--------- Good evening. It's now 5:30 and I'm calling this workshop of the Victoria City Council to order. Our workshops are informal, so we dive right into our agenda. The one item on our workshop agenda this evening is a sketch plat for downtown west phase 2. Kicking us off on
that topic is our community and economic development director Jen Brewington and city planner Brian McCann. Miss Brewington, Mr. McCann, I'm going to kick it over to you. >> Thank you, mayor and council members. Uh tonight we are looking at a sketch plat request for Victoria Downtown West
Master Development. uh they submitted the sketch plat application just to receive feedback from the plan commission city council. They've already gone through planning commission at their meeting on September 2nd. So that's why you are seeing it here now this evening. There are no approvals or actions taken tonight. This is just to
give uh the developers team feedback as they look towards making the preliminary plat and other land use applications. So, uh, the development team here, Carl and his entourage, as you all talked about earlier, uh, includes City of
Victoria staff and city council, the Monarch development team, uh, SW group, Saunter Architects, Confluence, DJR, Civil Site Group, Excelsier Bay Partners, and Music Group. So, we have a lot of folks here this evening that have
been having eyes on this project. So, for the location and area, it is currently two city-owned parcels totaling about 12 and a half acres in size, located north of Highway 5, south of the Carver Park Reserve, east of uh County Road 11, Victoria Drive, and some
existing businesses there, such as the daycare and the Dairy Queen, and then west of Olivine Apartments, which if you recall was the Downtown West Phase 1 apartment building. Uh for the proposed uses this evening, they're looking at
three phases of development with several commercial uses uses such as retail offices and restaurants as well as some open space, public gathering areas, and some highdensity residential products including town homes, condos, and apartments.
For the existing conditions of the site, it's currently vacant land with rolling hills. Uh there are some small pockets of tree coverage throughout the site. you can see on the north and south sides uh in the image on the right. There are also utilities available from Stiger
Lake Lane um which will also be included in the future extension of Stiger Lake Lane that's currently underway. And then uh also the Highway 5 corridor and adjacent businesses. It's also within 1,000 ft of Stiger Lake and Lake Auburn. So the
Shoreland District comes into play as we look at this uh development. So, this was previously acquired by the city back in 2006 and was always anticipated for a future extension of our downtown area, uh, including
restaurants, retail, mixed use, and other residential with a destination style setting. In 2016, the city council adopted the downtown master plan outlining the vision for the area. In 2022,
uh that first phase, the Marco Mlan development, the Allvine apartment building, uh was finalized and then the RFP was published in 2024 and Victoria DW LLC was granted the exclusive
development agreement uh with various renderings previously reviewed by the city council. And that is who is in front of you this evening. So, this was the sketch plat that was included in the report uh showing the multiple different proposed uses and how
the parking and streets laid out throughout the entire 12 1/2 acre site. Here's a colored rendering that uh outlines those uses listed in the report more specifically including those public space areas uh the residential
components as well as the retail commercial and then the central mixed use building for the site. I mentioned earlier that they'll be doing this in three phases. So here they've outlined the first phase including those town home condo buildings, the central mixeduse
building, and then the future retail and restaurant buildings. Uh phase two would consist of more of those town home condo buildings on the north side of Stiger Lake Lane and then future phase three would consist of those multifamily buildings and one more commercial
building. Our comprehensive plan guides this area as downtown mixed use which is between 24 to 75 units per acre. It also envisions smaller scale retail or offices and mixeduse development similar
to what the applicant is proposing. Looking at this density for phase one, it comes out to about 6.3. Um that's for the 48 units proposed over all of the public infrastructure area. So that includes all the streets, uh, storm
water, park areas, things we can't net out. So that's increasing that number drastically. It's likely not reflective of what the first phase density will actually come out to, but we are preemptively having conversations with the Metropolitan Council on the future
vision of full buildout for this site. So we're not anticipating a comprehensive plan being needed, but we're going to have to talk through that a little bit further with the Met Council. a comprehensive plan amendment beed. Okay. >> Yep.
>> Then for zoning, it is currently zoned central business district which allows the types of uses that they're proposing including uh highdensity residential, commercial, and mixed use buildings. Uh some of those may require conditional use permits depending on the types of
uses that come in as well as any potential amenities for residential. So, if they have like a swimming pool on the top deck, that's something that per our code would require an additional uh conditional use permit. So, that's something that we'll just have to take a
closer look at in the future. And then our central business district does not have any bulk standards. So, zero lot line setbacks. Um, that's apparent throughout all of the proposed buildings that they've shown in their plan. So the only standard that really comes into
play is that maximum height of 50 ft. Most structures do appear to be compliant with that in their plan. In the off chance that any of them do exceed 50 ft, we also allow a height extension through a conditional use permit as well.
Then for the streets, they are proposing multiple access points from Stiger Lake Lane. So that's the extension coming up through the site and connecting to County Road 11 on the north roundabout here. Uh the green areas are their proposed access points from that street.
They're also proposing two access points from Highway 5. The first one here on the right highlighted in red would just be an entrance only uh off-ramp style basically from Highway 5. And then the purple area shown here is a proposed
right in right out from Highway 5. For the pedestrian connections, they are showing sidewalks throughout the site. As you can see in the blue, they're scattered everywhere. So, there's lots of connectivity throughout the entire master development. They're also
proposing a regional trail connection here stemming off from Highway 5's trail, which would run through uh the south side of this master development and connect to the trail along the south side of Stiger Lake Lane.
For the parking, there's a total of 196 surface parking stalls shown. Um, based on the retail and commercial that was looked at, we are estimating about 188 parking stalls being necessary for those retail and commercial uses. Uh, there is
also additional parking that is anticipated being allowed on Stiger Lake Lane, which would bump those surface style lots up. Um, but then also for the residential, we're anticipating that underground um, parking will be available to the
residents. So overall, we anticipate this to meet our parking requirements, but we'll take a closer look at that with future submitts as well. For the landscaping and tree preservation, our central business district is pretty light on our landscaping standards uh because we want
to promote that downtown connectivity. So they still need to incorporate boulevard trees and foundation plantings, but they are exempt from open space and minimum planting requirements. And I mentioned there are pockets of tree coverage on the site currently. So
whatever they remove, uh if it's anything over 20% removal, they'll have to mitigate that with additional trees throughout the site. So we'll take a closer look at that as well. And then I mentioned it's within 1,000 ft of Stiger Lake and Lake Auburn with
are which are both recreational development lakes in our zoning code. Uh requiring a 150 ft ordinary high water line setback. All those buildings that were proposed in the sketch plat meet that standard and then a maximum
impervious of 80%. So that's another one we'll take a closer look at. uh but based on the renderings we anticipate that would be met as well. And then as part of the shoreland there is a RSPUD
process which is a residential shoreland planned unit development. This is required for any structure that has more than four units for residential units in it. Uh what the applicant would have to do then is provide a tier analysis outlining a maximum number of units that
would be allowed with the development. We did build in an exception for that two years ago. If you recall a shoreland ordinance that we went through with the DNR uh based on three criteria, an exemption would be possible for this development. Uh they're not providing
any riparian access for the development. It's also consistent with the density range in the comprehensive plan at full buildout and then the development is consistent with the other requirements of the shoreland district. So we are anticipating an exemption to this
standard if they move forward. And then for signage, lighting, and architecture. Uh the signage and lighting we'll look at uh closer with some more details at preliminary plat, but from what we can tell on the architecture, they appear to meet the
central business district design standards, including uh altered building variations, roof designs, enhanced entries, and highquality exterior materials. So, here in the upper right are a couple examples of the restaurant and retail
sites being proposed with the development. Uh, here's the mixeduse building. And then these are the town home condo units. So, here are a few additional renderings of those town home condo units. You can see a lot of uh
brick and altered uh variations in the facades as well as some balconies. And then for the mixeduse building, they have the ground floor tenants and then the additional high density on the upper
levels. And then once again here there are just a couple different renderings of the proposed retail spaces. And then here are some overhead renderings of that main street extension uh that we've talked about previously.
So highlighting all of the uh commercial, restaurant, retail spaces throughout this strip for the those four buildings and the on street parking available. So when looking at parkland dedication, uh we aren't for sure on what that
number will be yet since it's based on residential units and size of commercial developments. So we don't have all that information available yet. Uh but we do know that there is a formula set in code that we'll use as these developments move through the phases. Uh commercial
projects though are exempt if they are less than 1 acre in size. So expect that to come up as we start talking about parkland dedication in the future. Uh but they are proposing a public active plaza here um about a third of an acre
in size and then also the Victoria Community Center shown here. Both of these are potential areas that could be considered for Parkland dedication deductions. Here's that community center again. Uh they have two retail spaces proposed at
the end of it. And then this is just a potential rendering of what the inside could look like. It could be used for event spaces um or any other potential uses. I think Jen has a little bit more information on that one if the city
council has any questions on what that space could be used for. And then this is the public active plaza. Some renderings uh that were included with the case about potential engagement and activated spaces that could be used for
this area. Looking at the grading and storm water management, it has to meet the MCWD's rules because it's within their jurisdiction, uh, including wetland impacts. Based on the existing conditions out there, we don't expect that to be an issue. And then a new
regional storm water facility would be anticipated with this development to serve everything. That would have to go through additional review and coordination with the city engineering department and the MCWD. And then the site utilities are proposed
to extend from that stagger lake lane expansion and then also connect to existing infrastructure serving the adjacent businesses. The plane commission reviewed this at their regular meeting on September 2nd.
