[Roll Call]
[00:00:02]
SO I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.PLEASE JOIN YOUR COUNCIL IN RECITING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I'M PLEASED THAT WE HAVE A FULL COUNCIL AND MAYOR HERE TONIGHT.
SO THE FIRST THING I WILL ASK THE COUNCIL
[Approval of Agenda]
IS TO APPROVE TONIGHT'S AGENDA, WHICH IS FAIRLY LENGTHY.ANY ADDITIONS OR QUESTIONS ON THAT? I HAVE ONE ADDITION.
I'D LIKE TO ADD AN ITEM ON BEDERWOOD PARK, SPECIFICALLY RESOLUTION 7195 RELATED TO MOUNTAIN BIKING IN THE PARK.
ANY OTHER CHANGES TO THE AGENDA? HEARING NONE, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE IT WITH THAT ADDITION.
I'LL APPROVE THE AGENDA WITH THE ADDITION OF BEDERWOOD.
FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH, LIKE I SAID,
[Consent Agenda]
IS FAIRLY LENGTHY TONIGHT.WE HAVE 15 ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
THESE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE, WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION WITH NO DISCUSSION, UNLESS A COUNCIL MEMBER OR STAFF REQUESTS THE ITEM TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND ACTION.
TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ARE AS FOLLOWS.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING.
IT WAS A SPECIAL MEETING IN SEPTEMBER.
CLAIMS AND BILLS, WORK SESSION SCHEDULE, GRANT AGREEMENT FOR 2027 TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT.
A COMPENSATION ADJUSTMENT FOR A POLICE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER, POSITION RECLASSIFICATION FOR COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST, APPROVAL OF THE CARMEN BAY LAKE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT LEVEE.
APPROVAL OF A LEVEE FOR THE STUBBS BAY LAKE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
PURCHASE OF HOLIDAY EVENT LIGHTS.
DOING STREET REPAIRS FOR SPRUCE PLACE.
AND THEN WE HAVE RESOLUTION 7721, WHICH IS A VARIANCE FOR 3572 SHORELINE DRIVE, RESOLUTION 7722, WHICH IS VARIANCES FOR 3635 AND 3645 NORTH SHORE DRIVE.
RESOLUTION 7723, APPROVAL OF VARIANCES AT 1100 MILLSTONE ROAD.
AND THEN CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT CHAPTER 6.20 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.
THAT IS ORDINANCE 323 DEFINITION.
AND FINALLY, A CUP RESTAURANT EXPANSION, RESOLUTION 7720.
THAT'S AT 2160 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST.
DO WE HAVE ANY ITEMS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS OR STAFF WISH TO PULL FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO PULL NUMBER THREE, PLEASE, WORK SESSION SCHEDULE.
ANY OTHERS? MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO PULL NUMBER 14, PLEASE.
ANYTHING ELSE? IF NOT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA MINUS ITEMS 3 AND 14.
MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA MINUS ITEMS 3 AND 14.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[Public Comments]
NOW WE MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.AND WE HAVE ACTUALLY MOVED THESE AHEAD OF PRESENTATION.
SO IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO ADDRESS YOUR COUNCIL.
WE WON'T ENGAGE IN A BACK AND FORTH, BUT WE DO WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.
AND WE WILL ASK FOR FOLLOW UP FROM THE STAFF ON ITEMS THAT YOU RAISE BEFORE US TONIGHT.
SO WITH THAT, ANYBODY WANT TO TAKE THE LECTERN? AND PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AND WHERE YOU LIVE, PLEASE.
JIM TYSON, 1295 ELMWOOD AVENUE.
I'VE BEEN BEFORE THIS COUNCIL ON FOUR OCCASIONS AND HAVE MET INDIVIDUALLY WITH EACH COUNCIL MEMBER TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO LAKE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS.
IRONICALLY, TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVING THE LEVY FOR THE TWO THAT EXIST IN ORONO.
MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE CREATED LIDS IN 1973
[00:05:02]
TO MANAGE LAND BASED SEPTIC ISSUES.TO DATE, THERE ARE ONLY 55 THAT EXIST IN ALL OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AFTER 53 YEARS.
I HAVE RECENTLY LEARNED STUBBS BAY LID IS WORKING ON GAINING PUBLIC FUNDING AT THE LEVEL OF 250 TO $350,000 PER YEAR, 2.5 TO $3.5 MILLION OVER 10 YEARS TO MANAGE STUBBS BAY, A PUBLIC BODY OF WATER.
THEY STATE THEY ARE MEETING WITH ORONO TO INITIATE THE PROJECT.
FOR MINNEHAHA WATERSHED DISTRICT, STUBBS BAY PLAN IS MANAGING THE SYMPTOM, NOT THE SOURCE OF THE PHOSPHORUS, WHICH IS COMING LARGELY FROM THE WATERSHED.
IT IS WELL DOCUMENTED AND CONTRADICTS STUBBS BAY REPORT.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ASK, HOW DID EACH STUBBS BAY RESIDENT CONTRIBUTE TO THE INTERNAL PHOSPHORUS LOAD OVER THE YEARS BY FERTILIZING THEIR YARDS? I'M HERE TO POINT OUT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER THAT ORONO'S JURISDICTION IS VERY LIMITED BELOW ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OF 929.4, AND SPECIFICALLY IS EXCLUDED FROM LAKE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT.
YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND HAVE GRANTED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LID TO SELF TAX THE 67 PROPERTIES ON STUBBS BAY TO MANAGE INVASIVE SPECIES.
NOW THEY FEEL EMPOWERED TO TAX THE REST OF US.
THEY HAVE NO AUTHORITY OVER THE WATERSHED THAT FEED THE BAY OR ANY AUTHORITY TO MANAGE PUBLIC SPENDING WITHIN THE BAY.
IN CONTRAST, ORONO HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE WATERSHED.
AS YOU KNOW, ORONO HAS 40% OF THE SHORELINE ON LAKE MINNETONKA.
YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW THAT THERE ARE SIX BAYS IN MINNETONKA THAT ARE CONSIDERED IMPAIRED WATER BY THE DNR.
FIVE ARE PARTIALLY OR FULLY IN ORONO.
THE CITY OF ORONO, THROUGH ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SHOULD INCLUDE ALL OF ITS WATERSHEDS FOR IMPROVEMENT, NOT JUST FOR THE 67 RESIDENTS THAT RESIDE ON STUBBS BAY.
IF THERE IS AN INVESTMENT OF CITY FUNDS IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, EVERY RESIDENT DESERVES TO BE FULLY INFORMED AND EQUALLY BENEFIT FROM THIS STRATEGY.
ANYONE ELSE CARE TO ADDRESS US? YEAH, COME ON UP.
I'M SCOTT WELLMAN, 4105 OAK STREET.
I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TONIGHT TO INTRODUCE MYSELF AS A CANDIDATE FOR ORONO CITY COUNCIL.
I FEEL TONIGHT IS PARTICULARLY APPROPRIATE TO DO SO, BECAUSE TONIGHT'S CENTERPOINT PRESENTATION IS VERY RELEVANT TO THE PERSPECTIVE I HOPE TO BRING TO THIS COUNCIL.
THAT IS, THE TOPIC REFLECTS TWO OF MY KEY INTERESTS.
RESPECTING ORONO'S NATURAL SURROUNDINGS AND CONTRIBUTING MY PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE IN TECHNOLOGY, PARTICULARLY CYBERSECURITY.
I'M EXCITED ABOUT THIS INNOVATIVE CONCEPT.
OPTIONS TO DELIVER LESS AIR POLLUTION WHILE KEEPING OUR HOUSES COLD AND HEATED ARE DEFINITELY WORTH EXPLORING.
HOWEVER, I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT THAT I HOPE THE PRESENTATION WILL ANSWER.
WILL THEY PROPOSE OPEN LOOP TECHNOLOGY, WHICH WOULD EXTRACT GROUNDWATER? WILL THEY PROPOSE CLOSED LOOP TECHNOLOGY, WHICH WOULD NOT? I'M ALSO INTERESTED TO HEAR ABOUT IF THEY ARE CONSIDERING THE "DARCY SOLUTION" TO LIMIT THE SURFACE FOOTPRINT IMPACT OF THE SYSTEM.
I THINK SUCH QUESTIONS ARE IMPORTANT TO ASK BECAUSE A RESPONSIBLE EVALUATION OF PROPOSED PROJECTS LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY WITH NEWER TECHNOLOGY, SHOULD ALWAYS CONSIDER POSSIBLE LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BEYOND JUST THE SHORT TERM GAINS.
GABRIEL JABBOUR, 985 TONKAWA ROAD.
FIRST, I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR TRUSTING US AND ACTING APPROPRIATELY WITH THE LMCD BUDGET.
AND SPECIFICALLY, SPECIAL THANKS FOR YOU, MAYOR, WHO SO ELOQUENTLY REPRESENTED THE CITY'S POSITION, WHICH I AM INCAPABLE OF DOING IT THAT ELOQUENT.
SO I KNOW IT'S A TOUGH JOB, BUT SOMEBODY HAS TO DO IT.
SO YOU ALWAYS HEAR WHAT WE SHOULD DO, AND NOW AND THEN WE SHOULD BREAK AWAY FROM OUR ROUTINE TO THANK THE PEOPLE WHO MADE IT DONE.
EQUALLY AS IMPORTANT, IF NOT MORE, OUR OUTING WITH THE VETERANS AND THE WATERSHED [INAUDIBLE] THREE RIVER PARK.
AS YOU COULD SEE, MOST OF THEM ARE IMPAIRED VETERANS AND CANNOT
[00:10:06]
WALK AROUND.AND THEY WANTED ME TO COME AND EXPRESS THEIR GRATITUDE FOR YOU GUYS BEING THERE.
AND THAT WAS REALLY A PLEASANT EXPERIENCE FOR ME.
FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE VETERANS HAD THEIR 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF SELLING ORONO THE PARK, AND THEY WANTED TO HAVE ALL THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN MAKING IT HAPPEN BE THERE.
OF COURSE, WE MISS JEN OLSON AND WE MISS BARB SAKURA.
THE FINAL THING I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS SHARE WITH YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE BACK WATER.
AS YOU'RE PROBABLY TRYING TO RUN CITY HALL, YOU'LL FIND OUT THAT MANY DECISIONS HAPPEN IN THE BACK WATER, AND THIS IS THE FRONT WATER.
THE BACK WATER, BECAUSE OF STUBBS BAY AND THE FIASCO THAT IT OCCURRED, HAVE CAUSED A LOT OF COMMOTION AT THE STATE LEVEL.
HOW DOES THAT AFFECT YOU? I THINK, STEVE, YOU RECALL WHEN LONG LAKE ONLY GOT $350,000 FOR CONDEMNATION, AND WE WENT AND GOT 7.2.
WHEN WE ARE NOT LOOKED AT US FAVORABLY ON MINNETONKA, COULD BE ONE PERSON WAY DOWN THERE CAUSE ISSUES, WE'RE PERCEIVED AS CAKE EATERS, AND HAVING THIS COMMOTION COULD IMPAIR OUR ABILITY TO GET WHAT WE WANT TO GET OUT OF THE STATE.
IF THERE'S A GRANT TO BE HAD, YOU'RE THE RICH PEOPLE.
OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONER, WHICH I STOP THERE, HAVE SUBMITTED THE DNR AND WANTED TO PROHIBIT CHEMICALS IN THE LAKE.
AND I THINK TWO OF THE COUNCILWOMEN, YOU WERE WITH TWO PHDS WHO SAID WE NEED SOME CHEMICAL TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LAKE DOESN'T DIE FROM THE DNR.
AND WHEN SHE DIDN'T GET THE ANSWER SHE LIKES, SHE SAID, WE WILL INTRODUCE LEGISLATIONS AT THE STATE.
SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL, BUT THAT CAUSED A LOT OF COMMOTION IN MINNETONKA.
SECOND OF ALL, THE FISHING LOBBY TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO REALIZE THAT PERHAPS WHAT WE'RE DOING COULD KILL ALL THE VEGETATION AND THEY WILL NOT HAVE IT, WHICH IS NOT TRUE.
AND RON SCHARA, WHICH IS A VERY REPUTABLE SPEAKER OF THE ENVIRONMENT WHO SIT ON THE LCCMR, WHICH IS THE BODY OF GOVERNMENT WHO GIVE THE LOTTERY MONEY AWAY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE, OBJECTED TO SOME OF THE GRANT GOING TO VARIOUS AGENCIES OVER THE ISSUE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING ON MINNETONKA.
I MEAN, YOU COULDN'T EVEN IMAGINE IT.
THE THING THAT I REALLY FOUND TRADE THAT IS I'M SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
I'M THE FIRST ONE WHO TALKED TO DNR ABOUT ALLOWING ONE PARTICULAR BAY TO HAVE IT, AND THAT PROCESS IS VERY, VERY SUCCESSFUL.
STUBBS BAY LID, I KEEP HEARING THAT TWO PEOPLE, WHICH I AM ONE OF YOU PEOPLE, ONLY WANT TO HAVE A TILE BOTTOM LAKE.
AND THAT IS NOT REALLY HELPFUL.
AND THEY ARE A BODY OF GOVERNMENT LIKE YOU ARE.
AND NOW THEY WANT $3 MILLION FROM THE WATERSHED DISTRICT AND THAT BACKLASH.
BY THE WAY, WE DID NOT COORDINATE NOR I KNEW HE'S HERE.
SO IF YOU THINK WE AMBUSHED YOU, THAT'S PURE ACCIDENT.
I THINK THEY SHOULD LEVY $3 MILLION.
AND IF THEY'RE ASKING YOU TO USE YOUR GOOD NAME TO LEVERAGE AGAINST THE AGENCY, I STRONGLY ADVISE YOU AGAINST IT.
PARTICULARLY, I JUST TALKED TO ONE OF OUR CITIZENS WHO LIVE ON TANAGER LAKE.
THAT IS PERHAPS THE MOST IMPAIRED LAKE ON MINNETONKA.
AND WE ARE THE REASON OF IT, BECAUSE LONG LAKE CREEK DUMP INTO IT.
I DON'T WANT TO SPEND TWO AND A HALF HOURS HERE GIVING YOU A SPEECH, BUT I'M JUST TELLING YOU YOUR ACTION MATTER.
[00:15:03]
MATTER LOCALLY, REGIONALLY, AND STATEWIDE.PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DON'T REACT TO PEOPLE, INCLUDING ME, WHO ARE CONTINUOUSLY IN FRONT OF YOU SAYING WE NEED THIS, WE NEED THIS.
GOD HELP THOSE WHO HELP THEMSELVES.
THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO LEVY IT.
WHEN YOU GET OLD, YOU'LL MOVE SLOW TOO.
WE'RE AT 4,300 WATERTOWN ROAD.
AND I WANT TO THANK EACH OF THE BOARD MEMBERS FOR COMING OUT AND ACTUALLY VISITING THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S AN UNUSUAL OCCURRENCE, I HEAR.
I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A STATEMENT HERE IN REGARDS TO NUMBER 14 ON THE AGENDA.
AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A COUPLE OF LEGAL JARGONS IN HERE.
I'M NOT PURPORTING TO BE A LAWYER.
THIS IS JUST A LAYMAN'S REPORT OF SOME JUDGE'S OPINION.
ANYWAY, WE PURCHASED FIVE OF THE SIX LOTS AT 4300 WATERTOWN ROAD, AND IT WAS A SUBDIVISION AT THE TIME, AND IT HAD BEEN PURCHASED FREE AND CLEAR.
IT WAS A SIX LOT SUBDIVISION, BUT ONE LOT HAD ALREADY BEEN BOUGHT BY JOHN BALDWIN OF LAFAYETTE COUNTRY CLUB.
LATER, HE AND HIS WIFE DECIDED THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BUILD ON THAT LOT, SO WE BOUGHT THE LOT FROM THEM.
THUS, WE OWNED ALL SIX LOTS ON THE SUBDIVISION.
SHARON AND I ARE HERE TONIGHT TO QUESTION A PROPOSED AMENDMENT COMING FROM THE PLANNING COMMITTEE, WHICH COULD AFFECT THE VALUE OF OUR SUBDIVISION.
IT SEEMS TO BE ON A FAST TRACK TO GET APPROVED.
THE NEW AMENDMENT READS AS FOLLOWS, IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE AMENDMENT YOURSELF.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL CLARIFY THE CITY'S EXISTING APPROACH BY EXPRESSIVELY RECOGNIZING THAT SEPARATING LAND THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY COMBINED FOR TAX PURPOSES CONSTITUTES A SUBDIVISION AND IS THEREFORE SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCESS AND CURRENT ZONING.
OUR LAND WAS SET UP AND APPROVED AS A SUBDIVISION IN 1972.
WE BELIEVE OUR LAND, WHICH WAS PLATTED IN '72, WAS NEVER COMBINED, AND THE BOARD OF COMMISSION AND JUDGE THOMAS CAREY AND HOOPER VERSUS CITY OF ST. PAUL AGREE.
IN 1999, JUDGE CAREY RULED, BASED ON THE UNDISPUTED FACTS, THIS COURT RULES, AS A MATTER OF LAW, THAT JOHNSON'S PARCEL 29 IS IN FACT DEVELOPABLE INTO SIX RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
IN HOOPER VERSUS ST. PAUL, THE COURT SAID THAT ZONING CHANGES MUST HONOR THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION AFFORDED EXISTING USES.
THIS LAND HAS BEEN PLATTED FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS SINCE 1972, AND THE JOHNSONS HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO COMPLETE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY.
THIS WHOLE PROCESS STARTED WHEN SEVERAL BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS BEGAN CONTACTING US IN REGARD TO POSSIBLY SELLING OUR PROPERTY.
SOME VERBAL OFFERS WERE MADE, AND A FINAL OFFER OF $2 AND 1/2 MILLION WAS MADE.
THIS PARTICULAR BUILDER THEN BEGAN INVESTIGATING AND HE ENDED UP CALLING ORONO.
THEY WERE TOLD BY SOMEONE IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT ONLY ONE MORE RESIDENCE COULD BE BUILT ON THAT SIX PLOT AREA.
THE VERBAL OFFER WAS THEN, OF COURSE, RETRACTED.
THUS, WE HAVE BEGUN THE PROCESS OF CORRECTING WHAT CERTAINLY WAS AN ERROR ON THE PART OF THE ORONO CITY CLERK IN OUR ATTEMPT TO HAVE ONE TAX STATEMENT FOR ALL SIX LOTS.
WHEN WE BOUGHT IT, EACH LOT HAD ITS OWN TAX STATEMENT, SO WE GOT SEVEN TAX STATEMENTS.
AND MY REQUEST, OUR REQUEST, WAS TO HAVE IT ALL PUT ON ONE STATEMENT, AND THAT IS WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.
