Loading...
10-23-23 CC Reg Mtg MinutesCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2023 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Labadie called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call Present. Mayor Labadie; Councilmembers Callies, Maddy, Sanschagrin, and Zerby; City Attorney Shepherd; City Attorney Land; City Clerk/HR Director Thone; Finance Director Rigdon; Planning Director Darling; Park and Recreation Director Crossfield; and, City Engineer Budde Absent: City Administrator Nevinski C. Review Agenda Maddy moved, Sanschagrin seconded, approving the agenda, as presented. Motion passed. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Labadie reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Sanschagrin moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. City Council Work Session Minutes of October 10, 2023 B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2023 C. Approval of the Verified Claims List D. Accept Resignation of SCEC Attendant E. Approve Promotion to Public Works Utility Lead F. Designate 2024 Polling Place Locations, Adopting RESOLUTION NO.23-104, "A Resolution Designating 2024 Polling Precinct Locations for the City of Shorewood." G. Approve Independent Contractor Agreement with Tenicity CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 2 of 21 H. Approve Release Agreement with Alex and Elena Ugorets Motion passed. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Barry Brown, 6050 Burlwood Court, noted that he had lived in Shorewood since 1995 and noted that his property backs up to the wooded area in Freeman Park. He stated that he had used the Freeman Park trail almost every single day for the last twenty-nine years and explained that over the last seven years he has conducted various maintenance tasks along the trails and the easement areas including mowing, cutting back buckthorn, blowing leaves, removal of fallen trees, and snow plowing. He stated that he would like to request that Public Works once again take over these responsibilities on a regular basis, like they used to do. He noted that they stopped doing the work about eight years ago. He noted the location of an easement between Burlwood Court and Maple Leaf Circle that leads to the new ponds project. He stated that there have been several conversations with City staff where they were told that this area was supposed to be graded and reseeded this past spring. He explained that he is proposing that the City enforce the original contract agreement or have Public Works complete the project. He stated that once this area is reseeded, he feels that Public Works should take over the maintenance which should include weekly mowing. He stated that because the grading issues remain open, there is standing water in the easement area which has been brought to the attention of the City and noted that placement of the walking trail blocks the water from freely flowing into the storm sewer drain nearby and causes puddling and a place for mosquitos to breed. He reiterated that this was supposed to be corrected by the contractor. He shared a recap of what he felt was a very important community meeting regarding buckthorn and the grant the City has received. He stated that it appears as though the City's preferred approach is to clear cut the buckthorn using forestry mulching equipment and spray some type of poison on the stems to kill the regrowth. He stated that these actions are to take place in November or December of 2023. He stated that the larger buckthorn will be stacked in an open area of Freeman Woods and then burned sometime over the 2024-2025 winter. He stated that there appears to be no maintenance plan beyond the first year to fund the ongoing buckthorn removal. He urged the Council to fully fund these efforts for the next five years in order to maintain the woods. He asked the City to release to the public all proposals for the project at least one week prior to the November 13, 2023 City Council meeting so concerned residents can contact the Council directly in order to provide input before approvals are granted. Councilmember Zerby asked that Mr. Brown leave a copy of his statement and questions with staff. Mr. Brown noted that this has been an ongoing situation for the last eighteen months and noted that Planning Director Darling should already have copies of the information. 4. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Chief Tholen, SLMPD — Flock Camera and Approval of Allocation Detective Protivinsky and Officer Weinmann gave an overview of the proposed Flock Camera System and shared examples of other communities where it was currently being used. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 3 of 21 Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the primary purpose of the cameras was to just read license plates and collect data on the vehicles. Detective Protivinsky confirmed that was their primary purpose. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked where the cameras would be positioned. Detective Protivinsky outlined the way that Flock plots the community and takes into consideration their solar aspects. He noted that for Shorewood they are thinking of positioning the camera on Smithtown facing County Road 19. He stated that if Excelsior agrees to having a camera, they would like to place in near the elementary school in order to capture Highway 7 traffic as well. He outlined proposed camera locations in Tonka Bay and Greenwood. Councilmember Zerby asked about the ability to go back thirty days in looking back at data. Detective Protivinsky outlined the way the nation wide Flock system worked and explained their ability to go back and look for specific vehicles, if needed, without license plate information. Councilmember Zerby asked about transparency and what the intent was in terms of releasing information to the public. He gave the example of information released by Wayzata about the number of cameras, hot list hits and searches that took place over the last thirty days. Detective Protivinsky stated that was something that he would have to speak to Chief Tholen about, but noted that he is generally very open and up front about anything the Department is involved in. He stated that the information is readily available from Flock so he would hope that the transparency would be similar to what they have seen with other agencies. Councilmember Callies noted that Detective Protivinsky had made a comment that anybody could buy this kind of camera and asked if that meant they could log into the cameras and use it for their own purposes. Detective Protivinsky explained that the general public would not have access to the Department's cameras unless they would agree to share it with them. He stated that they can share with other law enforcement agencies, but does not believe they can share it with a private citizen. He stated that if a neighborhood bought a camera, in theory, the individuals in the neighborhood should be able to share with each other but reiterated that they would not have access to the Department's cameras. Councilmember Callies asked how the Department would be monitoring these and whether there would be someone stationed looking at the camera feeds or if they would only be looked at when there was some type of alert. Detective Protivinsky stated that for the patrol officers, there will be an app and they will be able to have it on their computer screen. He explained that if they get an alert, it would automatically be sent to their phone or their computer and then they can pull over and review the footage. He explained that like every other database, they cannot just review the data for fun and need to have a law enforcement purpose first. Councilmember Maddy stated that it appears as though the camera equipment would be leased so the Department would not be responsible for any maintenance activities. He asked what the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 4 of 21 plan would be for after the initial two year period and if it would be to plan to spend twelve thousand per year in order to keep them in operation. Detective Protivinsky explained that their goal is to continually get the grant funding. He noted that the only reason that they needed to come back to the cities and ask for additional funding this time around was because there was a slight price increase between the time they received the grant and the present time. Sanschagrin moved, Maddy seconded, Approving the Installation of the Flock camera in Shorewood and authorize the expenditure of $800 from the City's Public Safety Aid allocation. Motion passed. 