They were generally supportive. Uh they were particularly happy about the proposed uses and the building designs. They did have some general questions regarding the density requirements, uh the proposed highway 5 access points. They were also interested in the
possibility of incorporating a trail connection to the Carver Park Reserve, uh additional parking if feasible, and they expressed a desire for a rooftop restaurant and a grocery store as part of this development.
So, uh with that, that's all that staff has. Other representatives of the application are in the audience and I have some general questions to help guide discussion if needed. >> Very good. Thank you so much, Mr. McCann. Miss Brewington, anything additional that you would like to add?
>> Yes, mayor, members of the council. I just wanted to share some notes that we have been talking internally about that community space and that community building that we are proposing and Carl's team is proposing. Um, so we've been working with our parks and recck crew along with our communications to figure out what spaces do they need when
they're doing our events. Um, so looking at some storage space. Um, Brian mentioned hosting events of um, groups up to 150 people. We could do pop-up shops. We could do um, craft fairs, things like that. So really trying to be flexible with the space, not only just
the users, but the the functionality of the building. So, is it roll up doors, um public bathrooms, water fountains, things like that that the public can access um throughout the day? Um we're also looking to using the site as a additional polling place um in the
future. So, as you know, we're going to be having more residents living out there. So, how can we utilize this facility for that as well? So, a lot of exciting things with this space, not defined yet, but we are talking internally on what that could look like and really utilizing the um community engagement and surveys that we've we've
used in the past, too. Very good. Thank you. All right, council. Um, Mr. McCann, you want to take us back to our questions to guide our discussion, please? And council, um, I open the floor now for discussion.
Anybody want to kick us off? I think generally speaking, the Scotch Plat meets the vision of what we're looking for and what we're looking to do here. Um, I would have a few different questions
about the actual design. To me, it feels like the community center building, the open area for restaurants, and then the park right next door. Is there a way to kind of better incorporate or bridge
those together? >> You get what I'm saying or not? see a picture here that might be helpful. Mr. Runk, welcome. Please introduce yourself for the uh folks watching at home. >> Carl Rock of Monarch Development Partners and the the team um here can
help answer questions. Do you mind uh repeating uh council council member Patterson on that? >> Um just the public park, the public plaza and the community room. they feel like there there could be a way to tie them all together better than having a
retail place kind of in between. Again, we've gone through this a few different times, but that was one of the things that I just thought of as I'm well, not just this time, but just looking at it today. Um, and there's probably reasons why it's divided like
this, but I just wanted to throw it out there for everybody. >> Sure. Sure. And this is now the fourth time we've been in front of you all um starting last back in last December in our workshops we've done and uh our earlier workshops we were showing the community space or proposed community
space in that mixeduse building. As we looked closer at that with Jen and others on the staff um it was challenging really to program it and have people park there conveniently. Okay, >> which is where the brainstorming came out to be, you know, is there a better
spot for this? And potentially, could it be um at the end of that retail building number four looking out onto the new central green and parking right there and looking over to Carver Park Reserve and still have retail next to it and then public bathrooms next to it that'd be accessible to anyone that accesses uh
the new main street. So, that's what led to the evolution of thinking of that community space being there. Uh I don't know if that answers the question. we can speak more of the architecture itself, what's evolved on these buildings. >> And real quick, mayor and council, if I can, um, we also were taking consideration pedestrian crossings, too.
So, we wanted to make sure when we've got something happening at the central green and then that public park plaza and at the community center, how are people walking through that that space? So, we want to be really mindful of why we moved that building to the opposite side. So, when you're also driving into
downtown west, it's this grand entry building of, hey, you're here in Victoria Downtown West. here's a community space for you to to utilize. And so this also having it on the end here was just a better connection to the current downtown too is how we felt
>> in the middle. It's a better connection to downtown >> on the end. Yep. >> So So are you proposing where we're circling around that that turns into the mixeduse community room and we move that commercial interior? >> Correct. >> Absolutely. Yeah. if we could look at
that building more closely. So, we're proposing that there's two small shops there yet. >> Okay. >> Which helps diversify the offerings, you know, >> two retail shop >> retail small shops. Yeah. >> To be determined exactly what those are yet. And then on the east side facing Stiger Lake Lane would be the the new
Victoria space is what's been proposed at least right there. >> Okay. Can you go back to that kind of master plan and orient us as to the Olivine building and where the central green is? Yes, mayor and council members. Here is
the Olivine building. You can see uh the north edge of it right here. And then this is the central green space. >> Okay. Thank you. And so this first phase is is all these kind of buildings in the pink which will be where we land first.
Lots of commercial, lots of retail with housing on the top. Do you anticipate owner occupied housing or is it rental housing? It's owner occupied housing. >> Okay. >> And we think in our our ability to uh sell because we're selling not leasing these homes and they're all two bedrooms
and they're larger units that you're seeing at the apartment buildings that having the restaurants and retail buildings there and that public plaz will help and we think it'll help establish a sense of place there that people want to live up in the first phase of housing. But we are proposing owner occupied.
>> We agree that we think that will be helpful. Um, Council Member Person, >> can I just go back? You guys have already kind of decided to move the community room >> east
and south. All right. Well, there you go. There's my big contribution. You've already decided to do it. Um, but um the mixeduse building, that's basically retail and then most likely condominiums, right? condominiums as well as uh we're proposing about a 2,000 square feet or larger HOA community
space, you know, because it's all owner owner occupied housing without large amenities within those buildings. So, we're proposing there' be, you know, club space and a fitness room and such in there for residents and potentially small commercial space yet as well. Um, and to be determined above yet if it's
all residential condos or is there some commercial space. We're just now, you know, as this has become more real, talking to more tenants in the market and And what this is, we want to shape it around who the tenants are. >> That that building there that was
formerly I guess the miss mixed use on the on the that looks like it's probably the tallest building that four stories and then kind of a maybe a little area that has a roof on the p like the rooftop patio type thing there. Is that what I'm seeing? >> That's the intent. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So four stories would be the highest is
the intent right now for the for this phase at least. >> Yes. And then utilizing the hill again that we have this great topography, why not use it that way and have the the town homeown condos where you would have walk ups and the units above that >> are sitting up higher by nature of of the topography. And looking out to
Carver Park Reserve is our goal there. >> And then those those homes in phase two that are showing here um that we had talked about were uh big homes. >> Do those those will actually then sit below that sight line of that of because
of the way the topography is. step down a bit from there because of the topography again and those those homes are looking right over the park reserve and towards Siger Lake. Um so we thought it was important to fill the middle first with new housing and then expand east that way. But yeah, the idea is
that there are views of people that you know buy those units at the top of the town buildings condo buildings to look over the big homes as much as they can or through those buildings with sight lines. We just were outside taking drone photography at different elevations to match this plan and that'll help inform exactly what this looks like with our
preliminary plan application too. >> What was the um about or the proposed square footage of the community space? Do we know like what that potentially will be yet? >> Yeah, mayor and council, we were talking about 2,00 to 2500 square feet roughly.
>> What for reference point, what would the Lions Pavilion be? Do we know? We don't >> I was just curious like for >> much smaller. >> You think this is bigger? >> Yes. Yes. >> How does this compare to like the
community rooms that are over at the rec center? >> The community rooms that are at the rec center? I This would be definitely a lot different I would say. um more movable space, more movable furniture, movable walls, possibly more um AV options. Um
I'm not sure if any of you are familiar with the Paradise Commons facility that was just built in Wakonia this last year. That space is pretty similar to about 2200 square ft. So thinking about that and that includes like a small kitchen area, um some storage space, office space. So just for reference, if
you've been to that that building, that footprint's about similar. And then this is the space you were talking about doing like rolling doors or garage doors or leaving some of that flexibility there. >> Correct. >> Which I think that's a great idea. Um it just makes the space so much more usable
from outside to inside. >> Um I've got a question on the outside public space too. I know we talked about making it allse all seasons use let's call it right. So, any thoughts about I mean it's pretty easy for the summer of
fall and all that, but how about the heart of the winter? Have we thought anything more about that? >> Yeah, working with Arkansas confluence is not here tonight. Um, and Max Music had we have designed this to have positions for u pole structures for
tents, you know, temporary tent structures that could be there in cold months for like a Christmas market or beyond that. So that was how this has been planned is thinking about how can you enclose it or partially enclose it at bunch of time >> and then have different program that could exist in there. So we'd like to work with the parks and rec department
here to develop what that programming is exactly at different seasons and how could it work for that space. >> Great. >> Do you anticipate kind of turning that whole space over to the city of Victoria for ongoing maintenance and programming and all of that? >> We we do. We think that that's our
intent right now, our proposal that there's a reciprocal easement and operating agreement between us and all the properties we're developing and what the city would own long term and how they could function together. >> But we're open open to how that would exactly work. So it so it's up to the standards that it works for the
restaurants next to in their shops and up to the standards of the city of what you're looking for. >> Yeah, appreciate that. Thank you. Um, I want to take a look at that trail connection as well. >> Before we jump to that, y >> according to the internet, the Lions
Park pavilion is 3200 square feet. >> Okay. >> So, it would be one and a half times bigger than this. >> Is that the Google that said that? >> It's the Victoria website. >> Thank you for You're welcome. >> Hustle on the end there, Council Member
Patterson. All right. So this um trail it is shown in orange here hooks up to um the one that comes under highway five currently. Correct? Is that am I getting that right? >> Yeah. Powers sports or whatever
>> correct? I I believe so. Or this would be new trail actually. I believe um I think you're thinking of the Lake Minnitanka regional trail. >> Okay. This is this would not hook up to the Lake Mitanka regional trail. This would go up through the site to
connect to it, correct? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. But it does hook up or it does not. Okay. >> Let >> Thank you. >> Let the engineer talk. >> Yeah. Miss Garen, thank you for hopping.
