City Council - Regular Meeting

All right. Ready to go, Lindsay. Yep.

Okay, we're going to go ahead and call the order. It's the City Council regular business meeting for August 20th, 2026 at 6 p.m. Wendy, would you please call roll?

Council Member Borjan? Brown?

Here.

Kuhl? Here. Meineke? Here. Porter? Here. Mayor Phillips?

I'm here as well. We do have a quorum, so we'll move on. Item two is the Pledge of Allegiance. Would you please rise and say the Pledge of Allegiance with me?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States

Item three is approval of the agenda. Would anybody like to move any of the consent agenda items to the regular agenda? Hearing none, can I get a motion to approve the agenda?

Motion.

Second. Okay. Motion by Brown, seconded by Kuhl. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, same. That motion carries. Item four is welcome yes and public comment. We'll go ahead and open up the dais. If you want to talk to councilor myself, this would be for non-agenda items. We'll give you three minute time limit. Realize that we can't take action on these tonight since they aren't on the agenda and taking action would be a violation of open meetings law. Don't want to do that. Also, if you'd like to comment on any item in the consent agenda, now would be the time. Any takers? All right. Seeing none, we'll move on with that as well. Item five is our consent agenda. Can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda? Motion. Second. Okay. Motion by Kuhl, seconded by Meineke. Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Brown?

Yes.

Kuhl?

Yeah.

Meineke? Yes. Porter? Yes.

All right. That motion carries. Item six is old and new business for consideration, discussion, and possible actions. Item A is a discussion regarding loan tree, Maple Heights, potential amendment to a development agreement. So Maple Heights is 120-acre mixed-use commercial and residential development just north of Beardsley and east of 50th. The financial environment was different when they started, and they're finding the cost of capital is such that it's difficult to obtain sufficient capital to start moving ground. The developers also mentioned that some of the unique housing styles are less common and cause challenges for their lender. Norwalk has been encouraging mixed density and mixed use. However, it is unique for our area. So, Holly, I'm going to turn it over to you.

Sure. So you covered that really well, but this project we've all been working on for quite some time and we're really excited because this will be the catalyst to getting everything off to the races north of Beardsley between Highway 28 and 50th. And so we've been working with Lone Tree and we do have a couple of representatives here from Lone Tree to talk about just the general Maple Heights project. So I know Jenny and Carter, if you want to hop up there and introduce yourselves and then I can kind of get into the details of this.

Yeah.

Hello, thank you for the opportunity. My name is Jenny Nelson. I'm with Lone Tree Land and Development, partner and CEO over there on the land acquisition side of things. As you can see, we've been in this one for a couple years now. We've purchased and owned the land. We've worked out all the issues we had with obtaining the easements needed for the extension of utilities. We're primed and ready to go to deliver a mixed-use development, like Mayor mentioned. We're excited to get this in, give you guys a wonderful mix of commercial out front along 50th that's kind of a neighborhood commercial, some child care commercial that will come internally with a wonderful city park, and then a mixed use of attached housing, single family detached in multiple sizes, and phase that in over the next five to six years is what we'll see. So I'll let Carter introduce us.

Good evening. My name is Carter Buck. I am the CEO and partner on the development side of what we do. So we oversee all of the construction, all of the project execution. So here with Jenny and I just answer any questions that anyone might have about the project.

Thank you.

