was a nice dinner like that. >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It
is now 5:30 and I will call this regular work session of the Burnsville City
Council to order. Um, >> it's good to see members of our
community present in the council chambers. Welcome everyone.
Members of our community and the public are welcome to attend uh also by
watching us on Burnsville mn.gov/meings or Comcast channel 16 or 859.
The public can also participate through Zoom by joining us at zoom. us/join.
More information is available on our meetings web page and in the council
agenda packet. This is a work session and we go directly to the items that are
on the agenda. So the first item on the agenda is finding um study that uh was
done and Garrett Beck, you're on deck.
» Thank you, Madam Mayor. I like the way that rhymes. Uh good evening, mayor and
council. Uh this evening we are going to talk about a wayfinding study that our
team has been up to over the last year or so. Um, you may recall back in June
of 2024, uh, the team presented a parks plan, um, which really inventoried and
assessed all of our, um, our park amenities within the system. And as part
of that process of the presentation, uh, we indicated that evening that we were
going to also be completing over a period of time a park wayfinding study
as well, which would be part of the park's plan in the future.
So just a quick overview. Um a wayfinding study essentially establishes
a comprehensive citywide framework for how visitors can navigate our park
system. Uh this particular study assessed all 76 of our parks. Uh we used
a variety of uh ways to engage our community uh through different events
and platforms. And uh the final product [clears throat] will be aligned with
Burns sign standards. So the goal of the project uh was
strictly related to the community benefits as well. So having a a
comprehensive wayfinding plan will improve orientation and navigation for
our guests. It promotes accessibility. It increases the awareness of the
amenities within the park system. Uh it helps us to effectively communicate to
the public. Uh and it supports multimodal access.
So, the baseline assessment done by a consultant uh looked at 473 signs in our
76 parks and they determined uh based on their standards that 23 of our parks
currently meet uh appropriate wayfinding. Uh they indicated that 149
new signs um should be considered and I'll talk about uh those signs later on
in the presentation here. They also propo proposed that we remove 44 signs
um with uh 89 signs currently being in condition one and two. And I'll just
share right now uh part of our uh process over the last few years and into
the to the near future is that we're working to [snorts]
um replace condition one and two amenities. Uh the reason why there's
still 89 out there for signs is that we wanted to complete the wayfinding study
first. We didn't want to be replacing uh signs that are condition one and two
only to determine that they might be one of the 44. So, uh now that this study is
complete, we'll work on um taking care of those signs as well.
I talked about community engagement. Um we did eight on-site park intercepts.
So, that's really just um the team going out to a park, setting up a table and a
tent, uh sharing uh what's going on for the project, giving people opportunities
to communicate in person [cough] about um their ideas and and concerns, and
also an opportunity to visit a website and provide more information in a future
time if they wanted. Um, we had online uh mapping opportunities, so someone
could go on to their park and put a a pinpoint on there and then put a note
about um thoughts about wayfinding in a particular area. And then they also uh
were present at six of our city events.
So [clears throat] from a community engagement uh feedback process uh we
heard that um there was an opportunity to uh or I shared that there was an
online opportunity to request signs in the park system. So people were doing
that. Um they felt overall there was a need for clearer more consistent signage
and maps in the park. um an opportunity to expand signage for trails and access
points and then uh directional signage to specific amenities once you in the
park.
So, a little bit about the signage family and uh the different types of
signs you may see in a park system. So, amenity signs basically distinguish um
specific features in a park. So, um, if it's a playground, there's usually a
name of a playground and whatnot. Um, the arrival signs are your park
entrances. Um, it may be an amenity. For example, in Civic Center Park, we have a
skate park, right? So, um, there is a an arrival sign for coming to Civic Center
Park, but then when you get to Lion Skate Park, then there's a different
amenity sign there. Uh it also includes rules and safety and guidelines for uh
the park system. A destination sign highlights a key
destination within the park. Uh so for example um there if you're out at Lac
Leavon uh there are six ball fields out there and so a destination sign may be
uh you're at field A or field B or field E or whatnot. Directional signs provide
clear guidance at decision points. So if you're at a uh a road fork or a trail
fork, it helps you to to determine what direction you want to go based on what
your goal is. And then there are also actual trail and path signs that help
you to know uh where you're at on the on the trail and the path and within the
park.