>> Mayor members council. Um, so this uh trail connection would connect to the trail that's being built with the highway 5 and 11 project. So, we are extending the regional trail um so so the Lake Minnotonka regional trail up along the all power sports building with
the current project under construction and then it's going to come up along Stiger Lake Lane from where the orange ends on this picture. The current project under construction then also brings the trail up along Highway 5 and up County Road 11 and connects to the
trail that the county is currently constructing along County Road 11. >> Okay. So this yellow line, >> what is what a an additional trail through the site? So a local trail connection.
>> Okay. So you will be able to get to the Lake Minnitonka Regional Trail via >> trail. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. >> Add to that. We met with the three rivers park system superintendent Carlson board member chair the chair
current chair about the idea of integrating more the three rivers park system and they're open to putting wayfinding signage like you see on the lake regional trail that says to Victoria to Excelsier to the park reserve. So they're open to putting that at this site to help direct people on
bicycles and pedestrians. And the other I think one of the concerns I have is this is really this is really designed and envisioned to be very pedestrian friendly. And so if you've got people kind of rolling in on bikes fast, it's keeps it to the perimeter of the
site as opposed to running through the middle of it. It feels like Yes. >> Yes. That was the the intent with it. So it's convenient. But for example, let's say we lease to a bike shop. That is bike shop right there. or a group wants to end and have a beverage at the rest
tomorrow. So, it's convenient to have bikes parking right there as a destination. >> Yeah. So, it's right adjacent to that parking lot. Yeah. I love that. >> I think this is a a bigger like not just for this project, but I think you know when we think about our downtown and downtown west making sure, right, lots
of like when the um uh parks and rec right like lots of bike racks um way finding and even side like to find those bike racks, right? because I think people sometimes are like you'd bike down, right? But we don't know where to park, right? Or they're just leaning
against a light pole. So, um, so, but you know, I think having more bike racks for people to utilize, I think is important, especially. >> Yeah. >> Where just a question on general on parking. I I kind of understand the
surface parking where you're at with that. You mentioned underground parking. Can you kind of point out where you're thinking for that? Well, there's um surface parking is always preferred by restaurant patrons and guests >> and the small shop guests. So, we we have surface parking in green as you see there.
>> Underneath all the buildings, the mixed use building as well and the residential buildings, there's underground parking, two stalls per unit, which is the standard we need to meet for condo buyers and town home buyers. So, there's a lot more parking than you see on that diagram beneath all the buildings that are residential in use. Uh but we
believe you know we're satisfying we're about there satisfying what the requirement be if there's two restaurants and there's two anchoring buildings and small shops in the other buildings and it's convenient enough on the west side east side that people will park and actually walk to these places.
Um the planning commission did ask about could you build more parking and he said we would explore it and one of our early iterations we showed you all was that future multif family building potentially having covered parking there if we the place is running a few years with say two restaurants that are just
really successful that we might look at adding covered parking drive it's green on the left there drive just forward and there's covered parking there with a multif family building above it. So, we are open to that as a future phase. >> When as we look at the future um phases
and we want to do multifamily buildings, are you thinking rental apartment buildings? Is that what you're thinking in that? >> On the west side, we're thinking um because the Lake Auburn views are so good on the west side that you look right over the daycare building to Lake Auburn, those are condos.
>> And then we're proposing the building to the south as multif family based on the performance of this is years down the road. We think based on the performance of Olivine rural residences and and Victoria flats and just seeing how they all do long term here before deciding if that's or proposing if that's multif
family. But right now we think that there is demand enough demand long term for another building that could be positioned for this project. >> Does that need to be an apartment building to meet >> density requirements? >> Uh density. We have to answer that
question. >> Um, mayor and council members, that will depend on the number of units. Um, not necessarily the type of unit. So, if condos is an option that works and they hit the right number, it's certainly possible to heat uh meet the density
requirement. >> Okay. Is that is that going to be difficult? >> Well, um, most condo buyers are not looking for one-bedroom condos or studio condos. It's a it's a different market than they tend to see for rentals. So the density gets they become lower dense
buildings by nature of being condos or town homes. >> Sure. >> I have a preference though for condos in the LA what we'll call the last building in there. And that feels like that's the
space where we could get there's there's always the perennial ass for a grocery store. So, similar to what is in St. Louis Park where the Trader Joe's is at where you have the first floor retail, small grocery store, and then you have
condos above that. U feels like that that could be a good place. And I mean, I I am more comfortable with more a little more density here. And I would even be more comfortable in that building being a little bit taller. And
you really wouldn't you could bring your premium condos in a penthouse arrangement on top of all that and not disturb really any of the other sight lines of all the other buildings that are sitting in here.
Yeah, we're because we're phasing this um we're going to learn a lot along the way where demand is and on retail too and um being able to come back to you after a couple years here would we know more to give you an update that we could
do a Trader Joe's type if there wasn't you know interest for example >> we need interest of course yeah >> right at this time you know early on our discussions there's not been or if there is an interest ger um it would just take up really a lot of the sites with sort of a giant surface parking lot in a big box and there's also the new mathun's
open just a few miles north of here now in Minrista >> to consider you know as far as comp competition nearby. >> So do you have a sense as to how deep you could go with parking in in that structure? >> Um with the topography of the site and our grading plan it would be underneath
the footprint of that multifamily building right now. So it' be what would be one one two two rows of parking. Is that what guys? >> Yeah. So, the number of stalls we might have laid out would be 70 something stalls we could add in that case, which
would be easy for guests. I mean, just to drive it under instead of going underneath the garage or up a garage, you're at the same level in that case. >> And then just really quick on feedback on sidewalks, if we could bring that back up. Um, I I it looks great. I'd say
that a weakness I'd see is along the the very western edge of the for phase three that parking lot. Um in order to get to the other phase three
large multi-unit condo building, you'd have to go to the east, jog northwest, and then head west just to get to that building. Is there an ability for where it looks like there's the ramp going underground into
that main building that there uh can be some sort of sidewalk in there? >> Yes. Right now we we have more of a ceremonial stairs and pathway where the the blue line is connecting to the active plaza. >> Okay. >> But we haven't just we haven't developed those future phases that much. But I I
agree with your comment that it'd be if you live in the let's say conduburn, it'd be more direct path to go down that way. Okay, great. Thanks, Carl. >> All right, council. Other feedback? >> Other feedback? I I mean, I feel like there's enough park space in here
between what we can name the half moon up in the um center part. And then with the green and then the multi- lawn space, it feels like we certainly have a fair amount of
recreational space in here. I mean, visav when you look at what we have downtown currently today. We only just have this one slice here and then and that that feels a good size here. This feels substantially similar.
I this checks all my boxes. I love that we're doing the commercial part first. I think that's really important when you start trying to fill um homes. Um people want to be where there's stuff going on. The walkability is great. I love the
architecture of it. I feel like it matches it. it. You know, one of the really important things for me is that it actually flows really well with our current downtown and doesn't look like here's a downtown and here's a downtown. It's one downtown and that's really
important to me and I feel like we we this all these elements sort of captured that. So, um you know to council member to Chad's point about um bike racks and stuff like that. We want this to be walkable, bikable, um, and a really
active space. And I I I feel like you checked all the boxes. I >> Thank you. Looks great. >> Thank you. And it's hard to balance both that the people running the restaurants and running the shops, they need cars, but they al also wanted to make it very walkable. So, it's a challenge, but I think we've we've done that with the team here at this point.