[00:20:04]
THE CLERK FAILED TO PROVIDE FULL DISCLOSURE AS TO WHAT WOULD HAPPEN DUE TO OUR REQUEST.OUR REQUEST CONCERNED BILLING ADMINISTRATION ONLY.
WE DID NOT INTEND TO REQUEST A SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT, ELIMINATE LOT LINES, OR RELINQUISH THE SEPARATE LEGAL STATUS OF THE SIX LOTS.
WE ARE ASKING FOR THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO BE SHELVED UNTIL MORE INVESTIGATION CAN BE COMPLETED.
ANYONE ELSE WANT TO ADDRESS US? ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR THOSE OF US OR THOSE OF YOU THAT STEPPED UP.
WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO A PRESENTATION FROM CENTERPOINT
[16) CenterPoint Energy - District Geothermal ]
ENERGY ON THE POSSIBILITY OF GEOTHERMAL COMING TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.I'M CENTERPOINT'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS MANAGER.
WITH ME THIS EVENING IS JOSH GOETZ, SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER.
BEFORE I GET STARTED, I WANT TO THANK ADAM AND STAFF FOR THE ASSISTANCE THEY'VE ALREADY GIVEN US AND OUR TECHNICAL VENDOR AS WE'VE BEEN STARTING TO GATHER DATA OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
WE ARE EXTREMELY EXCITED TO BE HERE TONIGHT TO TALK ABOUT THIS OPPORTUNITY.
CENTER POINT IS LOOKING AT A NETWORK GEOTHERMAL SYSTEM PILOT.
AND I'M SO SORRY THE IMAGES DIDN'T SHOW UP, BUT THERE ARE NICE LITTLE IMAGES OF PEOPLE ON THAT.
SO WE WERE AT THE POINT IN THE PROCESS WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE DIFFERENT SITE LOCATIONS, AND ORONO IS ONE OF THEM.
WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PRESENTATION.
ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS A RIVETING SLIDE OF OUR LEGAL DISCLAIMERS.
SO WE'RE GOING TO START BY STEPPING BACK A LITTLE BIT.
THIS MAY BE REPEAT, BUT WE JUST WANT TO LEVEL SET AND HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE TALK ABOUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NETWORK GEOTHERMAL.
SO NETWORK GEOTHERMAL SYSTEM IS A SYSTEM THAT USES WELLS, PUMPS, AND PIPES.
I'M GOING TO GO TO MY SCRIPT FOR A MOMENT.
IT USES THE RELATIVELY STABLE TEMPERATURE OF THE EARTH AND A NETWORK OF WELLS, PUMPS, AND PIPES TO PROVIDE YEAR ROUND HEATING AND COOLING.
CURRENTLY CENTER POINT, YOU KNOW US AS THE NATURAL GAS PROVIDER.
THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD PROVIDE BOTH HEATING AND COOLING.
IT ALLOWS US TO USE MORE RENEWABLE ENERGY AND ALLOWS FOR A MORE EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGY, BECAUSE YOU CAN USE THE EXCESS HEAT AND COOLING BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS.
SO ONE QUESTION THAT WE ALWAYS GET IS, WHY ARE WE COMING HERE TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NATURAL GAS? SO WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
A FEW YEARS AGO, THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE PASSED A BIPARTISAN PIECE OF LEGISLATION CALLED THE NATURAL GAS INNOVATION ACT.
CENTERPOINT WAS FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS, AND FRANKLY, WE'VE BEEN REALLY, REALLY EXCITED TO GET TO THIS POINT.
IT SET THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK TO ALLOW NATURAL GAS UTILITIES WITHIN THE STATE TO GET INVOLVED WITH RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGIES LIKE THIS.
SO WE'RE IN THE FIRST INNOVATION PLAN.
WE HAVE 17 PROJECTS AND SEVEN R&D PROJECTS.
THE NETWORK GEOTHERMAL SYSTEM IS SIMPLY ONE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE.
YOU CAN SEE SOME IMAGES OF THE OTHERS.
WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON OUR WEBSITE, AND WE'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF CITIES HAVE THEM.
SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO DIVE MORE DEEPLY INTO THE SYSTEM THAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT.
AND I'M GOING TO PASS IT OVER TO JOSH.
YEAH, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR HAVING US HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU TODAY.
AS KAT MENTIONED, I'M THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT.
AND SO NOW THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT THE OVERALL PORTFOLIO, WE CAN TALK MORE ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT IN PARTICULAR.
SO LIKE KAT MENTIONED, THE GOAL OF THIS PROJECT IS TO BUILD A CONNECTED NETWORKED SYSTEM THAT USES GEOTHERMAL EXCHANGE WITH THE GROUND TO PROVIDE YEAR ROUND HEATING AND COOLING TO ONE OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE SERVE.
WE ARE LOOKING TO SERVE A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND POSSIBLY PUBLIC BUILDINGS.
AS PART OF THIS PROJECT, CENTERPOINT IS COVERING THE COSTS OF THE INSTALLATION, THE CONSTRUCTION, THE COST OF CUSTOMER EQUIPMENT, CUSTOMER RETROFITS, BUILDING CONVERSIONS.
THAT'S ALL PART OF THIS PILOT PROJECT.
THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE SOME POTENTIAL WEATHERIZATION
[00:25:03]
IMPROVEMENTS AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS TO PARTICIPATING CUSTOMER BUILDINGS THAT WILL ALSO BE PROVIDED BY CENTERPOINT AT NO COST TO THE PARTICIPATING CUSTOMERS.WE WANT TO STRESS THAT THIS PILOT PROJECT IS FULLY VOLUNTARY TO PARTICIPATE IN.
ALL CUSTOMERS, IT'S FULLY UP TO THEM TO OPT IN IF THEY ARE WITHIN OUR POTENTIAL PROJECT AREA THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT IN A COUPLE SLIDES.
BUT THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO-- OR PART OF THIS PILOT WILL BE TO EXAMINE THE POSSIBILITIES AND AVENUES FOR FUTURE EXPANSION OF THE SYSTEM AND THIS TECHNOLOGY.
AND SO WE'LL FUTURE EXPANSION IS PLANNED AT THIS TIME.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WAS FACTORED INTO THE OVERALL SELECTION OF POTENTIAL SITES AND IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL SITES.
AND SO WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT PROCESS AGAIN IN JUST A SECOND.
I LOVE FORESHADOWING, SO GIVING YOU LOTS OF LITTLE TIDBITS THAT WE'LL COME BACK TO.
AND THEN, YEAH, ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO LEARN HERE, OR TRYING TO AT LEAST GET TANGIBLE EVIDENCE FOR, IS THE WAY THAT A PILOT PROJECT LIKE THIS CAN OPERATE IN OUR COLD WEATHER CLIMATE.
THIS TECHNOLOGY ISN'T NEW TO MINNESOTA.
IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR DECADES AND DECADES.
BUT THE SPECIFIC APPLICATION OF THE UTILITY MODEL IS VERY NEW TO MINNESOTA, AND SO BOTH US AND XCEL ARE CURRENTLY PURSUING THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS IN ORDER TO LEARN HOW THESE SYSTEMS CAN BETTER SERVE OUR COMMUNITIES, CAN SERVE OUR COMMUNITIES OVERALL, AND THEN HOW WE CAN TAKE THESE LEARNINGS AND IMPROVE FUTURE APPLICATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGY.
SO WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO WE FIGURED IT WOULD BE GOOD TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE CAME TO HAVE ORONO AS ONE OF THE FINAL THREE SITES.
SO HERE WE HAVE A BREAKDOWN OF OUR OVERALL SITE SELECTION PROCESS.
SO ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, I THINK AT THIS POINT, WE REACHED OUT WITH A REQUEST FOR INTEREST, REQUEST FOR INFORMATION SEEKING INTEREST FROM CITIES WHO COULD HAVE A POTENTIAL SITE FOR THE NETWORK GEOTHERMAL.
SO THAT IS WHERE WE FIRST REACHED OUT TO ADAM.
AND SINCE THEN, WE HAVE NARROWED DOWN OUR SITES THROUGH AN INITIAL SCREENING, WHICH BROUGHT US DOWN TO 20 POTENTIAL SITES, AND THEN AN EVEN MORE INVOLVED TECHNICAL SCREENING, WHICH BROUGHT US TO A FINAL THREE.
AND SO WE ARE NOW PROCEEDING WITH ADDITIONAL TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF THOSE FINAL THREE SITES, INCLUDING TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH TYPES OF GEOTHERMAL TECHNOLOGY WOULD WORK BEST.
SO AS A ANSWER TO THE COMMENT WE HEARD EARLIER, OPEN LOOP, CLOSED LOOP, AND DARCY SYSTEMS ARE ALL THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT AND ARE ESSENTIALLY LOOKING TO SEE WHAT MAKES SENSE IN TERMS OF BUILDING A SYSTEM THAT CAN SERVE THE MOST CUSTOMERS, LEAD TO THE MOST GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS.
ULTIMATELY, THAT CAN SERVE THE PILOT, THE PILOT LEARNINGS, AND THE ACTUAL CUSTOMERS TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITIES.
SO IT'S STILL BEING DETERMINED, BUT WE'RE DEFINITELY LOOKING INTO ALL POSSIBILITIES.
AND SO AS WE-- OH YEAH, THAT'S PERFECT.
THE LAST THING I WOULD MENTION IS WE'RE PLANNING TO HAVE A FINAL SITE IDENTIFIED AT THE START OF 2027.
SO WE'RE CONTINUING TO MEET WITH THE CITY STAFF REGULARLY.
AND IN THE CASE OF THIS SITE, THE FOLKS FROM ORONO SCHOOLS AS WELL, SINCE THIS SITE, AS WE'LL AGAIN SEE IN A SECOND, INVOLVES SOME OF THE SCHOOL PROPERTY AS WELL.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND, YES, WORK TOWARDS THAT FINAL SITE SELECTION IN 2027.
AND HERE WE CAN LOOK AT OUR OVERALL TIMELINE.
SO HOW THAT SITE SELECTION FITS INTO THE BROADER TIMELINE.
SO ONCE THAT SITE IS SELECTED, WE WILL START DOING OUR DETAILED ENGINEERING DESIGN.
CURRENTLY WE'RE WORKING WITH A TECHNICAL VENDOR SALAS O'BRIEN, AND THEY HAVE DECADES OF EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH THIS TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY, DOING THE DESIGN, DOING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT-- OOH, BUMPED THE MIC.
SO THEY'RE A VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE SOURCE, AND WE ARE VERY LUCKY TO HAVE THEM ON BOARD HELPING US WITH THIS PROJECT.
AND SO WE'LL PROCEED WITH THAT DESIGN, WITH ENGAGING WITH CUSTOMERS WHO COULD POTENTIALLY BE ON THE SYSTEM, TARGETING CONSTRUCTION TOWARDS THE END OF 2027 OR THE START OF 2028.
AND THE GOAL IS THAT THE SYSTEM WOULD BE FULLY LIVE, SERVING ALL CUSTOMERS BY THE END OF 2028, POSSIBLY THE START OF 2029, SO THAT WE CAN GET SOME GOOD EMPIRICAL DATA AND REPORT BACK TO THE UTILITY COMMISSION WITH EVERYTHING WE LEARNED ABOUT HOW THE SYSTEM RUNS, HOW IT SERVES THE CUSTOMERS, CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE, AND ALL THAT JAZZ.
SO WE CAN NOW GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE AND TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFIC SITE IN ORONO.
OH, AND ACTUALLY, I'LL ALSO MENTION WE JUST THIS LAST WEEK ON WEDNESDAY, A BIG PART OF-- CAN WE ACTUALLY GO BACK A SLIDE JUST FOR A SECOND? BECAUSE I WANTED TO EMPHASIZE.
SO WE HAVE THIS STAR ON ONGOING ENGAGEMENT.
AND SO WE'RE IN THIS WINDOW RIGHT NOW WHERE WE HAVE A COUPLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PROJECT AND SUBMIT FEEDBACK.
SO THIS PAST WEDNESDAY, WE HAD AN OPEN HOUSE COMMUNITY CONNECT EVENT OVER AT THE ACTIVITY CENTER JUST UP THE ROAD.
AND SO THAT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR IN-PERSON
[00:30:05]
LEARNING ABOUT THE PROJECT AND SUBMITTING FEEDBACK AND QUESTIONS.WE HAVE TWO ONLINE VIRTUAL OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL FOR ANYONE WHO'S INTERESTED.
SO ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE PRESENTED AT THAT OPEN HOUSE IS AVAILABLE ON OUR NETWORK GEOTHERMAL THERMAL WEBSITE.
THAT'S ON THE LAST SLIDE OF THIS PRESENTATION FOR FOLKS TO REFERENCE.
AND SO FOR ANYONE WHO'S CURIOUS WHAT WAS PRESENTED THERE, IT'S GOING TO MIRROR A LOT OF THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.
BUT IT'S GOING TO BE OPEN AND AVAILABLE UNTIL OCTOBER 23.
THERE'S ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SUBMITTING-- THERE'S A FEEDBACK SURVEY FORM.
SO FEEL FREE TO FILL THAT OUT.
AND THEN FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT MORE REAL TIME Q&A, TOMORROW EVENING AT 6:00 PM, WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING A VIRTUAL TOWN HALL.
AND SO THAT LINK IS ALSO ON OUR WEBSITE, THAT SAME EXACT LINK.
AND SO DEFINITELY CHECK THAT OUT.
AGAIN, WE'LL BE DOING A PRESENTATION LIKE THIS.
WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR LIVE Q&A.
AND YEAH, WE ULTIMATELY WANT TO HEAR FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ARE POTENTIALLY GOING TO BE SERVED BY THIS SYSTEM OR WHO ARE GOING TO BE IN THE AREA AROUND WHERE WE'LL BE SERVING.
AND SO, YEAH, WE ARE OPEN TO ALL FEEDBACK, AND WE LOVE HEARING FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.
GET THAT ON YOUR RADAR AND CALENDARS IF THAT'S OF INTEREST.
SO ONE THING I WANT TO LEAD WITH IS, JUST TO BE CLEAR, NOT EVERY BUILDING WITHIN THIS PROJECT AREA IS GOING TO BE SERVED.
THIS IS JUST OF THE BUILDINGS WITHIN THIS AREA, WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE IN TERMS OF SYSTEM EFFICIENCY, SERVING CUSTOMERS, GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE.
SO SOME OF THE POTENTIAL BUILDINGS THAT COULD BE SERVED, IF THEY OPT IN, ARE SOME OF THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS LIKE THE GOVERNMENT CENTER, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO THE SCHOOLS ABOUT HAVING ONE OF THE SCHOOL BUILDINGS SERVED BY THE SYSTEM.
AND THEN WE'D ALSO LIKE TO HAVE A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL AS WELL.
SO THAT COULD BE THE TOWNHOMES TO THE SOUTH.
IT COULD BE-- OR NOT THE TOWNHOMES TO THE SOUTH.
IT COULD BE SOME OF THE SINGLE FAMILY BUILDINGS TO THE SOUTH.
ALL OPT IN, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE-- THE EXACT LAYOUT WE'RE STILL WORKING OUT, BUT THE IDEA THIS IS IT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE IN THIS COLLECTION OF BUILDINGS.
LET ME MAKE SURE I DIDN'T MISS ANY MAJOR DETAILS.
OH, AND THE LAST THING I'LL MENTION IS, AS WE POINTED OUT, ONE OF THE POTENTIAL LEARNINGS FOR THIS PILOT OR FUTURE APPLICATIONS IS EXPANSION OF A SYSTEM.
THAT'S TYPICALLY MUCH MORE COST EFFECTIVE TO EXPAND AN EXISTING SYSTEM THAN TO BUILD FROM SCRATCH.
AND SO THE BUILDINGS IN THIS AREA AS WELL, EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT SERVED ON THE FIRST SYSTEM, COULD BE POTENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR AN EXPANSION OF THE SYSTEM IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.
I'LL PASS IT BACK TO KAT TO WRAP THINGS UP.
WE'RE HERE TO STAND FOR AS MANY QUESTIONS AS YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK.
IF SOMETHING COMES TO YOU AFTERWARDS AND YOU DECIDE NOT TO ATTEND TOMORROW NIGHT AT 6 O'CLOCK, YOU CAN ALWAYS REACH OUT TO EITHER JOSH OR ME.
YOU CAN JUMP ON A CALL ANYTIME.
AND AS JOSH SAID, THE LINKS THAT HE MENTIONED, EVERYTHING IS ON THAT NETGEO VANITY URL.
SO THANKS SO MUCH FOR HAVING US.
I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK WITH SOME MEMBERS OF OUR STAFF AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND I COULDN'T BE MORE EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT, FRANKLY.
I THINK WE WOULD LOVE TO PARTNER WITH YOU ON THIS.
AND I HAVEN'T FOUND A DOWNSIDE YET FROM TALKING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, BUT I WANT TO OPEN IT UP FOR OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU CONSIDERING ORONO, AND WE HOPE YOU'LL CHOOSE US, FRANKLY, BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW YOU TO DO YOUR PILOT PROJECT AND SHOW THAT WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT GREENING UP AREA AND OUR COMMUNITY.
SO I THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY.
WITH THAT, I WOULD OPEN IT UP FOR OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS OR EXPRESS OPINIONS ON THE PROJECT.
I GUESS I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION.
WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FACILITIES, HOW MANY OF THE FACILITIES WOULD YOU PLAN ON USING? JUST ONE, OR WERE YOU PLANNING ON CHOOSING A FEW OF THEM AND THEN LINKING THEM TOGETHER RIGHT AWAY? YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
IT WOULD BE A SELECTION OF MULTIPLE BUILDINGS.
THE EXACT NUMBER IS STILL BEING DETERMINED DEPENDENT ON WHO OPTS IN.
BUT IT WOULD BE IN TERMS OF CITY BUILDINGS, TWO TO THREE OF THOSE AND THEN POSSIBLY A HANDFUL OF RESIDENTIAL AS WELL.
BUT THE IDEA WOULD BE A SYSTEM OF SOMEWHERE IN 8 TO 10 BUILDINGS, ALL CONNECTED.
AND THAT'S ALL DONE UNDERGROUND, I'M ASSUMING?
[00:35:03]
YES, THERE IS A CENTRAL PUMP HOUSE WHICH THEN PUMPS THE WATER AROUND THROUGHOUT THE SYSTEM.AND SO THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE AN ABOVE GROUND STRUCTURE.
IF WE WOULD USE THE DARCY SYSTEMS, THERE WOULD BE A WELLHEAD AS WELL THAT YOU WOULDN'T SEE WITH, SAY, A CLOSED LOOP SYSTEM.
SO PRIMARILY 90%, 95%, MAKING UP A NUMBER, BUT 95% OF THE SYSTEM WOULD BE UNDERGROUND WITH A FEW ABOVE GROUND STRUCTURES.
WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH AGAIN.
APPRECIATE YOU COMING HERE AND REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY.
NEXT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO A COUPLE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
[3) Work Session Schedule]
ITEMS THAT WE WILL GO TO FIRST.I'LL TURN THIS OVER TO COUNCIL MEMBER BENSON.
I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT I DON'T SEE IT ON THE SCHEDULE FOR THIS NOVEMBER, BUT WE DID AGREE TO HAVE A WORK SESSION ON RENEWABLE ENERGY, AND I'M NOT SEEING IT HERE ON THE SCHEDULE.
WELL, THEN THAT;D BE AN OMISSION [INAUDIBLE] AS WELL, AND THE REASON I INCLUDED IT ON THE AGENDA.
SO WHERE IS THAT SESSION? NOVEMBER 23.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? NO, NO, NO.
WHEN I SAW THAT, THE FORMATTING, IT WAS NOT.
WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE WORK SCHEDULE-- OR SORRY, THE WORK SESSION SCHEDULE.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NEXT WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 14, WHICH IS THE CITY OF ORONO TEXT
[14) LA26-000039, City of Orono Text Amendment: Chapter 6.20 - Subdivision Regulations, Section 6.20.020 - Definitions - Ordinance 323]
AMENDMENT.YES, I WANTED TO HAVE MORE CLARIFICATION EXACTLY HOW THIS IS WORDED, WHY IT'S WORDED THE WAY IT IS, AND HOW IT AFFECTS, LET'S SAY, THE COUPLE THAT CAME IN TONIGHT TO TALK ABOUT THEIR SUBDIVISION THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BUT HASN'T BEEN BUILT.
YES, THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER RICKS.
TONIGHT WE'RE LOOKING JUST TO ADD A CLARIFYING SENTENCE.
SO CURRENTLY UNDER OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, IF YOUR LAND IS COMBINED UNDER ANY TYPE OF COMBINATION, IF YOUR LAND IS COMBINED AND THEN YOU'RE ASKING TO CREATE NEW LOTS OUT OF IT, THAT DOES CONSTITUTE A SUBDIVISION BY OUR DEFINITION.
AND SO THE QUESTION OF ASKING IF LAND HAS BEEN COMBINED VIA TAX FOR TAX PURPOSES IS STILL A COMBINATION UNDER OUR INTERPRETATION OF OUR SUBDIVISION.
AND WE HAVE BEEN HEARING THAT QUESTION FROM THE COUPLE TONIGHT, BUT WE'VE BEEN HEARING IT FROM OTHER PEOPLE AS WELL OVER TIME.
SO WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE PERTINENT TO ADD THAT DEFINITION OR THAT CLARIFYING STATEMENT INTO THE DEFINITION TO THEN PROVIDE MORE TRANSPARENCY OUT WITH OUR CODE TO THE PUBLIC AS WELL.
SO THE STATEMENT TONIGHT IS MEANT TO BE A CLARIFYING STATEMENT.
IT IS NOT CHANGING THE POLICY OR APPLICABILITY OF HOW WE APPLY SUBDIVISIONS.
COUNCIL MEMBER RICKS, IF I COULD ADD TO THAT.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IN ORONO, BASED ON SOME OF YOUR ZONING REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF THE ACREAGE THAT YOU REQUIRE, CANDIDLY, I WON'T SAY AS A FAVOR TO THE RESIDENTS, BUT IN TERMS OF TRYING TO CONTROL SOME OF THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT, WHAT THE CITY HAS ALLOWED PEOPLE TO DO, INSTEAD OF GOING AND HAVING TO REDEFINE TWO LOTS AND PAY FOR THE NEW LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AND THE RECORDING OF THE NEW DEEDS, OR HAVING TO REPLAT IT, WHAT WE'VE ALLOWED PEOPLE TO DO IS JUST WITH THE TAX ID, COMBINE IT AND TREAT IT AS ONE LOT.
NOW, WHEN YOU GO ON TO THE COUNTY SYSTEM, THE PICTORIAL IS STILL THERE OF TWO LOTS, BUT WE TREAT IT AS ONE LOT, WHICH IT COMPLETELY REDOES WHAT YOU'D HAVE FOR SETBACKS, BECAUSE YOU NOW HAVE A LINE IN BETWEEN.
WE DON'T USE THAT AS A SETBACK LINE.
WE MAY, IN FACT, RELEASE SOME OF THE INTERIOR UTILITY EASEMENTS, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE DO WITH THAT.
SO IN THE PAST, WE'VE DONE THAT IN AN ATTEMPT TO TRY AND MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT A LITTLE MORE EFFICIENT AND A LITTLE LESS COSTLY BY COMBINING THEM IN THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY POSSIBLE.
AND SO WE HAVE RECEIVED AT TIMES PUSH BACK ON THE HEY, BUT I BOUGHT THIS.
I JUST WANT TO UNDO THE TAX ID.
IT'S JUST FOR THE SAKE OF PAYING TAXES THROUGH ONE BILLING ADDRESS AND NOW I WANT TO UNDO IT.
THE PROBLEM IS WE HAVE A NUMBER OF LOTS WHERE THEY HAVE BEEN COMBINED.
I THINK THAT IS LEGALLY SUPPORTABLE.
[00:40:04]
AND SO FOR THE SAKE OF UNIFORMITY, WHEN WE GET THE QUESTION OF WHY, IN SOME RESPECTS HERE, HERE'S WHAT THE CODE SAYS.WHEN WE GET REQUESTS FROM THE COUNTY OF, HEY, SOMEONE WANTS TO UNDO THE TAX PARCEL ID, THAT REQUEST STILL COMES BACK TO THE CITY FOR PERMISSION TO DO THAT.
OR DO WE LOOK AT IT AS A SUBDIVISION? AND WE'VE BEEN VERY UNIFORM IN OUR APPLICATION OF THAT, THAT WE VIEW THAT AS A SUBDIVISION.
SO WE ARE TRYING TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH THAT BUT JUST PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE CLARITY IN OUR CODE.
WHAT I'D SAY IS THAT THIS LANGUAGE IS NOT INVENTED OR UNIQUE TO ORONO.
WE HAVE STOLEN IT FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES WHO, CANDIDLY, LAKE SHORE COMMUNITIES WHERE YOU HAVE SOME OF YOUR SMALLER LOTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMBINED.
SO WE ARE TRYING TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH OUR PRACTICE, WHAT'S LEGALLY SUPPORTABLE, AND WHAT WE'VE GOT OUT THERE.
TO THE GENTLEMAN, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO HAVE THE LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU BECOME TOO PARTICULARIZED, BUT THERE ARE COURT ORDERS INVOLVED IN THAT AND WE'VE REVIEWED THOSE.
IT DID GO UP TO THE COURT OF APPEALS BACK DOWN TO THE DISTRICT COURT.
SO I THINK THAT ONE IS UNIQUE AND DIFFERENT FROM THIS CODE.
AND CERTAINLY, WE CAN FURTHER LOOK INTO THAT IF THERE'S OTHER THINGS TO REVIEW, BUT WE HAVE TAKEN AN INITIAL LOOK AT THAT.
WILL THIS AFFECT THEIR CLAIM IN ANY WAY? OR AS YOU JUST SAID, IT'S GOING TO GO DOWN, BECAUSE THERE ALREADY ARE.
YEAH, I WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S TWO THINGS THERE.
TO THE EXTENT THEY HAVE COMBINED CERTAIN LOTS WITH THE TAX ID, IT WOULD AFFECT IT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT IT JUST CLARIFIES WHAT THE CITY'S POSITION HAS BEEN FOR BASICALLY DECADES AT THIS POINT.
SO WOULD IT IMPACT OR CHANGE THE CITY'S POSITION? NO, WE'RE NOT PIVOTING AND DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
WE'RE DOING EXACTLY WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
I THINK WHAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO WITH THE JOHNSONS' REQUEST IS FURTHER LOOK AT THE COURT ORDERS.
WE HAVE DONE THAT WITH THE INFORMATION WE'VE HAD.
THERE IS ONE DISTRICT COURT ORDER THAT'S STILL OUT THERE THAT'S MISSING.
SO THERE MAY BE ANOTHER AVENUE TO REVIEW IT THERE.
BUT IN TERMS OF THIS LEGISLATION WOULD NOT CHANGE HOW WE BUILD THEIR APPLICATION, EVEN IF YOU CHOSE NOT TO ADOPT IT TONIGHT.
WHAT KIND OF THINGS DO THEY HAVE TO DO TO MOVE FORWARD? I KNOW THEY HAVEN'T ASKED ME THIS, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING BECAUSE THAT QUESTION'S COME BEFORE US AND THEY'VE COME BEFORE US NOW TOO.
AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE EXPRESSED, AS STAFF HAS EXPRESSED TO THEM, WHERE IT STANDS AND STUFF.
AND I JUST WANT TO GIVE THEM SOME GUIDANCE, MAYBE AS A COUNCIL, WHAT THEY NEED TO DO IF THEY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD, ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE LOOKING AT SELLING THEIR PROPERTY AND HAVING IT USED IN THE WAY THAT IT WAS DEEMED WHEN THEY PURCHASED IT.
THE QUOTE "THE WAY IT WAS DEEMED WHEN THEY PURCHASED IT" IS A LITTLE BIT TRICKY BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THE LOTS EXISTED AT THE TIME, WHAT HAS BEEN COMBINED SINCE THEN.
BECAUSE IF THEY HAVE BEEN COMBINED SINCE THEN, IN SOME RESPECTS, YOU DON'T HAVE AS MANY LOTS PERHAPS AS WHEN YOU STARTED.
IN TERMS OF WHERE IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THE CURRENT CODE IS WHAT WOULD GOVERN, AND THAT DICTATES HOW MANY LOTS YOU CAN CREATE.
SO AGAIN, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A SITUATION THAT SHOWS FIVE OR SIX LOTS, BUT THEY'VE BEEN COMBINED, FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WE REVIEW THAT AS THIS IS A BRAND NEW SUBDIVISION, AND WE WOULD APPLY THE CRITERIA AS IT RELATES TO THAT.
THE NAME OF THE GAME, IF WE'RE JUST HONEST ABOUT THESE, IS ALWAYS TRYING TO CREATE AS MUCH DENSITY AS POSSIBLE.
AND WHAT YOU HAVE IS WHEN YOU TAKE A BUNCH OF SMALLER LOTS AND YOU COMBINE THEM, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE AS MUCH DENSITY.
THERE IS MARKET VALUE, AS WE KNOW, IN BEING ABLE TO BUILD BIGGER HOMES ON SMALLER LOTS.
WE'VE TRIED TO CURB THAT A LITTLE BIT BY WHEN THEY COMBINE THEM, WE APPLY THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS AS CONTEMPLATED BY OUR CODE RIGHT NOW.
SO I HAVEN'T REVIEWED THEIR APPLICATION TO UNDERSTAND HOW MANY LOTS THEY'D BE ELIGIBLE FOR, BUT THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING STAFF CAN DO.
I CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT THE REVIEW UNDER TODAY'S CODE WILL NECESSARILY PROVIDE THE DENSITY THAT WAS THOUGHT OF 30 YEARS AGO.
AND I GUESS I'M NOT QUITE SURE.
I KNOW HE TALKED ABOUT-- MR. JOHNSON, YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT YOU DID ASK THE [INAUDIBLE] CALIBRATING THAT [INAUDIBLE] CHANGE THE TAX IDS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE IDS ARE STILL LISTED AND THAT THEY'RE JUST COMBINED OR IF THEY WERE ELIMINATED AND YOU JUST HAVE ONE PROPERTY ID NOW.
SO THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF EITHER.
I THINK FROM THE COUNTY'S PERSPECTIVE, AGAIN, THEY DON'T GET INTO THE LAND USE ISSUE.
SO I THINK IT'S PROBABLY JUST AN ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION OF IF YOU USED TO HAVE FOUR IDS, YOU NOW HAVE ONE.
I SUPPOSE IF THE CITY SAID, HEY, WE DON'T CARE, GO AHEAD AND REASSIGN FOUR.
THERE'S FOUR EXISTING LOTS ON THE COUNTY.
[00:45:01]
I WOULD TELL YOU THAT THAT'S A DEPARTURE FROM EVERY SINGLE PRACTICE WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR DECADES HERE.THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEFORE US THIS TEXT AMENDMENT, AND I HAVE THOUGHTS ON IT.
I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE TIMING IN A WAY, BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN THIS OPEN QUESTION THAT WE ALL HAVE VISITED THIS SITE, AND NOW HERE WE HAVE A TEXT AMENDMENT.
SO I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY TO ANYBODY WHO MAYBE HAD AN ISSUE LIKE THAT, I WOULDN'T SAY BEFORE COUNCIL, BUT WHO HAS THIS OPEN ENDED QUESTION THAT'S MAYBE UNRESOLVED, THAT HAVING THIS ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL RIGHT NOW MIGHT BE OF CONCERN.
WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS THAT WHATEVER THIS ADJUSTMENT IS, OR CLARIFICATION IN NO WAY CHANGES OUR CURRENT PRACTICE REGARDING SUBDIVISION.
SO THIS IS A CLARIFICATION THAT MAKES-- I SHOULDN'T SAY CHANGES ANYTHING.
BUT OUR POSITION HAS NOT CHANGED.
IT CHANGES NOTHING, WHICH IS FINE.
AND THE TIMING AGAIN IS-- AND I HEAR THE CONCERN FROM THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SPOKE EARLIER THAT THE CONCERN IS THAT THE TIMING OF TAKING THIS UP RIGHT NOW LOOKS LIKE IT'S DOVETAILING WITH AN OPEN ISSUE.
AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THIS IS CLARIFICATION ON SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY EXISTED, WHICH I'M GLAD YOU MADE THAT REAL CLEAR TO US.
AND I'D ASKED THIS QUESTION OF STAFF EARLIER.
SO WHAT I HEAR FROM YOU IS THE SAME.
REGARDING THE OTHER ISSUE, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY TAKING UP AS A COUNCIL.
BUT I AGREE THAT IF THERE'S OPEN QUESTIONS ON THAT, THEN WE SHOULD LOOK AT THOSE OPEN QUESTIONS.
THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE AN ISSUE OF PLANNING.
ANYWAY, FOR THIS FOR TONIGHT, I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS.
I'D ASKED STAFF PRIOR AND YOU'VE EXPLAINED IT.
OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE YOU PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO PASS OR TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT FOR CHAPTER 6.2.
SUBDIVISION [INAUDIBLE] SECTION 6.20.020 ORDINANCE 323.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IF SOMETHING COMES BACK AT A LATER DATE REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL AND THEIR ABILITY TO DEVELOP IT, AGAIN, THAT'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE DISCUSSED AND REVIEWED AND THIS DOESN'T GET IN THE WAY OF OUR ABILITY TO DO THAT.
WHAT IT DOES IS IT MEANS THAT IT WON'T BE DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY.
SOMETIMES A COMMUNITY CAN SIGN A LETTER SAYING, GO AHEAD, ASSIGN NEW TAX IDS, AND THERE YOU HAVE IT.
SOMEONE CAN ALWAYS COME IN WITH THEIR PARCEL, SEEK A REQUEST FOR A SUBDIVISION.
AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THE LOTS THAT THEY'RE CREATING ARE TOO SMALL OR NON-CONFORMING, YOU CAN START TO TALK ABOUT VARIANCES, WHICH IS A MORE VIGOROUS PROCESS.
BUT THE IDEA IS IT'S SUPPOSED BE.
THEY'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING FOR WHICH YOUR CODE DOESN'T APPLY OR ALLOW.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
THIS ISN'T NO TO THE REQUEST OR THE APPLICATION THAT WE'VE YET TO RECEIVE, PERHAPS.
IT'S JUST SAYING NO, ADMINISTRATIVELY, THIS CAN'T HAPPEN.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SAY AYE.
MOVE ON TO ITEM 17, WHICH IS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STEERING
[17) Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee Appointment]
COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT.GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
TONIGHT YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO TAKE ACTION TO ESTABLISH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE.
THE COMMITTEE IS-- THE CITY HAS BEEN ADVERTISING FOR RESIDENTS, PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE ON A STEERING COMMITTEE THAT WILL PROVIDE FEEDBACK FOR THE 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE.
THE COMMITTEE WILL BE SET TO MEET PERIODICALLY TO DISCUSS DIRECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SUGGEST CHANGES, AND ADDRESS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY.
THE COMMITTEE WILL ALSO REVIEW THOSE CHANGES IN ADVANCE OF ANY PUBLICATION FOR THE WIDER RESIDENT POPULATION.
TO DATE, THE CITY HAS RECEIVED AN INTEREST OF NINE RESIDENTS FOR THE COMMITTEE, AS WELL AS TWO VOLUNTEERS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TWO VOLUNTEERS FROM THE PARK COMMISSION.
YOU ARE ASKED TONIGHT TO DISCUSS AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SERVE ON THE STEERING COMMITTEE.
AND THEN WITH THE RESIDENTS, COMMISSIONERS, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE COMMITTEE WOULD STAND AT 15 APPOINTED MEMBERS AS WELL AS THREE STAFF, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE MYSELF, CITY ADMINISTRATOR, AND CITY PLANNER
[00:50:03]
TO FACILITATE THOSE MEETINGS.THE FIRST STEERING COMMITTEE IS SET TO BE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2, AND THE FIRST MEETING WILL BE INTRODUCTIONS AND AN OVERVIEW FOR THE 2050 COMP PLAN.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL ALSO BE ASKED TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON FUTURE MEETING DATES AND TIMES TO SET KIND OF A REGULAR AGENDA OR REGULAR SCHEDULE THROUGH 2027.
SO TONIGHT, COUNCIL IS ASKED TO MOTION TO APPOINT MEMBERS OF THE 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE, WHICH IS INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT A, AS WELL AS INCLUDE TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS AT YOUR DIRECTION.
WHAT IS THE TIME COMMITMENT IN TERMS OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEETINGS AND LENGTH? YEAH, SO AT MOST, IT WOULD BE MONTHLY FOR AT ABOUT 18 MONTHS.
SO IT WILL START HERE AT THE END OF 2026 ALL THROUGH 2027.
AND THEN I ANTICIPATE THE STEERING COMMITTEE WRAPPING UP IN THE EARLY PART OF 2028.
IT MIGHT BE QUARTERLY OR BIMONTHLY DEPENDING ON THE FEEDBACK WE GET BACK FROM THE COMMITTEE AND HOW WE WANT TO STRATEGIZE, WHETHER WE REVIEW CHAPTERS A MONTH OR A FEW CHAPTERS EVERY MEETING OR HOW THAT GOES, AS WELL AS THEIR TIME COMMITMENT OF IF THEY WANT ONE HOUR MEETINGS OR TWO HOUR MEETINGS.