So [snorts] insights from this um directional signs that guide visitors
are severely under represented at only 4.2% of all of our signs. And so what
that means at the end of the day is that um people uh should in [clears throat]
general have uh are able to find our parks, but once they get inside of our
larger parks, uh they may have some difficulty navigating through the park
system at that point. So, I talked about um the recommendation
for signs that um need to be added to the park system based on uh the proposal
and the and the plan. And this is just an example of what um obviously this is
not what one of our signs look like at this time, but it gives you an idea that
uh if you were at this particular park, uh there's a inside the parking lot,
there's an arrow there that says you are here. Um, and then a person can then see
based on where they're at when they're looking at the sign, if they want to get
over to the fitness, uh, area, uh, what direction they would need to go to, uh,
and whatnot. So, if you think about our park system specifically, we have some
very large community parks. Um, if you think about Neil Park, for example, uh,
there are actually five different major parking lots that you could, uh, go to
park to, uh, within Neil Park. So, uh, an example of where a sign like this
would be appropriate is that, uh, at each of those five locations where
people are coming and parking and getting out and getting ready to use the
park. There may also be other situations where there's major forks uh, within a
larger park uh, where a sign like this may be appropriate as well.
So again, the recommendation uh from the study is to replace or remove 44 of the
signs that provide minimal effectiveness to install 149 uh new signs of which a
lot of them will look like the the sign that [clears throat] I just mentioned
where it's an overview of the park helps people to figure out what amenities are
in the park, how are they going to travel to get to those. Um
[clears throat] and then thoughtful use of the city's messaging and consistent
standards.
The implementation process for this would be to finalize our sign standards.
Our team will work uh we'll look at the needs of those signs that need to be
added, work with our communications department, develop the standards, what
the sign will look like, make sure it's consistent with um our sign process.
We'll then develop a cost estimate and identify a funding plan to pay for those
signs and then prioritize by category. In general, uh we will look at our
larger parks that have more visitors to try to make sure we get those up to
speed uh as quickly as possible and then work our way through uh the neighborhood
and and many parks and um finish it off that way.
So, I will pause and see if there are any
questions or comments. >> Comments for staff,
questions, comments. >> I think it's a good idea of the signage
that's uh not only for the current residents, but we we have a lot of new
residents in this city that are just starting to learn our parks. So, that's
going to really help them a lot. >> Agreed. I think this is a a nice thing
to have. Um, >> okay. Any other comments? Yep.
» I I have noticed visiting other cities that they have some pretty good uh park
way finding signs and I have felt a little jealous that we don't um just
never was a big huge priority until we did this project or staff did this
project and it kind of shined a spotlight on that. Well, when we did the
parks analysis, >> that really told a big story about the
inventory that we have and the analysis that was done that identified what we
needed to invest in. >> Yeah. I think for the most part for the
parks that we have, it's a visual thing, right? You see where stuff is at, but
sometimes there's parks, you can't see all of the amenities that are there. But
um I think there's a lot of good reasons to do this, so I support it.
» Yeah. [clears throat] >> My
» Yeah. >> My only thought is if we and I know
we're not to the design phase yet, but um
restrict or reduce the amount of branding. I mean, we obviously can do
colors, but if we do logos and stuff, so that way if there is an overhaul, then
we're not having to go back through and replace allund and so of those.
So it it's been mentioned and and I agree we have a very diverse population
here in Burnsville. So in going through and this is page 13 of the plan
the symbols need to be ident um defined so people know what those symbols are uh
because it might be interpreted one way for somebody and a different way for
someone else. So what does the symbols mean?
Because people can look at the symbols and some will will understand but some
would not. So that's good. The other thing is that
I [snorts] just love going through the whole
plan. 235 pages by the way.
and you had all of the trails marked.
I liked that. However, uh down at uh the river park, the
riverfront park, the trail that's missing is around
[clears throat] Black Dog Lake. If you can take a look at that.
» Take a look at that. Yep. >> Yeah. Well, I know that e Excel built
that, but it's still within the trail system because when we come around, you
can do that. The other thing that I So, when we're
when we do the trail map, I think it'll be something that we need
to take a look at, but I was interesting. So, Keller, I did not
realize that the trail at Keller Lake goes all the way and winds into Apple
Valley and circles back into Burnsville.
So, I was thinking that maybe on my walks I was into Apple Valley did not
know. So, is there going to be signs that say
you are leaving Burnsville? [laughter]
Because the same thing is in Alamagnet. Because when you take that trail in
Alamagnet, when I looked at it, it goes right out into Apple Valley and then
curves all the way back. So, but I don't I I didn't know that I was
leaving Burnsville and was in Apple Valley.
» Thank you. just just some thoughts in when you do the trail. Um because this
is I love the fact that you also identified the trail from uh Fiser
Park going all the way down to Alam uh to Lac Laban
that whole trail. I don't think a lot of people realize that that goes all the
way down to Llaban Park. Do you, >> Madam Mayor? I would agree. That's why.
