I think it's going to attract more people that are going to use it as a a secondary home, you know, where they're going to split their time. You know,
somebody similar that I am, whether that's 30% of the time or 80% of the time, that's where they're going to spend most of their time. So, those are my concerns. I trust the the panel and everybody in here to to make the right decision. I'm not going to try to sway anybody, but those are my concerns and I
think it's something that that we really need to take a look at because it is where it's nestled in at right now. And I mean, I've read through some of the stuff we've had and it sound to me like most of our multi- uh housing, multi-dwelling housing supposed to be
not necessarily in the neighborhoods we currently have that they're in the in the paperwork you send out, they're kind of supposed to be on the east side of town. That's what the policies say. that's not the east side of town, you know, but again, you know, that's why that's why they're here for a conditional permit because, you know,
because those policies can be changed. I understand that. So, but that's that's that's my concern. I I think anything we can do to provide additional housing for new and current and uh upcoming uh
residents that are that are currently living with their moms and dads and we'd like them to stay in the community. You know, that we can do that. I'm all for it. But again, we have to make it affordable. And we we don't want to add a bunch of taxes on existing people to put in roads and a lot of roads, you
know, to make that accessible. We don't want to put the people that are currently living here and with double and triple the traffic in that small tiny little area, which again, I'm bordering on that area. You know, I'm not necessarily in it, but I'm bordering on that area. So, I I appreciate the
time that everybody takes to do all this. I really do. you guys got a tough job, you know, but uh you know, that's kind of how I feel about it. If I think if we could do something that would make the roads work better or use existing infrastructure we already have with roads, then we're in a lot better shape.
All right. Thanks, Bruce. Before you, could you spell your last name for It's S is in Sam. L O P. Like the ship. My name is Betsy Bowen and I've been a a pretty long time, you know, decades long resident here. My kids have grown up
here. So, I I'm I I'd like to stick around, too. and am, you know, personally in the category of I wonder if I'll need, you know, easier housing looking ahead here pretty soon. And but also just looking at the town, I'm just
interested, you know, in how we go from here, what what it is. And I in looking through the Bjorkberg project, I I rather like it. I you know, I be supportive of it. It's I think it's attractive and thoughtful and the
um um and pretty considerate and you know it is in a nifty little neighborhood being right in town which you know if I were a resident there I would find that terrific to be able to walk you know
actually walk places. It would be it would kind of be you know if I were dreaming up something for myself that's what I would dream up. So, I I know that it's not the only question on the table, but I you know, thanks y'all for taking
it on and uh I'll be interested to watch. All right. Thanks, I hate this. Uh Chuck Heler, I've lived here for about five years. I live about two blocks from the project. Um, I'm really
not for or against I I hate change as much as anybody does. I worry about the traffic. I wonder about how it will really be used, how it's going to impact the housing needs. Um, my main question and interest to hear here tonight is
I've heard some things and I don't know the whole story. have followed it a little bit but that if if it's already platted what control or power does this board have at this point can you say yes or no what are we here to approve exactly I'm not
real clear on that um if it's plated for one thing if that's what they want to build they can make their own mistakes or you know I don't know where does that come and go kind of thing is what I hope to hear about
Um, I guess that's about it, but I just want to thank. My name is Dave Walter. I live 2156th Avenue West full-time. I've got a handful of more questions and
then I'll make a statement later. Things just points of clarification. In the packet on page four, it said that item F, it said that the project would be no less than five units and a lot area of 3 acres, but on page 14 of the proposal,
it said two acres. I guess at some point it'd be nice to be You sure? Yeah, I don't need I don't need to now, but I just Yeah, I mean I can address that right off. That I think that's important to address right now.
It was not correct. Yeah, that was I thought it should have been what was not correct. It is the two acre. Okay. Yeah. I never got a letter announcing this and none of my neighbors did. Were we supposed to?
I got a letter I don't And again, it's not so Yes, you should. I don't I don't know. Well, two of my neighbors, immediate neighbors, we never did. We didn't know about this until last night. Okay. So, that's a point to bring up. I didn't get one. And
I live right right next to the project. So, might be a post office problem also within today. Within the proposal, I was not at all clear about the water and sewer
infrastructure, who's going to be paying for that and eventual tapping into it for future development. I I read the paragraph about that or the page. It just wasn't clear to me. So, if you could clear up that at some point or or discuss that so
it's clear for future development, that would be an issue. And I guess I'll stay state now, I'm strongly against this project. To me, and the same as when it came up in August, same issues. To me, this is not
housing that Grand Marray would benefit from at all. I talked with two realators again based on the previous project and they said that market val they thought the market value of those units would be somewhere between 7 and
$800,000 or up especially if it took a year or two to build. That's market value. Now obviously that's a guess on their part. To me, we don't need more of that housing in Grand Marray. That's going to
be drawing people from larger cities with more money. It's not affordable. It's I doubt it's for people that want to age in place. And I think those are two of the big housing needs that we have here. And I just
don't think I want to see development. Believe me, I hope you know that I'm in my own small way, I'm committed to that. But this kind of project just doesn't help us in my book. I don't see the in
the comprehensive plan there were six separate points that favoring development and the this project doesn't address those at all. It it goes counter to those points. Again, this is not a project for
Grand Marray. Thank you. My name is Ryan Martinson. I'm here with my wife, Machi. Uh we just purchased land that's directly connected to Bjorkberg since the first proposal. I mean, it's literally in our backyard and
we support the project. Um, what what I like about it, I mean, it adds units of housing for the community. I mean, people criticize price, but it doesn't have to be like the single solution for everything. I mean, truth is, like everywhere it's gotten a lot more expensive to build. Like, we're coming
from the San Francisco Bay area. I mean, it's significantly more expensive there. I mean, some people, you know, they may transfer from their house here and they might leave a less expensive house. I I like the design as well. I think it's tastefully done and we support it. As far as our preferences,
just being connected to 6th Avenue there, uh we like his proposal to have the utility hookup. I mean, we might we don't have the bandwidth right now to develop that back lot, but somewhere down the line we could hook up to that. So, that was a plus for us. And we also talked to John today and there was some
like trees right there in 6th Avenue and you know, he was willing to maybe like keep some of those as more of a screen as well. So, keeping some more greenery, but we support it and I I think planning and zoning in the city council has been a good job as far as housing. I mean, there you know there's all these projects coming in line and this is just
one part of it. But yeah, thanks. He's not speaking, just me. Um, my name is Mumachi Martinson. I'm Brian's wife. We um just bought the property at 309 FIFA, so bordering um the Bureber project, and we are really
excited about it. Um, it would be really nice to have more not just rentals, but homeowners in our area. Um, and I think that that's an exciting thing. Um, I agree with some of the comments made about the aesthetics of the Bureau Brook
project and think that it would be a really nice addition to the area. Um, I do empathize and understand that whenever there's change in a neighborhood, it can be challenging and hard, particularly noise, maybe traffic concerns, but I think that um, you know,
ultimately Grammaray needs more housing and I think that this could be a great housing uh, project in the area. So, I am in strong support. Thanks so much. Uh my name is Amanda Hand and I live um just down the block from the project. Um
generally here to express my support for the project. Um I uh have a lot of respect for the diversity of opinions we've heard already, respect for my neighbors whether or not uh I share their perspective. Uh, and I've learned a lot and other other ideas and issues have come to mind in light of what other
people have said. So, thanks to this body for hearing those. Um, in the grand scheme of things, I will have to trust this body and the city council and the city to do their due diligence and make good decisions. And I do trust this body and the city. I've seen good work here
and I appreciate the effort um to listen to all voices and be thoughtful about um your decision making and also I understand that as a citizen I don't always see the full um I don't have full
uh expertise and understanding around where our input begins and ends. You know, we we don't have a referendum on every single thing that happens in this city, nor should we. Um, so I appreciate that that's up to all of you to know where community input is relevant and
not. Um, I like Jan, I appreciate the project itself in terms of its our artistic uh appeal. It is a different kind of housing and I've appreciated the new and fresh and innovative designs that we've seen in recent years and I've been I've lived down the block for 12 years, been in the community for about
15 years. Um, and I appreciate just as much my neighbors who have five trucks in their yard and all sorts of cool old signs. And I would always hope that we maintain that diversity of housing and access and kind of people who live in the neighborhood. That's what appeals to me.