>> Yeah. Nice. Nicely done. Nicely done. So I think you've said before you're I think best case scenario would right like that you'd like to even be moving dirt sometime this year, right? So are you thinking you know phase one would be done spring of 2027? Um and then would
you start phase two right after that depending obviously >> yes how things go. ambition really is to be in front of you with preliminary plat already in November if we could hit that timeline and work with you on a on an early start agreement is what we've asked staff to start doing mass grading
this winter and December before it gets really frozen out there and let the the dirt settle for spring to do all this site work because we have to build a city essentially horizontally first and then come up with the retail buildings in the spring and summer and the condo buildings and we would also like to uh
we're looking right now in downtown Victoria for space for to build a sales gallery for condos because unlike apartments, we have to actually sign purchase agreements with buyers who trust this is happening and they want to see the site actually getting built or starting to get built. And we'll build a sales gallery with a simulated condo
unit and videos of the drone shots uh this winter is our goal. So, we we have if things go as planned, we really want like to get started already before it's frozen this winter. >> All right, council. last thoughts, questions. Did we hit all the Did we hit
all your questions? >> Yes, mayor. >> All right, very good. >> Should u I guess following up on your comments on the community space, should we meet offline as a you know, public private here again on that? Was that a recommendation you're on hearing or to >> maybe I have one more question on it
because outside of the grocery store, the number one thing Victoria residents want is a water feature and I'm just wondering if there's a spot where we could incorporate a water feature. We certainly can as long as it functions. It doesn't >> Well, I'm just trying to think of where exactly we're going to put it. And
that's where you come in and come up with ideas for me. I >> mean, if we >> Is a water feature like a water fountain? >> Well, no. It could be a swimming pool, a waiting pool, um, rain deck, I think is what they're called. And just something
along those lines where it's, you know, is it at the community center? Is it north of the uh green? Is it somewhere else with the other there's another phase where there's a park on the north end? Maybe there's a water feature there. Um,
>> we had a scheme uh that had a water feature at this active plaza. As we thought about it more, kids are going to get wet and then they're going to go into these restaurants and the restaurant offers. >> That's we thinking maybe if there we agree, but maybe there's a spies of central green if we work with the city or somewhere that that could be here.
Well, that's and at sketch plat's the best time to have this discussion, not at final or even preliminary. So, that's where I'm saying if there's some way we can incorporate or if it makes sense or if it doesn't say walk away person, you have no idea what you're talking about. I can accept that. Um, but it's just one
of the things that residents have asked about and it seems like if there's an opportunity, let's check it out. If there's not, we'll keep trying to b pound one in at the rec center sometime. One of the things that I think um we we really should be cognizant of and I and
I leave it to you guys and staff to kind of work out timing on this, but as we are building this infrastructure, I mean we don't want to we don't want to have a great stage with nowhere for a guitar to plug in for instance. So I mean there's some infrastructure things that I think
we have to work out. I don't know how specific we have to be about programming at this point in time, but I I think we leave it to staff to kind of let us know at what the what the appropriate amount of time is as we start thinking through the very specifics of how we're going to
use that space. What does it look like? You know, you mentioned tent poles where you got a place to anchor a tent. I mean, I think all of that is really great as we start to, you know, as we're building this thing. Um, we want to make sure that we've we've got all the that we've kind of thought about all of the
things that we might want to do and incorporate those. But I think at this point I is it too soon to be talking about that? >> Probably. >> We've uh our budgets we've submitted to the staff include allocations for electricity for example. So you could plug in speakers,
>> a TV screen that could come up for the Vikings game for example. Like so we we have allocations of that but we need to work together with you on what exactly this is. >> Yeah. Well, >> I think we have a good example, right? Like we have the band standalone here. So, it's like, okay, it works great, but what are those things that we could have
done then what we know now, right? >> Because it's going to be, you know, obviously it's not going to have the big hill like we do here, but it's going to be, you know, similar spacing and stuff. So, >> right. But I I I mean I feel like um even as we start to um look at our
future budget, you know, if we're going to need benches or a grandstand or, you know, a stadium seating, I don't know, we're we're going to need to think about that for our future budgets as well. So, so there's a there's probably a magic point in time when we have those
conversations and we'll we'll just trust that staff will get to us by that magic point. >> Preliminary PL application. It be great to talk again with staff about what we're designing exactly. So, we have more detail for proposing >> and you know,
our communications department and our park and wreck has been out in the park areas talking about this kind of stuff and their their wish list and that sort of thing. So, I'm I'm going to take a leap and say some of this probably is pretty well vetted um or the ideas are
actually out there already. So we can kind of decide. >> Right. Exactly. So all right. All right. Council, any last questions, comments for the team?
>> Thank you for bringing us this beautiful >> Thank you. >> development. We're excited about it. >> Fun. Fun to partner with you all. >> All right. Very good. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um there are no further items on our workshop agenda this evening. So I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn.
>> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. We stand adjourned. We will reconvene in Part: 2
Good evening. It is 6:30 and I call this regular meeting of the Victoria City Council to order. Please join us in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance 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. The first item on our agenda this evening is announcements. The city council will hold its next workshop on Monday, October 13th at 6 pm. We will be
reviewing the Victoria Fire Department paid on call duty crew firefighter staffing model. We also invite everyone to visit our community events web page and learn more about the ongoing engagement opportunities happening throughout September, including our first ever park after dark event on
Friday, September 26th from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the Bayfront Park. Check out the city's website for additional information on that event. Please enjoy uh join us at the Victoria Fire Department's annual community open house for an engaging evening with our local
firefighters. Explore fire safety tips. Enjoy hands-on activities like riding in a firet truck and test your skills in interactive demonstrations. This event is September 29th from 5:30 to 8:00 p.m. at the Victoria Fire Station. That
concludes our announcements for this evening. I do have a proclamation at the dis which I will read now. Uh proclamation 202507 to recognize October 5 through 11 as fire prevention week. Whereas the city
of Victoria is committed to ensuring the safety and security of residents and visitors. And whereas fire is a significant safety concern locally and nationally and homes are the locations where people are at greatest risk. And whereas the Victoria Fire Department
responded to $410 calls for service in 2024. And whereas economic loss due to fire in Victoria was estimated at $173,000 in 2024. And whereas lithium ion batteries power
many of the devices we rely on daily, including cell phones, laptops, power tools, and electric vehicles. And whereas lithium ion batteries can present a fire hazard when they are damaged, improperly charged, or used
with incompatible equipment. And whereas residents can risk reduce their risk by purchasing devices and batteries that are listed by a qualified testing laboratory only using only the cords and power equipment that came with the device and following manufacturers's
instructions. And whereas residents should always charge devices on hard, flat surfaces, keep them away from beds, pillows, and other flammable materials and stop using any device that shows signs of swelling, overheating, or unusual odor. And
whereas residents should always charge and whereas first responders are dedicated to reducing the occurrence of home fires and injuries through pre prevention and protection education especially related to emerging risks
such as lithium ion battery safety. And whereas residents who are informed about fire risks and prevention strategies are better able to protect themselves, their families, and their homes. And whereas the 2025 fire prevention week theme,
charge into fire safety lithium ion batteries in your home, highlights the importance of making safe choices when purchasing, charging, storing, and using battery powered devices. Now therefore, I, Mayor Deb McMillan of the city of
Victoria, do hereby proclaim October 5th through 11th, 2025 as Fire Prevention Week and urge all citizens of Victoria to support the many public safety activities and efforts of the Victoria Fire Department and other emergency
service organizations. Our next order of business is to adopt the final agenda. Council, can I get a motion to adopt the final agenda? Move to adopt final agenda. We have a motion. Can I get a second? Sec.
We have a motion and a second by council member Ivanski. Um all in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. The next item on our agenda is open forum. Open forum is the opportunity for anyone to address the council on an item that is
not on the agenda and not an application form that will be coming to the council at a future date. No one has registered in advance to speak this evening, but I understand there's someone interested in making a comment on an item that is on the agenda. Um, at this point in time, I will invite that person to come forward
and provide two minutes um to the council. Good evening. Welcome. Please state your name for the record. Thank you, mayor. My name is Danny Devany from Fredericks of Byron. I'm here on behalf of the Browenss and Wolinskies. Um I I was retained today
and this pertains mayor to and council members to I believe it's agenda item 6.3 on the regular agenda which is the cup application for an accessory structure. My clients own the properties on either side of that property that's at issue. Um and admittedly playing a
little catch-up here today and and my my clients were as well as this matter just came to their attention um as well. Um and I I so just to clarify what we're requesting and the reason that we're up here is um we're requesting a
continuation consideration of this matter so that there can be an opportunity to be heard here. Um and the reason for that is um I guess an issue of notice and and the opportunity hasn't been available yet to my clients. Um to that end, my plan is to briefly address
the council. I'll try to be as efficient as I can here. uh my clients are here and they are prepared and would request to speak to the council if this matter is going to be um considered this evening. Um but to summarize the issues for the council members um again it
comes down to notice um the hearing and um really what's at at issue here in the cup request. Um the there's generally a 10-day notice requirement published and and mailing. Um to be um to be frank, we're not sure exactly what was done in
terms of notice. All I can say is I was talking to the browsens and I believe that they actually got notice of the planning commission hearing where the recommendation was made on the 16th. I believe it was on the 18th or 19th. So they were not aware of it at all and did not have an opportunity to attend. Um as
far as I can tell in the record, um there's not a statement or indication of notice. That being said, um actual notice wasn't received, so there wasn't an opportunity to attend the hearing and present information and evidence. And the significance of that is the the nature of this particular conditional
use permit um on a lot that is right adjacent to their house. Um it's for an accessory structure, excuse me, that is near 1350 with square feet, which is the maximum allowable. Um it does have a significant impact on their properties.