Yes. I I think the signs at the different entrances really help those
overhead ones really help people to see all the different things. And that's a
great example of a park where you you can may not know that those amenities
are even there if depending on why you're visiting the park in the first
place. And >> the only way I found it was during co
» just keep walking. [laughter]
Just keep walking. And um
so th those were just I was thinking people should know about this because
it's a really nice trail and it goes down into Laman and winds around and
yeah so yeah then >> well there in addition to enhancing
there's maintenance and replacement like the sign at the the dog park bulletin
sign is is an absolute embarrassment. and it's in such horrific shape that it
really reflects poorly on the city. So, I think some of those things have to be
addressed sooner than later. I mean, to me, they're they should be addressed on
the front end of this project because they they that's that is a I don't
believe how bad that is. >> Well, they're going to get to all of
that because that's one and two in in the plan.
» Yeah. And and then page 34, you have all of the different family of signs for the
different >> and we have some really great signs that
are really nice. And then we have that one which is
» that's the other end of the spectrum. >> Yeah,
» the route signs are really nice. I think that'll give the system of what you're
looking [clears throat] to to put in place. And then the examples that you
have on page 35 is really gives people an an understanding of what it it's
going to look like. [clears throat] Yeah. So I I like all these things
because it really helps us to understand when we're going to invest in these
signs and what it's going to cost. Yeah. But I can't wait now for to see
the the trail plan
[snorts]
because it's this is really good. >> Good.
» Good to >> But it really really lets people know
where where things are. But I don't know the the folks who live over in
Alamagnet. Did you know that you were leaving Burnsville and you were in Apple
Valley? we're friends with their
» there probably those of us who don't walk that those trails all the time you
know cuz I walk I try to walk all over the city so it's not but I looked at it
and I said wow that's a lot so
we have we share quite a bit with Apple Valley Keller Alamagnet
yeah So very good. Anything else? But I think the Terrell system plan, I know
we've been working on it because we also work with
Dakota County on the Marian
talk about the trail sidewalk and all >> it's going on.
[snorts] >> It'll come. Yeah,
» we I like all the plans you're putting in place.
Just curious. Okay. Thank you. Anything else?
Those are just my thoughts. >> All right. Thank you, Madam Mayor and
council members. Um I am also uh up on this next one, but
» Oh, that's right. I'm sorry. >> Yeah. No, that's all right.
» This is his night. >> Yeah.
» Yeah. >> And and so item, too, because you've got
all of it. Okay. Yeah. This is the Rose Park land use and picobal project. And
Garrett, you're up and so is our deputy city manager in community development
director. It's such a long title, >> Jeff Thompson.
» Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um, just so people don't get sick of hearing me
talk, Jeff's going to help me out along the way here. So, um, uh, this evening
[snorts] we're going to take a look at the Rose Park land use and pickle ball
project update. Um so you may recall back on October 14th of 2025 at a city
council work session um council had the opportunity to review a pickle ball
feasibility study uh that informed the possibility of a pickle ball project at
uh Alamagnet Cliffn Hollows and Rose Parks.
So after a review of the schematic designs and hearing about the community
engagement results, council shared a consensus that evening for a preferred
location in the order of Rose Park first, followed closely by Clifton Park
and then Alamagnet and Hollows.
So council direction that evening was that staff continue the development of a
pickleball facility at Rose Park by continuing negotiations for a land use
agreement for Rose Park with the owners of that property which is RTX/Collins
Aerospace.
So, um, mayor and council, you'll recall, um, as part of the feasibility
study as we were exploring, um, the opportunities for the pickle ball
project across the entire park system, um, one park that was identified, um, as
a potential is Rose Park, um, which we talked about in October. And as part of
the feasibility, we um wanted to explore the park, but recognizing that there's a
unique agreement on that park and that we don't own it, but there's a long-term
lease uh that the city has had for the for the use of that land um for a park.
So, we had engaged Collins um in conversations as part of the feasibility
study uh just to to see if it was something that we could continue to
explore and bring forward for the council for consideration.
um at that October work session. Um this is information that we we talked about
which is um RTX and Collins were were open to a potential uh partnership for
potentially constructing the pickleball courts um on that land. Um and we had
had very early and high level conversations with them about what a
land agreement for that uh could look like and they had kind of framed three
larger um options for the city for potential future consideration. Um at
the time that was um the three options they had uh framed for us were extending
the existing ground lease for an additional 20 years uh to allow for the
construction of the of the of the project. The other two options were
extending the lease for a shorter duration and that's like a a three-year
duration um with the with the option for the city to purchase the land after that
three-year lease and then um an option to sell the land uh to the city um uh uh
for the project to proceed. So those were the again we didn't have in October
any specific terms for um for response or or information to to be able to
respond to it but those were the three high level options that had been
provided and there was a a question that they had asked of us which was whether
the the property could be considered taxexempt um for uh property tax
purposes uh because uh it is currently and has been previously
um classified by the county assessor as industrial land vacant industrial land
and taxed at the full market value of of of industrial land.
