City Council - Regular Meeting

First item on our agenda this evening is announcements. We have a few announcements, starting with our upcoming meetings. Our next budget meeting will be held on Monday, July 17th at 5 PM, where department heads will present their department overviews, which will include information on budget pressures, cost saving opportunities, and operational efficiencies. As a general reminder, all city council meetings and workshops are open to the public and held here in council chambers unless otherwise noted. If you would like to attend any upcoming sessions, please contact our city clerk in advance. In other news, city offices will be closed Friday, July 3rd in observance of Independence Day. Normal business hours will resume on Monday, July 6th. The next item on our agenda is a proclamation. recognizing July as Park and Rec Month, which I will now read. Proclamation 2026-6, recognizing July as Park and Rec Month, whereas the 2026 theme for Parks and Recreation Month, the power of, celebrates the power of parks and recreation to bring communities together, strengthen health and well-being, and foster resilient, connected neighborhoods. and whereas parks and recreation are vital to the health, vitality, and quality of life of the residents of the City of Victoria, and whereas parks and recreation programs and spaces in the City of Victoria, including parks, trails, open spaces, and recreational programs provide opportunities for physical activity, wellness, learning, and social connection for people of all ages and abilities while serving as gathering places that enhance community pride, environmental stewardship, and economic vitality. And whereas the dedicated park and recreation professionals, volunteers, and community partners who plan, maintain, and program these spaces make it possible for residents to enjoy safe, welcoming, and accessible recreational opportunities. And whereas parks and recreation play a critical role in promoting mental and physical health, providing spaces for relaxation and renewal, and encouraging lifelong engagement in outdoor activities. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Mayor and City Council of Victoria hereby proclaim the month of July 2026 as July Parks and Recreation Month and encourage all residents to recognize and celebrate the power of parks and recreation by exploring our parks, participating in local programs, and thanking the individuals who make these opportunities possible. With that, the next order of business is to adopt the final agenda. Council, can I get a motion to adopt the final agenda?

Motion to adopt the final agenda.

We have a motion. Can I get a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item on our agenda is the open forum. This is an opportunity for members of the public to address the council on items that are not on tonight's agenda or part of an active application that will come to the council at a future date. No one has registered to speak in advance, but if there's anyone in the audience that would like to address the council at this time, please step forward. Seeing no one, we'll move on to the consent agenda. Items on this agenda are routine administrative and do not require deliberation or are housekeeping items that are required by law. They are approved with one vote unless someone requests an item to be considered separately. Ms. Hardy, does staff wish to pull any items off the consent agenda for separate discussion and vote this evening?

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Yes, staff is going to pull 513 this evening.

Very good. Council, any items from council that you would like to see pulled for separate discussion and vote? Or any member of the audience looking to pull something from the consent agenda? All right, clerk, please let the record reflect that item 5.13 has been pulled for further discussion, and I am looking for a motion to approve the remaining balance of the consent agenda.

Motion to adopt the balance of the consent agenda.

I have a motion. Can I get a second?

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Ms. Hardy, you have pulled item 5.13 for a separate discussion and vote. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Mayor, members of the council, staff is pulling this. If anybody's looking at our agenda this evening online, you'll notice that there is an asterisk in front of the number, the agenda item 513, and it's noted as being amended. The item is to adopt a resolution authorizing continued participation in the Minnesota Council on Local Results and Innovations Comprehensive Performance Measurement Program. The reason that this is amended is that due to a glitch in our software that we noticed actually late this afternoon after we published the agenda, This item was not included on the agenda. So there it is a time sensitive item. So we wanted to make sure that council could take action on that. It's important because this allows us to be eligible for levy limit exempt exempts us from levy limits if we participate in this. And we get a state aid distribution in per capita disbursement in the amount of about $1,700. So it's not a lot of money, but it is something that goes to lower our lobby. This is a routine item, and so we wanted to just provide some transparency around what it is. And since we're talking about that, It is a program that we have participated in since 2019 and it just essentially provides some transparency around key performance indicators that we're reporting and making sure that the public is aware of some of these key performance items that we're tracking. So, and as I noted, it does, By participating in this, council would have to adopt a resolution, and by July 1st every year, we need to get that information to the state. And that participation allows us to be eligible for those levy limit exemptions if they were in place, and then to get the disbursement for state aid.

Okay, very good. Thank you, Ms. Hardy. Any questions, comments from council on this?

So by approving this, we basically get ourselves $1,700. If we don't approve it, we don't get our $1,700. Okay.

That's a very simplistic way of putting it, but yes.

I'd like to make a motion to adopt the resolution authorizing continued participation in the Minnesota Council on local results and innovations comprehensive performance measurement program.

Thank you very much, Council Member Patterson. We have a motion. Can I get a second?

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to our regular agenda. The first item on our regular agenda is item 6.1, which is a sketch plat submitted by Ebenezer Development for Astoria, located at 2285 Arboretum Boulevard. Presenting on that item this evening is our city planner, Brian McCann. Mr. McCann, welcome.