And as you can see on the map, the development about 120 acres will connect to the start property to the north that's kind of colorful, blocked off up there, just a general idea of what that could look like after development. And then the North Shore PUD, which is the big spread there along the lake, that PUD has been in place for some time. But this Maple Heights development with their infrastructure going in will connect to both of those and give them the ability to start to develop much quicker than if they had to do that on their own. So we've been working on an amendment idea to bring to council. So we really just want to get some feedback from council tonight on how you feel about this. If you're comfortable with a proposed amendment to the two current development agreements, we have one for water, one for sewer. And so in those two current agreements, basically, Lone Tree would be paying for all of the infrastructure on-site and off-site, so public and private. And generally, the city does come to the table and pay for the off-site improvements because they're public infrastructure pieces. But in this case, it was a little bit different. They were going to pay for it. And as the mayor had mentioned, when things changed a couple years down the road, the gap in funding was really about the cost of just the off-site. So $1.5 million is the total for sewer and water for the off-sites. And so we have been working together to figure out how the city can participate and help them just kind of get launched and get off to the races here. So if the city were to participate at 50% of that off-site cost, It would be $750,000 total for us. That's 50% of both the water and the sewer combined. And that's the public piece. And what we would do is, Luke Nelson worked with Jean. They took a look at finances. We would be able to pay that out of cash reserves. So we wouldn't have to do any lending for that or take out any debt for that. We would not have to use TIF. We will be receiving new revenues from this development, of course, over time quite a bit, about 77 million is what we're looking at over time. as they develop for proposed value with the commercial and residential. And that's really just the phase one, I believe that we calculated that to be. So we are looking for feedback from the council if you're comfortable with us bringing a development agreement forward in the near future to amend their existing development agreement where we would take part in that half of that upfront or upfront half of that infrastructure for the two off sites. And Luke or Tony or Luke, if there's any pieces missing in that, maybe just some of the repayment of the connection fees that we would receive back over time. If you want to touch on that, I don't know.

Yeah, I can mention that real quick. We ran a sample scenario. So if Loan Tree participates at, let's say, this 50% amount, The total cost, as we mentioned, was about $1.4 million to run water and sewer to their site. If they participated at 50% and if the city participated at 50%, and then over the course of, let's say, 10 years, it's outlined here. In the yellow, it shows in which years they would go ahead and build out that property or they would develop it. At time of platting, they pay fee districts. So if they were to develop 30 acres in year one, this would be their expenditure in a typical fee district scenario. It would result in 194,000. So the idea is if we're putting in 50% of the expense and they are putting in 50% of the expense, this 194,000, essentially comes off of the half that they are putting in. Move over to year three, another 30 acres. So come down another 194,000. If you continue out, assuming that they only do 80 acres of the total 120 acres over a 10 year period, they would have covered all but about 177,000 of their share. So that means at the end of 10 years, we would have to reimburse them. It's kind of like a balloon payment concept. We would reimburse them the remaining $177,000 of their 50% share. And then as development continues for the remainder, I'm going to zoom in just to allow this to be a little bit easier. The light green shows the service area boundary for the sanitary sewer fee district. So as the Stark land and a portion of North Shore develops, they too would have to pay that district fee. The idea is once those areas develop and we see additional people both connect to the water system as well as the sanitary sewer, the concept is the city is reimbursed all of the input cost for the water and sewer Generally speaking, we want to make sure that we're covered 100%. I know it doesn't always fully happen that way. It could be between 95, 98% cost recovery. I'm looking at Tony. So if I'm saying something wrong, he'll nod like this instead of yes. But generally speaking, once we design, bid out, build the project, we create that fee district, the idea when the area fully develops, we'll reimburse all those costs. The big difference here, and I'm repeating what Holly said, but just to really accentuate this point, in the past, we've had some developers that are ready to move forward with a development sooner than we're prepared to put in the city trunk mains to get there. And in those situations, the developer comes in and they will build and do all those upfront costs. That was our original agreement. I know there's reasons for it. They're asking for the city to now participate 50-50.

In public peace.

Yes. For the public, our responsibility.

So to the development. Right. Yeah.

Well, the water actually does cover the full frontage. So the water line is shown on this map along 50th in the dashed blue line. And then that purple dotted line there that's further east, that's the sanitary sewer to get to the edge of their property.

Basically, we'd be sewering and watering access to that little area by doing this project.

The existing water line is actually along Beardsley. It shows up as the light blue line.

Oh, okay. Gotcha.