Um, I am most interested in affordable housing. I think that's where we have the biggest gap and um, that's where my passion lies. Um, I think that when we build any housing, we relieve pressure in the market overall, and that will
create space for affordable housing in other places in the market, even though this project doesn't look like particularly affordable um, for our working and middle class families or people in the community. But I hope you will do your due diligence and double check that notion um, on behalf of the
project. My understanding is that we lost uh workforce housing aspect of the project on the first round and I hope that there is an opportunity for that to be revisited, find other funding, whatever it is. That was a part of the original proposal that really appealed
to me. Um hopefully we'll see that again. Um I I think cities are the place for um housing density. I I love a vacant lot in an undeveloped alley and street as much as the next Cook County resident. Um, but cities are where we're
supposed to um support housing density. Um, I guess my my final sort of personal weighin would just be that as someone who's raised children here who are young adults here, um, I would like for them to have opportunities to return to the community, work in the community, and have housing in the community. This
particular project would not be that for young people, but if it plays a role in taking pressure off the housing market as a whole and creates other opportunities for us, I I support the project and I appreciate your work. And you're done. Anybody else?
Hello, my name is Gan Ireland. Um, I live on 313 West 8, so right in the neighborhood. Um, I work at the hospital and so I'm right at the front lines of dealing
with housing shortages because we can't attract people to come. We can even house travelers and it's become kind of a desperate problem. I have renovated the lower level of the house and don't
we can't cram enough travelers in there to to staff the lab. So, um affordable housing is a really important priority for the community. These are be this project is
beautiful. I mean, the units are beautiful. It's probably going to be people with a lot of money who maybe live here part-time and some of them maybe full-time. It's going to
create a congestion in the um traffic and uh I think this be really it's also kind of a difficult area. It has some problems um because of the the way the water doesn't um I guess I think it has to do
with the the rock plate or whatever. It's kind of a difficult area to develop. seems like a high density housing like that would be really great to put in an area that had some fewer problems like that.
Um, I didn't get a letter. Um, even though we're, you know, in the neighborhood and I I feel like if we continue to bring in people who are retired, we're not going to have the
people to take care of them at the hospital. I mean, we're already there. So, it's just something to consider. Um, you want to have a vibrant community. You want to have families. You want to have a place where people can afford to live and um people are heartbroken. They
want to come. They want to live here and they can't. So something to consider. Thanks for listening. Yeah. Thanks. Appreciate it. Thanks for the opportunity. My name is Julie Carlson and I am a neighbor 316
West 8th Avenue. Um, I'm going to start by saying utilities are a big deal in Grand Marray and in uh the 1900s, 1995, I bought a parcel of property on 9th Avenue West. Um, it was
really inexpensive and I was very excited about it and I wanted to raise my children there and I wanted to know why it was so inexpensive and my realtor at the time said, "You're never going to get utilities." There was no road. There was
no utilities. We spent um from 1995 until finally 2001 fighting with two of the neighbors who did not want change. And I get it. change is difficult. And we were going to build in their backyard in their
forest and take away their trees. And one even had a tree fort, another one had a greenhouse. There were um railroad ties. Somebody put a garden and an outhouse, a non-compliant
outouse on what was our property. Um, in in my mind it's called trespassing. In their mind it was their backyard. And so I do get it. Change is difficult and it gets very very
emotional. We finally did get 9th Avenue West to go through and by the time we built and moved our family in there, six other houses, single family homes were up with public utilities.
year round homes and five of those um six homes had children in our schools. The neighborhood has changed um and houses have traded hands and it all comes back to change is difficult.
Utilities are tough. We have properties in Grammaray that can't be developed because we don't have utilities. And so I really would like um I'd like you to think about that when we've got all that property on the west side of
town and um people who really need housing. And a couple years ago, I think it was 2022, um we the city worked very very hard on city
ordinances and changing the lot sizes, changing setbacks for the purpose of more dense properties. The Buorkberg project is using those guidelines. It's exactly what we said that we wanted
at that time. Um I don't remember if there was a lot of public opinion about that. Um I know that I was at a couple of the meetings. It's I'm excited about the project and it's it is in my backyard. I
think that there's a need for all sorts of different housing, not just lowincome, not just workforce, not just retirees, but you know, you think about common interest community projects that we have in Grand
Marray, the um condominiums, Grand Marray condominiums and homestead cooperatives. Man, you try to get a unit at Homestead Cooperative. I wish we had a couple more homestead cooperative units because there's always a demand. Um, the Gunflint View
Apartments, uh, a a friend of mine is going into those and what I've heard is that she's going to be paying $3,000 a month. And you can Google an app for mortgage, how much your mortgage is
going to be, how much house you can buy. At $3,000 a month at 6.8% interest for 30 years with a conventional loan, you can buy a house for $550,000. That's really not not here nor there. It's it's not your job. It's not
my job and it's not the city council's job to um put the prices of houses. It's the sellers. Thank you. Anybody else? My name is Janet Simon and I live at 315th Avenue West. So this project is
just right behind me. And my one issue is I just hope if the project goes forward that they do what they can to maintain vegetative screening or if they have to take down some trees to build that they would do some plantings so that the people who live around there would have some sort of a barrier. I've
lived in my house for 30 years and it you know you kind of do get whoever said you get used to the vacant alleys and the the vacant lots. But if at least there were some trees that could could maintain that so it would it would disrupt the neighborhood as little as possible from what you can see or hear.