Thank you, Mayor and Council Members. Tonight we will be reviewing a proposal for a residential development, more specifically the sketch plat for Astoria Lake Town from Ebenezer Development. As you're well aware, the sketch plat is just to provide feedback to the developer as they start preparing preliminary plat plans for their project. There aren't any approvals taken tonight. It's just to provide guidance to the applicant. So you may be well aware of this site. This is the former Amira project which previously consisted of a 147 unit senior living apartment building. The property address as it currently stands today is 2285 Arboretum Boulevard. It consists of four parcels just totaling over 56 acres. There are two single-family homes on the property currently. There's one here at the end of Sky Drive, and then there's one further into the site in the center. They do have a single full access to Highway 5 at the moment, as you can see here, but they also have an additional access point from Sky Drive on the west. There are four parcels, as I mentioned. The southern two are part of the future Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail corridor. which the applicant is proposing to dedicate to the city to satisfy their parkland dedication. So I'll get into that a little bit more later in the presentation. But there is also significant wetland coverage on the site as well as the stream that connects Auburn Lake to the north and Carl Cray Lake to the southwest. The proposed sketch plaque consists of a 76 unit cooperative senior housing apartment building as well as six town homes between these three buildings shown here. One new single family house and then the existing one shown here that's off of Sky Drive. They are proposing a surface level parking lot consisting of 63 stalls and then an underground parking garage with 104 stalls, so totaling 167 parking stalls for the site. They would also be getting rid of that access to Highway 5 and a cul-de-sac on Sky Drive would be their main access for the site. Looking at the zoning and comprehensive plan, it's currently zoned plan unit development with underlying central business district. This happened as part of the AMIRA proposal because they received preliminary plat approvals for that project. The applicant is planning to rezone it to plan unit development again, but this time as a R4 high density residential project. And the reason for that is because of our comprehensive plan. Requirements for a central business district, any project needs to have 24 to 75 units per acre if it has a residential component. As their project currently stands, they'd be at about 17 units per acre. So as part of this, they would also need to submit a comprehensive plan amendment for high density residential instead of downtown mixed use. Otherwise, the residential uses that they're proposing all comply with our R4 district and our R1 district for that single family house, and they all comply with uses in our 2040 comprehensive plan. Moving on to the shoreland overlay district. As I mentioned, they have a stream connection between two lakes, so they fall entirely within that thousand feet of the shoreland overlay district. With that, they have a hundred foot minimum building setback requirement, as well as a minimum 50% open space requirement for the development. As part of this, we anticipate that they will submit for a residential shoreland planned unit development, which is just an additional layer to a planned unit development. With that, they're going to have to look at a tier analysis to determine if their density is in compliance with the DNR's requirements. They don't want too many units too close to a shoreline, so they're going to have to provide that analysis as part of their preliminary plat submittals. and then also our central business district in our shoreland ordinance says that it can have up to 80 impervious but all other districts must comply with a 25 maximum impervious with an apartment building that may be difficult for them to do so we anticipate that they will be requesting to increase that maximum impervious from the 25 to an amount yet to be determined Then we did not receive any building material lighting or signage plans. We will review all of those with a formal site plan application to be provided at preliminary plats where we'll look at any proposed building or monument signage as well as street lights or building lighting. Then for landscaping and tree preservation, our ordinance requires that they have a minimum 25% development open space for our R4 district. They would need one tree and one shrub of every 1,000 square feet of that required 25% open space for their project. They would also need to have foundation plantings around the apartment building and the town homes. We also would require buffers. Specifically to a 40 foot buffer along the principal arterial here Which is highway 5 as well as a 25 foot landscape buffer separating the single-family homes from the townhomes and the apartment and We would also require boulevard trees every 45 feet along city streets, which would just entail that public cul-de-sac here on Sky Drive. They would also need to provide plantings to screen the off-street parking areas towards any vehicular traffic. So if they didn't have a berm, they would also need to include some plantings to screen headlights from Highway 5 and Sky Drive. And then on top of that, there is a maximum 20% removal of trees on site without requiring mitigation. If they go over that, you're well aware that they would need to add additional trees into their project. So we'll take a closer look at all their landscaping and tree preservation plans with preliminary plat. Then for streets and parking, as I mentioned, they're proposing a public cul-de-sac here for the single family homes. Everything else within the site would be on a private entrance with a turnaround for the fire trucks and a private parking lot. Looking at their parking requirements, senior housing per code requires one space per dwelling unit, as well as an additional space for every five dwelling units. That total for their project comes out to be 92 spaces. But as I mentioned at the beginning, they're providing 167 parking stalls. So they're going well over their minimum requirements. And then we're going to have to look at the single family homes and the town homes more closely to see if they can meet the requirements for enclosed parking for those structures. Then for pedestrian connections, I've highlighted three different kinds of pedestrian connections that they're showing for the project here. On the west end on the public street, they have a public sidewalk shown in green. And then internal to the site, I've highlighted in red all of their private sidewalks going around the building and the parking lot. And then lastly, in the blue, this would be a trail connection to the future Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail corridor. It's yet to be determined if they would allow public access for that trail, but it's a section of Sidewalker Trail worth mentioning. Then for parkland dedication, we did the math and the requirements come out to be just under an acre for the project or $98,000 in parkland dedication fees. The developer, as I mentioned, is planning to dedicate the full seven acre section of the future Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail in compliance with an easement that we have in our records for those two parcels. This greatly exceeds the minimum requirements and with that we've been getting questions from the public about if we would require the developer to construct that segment of the trail or acquire additional land that's outside of their project scope. In both cases the city has not vocalized that we would require that from the developer. Then for wetlands, stormwater management, and site utilities, they're subject to the MCWD's rules and regulations. So they have to plat wetlands and buffers within city outlots that are deeded to the city. We anticipate that they will be requesting as part of their PUD some deviations to the single family homes for this project. Due to the proximity of the wetland buffer on these two single-family Lots with that we might see some shorter lot depths Larger lot with things like that. So that's something we anticipate seeing with preliminary Platts middles Otherwise, they are proposing a underground stormwater System highlighted in green here and their site utilities are proposed to come from highway 5 and sky drive noted in yellow on the plan and With this, the applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting at Winchester and Rye last week. About 15 attendees went to the neighborhood meeting expressing concerns regarding the additional traffic that would be generated on Lakes Parkway for the Lake Bridge neighborhood. And they also requested that the developer construct the trail corridor or complete and purchase additional properties for that trail corridor. But there was also support for a lower project density than what was previously approved with the Amira project. And they were hopeful about the dedication of the land for the future trail as well. The Parks and Recreation Committee also reviewed the project that same evening that the neighborhood meeting was held. And they recommended the city council accept the trail corridor dedication to satisfy their full parkland dedication requirements. We also did receive four public comments expressing similar concerns to those heard at the neighborhood meeting. Those were attached with the council packet for this evening. And then the Planning Commission also reviewed this development last week. They were generally supportive of the project stating the need for senior housing in the city and that the trail corridor is desirable for the project. Questions were raised though regarding access and traffic in the previous traffic study that was done for the Amira project. They also questioned the building heights, the potential maximum impervious for the project overall. how re guiding to a high density district from the central business district would affect our city future land use projections as well as the sidewalk or Trail connections for the site and the possibility of adding one on highway 5 For the residents to get to downtown instead of constructing the trail corridor For the Lake Minnetonka trail and then also exploring the potential of a boardwalk connection instead of working This site along that trail corridor. So with that, I have a couple of questions to help guide discussion if needed. Otherwise staff can stand for questions and a representative of the application is in the audience as well.