5. PARKS 6. PLANNING A. Report by Commissioner Holker on October 3, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commissioner Holker gave an overview of the discussion and recommendations from the October 3, 2023 meeting. B. Conditional Use Permit for over 100 cubic yards Applicant: JK Landscaping Construction Location : 4800 Spray Island Planning Director Darling reviewed the application for a CUP to import two -hundred and fifty cubic yards of material. She noted that the affected property is on Spray Island and explained that they are proposing to import the material by barge in order to level the lawn area on the actively used portions of the property. She stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item and recommended approval, subject to the conditions as outlined in the staff report. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if any approval from the DNR would also be required. Planning Director Darling stated that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is the permitting authority on behalf of the DNR. Councilmember Callies stated that she attended the Planning Commission meeting when this item was discussed and her recollection is that this fill material would not change the elevation on the site or the overall grading and was really just to level off the property. Zerby moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 23-106, "A Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Import of 250 Cubic Yards of Fill at 4800 Spray Island." Motion passed. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 5 of 21 C. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concept and Development Stage PUD for a Paddle Sports Club Applicant: Admark, LLC Location: 24560 Smithtown Road Planning Director Darling explained that the City was utilizing two consultants who are giving aid to the City due to potential conflicts of interest with the City's typical consultants. She introduced Korine Land serving as a City Attorney, from LeVander Gillen and Miller, and Josh Phillips, serving as City Engineer, with Barr Engineering and noted that he was joining the Council via online video conferencing. She gave an overview of the proposal to re -guide the property from residential to commercial and the concept and development stage PUD for property located at 24560 Smithtown Road. She explained that the applicant is proposing a hybrid use that is essentially a twelve -unit self -storage condominium project where each condo owner would have access to the clubhouse level which has a lounge, kitchen area, and an indoor pickleball court. She stated that each member would purchase a storage unit as a condominium and would use it for personal storage, vehicle storage, or leisure uses. She stated that the plans have the project divided into two buildings with both having self -storage units with the southerly building having units that would each have their own restroom and have a mezzanine level over half the unit and the northerly building would have the clubhouse on the second floor with storage areas on the first floor. She outlined the purpose of a PUD and noted that the applicant was requesting flexibility in most of the applicable setbacks, the height of the structures, impervious surface coverage, parking, hours of operation, and landscaping and screening requirements and reviewed some specifics from the proposed plan. She explained that staff had originally recommended denial of the application because of the over -development of the site and the amount of flexibility requested. Darling noted that at the October 3, 2023, Planning Commission meeting, they voted 4-1 in favor of the application. She noted that they had discussed the possibility of limiting the height of the buildings, but ultimately did not act on that proposal, but included the remainder of the conditions that staff had proposed. She stated that at the meeting, the Planning Commission had expressed concern that they did not have enough information about this type of project in the area. She explained that staff had not provided extensive research on the other projects in the area because City codes are adequately written to provide protection from the over development of properties and this parcel is smaller than the storage condos that are proposed in other communities. She stated that following the meeting, staff spoke with many of the other planners in nearby communities and spoke with a developer of storage condos and reviewed photos and plans for four different developments. She stated that she found that this type of project is typically located away from residential uses and is generally in commercial areas. She stated that they are always buffered and screened from residential properties with either distance or natural environment features. She reviewed some of the smaller questions that the Planning Commission had asked her to look at more closely, including the driveway visibility. Darling noted that the applicant had submitted a revised plan that included diagonal parking and stated that her concerns were essentially the same with this proposal as they were with the original proposal. She stated that the Excelsior Fire District reviewed the plans and confirmed that they would not be in support of this layout because it further reduces the width of the required fire lane on the property. She noted that this proposal is up against the 120-day review period deadline which will end on November 4, 2023, so there is not an option to extend it to another meeting. She gave a brief overview of the two options available to the Council to either deny the request or approve the request. She explained votes that would be necessary in order to approve the Comprehensive Plan amendments or rezoning from residential to commercial. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 6 of 21 Councilmember Callies stated that the City had just undergone a major review of the Comprehensive Plan and at that time there were no changes to this site being guided as commercial from medium density residential. Planning Director Darling stated that was correct and noted that the Planning Commission and the City Council had approved the Plan with this property being residential but increasing the density from low to medium density up to medium density. Councilmember Callies clarified that at that time it was still considered appropriate for it to remain as residential. Councilmember Zerby stated that in looking at the City website and the City zoning map it appears to be shown as C-1 and asked if he had the wrong parcel or the wrong map. Planning Director Darling stated that he was looking at the correct map and explained that the property was not rezoned after the City Council initially changed the land use designation on the property to residential. Councilmember Zerby asked about when a super majority vote would be needed and noted that this appeared to be a situation where it would be changed from commercial to a CUP. City Attorney Land clarified that the property has been `guided' as residential, so once that Comprehensive Plan has been approved by the Met Council, they will have one -hundred eighty days to make their zoning ordinance comply, which would be the next step that would have to be taken. Councilmember Zerby asked if the Comprehensive Plan had been approved. City Attorney Land stated that she believed it was scheduled for approval in the near future. Planning Director Darling stated that it is scheduled for approval on Wednesday. Councilmember Zerby clarified that as of today it was not approved. City Attorney Land stated that she would strongly urge the Council to go with their last vote on this parcel which was that they approved a plan guiding it for residential use, which is why it would require a super majority vote in order to re -guide it to commercial. Councilmember Zerby stated that he was not a lawyer, but the law, to him, is black and white and, at the moment, the Comprehensive Plan was not approved. Planning Director Darling clarified that the current 2030 Comprehensive Plan does guide this property for low to medium density residential and not commercial. Councilmember Zerby noted that the map, which is available to the public, has it designated as commercial property. Planning Director Darling clarified that he was referring to the zoning map and not the Comprehensive Plan map. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 7 of 21 Councilmember Zerby stated that he understands that, but reiterated that the land, today, is zoned as commercial. City Attorney Land stated that it is guided as residential whether is low to medium density or medium density, so this would still change the zoning classification. Planning Director Darling stated that she believed what Councilmember Zerby was saying is that because there is commercial zoning on it now, and there is a commercial PUD, this would be considered commercial to commercial zoning. City Attorney Land confirmed that that part is correct, but the portion that is still in conflict is the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that changing the zoning classification of the Comprehensive Plan still requires a super majority vote. Councilmember Zerby reiterated his point that the Comprehensive Plan had not yet been approved by the Met Council. City Attorney Land stated that even if the City went with their old Comprehensive Plan, it was still guided for residential and changing it would require the super majority vote. Councilmember Zerby noted that he did not believe the old Comprehensive Plan had been approved by the Met Council. Planning Director Darling stated that the 2030 Comprehensive Plan had been approved by the Met Council. City Attorney Land explained that they are kind of stuck on the no-man's land of the Comprehensive Plan not being consistent with the zoning ordinance, but reiterated that was guided as residential, and to amend that, a super majority vote would be needed in order to change the zoning classification to a commercial designation. Councilmember Zerby reiterated that, as of today, it is commercial property because that is what it is zoned as. City Attorney Land confirmed that it was zoned as commercial but was not guided as commercial. Councilmember Callies stated that Minnesota Statute requires that the zoning ordinance be brought into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and that has not been done for this parcel. Councilmember Zerby stated that if he were a property owner and looked at the City's website to see how it is zoned and what options there would be for using this property, he would have seen that it is zoned as commercial, C-1. He stated that there is no discussion about the gray area of what it may be `guided' as. He stated that it does not seem logical for a developer to investigate and create plans based on the information that the lot is commercial to then come to the City and be told this parcel is now residential. Councilmember Callies stated that she thought the property owner had to also consider the Comprehensive Plan. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 8 of 21 Councilmember Zerby stated that he did not believe most people were aware of what a Comprehensive Plan is. Councilmember Callies noted that she felt that was beside the point because she believes both things go hand in hand but could acknowledge that there was some inconsistency in this case. Councilmember Zerby reiterated that if he went to the City website it would say this property is zoned as commercial and noted that there was no asterisk that tells anyone to go take a look at the Comprehensive Plan guidance. Mayor Labadie noted that this applicant had worked with the City on other applications. She asked if the Comprehensive Plan and zoning was discussed with the applicant. Planning Director Darling stated that it was discussed for both potential projects. She noted that this was the first official application and explained that in 2021 they had submitted a sketch plan for a residential development that was discussed at a work session. Mayor Labadie noted that even though this is the first official application, the Comprehensive Plan and zoning were discussed with the applicant for both potential projects. She asked City Attorney Land about why she highly recommended that the Council go in one direction versus the other. City Attorney Land stated that she does a lot of training with Planning Commissions because there are a lot of rules that regular people just do not know. She stated that the guiding document for the City was not intended to be very black and white and is to be guidance with a broad brush. She stated that the zoning map gets much more particular and breaks it down into smaller parts of what is planned, for example single family residential and multi -family residential. She stated that the Comprehensive Plan is just as important as the zoning plan, and both have to be taken into account when they apply every single land use application. She stated that just because the City's zoning ordinance was not made consistent does not make the Comprehensive Plan any less important. She noted that every single applicant has a duty to look at both documents and both are available on the City's website. She stated that one of the last Council decisions on this property was that it should be guided as residential, and the most recent Council decision was that it should be guided for medium density residential. She clarified that was why changing this from residential to commercial, which requires a Comprehensive Plan amendment, should be a super majority vote. Councilmember Zerby stated that he disagreed with that point because this parcel was not residential. He stated that the meeting that was held when the sketch plan was presented had many residents attend who told the City that they did not want this to be changed and the Council agreed with them. He stated that they had directed the applicant to keep it commercial and find a commercial purpose for it. He reiterated that the property was still zoned commercial today and is not zoned residential at this point. Mayor Labadie asked City Attorney Land about the votes that would be required for the two alternatives presented by staff. City Attorney Land stated that for a vote to deny, that would be a simple majority vote. She noted that, if the Council were to vote to approve the request and change the Comprehensive Plan, by CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 9of21 law, it would require a super majority vote regardless of whether or not it was what the people wanted, because it is guided as residential. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he was trying to understand how many code sections required flexibility and asked if he was correct that it was six. Planning Director Darling noted that there were a few that she summarized together in her report, but believes it is likely around six in total. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if there were specific requests that concerned staff related to safety or well-being. Planning Director Darling stated that the variances that she felt were most concerning were the limited amount of screening from the residential properties to the west, the height of the buildings, which is compounded by the height of the retaining walls, and the lack of parking on the site. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked about the impervious surface requests and if staff was concerned about hard cover and the impact on the adjacent properties. Planning Director Darling stated that the applicant was requesting impervious coverage of seventy percent when the ordinance allows for sixty-six percent. She noted that for this difference, they are proposing a pervious paver which will need annual maintenance. She stated that the applicant is showing quite a bit of stormwater treatment and control on site so she believes they will be able to provide rate and volume control on the site and would be able to provide some treatment. She explained that the limitation on impervious surface was not just controlling stormwater and was also related to bulk control, so they are holding more of the site open for open space, which, in this case, she believed showed another example of over development of the site. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that there are a number of suggested conditions included in the report if this were approved and asked how the City would enforce those conditions. Planning Director Darling stated that there are some that would be relatively easy because the City would not issue a permit until the requirement had been met. She stated that long term, it would require staff going out and investigating complaints or keeping their eye on the development to ensure that they adhered to the conditions of approval. Mayor Labadie stated that she was concerned and having a hard time getting around the parking issue that cannot be resolved without blocking the fire lane. She stated that she was not sure that this concept was appropriate for this particular parcel, and she felt a big factor was the parking issue. She stated that concept of the man cave and the lounge area would probably be utilized for an event such as Super Bowl Sunday and noted that the American Legion is designated as an overflow parking spot, but they would also have a lot of patrons on that kind of day. She expressed concern about where the guests coming to this building were supposed to park. She stated that she was also concerned that the Fire Department had not given this proposal their blessing. Councilmember Zerby asked if the Council could hear from the applicant. Mayor Labadie noted that she would like the Council to finish discussing Planning Director Darling's report before they heard from the applicant. She stated that the public hearing on this CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 10 of 21 item already took place at the Planning Commission meeting but knows that there are many people present at the meeting who are very interested in this topic, but she intended to only open discussion up with the applicant. She encouraged them to get their questions or comments to the applicant before he addressed the Council. Planning Director Darling clarified that the Fire Department signed off on the parallel parking stall plan, but not the diagonal parking plan that had been resubmitted. She stated that the concern she has with parallel parking is that the parking spaces would block pedestrian access out of the doors of the units. Mayor Labadie asked why a revised parking plan had been submitted if the Fire Department had already signed off on approval for the parallel parking plan. Planning Director Darling stated that she thinks it was because staff met with the applicant after the Planning Commission meeting, and they discussed the concept of parking. She stated that the applicant was hoping to provide more convenient parking on the site by providing angled parking stalls. She stated that this is just very tight on the site and noted that the Fire Department had stated that if the applicant wanted to provide more parking in front of the buildings, they would need to cut off the landscaped area in order to provide the required fire lane. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the City had heard from the adjacent property owner. Planning Director Darling explained that the adjacent property owner was at the first Planning Commission meeting. She stated that following that meeting they met with the applicant and did not attend the second Planning Commission meeting. Councilmember Callies stated that she was in attendance at the Planning Commission meeting, and they had a lot of discussion around events and there is a condition of approval that states that events that exceed the amount of parking on the site would not be permitted. She stated that the problem she sees with that is how it will be monitored. Mayor Labadie asked the applicant to address the Council. Mark Kaltsas, 6015 Cathcart Drive and Adam Schultz, 26030 Valley Wood Lane, addressed the Council. Mr. Kaltsas noted that he has a handout that he would like to distribute to the Council in response to the report that was sent out on Friday. He stated that he would also like to give the Council some additional context which the Planning Commission had found helpful. He noted that they came to the Council in 2021 after purchasing the property that had been for sale for about ten years. He stated that they are aware of what the property is guided for in the Comprehensive Plan, but noted that the property today is zoned commercial. He stated that he did not believe the onus for rezoning the property was on them and should be the City's responsibility. He noted that it had been over a decade and the City had not rezoned this property. He stated that they came in with an initial plan for a residential project and the room was packed with residents who were opposed to developing it into a medium density residential development. He stated that, at the time, there was discussion from the Council that they were not sure that the property should be developed as residential either. Kaltsas explained that following that discussion, they went back to the drawing board and took a look at what this property would allow for and what project they could put in front of the City that would benefit the City and the local residents. He explained that there was a group of local CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 11 of 21 residents from the area that have an interest in pickleball and C-1 states that private clubs and lodges are allowed. He explained that they would like to form a private club called the Shorewood Paddle Club and noted that this group also has a common interest in boats. He stated that there is heavy industrial use to the east of this parcel, with an auto repair facility that is very loud and some type of motel or apartment building on the other side. He explained that they had looked at the marketability of putting residential products on this property with the proximity to the other uses and felt that this site could be a nice transition property with what they are proposing to the residential area on the west side of the property. He stated that if this were a multi -family residential development they would need the same drive aisle, the same amount of storm water management, and the same limitations with building setbacks along with a driveway to serve the units and a fire lane. He stated that when they looked at it, they felt that C-1 made sense and had discussions with staff about those standards and tried to put together a site plan that made sense. Kaltsas noted that it is important to note that this property slopes 22 feet from the street to the park on the north side which makes it challenging to develop. He stated that they tried to step the buildings with the grade rather than just flatten it out and just build one big retaining wall and have a product that fit the site and not one that just a mass building which was why they broke it into two buildings. He explained that one of the things they heard loud and clear with the residents who came out in opposition of the residential project was the amount of traffic that would be generated. He stated that the site is guided for six to eight units per acre by the current Comprehensive Plan. He noted that usage versus a private club would generate a two to one traffic count. He stated that because of traffic in the area, particularly along Smithtown Road, they felt this current proposal was a better solution and that this project would add huge value to the City and this area. He stated six or seven residential units would barely fit on this property when you take into consideration fire lanes, setbacks, and the building. Kaltsas explained they met with staff last week and were trying to pinpoint the targeted parking number and explained that they have gone back to the parallel parking proposal after they understood the comments from the Fire Department. He noted that he had reached out to Medina, Watertown, Chanhassen, and Independence about their projects and they allow parallel parking in front of their buildings, but do not stripe it. He stated that they are proposing a ten foot wide space in front of the units for parallel parking which still leaves about three feet for people to have to room to walk around the car and open the door and enter the unit. He explained that he had taken a look at recent approvals in the City and referenced a twin home development behind the Tonka Bay project which had a PUD and each of those units is located on a twenty-six foot wide drive lane with no parking on either side and two parking spaces in the driveway and seven additional spaces for eleven units. He stated that the Council made a provision that each unit had to maintain one indoor garage space open for parking and explained that they were proposing the same for this project. Kaltsas noted that he thinks it is important to note that they have four space garages with the condo units not and not just the two spaces that the twin homes have. He stated that they would include this in their HOA and CIC documents and mandate that each unit maintains one space for their own parking indoors. He stated that these will be heated garage units, so during the colder months, he suspects they will want to park inside. He stated that the City had asked them to provide six spaces for the pickleball, ten spaces for the lounge area, five spaces for the individual units, if they were categorized as storage units, and noted that he would not categorize them as storage units. He explained that they were proposing six spaces, with one being accessible, fourteen spaces for the lounge, and each unit would have their own individual space on top of that, so there would be a total of thirty-two spaces. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 12 of 21 Kaltsas explained he is awaiting additional information from the building inspector because ADA excludes private clubs from their requirements. He noted that he thinks they will plan to maintain their accessible space, but does not believe it is an actual requirement. He stated that regardless, they will have thirty-two or thirty-three spaces which is in excess of the twenty-one spaces that are required. He noted that there has been a lot of discussion about the pickleball and lounge area becoming somewhat of a party facility but it would simply be a place to play pickleball and comfortably hang out. He noted that it would not be a party facility and explained that they would not be serving alcohol. He stated the intent is for this to really be a residential based indoor pickleball court with some seating on one end. He stated that there will be bathrooms and a locker room storage area for the members. He reiterated that it was not intended to be a public facility and noted that the fire lane will have signage so people will know that they cannot park there. Kaltsas explained there has been a lot of discussion on buffer and landscaping. He explained that with a site that is one -hundred feet wide, they are also concerned about buffering and landscaping. He stated that would like to not be seen and noted that they had pulled back the driveway back from the property line to meet the setback requirement which was not clear in the report. He explained that they are proposing over sixty trees to be planted on the property line. He stated that he is a licensed landscape architect and does planting plans for a living. He stated that he believes they can successfully grow and screen anything with what they are putting in. He explained that they are planning to put in a significant number of six to ten foot evergreen trees as well as a significant row of arbor vitae and some overstory deciduous trees. He noted that they have also agreed to put in an opaque fence along the entire property line. He stated that they have met with the adjacent property owners and they are in support of the project. He noted that the motel property has changed hands recently and he had not yet met with the current property owner. He stated that he also feels it is important to note that there were no negative comments that came forward with this proposed project. Kaltsas explained they are calling these units `lifestyle condos' and people would be purchasing them and not rental units. He stated that with a purchase of one of the condo units they will have membership in the club and explained that there is no other access to the membership, so it would be capped at the twelve units. He stated that the build out for each unit would depend on each individual member and explained that they will provide them with a shell that has heated space and they can finish it how they like through the City's process. He stated that the south building meets all applicable setback requirements, but noted that the report had indicated that it did not. He stated that the exceptions they are asking for on this project relate to the north building and explained the reason that they went a little wider was that they were trying to accommodate a pickleball court. He reiterated that he feels this will serve as a great transition for the nearby residential properties. He stated that he looks at this as a `quasi' commercial development as a transition that will elevate the quality of the area from the motel and car garage usage. He stated that they were excited by the recommendation from the Planning Commission and were also in agreement with their proposed conditions. He explained that their intent was to work with the City to get a project going that makes sense and that everybody would like. He stated that the people that are in the room tonight all live in the area and were here in support of the project. Mayor Labadie stated that the nearby property has been referred to as a motel and asked if it was that or an apartment building. Planning Director Darling explained that it was an apartment building. Mayor Labadie asked that this property be referred to as an apartment building and not a motel. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 13 of 21 Councilmember Maddy stated that he really likes the concept being presented. He noted that it looks fun and vibrant, but not too vibrant for the City. He stated that the problem is that a little over ten years ago the City did a small area plan to try to prevent proposals just like this one with an awkwardly shaped lot that makes it tough to deal with things like drainage and fire lanes. He stated that the idea, at the time, was that the best use would be to combine lots and share some of the burdens of things like stormwater and parking. He asked if Mr. Kaltsas had approached neighboring properties to see about the possibilities to combine them. Mr. Kaltsas stated that the neighboring property owner wants to stay and the apartment building just changed ownership. He stated that the residents in the building are leaving because they are doubling the rent. He noted that they had approached those owners as well as the auto shop, however, the price was too high. He stated that he thinks it was a noble idea on behalf of the City, but they were just not able to assemble any additional properties for that type of use. Mr. Schultz explained that when they bought this property from the Legion, they said they knew the City was trying to assemble properties for a project and the only way the Legion would move and sell their property was if someone found a lot the area and built them a building which is unattainable. Councilmember Callies stated that a lot of what is being discussed is theoretical and noted that she agreed that assembling properties for a project was a good idea, but people cannot be forced to sell nor should someone have to buy something else in order to use their property. She stated that the Council needs to consider the proposal that is in front of them right now. She stated that when residential use was discussed in the past there was not a particular appetite for it, but reiterated that was not what they were being asked to consider. She stated that she thinks this is an interesting concept, but it seemed a bit `faddish' and noted that it will be hard to determine if people will still be interested in pickleball in ten years. She stated that it essentially would not matter though, because pickleball and storage are allowed uses in commercial zoning. Planning Director Darling explained that a private club serving food and drink is allowed as a permitted use and a self -storage facility is allowed as a conditional use. Councilmember Callies stated that what it gets down to is how the use is developed on this site and to her, it seems that it is over developed for the site and seems to require too many modifications to make it work. Mr. Kaltsas asked if anyone else had considered putting another residential project on this parcel. He stated that they had looked at it extensively and the things that are being brought up as deficits are the same as they would be for a residential project. He stated that he feels they will end up having the same conversations about the massing in order to get to six units which they have to based on Met Council approvals. He stated that in order to develop this site, there will need to be modifications allowed because of its size and the way the City has decided to guide it. He reiterated that was why they looked at this proposal because it seemed like it provided a better break and gave more separation from the adjacent residential property than a residential project would offer. He stated that it was not their proposed usage that was causing an issue with the massing but were because the site is small and the requirements are high. He noted that for the south building which is the most visible, they are proposing to be about twenty-one feet tall and a residential multi -family structure will easily be about thirty-five feet tall. He stated that what they are currently proposing is less intense and less dense than what it would be with the residential CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 14 of 21 use that it is guided for. He stated that what they are proposing will not be an eyesore with a massive multi -family unit building on it which he feels will have much less impact on the surrounding properties. Councilmember Callies stated it is possible for there to be a smaller project, however, the Council does not have additional time to consider those since they are up against the deadline. Mr. Kaltsas clarified that the reason that he was not in favor of extending the timeline was because they submitted their initial application in December of 2022. He stated that they have tried to work with the City and noted that before they even bought the property, they approached the City to see what they wanted to see in