SO WE HOPE TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS AT THE FIRST MEETING FOR WHEN PEOPLE'S AVAILABILITY AND SCHEDULES WILL ALLOW.
BUT IT WILL BE ABOUT A YEAR TO A YEAR AND A HALF COMMITMENT OF AT MOST OF A MONTHLY MEETING TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK AND REVIEW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? ANY INTEREST AMONG COUNCIL MEMBERS? I WON'T BE DOING IT.
[LAUGHTER] BUT I'M HAPPY TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY ELSE.
I'M HAPPY TO BE ONE OF THE PEOPLE.
YEAH, AND I'LL JUST BE TRANSPARENT.
I WOULD PREFER, GIVEN MY INVOLVEMENT WITH THE TORONTO FIRE TO STAY WITH THAT ONE.
MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, ONE OTHER OPTION FOR YOU TOO IS MAYBE APPOINT ONE PERSON FROM THE COUNCIL TODAY, AND THEN DEFER A SECOND APPOINTMENT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.
TO BE CLEAR, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO THIS AS THE MAYOR.
I ALSO WOULD BE HAPPY TO HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE TAKE ON THAT ROLE.
SO I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.
[INAUDIBLE] I CAN MAKE A MOTION THEN.
SO MOTION TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO THE 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE, AS LISTED IN THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A, REVISED TO INCLUDE COUNCIL MEMBER RICKS, JACQUELINE RICKS, WITH ANOTHER APPOINTEE TO BE MADE IN THE FUTURE, NEXT YEAR.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AND A BIG THANK YOU TO THOSE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE STEPPED UP AND BEEN WILLING TO SERVE ON THAT.
AND THANK YOU TO COUNCIL MEMBER RICKS, TOO, FOR VOLUNTEERING TONIGHT.
REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT TASK FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY.
SO GLAD TO GLAD TO SEE PEOPLE STEPPING UP.
NEXT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 18,
[18) LA26-000030, 915 Brown Rd N, Setback Variance ]
WHICH IS A SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST AT 915 BROWN ROAD NORTH.I THINK THAT'S ONE WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU FOR SOME BACKGROUND.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME ON THE PROPERTY.
IN AUGUST, THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S ORIGINAL REQUEST, WHICH INCLUDED A SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO PLACE THE HOME 10 FEET FROM THE NORTH SIDE LOT LINE.
BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION OF PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS ON THE ORIGINAL PLAN, ADDITIONAL APPROVALS FOR A CUP AND A SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE WERE ALSO INCLUDED IN THAT REQUEST.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION TABLED THAT APPLICATION, CITING CONCERNS WITH THE REQUESTED SETBACK FROM THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, AND DIRECTED THE APPLICANT TO RECONSIDER THEIR SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST, AS WELL AS THE WALL PLACEMENT.
THEY TOOK THE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMISSION, AND AT THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, THE APPLICANT PRESENTED THE UPDATED REQUEST THAT IS ON THE SCREEN, REVISING THE VARIANCE FROM A 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 20 FEET, WHERE THE 30 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK IS REQUIRED.
THE REVISED PLANS ALSO ELIMINATED THE NEED FOR SPECIFIC APPROVALS FOR THE PROPOSED RETAINING
[00:55:04]
WALLS.A PREVIOUSLY SHOWN WINDOW WELL ON THE NORTH SIDE HAS BEEN REVISED AND RELOCATED.
SO IT'S NOT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
WE DID RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION, AND THERE MAY BE PEOPLE HERE THIS EVENING TO SPEAK.
ALTHOUGH THE PROPERTY DOES HAVE SIGNIFICANT PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS IN THE LOCATION OF THE TRIBUTARY, THE HISTORIC BARN THE OWNER IS TRYING TO WORK AROUND, STAFF DOES CONTINUE TO ASSERT THAT THE PROPOSED HOME FOOTPRINT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED WITHIN THE CONFORMING BUILDING ENVELOPE, WHICH IS SHOWN IN YELLOW.
PLANNING STAFF CONTINUES TO RECOMMEND DENIAL AS APPLIED.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT THIS EVENING.
I HAVE THE PLANS FOR THE HOME.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE REVISED WINDOW WELL LOCATION ON THEM, BUT I DO HAVE AERIAL PHOTOS AND SOME OTHER PHOTOS OF THE SITE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THEM, BUT THAT IS ALL I HAVE TONIGHT.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT YOU MOVE TO DENY THE VARIANCE AND DIRECT STAFF TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION AT YOUR NEXT MEETING.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MELANIE BEFORE WE CALL THE APPLICANT UP? ALL RIGHT.
APPLICANT'S HERE, WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS US.
JOHN QUINLIVAN, 3211 INDEPENDENCE ROAD IN INDEPENDENCE.
THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE PROPERTY.
I THINK, AS MELANIE SAID, WE APPROACHED THE PLANNING IN AUGUST, I BELIEVE IT WAS.
THOSE OF YOU THAT-- FUN FACT, THIS IS WW BROWN PROPERTY PURCHASED IN 1870.
SOME OF THE NEWS ARTICLES I READ CALLED HIM FARMER BROWN.
AND THE MINNETONKA PAPER AT THE TIME-- I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS THE GAZETTE OR SOMETHING, WROTE ABOUT HIM BEING FRIENDLY WITH ABE LINCOLN.
SO WHO KNOWS IF THAT'S TRUE OR NOT? THE BARN WAS BUILT IN ABOUT 1900.
AND THE OLD HOUSE HAD BEEN REMOVED.
THE NEW OWNERS, JOHN AND MCKENZIE ARNOLD, MCKENZIE'S GOT A YOUNG ONE AND IS PREGNANT, SO SHE DIDN'T MAKE IT, BUT JOHN DID.
THAT WILL ALSO BE THEIR PERMANENT RESIDENCE.
SO IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO KEEP THE BARN.
AS I SAID, IT WAS AROUND 1900, LATE 1800S.
AND WHAT THE GOAL WAS TO GET THE HOUSE FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM THE BARN SO WE DIDN'T HAVE GRADING AND RUNOFF ISSUES.
AND IN OUR FIRST MEETING, WE HAD IT AT 10.
PLANNING COMMISSION CAME AND SAID, HEY, LISTEN, WE CAN GO DO 20.
BUT THERE WAS ALSO-- THE RETAINING WALL THAT YOU SEE TAILS OFF.
IF YOU PUSH THAT FORWARD, THAT'S SNUCK INTO-- [INAUDIBLE]? IT WAS A CONDITIONARY [INAUDIBLE].
SO WE WENT BACK TO OUR SURVEYOR AND SAID, OK, BRING IT TO 20.
TRY TO SLIDE IT BACK SO WE COULD MAKE THE WALL FIT.
MAKING THE WALL FIT HELPED OUR GRADING ISSUES, AND IT ALSO HELPS FROM A WINDOW WELL STANDPOINT THAT WE CAN MOVE IT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE SIDE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TO EITHER THE LAKE SIDE OR THE SOUTH SIDE, IF YOU WILL.
AND SO WE DID THAT, FOLLOWED, GOT BACK ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I MISSED THAT MEETING [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, BUT I THINK THAT WE DID WHAT THEY ASKED US TO DO.
WE DID WHAT THE NEIGHBOR ASKED US TO DO.
I DIDN'T CHANGE THE PLAN WITH MELANIE, AND SHE REACHED OUT THE NEXT DAY AND SAID, HEY, WE MISSED YOU LAST NIGHT.
I SAID, FOR WHAT? SHE SAID THE MEETING.
I THINK WE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN APPROVAL, IF YOU WATCHED THE MEETING, IF WE WOULD HAVE MADE IT CLEAR THERE IS NO WINDOW WELL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE NEIGHBOR ON THE TOP SIDE WHERE WE'RE BRINGING IT DOWN TO 20 FEET.
WE'RE TAKING THAT OUT ALTOGETHER AND EITHER GOING TO DO LAKE SIDE OR DO IT ON THE BOTTOM.
SO IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT, SOME OF YOU DID SEE IT.
IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO PULL IT AWAY FROM THE BARN.
WE DON'T HAVE TO PULL IT TOO FAR.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF BIG TREES OUT THERE THAT WE CAN STILL SAVE.
THIS, TO US, SEEMED LIKE THE BEST POSSIBLE LOCATION FOR US TO PUT THE HOUSE WHILE STILL MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF THE BARN.
THE TRIBUTARY IS A BUGGER, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S 75 FOOT, RIGHT, MELANIE? YES.
SO THAT'S A 75-FOOT SETBACK, AND IT'S HUGE.
[01:00:02]
DIDN'T GIVE US A LOT OF OPTIONS ON WHERE WE WERE GOING TO PUT IT.THE OTHER THING THAT I WILL NOTE IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY, YOU SEE WE KIND OF CURVE IT IN AND BRING IT IN.
WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP IT UP AS FAR AS WE CAN, BECAUSE ON THAT BOTTOM SIDE WHERE THE HAND IS, THAT WHOLE SIDE DROPS OFF SIGNIFICANTLY.
WE CAN LEAVE THE CONDITIONS ESSENTIALLY AS IS.
WE DON'T HAVE TO DISRUPT THAT AREA FURTHER, WHICH ALL FALLS INTO THAT TRIBUTARY.
SO THAT'S OUR OPPORTUNITY THAT WAS SITTING IN FRONT OF US.
I THINK, AS I SAID, WE DID WHAT PLANNING ASKED US TO DO.
IT'S ON ME FOR NOT BEING THERE TO EXPLAIN THE WINDOW WELL.
AND I HAD NOT SENT AN UPDATED PLAN TO MELANIE, SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONFUSION, WOULD 20 REALLY MEAN 15 WHEN WE PUT A WINDOW WELL IN.
I DID MEET MR. QUINLIVAN AT THAT PROPERTY, AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD FOR HIM HAD HE SPOKEN TO THE NEIGHBORS, BECAUSE THAT MEANT A GREAT DEAL TO ME, ESPECIALLY THE NEIGHBORS RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU SAID YOU ALWAYS TALKED TO THE NEIGHBORS, AND YOU HAD INDEED TALKED TO THEM, AND THAT THEY HAD AGREED THAT THE 20 FOOT WOULD BE AN ACCEPTABLE THING.
SO I APPRECIATE YOU DOING THAT.
AND THE NEW OWNERS TALKED TO THEM.
I THINK THAT'S SO IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE LIVING NEXT DOOR TO SOMEBODY.
YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE GOOD RELATIONS GOING.
AND I UNDERSTAND WITH THE TRIBUTARY, IT MAKES IT A DIFFICULTY.
AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU HAD POSITIONED THE HOUSE SO THAT YOU COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A VIEW OF THE LAKE AS WELL.
NOT THAT THAT'S THE ONLY REASON TO PUT IT THERE.
I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING ELSE THAT THE NEW OWNERS ARE DOING ON THE PROPERTY.
SO I THINK IT'LL BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? I WOULD SAY, AND I WAS AT THE PROPERTY AS WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT, YOU CAN'T PUT IT IN THERE WITHOUT VARIOUS REQUESTS.
THE ONE THING I DO LOOK AT THAT WITH THE POSITIONING OF THAT AND THE TRIBUTARY THERE, THERE WAS A DRIVEWAY COMING IN.
AND GIVEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBOR WANTED 20 FOOT.
BASED ON WHAT I SAW, LOOKING OVER THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND WATCHING THOSE VIDEOS THERE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY TOOK AWAY [INAUDIBLE] AND SO FORTH [INAUDIBLE] SETBACK AREAS.
WITHOUT THE [INAUDIBLE], CORRECT.
SO WITH THAT AND WITH PROPER SCREENING [INAUDIBLE] NOT TRYING TO DESIGN ANYTHING [INAUDIBLE] WITH THE NEIGHBOR [INAUDIBLE].
PLUS KEEPING THAT HISTORIC FARM, I MEAN IT'S IMPORTANT [INAUDIBLE].
[INAUDIBLE] I NEVER LIKE TO GIVE VARIANCES, BUT I UNDERSTAND [INAUDIBLE].
OTHER THOUGHTS? I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'M READY FOR DISCUSSION, BUT I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THE RETAINING WALLS THAT ARE PART OF THIS ARE NO LONGER PART OF THE DESIGN? THEY ARE.
WE JUST PULLED THEM WITHIN THE [INAUDIBLE].
SO IF YOU SEE THE ONE THAT TAILS OFF IN BETWEEN THE BARN AND THE HOUSE, WHEN WE ORIGINALLY HAD IT, IF YOU PUSH THAT FORWARD, IT GETS OUTSIDE THE ENVELOPE.
THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD HAVE NEEDED A CUP.
AND FRANKLY, IT PULLS THE HOUSE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AWAY FROM THE BARN, SO IT JUST MAKES THE GRADING AND STUFF IN THERE BETTER.
AND SO WE PULLED IT BACK TO WHERE YOU CAN JUST SEE [INAUDIBLE].
HOW LARGE A RETAINING WALL ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THERE? I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT SITS TODAY, BUT IT'S IN THE 30-INCH RANGE.
AND THE DRAINAGE AROUND THAT WILL GO AROUND THE BARN OR WILL THAT GO INTO THE BARN? YEAH, SO MOST OF EVERYTHING ON THIS SIDE ON THE-- I'LL CALL IT THE SOUTH SIDE.
IT'S PROBABLY IN THE-- IS THAT THE WEST? WEST WOULD BE THAT WAY.
[01:05:01]
SO ON THE SOUTH SIDE, IT DRAINS DOWN TO THE SOUTH.NOW, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THERE'S AN EXISTING SHED, AND THAT'S IN REALLY BAD SHAPE.
AND SO WE WOULD HAVE EVERYTHING FALL TO THE TRIBUTARY THAT WAY AS OPPOSED TO GOING WEST.
TOWARDS DICKEY LANE OR THE BARN.
THE FOUNDATION CAN'T BE CHANGED.
SO WE WANT TO KEEP IT AS DRY AS WE CAN IN THERE.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS THE FACT THAT THE EXISTING HOUSE IS AT 25 FOOT FROM THE SIDE YARD.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CONSIDERED MATCHING THAT, BRINGING IT DOWN TO 25 VERSUS 20.
DOES THAT GET TOO TIGHT WITH RESPECT TO THE DRAINAGE AND EVERYTHING ELSE? I THINK THE DRAINAGE WOULD BE-- IT'S THE ELEVATION BETWEEN THE BARN AND THE HOUSE AND HOW WE HAVE TO DO THE GRADING BETWEEN THEM.
YOU DON'T THINK IT WOULD WORK TO HAVE-- I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY TIGHT TO DO THAT.
AND IT JUST GIVES US SOME MORE BREATHING ROOM.
AND IT WON'T JUST BE FOR THE NEIGHBOR, BUT I THINK THEY WERE OK WITH THE 20.
AND SO IT JUST MADE IT EASIER FOR US.
IT MADE IT BE EASIER ON THE HOUSE.
AND BY THE WAY, WHEN WE DO CONSTRUCTION, WE HAVE TO GO AROUND THE HOUSE.
SO WE NEED ROOM BETWEEN THERE TO WORK ON THAT WESTERN SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
AND THIS JUST MADE IT EASIER FOR ALL OF IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WHILE WE STILL HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE? HOW MUCH OF THE REQUEST FOR VARIANCE? BECAUSE WHAT I'M SEEING AND READING IN PLANNING STAFF'S REPORT IS THAT THIS JUST DOESN'T MEET CRITERIA FOR VARIANCE.
THE BUILDING ENVELOPE IN YELLOW IS BIG ENOUGH TO BUILD A HOUSE, MAYBE NOT THE EXACT HOUSE THAT AN APPLICANT MAY WANT, BUT IT IS BIG ENOUGH, WHICH IS WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING HOW MUCH OF THE REQUEST FOR VARIANCE IS OUT OF CONVENIENCE OR WANTING TO KEEP CERTAIN VIEWS OR A CERTAIN LAYOUT VERSUS A NEED FOR THAT.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO DESIGN A HOUSE WITHIN THIS BUILDING ENVELOPE? WELL, IT'S CERTAINLY POSSIBLE WITHIN THE BUILDING ENVELOPE.
IT'S LIKE I SHARED WITH ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, I SAID I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE A HISTORICAL PRESERVATION IN ORNO, BUT IF WE DID, THAT BARN WOULD BE ON IT.
AND I APPRECIATE WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO WITH THAT.
AND WITH THE TRIBUTARY JUST MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO COMBINE BOTH OF THOSE THINGS TOGETHER AND STILL MAKE IT WORK AND SAVE EVERYTHING ELSE.
JUST KIND MADE IT EASIER TO DO THAT.
WHAT I GLEANED IN WATCHING BOTH OF THE PLANNING MEETINGS IS THAT PART OF THE ISSUE IS WANTING TO SEE THE BARN FROM THE ROAD.
THERE'S A VISIBILITY OR AN AESTHETIC, I GUESS I'D CALL IT.
IT'S MAYBE NOT SERVING A PRACTICAL FUNCTION, BUT BY BUILDING A LARGER HOME, WHICH THIS ONE WOULD BE, YOU MAY BE BLOCKING PART OF THAT BARN.
BUT THAT'S A CHOICE VERSUS A NEED.
YEAH, ACTUALLY, IT'S A PRETTY SMALL HOME.
YOU'RE TALKING 3,000 SQUARE FEET WITH A TWO STALL GARAGE.
IT'S ONE OF THE SMALLER SQUARE FOOTAGE HOMES THAT WE'VE DONE.
AND IT WAS THE HOMEOWNER'S DESIRE TO RETAIN WHERE PEOPLE COULD SEE THE BARN FROM THE ROAD, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A STAPLE IN THE COMMUNITY FOR SO LONG.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE, THAT LAST VIEW.
AND OF COURSE, IT'S OVERGROWN.
SO THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF CLEANUP IN THERE.
BUT THAT WAS A STRONG DESIRE TO KEEP THAT SO PEOPLE COULD SEE.
WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE INITIAL ASK OF A 30 FOOT? OR SORRY, A 10 FOOT SETBACK VARIANCE? WHY DID THE APPLICANT OR WHAT WAS THE DECISION TO GO FROM A 10 FOOT ASK TO WHAT IT IS NOW? WELL, PLANNING.
PLANNING CAME BACK AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH 10.
THE NEIGHBOR WASN'T COMFORTABLE WITH 10.
AND SO WE SAID, ALL RIGHT, WELL, LET'S GET TO THE 20 BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT THEY'VE GIVEN US.
[INAUDIBLE] THE FARTHEST I CAN GET AWAY FROM THE BARN, THE BETTER IT IS FOR THE INTEGRITY OF THE BARN.
AND SO THAT WAS OUR MOTIVATION TO GET AS FAR.