Very good council questions, comments.

I have a few. I have a bunch, too. Go on.

Council Member Roberts, why don't you go ahead and start us off?

Just to clarify, you've said townhomes, but in the packet it actually says twin homes. Can you confirm which is actually correct?

Yeah. Mayor and council members, in their submittals, they have them noted as townhomes. In my mind, a townhome is a four-unit product or more, three units as a triplex, two as a duplex, or a twin home. Essentially, these are twin homes. They're two units in each structure.

And so when we say six, does that mean then there's 12 units to be in, or is that six total? So it's really, it's those three we see here. Yeah, okay.

Six total between three buildings.

And then can you remind me, and I'm sorry if you said, how many units were in the original Amir project that was brought before us?

147, as well as two single family homes. Okay.

So, and this one is?

This one is 76 plus six, so 82 between the whole site and then still those two single family homes.

I guess, I mean, I agree we need more senior housing in the city. I like that it's something different, right? It's a co-op, gives a little bit different options for people. Is the Twin Homes, are they part of Is that part of the co-op or is that, is it rental? Is it, I guess, are those different or is it the same?

Mayor and council members, I believe that the townhome.

Josh Kalman. My company, Leap Development, is based out of Pella, Iowa, and I have partnered with Ebenezer and Ebenezer Development on the creation of Astoria Cooperatives. So, Mayor, Council Members, thank you for having us here tonight. We're excited about this community and the potential for this project. So, a little Co-op 101. I've been doing senior development for my entire career. in the last 15 or so years of that, specifically in senior housing cooperatives. It is an ownership model where there is one master mortgage and then the members or shareholders actually live in the cooperative. And so they buy a share. There's an ongoing monthly carry fee that covers as many of the activities of the building and their lives as possible.

So similar to an HOA fee?

Similar, yeah, exactly. Except for 50% of their monthly fee is deductible the same way that it would be if they were in a single family home. for their property taxes and principal and interest. And so then they own and operate that building under one master mortgage, of which they are shareholders in that entity that we form. And they take over and then run via an elective board, as well as other folks who are on different committees to run finance and operations and building and grounds and things like that. It started in the late 70s. The first project was 7,500 York and Edina. It's mostly a Midwestern concept. There have been a few attempts outside of Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Missouri, but for the most part, I think if there's 160 senior co-ops or so in the country, well over 85%, 90% of those are in Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Missouri.

That's interesting. Why is that?

I think a lot of it is because the professionals are here, the folks that sort of created this concept as a senior product were here, the attorneys, the architects that understood that the size of these units is a little larger. So we have units that are up to 1,900 square feet in this particular project. and lots of additional amenity space and different things like that. So I think the folks that understand how they operate are here, same way with Ebenezer. I mean, that's the unique thing about partnering with Ebenezer on this is that they're the largest senior cooperative manager and operator in the country, but certainly in Minnesota. And so they're taking their expertise from all those years of managing other developers' projects and putting that insight into the creation of their own brand.

So even though the unit count is lower, is the footprint of the building actually similar to what the Ameriproject, and I don't know if you know that. Brian, maybe I ask that question to you.

Mayor and council members, I believe it's a little smaller, but relatively same size in terms of overhead footprint and building height.

Okay. Very good. Thank you. And then as the people buy into this co-op initially, are there any restrictions or issues with trying to resell their particular unit? Or how does that work on the reselling the real estate market?