So those were the that was the information. Again, this isn't new. This
is what we had talked about at that October work session before we get in.
And then as Garrett said, the direction from the council was for us to continue
those ne negotiations with the landowner RTX Collins and bring back specific
terms for the council's consideration. Um we'll talk about that, but before I
just want to uh just do a little reminder of uh the existing arrangement.
So as I said, the land is owned by Collins RTX. Um, it is, um, the original
lease agreement for the park was was developed in or was signed by the city
in the parties in 1992 when the park was developed. It was a dollar lease for a
20-year period and allowed us to build the park amenities that are largely out
there today, the the ball field um, and the the soccer field. Um, and as I said,
that was a 20 year originally a 20-year lease. Um, there have been two
amendments since that original lease. a lease in a first amendment in 2010 and
then a second amendment in April of 2019.
» Yes. >> So the you know the the gerine um points
of the existing ground lease term is the the current lease uh runs through
September of 2032 for the portion of the park that is the property that is used
as a park. There's a portion of the property that is uh that Collins
constructed an employee parking lot on and that area is not included in in the
lease agreement because the original 20-year lease term
has has um has expired. Um there is no long um they are no longer responsible
for compensating the city if if they terminate it. But either party does have
the ability to terminate that existing lease agreement with a 180day or or
six-month notice to to either party. But as I said, because that original buyout
clause from the original lease has is has expired, Akones wouldn't be
responsible for for paying us should they terminate that lease um early um
that's allowed under the lease agreement.
So, uh first I just talk a little bit about the property tax exemption
conversations that we've had. um for information, [clears throat] the the
Dakota County Assessor is ultimately the agency that determines and sets um the
property tax classification and the property tax valuation for all
properties in Burnsville. Um and so we facilitated convers since the October
work session, we facilitated conversations with the Dakota County
Assessor. Um and initially the those conversations um the assessor indicated
that based on their review of this the statute and the guidance provided by the
department of revenue the the unique agreement we have uh did not qualify the
property for tax exemption which is why that determination had been made over
the years to tax it as the industrial land value.
We did then uh just reach out to the department of revenue um the state
agency that oversees it and um ultimately they provided some guidance
documents to the city for a um comparable situation in a different
county in Minnesota which said that a an agreement such as a ground lease for a
for potentially exempt use could be classified um as taxexempt.
So, the city provided that um guidance document provided from the department of
revenue as well as the copy of our lease agreement uh for the property to uh the
Dakota County Assessor. Um they reviewed all of that and ultimately um made a
decision that [clears throat] the city's leased portion of the property um will
be exempt from properties taxes starting in uh 2027. So, as you know, the the the
property tax system works that essentially the the values that are the
the classification values that ultimately determine tax year tax uh
your property taxes are determined the year ahead of the payable tax year. And
so, um ultimately it becomes effective uh next year in 2027.
» Jeff, will it spring back when the lease expires then?
» Um mayor and council, yeah, I mean ultimately yes. Um, as you can, as it
says on the slide, right, any future change, what the the determination that
the county assessor made says that if there are any changes to the property
use, the improve the improvements or the lease, they they would re re-review that
and ultimately determine if it still qualifies for exemption. We would assume
if there's not that ground lease in place that qualifies for exemption, um,
that prop that property tax exemption would likely go away.
Um and the only other caveat is that exemption is only pertains to the
portion of the property that we lease for the exempt use for the park. So the
area of the park, the area of the property that's used for employee
parking uh would remain taxable uh for property tax purposes.
Just provide a little bit of information what that means. Um, so in 2026,
uh, the total property val the total pro, uh, property taxes on the property
for the full valuation is just over $104,000.
And that's based on the industrial land value, the taxable market value at full
industrial land at uh, uh, over $3.5 million. The 20 26 amount for the city's
portion of those property taxes is $22,488.
Since the exemption applies in 2027, um we don't yet know what those 2027
property taxes will be. Uh because um all the taxing agencies are currently
working through their budgets and levy process. Um but um as part of the normal
taxation process, the Dakota County Assessor has released the proposed
taxable market value for the property reflecting those changes of the
exemption for the city's uh ground lease area and reduced the the overall taxable
market value of the property from to to $558,000.