IF YOU GO THERE, YOU CAN SEE AS SOON AS YOU GET PAST THE BARN, YOU HAVE THE LAKE VIEW.
SO IF WE MOVE OVER 10 MORE FEET, YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A BETTER VIEW.
RIGHT BEHIND THE DUMPSTER, ALL THAT'S GOING TO BE CLEARED OUT.
THERE'S A BUNCH OF JUST-- THERE'S BUCKTHORN AND STUFF IN THERE.
SO FROM A VIEW PERSPECTIVE, IF YOU MOVE IT OVER 10 FEET, WE'RE NOT GETTING-- FROM 20 TO 10, SORRY.
YOU'RE NOT GETTING MORE AMAZING VIEWS.
NO, AND I WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE A SITE VISIT.
[01:10:01]
I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY.I GO BY THERE NEARLY EVERY DAY, SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR.
THE STRUGGLE I HAVE IS-- AND I DON'T RECALL THAT PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND IN FACT, THERE WAS, STAFF, MAYBE YOU CAN CLARIFY.
THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT FROM THE CHAIR ABOUT BRINGING IT BACK TO PLANNING WITH THE WINDOW, SINCE IT HAD BEEN LEFT OFF THE PLAN.
IS THAT NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE REQUIRED AT THIS POINT? THERE WAS A REQUEST OF COUNCIL TO BRING IT BACK TO PLANNING.
HE WAS JUST CLARIFYING THAT IF COUNCIL WANTED THEM TO WEIGH IN ON THE ISSUE BECAUSE OF THE CONFUSION THAT I HAD WITH IS THERE A WINDOW WELL OR NOT.
IT WASN'T MY TAKEAWAY IN WATCHING THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT ALL THE COMMISSIONERS WERE NECESSARILY IN FAVOR OF A 20 FOOT SETBACK.
SO MAYBE I HAD A DIFFERENT TAKEAWAY THAN OTHERS.
I WASN'T THERE, BUT I DID WATCH THE FULL VIDEO.
MY STRUGGLE WITH THIS IS THAT PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY ISN'T MET, AND THAT'S THE HIGH BAR THAT WE HOLD FOR VARIANCES.
BUT THE IDEA OF SAVING A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE, IT'S NOT AN HISTORIC LIST.
AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF A HOUSE CAN BE DESIGNED IN A WAY TO PRESERVE THE BARN, JUST LIKE ONE HAS IN THE PAST, THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE POSSIBLE.
AND I DO APPRECIATE WHAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT IT.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK THE PLANNING CHAIR, I WOULD AGREE WITH HIS ASSESSMENT, THAT WE'RE NOT JUST LOOKING TO SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE ON A 10 FOOT ASK TO A 30 FOOT REQUIREMENT IN THE MIDDLE.
SO I'D LEAN TOWARDS NOT SUPPORTING THIS, JUST BECAUSE I'M A STICKLER FOR THESE, AND I FEEL LIKE UNLESS THERE'S A VERY, VERY CLEAR NEED, THIS APPEARS TO BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE REDESIGNED TO STAY WITHIN THAT BUILDING ENVELOPE, WHICH IS WHAT OUR STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED.
YEAH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD ASK IS, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO SEND THIS BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION OR NOT? YOU CERTAINLY CAN.
I MEAN, I THINK-- WHAT WOULD YOU BE LOOKING FOR THEM? I MEAN, I THINK-- I DON'T KNOW A GUESS.
I DO THINK THERE WAS CONFUSION AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT THE WINDOW WELL IN PARTICULAR.
I TOO DIDN'T GET THE SENSE THAT IT WAS A, OH, IF YOU WERE 20 FEET AND THERE'S NO WINDOW WELL, WE'RE FINE WITH IT.
I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE MESSAGE.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR, THOUGH, WE WEREN'T SPLITTING THE DIFFERENCE.
WE WERE GIVEN GUIDANCE AND LOOKED AT OUR FIRST MEETING ON THIS TABLE TO COME BACK.
AND THE STAFF WILL TELL YOU, I WASN'T JUST SAYING WE WANT TO SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE [INAUDIBLE] AND WE WERE GIVING TO THAT.
I THINK, IF THAT'S THE CASE, AND IF THIS PROCESS WOULD BENEFIT FROM IF OUR PLANNING COMMISSION WAS GIVING DIRECTION AGAIN, SOMETIMES MY PERSPECTIVE, ANYWAY, IS THAT IN MY TIME UP HERE, WHEN VARIANCES COME BEFORE US, OFTENTIMES IT'S AN ASK THAT IS I CALL LARGE AND THEN WE WALK IT BACK FROM THERE.
SO I JUST WANT TO ENSURE THAT WHATEVER HAS HAPPENED HERE WITH THE PLANNING THAT THE COMMISSIONERS ARE ABLE TO GIVE A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS BETTER IN LINE WITH OUR CODE.
AND IF THEY APPROVE THIS VARIANCE AND FEEL THAT IT'S NECESSARY, TRULY NECESSARY, NOT WANTED BUT NEEDED IN ORDER TO BUILD ON THIS SITE, THEN LET'S HAVE THAT RECOMMENDATION.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, I JUST DON'T SEE IT.
OUR PLANNING COMMISSION DID HAVE QUESTIONS.
AND I DID RUN OUT TO THE PROPERTY EARLIER TODAY.
AND I WILL SAY THAT UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME OF THE HISTORY BEHIND THE BARN NOW THAT YOU EXPLAINED AND THE TRIBUTARY AND KNOWING THAT THERE'S A WINDOW, A BUILDING ENVELOPE, WHATEVER IT'S CALLED HERE.
THE ONE THING THAT I DID LIKE ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION WAS SOME OF THE LARGE TREES THAT WOULDN'T BE AFFECTED IF THIS HOUSE ACTUALLY HAD TO MOVE 10 MORE FEET IN TOWARDS THE BARN.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME DEAD TREES AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE GOING TO GET CLEANED UP THERE.
BUT I THINK IT WAS A BIG ELM OR BIG OAK THAT WAS THERE THAT WOULD REMAIN WITH THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION.
SO THAT TO ME, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT KICKED BACK, BECAUSE I'D LOVE TO HAVE OUR PLANNING COMMISSION WEIGH IN WITH MAYBE THE UPDATED PRINTS, AND HAVE YOU BE ABLE TO AT LEAST COMMENT IF YOU WERE ABLE TO GO BACK IN.
THAT'S WHERE I'M AT WITH THAT.
WHAT THAT DOES TO THE TIMELINE? TIMELINE, THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION.
ARE WE RUNNING UP AGAINST A DEADLINE? I EXTENDED THE TIMELINE UNTIL AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS.
THAT WOULD GIVE TIME TO GO BACK BEFORE PLANNING
[01:15:04]
AND THEN COME BACK TO OUR SECOND MEETING IN NOVEMBER.WE COULD BE BACK HERE AGAIN IN TWO WEEKS TO TALK ABOUT IT.
I JUST DON'T THINK WE GOT CLEAR DIRECTION.
[INAUDIBLE] ANSWERING QUESTION.
BY THE WAY, I LOVE OLD BARNS, AND I LOVE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAVE THIS THING, PARTICULARLY WITH THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF IT.
AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HELP YOU DO THAT.
I MEAN, THIS IS RIGHT OUTSIDE MY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I WAS VERY CONCERNED WHEN SOMEBODY [INAUDIBLE] THIS PROPERTY, THAT-- THE BARN WOULD GO, YEAH.
THE OUTHOUSE IS ONE THING, BUT THE BARN.
SO I THINK WE JUST NEED A MOTION AND PROCESS TO [INAUDIBLE].
DOES ANYBODY CARE TO MAKE THAT MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SEND-- WHAT DO WE-- TABLE OR SEND IT BACK? SEND THE APPLICATION BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR MEETING ON WHAT DATE MELANIE? OCTOBER 19.
SORRY FOR THE HOLD UP ON THIS, BUT I THINK-- YEAH, SO THAT WOULD BE THE MOTION TO SEND THE APPLICATION BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN NOVEMBER 19.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AGAIN, SORRY FOR THE DELAY HERE, BUT WE WANT TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION.
AMENDED FEE SCHEDULE, ITEM 19.
[19) Amend 2026 Fee Schedule - Ordinance 322]
I BELIEVE THAT IS MR. EDWARDS.MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A GARAGE CONDO COMPLEX BEING BUILT IN OUR CITY.
IN ANTICIPATION OF THAT NEW FACILITY, LAST YEAR, AS WE WERE PREPARING OUR FEE SCHEDULE IN ORDER TO CONTEMPLATE HOW WE WOULD CHARGE UTILITY FEES TO THAT, WE DEVELOPED A GARAGE CONDO FEE.
TO DO THAT, STAFF TOOK OUR EXISTING FEE STRUCTURES FROM OUR COMMERCIAL AND OUR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND MERGED THEM.
THOSE FEES HAVE NOW BEEN APPLIED IN SEVERAL INSTANCES TO CONDOS.
WE DID RECEIVE SOME FEEDBACK FROM CONDO OWNERS AS WELL AS THE DEVELOPER WITH SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THOSE FEES.
SO STAFF DID GO THROUGH AND RELOOK THOSE FEES.
WE DID FIND ONE ITEM THAT WE DO AND CAN RECOMMEND ALTERING, WHICH IS IN THE SANITARY SEWER PORTION OF THE FEE SCHEDULE.
THERE IS A MINIMUM OF $75.41 THAT WAS IN THERE.
AND THAT WAS A DIRECT COPY FROM OUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AND THAT EXISTS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO TAKE ACCOUNT FOR PROPERTIES THAT ARE CONNECTED TO SEWER BUT ARE NOT CONNECTED TO WATER [INAUDIBLE].
SO IN THE CASE OF THE CAR CONDOS, EVERY UNIT HAS A WATER METER.
AND SO HAVING THAT MINIMUM DOESN'T REALLY MAKE MUCH SENSE THERE SINCE THEY WON'T HAVE A METER INSTALLED WHICH TO USE TO MAKE THEIR [INAUDIBLE].
ADAM, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THE METERS, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THEY SAID THEY WANTED A METER FOR EACH CONDO, RIGHT? BUT ARE THEY ALL SEPARATE OR ARE PEOPLE PURCHASING TWO AND COMBINING THEM, OR IS IT STRICTLY-- SO EACH UNIT, WHEN IT GETS PLATTED, EACH UNIT WILL HAVE ITS OWN.
SO EACH BUILDING IS ITS OWN PLAT ON ITS OWN, AND THE BUILDING THEN DICTATES HOW MANY UNITS-- THAT PLAT DICTATES HOW MANY UNITS ARE IN EACH BUILDING.
SO THAT'S HOW MANY METERS WILL GO.
SO EACH INDIVIDUAL UNIT WILL HAVE A METER.
AND THAT'S DICTATED AT TIME OF PLATTING.
IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PURCHASE MULTIPLE UNITS, THEY WILL THEN HAVE MULTIPLE WATER BILLS, AND EACH UNIT IS STILL INDIVIDUAL METERED.
IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE THAT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A COMBINATION PROCESS TO THEN COMBINE IT, AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO SOME DEGREE, AMEND THE UTILITIES TO SOME DEGREE.
SO THERE'S A PROCESS TO DO THAT.
[01:20:01]
BUT AT THIS POINT, EACH INDIVIDUAL UNIT IS METERED.AND IF THEY WANT TO BUY MULTIPLE, THEY WOULD THEN HAVE MULTIPLE WATER [INAUDIBLE].
[INAUDIBLE] BEFORE THE PRESENTATION? YEAH.
AS A MATTER OF PRACTICALITY, OBVIOUSLY, THAT'LL SAY, TWO UNITS INTO ONE THING? THERE'S ONLY ONE OF THOSE WATER METERS THAT THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO CONNECT INTO TO [INAUDIBLE].
SO THAT WOULD JUST BE [INAUDIBLE]? I WAS JUST WONDERING HOW THAT WORKS.
AND AS I UNDERSTAND, THE SEPARATE WATER METERS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS REQUESTED BY THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROJECT.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, I BELIEVE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE DEVELOPMENT, IT WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW MUCH THE HOA WANTED TO MANAGE VERSUS HOW MUCH THEY DIDN'T WANT TO MANAGE.
AND ONE OF THE DISCUSSION POINTS WAS TO HAVE EACH UNIT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN UTILITIES, THEIR OWN WATER.
AND SO THEN THROUGH THE DISCUSSION OF OUR TEXT AMENDMENT, WHEN WE AMENDED GARAGE CONDOS AS A USE, IT WAS LISTED IN THERE AS A CONDITION THAT EACH UNIT BE INDIVIDUALLY METERED.
AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT CAME THROUGH AFTER THAT MEETING THOSE CONDITIONS.
SO WE WOULD BE ELIMINATING THE MINIMUM SEWER FEE, BUT THERE WOULD STILL BE, WHETHER THEY HOOK UP TO WATER OR NOT, THERE WOULD BE A $18.70 PER MONTH CHARGE FOR WATER AND $7.54 FOR SEWER.
25, ESSENTIALLY 20-- PLUS WHATEVER-- PLUS USAGE.
BUT IF THEY DIDN'T HOOK UP ANYTHING, THEY'D STILL BE PAYING REGARDLESS.
AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH HOW [INAUDIBLE].
BASE RATE OR A READY TO SERVE RATE, WHICH IS KIND OF YOUR BUY IN TO THE SYSTEM.
AND THEN THERE'S THE RATE OR THE RATE THAT IS BASED ON YOUR USAGE.
OUR CITY HADN'T DONE THIS IN THE PAST.
THIS IS THE FIRST GARAGE CONDO AND WE AMENDED OUR CODE ESSENTIALLY TO ALLOW IT.
IT MAKES ME WONDER WHETHER OR NOT PROSPECTIVE OWNERS HAVE BEEN ASKED THOSE TYPES OF QUESTIONS WHEN YOU GET INVOLVED IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS, BECAUSE DETAILS MATTER.
I'M SURE IT'S BEEN-- I KNOW, BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN THE EMAILS.
IT'S BEEN AN AWAKENING FOR SOME PEOPLE ABOUT THE CHARGES, WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE.
SO IT'S GOOD TO HAVE CLARITY ON THIS.
MOTION TO APPROVE CHANGES TO GARAGE CONDOMINIUM SEWER AND WATER SERVICE RATES EFFECTIVE FOR THE OCTOBER 2026 UTILITY BILLING.
THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECONDED.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR [INAUDIBLE] END OF THIS AND RESPONDING TO THE FEEDBACK WE WERE RECEIVING.
I THINK WE NEED A SECOND MOTION ON THAT ONE FOR A DIFFERENT ITEM.
THERE WERE TWO MOTIONS REQUIRED.
THERE'S A SUMMARY ORDINANCE AS WELL THAT WE NEED.
MOTION TO APPROVE SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 322 AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT C.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 20.
[20) Water Softening Options - South Water Treatment Plant]
YEAH, HI.SO YOU HAVE THREE ITEMS WITH PUBLIC WORKS TONIGHT.
THE FIRST IS THE LONGEST OF THE THREE.
I HAVE ABOUT 11 SLIDES TO WALK THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THE SALT WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND THE HISTORY OF THE WATER SOFTENING.
SO YOU STILL HAVE IT OPEN? I HAVE IT OPEN.
IS THAT OK? [LAUGHTER] SO THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT, THE SALT WATER TREATMENT PLANT IN ORONO WAS BUILT IN 1970, AND IT WENT LIVE IN 1971.
AND THAT'S WHEN THE WATER TOWER WAS CONSTRUCTED TOO AT THE SAME TIME.
AT THAT TIME, THE HARDNESS WAS MEASURED.
AND I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT WHAT THAT ACTUALLY MEANS, BUT IT WAS MEASURED AT 24 GRAINS, CALL IT.
AND HERE WE ARE DECADES LATER, AND IT'S STILL AT ABOUT 24 GRAINS HARDNESS.
AND HISTORICAL PUMPING RECORDS.
USED ABOUT 125,000 GALLONS PER DAY.
AND THE PLANT WAS DESIGNED TO PRODUCE SOFT WATER AT FOUR GRAINS.
AND THAT WAS A RESIDENTIAL TARGET THEN.
[01:25:02]
I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE POPULATION WAS OF THE USERS AT THE TIME, BUT IT'S PROBABLY IN THE REALM OF 500 TO 1,000 PEOPLE.AND WHEN THE NEW WATER PLANT WENT INTO EFFECT, THE RESIDENTS THAT WERE ALREADY THERE HAD PRIVATE WELLS, AND SO THERE'S PROBABLY A PROGRAM TO PHASE OUT THOSE PRIVATE WELLS.
AND I DON'T REALLY KNOW THAT PROGRAM, BUT THE VAST, VAST MAJORITY OF THEM HAVE BEEN PHASED OUT.
SO THAT WATER PLANT SERVED ITS USE UNTIL CALL IT ROUGHLY 25 YEARS IN 1995.
THERE WAS A DESIGN REPORT THAT WAS COMMISSIONED TO LOOK AT THE NEXT CHAPTER OF THAT PLANT AND SET US UP FOR THE NEXT WAVE.
AND I JUST WANTED TO CALL OUT SOME DATA POINTS.
IN 1995, THEY WENT BACK, AND THEY LOOKED AT PAST USAGE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GALLONS PER DAY HAS VARIED OVER THE YEARS.
AND I PUT A BULLET IN THERE FOR CONTEXT.
ON AN AVERAGE DAY, IF YOU TAKE THE WHOLE USE OF THE WHOLE YEAR DIVIDED BY 365.
NOW, WE HAVE HAD SOME WATER EFFICIENCIES OVER THE YEARS, BUT WE'VE ALSO HAD POPULATION GROWTH.
BUT IN GENERAL, IT'S REMAINED FAIRLY CONSTANT.
WHAT A HUMAN BEING USES IN WATER EACH DAY, THAT HAS REMAINED FAIRLY CONSTANT.
THIS AREA HAS NOT SEEN EXPLOSIVE POPULATION GROWTH.
SO AT THAT SAME 1995 DESIGN REPORT, THE ENGINEERING STUDY RECOMMENDED SEVERAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SOFTENING SYSTEM AT THAT TIME.
AND THERE WAS ABOUT-- IT WAS ABOUT A $700,000 PROJECT THAT HAD TO HAVE MULTIPLE PHASES BUILT OUT, AND ABOUT 120,000 OF THAT WENT TOWARDS JUST THE SOFTENING SYSTEM AT THAT TIME.
THE WORK WAS COMPLETED OVER THE LATE '90S.
AND THE TANKS THAT ARE IN THERE NOW WERE RECOMMISSIONED IN '96.
SO THEY DID SOME SET UP PROJECTS TO GET THERE.