Yeah, great question, Mayor. So it doesn't actually have to go through the general real estate market like on the MLS, but it can. Basically, the co-op contracts for 90-day increments to be able to sell those units, and they do generally sell within that time period. Co-ops tend to build pretty healthy waiting lists because they are entering in, in our particular model, at 50% of the actual value of the unit. That's where we... Model our share prices around 50% of value and so when the market fluctuates they still stay relatively affordable for the day and time of the market and so there's some pieces of that built into how it appreciates and The members have a say in that in the future, but we generally build in like a 1% to 2% appreciation per year. So it's certainly not following the ebbs and flows of the housing market when things go really, really well. But that also means that it doesn't follow it when it goes down either. And so it remains a pretty attractive project or product through the different real estate cycles.

So talk a little bit about what the cost to get into a co-op unit would be.

Yep. So we're at a point where we're still developing the actual pricing for this particular model, but we have a project that we just opened in December of 2025 in Lakeville. And I think the average share price on that community was around $270,000, maybe $265,000. Okay. And then they also can personalize their homes. So while someone might buy a share or a unit in a cooperative for $275,000, they can choose to spend anywhere from $0 on upgrades and choose from our packages all the way up to, you'll see folks that are spending $50,000, $60,000 on upgrades for their home to sort of personalize it. for their own tastes.

Oh, got it.

Okay. You said that was the average was roughly two 70 or is that more of the entry? Nope. That's that's the average. Got it.

Got it. Yep. Thank you. And I, our next project, which is on the Woodbury, um, Oakdale border, um, it's a little higher than just pricing. We were sort of in the midst of a lot of fluctuations in the market. And so those steadied a bit, but the pricing did go up there. And I think that one's closer to 285 or 290 on average.

Good question. So will the cooperative own the real estate parcel? That's part of the overall share, or will some other entity own it and ground lease back to the cooperative?

No, the cooperative owns the land.

So there'll be a shareholder in the building grounds. They'll also own the PIN for this parcel? Correct. And then does the cooperative... And it may not be of a certain given size, but will it have its own brokerage for transferring units, or will it move through the existing, you know, you're represented by a broker, both buyer and seller?

Yeah, great question. So a buyer could be represented by a broker if they chose to, or it could run through the cooperative and they would just charge, I think they... I think so the HOA at Ebenezer or any management company of a co-op will generally have a brokerage license on their team, which Ebenezer does. But they'll just run those resales of units through the cooperative, and the cooperative charges like a $1,000 to $2,000 transfer fee.

Do you have a certain number of units that you have to sell before you begin construction? And if so, what is that?

Yep, great question. So because of the experience that we have with HUD and Ebenezer's experience, it's a 60% presale requirement. I think new developers are required a greater percentage than that. And so at 60% of the 82 units, we're right around 50 units to presale. And I think we have a reservation list already. We haven't launched. That was the other clarification I wanted to make sure I mentioned this to the Planning Commission as well. You will see us in the community. In fact, I think as early as this week, we'll be hosting some informational sessions where we are gathering reservations. And so I always tell that to councils and commissions with co-ops. We're not presuming any sort of approval, but because of that HUD-insured requirement of that presale, we do running in parallel with the approval process. You will see us out there.

Okay, very good. Other questions for Mr. Is it Common? Yeah, Common.

Yeah, you got it.

Before we have him take a seat.

Yeah, I mean, there's a supplemental description from the sketch plot application. Mm-hmm. There's conflicting numbers between what's that and what we've seen here tonight. What's the accurate number? Because I see that it was 65 units that are now being brought down to 30 for the outdoor. Help me to understand, Brian, what we're actually dealing with.

Mayor and council members, we are looking at the 76 unit cooperative, so their submittal the first time around, I think, had included an additional six units in the cooperative building, and then they revised their application to reduce it down to 76 units within the co-op building.

And I think we also lost a villa. We had originally planned for four villas and eight of those twin homes. Sure. And we lost one of those units as well, just with site planning and buffers.

All right. Any other questions for Mr. Common?

Maybe. So the cooperative is like, it's an apartment-like facility, but you're really more, it's kind of a condominium. It's somewhere in between the two. if i have my share and i want to sell my place do i have to go through the cooperative or can i say andy this shares now one point two five would you like to buy it

So great question and great observation. It does run through the cooperative documents and bylaws and the legal structure that the cooperative indicates. So a person entering into the cooperative, so when you bought your share, you would have been able to look at the legal documents and it would have told you the share price for that unit two years from now, five years from now, 10 years from now, 20 or 40 years from now, because it's a 40 year fixed rate mortgage that we obtained. So it outlines the future sale price. Yeah, correct.

So it's not a fundraiser for you. Can I buy more than one? Am I required to?

Yeah, so that question does come up sometimes. Generally, people can buy more than one unit, yes. But they need to be occupying those units. And just because of the way that we cap that growth and appreciation is generally not looked at as a real estate investment for individuals. It's more of that insurance policy that they know what the price is going to be. And they can take the additional funds from the purchase of that $300,000 unit and invest it the way they want to.

Got it.

Thank you.

Yeah, you bet. Good questions.

Anything else? All right. Thank you. Go ahead and have a seat. Don't go far. All right. Any other questions for Mr. McCann on this?