So there's a year gap in there, but you can see the overall reduction is about
$3 million in in total property tax um taxable market value for for property
tax purposes. And again, that's independent of the city's lease um
negotiations with RTX Collins. This is um a determination the county assessor
has already made and implemented u based on that department of revenue guidance
and the city's existing lease.
So, um the original um options that Collins had uh we had talked to Collins
about ultimately they gave us a specific lease term proposal for one of those
options. Um and so I just want to walk through what the the framework of those
terms are. Um that would be a 20-year lease
extension uh to the existing lease um with an annual initial annual rent of
$90,000 per year with a um annual rent escalation for essentially inflationary
purposes of 2 and a.5% annually. So that the 90,000 would be uh at the first year
and then it would uh increase 2 and a half% uh each year for the 20-year
terms. the the lease extension would be
premised on the the land being prop the land that the city is owning being
property tax exempt. Um and should uh that if should the county assessor make
a different determination uh the annual rent would be adjusted under the lease
terms to fully account for um the city's portion of the property tax uh
liability. Now, we don't expect that, right? Because of the guidance we've
received um um and the ground lease qualifying for exemption, we wouldn't
expect that. But it were it was terms that um that Collins and RTX provided in
the lease agreement. Uh should that change based on the the the the clause
that the county assessor said which said they could re-review it if there is a
change. >> So toward the end of this lease it'd be
about 140,000 a year. >> Yeah.
[snorts] >> Two and a half%
» 22. >> Correct. Correct.
» Thank you.
The um we also had a lot of conversations um with RTX and Collins
about the termination clause um recognizing that um the city is making a
substantial investment in this property and under a lease term for building an
asset on land we don't own um there is a risk to the city um that if there's a if
RTX Collins has the ability to terminate the lease um it would result in the city
having built improvements um that would no longer be available to us. Um the
terms that they have given us is that um very similar terms to the original 1992
lease which is essentially um either party may terminate uh the lease with a
12-month notice within that 20-year term. Uh either party could terminate
the lease with a 12-month written notice. Um if RTX terminates it, there
would be a simple depreciation clause which essentially says uh we were using
for planning purposes a million dollars of planned capital investment the city
would make that that amount of of total project investment would be depreciated
over the 20-year term of the lease such that the the termination payment would
would decline by uh $50,000 per year. So, in, you know, in year one, we'd get
900. At the end of year one, we'd get $950,000, and by year 19, uh, we would
only receive $50,000 in payment. And then at the end of the lease, there
would be no compensation for the city's capital investment.
» Question. >> Yes.
» What's our normal depreciation of an asset like that?
we have to basically go in and completely overhaul it because right I
mean is 20 years the time where we would have to go in and spend a lot of money
to rehab the whole facility to make it you know maintain it well
» council member Keely yes um with tennis courts pickleball courts there is uh
ongoing maintenance about every 5 years that you want to do for uh crack sealing
and resurfacing but um the general life expectancy of a cord is right around
that 20 year period. Fencing can last a little bit longer. Um, so can lighting
systems, but >> sure,
» if you're looking at the the actual court process itself, that's that's the
general time period. >> This is a logical depreciation [snorts]
schedule at 50,000 a year over the 20 years. So, if they were to cancel after
10 years, we would get half a million, right? But they would also have um the
costs that we would normally bear if we kept it. They would have the costs of
maintaining it, eventually replacing it. So, it's just how assets work with end
of depreciation. >> Okay. Cara,
» would they maintain the pickle ball court? I mean, I would assume if they
take the lease back, it would be to take the pickle ball court out
» to do something that they wish to do like a building or a parking lot or or
something like that. Um, >> so there is depreciation of the built
asset. Um, but what we don't get back is the money that we put into it to
get everything prepared and the water management and all that kind of stuff.
Um, which you put that money into it and then after 20 years if you need to redo
the court, you're redoing the court, but you're not having to redo the site prep
and the um like water management, that type of
thing. So, do
we have a breakdown of what that is? Like how much are we putting into it
that would not be the actual pickle ball court? [snorts]
Uh there there just one comment. So, we asked when we were talking to to Collins
Aerospace RTX about this, it was a depreciation of all of the investment
that went into it, not just the specific amount that went into the pickle ball
court. So there's some >> parking lot spaces, there's lights,
there's the court, there's the um the wetland management type things. It it
was the total package. So it'd be depreciation of if as council member
Keley mentioned if we let's say it for round numbers it was a million dollar if
after 10 years they would give us $500,000 back because that was the cost
of the total project. >> Okay, I get that. But okay, so say say
we have to do redo redo the pickle ball court 20 years and they're like yes we
would like to give you a lease again, right? Um do we have to pay for site
prep all over again and water management and those costs again?