THIS IS A SCHEMATIC THAT YOU'LL SEE, I HOPE YOU CAN SEE IT, OF OUR PLANTS.
SO WE HAVE TWO WELLS AND EACH HAVE THEIR PUMP AND GOES TO AN AERATION CHAMBER.
AND THEN THERE ARE TWO HIGH SERVICE PUMPS, PUMP ONE AND PUMP TWO.
AND THAT'S THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
BUT THOSE TWO PUMPS WILL-- ONE OF THEM WILL RUN AT A TIME.
THEY'LL PUSH THE WATER THROUGH THE SOFTENERS AND UP INTO THE TOP.
AND ONE OF OUR SOFTENERS FAILED IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR, AND WE DIDN'T QUITE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANT.
WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE WAS RESIN ALL OVER THE FLOOR AND WE HAD TO DO A LOT OF INVESTIGATION.
AND WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING OF WHAT THE FUTURE OF THIS PLANT AND WHAT SOFTENING MEANS FOR THE CITY OF ORONO.
SO I'LL REFER BACK TO THAT SCHEMATIC.
AS YOU LOOK AT THIS, IT'S THE TANK TO THE LEFT THAT HAS FAILED.
SEVEN FOOT DIAMETER TANKS, LARGE TANKS.
THEY HAVE THE SOFTENING MEDIA INSIDE, JUST LIKE A HOME SOFTENER WOULD HAVE.
AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND A TON OF TIME ON THIS, BUT THEY REGENERATE INDEPENDENTLY.
SO AS THE MEDIA GETS FILLED WITH THE HARD WATER AND USED UP, THEN THERE'S A REGENERATION CYCLE.
AND SO WHEN I REFER TO HARDNESS AND SOFTENING TREATMENT, IT'S KIND OF A SCALE, BECAUSE THE SOFTEST WATER COMES OUT RIGHT AFTER THAT REGENERATION, AND THEN IT SLOWLY BUILDS UP AND THEN IT REGENERATES AND THEN IT'S SOFTER.
AND BECAUSE THEY SOFTEN INDEPENDENTLY, AND WE DON'T WANT THEM TO REGENERATE AT THE SAME TIME, BECAUSE THEY REGENERATE INDEPENDENTLY, OUR SOFTENING OUTPUT IS A RANGE FROM 8 TO 14 CURRENTLY.
AND IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT THE LAST FEW YEARS.
LIKE I SAID, ORIGINALLY, THE PLANT WAS DESIGNED TO OUTPUT WATER AT A GRAIN OF FOUR, BUT I THINK THAT'S JUST KIND OF BEEN PROVEN TO BE UNREALISTIC OVER THE YEARS.
WHAT IS A TYPICAL HOME WATER SOFTENER? EXCUSE ME.
A TYPICAL HOME, USUALLY A RESIDENTIAL TARGET, IS TWO TO FIVE.
AND SO THE TANKS WERE REFURBISHED AS PART OF THAT 1998 PROJECT.
AND THEN THEY REPLACED THE MEDIA AND THEN
[01:30:01]
THEY REPLACE THE MEDIA AGAIN IN 2014.THERE'S BEEN DIFFERENT PROJECTS OVER THE YEARS THAT HAVE REPLACED THE DIFFERENT VALVING, THE DIFFERENT ASSOCIATED NUMBERS.
WE CURRENTLY SOFTEN-- I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
WE ARE NOT ALONE IN HARD WATER.
MOST OF THE GROUNDWATER IN MINNESOTA IS CONSIDERED HARD.
I'M FROM WISCONSIN, AND WE HAVE HARD WATER IN WISCONSIN AS WELL.
YOU DON'T WANT YOUR WATER TOO SOFT, BECAUSE IT CAN BE KIND OF CORROSIVE ON THAT END TOO, BECAUSE IT'S LOOKING TO REACT WITH SOMETHING.
SO AS YOU ASKED THERE, TWO TO FIVE GRAINS IS THE COMMON RESIDENTIAL TARGET.
THERE'S NOT REALLY A SET DEFINITION OF WHAT IS HARD WATER.
HARDNESS IS KIND OF AN AESTHETIC.
BUT GENERALLY, OVER SEVEN IS CONSIDERED HARD COLLOQUIALLY.
AND THEN OVER 10 IS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, VERY HARD.
WE MEASURED OUR RAW SOURCE AGAIN JUST LAST FRIDAY.
SO THE MINERALS IN THE GROUND HAVE NOT CHANGED.
SO AS I SAID, WE'RE NOT UNIQUE THAT WE HAVE HARD WATER.
WE ARE UNIQUE THAT WE SOFTEN ON A MUNICIPAL STANDARD.
AS FAR AS THE RESEARCH THAT WE COULD DO, THERE'S MAYBE TWO OR THREE IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA THAT MUNICIPALLY SOFTEN.
AND THOSE WOULD BE SMALLER SYSTEMS AS WELL.
AND THERE MAY BE SYSTEMS SUCH AS, WELL, I KNOW THAT THERE'S SYSTEMS THAT ARE NOT PERMANENT MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS. SO YOU MAY HAVE CAMPGROUNDS OR TRAILER PARKS OR MOBILE HOME VILLAGES THAT HAVE ONE LARGE COMMERCIAL SOFTENER.
BUT THOSE ARE NOT GOVERNED TO THE SAME MUNICIPAL STANDARDS AS THE CITY IS.
SO BECAUSE OF THE WATER BEING HARD, THE GROUNDWATER, YOU CAN EITHER HAVE THE MUNICIPAL SOFTENING THAT WE DO OR YOU CAN HAVE THE POINT OF USE SOFTENING AT THE HOUSEHOLD OR FACILITY BUSINESS LEVEL.
THE MOST COMMON OF THOSE YOU MAY HAVE THEM IN YOUR HOME.
I LIVE IN SHOREWOOD ACROSS THE LAKE.
AND THEY'RE ARE ABOUT $1,000 TO $2,500 TO INSTALL.
AND YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH THE SALT.
AND THAT IS THE MEDIA THAT IS USED TO CLEAN OUT THE FILTER AND EXCHANGE THOSE IONS.
SO IT DOES PRODUCE SALTY WATER WHEN THE SOFTENER REGENERATES.
A RESIDENCE CAN BUY A SOFTENER.
YOU CAN LOAD YOUR OWN SALT. YOU CAN PAY FOR SALT.
BUT THERE'S A MAINTENANCE COMPONENT.
THERE IS ALSO REVERSE OSMOSIS, WHICH IS A LOT LESS POPULAR ON A HOUSEHOLD LEVEL.
BUT ONCE YOU GET INTO LARGER FACILITIES, MAYBE SOME OF LARGER COMMERCIAL FACILITIES OR MANUFACTURING FACILITIES WOULD HAVE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER.
AND THAT IS BASICALLY A PRESSURIZED-- SO THINK OF AN ESPRESSO MACHINE, A PRESSURIZED FILTERING AND GETTING THE HARDNESS.
SO EMERGING ON A HOUSEHOLD LEVEL BUT JUST EXPENSIVE AND IT HAS ITS OWN CHALLENGES.
OR THERE COULD BE A NO POINT OF USE OPTION.
THERE'S CERTAINLY HOUSEHOLDS AND THERE'S HOUSEHOLDS ACROSS OTHER PARTS OF THE US THAT HAVE HARD WATER THAT JUST SOFTENING IS JUST NOT AS COMMON ON A POINT OF VIEW.
SO USUALLY EVEN HERE, WHAT WE DRINK, WE PREFER TO DRINK HARD WATER BECAUSE IT HAS THAT MINERAL TASTE.
BUT TO SEND HARD WATER THROUGH YOUR BATHROOM FIXTURES, YOU MAY NOTICE SOME SCALING.
BUT IT'S NOT A DAMAGE TO ANYTHING.
AND BECAUSE HARDNESS IS NOT-- HARDNESS IS AN AESTHETIC, IT'S NOT MONITORED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.
WE TEST FOR IT BECAUSE WE SOFTEN.
BUT THEY DON'T REQUIRE I THINK WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THEN.
SO WE SENT OUT A SURVEY TO OUR CALL IT ROUGHLY 800 USERS ON OUR SALT WATER SYSTEM.
AND IT WAS A ONE QUESTION SURVEY AND IT SAID, DO YOU HAVE A SOFTENER?
[01:35:01]
AND WE JUST WANTED TO KNOW.AND SO YOU CAN SEE THE MAJORITY DOES.
A LITTLE BIT SURPRISED THAT ROUGHLY SPLIT.
AND FOR JUST SIMPLE MATH, WE CAN SAY ROUGHLY 800 USERS, ROUGHLY HALF OF THEM HAVE SOFTENERS.
AND WE USED THAT DATA LITTLE BIT AND WE KIND OF THOUGHT ABOUT OUR NEXT STEPS.
AND WE'RE HERE TONIGHT PRESENTING BASICALLY THE TWO BROAD FORKS IN THE ROAD.
AND I'M CALLING THEM OPTION A AND OPTION B.
OPTION A IS TO BASICALLY CONTINUE TO DO WHAT THE CITY HAS DONE SINCE 1971 AND CONTINUE TO SOFTEN THE WATER ON A MUNICIPAL LEVEL AND SEND THAT OUT TO OUR RESIDENCES AND OUR DOWNSTREAM USERS.
BUT IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE NEED TO CONSIDER WHAT THAT MEANS FINANCIALLY AND OPERATIONALLY.
SO FINANCIALLY, WE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE, OR SORRY, NOT REPLACE, REHAB THE TANK THAT IS CURRENTLY FAILED.
AND NOW THAT WE KNOW THAT ONE HAS FAILED AND IT'S AT THE END OF ITS LIFE, WE WOULD WANT TO GO AND REHAB TANK TWO AND TANK THREE THAT ARE NEXT TO IT.
AND WE WOULD CONTINUE TO USE SALT. AND RIGHT NOW, WE BUDGET ABOUT $40,000 IN SALT PER YEAR.
THE PRICE OF SALT FLUCTUATES AND OUR WATER USE FLUCTUATES, SO IT'S NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE, BUT YOU CAN SEE SOME PAST YEARS.
SO YEAR TO DATE, OR AT LEAST TO AUGUST, IT'S THE LAST TIME WE WERE BILLED, WE'LL PROBABLY BE CLOSE TO THAT $40,000 AMOUNT HERE.
AND WE HAVE THE TECHNICAL KNOW HOW.
OUR STAFF IS TRAINED ON RUNNING THESE SOFTENERS.
IT'S JUST THAT THEY'RE AT THE END OF THEIR LIFE.
THE OTHER MAJOR FORK IN THE ROAD IS DO WE LOOK TO DISCONTINUE SOFTENING? AND WHAT WE WOULD DO, WHAT THIS COULD LOOK LIKE, WE WOULD HAVE SOME EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT, OF COURSE, AND THAT WOULD BE TO ADVISE OUR USERS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS.
SO THERE COULD BE AN EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN.
THERE COULD ALSO BE A FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IF WE WANTED TO ASSIST USERS ON PURCHASING SOFTENERS IF THEY CHOOSE TO FOR THEIR HOMES.
WE WOULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF UP FRONT COST.
WE HAVE A QUOTE FOR $52,000 OF SOME UPFRONT COSTS TO PERMANENTLY BYPASS THE SOFTENERS.
AND THEN WE WOULD JUST TURN THEM OFF AND WE WOULD PUT THEM IN A PROTECTIVE STATE, BUT WE WOULDN'T REMOVE THEM FROM THE BUILDING.
AND ONE THING THAT WOULD CHANGE-- AND WE COULD DO THAT BYPASS IN THE SHORT TERM IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.
ONE THING THAT WOULD CHANGE AS SOON AS THAT BYPASS WOULD BE INSTALLED IS THAT WE WOULD NO LONGER NEED TO BUY SALT.
SO THE SALT, THE ROUGHLY $40,000 A YEAR, WOULD JUST END.
WE PAY FOR THAT NOW OUT OF OUR OPERATIONS FUNDING.
SO WE COULD PROJECT THE BEST USE FOR THOSE FUNDS.
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WOULD REQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL TESTING, BECAUSE IT'S A CHANGE TO OUR SYSTEM.
SO THEY SAID, LOOK, WE DON'T REALLY CARE IF YOU SOFTEN OR NOT, BUT SINCE YOU DO AND YOU'RE LOOKING TO CHANGE, WE NEED ADDITIONAL TESTING.
AND THAT WOULD ALSO BE TRUE IF WE EVER DECIDE TO SOFTEN AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.
THEY JUST WANT SOME ADDITIONAL TESTING.
THAT'S A RESIDENTIAL SAMPLING PROGRAM THAT WE ALREADY HAVE TO DO.
AND THEN AT SOME POINT, IF WE CHOOSE TO DO THE EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN, THE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, AT SOME POINT, WE WOULD PUT A SUNSET ON THAT PROGRAM.
AND SO THOSE ARE THE TWO MAJOR FORKS IN THE ROAD.
YOU CAN SEE OUR SYSTEM SIZE HAS GROWN HORIZONTALLY.
OUR POPULATION GROWTH, WE'VE BECOME DENSER.
BUT FAMILIES PER RESIDENTS ARE SMALLER.
WE'VE GROWN A LITTLE BIT IN POPULATION.
AND WE HAVE ABOUT A 60-YEAR-OLD PLANT AND WE'RE JUST TRYING
[01:40:03]
TO SET UP THE NEXT CHAPTER OF THAT PLANT.SO WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO SEEK DIRECTION FROM YOU.
AND AS WE PLAN FOR OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WE ARE PLANNING AND WHAT WE PRESENTED IN OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WE ARE TRYING TO BUDGET FOR THE MOST EXPENSIVE OF THE TWO OPTIONS, AND THAT IS THE CONTINUING OF THE SOFTENING.
AND SO IF YOU CHOOSE TO CONTINUE OR HAVE THAT DISCUSSION ABOUT CONTINUING, IT'S A DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE HISTORICAL PRACTICE OF WHAT WE'VE DONE VERSUS THE FUTURE CAPITAL COSTS AND THE FUTURE OF THE PROGRAM.
AND THEN WITH AN EYE WE'RE TWO YEARS INTO A FIVE YEAR RATE STUDY CYCLE.
SO WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT RATES AGAIN IN ABOUT THREE YEARS.
IF WE CHOOSE A PATH TO DISCONTINUE SOFTENING, WE COULD-- OBVIOUSLY I TALKED ABOUT THE EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN.
I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE DONE ON A STAFF LEVEL.
THAT WOULD BE SOCIAL MEDIA PRESENTATIONS, OPEN HOUSES, PUBLIC MEETINGS, LETTERS TO OUR USERS.
AND WE CAN THINK ABOUT A FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN BASICALLY A $40,000 SALT YEAR, IF YOU WILL.
AND WE COULD PROPOSE HOW MANY SALT YEARS WOULD WE WANT TO SET ASIDE FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.
AND THAT COULD GO FOR HOWEVER TERM LENGTH.
SO THOSE ARE THE BROAD OF CONSIDERATIONS.
AND YEAH, I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE? NO QUESTIONS, BUT I HAVE A LOT OF OPINIONS ON THAT.
THAT WAS VERY, VERY HELPFUL PRESENTATION.
AND I ACTUALLY DID SOME OF MY OWN RESEARCH AS WELL, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S INTERESTING.
AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID, THAT MUNICIPALITIES DON'T TYPICALLY DO THIS, BECAUSE IT'S NOT REQUIRED FOR SAFETY AND BECAUSE IT IS AN AESTHETIC, IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT, A PREFERENCE ISSUE.
SO WHY AND HOW IT CAME ABOUT, WE DON'T KNOW.
BUT MY PERSPECTIVE IS BY CONTINUING WITH THIS, WE ARE AFFIRMING THAT THE DECISION THAT WAS MADE ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO IS THE RIGHT ONE GOING FORWARD, WHICH I-- 50 YEARS AGO.
AND THAT'S WHERE I CAN'T MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT IT'S THE RIGHT DECISION TO CONTINUE TO GO IN.
AND I HAVE A LOT OF SENSITIVITY.
I KNOW WE GOT AT LEAST ONE COMMENT FROM A RESIDENT WHO DOES BENEFIT FROM THE SOFTENING, ESSENTIALLY SAYING, WELL, I GOT RID OF A WATER SOFTENER BECAUSE THE CITY STARTED SOFTENING, AND NOW MAYBE I'M BEING TOLD TO REVERSE THAT.
TO THAT, I'D SAY, NO CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO BURDEN RESIDENTS.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, THE EVOLUTION OF HOW WE DO THINGS IS SOMETHING THAT CHANGES THROUGH TIME WHEN WE KNOW BETTER.
SOMETHING THAT I FOUND VERY INTERESTING IS THAT MPCA, MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY, PUT OUT AN ARTICLE JUST IN OCTOBER, JUST TWO YEARS AGO, OCTOBER 2024.
I'LL SEND IT TO YOU, TO STAFF.
THAT THE CITY OF MARSHALL, WHICH IS 14,000, JUST A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN ORONO, GOT GRANT MONEY FOR THIS VERY THING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, REDUCING CHLORIDE GOING INTO-- THEY HAD A BIG LOADING IN THEIR LAKE SYSTEMS OR THEIR TRIBUTARIES.
AND THEY WORKED WITH BOLTON AND MENK, ACTUALLY, AND THEY DID DO A REBATE PROGRAM.
AND IT TOOK-- WHERE DID IT SAY? THE FIGURE WAS 160 TONS OF SALT PREVENTED FROM ENTERING THE REDWOOD RIVER IN MARSHALL IN ONE YEAR.
AND HOMEOWNERS AND BUSINESSES ALIKE WERE PART OF THAT PROGRAM.
SO LONG WAY OF SAYING THAT I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT BYPASSING IS THE WAY TO GO, NOT INVESTING IN MORE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT LESS AND LESS RESIDENTS THROUGH TIME ARE UTILIZING.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO GO ABOUT THINGS FOR ANOTHER 30, 50 YEARS TO BURDEN ALL HOMEOWNERS, TAXPAYERS WITH A SPEND LIKE THIS, WHEN PEOPLE CAN MAKE INDIVIDUAL DECISIONS, AND MAYBE SOME PEOPLE WOULD DECIDE THEY DON'T CARE TO SOFTEN THEIR WATER.
SO FOR ME, BASED ON THE RESEARCH I'VE DONE AND EVERYTHING ELSE, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S INCENTIVES AND WAYS ALSO THAT WE CAN EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT USING LESS AND HIGH EFFICIENCY SOFTENERS, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SUPPORT HERE.
OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? QUESTION FOR YOU, BRENNAN.
WHAT'S THE HARDNESS OF THE WATER, OUR OTHER WATER FACILITY? IS IT THE SAME? IT'S THE SAME.
I MEANT TO SAY IT IT'S ALSO ABOUT 24 GRAINS.