Maybe it would keep the deer herd out of my backyard so they don't eat my tulips. Who knows? But um my other question is you're you're getting eaten up too. My other question is in the packet they talked about the special assessment is and I presume is that if the project
develops there's going to be future discussion about Third Street. Is that why that information is in there? That was justformational. Yeah. Because I just kind of wondered, well, what will happen to Third Street? And I know that that's not the point on the agenda for
today, but you know, I um you know, as we all know, that street isn't isn't terrifically great. My other question is if there's going to be an access on Fourth Street going from west to east as somebody referred to
here there is there's not going to be an equal access from four street from fifth avenue west where there's a vacant alley would would correct the four street access just be on that one side and not the other side. I was just curious about
that. So okay thank you. If anybody wants to see that map, it is available on the website in the city council in the planning commission packet. There is a map you can look at that and I'd be happy to show it to somebody if you want to see afterwards. You know, traffic in the area is is increasing with that
gunfoot view with those 50some apartments. There's, you know, if every apartment has one or two cars, there's extra cars up and down. And now this other development, there'll be more traffic up and down and back and forth. And I was just kind of curious where all the roads were intersecting with Fifth
Avenue West. That's it. Well, I wish you well on this uh discussion. Thanks. Appreciate you. All right. Any other takers? All right. Well, thank you everyone for your for your comments, for coming up here and talking and for being
here today. Um this is where democracy happens right here. Um, and so, um, folks, would you like to Howard Hstrom, John Patter. So, I've uh kind of been asked by John to uh kind
of help with this project here. Um, I have brain death once in a while and to take on one more thing, but I have to take this on. Uh, John's a good guy. Uh, he has a real passion for Grand Marray and this project and I think we're lucky to have him here. He's
assembled a great team. Uh, his architect is Benjamin David Olsen. He's innovative and acclaimed for his work. Uh, as people have mentioned in their comments, you know, it looks really good. Uh John Ly I think he might be here MSA is a civil engineer. Uh he does
good work is known uh here and and is familiar with Grand Marray. Uh John has financial partners on board. Uh he's recently been granted the Minnesota housing grant um award. Uh H has been
behind this project first with Nathan Hale and continuing with Jeff Brand and his board. Um so I've talked to a lot of community members about the project. Uh most of them agree that it's necessary and
uh in addition to the housing mix that uh is currently here and is anticipated and in the works. Um you know I'm not here to speak to the cost of that project or um affordability the whole affordability thing. it it has
so many monikers. I mean, this will be the well cost and they will be fine, but I I think it's going to be in the the realm of uh um I think Julie said it best. I mean, there's it's you you can't believe what anything costs these days. I mean, it's there's
no surprises on that. Um but I think uh John wouldn't go forward with this if he didn't think there and he he's talked to a number of people. I think they spoke here too that looking forward to if they downsize, this would be kind of the property they'd go into and and uh so
it's not people from outside, you know, looking at coming and investing here. It's people that are already here looking for a simpler living and and uh you know, I'm of the age I can attest that um as you get older, you think about a simpler life, less shoveling,
downsizing. Um I am fortunate to have a house that I can age in place in. Uh but who knows what's to come. Uh city council that this is the second time before this um planning
zoning and thank you last time for the strong endorsement. Uh John got to the city council and was denied. Uh the two main findings and it's been brought up here is the capacity of third street for additional traffic and uh the future needs along
sixth and seventh avenue for the utilities. Uh the city would have been happy to come be excuse me the developer would have been happy to come to the city and say hey I've got this nice project on block 16. I need utilities uh and put
those utilities in and I can build this project. Well, the city is not uh didn't want to spend the money, didn't want to make the assessments. Uh so the developer went back and said, "Okay, how about if I provide my own
utilities?" And that's how the design was was designed to bring um shore water over from the intersection of third and sixth over to the center of the block. uh run shore and water up the
center of block 16 and uh serve his needs. Um so one of the one of the findings was well gee you know what happens to uh the properties on other side of six and seventh. So, uh, in in meetings with
John and the architect and the and the surveyors, uh, said, "Well, how about if we just provide and meetings with, uh, city administrator, how about if we take our our not Mike, but anyway, John's project
of the main sewer running up the middle of the block. How about if we provide easement to that line to the west and to the east?" um uh in that in and the developer has agreed to provide that easement for
future development. the the other the the street third street uh you know everybody knows that's a little deficient after uh last fall the city uh
contracted their engineer LHB who came back with the proposal for curbon gutter and widening that that street. Uh it went on to put in a lot of infrastructure shore and water but just dealing with the traffic. Uh there is a
LHB study and you probably all seen that of widening. Um I I measured the pavement that's there. It's 15 feet. So uh going to a 20 foot uh pavement width add 5T to that.
Um and I've not done I'm not a surveyor so I don't look strongly at that. that the the road is positioned kind of on the south side of the rightway. So that I'm assuming that uh the 5-ft additional will be on the on the north side of Third
Street. Um in you know the whole traffic thing uh the Yorkberg project uh there's a Wall-E avenue that goes you know across the block and that'll be one way just because you know you don't want a
wide street there so the traffic will be one way. So so I think you're going up up seventh and down sixth. So really when you come down sixth, he'd probably turn and go off and then over to fifth
and and out the door. So you really half half the traffic on that segment of the street. Uh and and lastly um if you if you look at the 21 22 project how uh town homes that are there are
anticipated uh if you project the selling price and I you know I haven't had those discussions with John and and you know there's if if they sold for $300,000 at the current tax rates that would that would create $300,000 of
additional tax revenues over 10 years to the city just the city portion. So I mean it's not an insignificant project uh overall for the county for the city not just providing housing but it there is future tax revenues
there. So I don't know if you want me to say more if you have questions. I think maybe if if anybody has it is second time around so we have read this and I assume all our commissioners have done their homework.
Um, not that. Did you want to make one final statement before we go to commissioners? Nope, you're good. No, I'm ready for questions. Okay, great. Um, well, first of all, I I'll start off with questions if you all don't mind. Um, I would be interested in pointing
out uh or interested in you pointing out the biggest difference between the first time and the second time. Well, number one is the LHB report on on the improvements to Third Street um to help with the increased traffic flow and of
course curb and gutter. It'll it'll channel the water as well. Uh then the second one is this whole question of of utilities to the the blocks on either side. you know, since norm normal normally you'd run
water and sewer up the the streets and access the homes on either side of that street. So, it's a catch 22. Uh city says, "No, we can't provide the utilities. We provide the utilities. Gee, now we don't have utilities for
these folks over here." So, it's a tough one to wrestle with, but but in this case, we found some routes where we can provide uh easement, you know, and then hopefully hopefully shorter routes then to to service those half of the blocks
that that phase six and seven. Okay, thanks for that. I am interested in knowing uh so last time we were looking at some more affordable housing units that were part of the project that I'm not really seeing this time around.