» We would not at that point. >> Okay. So it would just be rebuilding the
pickle ball court. So the difference I'm asking is how much of what we have to do
is prepping the site and how much is pickle ball court because even with the
depreciation say they boot us off in 10 years and we get the depreciation on the
on the total amount right that still is like we have to 100% site prep somewhere
else. So that's a cost that we incur that we would not have to incur again if
we were able to rebuild on a spot. >> Does that am I asking the right
question? >> Well, [snorts]
» in the right way, I should say. >> Yes. Mayor and council again at a at a
planning level budget perspective. Yes. I I would agree that the um if we look
out 20 years, the cost of um rehabbing the courts in place in their current
location would be less than >> constructing courts, you know, removing
the courts and or then building an entirely new pickle ball project on a
different park location and going through all of the
» planning and design and uh total site construction costs. we would assume
those would still be higher than than being able to replace the asset in
place. >> Yeah,
» we don't we don't have a breakdown of what those dollars are because there's
also 20 years of construction inflation that we can't fully um hedge for. But
yes, we would from a planning level perspective assume the a new project
cost would be higher in 20 years than a project that's replacing the courts in
place. How much is it like because we can't say 20 years from now, but like
looking at today, is there a percentage?
I would have to go back and look at the October
um presentation. I I believe we had I I know we had an opinion of probable costs
and it was broken down by line item. >> Uh there were I want to say 25 to 30
line items in there that made up the million dollars. So, I unfortunately,
um, Council Member Scholes, I don't have I I can't tell you.
» My estimate right now on the spot, if I had to say it's going, that would be
about $750,000 of the project would be courts and lights and fencing and things
like that. But the courts themselves, >> but we still $90,000 a year.
» You're going to have $2 million in lease payments by the time this is done.
» $90,000 a year for >> You pay a dollar right now for the same
amount of time. >> Yeah. And I'm trying to remember off the
top of my head when we renovated courts at
um North River Hills, for example, that was in the neighborhood of $300,000 for
an onsite location. If that's helpful. >> That is. Thank you.
» Just the courts, right? So, and the fencing, but
» we already had the lights in place, so >> Right. Right. Yeah. Okay. Yep.
» I appreciate that. Thank you. >> Okay.
» Okay. >> Yeah. I just want to pick up on what uh
Council Member Gerson said. I mean, we're talking about the cost of the
investment and what it looks like if either party gets out, which we probably
wouldn't, but they might, right? You never know. Um company could get sold
again and a new direction and they want to use the property. Um but
maybe the bigger concern is $90,000 a year.
» $9,000 cost. Right now, we'd pay >> escalates. Yeah. And it escalates. I
mean it's >> that's a very
» that's for me >> that's a very bad deal for the city
» for me that's the >> right
» that's the cost >> y
» right now it was $1 >> 90,000 is
and we have a plan moving forward so would you continue please with
» and just mayor and council to quantify that cost you're looking at over $2
million >> over the 20 years
for that cost of just simply using the land,
» right? >> Um, council member Schultz, to your
question, I'm trying to pull up just comparable what we have in terms of
replacement value for um, uh, ro the rose park complex in our parks plan. I'm
still trying to find it. If I if I do, I'll let you know what that number is.
» Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Yeah, but please proceed.
So, council members, in addition to uh getting new information from RTX and
Collins about a potential land uh lease, uh we also learned on April 3rd from BV
United, uh which is the soccer club that provides recreational and travel
opportunities uh for soccer for Burns residents and others. But uh a lot of
Burns residents uh who choose to participate uh announced that they had
an intent to dissolve as an organization effective at the end of this month. Um
in August 2026 um and I did have a conversation with uh
the president of the Burns Athletic Club just to affirm this. Um the Burns
Athletic Club intends to take over the recreational
um side of providing soccer opportunities for Bernzo residents. So
um during that conversation, we also just talked about um if they had a plan
on potential sites that they would be interested in and um Carrie indicated
during that conversation [snorts] that uh she did not foresee Cliff N
being one of the sites that they would like to use. um which was um at a
location that uh the that BV United had been using pretty heavily um throughout
their existence. So uh nonetheless uh what this means is that um just because
of soccer decline in Burnernzo and the fact that that organization cannot um
does not wish to continue uh we will have a change in uh the field use uh
requests that we receive um which will free up some additional fields um for at
a location as we'll talk about like Cliff End that had been heavily
programmed for soccer in the past. So, um,
for this next section of the presentation, we have the four
locations, uh, based on the order that council had, uh, indicated back on
October 15th of 2025. And what you're seeing uh, the rest of
this way is really uh, design, schematic design, uh, statistics, things like that
that were reflective uh, and true at the time of the October 15th. uh set another
way. Things have not been updated for uh just for this presentation or anything
like that. So, this site we're looking at here is Rose Park. Um some of the
things we talked about that evening were that there'd be a proposal to add an
additional 14 stalls at this location. It would have minimal impact on existing
user groups. Um i.e., Rose Park is heavily used by the travel soccer
program. uh but this was an area that was less used and they were more
interested in a facility like this going in at Rose Park where they could absorb
the impacts of it as opposed to cliff end uh as is what they shared uh prior
to the October meeting. Um and from an engagement standpoint there was a strong
community support for this particular location.