AND THERE'S NO SOFTENING CURRENTLY AND NOBODY COMPLAINS ABOUT HOW HARD THE WATER IS.
[01:45:04]
IT'S A NEWER SYSTEM, AND I ASSUME THAT JUST SOFTENERS WERE KIND OF PHASED IN RESIDENTIALLY AS IT WAS BUILT OUT.I'VE ASKED SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE IN THAT WATER AREA ABOUT THIS ISSUE, AND THEY DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE [INAUDIBLE].
A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE REALIZED, PARTICULARY AT [INAUDIBLE], THAT YOU CAN HAVE [INAUDIBLE] WATER THAT WE'RE SENDING THEM AND IT'S NOT MEETING THAT [INAUDIBLE].
THEY DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE SOFTENING AT ALL, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MATTER.
IT'S STILL NOT COMING TO THEM AS SOFT.
SO THEY'RE APPLYING SOFTENERS AND OTHER THINGS.
AND A LOT OF RESIDENTS HAVE WELL.
TO ME, I WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT DISCONTINUING THE WATER SOFTENING.
BUT LET'S BE GENEROUS WITH CONSUMERS TO GIVE THEM REBATES TO BUY A WATER SOFTENER.
SO YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE 80,000? YEAH, WELL, I THINK SO.
I MEAN, LOOK AT HOW MUCH WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY JUST TO FIX THESE AGAIN.
I'D LIKE TO SEE OUR WATER RATES GET A BREAK.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE OUR WATER RATES GET A BREAK.
SO THIS WOULD HOPEFULLY [INAUDIBLE].
BUT IF WE DID A COUPLE HUNDRED DOLLARS PER PERSON [INAUDIBLE].
IF WE GENERALLY SAY THAT THERE'S 800 USERS AND GENERALLY IF THERE'S HALF THAT COULD ASK FOR SOFTENER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE, THAT'D BE 400.
SO IF THEY ALL ASKED, IF WE SET ASIDE 40,000, THAT'D BE $100 PER ASK.
AND THEN IF WE DID TWO SOLID YEARS, THEN WE-- YEAH, I'D PREFER TO BE MORE GENEROUS THAN THAT.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD ASK STAFF TO LOOK INTO, OR DO WE NEED TO DECIDE THAT TONIGHT? I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO DECIDE A NUMBER.
WHAT WE'D BE LOOKING FOR FROM YOU IS JUST A MOTION OR DIRECTION.
WE WILL THEN TAKE THAT DIRECTION, COME BACK TO YOU WITH A PLAN, BECAUSE WE'LL NEED TO BRING FORWARD TO YOU ANYWAY.
SO IF WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH NON-SOFTENING, WE NEED TO BRING COUNCIL ACTION TO DO THE BYPASS.
AND WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING SOMETHING FORWARD FOR A REBATE PROGRAM ANYWAY.
SO THAT'S THE GUIDANCE SO THAT-- WE JUST-- A MOTION TO DIRECT US TO DO THAT, AND WE CAN JUST [INAUDIBLE].
ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE THAT MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO PUT TOGETHER A RESOLUTION DISCONTINUING SALT SOFTENING WITH THE SALT WATER TREATMENT PLANT, AS WELL AS PUTTING TOGETHER A POTENTIAL PLAN FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.
OK WITH THAT AND YOU'RE OK WITH THE SECOND? I AM OK WITH THE SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
NOW WE MOVE ON TO PUMP NUMBER TWO.
[21) Replace - South Water Treatment Plant High Service Pump #2]
YES, HIGH SERVICE PUMPS.SO YOU SAW IT IN THE SCHEMATIC OF THE PLANT.
AND THESE HIGH SERVICE PUMPS, SIMILAR HISTORY.
WERE INSTALLED ORIGINALLY IN THE 1970 BUILD OUT.
THEY WERE RECOMMENDED TO BE UPSIZED IN THE '95 STUDY.
THEY WERE UPSIZED AND INSTALLED IN 1998.
THEY LIVED A GOOD LIFE AND FOUGHT TO THE END, BUT ONE HAS FAILED.
AND THERE WAS SOME CLOUDINESS EXPERIENCED IN OUR SYSTEM, WHICH WAS MICROSCOPIC BUBBLES ENTERING OUR SYSTEM FROM THIS PUMP NUMBER TWO.
WE HAVE A QUOTE FOR $20,000 TO REPAIR IT.
WE HAVE ANOTHER QUOTE FOR $50,000 TO REPLACE IT.
AND KNOWING HOW OLD IT IS, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE REPLACE OPTION.
AND THEN AS PART OF OUR CAPITAL PLAN, WE WILL BE INTRODUCING REPLACEMENT OF THE OTHER ONE TOO.
SO UNFORTUNATELY, THE PUMP DOES HAVE A FOUR AND FIVE MONTH LEAD TIME.
SO WE CAN GET THAT ORDERED AT LEAST AND THEN GET THAT INSTALLED AND RUNNING WHILE OUR CURRENT PUMP NUMBER ONE IS FUNCTIONING.
GET THE TWO AND THEN CIRCLE BACK TO ONE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
[01:50:02]
QUESTIONS? I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THIS WORK SESSION EARLIER AS WELL.I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REPLACEMENT OF THE HIGH SERVICE PUMP NUMBER TWO AND CHECK THE VALVE AT THE SOUTH WATER TREATMENT PLANT.
[INAUDIBLE] ACCORDING TO THE QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS FOR A WORKING PRICE OF $200,595 PLUS TAX.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[22) Replace - Street Sweeper]
WE CAN TALK ABOUT SWEEPING.SO WE HAVE A STREET SWEEPER THAT WAS PURCHASED IN 2016.
IT IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT IS NOT ONLY A WATERLESS SWEEPER, IT IS ALSO A NON AIR REGENERATIVE.
SO IT BASICALLY JUST RELIES ON MECHANICAL SWEEPING.
IT'S A BROOM, A CIRCULAR BROOMING METHOD, IF YOU WILL.
THAT HAS LASTED AND SERVED US FOR 11 YEARS.
I'VE BEEN HERE FOR FOUR MONTHS, AND I'VE WONDERED WHY I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS SWEEPER OUT IN USE.
AND I JUST LEARNED TODAY THAT AFTER OUR SPRING SWEEPING, IT GOT KIND OF A THOROUGH INSPECTION BY OUR FLEET STAFF, AND SOME PARTS WERE ORDERED AND THE PARTS WERE ON BACK ORDER, AND THE PARTS TOOK SIX MONTHS TO ARRIVE.
SO IT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR OUR FALL SWEEPING.
BUT WE KNOW THAT IT JUST HASN'T BEEN A GOOD MODEL FOR US.
PART OF THE PROBLEM IT'S SO HARD TO GET PARTS IS THAT THIS WATERLESS UNIT IS A VERY SMALL SUBSET, 3% OF ALL OF THE MANUFACTURER'S MODELS.
SO IT'S EXCLUSIVE AND THERE'S JUST NOT A LOT IN USE ANYMORE.
OUR STAFF HAS BEEN RESEARCHING WHAT AVAILABLE MODELS THERE WOULD BE.
THEY'VE DEMOED FOUR DIFFERENT MODELS, BUT WE ARE PROPOSING ONE, AND I'LL GET INTO THE ONE WE'RE PROPOSING.
THIS WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE PART OF OUR '27 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, BUT THERE IS A PARTICULAR DEMONSTRATION MODEL AVAILABLE NOW.
SO WE THOUGHT WE COULD TRY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT A LITTLE BIT OF SAVINGS IF WE ACTED NOW.
THIS WOULD BE FULLY FUNDED BY OUR STORM WATER FUNDS.
SO IT'S CASH IN HAND, IF YOU WILL.
AND THE NEW MODEL IS A 2026 UNIT.
IT'S KIND OF A TRAVELING ROAD SHOW, AS THE MANUFACTURER HAS BEEN PROMOTING IT.
AND IT IS A COUPLE OF MAJOR DIFFERENCES.
IT DOES HAVE A WATERLESS-- SORRY, A WATER FUNCTION.
SO YOU CAN BASICALLY TURN THE MECHANICAL SWEEPING INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE OF USING WATER AND OPERATE THAT.
AND IT DOES ALSO HAVE REGENERATIVE AIR CONTROLS, WHICH MEANS IT'S BASICALLY LIKE AN AIR COMPRESSOR TRYING TO LOOSEN THE DIRT AND DEBRIS.
AND SWEEPERS ARE USED NOT ONLY FOR LEAF COLLECTION.
IT'S ALSO USED AFTER EVENTS OR AFTER CAR ACCIDENTS OR JUST THE GENERAL KIND OF KEEPING DIRT AND DEBRIS AND MAINTAINING THE REST OF THE UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS THE ASK TO PURCHASE THIS DEMONSTRATION UNIT.
THE PRICE FOR THE DEMONSTRATION UNIT WAS $349,736.
THERE IS THE NEW 2027 MODEL THAT'S $18,000 MORE THAN THAT.
AND THEN THERE'S AN ALTERNATE MODEL.
AND LIKE I SAID, WE TESTED A FEW, BUT THIS IS THE ONE THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING.
AND THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO JUST KEEP USING OUR EXISTING SWEEPER LONGER.
AND WE JUST KNOW THAT THAT TIME IS COMING.
CAN I ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS? SO THE OLD ONE USED TO JUST SPEED, RIGHT? THERE WAS NO AIR.
THERE WAS NO WATER TO SPRAY IT.
AND SO THE NEW SYSTEM USES BOTH AIR AND WATER AND IT'S SUCKED UP INTO THE MACHINE AND CARRIES FIVE CUBIC YARDS OR SOMETHING.
AND THEN WHEN THEY DUMP IT, WHERE DO THEY DUMP IT?
[01:55:01]
THEY TALKED ABOUT IT ON-- I WATCHED A YOUTUBE VIDEO.WHAT DO WE DO WITH OURS? SO TWO THINGS THAT I DIDN'T MENTION IS JUST OVERALL CAPACITY.
SO THE SHORT ANSWER IS DEPENDING WHAT WE SWEEP UP IS WHERE IT GOES.
THE LONG ANSWER IS WE TRY TO REUSE IT AND THERE IS SOME ON BOARD FILTERING MECHANISM.
SO IF YOU KNOW YOU'RE JUST SWEEPING UP SAND, SOME OF THAT CAN BE REUSED FOR NON-STRUCTURAL FILL.
AND WE WOULD TAKE IT TO OUR COMMODITIES YARD AND WE CAN FURTHER PROCESS IT OR CLEAN IT.
IF WE KNOW WHAT SOMETHING HAZARDOUS, THEN IT MAY HAVE TO BE LANDFILLED.
WHEN IT'S SOMETHING HAZARDOUS, THE WATER CAN BE BENEFICIAL IN THAT CASE, OR THAT MIGHT ALSO BE AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE YOU DON'T USE WATER TO AND USE YOUR AIR CAPACITY TO HELP WITH THAT.
RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NO MANDATE THAT ALL SWEEPINGS HAVE TO BE LANDFILLED.
AND THIS HAS CAMERAS ALL OVER IT TOO, THESE NEW ONES, SO WE CAN GET RIGHT UP TO THAT CURB? IT SEEMED LIKE THEY HAD A CAMERA THAT WOULD SHOW YOU.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT, BUT I WOULD ASSUME THE TECHNOLOGY IS ADVANCED FOR THE '26 MODEL.
I WAS AMAZED HOW MUCH EQUIPMENT IS ON THESE AND EVERYTHING THAT WENT INTO IT, AND I DIDN'T EVEN FINISH THE WHOLE YOUTUBE VIDEO.
SO YEAH, IT WAS PRETTY AMAZING.
AND THEY HAD A SYSTEM, WHICH I SAW OURS DOES, THE ONE THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING, THAT EVEN CLEANING OUT OF THE OLD STUFF ISN'T [INAUDIBLE].
[INAUDIBLE] ADDITIONAL TANK, 600 GALLONS OF WATER.
AND YEAH, IT'S A PRETTY AMAZING SYSTEM.
YEAH, I MEAN, LIKE I SAID, I FEEL LIKE THEY'VE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE AS FAR AS TESTING THE DIFFERENT UNITS.
I THINK ONE THING THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN THE VERY BEGINNING WAS GETTING A SWEEPING UNIT ONTO A TRUCK CHASSIS SO IT COULD BE DRIVEN AT FULL SPEEDS IF IT HAD TO.
AND THEN IT JUST OPENS UP THE PANEL WHERE YOU'RE DUMPING, IF YOU HAVE TO LANDFILL IT, IT JUST OPENS UP THE POSSIBILITY OF THAT EFFICIENCY FROM THERE.
AND THE CHASSIS IS PURCHASED WITH IT, RIGHT? THIS ISN'T A UNIT WE CAN PUT ON OUR-- WHERE WE CAN CHANGE OUT THINGS ON OUR TRUCK [INAUDIBLE].
WE'RE HEADING MORE TOWARDS THE SWITCH OUT OPTIONS.
AND I THINK, FOR US, BEING A CITY THAT'S ON A LAKE, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO CLEAN OUT AS MUCH AS WE CAN ON OUR ROADS AND STREETS BEFORE IT FINDS ITS WAY TO THE LAKE.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, THE STREET SWEEPER IS OUR PRIME PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT WE USE [INAUDIBLE] OUR STORM WATER [INAUDIBLE].
WE ARE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH PHOSPHORUS WE'RE PICKING UO FROM OUR ROADS, HENCE WHY YOU HEAR STREET SWEEPER, BUT THEN YOU HEAR US TALK ABOUT FUNDING IT FROM THE STORM WATER FUND.
BECAUSE IT IS PART OF OUR WATER QUALITY PROCESS EFFORTS, AND IT'S OUR MOST EFFECTIVE.
SO IF WE'VE GOT A FUNCTIONING UNIT LIKE THIS, HOW OFTEN WOULD WE SWEEP THE STREETS? MORE THAN SPRING AND FALL OR IS IT-- NO, WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO SWEEP MORE OFTEN.
AND A NEWER MODEL, THE DOWNTIMES WHERE IT DOES EXPERIENCE-- I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER OF HOW OFTEN WE COULD.
I THINK THE SAFE ANSWER TO SAY IS DEPENDING ON STAFFING AND OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING.
BUT DURING THE SPRING TO FALL IS THE HEAVIEST SWEEPING TIME IN THE GRIT AND THE SAND.
BUT WITH ANY UNIT, WHETHER IT'S WATERLESS OR HAS THE WATER CAPABILITY, YOU CAN SWEEP IN THE WINTER TIME AS WELL.
YOU JUST DISABLE THE WATER OR DRAIN THE SYSTEM.
AND SO, WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH ROADS BECOMING OVERLY SANDY OR JUST IN AN AREA THAT MIGHT GET SOME WASHOUT.
SO YOU CAN SWEEP ALL YEAR ROUND, BUT THE HEAVIER TIMES ARE SPRING AND FALL.
THE CURRENT OR PAST PRACTICES.
GOT TO LIVE A WHOLE CYCLE WITH US.
SO THEY DO 100% OF OUR ROADS EVERY SPRING AND FALL, KIND OF A COMPREHENSIVE PASS.
AND THEN THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE SEASON, THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT THEY JUST KNOW ARE PROBLEMS. AND THEN THERE'S A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION CLEANUPS, OR JUST IN THIS AREA.
AND WE TRY TO MAKE THE CONTRACTORS DO THEIR OWN CLEANUPS, BUT SOMETIMES YOU JUST NEED IT.
IT'S OUR OWN MAINTENANCE FACILITY WHERE WE [INAUDIBLE] AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
[02:00:02]
IT'S A VERY HEAVILY USED PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND I DIDN'T WATCH YOUTUBE, BUT I DID GO BACK AND READ THE MEETING MINUTES FROM 2016 WHEN WE PURCHASED THE LAST ONE.
AND I THINK WHAT'S CLEAR TO ME IS THAT IT'S A BIG SPEND.
SO I DON'T WANT TO MINIMIZE THAT.
AND REALLY, IT'S INTERESTING WHEN YOU LOOK BACK AT A PURCHASE THAT WAS MADE-- AND IT WASN'T EVEN 11 YEARS.
WE'RE LESS THAN 11 YEARS ON THE LIFE OF THIS ONE, THAT AT THE TIME WHEN THIS WAS PROPOSED, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE STATED WAS THAT THE ONE THAT WE'D HAD PREVIOUS TO THIS MOST RECENT ONE HAD DIFFICULTY ON TIGHT, NARROW STREETS AND HAD SKIP ZONES DUE TO TIGHT CORNERS.
YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE THE ONE THAT SAID THAT IN THE MEETING.
ANYWAY, AND IT WAS LESS BULKY.
AND WHAT I GATHERED, ANYWAY, WAS, IF YOU WILL, STATE OF THE ART, BEST SUITED, MOST CAPABLE, EXCELLENT SERVICE, WATER FREE, ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY, CONSERVATION OF WATER, ALL THESE OTHER THINGS, WHICH IS ALL GOOD.
AND HERE WE ARE, UNFORTUNATELY, IN OUR AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT WHERE IT'S LIKE, THIS HAS BEEN A DISAPPOINTMENT IS THE WORD THAT WAS USED IN THIS.
SO I JUST WANT TO BE MINDFUL THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT A SPEND THIS BIG THAT WE NOT JUST HAVE DONE OUR RESEARCH, BUT THAT THIS IS NECESSARY RIGHT NOW.
BECAUSE ONE THING I DID LOOK INTO WITH THIS CURRENT MODEL THAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED IS THE LIFESPAN.
FROM MY CURSORY LOOK, THIS ITEM IS INDICATING MAYBE A 20 YEAR LIFESPAN.
I SAW 7 TO 12 YEARS IN MY CURSORY LOOK.
AND ALSO THAT THE UPTIME FOR THIS ONE IS LESS THAN 40%, HIGH MAINTENANCE DEMANDS, AND ELECTRICAL QUIRKS FOR SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH THIS MODEL BEING RECOMMENDED NOW.
SO IT ALSO HAS THE LARGEST STANDARD CAPACITY HOPPER IN ITS CLASS.
WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S NECESSARY FOR A CITY, I DON'T KNOW.
I JUST THINK IT'S INTERESTING TO LOOK BACK AT A PURCHASE LIKE THIS AND SAY, WELL, IT WAS THE BEST RECOMMENDATION WE MADE AT THE TIME AND IT HASN'T PERFORMED AS WELL AS IT COULD HAVE.
SO IS THIS THE RIGHT TIME TO GET ANOTHER ONE? HAVE WE DONE OUR DUE DILIGENCE? I DON'T HAVE ALL THE TECHNICAL ANSWERS TO THAT.