I mean, maybe less of a question, but more of a comment. I think it would be beneficial for us to take another run at the MnDOT for having an exit directly from this parcel back to Highway 5. I'm trying to remember, and I don't think at the time we first saw a MIRA, there was a roundabout constructed at 11 and 5. So there were concerns about a left turn out of this project out onto Highway 5. I think it bears another view at trying to make the case that perhaps a right in, right out from 5 going east could be a potential solution to some of the traffic concerns that we've heard and now that there's the roundabout you certainly can you know through a bit of maneuvering and not terribly far be able to construct a de facto left turn um and then you know then the question of like can you turn left in you know perhaps not perhaps that has to go up to the lake bridge and then come back through sky but to at least take some of that pressure off it i think it merits our uh use of trying to have that access restored it's there now so it's not I mean I think it's not like we're asking for a new cut into five we're just looking to modify what's existing currently

I think that's a fair question. Lakes Parkway, that was actually built as a collector road, not just a neighborhood road. Is that true? Do we know? Yes, that's my understanding as well. Okay, so that actually was built to manage more traffic than it actually currently is. Okay.

Correct. Because if memory serves, that...

connector road terminates with the intention of at the time a ghost plot of the parcels to the west that is still privately owned correct good all right thank you i guess i would just add that i do think it's important that we look at at whether it's the lrt um you know i that neighborhood is kind of out on an island over there and having a way to get into downtown more safely like whether bikes or whatever so activity is important i think i think the connectivity and making it available to the public not just the residents you know what how we do that right i know you mentioned potential for a boardwalk instead of having to buy like i i do think we need to Exhaust those options to see what we can do obviously there will be more traffic for the joint the Neighborhood next to them and so make you know, this is at least they get a benefit from having You know an easy way to walk or bike or whatever down downtown Yeah, so is that part of this sketch platter is that something that we need to talk about in a different discussion It's kind of my thoughts on it I mean, I think it's part of this, isn't it?

Well, I mean, certainly. You're giving us the land.

Yeah, I mean, it's a great opportunity to make that trail connection that we so desperately want to make. And the private property parcels that would make it the easiest are a serious burden for the property owners. I mean, it cuts right halfway through their backyards. Which is a real problem. So we're looking at a complicated trail build. And I have some questions maybe around some proposed grant funding that we might be able to get. Do we have a partner? that might be willing to share the cost of extending the trail with that for us. Whoever that might be, I would encourage staff to exhaust those possibilities as well because we are never going to get a better opportunity to build out that trail than as this property develops.

I absolutely agree. I just don't know if it's part of the sketch plot. But I think we have to look at jogging north of the three properties that don't want to sell. I think we need to get after the Boardwalk Kings, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, work with them. The LRT is technically county property, so even if we get it, we have to give that to the county to build. So the city's not even really doing it. It's super complicated. It's not like we can just say, all right, Ebenezer, can you guys build this trail back here for us? And it'll cost you a couple million bucks, but it'll be a great benefit to everybody. It's not even just benefit Lake Town, but the neighborhood to the north that's always looking to get connected somehow off of 5, if we can have an easier access point for them to cross 5, I mean, it's a... Key component for sure for the city. I just don't know if it's part of. Their schedule their sketch plots like. Here's our driveway and here's our parking lot and. I just don't think it's their job to build it.

Yeah, I think it's just like, it's a discussion for staff to look at and then if there's a opportunity for, you know. hey, can you help us with this little portion of this, right?

Like then maybe we- While you're building your path back to it, can you continue on to this edge?

Yeah, like whatever we figure out is the most economic, right?

Like maybe there's a- Draw a couple more two by fours in the back of the track and do this.

I'm aligned with Council Member Pedersen that it's a good thing to get the easement. I think that's a bit of a stretch to say Ebenezer fund this-

Yeah, I don't think anyone's saying that.

I think it's just saying... We have heard comments that somebody should buy it, and I think we need to dispel those notions that this particular project is not... It doesn't serve their benefit and the other benefits that we're going to... from going forward with a structure that's like this to take what, there just doesn't seem to be the financial feasibility in this to be able to absorb that.

And that's why looking at partnerships, potential partnerships, or exhausting other options, I mean, this is the time to look at it, even though it's not in Ebenezer's court completely by any means, but I think we need to look at, exhaust those options and look at them.

All right, anything else staff, developer looking for from council on this project? There's no action to be taken. It's just for feedback.

I do like the concept of a co-op.

I agree. I think that's going to get... It checks a couple of boxes for us. The senior housing component, the affordability component, the fact that people can maybe finally move out of their big houses into something that right-sizes them. I love this idea. And the ownership piece of it, I think, is really important.

Well, I... yes to all of that but i also think there's been some concerns and again i'm starting to answer some of the questions from the public comment that we got via email but the slates right is a collector of sky drive is not uh... Does that matter? I'm not sure. But we have 142 units down to 82. We have a scaled view versus just an apartment. So you have some single family homes, town homes, and then you have the apartment complex or the co-op complex. uh... were lessening that were lessening the blow from what was already approved all the way through preliminary plat last time uh... and that fell through just basically due to their own personal financing not anything city was necessarily doing uh... but uh... i think what the last traffic study with the double numbers was something like twenty four increase Traffic routes per day or something like that. So if they're to do a traffic study, it's probably going to be less during peak times Is that correct mayor and council members?