Yeah, it's at the corner of Beards Lane 50th. And we already have a water district established for this area. So that's one of the reasons we show the water main going all the way to the north side of this development. So that's a cost that was estimated at the time that district was put together. And assuming, contemplating that the city would build that even even though it wasn't built and there's a reason I mean you know the the issue is the city city never came never never uh budget for that project it hasn't been a priority until until recently um and gave a great explanation. And again, yeah, I just want to repeat and clarify, this is for off-site improvements that typically when there's interest in developing an area and it's a priority for the city, the city would construct that off-site infrastructure, water and sewer projects. Our code contemplates that the city would construct those and then we would develop a benefited sewer or water that the developer was going to pay for those upfront costs because it wasn't budgeted by the city. It wasn't a priority for us at the time. So this is really what we've come up with that for the council to consider is kind of a hybrid for sharing the cost of that offsite infrastructure, even though typically the city would pay for all that. So, you know, essentially the council has another option to pay, pay, the developer would participate in that off-site infrastructure cost at the number we talked about, about 50%, and then they would recover that cost over time through revised development.

In a way, I kind of like this because it puts the onus on the developer to recover their money. Right? I mean, if they develop that, the sooner they do. Essentially, yeah. The quicker... So that would be a great example.

But if that moves quicker, then yeah, that would be the case.

But my question would be then, so the way this is laid out now, if I understand it right, the city waits its turn for reimbursement. The developers reimburse first and the city waits. Correct.

That is a very good point, Ed.

Yes. that's for the on-site you know and the thing that we like about this is holly mentioned is this is really you know getting this infrastructure in this area is really a catalyst for uh what that first map showed you know i mean uh access eventually would have an accident connection from the west side of the north shore pud as well as the 100 100 plus acres north of the lone tree property that would be open for development as well so the city would i believe what But for for. other development outside of that room tree area, then the city might recover that first.

Yeah, that's why I was excited about this one. Like Tony said, is that we've watched that giant piece of land, you know, north of Beardsley between Highway 28, 50th, just sit there. We know it's valuable. We know everybody likes it. It's the best ground, you know, in the metro, but nobody wanted to pull the trigger. You know, no developers want to pull the trigger on it first because it's expensive. It's, you know, the ground and the infrastructure. So we're I'm excited. We're excited, I think, to have such good developers on board to kick that off. And even just that first phase of value with the $77 million of proposed value, we'll see how that's just the first phase of the residential. There's another low estimate of $10 million for the commercial piece that's a long way. 50th. And then as that builds out over time, the rest of their phases, that'll just continue to increase. And we have a giant spreadsheet that shows what the future value could look like to start land being developed, North Shore. So it's just a really good, it's a really good kickoff to that area.

But then...

Since they have changed the legislature to a system...

Actually, no. So this is residential. Our past practice has been, we typically don't use TIF for residential projects. And I'll just tell you a huge part of what gave me a lot of comfort in feeling comfortable in recommending that we move forward with this amendment is talking with Gene Kelly, finance director of and having her be able to identify funds that we have on hand without having to go to market, utilize existing funds to cover our 50% portion. Another way to look at it, not using TIF, this is kind of like a 50% grant. And so we have a developer cost sharing in this. Just as Tony said, we could be in a situation where it's just 100% city cost, kind of like we're doing with the North River Interceptor. Whenever we're using TIF, pay that back. But without muddying the waters, this is not utilizing TIF. For the most part, this is not impacted by state legislation.

Pretty forget the stuff in the ground. Let's say that we're fortunate and something pops outside of their development area. So then that would pay for their service. And then that would be a reimbursement for this developer, right?

Like if Stark develops?

Anything that comes through that district would first go to reimburse this developer.

Right. For the onsites.

So it really is kind of a subsidy for the onsite, like a grant. Well, they would be getting paid back their own onsite, right? But the pipe you're putting in, sewer and water, would be... It'd be... bigger than if they just want to be built their own, it'd be... Yeah.

Yeah, it would have to service that whole area.

I think for point of clarity, you know, incentive or grant really might be a little bit of a misnomer because really what it is, is like Luke had said previously, the city would pay for these off-site improvements, right? And If nothing was done, the city would eventually pay for these off-site improvements. What the developer's doing is saying, hey, we want to do this earlier. So we will help you pay for these off-site improvements, and instead of the city waiting to get reimbursed 100% through a district, what we're going to do is we'll advance the money, but we get it reimbursed through the district before the city gets the rest of theirs. Now, this agreement will, in the end, after usually it's like 10 years, we guarantee to pay them off 100% anyway. regardless of whether those district fees are collected or not. So they're going to get 100% reimbursement. So really what they're doing is just advancing money to the city so it can get paid and get started earlier than what we would have done otherwise. So it's not really a giveaway or a grant. And I think it's kind of a point that out because the community needs to understand that, that we're not giving incentives. They are advancing some money to get something done earlier than would have before. But ultimately, it all gets paid back through the district.