These next two sites are cliff. Um this particular one that you're looking at is
the location where uh the ath the soccer club uh had their soccer fields laid out
and we're using uh for their programming. Um it was uh again the
designs are all similar but in this particular case the parking lot's large
enough to to use and we were not proposing additional stalls. However, we
did note on really heavy events um there were situations where these parking lots
were full and people were having to cross Cliff Road and that was kind of a
concern. So, um from an engagement standpoint, um there was low community
support for this particular location, specifically by the soccer club,
indicating that it would have a negative impact on their program. Council member
Gustiffson, I >> I appreciate you going through all these
slides on this. Um, >> in my mind, and I don't know where the
rest of the council is at, I think Rose Park doesn't seem to be a good business
decision on our part. >> And now that we're finding out that the
soccer is not going to get displaced down at Cliff Finn, I think that almost
seems like the natural spot for it to move to gravitate to. And I think we
could kind of cut to that chase a little bit quicker if we
» And you've already assign talked to the club and there's North River Hills which
is a big soccer park. So let's move it along.
» Uh let's delay that. Um because while I
» I appreciate that we're like sitting here and we've we've seen these and been
able to look at them. uh our residents really haven't and that's what this is
for is so that our residents can hear this. So I I get that we're like
» come on move it along but >> this is for residents and I I
» if you can go back and and because the history's been there and you've already
had engagement with a lot of the interested parties on all of this. So,
» do we not want our residents to hear the presentation?
» Uh, well, they saw this presentation last year. But if you want to go through
» I'll go faster. >> Yeah. And then of course all of the the
history of once you understood where things were with the United Soccer Club,
who have you talked with and what was their feedback to you?
because you've talked to a lot of interested parties from what I
understand. >> I'll try to I'll speed up the process
here. Um this was the location with that would have displaced the volleyball
courts. The rest of the information that I shared about the soccer location
remains the same. Uh here's a look at Alamagnet Park with a proposal of 18
spots. There was no displacement of users, but it had low community support.
And here's was Hollows Park which would have displaced a uh a ball field by the
BAC had new parking constructed and new on street parking required. It had
moderate community support. So with that said again I mentioned on October 15th
uh that these numbers were opinions of probable cost related to construction at
each of the locations. Um Alamagnet uh Rose Park was the cheapest. Um, cliffn
uh was also the cheapest on the soccer fields. Uh, the volleyball courts were
more because of the need to add additional wetland um because we had to
fill in some wetland followed by Alamagnet and then Hollowos Park was
going to be the most expensive because of the parking lot needs.
So, uh, from a timeline standpoint, uh, based on decisions from council tonight,
if, uh, we determine there is a location that you would like staff to proceed
with on the project, uh, we would look to engage, uh, the park neighbors at
whatever the location was. Um, and we still have our consultant that we've
been using that we could, uh, be working on survey and site design prep during
that time while we were doing engagement. Um, and then, uh, after that
was complete, we would be looking to do the actual site design, develop the bids
and specs where we could actually bid the project in January through February
of next year with a goal to build it uh, and through the spring and summer based
on the uh, preferred contractor chosen schedule and the Minnesota weather.
So, that takes me to the last slide uh, for policy consideration. Does the city
council wish to continue with a pickle ball project and if so at which
location? >> So I have a question.
» So um is there a map of where the pickle ball
courts are not just in Burnsville but in our surrounding city? So we can
so we can see like is is there a spot that is more
pickle ball rich and a spot more pickle ball poor?