Um and um again they are here to potentially speak to that. Um it's a conditional use permit. So it is not considered a matter of right. Um but subject to the standards that are articulated in the ordinance. Um one of those standards and this is under 31-2A
as that the applicant has the burden of proving that standards will be met. The standard, one of them under 31-2B is that the proposed use shall not negatively impact surrounding lands and includes consideration of the effects on valuation or aesthetics of surrounding
properties. And um that just wasn't something that there was an opportunity to specifically address at the hearing among other issues. Um and this is that the the brows and the mealies can speak to in detail the impact of a structure
of this size. um right on the border of variance, the impact that that does have on valuation and aesthetics. Um it's 60 feet long. It's much different than the situation there. That's all to say there wasn't an opportunity in the the hearing to address these issues and it wasn't
specifically considered by the commission. Um, so what what we're spec specifically requesting, excuse me, council members, is for now, uh, that this matter be continued and tabled with an opportunity to further address these
issues. Um, I'll note that based on my understanding, again, just looking at being able to look at documents today, the application was submitted, I believe, in late August. So, there's still plenty of time within the general 60-day time frame um, to consider and make a final determination on this. Um
but again the the key thing and what we're asking for is an opportunity to be heard. Um and so my clients are prepared to speak if when this matter does come up on the regular agenda and would request more time. Um but we we submit that the best approach is to either
through some manner or another notice and conduct a hearing whether it be by the council or with the planning commission just so there's a full opportunity on this because this is a significant project significant development and they haven't had that chance yet and I'm happy to answer other questions right now as I can. I know my
clients are happy to answer questions and happy to present um to the extent that we're permitted. we would ask for that opportunity later, but I I think I've gone over my two minutes. Um, again, doing my best today, just being coming aware of these issues to present the matter to the council.
Okay. Thank you so much. Um, council, I'm going to I'm going to ask us to hold our questions until this comes up on the agenda this evening. Thank you. All right. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to address the item the uh council on an item that is
not on the agenda or not an application form to come before? Please step forward, introduce yourself and provide your address for the record, please. My name is Mark Gerling. I'm the applicant for the conditional use permit. I really don't hear too well and
I couldn't hear exactly what he said, but I see no reason to continue uh the permit application approval. Uh, it's my understanding that the question before us is, does my application meet the existing building and zoning ordinance?
And Travis has told me that it does. Thank you, Mr. Curley. Okay. Is there anyone else in the Oh, okay. If this is related to that topic, I'm going to wait till we're on the the one more thing. I would like to start construction this
fall and any delay would probably prevent that. Thank you. All right. Is there anyone else that would like to speak to the council on an item that is not in application form or on the agenda this evening? All right. Seeing no one, we'll move on to the next
item on our agenda, which is the consent agenda. Items on the consent agenda are routine administrative and do not require deliberation or are housekeeping items required by law. Consent agenda items are approved with one vote unless someone requests an item to be
considered separately. Miss Hardy, does anyone wish to pull any consent agenda items for separate discussion and vote this evening? None from staff. Madame Mayor, a member of the council that wishes to pull any item from the consent agenda? None. or a member of the audience
wishing to pull anything from the consent agenda. Seeing no one, seeing none, I will uh entertain a motion for our consent agenda, please. Motion to adopt the consent agenda. We have a motion. Can I get a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. All in
favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to our regular agenda. The first item on our regular agenda is item 6.1, which is to consider our maximum tax levy and general fund budget for 2026. Presenting
on this item this evening is our assistant city manager and finance director, Trisha Pollock. Miss Pollock, welcome. Thank you. Good evening, mayor, members of the council. Tonight, we are going to ask council to adopt the max tax levy. Just to review um in a few short slides
here um the general fund budget includes 1.67 million in transfers to capital funds and 7.46 million in operating expenditures. So, in order to achieve that balanced budget and maintain a fund
balance of at least 30% of the following year's operating expenditures at year end, $193,000 increase to fund balance will be needed. Then on the um other side, we're projecting 1.7 million in revenues and a
7.61 million in operating levy. Looking at the general fund budget in more detail on the revenue side, we have six 7.65 million in taxes and franchise fee revenues. Those franchise fees are for
cable, none electric or gas, which we reviewed at the last month's workshop. The remaining 1.66 million comes from licenses and permits, charges for services, and other revenues. The expenditure breakdown is general
government at 3.15 million, public safety at 2.27 million, public works at just slightly over a million dollars, and park and wreck at 957,000. And then the capital fund transfer of
1.66. The max tax levy is 9.96% higher than 2025. The tax capacity rate is estimated to be at 30.47% which is 007% higher than 2025.
And the breakdown of the $9.78 million levy is 2.27 million in debt service payments and 7.6 6 million in general fund levy. The net tax capacity is 10.4% higher
than in 2025. Our median home value of $583,100 is 5% higher than 2025. The tax on the medium value home is 1.7
or $1,776 annually or $87 higher than in 2025's medium value home. And the year-end population is expected to increase about 3.4%
and the tax per capita would be at $746. Looking at the long-term financial plan projections through 2035, the we we expect the tax capacity rate to be at approximately 30 to 32% each
year. Um this would maintain that minimum of at least 30% of the following year's operating expenditures in the general fund unassigned fund balance. We anticipate a continued growth in population and a continued growth in
number of households. So, as you can see there, we're we're projecting about 13,240 people um for population by the end of 2026. Does council have any questions or
comments for staff before I ask you um to adopt the resolutions? Council questions, comments for staff. We're well well familiarized with these numbers. Been working on them for a
while here. All right, seeing none. Okay. So, um these are the two resolutions that I would ask um for council to consider this evening. Very good. We have two resolutions in front of us. Council, uh seeing no questions or further discussion, I will
entertain a motion. I'll make a motion adopting the preliminary tax levy for the city of Victoria for collection at 2026 in the amount of 9,879,558. Thank you, Council Member Evansky. Can I get a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. All in
favor signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. I will entertain the second motion, please. I'll make a resolution adopting a preliminary 2026 budget for the general fund. We have a motion. Can I get a second?
Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Uh, thank you very much. Uh, next on our agenda, item 6.2 two is a public hearing for the vacation of drainage and utility
easement at 6525 Hawks Point Lane. Presenting on that this evening is associate planner Travis Brierly. Mr. Brierly, good evening, Mayor and Council. Welcome. Thank you. Give me one second to get this set up.
tonight. Uh the first topic, mayor and council, as you pointed out, is for an easement vacation at 6525 Hawk Point Lane. Um the request is for a partial vacation of the rear easement that's on the property. The purpose of the vacation being requested is for the
installation of a swimming pool behind the home. And this easement was put in during the platting process primarily for storm water management. And then we do need a public hearing. It was uh properly noticed in the paper as well as
mailers out to properties within 350 ft. When we look at easement vacations, we need to consider a couple different things. The appropriateness is the number one thing to look at. Um, this requestification uh could have been done when there was a grading permit submitted a few years ago that moved a
mound back from the property, moving the storm water actually closer to the rear of the property. Um, the swimming pool is an appropriate use for a single family uh property and then the standard sideyard uh easements of the 6 ft would still remain with it broken down. um
storm water management. By vacating this, the storm water is not going through the area anymore and then there's no utilities in the ground. To kind of break that down in a simpler way, on the left side of the screen, uh there's the proposed pool, there's the area in orange, which is the area being
requested to be vacated, and then the rest of the yellow is the large easement that's in the back. On the right hand side, you'll see the blue arrows were the original plan for storm water to cross the property needing that easement area. And with the new grading permit, the mound being pulled back, the storm
water now goes closer to where the red lines are. So the the purpose of the vacation or excuse me, the purpose of that portion of the easement isn't being utilized for its intended effect. So with that, uh, staff doesn't have any concerns going forward and we verified
with the city engineer as well on the storm water controls for the site. With that, I can stand for any questions. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Brierly. Council, any questions or comments on this? Just a quick question. What's the proposed impervious surface uh of this
lot after the pool is taken into consideration? Uh, council member, we don't have a specific uh, uh, application that's been submitted for it yet that I'd be able to speak to that directly, but the limit is 25%. And they would still need to be underneath that. So, even as staff when they submit the
permit, they still have to meet all those requirements. None of there's no variances being requested. So, they still need to all the other rules. To be clear, we're asking the easement to be vacated ahead of the application for the reason that we're vacating the reason the easement
Yes, correct. Because it if the if the easement is vacated, it doesn't create any adverse impacts for the storm water management or to the city. Um, but what it does do is it allows for flexibility when finalizing the design of the pool and that area for the staff review on
the application. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, council? All right. Seeing none, I will entertain a motion. Motion to adopt resolution number 2025-58
for a partial oh mayor and council we do need to have a public hearing tonight. Oh sorry sorry about that. At this point I will now open up the public hearing on this item. If anyone is here to speak to this item please step forward.
If there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak to this item, please step forward. And one more time. Seeing no one, I will I will now close public hearing and entertain a motion. Motion to adopt resolution number
2025-58 for a partial vacation of the rear drainage and utility easement for the property at 6525 Hawk Point Lane. Thank you. We have a motion. Can I get a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I.
I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item on our agenda, item 6.3, is to consider a conditional use permit for an accessory structure at 1200 Highway 7. Again, presenting on this item is our associate planner, Mr. Brierly. Mr.