Let's say that I don't think it'll happen. But let's say for some of it, their development just doesn't go. It just flat doesn't go. So 10 years from now, we're paying for the rest of that sewer that we put in. That's right. But we'd be paying for it anyway, wouldn't we?

That's right. We have not. taken a real deep dive into the development agreement, but there are some performance standards. Jenny's nodding yes. They recognize there are some performance standards that are within the development agreement. So if they did nothing, that does limit their ability to be reimbursed. So there is some expectation of at least a minimal level of performance.

Not that I don't think you guys will work hard to try and get it done.

I think it's important to kind of take it from that standpoint so that to recognize the city's not giving incentives for resident development. Yeah, because they'd be lining up at the door after that. Absolutely.

So while I'm thinking about it, Holly, what are you looking for from the elected officials?

Where you all stand on your comfort level with us moving forward with this type of an amendment, because we could put the development agreement amendment draft together pretty quickly and have it on the next council meeting if you're ready for that. There's a little procedure. It'll take a couple of different meetings to get it through, but they're really pretty ready to go. And so they're kind of looking for how do we know on timing if this is going to be maybe a yes. So yeah, just really looking for your comfort level on if we can bring that draft to you or the agreement to you at the next council meeting.

Kelsey just threw a thumbs up on the screen. Yeah. Do you want to like a scale of one to 10, Holly? Yeah, but then it was two years ago, one for water, one for sewer.

So we'd be amending those basically.

Yeah.

My comfort level is very high.

Nine out of 10.

I like it. We'll go nine. I feel like I could get more comfortable.

What was Kelsey trying to say something?

I think she gave a thumbs up.

She gave a thumbs up.

Okay. You're good. Look at that. Four out of four. All right. There you go.

Okay. You guys feel comfortable? All right. We'll get that. We'll get that on the next council meeting.

I mean, it's just, it's exciting that we've got a willing participant to get something going in that area.

Well, and that's the thing too. A guy doesn't mind doing a little bit for the first one.

Yeah.

It's like, this is like, let's roll.

You guys should go to the fair to celebrate. Yeah.

Take your vitamins. Take your vitamins before you go to the fair.

All right. So, Holly, you need to hang up?

No, I'm good.

Okay. Thanks for being here. Thanks for having me. Thank you. Yeah, thanks for coming. Nice to meet you. All right. Item B is second reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 66 of the Norwalk Code to establish a vehicle weight restriction on Southwest 28th Street. So this ordinance is for an embargo on 28th Street that will cause the road to be used more like a normal residential street because all but one user on that road is residential. The non-residential user is Echo Valley Country Club, and they have indicated they have no objections to that embargo. Wayne, I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you, Mayor. I just want to cover a few things. I think that went over last time. It's entirely zoned residential or in a PUD. The golf course is the PUD. And as you mentioned, they're okay with the weight restriction. Being a residential road, I think it helps to think a bit about the road in front of your house. It's residential. The issue we have out there is it's a rural feeling. It's kind of an unimproved road. I think people get the sense that they can use it for other purposes as like industrial or commercial or however they want, but they can't. It's residential. And that's why Des Moines, they shut down The operation that was occurring out there, they've shut that down. They issued a stop work order. So I think that's resolved. I really have concerns about somebody else doing the same thing. Somebody else may buy property out there thinking, I want to store semi-trailers or I want to dump whatever. That was unfortunate that it happened. to Mr. Corham that he bought that intending one use and he couldn't do that. I think by enacting the embargo, getting a sign up, I think it prevents that from happening again. We don't want that to happen. We also want to protect our investment in the roadway. So that's really why the embargo is on here. I think it's important that we enact it. The county has done it. The county has approved the 2088 to do the improvement. So in Des Moines, considering it Monday.

That's it. All right. Discussion or questions from the council?