Well, the the Minnesota housing grant Minnesota housing grant comes with some affordability guidelines and but you know you go back to the PUD and and the ordinance. Um I'm not aware that it's a requirement
to provide affordability. So I mean it's an interesting question. I think we all are I mean I wear many hats. You know, one of the hats I wear is a development or real estate group that's working on a apartment. You know, in that project, we
have both 80% 60% and 80% AMI units. So, I mean, it's really hard to talk new and new structures, uh, home type units and affordability in the same breath. I mean, I don't know if you can do that
without a lot of subsidy, but you know, as the Minnesota Housing Finance or Housing or Housing Finance, I can Yeah. U Minnesota Housing Finance Agency in January uh awarded us an impact fund grant. It's
about $28ome,000 and it's it's very simple uh simpler than I what I thought it was originally. So, anybody who makes less than I think it's 150% of the average
median income and homesteads it, they get somewhere between 60 to $58,000 off the cost of their house. Yeah. And they have to homestead it and make less than that. Yeah. So, it I don't really want to accentuate that because there's a lot
of hoops to the grant. Yeah. And so, but so this is just potential at this. That's a potential. But you know, the the key thing in there is homestead it and we've been awarded that. So that's not transient people. That's people that are going to live there and and homestead the property. So but you've
been awarded it, but there are some hoops. So just like living what's the Well, it's there's details. I didn't I didn't bring it up my economy because it's it's a potential out there uh that could address the affordability issue. I
I'm not prepared to sit here and say that that's absolutely going to happen. Certainly be good if it did. But and why wouldn't it happen? Just so that I can just the paperwork and my brain power, you know, brain width understanding it all. You got the paperwork done. you would get. Oh, we have so just I mean
well just yeah the easy easy thing is it's all all all a lot of grants coming down the road now have uh prevailing wage requirements and prevailing wage requirements uh roll up your costs
appreciably even if everybody gets paid you know the prevailing wage there there's all those requirements and and I've yet to be really clear on on that there's benefits on top So, you really, the developer really has to do a calculation of
um, you know, if you got a million dollar project and you got a $200,000 grant that raises your costs, $200,000, is that worth it? And and I've not done that mental gymnastics. John has not, but you know, it's it's not money you
want to turn down either. So, it's that's all to be I can't in good chin sit here sit here and say, "Okay, this is in the bag. we're going to do this and this is going to be make it more affordable for folks who want to buy. That's yet to be seen. But,
you know, certainly uh desired. Put it that way. Okay. It's desired, but you don't have any concrete sense that it will happen that there will be any units that there's a lot of this is preliminary because uh uh
there's no permit for the planned unit development. That's why we're here. If we go to the council one more time, uh there's a lot of work to get to this point. Um there's a lot more work to be done and could be done. It's just, you know, h how much work do you do up
front? You know, this so you know, every nut and bolt hasn't been counted and and and ordered. I mean, this this is a a really good plan. It's been put together by some really professional people. Uh is there way more work to do? Yes. Um,
so not every detail is done in, you know, I don't want to I don't want to sit here and and promise what the completed look like. Promise, but but I would like you to speculate. Oh, I I speculate that that's real money that that would be hard to turn down that
will help make So if you were to get that, do you have a sense that and how how would that result? What would the result be? Like if you get it, buy it down $75,000 of the cost of that whatever unit 58 to
$60,000 depending upon whether it's a unit. So every per unit. Yeah. So it's about 286,000. Pretty simple. If they make less than $115,000, they put the application in to Minnesota Housing Finance Agency to certify it and they homestead it, which
is two really nice things. So you have income limit and you have homesteading. If that happens, they they reduce my cost which goes directly to the buyer of those five units.
Okay. And we have five units designed for it. We sell them. So only five units. Yeah. It's only five. No, it's only five. That's right. So it's that was the same as last time, right? Yeah. Yep. Which five? The ones that go up at an angle. Sandy. Sandy. Sandy.
You're calling Uh, units 11 through 15 in the middle of the block. Yes, the northeast corner. Yeah. Okay. When are we going to build those? Yeah, I think that was the question from last time. Uh, you know, it probably will be the ones on the bottom uh southwest and
those uh would be most likely the the first two parts. Uh timing depending upon, you know, who wants to buy them. We have interested people in those for sure. Yeah. Okay. Um I'm sure commissioners
have more questions than mine. So um Commissioner Johnson, would you okay like to go? Okay. So I have a question about the utilities and your schematic drawing and I'm
not good at interpreting sometimes. Can you explain to me the purple dotted line that I assume is one part that goes across the middle and then one goes on the upper section. The the
purple is sewer and water coming up. There's one in purple and black. Um and the upper left you see a a red a painted red. Okay, I see. Yeah, that's the ement for people to access. Yeah.
So, that is the easement there and the other easement is down and coming down right right along Wall-E lane. So, those two red or blue blue and green are sewer and water. So, then at the end of that, which is fairly close to the street,
then would be and there's easement there that that could come over and access. So, why isn't there an easement on the west side while the other because we're we're coming across up above there. Oh, I see it. Oh, way up there. Yeah. And that's the most difficult area. And
there's an interest from the Carlson's up there to have it. So, we talked to them about what they like, where it should go. And there's also one up on Fourth Street. There's a little pink line. I see that. Yeah. All right. I just want to make sure I understood where the easements are. Yeah. And here
we're trying to accommodate out the future somewhere. I mean, knowing your need to not box not be boxed in, but I personally appreciate that that you've taken that step. I think that says a lot about your commitment to our community that you've
made that um adjustment because that was a big concern last time. Y um sorry I have to go back and what my other question was. Okay. the phasing or the timeline of all these various
projects. I assume well like the state you can't start there. So can you explain walk us through what you're going to be doing first and what your timeline is. Well we we'll probably start from third street on on the west half where there are five units. We'll
either put all the utilities out way but more than likely we might just do the first half. Start with those first five and then the five that are up at an the other angle up on uh the northeast. Yeah, the northeast. Um then the next
most likely will be way up on the top and the bottom corner is completely up to how long those wonderful people continue to live there and we want them to live there. That's our our So So
you're not your intentions right now are not to extend the water and sewer water and sewer all the way at once. We might. It depends upon the contractor availability costs and so on. It' be nice if we could just do it all right away because it's less dist, you know,
it just getting someone to do it too. There are a couple of them that are interested if they can do maybe the first half, you know. Uh so that's part of it. Okay. And um so my next question is
about how you fund this. Are you pre-selling these before they're built to come up with cash or are you building all five units and hoping to sell? Um we aren't going to build five units sell. Uh it's a so the for the market ones the
market rate ones typically those are sold. There's a down payment. um down payment goes towards land, utilities, things like that, and they as the house gets build, they draw on it, and it's paid for basically by the buyers. Okay? Uh the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
is a little bit different because those people don't pay as you go. They pay when it's completed and they approve it. So that's where when you talk about the complications, Greater Minnesota Housing Fund has indicated they will finance the construction financing and that's where
John gets a headache and probably will have somebody help me with with that those details. So So that's what I'm just wondering. Um, we know we have a housing problem and I don't see Yeah, personally I don't
see these things not selling, but we also don't want an unfinished project because we've had that before in our community. So, I just want to make sure we have good information to make sure this is the best project for this property because it's going to work.