Brierly, please. Thank you, mayor. Uh, a little background on this application. Uh the application for conditional use permit for accessory structures is required when an a detached accessory structure is going to be between 900 and 1,350
ft. Um the applicant is requesting to move an existing garage and then put an addition on which would bring the total footprint to 1,336 ft. A public hearing was properly noticed and was held at the September 16th planning commission meeting where
no comments were received and um unanimous uh recommendation for approval was given by the planning commission. There is a 60-day rule that applies with this with any land use permits. Uh that rule will expires on October 27th of this year.
the proposed um plan for the conditional or the proposed plan for the new building. As you see on the left side, there's two blue squares with the arrow. This the lower blue square is the existing garage and the plan is to move it across the yellow area which is a
sewer easement that the city has and then to put the addition on on the right side's a little bit pulled out more to where everything would be due to the topography of the land as well as the size of the structure. moving it to the north side of the of the drainage or
excuse me of the utility easement uh is a more appropriate place. Uh different factors were considered when we go through and look at condition use permits. We have to look at consistency with the comprehensive plan. This being a single family lot detach accessory structures are part of that.
Uh health, safety and impacts of general welfare while going through the lists of different things. uh it doesn't appear it's staff's opinion that it doesn't create any adverse impacts um on adjacent properties or the neighborhood itself. Compliance with standards of current and future regulations. What
we're looking at that is if it was to be approved, would this be something that would be completely out of the ordinary forward the direction the city's h heading with different type of land use um arrangements uh public infrastructure and services. This uh structure does not
plan to be attached to city sewer nor to city water. So therefore, there's no effect on the city infrastructure. Screening and landscaping buffers. Uh behind the behind there's still going to be trees between the the building as well as the property line which is about
22 ft. So that type of vegetation will still stay. In addition with that, there's uh the tree removal uh doesn't trigger any type of vegetative review by the city staff. architectural and design standards. When we have a struct or detached accessory
structure over 200 square feet, it's required by code to be in a similar design to the principal structure. In this case, we worked with the applicant as well as their architect uh to make sure that that was stated in the beginning and that's how the design came out to be. Uh zoning code compliance and
consistency with other uses. Everything being proposed is with inside the zoning code. It meets setbacks. It meets height requirements. um access points. Um so that type of stuff is being met and detached uh structures such as these would be permitted on other properties in that neighborhood as well as
throughout the rest of the city. The the last thing that we look at is traffic impacts because this is being used to primarily store vehicles. Um those vehicles we're going to stay for a while, but it shouldn't increase the amount of or any noticeable increase to the amount of traffic that is going to
the property. uh access to the property uses a private road that comes through the property and the driveways about right down the center. So what we're looking at with the proposed conditions that go with this is that a building permit is required. So no construction would be able to start
prior uh to the city council uh approving a conditional use permit. Uh the garage can't be located with any setbacks or any easements and that's just to ensure that the garage is properly replaced as it was designed. Um and it can't be used for housings of persons. It does have a area above but
that wouldn't be used as an ADU. Um but it could be occupied throughout the day. Um other attached accessory structures have to be removed. There's another shed that's on the site. So currently there's more than the permitted uh accessory structures. that shed would be coming
down with this project. Uh so they would be within the zoning code and then all the other regulations within the city's municipal and zoning codes also have to be adhered to. Uh there is an application that's been submitted and staff has done a preliminary review of it and we don't see anything that would
prohibit um moving forward with approvals outside of the com the conditional use permit requirement. And with that I can stand for any questions. Very good. Thank you. Um uh council attorney vos since we had a
um it appears we did notice and conduct our proper notification on this. So let's talk through what our options are here. Yeah, mayor and councel. Thank you. So yeah, two points mayor uh along those lines. I mean first of all to be clear
uh council um pointed out that he was retained earlier today. I of course then heard about that this issue coming up a couple of hours after presumably he was retained. I appreciated the the heads up from council about this issue. I passed it along to staff. I was in a meeting so
I didn't pass it along until an hour or two ago. So we're all we're all sort of um we're all in the same boat here on sort of um appreciating this issue for the first time today uh just in the last couple hours. So, uh, along the lines of what you're asking about, mayor, I mean, first of all, the the, uh, statutory
requirement, and it's consistent in our city code. Our city code has the same requirement, and that is that when you're going to consider a cup, you want to get input. You are required to get input from your planning commission. And the hearing that's held in front of the planning commission has to be noticed at
least 10 days before the hearing occurs. and mailed notice has to be given to neighbors within 350 ft of the property that's seeking the CUP um so that folks can be made aware uh in case they want to come and make comments. Um Mayor, to
your point, my understanding from Travis and from staff is that that occurred uh that there was published notice 10 days or more in advance of the hearing and there was mailed notice. I think what I understand from council and from the comments that council made uh that the neighbors just sort of didn't appreciate
their opportunity. They didn't recognize their opportunity to make comments in front of the planning commission. They are recognizing that now and they and they want to say something. So to your point, mayor, I think the city has complied with the notice requirements here. That said, are you prohibited from
continuing this and getting more input? No, of course you're not prohibited, but you have complied. The city has complied with the notice requirements. You've held a public hearing in front of the planning commission, and I don't see any legal infirmity with how this has gone down so far procedurally. I think the
city has complied. The other point is, and I think it's self-evident to you, it the request has to be understood by by the neighbors, the request has to be understood not just to table this and take more input. It's really a request to table this and send it back to the planning commission for a new public
hearing. I mean, there is no other process that we could have where the applicant who's here, who has made comments in response to the issues being raised. The applicant has a right to respond to opposition or input. Um, and the way we do that is we go to the
planning commission. We hold a hearing. The planning commission gets to hear all that and make a recommendation to you. So, it's entirely up to you what you want to do about that. But I I think you have to understand the request before you is not just to table and take emails or something else from folks here. I
mean really the request is to start over and go back to the planning commission and have a new public hearing and let the two sides or the multiple sides have it out in front of the planning commission and then have a new recommendation from the planning commission. And I'll stop there.
Council questions, comments, thoughts about the 60-day rule. Um, if we did uh go back to the planning commission, what would be the date and would that still be
an option be within that 60-day rule? Yeah, please. Mayor, members of the council, Council Member Right. Um, so I think the as noted on the the
presentation, the 60 rule 60-day rule expiration is October 27th. Um, so there would if we're I I guess a process question for our attorney. would we have to we'd
have to publish a new notice. Um, so if we did that I'm doing some math now. So if we did that on this if we did that this week the plan so it would be the October 7th planning commission. No. Nope. It would
be the one after that. The October 21st planning commission would be the new public hearing and that would bring you to the last day for the 60-day rule October 27th council meeting. So yes, Council Member Refe, members of the council, um there would still be time
procedurally to meet the requirements um to hold to send back to planning commission and hold a new public hearing. So that again that would likely be held on October 21st uh with the planning commission and the new public hearing and then October 27th it would
come back to council. Thank you for that clarification. Should we hear comment tonight um without continuation? Is is that allowable or is that reopening a public hearing that's already been closed?
Yeah, mayor. and and pardon my being direct and blunt and I certainly don't you know I just need to be clear because it's a great question mayor and it's a correct question um there is no more process that is due to the neighbors that have a problem with this and so any
additional process that you afford here is to accommodate them uh and so if you wanted to sort of consolidate that and do that right now um I I I'm not going to tell you that that's illegal or problematic. I think you could do that
now. I mean, the only concern I have is that again, the applicant presumably wants to be able to hear the comments that are being made and wants to be able to respond to them and I don't know what the comments are going to be. And so my my only concern is just sort of this is not sort of normal process, but you're
affording process. you're affording an additional process beyond what the law requires if you elect to do that um to try to accommodate folks that that have not had comments yet. So, I don't know if I've answered your question. Are you compelled to do it? No. Are you prohibited from doing it? No.
This is this is unprecedented. We we've never done this before. We we hold our public hearings. We notice them properly and and then we close the public hearing. So, to take this additional comment is concerning. So, can I say something? Yeah, please. Council member,
obviously I'm sympathetic to um the groups that you know have an issue with this and would like to be heard. Um obviously we also don't want to set precedent on you know opening things back up basically. Um,
that being said, I mean, I personally would not be against at least hearing from them because my main thing is is on the face of it, what we've been told by Travis and staff is like like I I don't see a reason not
to accept this, right? So like I would like to hear like is there what is this major reason that you guys feel that we should not be accepting this and does that change my right like so I for me I'm like
I would much rather I'd feel better accepting something that I'm leaning towards accepting and here like is there some major reason that changes my mind and I back to that setting precedent I you you know, not
every situation is the same, right? So, the next time if this ever comes up again, god forbid not, that you know, if the circumstances aren't similar, right? Like I feel like every situation is different. So, you're kind of making it up as we go. All right. Thank you, Council Member
Roberts. At this point in time, I will look for consensus from the council about hearing additional comment on this. All right. Well, I'd like to the the applicant has due process in this matter and that due process has been followed.