this location. He stated that they have spent a few years trying to go through the process and get to a point where they had a yes, this is the right project and have been spending money to put together the various plans and have tried to listen to staff. He reiterated that they submitted their application in December of 2022 and cannot just continue to delay because they want to do something with the property. Mr. Schultz explained that they have a lot of carrying costs associated with the property. Mayor Labadie stated that they understand that, but the Council needs to make a decision that impacts the footprint of the City in that area. Councilmember Callies stated that she did not want to have the impression that Mr. Kaltsas has been doggedly submitting things and working with the City since December of 2022 when the City has really only had a complete application for a few months. She noted that she wanted it to be clear that they were not leaving the impression that the City has somehow been slow walking this application. Mr. Kaltsas stated that they were not implying that, but were asking for direction. He stated that they want to know what the City wants on this site and to know the significant points. He reiterated that they intend to put together a project where they can work with the City. Mr. Kaltsas noted that Mayor Labadie had suggested that those in the audience get their questions or input to him since she was only going to allow him, as the applicant, to address the Council. He explained that he received texts from many of them stating that they were in favor of the proposed project and reiterated that there have been no residents in the City opposed to the project. Mayor Labadie asked about the statement of the five foot setback being met which was not stated in the staff report. Planning Director Darling stated that the setback for a drive aisle is five feet and they will meet that requirement. She noted that her questions were related to the planting centers that she thought were closer than three feet. She stated that the other concern is within the zoning ordinance, the fifty foot required buffer is supposed to be landscaped and screen fencing can be used in addition but not as a substitute. Councilmember Zerby stated that he was looking at the Minnesota State Statute 462.357 and referenced 1.H. which talks about Comprehensive Plans in greater Minnesota and asked if that would be applicable to Shorewood. City Attorney Land clarified that this section refers to `greater Minnesota' and noted in this section or the next it lays out the timeframe for having to match your zoning ordinances with the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 15 of 21 Comprehensive Plan. She noted that most cities fail to make the documents consistent within the timeframe though. Councilmember Zerby stated that in reading through this it talks about cities being `encouraged' to make the zoning changes ahead of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the City has not done this despite having had ten years to do it. He noted that the City also had the ability to purchase this land which they also did not do. He stated that from the history of what the City has done, there does not appear to be an interest in rezoning it. He stated that he believes they got feedback from the Met Council that said the City cannot leave things the way they are and needed more density, and were asked to go find a place to put it. He stated that he believes the City was told that they needed to find `x' number of units and told them to go find it which is where the thirst for higher density housing comes from. He stated that the City has seen high density housing projects and referenced the recently approved Lake Park Villas project that basically has no grass because it is almost all hard cover in order to fit the units on the lot. He stated that getting that type of density on this lot will be very challenging. He referenced that Statute language that says when there is rezoning there is a requirement to notice by mail, ten days before the hearing. He stated that he thinks a vote against this project, would really be a vote in favor of residential use, would not meet that notification requirement. He stated that his argument is still that the City has not rezoned the land yet so it is still commercial and not residential. He stated that this was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and typically, the Council takes their recommendations very seriously. He stated that the overall statement shared by Commissioner Holker was that this proposal provided a softer buffer between the commercial and residential areas. He stated that he feels it would help define the commercial zone for the Smithtown and County Road 19 intersection. He noted that the public feedback on this proposal has been unanimously in favor of this project and did not appear to have anyone in opposition. Councilmember Callies stated that she understands what he is saying about the designation of the property being appropriate as commercial, but she believes that is missing the point. She stated that this is the application that is in front of the Council and she feels forcing this particular commercial development on this site is too large, which is why she was not in favor of this particular proposal. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed with Councilmember Callies on the point that this is the application in front of the Council. She noted that Councilmember Zerby had implied that a vote against this application was essentially a vote a in favor of high density residential, which she disagreed with. She stated that she understands where he was coming from with his comments, but reiterated that this is the application in front of the Council. She stated that she is planning to follow the guidance of City Attorney Land related to whether a majority or super majority vote would be necessary. She noted that the Planning Commission gives the Council an advisory recommendation and noted that however the Council ends up voting on this issue she wants to make sure the Planning Commission understands that this is not a slap against them if they choose to vote against their recommendation. Councilmember Zerby stated that he understands the argument that this is the application that is in front of the Council, but they have heard the developer say that they are willing to make changes. He stated that often the City has said that they will approve a project with a list of conditions, so while this is the application in front of them, they can say, for example, that they want a smaller footprint, a larger setback, and more parking. He stated that the Council has flexibility and noted that ultimately it is the Council's decision whether to follow the lawyers CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 16 of 21 guidance or not because if the wrong decision is made, it is the Council that will take the brunt of that choice and not the attorney. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that as he read through the Planning Commission minutes, he found that they wanted more information but were up against a time constraint. He stated that the recommendation for approval from the Planning Commission was more in the vein of a mindset that they felt that, conceptually, it sounded like a great plan, but we would have liked to have more information if they had more time. He stated that he got the impression that the approval was `tepid' from many of the Commissioners and that staff's position was a strong `no', which he did not feel should be ignored. Councilmember Maddy stated that he has been trying his best not to say anything mean about the Met Council and the requirement that they placed upon the City of not being able to build anything less than six units/acre density which has entered the conversation. He asked if, procedurally, the City takes one of the residentially guided properties and turned it into C-1, if there would be repercussions on the Comprehensive Plan amendment that they may run into trouble with further down the road. Planning Director Darling stated that there would not be all out warfare on the City streets if they do not follow the guidance and approve something with a different land use. She stated that they would have to amend their Comprehensive Plan and noted that they do have enough places in the City where they can still get the required units required by the Met Council, however, it shrinks up the opportunity areas. She noted that there is a possibility that the Met Council could make it uncomfortable for the City and explained that one of their tools is extending out the application and noted that one