I have never not completed a project. I've done uh one in Northfield, one in Winona. I've done three in the city of St. Joel and I think there's somewhere in the packet there's recommendation from the city of St. Joe. Um they've all been completed. People are happy. Um and
it's added to the vitality. So, so universally people that have studied this project that that I know that that like housing and I mean they're all blown away by the design. I mean it's a very nice design, very clever. this Benj Benjamin Olsen is very good
and yeah I I think it's a it's close to a no-brainer but it it comes back to the developer John is has put a lot of resources into this and you know you ask about all the construction details well you can only
go so far you know and this is until approval comes I mean that's when the real work comes down and getting the nuts and bolts of all those a lot more of those questions answered But you know all all it is is kind of experience um his experience in construction and and
people around him. I have one more question about the road. So um this is a narrower road 22 ft you said 20 it's 15 ft now is going what what you're going
to put up in the that's like 16 ft 16 ft paved on the on the avenues and not paved internally. That's just for That's for water, you know, penetration. Okay. So, it's not paved where it's your private road, oneway road, right? But
you will pave it up and down the Yes. And that's that's all agreed to with a development agreement with the city how that all works and a license, all that stuff. So, let's make sure the tenses are clear is not currently agreed to. It would be
covered by development agree. That would be part of that. Yeah. And I'm And just remind me again what the width of those up and down avenue. 16 ft. 16 ft. One way. One way. Those will
be one way streets. And if we have more development on either side by the city, those other parcels, they might have to get widened. You know, I don't know. This So, this is a question for me to ask our city administrator. How how does that happen? And is that fall on the
city then or does that fall on the whoever wants to do a develop? That's an open question. So let's start with how it gets to where it is. There's currently a gravel driveway on Fourth Street approximately where they're showing the access to the property right
now that Tony Averson built with a license with the city. So that license provided him with permission to build the road and the requirements that he maintain the road and that we don't have any uh public obligation to do that that
it's open to the public and that if it's needed for public purposes he has to remove his improvements. So it' be a similar deal for these avenues where the developer would be responsible for building what we agree to allow in the right of way and for maintaining it and
for allowing the public to access that public right of way and that if we need it for any public purpose that it would be their responsibility to remove it. Well, the really the only likely public purpose we would need it for is the one you're talking about that we want it to
be a more sufficient road to access the properties further up to the north on the avenues. When we do road construction projects like that, we would typically assess the people that are benefiting from it and we would only
do it because they were asking us to. So, I would imagine that they'd be interested in us doing that and be willing to pay for access to that property at least to some extent, but it's not clear just what those numbers would look like or which who would have
to pay what or any of that stuff. That's all open question. Thank you for that clarification. How about easements then, Mike? Um, same thing. I mean, are all those questions been answered or not close? I think the
easements are a great concept to talk about how to handle this issue, but I don't really understand how they work yet. And so when I look at this map and and the question about the one that goes to the west, for instance, is designed to access people that have actually said
they might want to access it, that makes sense to me. But this is just a two-dimensional line drawing on a piece of paper, right? This isn't an engineered design. And is that the right place to build utilities to access those properties. I think there's a lot more
work that needs to go into answering that question. And then how do those neighbors actually gain access to those utilities? What legal rights do they have? What steps do they have to follow? What is it going to cost? All those details still need to be worked out. I don't know how any of that works. And
that would be in the development agreement. We could cover that in development agreement. I think then the the other issue we'd need to cover is is this still private utilities if we're having other property owners connect to it in the future and if not what are we going to handle these utilities a little
differently than we had considered. These are all answerable questions but there's a lot of details that I think we need to work out before we're done. But forced on the developer because the city doesn't want to provide the infrastructure. Yeah, I don't think that's quite accurate. So I will go back
to college claim about that and say if the developer wants the city to provide utilities on sixth and seventh avenues they've been told many times there's a process for them to request those. They haven't done that. If they do that the process we'll go through is to invite
the neighbors to talk about should we do an improvement and then if we decide to move forward then we'll do a design and then we'll talk about the cost and then we'll talk about assessments. So before any of that actually happened, I think the developer said, "Hang on, we don't
want to charge our neighbors assessments. Plus, it's going to be twice as expensive for us potentially to do it in Sixth and Seventh Avenue, so this compromise works better for everybody." Never was it a the city's not going to do sixth and 7th Avenue. We were not asked.
Okay. Thank you. I have a question about that. But so they're building utilities in here, but it has to be the city standards, correct? I mean, is that part of the development? Yes and
no. Other cities, we're going to make sure that they're designed by a licensed engineer, one that we trust and would use for our own purposes, but we're not responsible for the maintenance of them. And so we're not going to have the same stringent requirements on construction
inspections, for instance, um that we would if they were owned by us and we had a lifelong maintenance obligation on them. So I'd say yes, they'll they'll be designed to our specifications, but we're not as interested in their construction as we
would be if we owned them. And that interest comes at a cost and a fairly significant one. So, it's cheaper to install them and have them be private only because you're pushing off that maintenance obligation in the future to
these owners rather than to the city. Which is done through the HOA, right? Y right. And it's not unprecedented. We have those situations in the city right now where there are private utilities that are built to our standards, but we don't own them and we don't maintain them.
Are those access for adjoining properties not part of the HOA to look into. I don't know that we've got anything like that. So, this would be new and like I said, I think concept is a good way to talk about solving that problem because what we're really looking for here is a compromise that
doesn't create significant financial obligations on neighbors who were never involved in this project in the first place and still allows those properties to be developed in a reasonable way in the future. It's a it's a complicated question. It's the catch 22, you know,
how do you how do you get it built in a timely manner? How do you not use all the developers money? How do you provide for the future without um having all the neighbors, you know, pay the costs? I mean, it's it's been a difficult
balance, but you know, certainly this uh and you're looking at the map, I mean, this easement could come, you know, off of off Wall-E Lane as well. I mean, you're close to it. So, it's a suggestion. We'll work with Yeah. Yeah. So, you're not dealing with unreasonable
people here. You know, that's been Mike's been pretty good to work with back and forth. And, you know, John has been very flexible, too. Commissioners, more questions. One one thing I was just going to mention too in talking to uh some of the
neighbors on 6th Avenue um their preference would be that our 16 ft be take up less of the woods to the east. We're very amenable to that and I spoke with John Boy our engineer. It's very doable. So that'd be kind of a city
decision as you know does it need to be in the center or off a little bit? Yeah. Okay. Good. Great. Appreciate the opportunity to present this the second. Yeah. Thank you. Very good. Thank you.
So, back to the audience. More commissioners. Somebody asked a question at the beginning of the public comments about what authority are we acting on here. Why are they asking us for permission? What can they do without
permission? I think was the maybe not us but underlying question there. The reason that they need to come and talk to you at all is because the utilities that exist to serve this property only exist in the very southeast corner of the property where
the existing Everson house is. And although it is currently subdivided, those lots other than the ones that the Everson house is on don't have access to municipal sewer, which means that our zoning ordinance would require them to be 200 ft wide and 350
ft deep, which is pretty much a city block. And you couldn't put two of those on a city block. So the existing permissions to use this property with its existing utility connections is done. It's taken up. So
the way to access the rest of the property is to construct more utilities. And then when they want to access it in this way, which is a reubdivision, basically we're going to ignore the existing lot lines and draw new ones where we're going to sell these lots
instead. They have to come back and ask for a conditional use permit to do it this way. There's other ways they could ask. They all end up looking about the same, which is there's a public hearing, we invite the neighbors, you have a series of legal test questions that you need to answer. This board makes a
recommendation to the council and the council makes a final decision. In order to avoid that would require the extension of utilities to all of these lots in some other way. And I think we've touched enough on that that I won't elaborate. Thanks.