Yeah, I voted no last time. Yeah. The LA court of plan, that's just not a lot. I'm trying to help them out, try to get, throw a wrench in the thing so that maybe you go back to one with little leverage, but if that's done, over with, then I guess I'll vote yes.

Okay. Any other discussion or public input? I think it's time to make a motion. Motion to approve the second reading made by Poole. Anybody want to second?

Okay.

Okay, Meineke second. Any further discussion? Lindsay, would you call roll?

Councilmember Meineke? Yes. Porter?

Yes.

Brown?

Yes.

Poole?

Yes. All right. Motion carries. Item 8C is a second reading of an ordinance amending the Norwalk Code to amend Section 5519. section 4601, section 9211, 13510, 6209, 6210, 6302, and 6304, 517, and 13515. These are just a lot of corrections to the ordinances. Jim, anything to add? No. Motion. Thank you. Motion by Brown to approve the second reading, seconded by Kuhl. Any further discussion or any public input? Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Porter?

Yes.

Brown?

Yes.

Cool.

Yes.

Meineke? Yes.

All right. Motion carries. Item 8D is final reading of an ordinance amending the zoning ordinance regarding the reconstruction of non-conforming structures on residential lots. So back in April, we had a final reading of a zoning amendment that addresses the replacement of structures. The situation that caused that amendment was residents weren't able to replace, like in the event in the event of demolition, fire, or other damage. And as an example, an unattached garage, they couldn't replace it on its current footprint. The amendment changed what that was approved, only addressed structures in Gordon Heights, Westwood, Estates, Platts 1 and 2, and Norwalk, Knowles, Platts 1, 2, and 3. Well, we've now had another instance in another part of Norwalk where the same type of thing is happening. So this ordinance amendment allows residents to reconstruct garages in their originally approved It is important to note that this change does not override new fire and building codes, which may still require a higher standard of construction, depending on the structure's location. Luke, anything else on this?

That's a very good summary. I've got nothing else.

All right. Any discussion questions from council or public input? Anybody want to make a motion to approve that final reading? Motion. Second. Okay. Motion by Brown, seconded by Meineke. Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Councilmember Brown?

Yes.

Kuhl?

Yes.

Meineke? Yes. Porter? Yes.

All right. Motion carries. Just to note that Kelsey's typical yes does not seem to be as enthusiastic as we've grown accustomed to.

I think the word you're looking for Councilman Brown is nasally.

It's slightly more nasal in tone.

All right. Item seven is future agenda items. So the purpose of this item is for council to give direction by way of motion to have items placed on future agendas. It's not for the discussion of the merits of the subject matter. So any future agenda items for tonight?

Yes, sir. I've got one here. Uh, There's a group at the state level putting together a study of data centers. And I'd like maybe to discuss that on a future agenda. They're looking at the planning of those and resources and how it might impact in communities. So I wondered if maybe the staff could look into that a little bit and we could have it on the next agenda to discuss it.

Okay, and just as some background, this is a coalition of businesses like Chambers of Commerce, unions, and economic development organizations throughout the state. It's very bipartisan. And I sent you guys an email as far as the website.

And you want it on the next agenda, Ed?

Well, if that gives the staff enough time to look into it and to find out, you know, the particulars of who and what they're looking at doing.

We met with them. Yeah.

Wow.

They're amazing.

Let's just do it.

Well, great. Yeah. And what would we put on the agenda? It would be a discussion item about, um,

about partnering with?

Should we participate?

Yeah. Okay. And becoming a partner with the organization. Great. Okay. Anybody want to make a second?

Okay.

Okay. Lindsay, would you call the roll on that one?

Yes. Council Member Kuhl?

Yeah.

Meineke?

Yes.

Porter? Yes. Brown.

Yes. All right. Motion carried. You got a clean sweep. Yeah. You got, yeah. Unanimous. Anything else? Carry nine. We'll go to option number eight. We got council inquiries and staff updates. I'd like to remind everybody that this portion of the meeting is much less formal. You may hear some back and forth banter and general joking around. We've already heard some of that tonight, which is awesome. We believe this can build camaraderie and cohesiveness between staff and council. I'd like to point out that there's an Envision 2023 update in the packet. And we'll start off with Jim. Nothing. Kelsey, you got anything?