That's correct I actually printed a copy of the last traffic report which funny enough was actually done three years ago or submitted to the city three years ago today But that says that's the site in total during peak hours would only generate up to an additional 37 trips in the evening hour of 4.15 to 5.15 p.m. and generates like 450 trips in the average day. That was for the 147 unit proposal. We're talking about just over half of that now. So you can expect those numbers to go down significantly from what was proposed before. And I'm curious to, sorry, go ahead.

And if we're successful with... you know, getting some access to five. I mean, I think that this becomes a completely on that question.

Do they take into account what type of living it is, right? Because you think senior living, right? If they're retired, right? Like they're probably, they could be retired, so they're not going to work during the day. They obviously, they probably don't have kids, so they're not going to all those events that you have to go to, right? So... I mean, it should be even less. So they do take that into account. Correct.

Yep. There's a whole different classification for senior housing versus apartment or condos or whatever it may be.

I'm going to take umbrage with that. I think that seniors will definitely have a clamoring to leave during the peak hours to go to the Mocha Monkey once that's open.

We'll be taking the new trail to the Mocha Monkey. I mean, I think it satisfies a lot of things. There's not going to be more traffic deep in the neighborhood unless they're taking the different access point from the deep west, which may increase a couple extra trips. You might have a couple of extra Amazon deliveries, but UPS, FedEx, mail is all going to be the same servicing both areas. I don't see it creating a safety issue for kids on bikes or people walking the trails. My only concern would be stacking the distance between Sky Drive and Highway 5 in the mornings, taking a right or taking a left out of there. I know that's an engineering thing for CARA, but if I have a concern about the plot, it would be stacking of cars at certain points in time based on how close Sky Drive is to Highway 5. And that's it for me. Thank you. Thanks.

I just have one other question. I apologize if you answered it or if I just missed it. I was trying to look to see. The townhomes or the twin homes, do they have their own separate parking spots? I know you talked about the outdoor lots, right? And then there's underground parking. I guess I just was trying to figure out if they have a driveway for those. Mr. Common, please.

Yeah. Yeah, thank you.

So they actually do, and each unit would have a two-car enclosed garage as well as a driveway to those spaces.

I was going to say, our code requires a two-car garage on those. Correct.

And that is achieved. All right. Thank you.

Thank you. As we get to the impervious, too, I just want to say one last thing I forgot to put in my notes. If we left it as CBD, they could actually create more units and would be required to create more units, and they would have up to 80% impervious surface coverage. Because we're going to R4, They can effectively reduce the number of units there, but now they're beholden to a 25% impervious. So I'm just kind of level setting as we get to the point. We should also keep that into consideration that we may want to allow a little bit more impervious surface allotment through the PUD based on the fact that When this was a CBD, they could have gone way bigger and done things way tighter. So anyway, that's it. I swear I'm done now. Thank you.

All right. Last call for any other? Any comments from council? All right, Brian, you have everything you need?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Very good, then we are moving on. The next item on the agenda, item 6.2, is the final plaque, conditional use permit and encroachment agreement for the Hotel Victoria Commercial Development. Brian McCann, this is back to you again, sir.

Thank you, Mayor and Council Members. Tonight we are at the final step of the major subdivision or planning process for the Hotel Victoria project. This is where we finalize the development details. You'll be seeing a development agreement at one of your upcoming meetings on the consent agenda as part of this process if you choose to approve it tonight. As you're well aware, this is a commercial development project located right in the heart of the central business district downtown here. Tonight they are requesting final plat approval as well as a conditional use permit approval for shared parking arrangement as required by the preliminary plat approvals that the city council granted as well as an encroachment agreement for some building overhangs. So for the location and existing conditions the site is located at 7929 Victoria Drive It's currently a single parcel which has the Winchester and Rye building with some available green space to the north where the proposed hotel would go The site as it stands today is surrounded by streets on all sides It is also within close proximity to the Lake Manitoba regional trail You can see just a little portion of it in the image on the left in the top left corner The site is also about 50% impervious today with the Winchester and Rye building and sidewalks and parking. So for Hotel Victoria, just as a reminder of what their project entails, they are proposing a 46 unit boutique hotel with various amenities, including a covered parking garage with 41 parking stalls. That's where that request for the shared parking agreement comes in. For those five stalls, they weren't able to fit in the parking garage for their project. They're also proposing a fitness center, a lobby with a breakfast bar, multiple meeting rooms and spaces for the project. Since the city council last reviewed it at the preliminary plat, you may recall that it was tabled for the applicant to find some additional parking for the project. With this, they've proposed some modifications to Steiger Lake Lane within Carver County property to create angled parking to get them to a net zero product. So they're not losing any spaces, they're not gaining any on-street spaces with the project. They're bringing it right back to the same number of stalls that are on the streets currently. And then there are some building overhang encroachments that require the encroachment agreement, notably the balconies and the entrance here for the building. So that is why you are seeing an encroachment agreement on your case this evening. So here is the final plat that was submitted. Lot one would contain the hotel, lot two would contain Winchester and Rye, and then they have an outlot here which contains a small portion of sidewalk and parking that they are proposing to privately own and maintain with the project. And then with landscaping and tree preservation, they are exempt from the open space and minimum planting requirements as being part of the central business district. They placed foundation plantings where practical, as you can see in the image on the left adjacent to the building in some spots. They also are required to have a boulevard tree every 35 feet. During preliminary plat, the city council granted them a deviation for that due to the developing urban nature downtown here. And then our tree preservation requirements, anything over 20% typically requires mitigation for removal. They are proposing to remove some additional trees on Steiger Lake Lane here to accommodate those angled parking stalls that were required with that staff did not Anticipate that tree preservation would be required to make up those lost trees on the north side since this was a request to add additional parking capacity Then regarding streets, parking, and drive aisles, they are still planning to expand Randy's Way up to 20 feet wide. So with the other project in the southeast here, the entire section of Randy's Way will actually be upgraded to 20 feet in width. They are also proposing those angled parking modifications to Steiger Lake Lane. As I mentioned, that's within Carver County property, so they need to approve that. As part of their request, so city staff are actively engaging Carver County. They've noted verbally that they would be open to that, but we are requesting formal written approval from the county for those expansions within their property. And then regarding the minimum parking requirements, they are required to have one space per room, meaning they need 46 parking stalls off street. They are providing 41 in the underground parking garage, so that is where the request for the five shared parking comes from. With that, we reviewed this against our general requirements for a conditional use permit set in our code and we did not find any discrepancies with any of the following items listed on the screen. And with that, we had a public hearing that was held by the Planning Commission at their meeting last Tuesday. We did not receive any written comments and no one spoke from the public during the public hearing. So the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and discussed the improvements to Steiger Lake Lane since that was the first time they had seen them, since they had previously reviewed the preliminary plat. And then also had some general questions regarding on-street shared parking use with a hotel concept since there is a overnight component with that. So the Planning Commission ultimately recommended approval with a unanimous 7-0 vote. These were the conditions that staff had presented to the playing commission and the playing commission recommended that the city council approved the request with these conditions. I've highlighted the ones that are abnormal from the ones you would typically see. So, uh, the first one being that the conditional use permit is for the shared parking agreement for five public spark parking spaces. Um, The stalls that made the most sense were the five parallel stalls on the south side of Steiger Lake Lane directly adjacent to the building. With that, we would also require number two, a staging plan to be reviewed and approved since they would be constructing in a sensitive area downtown. As well as number three here, the property at 1600 Arboretum Boulevard is used for project staging and contractor parking, as the applicant noted during their preliminary plat approvals. And then the last two items here, 11 and 12, that they receive approval from Carver County for those modifications within their property boundaries. And then lastly, that they provide a sidewalk connection from that contractor in staging parking at 1600 Arboretum to Kwamaklit so that contractors or visitors could safely get between the two sites. So with that, I have two sample motions on the screen for you for consideration this evening. I can stand for any questions you have, and there are representatives of the application in the audience this evening as well.