We have a planning commission. This is where these matters are for public hearing. The public hearing was held. It was held to in the best of our belief in accordance with uh the the rules that govern that. And so with respect to a
public hearing, the matter is closed. Now, we can choose as council to extend a courtesy to have neighbors be heard before this body. Um but with respect to the decision making capability about what is before us that that's what we're
here to decide tonight and make those decisions on the basis of what staff has pres presented and then weighing in uh within our capability as a council to grant the conditional use.
It's a conditional use based on the conditions that are presented for and we're the ultimate arbiter of that decision. So, um, but with respect to going back to the applicant, I I don't think that we rejudicate the matter that's already
been settled. Council members, hearing comment. Go ahead. I'm open to hearing comment. Okay. Council member Patterson. My only question was during open forum I just heard an objection to the fact that
things were not properly noticed. I believe that we did advertise in the Wakonia paper I do believe that things were sent out properly. Um I'm open to hear the comments but when it comes down to the letter of the law
I can't see what would stop us from approving this. As a courtesy, please step forward and we will hear your comments. Please, please introduce yourself and your address for the record. I'm Celeste Browen. I'm at 6485 Virginia
Drive. The four of us, the two neighbors on either side, we were gone. We were gone 10 days weekend. I think a week. We left on September 7th. By the time we came back, this that
planning commission had already happened. We did not get our mail delivered till like I don't know by the time they finally got it to us I think it was the 17th 18th we did never we never got notice that's what I want to say is and we're
responsible you know citizens we left on September 7th and that was a it was a Sunday we never got that letter we got the two letters from um the city of Victoria on that one and on the um Hawks Point deal on the same today but this
the planning commission had already happened otherwise we would have jumped on it because I what I want to c yeah can you just provide your comments for us I mean we there's no way that the city can monitor when everybody's on vacation so that so I'm just telling you
so yeah so go ahead and go ahead and provide your comments notice and the other thing I'd like to say is that um you know 31B2 talks about that um we should um propose that we should not negatively impact the effect of surrounding properties
including valuation aesthetics and scenic views. This is our this is our driveway. These two cones would be that's 60 ft. That's what this building would be right along our driveway. This is the woods we have.
There's no way you can cover a 60 foot 22 story 22 foot tall building without seeing it. And so is it affecting our scenic views and our aesthetics? Big time. It really is. And this is what
we're trying to trying to stop. And Mark was our friend never said anything to us about this. So we had no idea until we got our notice. and then we have been scrambled to try to you know approach. Okay, thank you. Um please state your
name. I'm Celeste husband. I also live at 6485 Virginia Drive and I just want to make a comment about uh the process. Um we did get that uh notice last Thursday. Um I left a message for Mr. Brier Lee um late
in the day on Thursday asking what it's about because the letter was one paragraph. It didn't describe what was happening. And So I contacted him, left a voicemail. He promptly called me back the next morning first thing, which was great. And in that conversation, I explained to him that the aesthetics of
a 60foot warehouse right next to our driveway was going to be a huge impact on on our our property on on the aesthetics, the beauty of it, and the valuation. And what Mr. Briarley told me was and I asked him to come out. I said,
"Can you please come out today?" And he explained to me, by the way, what the project was and that had already been approved by the planning council. I said, "Can you please come out today and he said I can, but I want you to know that aesthetics don't matter." That's
his direct quote. And uh what I learned last night when I read in the code, um I think it's 31-2, it says aesthetics and valuation. I don't know the language exactly. scenic views.
Scenic views must of the neighboring properties must be considered. It said that in the code. But I learned from Mr. Barley, he hadn't been out. No one had been out to view it from our perspective. And so I got to believe that that process wasn't followed and the diligence by the planning commission
wasn't followed. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much for that. All right, council. We've heard we've heard comments. Um, Mr. Brierly, you said this is 22 feet in from the
mayor. It' be about uh escaped me a little bit. It's about 22 feet from the property line. Uh, is where it'd be. The minimum setback standard is six feet. Okay. And just so I so I'm clear, can you do you know where the driveway is? Can you
can you point to that on this? The mayor the um neighbor's driveway the neighbor's driveway. I'm sorry I missed your last browsen driveway. Mayor, their driveway is located where my cursor is. Okay. Um I don't know the distance from the property line. That's not something I
looked up. Okay. And you said there's trees that are in Right. in front of that. So trees would actually block view. Am I right about that or no? Correct. Correct. Mayor, there there is ve there's trees and other vegetation
there. As far as how much view it blocks, that's a question that is is subjective. Understood. Understood. All right. Council questions. That vegetation and those trees are all staying there, right? All the construction's being done fully within
this in the other property. Uh council member, that's correct. Uh speaking with the applicant about the process for construction, uh where you're going to see tree removal uh is going to be where the structure is and then going to the east. Uh there might be some removal that'll need to be done
for the construction project, but it'd be pretty minimal based on the conversation with the applicant. the the current structure appears to be closer to the browsen's driveway than the new structure is going to be. Okay. Council questions, comments.
So if this were 900 feet, we wouldn't need a cup at all. It would just happen. Council member, that is correct. And then any structure that is over 200 square ft uh and needs to meet the requirement to be of similar design to the principal structure itself. If it was attached to the home, it
absolutely wouldn't be something that would require a cup. Correct. That is correct. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor Counselor, please. overstepping my bounds. So, shut me down as soon as I've gone too far, but I'm intrigued now just looking at the picture. Can staff just explain how the
subject property, how the applicant's prop, how how is access obtained? Where is the access? Uh, the access will come down the driveway and it'd be off the existing driveway and but with the cursor, show show the route of access.
So, it be coming in like this to where then? to right here and then it'd be accessing on the east side of the structure. Right. Right. But point out to the road where access is coming from. So there's a private drive or there's a private uh road right here. Yes. And then the applicant's driveway comes
in. There's an existing private road through there. Correct. And there's and it'd be just off the driveway. Got it. That So the existing driveway for the subject property is to remain unchanged. Is that a fair statement, council member? That's correct.
And then just a quick question on um the the commonality of multi- or maybe eightcar garages um or sorry. Yeah, we have basically two
twocar garages that we're going to construct. Correct. Uh council member. So on on this image here on the bottom, the existing garage that's being moved is the garage that's grayed out. The addition is the part that's not. So it'd be doubling the size
of the garage and then having another room with inside it as well as a room uh that would be more like a loft type area. And this is connected to the existing home. This would be a detached structure. It is detached. Sorry. So, just to reiterate, the the image on the left
shows in the where the arrow starts is the existing garage. The applicant's proposing to move it across the sewer or excuse me, the utility easement that's there. Um, and then so moving from here to here and then putting that addition on uh to the north side.
Are there active utilities in the easement? Uh, there is an active sewer line in the ement, council member. And then so a fourcar garage in this area is it atypical or is it somewhat common? Not
highly unusual. Uh council member, I can't speak to every property up there, but there's um my understanding of the properties that are with inside the Lake Mitanka residential district vary in size as well as the capacity to store vehicles.
Uh so is as is looking at it that'd be a difficult question to answer specifically but when we look at things as staff and go through applications that come in we look for the current zoning regulations uh and we look for compliance with that if there's issues we work with the applicant to bring it
in compliance. Uh the other thing that we do when we look at things that are a little bit larger we look for what if it needed to be denied how would we do that? So, we kind of play devil's advocate to try to get ahead of of any concerns that come up. And in this case, uh, all the zoning requirements would be
being met. Okay. Thank you. And the aqua line is the property boundary, correct? Correct, Mayor. And can you said it a few times, I think, how far off the property line is it? It'd be about uh 22 feet.
And the requirement was six. Thank you. What what's the height of the new uh the height of the new structure? 23 23 feet. The max and then council member, the maximum height of an
detached accessory structure in the Lake Minnetonka residential 35. Can you go back to the picture that shows the two? Yeah. So, I mean, it looks like it's really kind of perpendicular to their garage as well. So, like I I'm not
really like the views would be out the back of the hut, right? Like I like I just I'm I'm not seeing why this would be a Okay, other questions, council. So, we're actually moving the garage and then
putting an addition on. Correct. Is that correct, Council Member? That's correct. All right. And then that orange is the the entire represents the old garage plus the new addition. Correct, Mayor.