No.

Okay.

Jason? I don't have anything. Ed? No, sir. Luke? Nothing, I guess.

Okay.

I had something. No, I was just going to share. I've started an initiative where like once a month I'm going to go and work at a different building in a different department just to sort of build relationships, but also, you know, just be more visible and hopefully, you know, coming to visit City Hall if you don't work here, maybe that's a bit intimidating or they don't feel comfortable. So just trying to do some outreach. And this week I was at the fire department. I was there three afternoons. Okay.

You did it. You went down the pole.

It was really freaking scary.

It was fine. I almost didn't put my feet underneath me when I landed, but I was in good hands. But yeah, I just had a great week with the fire department. They welcomed me. You could see how excited they were to share what they do, to talk about their job and show me around and that sort of thing. And it was a great time. I really, really enjoyed it.

That's pretty neat. You got to watch those firemen though. They'll take your donuts.

Thanks. Wait. Nothing tonight.

Chief? Nothing tonight.

Nothing. Thanks, Chief. I'll pass. Let's go to Jean Kelly.

Wow. Everybody's passing but me? Shocking. Okay. I just have one item. Denman & Company, our city's auditing firm, was on site the week of July 27th. No significant errors or deficiencies. have been reported. All looks pretty solid for the past fiscal year. We will continue to work on that final product for the next couple months and a presentation to city council later in the year. That's all I have.

Thank you. Thank you. By the way, Kelsey Porter says that she didn't know that the fire poll was an option or she would have done it as well. I was not there.

I had things to do and I thought HR...

New businesses, DeMoss had their grand opening last week, which was great. Awesome new business we have here in the community. D1 Training is opening in the Norwalk Sportsplex Norwalk building. Grave Gym will be opening in the building next to Cooper's. There's like a space in between the Cooper's building and then Be Real Archery and Pro Shops opening open already down in the Dunn Industrial Park. Now we did get a request to maybe open a library in Wine Bar, which is kind of exciting, our bookshop in Wine Bar. And then we sent formal requests to Aldi's in Texas Roadhouse. So if anybody knows anybody else there, we've contacted them in multiple different ways. So we're just going to keep pressuring until they answer us.

All right. Jean Strable.

Nothing tonight. Thank you. All right.

Carissa.

Nothing for me either. Thank you.

Nothing tonight.

Man, everybody worked you out here early.

Sorry, I do have one thing to share. Well, two. First, I don't know if you all recall, but you approved in the budget to purchase. Oh, Chris, I'm going to get it wrong. I'm going to call it a robotic line painter.

Yeah.

for soccer fields and baseball fields. And I kind of geek out on some of that stuff. So I had told Chris's staff when they get that ordered, I'd love to come out and see it work. And today they had an operational painting the soccer fields. It was neat. And part of it for me is twofold neat. One, the technology that goes into it using satellites, once they have specific locations to pinpoint where to start. It has all the measurements to do an exact field for soccer, whatever size field they're using, as well as a baseball field. But even more exciting is some of the cost savings of us being more efficient with staff time. They were explaining to me what it takes for one or two individuals to go out there, run string lines, find the corner pins, and paint physically by hand those fields. And all of them, the gentlemen that were out there doing this work, painting the fields, were very quick to say that this equipment now makes those lines perfectly straight, where in the past they'd get a few hiccups here and there. So if you get the chance to ever see that work, I highly recommend it. Also, today, I didn't get to see this. I saw a video. They had a robotic mower. a 72-inch deck robotic mower. 72? 72-inch that went out. I mean, it was like a full-size piece of equipment that you would see somebody ride on, and it was all automated. Now, I will say that the staff had mentioned that they're not quite comfortable with that technology yet, but the fact that they're thinking about ways to harness technology to be more efficient was pretty impressive. So that was really cool. Second thing I have is I'll speak Sunday. I was invited to a local church. Just do a little presentation update at the Norwalk Christian Church. That's all I have. Thanks.

And I really don't have anything either. So I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

Second.

Motion by Kuhl, seconded by Brown. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, same. We're adjourned, 637. All right.