Very good. Thank you, Mr. McCann. Council, questions, comments?

I'm excited for it. I don't know much about the encroachment agreement. That just basically means the balcony's hanging over the edge?

Correct. Over the property line into the right-of-way.

Okay. That's totally legal?

Correct. With the agreement.

Okay. Is it the balconies and the overhang of the front as well, or is it just the...

Correct, yeah. So if, maybe I don't have a good image in this slide deck. Yes, I do. So as you can see here, this is the front of the building. This is the property line here, this dashed line going around it. Their balconies would slightly extend over the sidewalk here, and then the front of the building would slightly extend over this corner here, requiring the encroachment agreement.

anything else councilmember petersen i have no other questions on the engagement agreement thank you i don't have any questions i just i think you know i think we've said it before i think it's a going to be a great addition to the downtown. We know we have a need for it. We've got lots of businesses and events in the city that currently people are either staying with family or going out of the city to stay at different hotels. And this will keep them in the city and visit our restaurants and do other things. So yeah, I mean, I think once we got to that net zero, I think everything kind of fell into place.

Agreed, I think it's a lot of work has gone into this, so I think it's a need, and keep the wallet share in Victoria, right, for another night or two. So I think that's great.

Okay, any other questions, comments? All right, with that, we're gonna take this in two motions. Council, can I get a motion?

Motion to adopt the resolution approving the final plat and conditional use permit for Hotel Victoria.

We have a motion. Can I get a second?

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Can I have a second motion, please? Motion.

Oh, you go ahead, Andy. I was asking about it, so I thought maybe I should jump in. But you do it. I'll do the second.

Motion to adopt the encroachment agreement for Hotel Victoria.

Motion. Can I get a second from Council Member Pedersen? All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Motion carries.

All right. Next item on the agenda, item 6.3, a zoning text amendment request regarding fence setbacks. Mr. Briarley is with us this evening to present on this item. Whenever you're ready, please.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. As pointed out, this is a zoning text amendment that was brought forward This is not the zoning tax amendment. Give me one second. Sure.

One second.

Mayor and Council, forgive me, there's a technical issue. No worries. If you can indulge me for 30 seconds, I can get it up.

Sure, no problem.

I do apologize. Going real quick. I apologize. Mayor, Council, the technical issue that we have is normally it can get put on remotely, and it just didn't. make it to the desktop. So just get in an alternate way to get it there real quick.

It's all right. Go ahead and do what you need to do.

Just a lot of dead time, and like I said, I apologize for that. So we're working to resolve that.

Fence posts.

It is. I would like to blame Brady Lee for this because he also put together the Ebenezer materials.

He put together what?

He's credited with putting together. There we go. Now we've got it working.

All right. Very good.