Okay. Thank you. All right. Any other questions, council? I mean, we've heard about I would they say 31B the like I mean how like I mean can you speak to that I guess Bob a little bit? Yeah, mayor and council first of all I
see council sneaking up to the podium here. I I I would just say that um I I think you've shut down now any additional input. I mean there has to be an end point, right, for public input and I think we've reached that point. So, I'm not going to look at council because I don't want to bother him. But, uh, I think I think we're done now
hearing from folks. Am I right about that, mayor? Correct. Okay. So, as to as to um uh your your question um restate it again because I had it firmly in my brain until I started talking and then I lost 31B has been mentioned a few times. Yes. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. So, and and
that the point about aesthetics I think is the particular point that's come up about that. I I would just say again I'm going to fall back on process about that. Of course, in a conditional use permit process or a variance process or any of the zoning processes you go through, the staff doesn't independently
go out and evaluate the standards against what's being proposed. It's an opportunity for supporters and opponents to come in and make arguments about the standards. Right? In other words, the staff absent any input from anyone doesn't go out and evaluate properties
and come back with reports on appraisals and and you know their own impressions of the site and whether it's a aesthetic or not. That's for neighbors and folks that are interested to make those arguments. So, it's a fair point that the code language apparently, I mean, I
don't have it in front of me, but apparently refers to aesthetics. Would aesthetics be an appropriate issue to raise? Yes. But the staff doesn't I mean that's not the staff job. So Okay. Uh I have another question for Travis if you can answer it. Do you do you have a
sense of on this parcel the percentage of impervious surface that this proposed addition is going to go from and then two council member the applicant did provide a building permit. I'm pulling it up real quick. I can tell you what the
impervious will be. Um, but we did look at it beforehand as well. If you can indulge me for one second, the total impervious cover with the with what's being proposed will be 24%. And
the maximum is 25% for zoning. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. All right. We're we're not taking any more comments, sir. request. Very good. Quickly, so thank you, Mayor. Um, I think what
we're hearing here, I think what we should do as we presented is respectfully the city's council is confirmed that notice was proper, the actual notice didn't happen. We don't know on the record what did. The other thing that we've been talking about now is the types of things that should have been addressed at the public hearing if
there were an opportunity. So we ask an opportunity to do that. There's still time to do it. Um the burden is on the applicant to show these standards. Um so respectfully, um if we think there's not a sufficient record for that, we would ask for some additional process just to make sure this is done right. I do appreciate that.
Thank you. Thank you. All right. Um any other comments? No, I would just like to address council's comment about these things which should have been addressed. This is the purview of the city council to ask these kinds of questions and make these kind of inquiries. It's fully
appropriate and it doesn't really bear relevance to what the public hearing of the planning commission had. So, I I think we're well within our space to probe deeper and ask further questions about the appropriateness of the structure because frankly, if we chose
if we thought that the planning commission aired in this, we would have the authority and ability to do that. But we also have within our purview to accept the planning commission's recommendation if we so choose to do that. Okay. Do you have any further questions
that I do not answer? Thank you. Any other members of the council? Mayor, I I I want to respond to council's additional point there. So now I mean now we're really getting in the weeds here, but I I'm we're that's where we are. So the the statute that governs the notice that's required
to consider a conditional use permit reads and I'm going to be paraphrasing a little bit but mostly I'll be quoting uh it says public hearings referring to public hearings in particular on variances but the cup statute refers to the variance statute etc. So no zoning
ordinance or amendment thereto read that to mean no cup um shall be adopted until public hearing has been held thereon by the planning agency or the governing body. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official paper of the municipality at least 10 days prior to the hearing when an amendment that
doesn't matter irrelevant. Um, notice shall be given to uh each owner of affected property or property situated wholly or partly within 350 ft of the property to which the read cup relates. For the purpose of giving mailed notice, the person responsible for this is the
important for the purpose of giving mailed notice. The person responsible for mailing the notice may use any appropriate records to determine the names and addresses of owners. A copy of the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent shall be attested to by the responsible
person and shall be made part of the records of the proceedings. I heard council raise the question of were was the list of people that received the mailed notice referred to at the planning commission meeting. I don't know if that's the case or not, but let's just knock that down. Now, I
understand Travis from what you've sent to council before the meeting tonight to be a copy of the letter that was sent. Is that right? That is correct. Okay. And you're you have personal knowledge that those letters were sent. Those letters were mailed on August 29th.
And is that more than 10 days prior to the hearing date? That provides uh 17 to 18 days worth of notice. Okay. And you are that's true and correct that you're attesting to those facts? I am. Okay. So that we've covered now what the statute requires. Okay. Thank you. All right. Very good.
Uh final questions, council comments. Seeing no further discussion, uh this item has two motions. One to adopt the ordinance amendment and the second to authorize summary publication for a resolution. So councel, I will entertain a motion.
Motion to approve resolution 2025-59 for the issuance of a conditional use permit application for an accessory structure to be no greater than 1350 square ft on the property at 12,200 highway 7.
I apolog we have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Um my apologies. There is only one motion on that. Thank you very much. All right.
Uh, item 6.4 is a item that considers an amendment to chapter 22 of our municipal code which covers streets, sidewalks, and other public places. Presenting on this item this evening is once again Mr. Brierly. Welcome back. Thank you, Mayor Councel. Um, little
background on this. Uh, this refers to rightway applications. Um, Okay. Um, and with that with inside the the language that's with inside the code, it states that there's a review has to be done within 10 days of the
application being submitted. Uh, there's no statutory requirement for that as long as it's done within a reasonable amount of time. It's access to our rightways. There's different regulatory bodies that deal with that type of permit and those things. Um this has come to us from the city engineer
primarily because we have a lot of rightaway permits that have been submitted and sometimes it takes more than 10 days to review them. Um a public hearing is not required though there was uh proper public notice that we were required to do a staff and which was completed correctly.
The proposed amendment is fairly straightforward. Um basically if an applicant has submitted the requirements to this division meaning the application city shall issue a permit within a reasonable amount of time after receiving the completed application uh that provides some flexibility for our
engineering staff to do review as well as public works and makes it so that we can be more compliant with our code. Okay, very good. Can you back up one thing? There was just a little bit of disturbance and there's no statutory requirement. That's what I was looking for. for the city to
have a have a set time period. Um, so the the statute doesn't say it has to be 10 days or five days or 14 or anything like that. All right. So, we're going to we're going to amend it to within a reasonable amount of time. All right. Very good. Thank you, Mayor.
Yes. One incredibly technical um nuance on that. So, the state rightaway law covers two different issues, which is utilities that put stuff in the ground. Yep. But it also covers small cell wireless, you know, the wireless things
that go on poles. There is a time limit for action on the small cell wireless stuff. It's 90 days. There is no time limit on the traditional utility stuff. And so this language is totally consistent with the statute. Very good. Thank you. All right.
Carry on. Here we are. All right. Any other any questions for Mr. Brierly? Any other comments? I I want to just follow up on Bob's question and um so there's two sections of this in statute. One section is
either silent or doesn't specify any time frame. One says 90 days um a reasonable amount of time. Could that be a period of time that extends beyond 90 days? Yeah, mayor and council in the normal
course for sure. um there are sufficiently complicated applications that a staff could require more than that period of time. I guess I would always read though and I was I would always advise a a city client to read reasonable amount of time to be limited
by law. Other words, it's not reasonable to take longer than you're legally entitled to take. So I would always read reasonable amount of time to be consistent with whatever statutory time limit you have. Does that make sense? It does. Thank you. Y Okay.
Any other questions, comments? All right. This is the one we've got two motions on. One to adopt the amendment and the second to authorize publication. So, uh, council, I will entertain a motion. Motion to adopt an ordinance 469MC
amending chapter 22 section 22-167 of the Victoria Municipal Code and to adopt resolution number 2025-60 authorizing a summary of publication of ordinance 469MC.
Uh do we want those in two separate motions? Yes. Okay. So let's let's start the first one um to amend Amend adopt the proposed aort. Okay, I'm gonna
let's start again. Council member Refe. Okay. Motion to adopt an ordinance 469MC amending chapter 22 section 22-167 of the Victoria Municipal Code. Very good. Thank you. We have a motion.
Can I get a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. And the second motion, please. Motion to adopt resolution number 2025-60
authorizing a summary publication of ordinance 469MC. Second. Wow, that was We have a We have a motion and a second by Council Member Patterson. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries.
Pardon me. The final item on our regular agenda this evening is item 6.5, which is a closed session to discuss land sale terms for downtown west phase 2 pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D.05
subdivision 3C1. I'd like to make a motion to close the meeting to discuss the land sale terms for downtown west phase 2 65231030 and 65231020. Uh we have a motion. Can I get a second? Second.
We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. We will now go into close session. Once we're done, we'll return to reconvene the regular meeting of the council. Good notes. Um, I would like to call for a motion to
reconvene this regular meeting of the city council. Can I get a motion? I I've made a motion. Can I get a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Um just pursuant to the closed motion, uh city council gave direction to staff and legal to uh work on the deal points
of a um developer agreement and sale of land. All right, council. There are no more items to come before the uh body this evening. So we are moving on to reports and emerging issues. Attorney V, you're up first. I don't have anything, mayor. Thank you.
All right, Miss Hardy. Anything from staff? Nothing to report. Mayor, okay. Anything interesting from the city council members? Attended uh council member Refe attended some great meetings out in Washington DC. Um our city engineer and
I and many others from the county etc. were in in meetings with Congressman Tom Emmer, uh, Senator Tina Tina Smith, Senator Amy Clolobashar, and made some great headway on the Highway 5 corridor and that that gap we need to fill right
on five. And it was very evident that they um know a lot about the Southwest Corridor, number one, and number two, they kept saying, "We're so glad you're all here in front of us." and and uh in person versus
uh you know remote etc. So it was a great great couple days. Um said the engineer I'm sure would agree but it was uh well worth our time and and a great experience. Very good. Thank you so much for representing Victoria out in Washington.
Appreciate that. All right. Any other final thoughts from the council? Seeing none, there are no more items to come before the body this evening. So I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. We have a motion. Can I get a second? Second. All in favor signify by saying I.
I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. We stand adjourned.