thing she has heard is that they will have to incorporate all conditions of approval into the final package before they will accept an amendment. Councilmember Maddy stated that for him, this proposal is too much for a PUD. He stated that he likes the idea, but to be using the PUD tool to scale something up this large on this tough of a lot does not seem like a good use of a PUD. He stated that the Country Club development was a PUD and the City loosened some requirements for the houses, but then got a portion of the property as public space which he felt was a win/win. He stated that he does not see the same type of justification for the use of a PUD in this instance, and reiterated that he liked the project and believed it was a good area for this kind of use. He explained that, as it is proposed, he would have to vote to deny the request. Mayor Labadie stated that she saw some nodding heads when the point was made that the auto repair shop is a noisy neighbor and the opinion was shared that it will be hard to put any type of residential use in next door. She stated that the apartment buildings in Tonka Bay back up to the Public Works building and every time a snow plow backs up they will hear the `beep' and those units still filled up. She stated that she was not sure that this proposed use was the best for the community, based on all the things being discussed. She noted that it was difficult when the Comprehensive Plan was rejected by the Met Council on the grounds of lack of density and lack of affordability. She stated that she understands some of the concerns shared would be the same with a residential project but she was concerned about the laundry list of requests and using the PUD method. She stated that the applicant has indicated that they were willing to bend a bit, but noted that she was still uncomfortable about the idea of using a PUD in this instance. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 17 of 21 Councilmember Callies noted that she did not think the Council should say that they would consider a different application and basically redesign the project and reiterated that this was the application that is in front of the Council. Councilmember Zerby noted that he would like to echo the comment made by the Met Council. He stated that they are an appointed body and not an elected body nor do they have representatives for the City. He stated that they apply the same standards to every City regardless of its characteristics and he takes offense that the City is being driven by the Met Council to make these changes and not listen to the residents. He stated that the residents have spoken out on this property before and they have said that they like what they see with this proposal. He stated that he felt ignoring what the residents are saying and going with what Met Council says would be a mistake. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed with everything he just stated, however, the Met Council does have authority over the City, to a certain degree, which cannot be eliminated tonight. Callies moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO.23-107, "A Resolution Denying a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Concept and Development Stage PUD for property located at 24560 Smithtown Road." Motion passed 4-1 (Zerby opposed) Mr. Kaltsas asked to address the Council. He stated that he felt he was deserved a chance to speak since he has been working on this for so long and had spent a lot of money on this project. Mayor Labadie noted that Mr. Kaltsas was not in charge of the meeting but she would allow him a few minutes to address the Council. Mr. Kaltsas thanked the Council for looking at their proposal but wanted to express his frustration with the process and with where it has ended up. He stated that he bought the property in order to develop it and not simply throw darts at a dart board and try to guess what the five members of the Council may want on the property. He stated that he was disappointed because there were two public hearings on their proposal and there were no negative comments received from the residents of the City regarding this project. He noted that there were also over a dozen people who live in the City who are on the record in support of it. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval and he did not understand why the Council decided to just disregard what the residents and the Planning Commission have said about the project. He stated that it appears as though the Council is looking at this from a procedural basis and explained that he had asked the City what would be the best way to approach this and staff had recommended that he look at a PUD. He stated that he felt the standards that the Council said they were asked to make concessions to were cherry picked from the ordinance. He gave the example of the City basically saying, `you cannot do it as a C-1, but we are going to apply this C-1 standard'. He stated that in the review process, he feels that this was cherry picked which has been super frustrating as someone who was truly trying to meet the standards. He stated that they were asked for a couple of setback requirement changes and to be able to put two buildings on one property which he did not feel was an excessive amount of exceptions. He stated that this proposal is not for a self -use storage facility so for staff to draw from the self -use storage height requirements was frustrating. He stated that it has also been frustrating for him, as a resident, throughout this entire process. He noted that he spent the money to buy the property, try to develop the property, meet with residents and neighbors, as well as the Planning Commission. He reiterated that everyone has CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 18 of 21 said that they liked the project and felt this was a good use and stated that for the Council to go against that for reasons that he did not feel were clearly articulated has been frustrating. He stated that he believes the message he got was that they `just did not like it', but noted that he had already gotten a lot of pushback on the residential project he brought before the City the last time and now he has to go back and ask the question of what he can use his property for. He stated that he understands that what he brought before the City at that time was a concept/sketch plan but that is the point where they should be able to give him some feedback and comments. He stated that proposal was noticed and they got a ton of public input and the residential proposal was not well liked or well accepted. He stated that he brought a commercial development plan to the City and was also given a simple `no' answer. He stated that because the entire conversation on his project was started with a statement on how many votes they would need to deny the request, it gave him the impression that the decision was preconceived in opposition to the project. He stated that the impression they and others present tonight have gotten is that they really walked into a meeting where they had been sabotaged by staff. He stated that in addition to the concerns he has shared he was also concerned that he does not have a reasonable use of this property because he has come forward with both a residential and a commercial option that have been rejected. He stated that he understands he does not have a formal denial on his residential proposal, but there was a room full of people, including the Council, that clearly expressed their opposition. He suggested that it feels a bit like the Council was trying to guard that property because they own the property two parcels down and are hoping to assemble something else. He stated that may not be what is happening, but noted that it certainly feels like it from what he has seen from staff and the Council's actions. He stated that he would like be able to have some interaction with the Council to talk through some of these issues and noted that he had reached out a few times but was unable to connect. Mayor Labadie noted that she did not recall him reaching out. Mr. Kaltsas stated that he and Mr. Schultz had sent several a -mails and had made several phone calls to all of the Councilmembers. He noted that he had heard back from the Councilmember who is no longer on the Council. Mayor Labadie stated that the Council's action tonight was not preconceived and she had asked what votes were needed for both alternatives that were presented. Mr. Kaltsas stated that he went back three years in Council minutes and noted that every time the Planning Commission had made a recommendation for approval, a positive resolution was brought before the Council. He explained that he could not find an instance where both a negative and positive resolution was brought before the Council, especially with the denial resolution being placed in the first position. He stated that bringing both a negative and positive resolution were not standard practice in this industry and, to him, seems odd. He stated that it does not feel good for that to be what was done when the Planning Commission has made a recommendation for approval and reiterated that he did not find any other similar examples in the three years of minutes that he reviewed. Councilmember Callies stated that some of this is a matter of timing due to the deadline. Mr. Kaltsas stated that the whole process of the Council being presented with both a positive and negative resolution felt odd and icky and explained that walking into the room tonight also felt odd and icky. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 19 of 21 Mayor Labadie stated that it also felt `icky' when he made the statement that the City made this decision because they own a parcel nearby. She stated that fact was not in her mindset and explained that the Council makes hard decisions at every meeting and even disagree which each other at every meeting. She stated that she has not felt that anyone on the Council made a decision with any type of beneficial intent to them and she did not appreciate that implication. She stated that she feels the Council has been clear in their comments that this proposal just did not quite feel like the right thing and encouraged him to work with staff and assured him that they did not want him to have a parcel that he could not do anything with. Councilmember Maddy asked if Mr. Kaltsas had reached out to him. Mr. Kaltsas stated that he was not yet on the Council when he had reached out. 7. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS 8. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS 9. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Staff Mayor Labadie asked if City Attorney Land had any additional items for the Council. City Attorney Land stated that she did not have any additional items and City Attorney Shepherd had not passed along any additional information. Mayor Labadie explained that she would like to allow City Attorney Land to leave the meeting at this time. 1. 3d Quarter 2023 General Fund Budget Report Finance Director Rigdon summarized the report and noted that the City was, overall, in a good situation. He noted that the tax revenues have come up to $2.7 million, and for licenses and permits are at 108% of budget as of September 30, 2023, and reviewed details from the other areas of revenue. He reviewed expenditures by type and program and noted that they were all pretty much in line with what they had planned. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if there were any huge variances that Finance Director Rigdon saw that were not explained by timing differences. He referenced specific examples throughout the report. Finance Director Rigdon gave an explanation for Councilmember Sanschagrin's examples and noted that things look pretty good overall and should be able to hit their budget. He noted that in past years they had a bit more of a surplus and did not think that would be as large this year. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 20 of 21 2. 3rd Quarter 2023 Investment Report Finance Director Rigdon gave a general overview of the 3rd quarter investment report and stated that the City is solid in the safety, liquidity, and yield categories. Councilmember Maddy stated that he has noticed Finance Rigdon's technique of keeping as much in the 4M fund as possible appears to be paying off and thanked him for his efforts. Other Staff Reports Park and Recreation Director Crossfield stated that the Park Commission will meet tomorrow night where they will be discussing the Shorewood Community and Event Center Fee structures. She noted that they had fifty-three rentals in October and have fifty-seven rentals scheduled for November. She noted that Public Works Director Morreim was not able to attend tonight's meeting but sent her an update and asked her to share it with the Council. She noted that Public Works staff began sweeping today on the west side of town and will work their way eastward and should be completed in about five weeks. Public Works staff are also preparing equipment for winter and will bring more details to the next Council work session. City Engineer Budde stated that Birch Bluff continues to get buttoned up with restoration. He noted that the concrete work at Strawberry Lane should be finished up tomorrow and paving is slated for later in the week, however there is rain in the forecast, which could delay things. He stated that there are also plans to pave Freeman Park trails later this week if the weather holds. He noted that there are areas peppered around the City for the utility and drainage improvement project and the contractor will be working on that over the next two or three weeks. He stated that the contractor who did the crack filling through the City came back to do some corrective work, including the City Hall parking lot, so that has been wrapped up for the year. City Clerk/HR Director Thone provided an update on the new website progress and noted that there is a link to the website survey in the Shore Report and online. Planning Director Darling stated that the first deer hunt was held October 13-16, 2023. She noted that there was a lot of rain so the amount of time they could actually hunt was reduced. She stated that they did harvest seven deer and noted that the next hunt is scheduled for October 27- 29, 2023. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he had just completed week two of Citizen's Academy which has been a very fun program to go through. Councilmember Maddy noted that he was also in the Citizen's Academy program and felt he was learning a lot of new information. Councilmember Callies stated that the lift station project on Radisson Road is ongoing but wanted to note that the contractors have been really great and responsible about cleaning up. She asked about the audit of Laserfiche. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 21 of 21 City Clerk/HR Director Thone stated that they had completed the audit and noted that she had just received the report earlier today. She noted that it will take a few hours to go through the report and garner feedback from CDI and then work on the areas of improvement. Councilmember Callies asked for a summary of what happened at a future meeting and explained that she was interested in some of the settings. City Clerk/HR Director Thone stated that she will report back to the Council on the audit results and noted that later this week there will be some additional staff training on Laserfiche and explained that they were really looking to optimize their use of it. Councilmember Zerby complimented those individuals involved in the virtual meeting on Zoom and noted that tonight, it appeared to have gone flawlessly. Mayor Labadie stated that she recently attended the Mayor's Alliance to end childhood hunger. She stated that she had attended the Minnetonka School District meeting with the mayors meeting and noted that it was very interesting and the money that trickled down to public schools was not trickled down equally and was done based on other financial factors. She stated that the students in the Minnetonka School District received $61/student, which was the lowest in the entire State. She stated that some districts received close to $3,000/student. She stated that most of the Council attended the buckthorn removal session at Freeman Park with about twenty-five residents. She stated that she wanted to extend a sincere thank you to the Council because tonight was a hard meeting where they had to make a hard decision. She explained that she did not appreciate a resident questioning the integrity of the Council. She stated that they appreciate everyone who serves on the Council and that they thoroughly read the packets and take their jobs very seriously. She stated that this is a hard job that she feels they undertake with courtesy to each other and residents. Councilmember Maddy stated that he believes the Planning Commission also deserves appreciation. Mayor Labadie agreed and stated that it may feel like a slap in the face when the Council chooses to vote against their recommendation, but it was not. She stated that she also wanted to thank the Commission because they ask a lot of the questions ahead of time and also have a hard job. 10. ADJOURN Maddy moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of October 23, 2023, at 9:49 P.M. T reTt 156T11•. T� ATTEST: Sandie Thone, City Clerk nnif r Labadie, Mayor