Can you also address the um fact about letters to neighbors and who you sent letters to and when's letters went out? Uh no, but we'll we'll get that back to you. We'll we'll send you a list of all the addresses that we sent letters to
and when. I mean, some people said they got them, some people said they didn't. I have no answer for that. Okay. Um, I think, um, the only thing that I'm concerned about is has have there been enough substantive changes from 1.0 to
2.0 to and maybe we can't control what happens at the next level for the for the city council. I don't want to for them. But um clearly we've been asked to vet this differently. Uh and and do we feel like this
is have they answered enough of the questions? Um, you know, I think, you know, we are a separate body and when we take it up, I mean, we are taking it up on on behalf of the
council. Um, and I feel like we follow our findings. We do our best to follow that out and it will lead us to a decision, right? We'll make a decision from that.
Um I I hear your concern like you know we sent this to the council before. Um and is this substantively different? Uh it is different. I feel I mean I think that there are things in there that we can
see. I think the thing that would make the biggest difference in my opinion is those easements. that could be hammered out in a way that we could feel that that's going to happen. That that there would be a way
for us to make an agreement that could go forward and make sure that those neighboring properties could reasonably realistically have access in the future. There was a way to establish that. To my
mind, that would be a big step. Um, and I think the other part was at on Third Street, but as you know, and maybe some of you all, you know, we've talked a lot about Third Street, and I think we already have that kind of in our hopper as something that we are in discussion about. I don't feel like we've come to a
conclusion exactly, but we know what we can do. We know what's within our, you know, what we could just pay for as opposed to assess. So, I don't know. I I I I feel like there is I feel like it's definitely, you know, it was, you know,
we all agreed last time that it was a good project and and I still think I personally think it's still a good project. Um, I feel like the, you know, there are things to be hammered out, but I think they can be
hammered out. I think that we can come to an agreement about those easements to make them really substantive and, you know, have have that really happened for ourselves and the the neighbors, for the
city and the neighbors. And I think the redesign of the road, the oneway traffic around, I see that as maybe um helping with the concerns last time
about traffic on third going west because well, we kind of people may still go back around that way, but I just think the flow of the traffic and having it one thing I was
I'm concerned about how narrow that was, but it does cut down on people just driving through and around to check out the new stuff. I mean, it's um I don't know. I feel felt like that
felt better on the plan. I can still see a lot of folks using third to get to seven. I think so. Yeah. To head west. Yeah. To head west. You need to come around the circle. Yeah. Head back.
Which I guess is my other point. Um so the other change that was made was this this contribution to road improvement. And um it seems like settling on the proposal is 25% roughly of that cost. We got a cost estimate of about 200,000.
It's probably a little light, but um is is 50,000 enough? I mean that's that's the question this I mean we would yeah we're talking about third but why are we talking about third right well okay
we've had a lot of talk about that started with this application that started with this application for sure well and it's also you're talking about third because you haven't kept up city council hasn't kept up on maintenance of our city streets I can tell what about you county commissioners you haven't
done so good either No, let let's talk about city doing its job so that we can have more infrastructure and more housing to contribute to our tax base and relieve the taxes for all of us. Yeah. Because really, Ben, my response
to that is like I'm I mean, yes, we're talking about their because of the project, but really it was our job to have done that road anyway. Sure. You know, the fact that they're contributing to it, it's like that's great, but it's really our responsibility, you I mean, that should have just been built. Well, let's let's back up a second on that. I
mean, that's a fair policy position for the council to take, right? But it's not the one we've taken. The the city doesn't just build streets because it's our job to build them. We build them because the property owners want access to their property, ask you to build them, and contribute to
their construction. Right? So, that is not what happened here. Right? this road. I'm not sure when this goat trail was pushed through, but I know why it is the way it is, right? It's difficult topography and there's a lot of rock right there and there's no utilities. So, they built something that was adequate for what they thought at the
time. I'm not sure there was ever a trigger that would have required the city to say it is now our job to make this different. The neighbors certainly didn't come and ask us to do that. There wasn't any clamor in the community to do that. the issue came up when this application arised and it makes sense
then then you look at that road in a different light and you think oh no it's not adequate for the way it might be used and and maybe the only other thing that came up was the highway 61 project and there was some cutth through traffic that occurred there that I'm not sure
there's any measurable amount of that that's left um this is a pretty low traffic street and all of our streets are honestly, but this one's pretty low. So, I think it's fair to say either it's fine the way it is or we'd like it to
change, but it seems like there's something in between there that would serve this project the best. That uh and I look at the third street between Sixth and Seventh Avenues, for instance, and know that a good portion of that they're going to destroy and have to reconstruct
to build their project anyway. And so why not just have them take that responsibility and we'll take the next block and that'll be our city responsibility and they can handle this block. That makes more sense to me than a contribution of of an amount.
Fair. Yeah, I like that better. Um, I'm sure it's in the development agreement side of things, but like because of the non-public privately maintained, you know, the kind of way they're going about that, when units, I mean, if they're going 21 units, is
there, you know, I know they're building out their infrastructure, they're maintaining their infrastructure. Are they going to is it each one of those units is going to get the usual water sewer power fee that they're going to have to pay
for over the cost of 21 units? Yeah. So recently the public utilities commission did away with the facility fee portion of that fee. So the total fee now is 300 for
water, 300 for sewer, 1 to 200 for electric. still pretty significant. But what those fees are designed to pay for are the pieces of equipment that we actually provide to that a meter, the connections for the meter, potentially a
valve. Uh, and you know, they're not actually covered by those fees. So, they for sure would unless there's some uh proposal here to not meter these, but I wouldn't see how you could do that if you're selling them separately. So, $1,000 of utility fees is a drop in the
bucket at least. Anyway, well, I guess my only comment would be is I think in the changes I appreciate the work that you've done, John, and I would say um does I mean I think it's great that you got the finance Minnesota
housing finance uh funds and um to Howard's point, if it's like well it's a million and now it's going to cost a million too because we use prevailing wage Well, we have five potential workforce housing. Again, using the AMI like,
yeah, sure. Like, I guess like if you look at as an accountant, that's true. But if you look at it as like what we're trying to do here with the policy changes, the zoning changes, the things that we've done and what I think you're trying to do, I think it is worth the extra effort even if you do need to have some help to help you do that because
and I think as far as like um gaining support and not having I mean there's a lot of support in the room but I think as far as like again community based if you're if that's really your intent I think that's we want to do it. Yeah. So I mean I I I see that as being
and and actually I think like it makes a neighborhood much more vital. Right. So if you consider your little block a neighborhood you get families and not just 70 plus in there. Sorry to be negative on that, but I just, you know, cautious about putting too much in the public record that who you look back,
you can't do it. But yeah, certainly the tensions there. No, I didn't mean I didn't take it as negative, but I think I mean I was saying like flip side of that is like actually it's a really good positive for you with some more paperwork. Yes. But um yeah,
great. Any more questions or discussion? questions. I'd like to just take two of the thoughts that you've talked a little bit about putting together and Ben's thought originally was the council had their own decision that they made with reasons
behind it. And I don't think it's wise to just send this back without having really dug into those reasons and at least provide your opinion on whether they've been addressed or not. And you've done some of that. One of them that we've talked about is this utility
easement question and now it's more of a process and timing issue. Is this something that you want to see more information on a slightly better version of with more details before you're ready to make your finding on that yourself or
is this something that you want to send on its way and have the council do that work? My preference would probably be the former So Mike, you're suggesting that maybe we get
more specificity around. Yeah, let's take this concept and turn it into something that people can explain and understand a little more clearly. Yeah, I think it's important that we just I mean everybody wants the best for this project, right? I mean I think so.
um let's just go the extra step, get the right information, get it on. I mean, I was a little bit disappointed that the packet was light. It like it didn't have all of the things that we would normally have in a conditional use packet anyway, you know, storm water systems, you know,
all of those things, right? So, um, if we if we want to put our best foot forward, we have to have all the information. And I think our in our colleagues at the city council deserve that as well.