All right. So, Mayor, Council, again, I apologize. Tonight is a zoning text amendment that was brought forward by a resident to make some changes to our fence ordinances. The main thing looking at it is changing how we define a fence setback from stormwater posts, primarily on residential properties. Instead of looking at it from the stance of the fence itself, we look at the post specifically as that measurement. This is a zoning request, therefore we are on a 60-day rule, which would expire on July 7th. This was properly noticed. We sent it out. We had a public hearing at the last Planning Commission meeting where no comments were presented from the public, and there's unanimous recommendation from the Planning Commission for approval. The proposed language you see in front of you is pretty straightforward. Just state that the fence post shall be no closer than six feet to any stormwater pipes, just to help with clarity for residents. The intent of the setback is to provide access for public works and contractors to get in to maintain the stormwater infrastructure, which includes the pipe itself, as well as any inlet structures that might need to be cleaned out. The overall effect that would come with this is it would change it so that you could put in a gate to cross stormwater pipes or be able to connect to existing fences which were installed underneath the previous ordinance. So a real world example that comes up is we look at property or the property here with the four on it is actually the applicant. On property three to the north, this fence already exists and was put in under the old ordinance. There's a stormwater pipe that runs on the property line in between. Under our current ordinance, the applicant could put in a fence but would have to be six feet off the existing fence to the north with his neighbor, creating a gap. Though that gap would be created, the ordinance is not based on an aesthetic. It's based on an availability to maximize the use of a person's property while mitigating any adverse effects that public works would have with maintaining our infrastructure. So that would just be one example. And then to the south here is another example where there's an inlet. Currently, the fence would have to jog around the inlet underneath. the proposed language we could actually put a gate across the inlet allowing for maximization there and the main reason the gate works for theirs the easement comes up from the south public works would still have access to that area to do the maintenance and the other things you need to do by opening the gate so there's no additional machinery or anything else required So like I said, the overall effect is it doesn't really have any downsides to it, but it will allow for greater maximum use for our residents to put a fence around their property. And with that, I can stand for any questions.

Very good. Thank you. Questions, comments from council?

We're basically putting gates over the stormwater pipe instead of a pulled fence, right?

Council member, that's correct. They would need to have at least a six foot. So where the post would be for the gate, the gate would have to extend six feet from there. And that way you can create a 12 foot opening with two gates to get in there with existing fences. The fence is already in the way that exists now, but the additional fence that would come in, we use a gate that could open. So it doesn't actually create any more nonconformities.

Makes sense. I couldn't come up with anything. I tried to do a little search on it. I couldn't come up with anything. What is the negative here? Like if we have to get a machine in there that's too big and it breaks up some fence because it's wider than six feet, but I can't come up with a machine that would need to go in there to do that.

Yeah, I don't see a downside.

I don't either. All right.

Any other questions, comments? Seeing none, I will entertain a motion. motion to adopt ordinance 489ZC amending the minimum fence setbacks from storm water pipes we have a motion can I get a second second we have a motion and a second all in favor signify by saying aye aye any opposed motion carries With that, there are no more items on our regular agenda this evening, so we're moving on to reports and emerging issues. Attorney Volst, anything from you this evening?

Mayor, I don't. Thank you.

You've been very quiet this evening.

I've been trying to be a good boy.

Ms. Hardy, anything from staff? None from staff, Madam Mayor. All right. Anything from the council members this evening?

I have two things. Yes, Council Member Patterson. Maybe three. This week is the PGA Championship for Women at Hazeltine, KPMG. I'm volunteering. I think it's a great way to get out and spend some time with your family and watch some great golf. 24th is our next car show, I believe. then unfortunately as of the 22nd which is today the very road south and Chaska is getting a mill and overlay until the middle of August I did drive it today and it was still operational without any sort of encumbrance but it looks like chaska is doing some construction there for all of you watching unfortunately fortunately it's well needed it's a little beat up but i'm like wait one week because that's my path to hazeltine anyway so those are just the three little updates i had thank you very good thank you any other

I have two, not updates, but I want to put city manager Hardy on the spot. One, I just am curious, after our ordinance last, what, two weeks ago or last meeting, if there's been any complaints, updates on noise at night, if there's any update.

Excellent question. Thank you. Council Member Roberts, Mayor, members of the council, we have not, like, The last two weekends, we have not received any noise complaints specifically for loud outdoor music. And there were other calls to service in the downtown area, but none of them related to noise.

And then my only other question is, and I think I asked this maybe a month or so ago, but I keep getting asked about it because people are excited about it. Any update on Quick Trip on when they're going to start?

Do you have an update, Brian?

People are jonesing for some Quick Trip.

Mr. McCann has the answer for us.

Thank you, Mayor and Council Members. Yes, quick update to that last question as well. I do want to note that we did get one complaint through our revised system that we just got this morning, so we didn't get the chance to update Ms. Hardy on that. But yes, that's the only one that I'm aware of that's coming. And then secondly, for Quick Trip, they should be getting their building permit soon. All the requirements that I needed on my end have been done, and I think we're finalizing the building permit plan set pretty shortly. Construction is anticipated soon, and I think it's gonna be a three-month construction. They said so they move pretty quick so We might have three months. Can you repeat that three months? That's impressive.

I think that is impressive I remember them saying what their construction time was and it was it was quick. Yeah, yeah for sure Yeah, okay. Thank you. All right anything else No, thank you All right, seeing nothing else, there are no more items to come before the body this evening, so I will entertain a motion to adjourn.

I'll make a motion to adjourn.

We have a motion. Can I get a second?

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries. We stand adjourned.