I JUST WANT TO ENSURE THAT THIS IS A PURCHASE, EVEN IF IT'S COMING FROM STORM WATER, THAT THIS IS NECESSARY OR WE COULD WAIT ON THIS AND GIVE CONSIDERATION.
AND THEN JUST MAYBE TO ADDRESS THAT.
YES, OUR STAFF HAS SPENT THE LAST SIX MONTHS IN VARIOUS DIFFERENT GROUPS WITH THOSE SAME KIND OF CONCERNS AND TESTS, TAKING ALL OF THE UNITS DOWN TO OUR NARROWEST, WINDIEST ROADS TO TEST THEM, BECAUSE THAT WAS A BIG CONCERN WHEN WE HAD A TRUCK CHASSIS MOUNTED ON BEFORE AND COULDN'T GET ON SOME OF OUR REALLY TIGHT CORNERS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THESE NEWER MODELS IS THEY'RE NOW ABLE TO, WITH THE OUT BOOM BRUSHES, GET OUT FURTHER AND PULL THAT MATERIAL AND [INAUDIBLE] COLLECTED.
AND I DO RECALL, THAT PARTICULAR ONE, WE WERE SPECIFICALLY, AT THE TIME-- THE HARD SALE ON THE INDUSTRY WAS GO WATERLESS IN THE NORTHERN CLIMATE SO THAT YOU COULD USE IT TO PICK UP SALT AND THINGS LIKE THAT OFF THE ROAD.
IT'S TURNED OUT THAT BEING WATERLESS, WHILE THAT LET US DO THAT KIND OF THING, CAME WITH SOME OTHER BAGGAGE THAT MADE IT PERFORM LESS WELL IN SOME OTHER INSTANCES, SO MUCH SO THAT THE INDUSTRY STARTED GOING A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.
AND SO NOW THIS MODEL IS NOT AS WELL SUPPORTED AS OTHERS BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A MINOR PART OF THE FLEET.
BRODY WAS TELLING ME THAT THE PRIMARY USE OF THE VERSION THAT WE HAVE NOW IS PLACES LIKE CONCRETE FACTORIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHERE YOU CAN'T HAVE WATER MIX WITH THE DUST OR IT TURNS IT INTO CONCRETE, THAT KIND OF THING, AND SOME HIGH ARCTIC [INAUDIBLE].
SO THE ONE THING I DO WANT TO SAY IS I CAN'T EVEN REMEMBER HOW MANY UNITS THEY'VE TESTED AND DEMOED, BUT THOSE KIND OF THINGS-- BECAUSE YES, I WAS HERE FOR THAT ONE.
SO THAT'S THE ONE THING I KEPT TELLING BRODY WAS WE CAN'T HAVE ONE THAT WE CAN'T GET DOWN OUR NARROW STREETS, BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE JUST DEFEAT THE WHOLE PURPOSE.
AND I'M IN NO WAY QUESTIONING THE DILIGENCE THAT'S GONE INTO THIS, JUST VEERING OUT AND JUST SAYING THESE ARE-- BIG PURCHASE.
AND WE PLANNED ON SPENDING THIS KIND OF MONEY FOR A SWEEPER THIS YEAR.
WE HAD IT PROGRAMMED FOR 2027.
SO WE WOULD HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE SHOWING IT TO YOU ON THE CIP WHEN WE DO THE EQUIPMENT [INAUDIBLE].
WE HAD IT LAST YEAR WHEN WE DID SAMPLING [INAUDIBLE].
FOR INSTANCE, WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY WITH A MODEL THAT THE GUYS WANTED AND TESTED BEST AT A DISCOUNT [INAUDIBLE]
[02:05:03]
DEMO MODEL.DO WE GET ANYTHING ON A TRADE IN FOR OUR EXISTING? YEAH, EITHER THE DEMO MODEL OR THE '27 MODEL FACTORS IN ABOUT $20,000 OF TRADE IN DONE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE WE READY TO MAKE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND PURCHASING THE 2026 SCHWARZE A9 MONSOON DEMONSTRATION SWEEPER FROM TITAN MACHINERY, AT A TOTAL COST OF $373,780.35, INCLUDING THE MOTOR VEHICLE SALES TAX AND THE PELICAN TRADE ALLOWANCE UNDER MINNESOTA STATE CONTRACT NUMBER 258159.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, JUST ONE MORE QUESTION FOR STAFF.
DO YOU HAVE ANY ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE FROM FOLKS IN THE LAKES COMMUNITY OR ELSEWHERE WHO USE THIS MODEL, WHO CAN SPEAK TO ITS EFFECTIVENESS? I KNOW THEY DID.
I DON'T KNOW THE NAMES OF THE COMMUNITIES OFFHAND, BUT I KNOW THEY DID REACH OUT TO OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE THIS PARTICULAR MODEL AND COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE THE OTHER, THE TYMCO MODEL.
AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A GENERAL ANSWER, BUT IN GENERAL, EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OWN OPINIONS ABOUT WHAT'S BETTER AND WHAT'S SUITED.
BUT SOME OF THE MORE URBAN COMMUNITIES, THEY KEEP A SMALLER UNIT TO DO THEIR URBAN AREAS AND THEN A LARGER UNIT TO DO THE STRAIGHT PASSAGES.
SO THAT WAS UNDER CONSIDERATION AT ONE POINT.
BUT WE DECIDED, LET'S JUST GET THE ONE UNIT THAT WE CAN DO BOTH.
THE ONLY THING I'D COMMENT IS THAT [INAUDIBLE] IS THAT THEY MADE THE BEST DECISION THEY COULD AT THAT TIME.
AND BASED ON THE HISTORY AND RESEARCH AND EVERYTHING, WE'RE MAKING THE BEST DECISION IN 2026.
[INAUDIBLE] HOW IT ALL PLAYS OUT.
I WOULD JUST COMMENT THAT AS A ROAD BIKE RIDER THAT RIDES ON THE SHOULDERS, I REALLY APPRECIATE WHEN A STREET HAS BEEN SWEPT.
THOSE ROCKS COME UP AND CAUSE FLAT TIRES AND OTHER HAZARDOUS THINGS.
ANYWAY, ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE, SAY AYE.
THANKS FOR ALL THE WORK YOU PUT IN TO RESEARCH THIS.
NOW, WE HAVE ONE THING THAT'S BEEN ADDED TO THE AGENDA.
[Mayor and Council Report]
AND FOR THAT, I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO COUNCIL MEMBER.THIS SHOULD BE QUICK, ACTUALLY.
MAYBE I HAVEN'T MENTIONED, I ATTENDED THE PARK COMMISSION MEETING, BOTH MEETINGS, WORK SESSION AND REGULAR MEETING LAST WEEK.
TALKING A LOT ABOUT PARK STANDARDS, WHICH WE HAVE BEEN TALKING A LOT ABOUT.
AND ONE THING THAT OCCURRED TO ME AFTER THAT DISCUSSION IS BEDERWOOD PARK IS CURRENTLY OUT OF ALIGNMENT IN TERMS OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A RESOLUTION, WHICH WAS RESOLUTION 7195 ESTABLISHED IN 2021, AND IT DESIGNATED A PORTION OF BEDERWOOD PARK FOR MOUNTAIN BIKE PRACTICE.
THAT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH OUR CITY WIDE PRACTICE, SO I DISCUSSED THIS AT LEAST ONCE, IF NOT TWICE, WITH BOTH JOE AND ADAM.
AND REFERRING BACK TO MY NOTES WHERE ADAM AND I HAD LEFT IT, ESSENTIALLY, WAS ADAM'S RECOMMENDATION, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, TO BRING THIS BACK TO THE PARK COMMISSION AS A FORMAL REQUEST THAT THEY REVIEW THIS RESOLUTION AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS STILL SERVING OUR CITY OR WHETHER OR NOT ANYTHING'S CHANGED.
I BELIEVE, WHEN I HAD CHECKED IN WITH STAFF PROBABLY EIGHT MONTHS AGO, THE TEAM THAT HAD INITIALLY BEEN USING THAT PORTION OF THE PARK IS NO LONGER DOING THIS.
SO IN ORDER TO KEEP THINGS CURRENT, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN ALIGNMENT HERE, AND ALSO WITH THE ISSUES REGARDING E-BIKES, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE ABOUT OUR PARK SYSTEM.
AND IF THIS IS STILL NECESSARY, GREAT.
IF NOT, IF IT SHOULD BE AMENDED OR IN ANY WAY ALTERED, I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO DO, WHICH IS WHY I WANTED TO BRING IT TO COUNCIL TONIGHT AND SEE IF THERE WAS SUPPORT FOR BRINGING THAT BACK TO PARKS FOR CONSIDERATION.
SO AGAIN, TO BE CLEAR, THIS 2021 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED MOUNTAIN BIKING IN AND AROUND BEDERWOOD? YES.
SO JUST TO PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND TO IT.
SO OUR PARKS CODE PROHIBITS BICYCLING IN PARKS
[02:10:03]
EXCEPT IN DESIGNATED AREAS.SO BACK IN 2021 WHEN THIS ISSUE CAME UP, THE COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT DESIGNATED CERTAIN PORTIONS OF BEDERWOOD PARK AS DESIGNATED FOR MOUNTAIN BIKE USE.
SO THAT'S THE BACKGROUND OF WHERE THAT COMES FROM.
I HAVE SEEN THEM BIKE [INAUDIBLE] RIDING IN BEDERWOOD [INAUDIBLE].
THAT WAS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING OF TALKING WITH STAFF.
I JUST THINK, AGAIN, AND ALSO THE PROCESS BY WHICH THAT RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS-- I WOULDN'T CALL IT LENGTHY.
SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT STANDARDS, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT GOOD PROCESS, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CONTINUITY BETWEEN OUR PARK SYSTEM BUT THROUGH IT, THAT SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED TO ME, AND I JUST WANTED TO SEE WHAT THE COUNCIL THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.
CAN I ASK IF THERE'S BEEN ANY DAMAGE TO THE PARK BECAUSE OF THE RIDING? NONE THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD BY OUR MANTENANCE STAFF.
THERE HAVE BEEN OCCASIONAL COMPLAINTS OVER THE YEARS OF KIDS RIDING IN PLACES THAT WERE NOT PART OF THE DESIGNATED AREA OR RIDING THE BIKE IN A NOT SAFE MANNER, THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD OF ANY DAMAGE.
TO BE FAIR, WHEN I SAY I SAW THEM THERE, IT LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE MAYBE USING THE PARKING LOT, MAYBE TAKING OFF.
NO, RIGHT, AND I'M TALKING ABOUT AN AREA THAT WAS CLEARLY IN THE PARK.
AND WITH THE IRRIGATION THAT HAS BEEN PUT IN ON THE BALL FIELD, I THINK MY OPINION, ANYWAY, ON THIS IS IT'S VERY UNCLEAR AS TO WHO WOULD BE BIKING THERE.
I COULDN'T DEFINE WHERE THAT AREA IS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT ANY OF US COULD.
THIS RESOLUTION ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS FOR IT IN THAT PARK AT A PLACE WHERE IT'S NOT DEFINED, AND IT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH OUR OTHER PARKS.
I THINK MY OPINION IS MAYBE HAVING PARKS COMMISSION LOOK AT IT, DETERMINE IF THIS IS A BEST USE, IF THIS IS ALLOWING E-BIKES AS WELL AS SCOOTERS, MOUNTAIN BIKES.
I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU, ALISA.
I THINK THIS SHOULD BE SENT BACK TO THE PARKS.
I DON'T WANT TO KEEP GOING ON AND ON.
ARE WE IN AGREEMENT TO SEND IT BACK TO PARKS? I GUESS THE REASON I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE DAMAGES, I WALK THE LOOSE LINE ALL THE TIME.
AND I NOTICED [INAUDIBLE] ELECTRIC BIKES AND THEY'RE RUTTING IT OUT, AND THEN THEY LEAK GAS ON THE-- ON THE WATER SIDE WHEN THEY REV IT UP AND [INAUDIBLE] BIG RUTS.
AND IT'S GONE DOWN A COUPLE INCHES.
SO IT IS A CONCERN, ESPECIALLY [INAUDIBLE].
IS THAT ENOUGH DIRECTION? I KNOW EVERYONE'S LIKE-- YOU'D LIKE DIRECTION FOR THE-- WE'D LIKE TO LOOK AT IT.
LOOK AT IT AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES TOO MUCH DELIBERATION.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR, ENGINEER REPORT? ANYTHING FOR US, MR. EDWARDS? NO, WE'VE COVERED MOST OF IT ALREADY.
WE'VE BEEN REALLY FOCUSED ON GETTING THE CAPITAL APPROVEMENT PLAN READY FOR THE PRESENTATION, WHICH WE HAD EARLIER TODAY.
ANY REPORTS FROM-- ASK OUR ATTORNEY FIRST FOR ANY-- NO UPDATES FROM LEGAL.
ARE THEY ALWAYS LIKE THAT? OH, I WAS GOING TO SAY, ANY UPDATE ON THE MOST RECENT CASE THAT CAME? NO.
THERE IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT-- IT HAS NOT BEEN FILED WITH THE COUNTY YET, BUT THE CITY IS PREPARING THE ANSWER.
SO I DO THINK IT WILL BE FILED HERE SHORTLY.
ANY COUNCIL REPORTS? I ATTENDED THE CARMAN BAY ANNUAL MEETING.
BECAUSE OF A WARRANTY ISSUE, THEY WERE ABLE TO DROP THEIR [INAUDIBLE] YEAR [INAUDIBLE] ONE THING I [INAUDIBLE] WINTER WONDERLAND.
CAN YOU GIVE ANY DETAILS? WELL, YEAH, MRS. CLAUS IS RIGHT HERE.
[LAUGHTER] YEAH, WE DO HAVE MR. AND MRS. CLAUS COMING.
AND WE ARE WORKING WITH THE LIONS TO HAVE HOT DOGS AND BRATS AND HOT CHOCOLATES AND MAYBE MULLED WINES AND STUFF.
AND WE DO HAVE SOME VENDOR TENTS THAT WE'D LOVE TO FILL IF THAT WOULD BE THE CASE.
[02:15:01]
SO WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.YOU APPROVED THIS EVENING-- CHRISTMAS LIGHTS.
THAT'S BEEN A BIG FOCUS OF THE LAST FEW MEETINGS.
WHICH IS GOING TO BE A GREAT PRESENTATION HERE AT CITY HALL.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, I ATTENDED BOTH THE PARK COMMISSION MEETINGS LAST WEEK.
AND ACTUALLY, I PRESENTED TO THE PARK COMMISSION WHAT HAD BEEN DONE IN TERMS OF THE MAYOR'S MONARCH PLEDGE GARDENS BEING INSTALLED AROUND THE CITY.
AND THAT PROCESS, JUST THE PROCESS OVER THE LAST NUMBER OF MONTHS, HAS MADE ME REALLY WANT TO RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE A DEEP DIVE.
SO THIS WEEK, MYSELF AND COUNCIL MEMBER RICKS AND A COUPLE OF THE STAFF MEMBERS ARE GOING TO GET TOGETHER TO LOOK AT HOW THAT PROCESS WENT, WHAT WENT WELL, WHAT COULD BE IMPROVED UPON, BECAUSE THE IDEA IS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE, ESPECIALLY WITH THE VOLUNTEER ASPECT.
I'VE BEEN APPROACHED NOW BY A FEW DIFFERENT PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN GIVING THEIR TIME AND EXPERTISE TO THE CITY WITH THIS.
AND THEN ALSO, I ATTENDED, NOT IN MY OFFICIAL CAPACITY, BUT OUT OF INTEREST, AN AUDUBON OF THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER PRESENTATION LAST WEEK AND LEARNED THAT MUNICIPALITIES CAN ADOPT WHAT'S CALLED THE AUDUBON LIGHTS OUT MUNICIPAL EFFORT TO REDUCE LIGHTS DURING PEAK MIGRATORY PERIODS.
MINNETONKA, PLYMOUTH, AND SOME OTHERS AROUND HERE HAVE JOINED THIS, AND IT'S ESSENTIALLY A WAY OF-- THERE'S AN EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT, ALMOST LIKE WITH THE WATER SOFTENER, WHERE DURING THOSE PEAK TIMES, IT'S SPRING, MARCH 15 TO MAY 31, AND THEN FALL, AUGUST 15 TO OCTOBER 31.
MESSAGING TO HOMEOWNERS, FOLKS TO TURN THE LIGHTS DOWN OR TO REDUCE THAT LIGHT EFFECT DURING THOSE TIMES.
AND ALSO WITH MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS BEING ESPECIALLY SENSITIVE TO THAT.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING I JUST WANTED TO INTRODUCE, BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH A WONDERFUL AREA HERE AND SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENT.
AND ALSO WE'RE DEFINITELY IN THE FLIGHT PATH FOR MIGRATION.
SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT I WAS JUST HOPING TO CONSIDER POTENTIALLY IN THE NEW YEAR, OR THERE'S COUNCIL SUPPORT LOOKING INTO IT.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S A COST TO IT.
IT'S AN EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT.
IT'S SOMETHING I WANTED TO INTRODUCE TO COUNCIL AND SEE IF THERE WAS ANY DESIRE TO LOOK INTO FURTHER.
ONE, I KNOW WE MENTIONED THIS AT WORK SESSION.
WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT LOOKING INTO DIRECTING STAFF TO TAKE A LOOK AT POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS IN OUR CITY SIGNAGE.
I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S SUPPORT TO DO THAT, TO ASK STAFF TO TAKE A LOOK AND SEE IF THERE ARE OPTIONS WITH HOW WE PRESENT OUR SIGNAGE AROUND THE CITY, AND IF WE WANT TO INCORPORATE A NEW STANDARD THAT FALLS MORE IN LINE WITH SOME OF THE PARKS SIGNS THAT WE HAVE.
I'D JUST LIKE TO GET THOUGHTS ON THAT.
I'D LOVE TO HAVE STAFF TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
AT LEAST A CANVASSING OF WHERE WE CURRENTLY HAVE SIGNS AND WHERE WE MIGHT [INAUDIBLE].
AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER THING I HAVE IS FOR THOSE INTERESTED, WE HAVE OUR SHORELINE FIRE DEPARTMENT BOARD MEETING THIS WEDNESDAY AT 8:30, WEDNESDAY MORNING.
I'LL JUST ADD A COUPLE OF THINGS.
LAST WEEK, I HAD A COUPLE OF EVENTS.
THE MAYORS ASSOCIATION MET IN ST. PAUL.
WE HAD A SPEAKER ON SOCIAL MEDIA THAT WAS VERY INTERESTING.
AND THEN A REGIONAL COUNCIL OF MAYORS FOR SOCIAL [INAUDIBLE] EVENING ACTIVITIES.
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE [INAUDIBLE] BOARD MEETING ON WEDNESDAY.
WITH THAT, I THINK I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.