I just want to be clear what you're requesting that they do. Is it the LHD plans that we need to see? Yep. Is that what you're saying? Uh MSA did the plans for them and we did have those engineered drawings at some point in the
previous version of this. So I'm sure we could get that back and look at those again. What I'm talking about is we've got a concept and the totality of it is a dashed purple line on a piece of paper. And I think it's important concept like it's a it's a movement
towards trying to address what the city council said one of the problems was. But it's hard to know whether this is adequate or not without really thinking through mechanics of it. How's it going to work? How do people connect to it? What do they owe if they
do? Uh if they do, is this now still a private utility or is it public? I think just let's work through some of those questions and and and it seems like people like the idea, so let's work with it now. It's, you know, like on the the you don't want to do too much development and then find out nobody
likes it anyway. So, but you all do like it, so let's keep going. I I I really push for a decision today. I mean, we really John needs some certainty. I mean, how much more work can we do without knowing where where
this is going? And you know, certainly a willingness on John's part to work in a development agreement. Yeah. Work this through, but it's a development agreement. Uh, you know, where those lines on the page go, you know, those aren't set in stone at this point in
time. I mean the the concept out there is there'll be utilities there uh is very amendable to saying how do we get those utilities over to those other blocks when development happens. So they that can come off in several
spots there and and you know I would certainly lobby for for a vote today moving forward. Uh there's some work to be done before next week's council meeting, but you know,
summer's going away and and Mhm. this is the developer may go away. I mean, you got to we got to have some decisions here. We I think you understand the concern is that as Ben pointed out like well we can
say yeah I get that doesn't help you either. Yes, but this can't be an endless process of back and forth and and I mean engineers are expensive and surveyors are expensive and all the architect. I mean
this is all you know I think we all anticipate there's quite a bit of work once you get the plan unit development yes vote. You know this isn't I explained it earlier. I mean we don't have all the answers. you're not going to have all the
answers. There's no there's no incentive to go engineer and and design this out to the nth degree when you don't even know if you can do it. So, um you know the question right now the engineering first time I know how those things there's a
long way to go. Yeah. I mean, yes, I understand the difference between a final like engineering plan and what we had in the first round, but we didn't have a first round. I asked for it today and I was sent today, but it was the last one. It didn't it wasn't this. So, well, that Yeah, which I get I know it
takes money. I know, John. It takes time to do all that stuff. But I I think like you know my again like I think I brought that up last time even though I voted for it. Like I still I understand how storm water works and the amount of water coming off the site has to like not exceed after development of what
comes off the site naturally. I totally get that. But it you do also look at like that water is dumping out onto Third Street. We know that's third that third street is completely underbuilt and you know I I would like to see like
where where does that tie into all the new sewers work in Fifth Avenue West that got completed right which wasn't done in August was it? whatever like when we if we had all that stuff this so I think it was that's that's I guess my you know I don't I
don't think that we're saying that you need to go back to MSA and like all right we're going to I think everybody here wants to say yes again but we want to say yes having the information in hand informed to be able to get it to
the city council so that it passes at city council like we did what we were supposed to do and asked the questions and we weren't just going on. Well, we'll get that to you. Well, I'll come back up here if I can if
I may. Um, and it's a a chicken and egg and and uh you know, with the the letters that people didn't get. Uh, you know, this is submitted in a timely fashion and if there was deficiencies in what was in the packet, you know, should
have been notified for today. And you know, certainly got that. And um yeah, if if you like the project and you think we can get there and work through this, you know, I would really ask for a vote tonight and send it to
the council. There's some work that can be done between now and next week. Um certainly talking to Mike and and trying to shape this development agreement, what that looks like. Um, is that that all one second? So, Mike, is there in
your mind any way that that could be done that that we could somehow satisfy between now and council this notion of the utility? Uh, my prediction is not chance, but let's talk about what that actually means.
What would it take to satisfy? What what in answers would we need to come up with in order to make this concept something that the city council might be willing to accept? I guess I don't really know because we haven't talked about it with
the city council, but the questions in my mind are the ones I've already said. Okay. How how do people access this easement? What are their obligations? What is it going to cost? um is if they are connected to it, is it still a
private utility? How is that going to be handled? What are the maintenance obligations? Like there's just some issues that need to be thought through. Uh is I mean, is there any possibility for that to be talked about and solved before next Wednesday? I don't know when I'm going
to spend any time on it between then and we'll put the packet out tomorrow, right? So, it it's not realistic to think that that's going to happen. No. Well, so what is the time frame then? I mean that this is, you know, there's a there's an
opportunity to to if this is a good project and you're in favor of it, I guess there's work to do. Um, you know, are we going to kick this down and be gone another year down the road and lose another construction
season? I mean, that's not tenable. What you're looking at though, Howard, is do you want to try to deal with the risk now or just take take your chances with the risk next week or the week after or whenever
it is. Maybe that's none of our business. If that's what you want to do, then but it's our responsibility to pass along something we feel comfortable with. I again we have questions that we want answered and you know I don't I'm not I can't speak for everybody but like
so what's what's the discomfort part? We want to understand like we the things that we like from the changes like why didn't it pass the city council so that you guys address some of those things but there still is things that need to be a little bit more clearly understood of what that looks like because if you
say yeah we're going to let yes we did this nice thing by allowing these easements again we don't like but we're going to charge you 10 grand a piece to hook that up and we don't know because we don't have that and I'm not saying I'm not saying you need to get MSA out
to like redo everything but But we I mean it's our job to send things to the council in a way that we truly support. Yeah. And especially when something gets kicked back to us. Yeah. Then we need to feel like we at least
are not just like oh yeah know you guys deal with this. Well there there was five findings and and basically they all boil down to the same two. one is the traffic and one is the future development of the other halves of the block on six
and seventh street. Uh easements are your answer to one of those findings correct but we don't have enough information. Well I don't know how to prov you know it's it's uh how much are we going to charge?
I mean do you know John? you know, probably be prrated, you know, so if two houses are going to hook up, be a portion of it, you know, something fair. Yeah. Um I I'm I'm confident I can work out something with with Mike. Um you know, there are
there are good questions that he brings up and they will need to be addressed. It's new. Uh our goal is we don't we don't want the neighbors. I'm sorry. We we don't we don't want the neighbors
to be assessed. Um and I you know I thought about that how do you charge and in talking to people I said there'll be some charge for you know hook into what we did uh something reasonable I mean that's the goal um and then you know Mike you talked about are the utilities
then part of it maintained by the city those are things we can address I think uh and are they answerable questions can we address them yes absolutely we can are they addressed right now they are not so question other projects have been uh done and
then uh they're contingent upon a development agreement being done right afterwards because I think most people have development agreements that are done later and why can that not happen here? It certainly can at this level. I don't know whether that's likely to
happen next week. Well, so I guess what I'm saying is other projects that have been approved are contingent upon the developer working out a development agreement with the city that develops some of those
intricacies that you are an expert at. You know, you do the research and you know what, you know, you have a broad consensus. So, I wouldn't expect it to be done next week, all those details. I'm I'm suggesting that it be contingent upon a development agreement that, you
know, the city accepts. Um, which I I think is reasonable and I'm comfortable working with the city on it. Um, so yeah, it it I I think for me, and maybe I'll read it wrong, but if it's if it's a you're kicking it down the road today,
that's basically a no. You don't want to do this development agreement or you don't want to do this plan unit development. Um, It is a big project. It's new. You don't haven't done this kind of a planned unit development. I don't think in the city uh there is no model to work from. But
uh what you do have is a commitment to work on that model. And you can't work on that model until we have some direction forward. And you know, if the if your answer is kick it down the road, that's kind of going to be received as
it's a no. So then where where does John and his team uh come up with the the confidence to keep moving this project down the road and and cost uh without some kind of a
yeah let's do this. How do we Sorry, probably didn't interrupt, but I was ask Mike or maybe like how do we decide in the in the right so again think it's great to look for allowing access on the
adjacent properties that share the avenue opposite sides of the avenue but h how do we make that who makes a determination then because obviously if now they're saying it's not quite private and it's public then that's a
That's that opens up a whole another can of worms could potentially. Yeah. So, it's nice to be able to who makes that determination public, private in the infrastructure side. Well, that's a that's a conversation we can have. I don't think it has to be, you know, we make it, they make it. I
think it has to work for everybody. Yeah. So, so on um I I think your concerns are legitimate about not knowing all the the details of some how some of this works. Some of them I don't know I'm comfort I mean if you for
example made a recommendation to approve contingent upon this having a development agreement that addresses the easements you know which is I think that's kind of the big one right now and Antony you'd like to see all of the
engineering we just didn't completely update up pretty close there you know and and and even last time I think you know the engineering there were certain things that the development agreement was look at say how about this or whatever. I'm comfortable with that. I
it I I'm happy to take that risk to be able to start moving ahead on it. So, well, I mean, we've done that in the past, of course, pass things on was bad idea that there would be a future
agreement made before it was approved. Is there a way for us just as a condition? Yeah. Yeah. I think Mike Absolutely correct. I mean, yes, we can we can do that. Is that going to be received next week? I can't I can't tell you that.
Yeah. And that's where my concern would come in. And I'm going to disagree with you, Howard. Just because we put it off today does not mean we don't like this project. We don't think it's a good thing. What we're doing is trying to make sure it doesn't fail next week.
Okay. Yeah. So, don't say that if we don't do what you want today that we're saying no. We want to make sure we don't end up where we ended up last August and we're embarrassed because they send it back to us saying we didn't do our job and we're trying to
do that job. Yeah. some you know maybe what it is is it's not ready for next week but that doesn't mean that what is the kind of the logistics of timing I mean do we have to go looking
way out another month or is it something that could happen you know in steps quicker than that or how does that work I don't I mean we have a special meeting we could have a special meeting we've done that for other things before I'd be happy to do that okay so It took like
two weeks or something like that. It's more reasonable. And then I think I think reasonable to Yeah. I don't know that we've got a good idea of how this work is going to get done yet, but let's just imagine that your team can come up with some more details on your own that
tries to address some of the questions we brought up tonight. And then we schedule some time next week to sit down and figure out can we get that in something that's a little closer to finished format and aim for not the 14th of May but the 28th of May to come to
the city council. Yeah. Because that's a they go every two weeks, right? So it's not Yeah. So I mean if if if you're not comfortable with those details, I'm okay with that. I'm happy to work with Mike on some of those things. He's got good insights, ideas on things. Um, obviously
I'd like to, you know, go to bed tonight and say, you know, but um, you know, we want to do it and if those are the big questions, um, I, you know, I rely on Howard to help with a lot of this stuff and I know he's going to be traveling, so that's an
issue. Um, but if we could, you know, have discussions next week and kind of get a good sense of, you know, this is going to work and maybe a special meeting if you guys are willing. I'm certainly willing to, you know, spend the time on it. Yeah. Well, as was said, we've done that before. Yeah. So, we can
certainly So, two weeks from now, do people's calendars look for that? They do. 21st. Yeah. And then go to the council 28th. Yeah.
Yeah. May 21st is like the 21st. Okay. Call that tenatively scheduled. And so what we're asking for from the developer before then is we want to see a storm water management plan, at least that part updated to meet this new
arrangement. It's not that new, so it should be do. Yeah, we're pretty close to it. And we want to have some more development on the concept of the utility easements. Okay. to look at at the time. There'll be conversations with you though.
Yeah. Okay. And um about Third Street. Do we need anything else on that? I think the idea that that you know like you were discussing and it seemed like commissioners were also amenable their
responsibility on third and between that's going to get all torn up with what they're working on anyways. Yeah. And then we'll do the remainder. So just on that um there are limits you know we keep talking about costs and
um we are willing to contribute up to $50,000. uh our work is going to be mostly on one side and it sounds like the widening is going to happen on that side and I would really hope that we can do it within that 50,000 you know I mean I don't
again you know it's always less expensive if you know the developer can do it or you guys have it paid for but that's where we're at and that's really uh that's it's really tough right now because I still have to go out and get
other grants you know we have We had 400,000 that we lost. We did get another 286, but there's, you know, it's it's hard to do. So, yeah, I I mean, I'd say 50,000 is our limit on that. Um, it' be
nice if we just pay, you know, everything, but there's other people that are going to benefit from that also on the other side of the street that want to develop on the on the south side, and I'm not comfortable paying for all that. So, yeah, you can't throw everything back to the developer just
because he's seem to be amendable to doing it. But, you know, that'll give us a couple weeks to have more of those kind of conversations. We should probably continue that conversation. And it's important to note this was one of the key findings the
council said no because of I know it needs to be addressed or it's going to happen again. All right. Just one question if you could make available to us what exactly you want. We want the road widen to 20 ft. Um, that's something I can, you know, get to
our engineer and say, "Hey, what would it cost?" Yeah, John's got our feasibility. Does he? Okay. All right. Okay. Good. Okay. All right. Well, I think we all know what we're going to do for the next two
weeks. Thank you everyone for uh formal motion to adjourn. I can just adjurnn us. Oh, I mean, oh, do we need a motion for this to say we're not I don't think you you don't have to take any action on it tonight because there's nothing before we're not pushing it back in a way that I think the 60-day rule is
going to be effective. So, yeah, as long as we actually do meet in two weeks, which is fine. And if we don't, then we can have the council take that. Okay. Tabled and not rejected. It's not even tabled.
continue even come up. So, thank you. Thank you everyone. Good good questions and discussion. So, thanks. Yep. We are adjourned. Thank you everyone.