» Pickle ball desert. >> Yes. Is there a pickle ball desert is
what I'm asking. >> Do we have a wide angle view? I think
that's a good question to
» uh Garrett. Um, [clears throat and cough] madame mayor,
uh, members of council, uh, in Burnernzo, we just have the one pickle
ball complex that's an official pickle ball complex. There are six courts that
are dedicated solely to pickle ball. There is one tennis court that is lined
and temporary nets can be put in. >> Um, at Red Oak Park that is on the uh,
north east side of Burnsville. There are no other pickle ball courts in
Burnsville that are dedicated pickleball courts.
» Okay, >> mayor and council, we we do have a a map
of where uh we currently have the Rose Park uh pickle ball
» Red Oak Park. >> Red Oak, I'm sorry. I
» I apologize. uh in Burnsville and uh a map that shows the so if we don't have
it in the presentation I think Bethany can bring it up but a map that then
shows the uh six neighboring communities and where their public dedicated pickle
ball facilities are. >> Thank you because yes
» right here it's on Google Maps. >> There you go. Y
» All right. So where are our three choice? Well, really, we're
not going for the most expensive one, so screw that. Um, where are the other two
choices [clears throat] at on that map? >> One is on the west side, hollow, but
that is real close to a lot of houses. >> I think Hollow is off the table.
» Yeah, Hollow's off the table. So, we're looking at Alam Magnet, which would be
far south. >> Well, there by the
» And we're looking at Cliff Fen. >> Yeah. which
» north >> about in north
» that's in that north area >> and then the Alamagnet one would be way
down southwest but by >> 2011 southeast
» yeah sorry southeast >> north of 42
» north of 40 yeah >> oh
okay >> like the ashaped lake
» yeah exactly east of there >> got it to the border
so they'll both be both on the east side where Clifton Pen is in the central
north.
» And then you got Savage Community Park on the west side.
» And again, to be to be clear, this is just simply public dedicated.
» Yeah. >> Uh pickle ball facilities. So there are
many other multi-striped, multi-use courts, as an example, both in
Burnsville and in our surrounding communities. So, this is just focused on
dedicated. >> And there's some privately owned for
rent. >> Yeah.
» Pickle ball. Like I know there's one in Lakeville that
» Yeah. >> And they're indoors at a shopping center
» year round.
» I wish we had I wish we had those two spots marked on that map. That would be
» helpful. We can update it. One of the decisions that we made back in 2025,
Garrett, was to say if Rose Park didn't do you want to go through that again? I
mean, the decision that was made back in 2025 that if Rose Park wasn't the second
choice was cliff >> 2025 already.
This is 26. I'm looking at the background as well.
» Yeah. >> Yeah. Um, Madame Mayor, if I'm answering
your question correctly, I I believe when council was discussing the project
that evening, um, there was a consensus that uh, Rose Park that council would
like staff to talk to Collins and RTX about the possibility of Rose Park.
» Um, there was also some support that evening. um more than one council member
had support for cliffn park as a as kind of a 1a slash two um and then there was
various opinions about hollows and alam magagnet that evening. So um from that
conversation we did have the discussions and uh also with the new information um
have presented that tonight about cliffn.
Okay, members of the council, the question, the policy question before us
is that do we proceed with
what is presented that Rose Park
is I said it's prohibitive. I believe 90,000 from one
» Yeah. >> from one $1 to 90,000 is prohibitive to
go to 90,000 a year. And yet we do have to build it also. So
» shall we say Rose Park is off the table? >> Yes,
» agreed. Yes. >> Okay. Very good. So Cliff Fen is the
next and you have already talked to all of the
soccer players at Cliff Penn and then moving some of that those courts over to
North River Hills. Madame Mayor, yes, I have had
discussions with the president of the BAC. They are planning to do
recreational soccer and uh from our conversation, she indicated that they do
not plan to use Cliff End Park as part of that process. Uh they are still
putting their plan together. It will involve uh some of our neighboring
communities and um but she assured me that at the time of our conversation,
Clifen was not a location they were planning to use.
» Okay. So Cliff F then is the next best here that we have on the
table council. >> So my opposition to Cliff Fen at the
time was the disruption of soccer. Um so with this new information I've softened
up on that location. Um,
I do want to call attention to the fact that this is closer to a wildlife refuge
that has sensitive breeding grounds for eagles and other birds. And I know that
that was a pretty significant talking point in opposition to Al Magnet. And
so, um, I just want us to be consistent here that if this is to go forward with
Cliff Fen, that this could potentially have more disruption here, um, as it
relates to that specific item than it would at Al Magnet.
» Okay. Any other thoughts, Tara? So in the
survey that we did in mid July,
um let's see.
Do you have that on in the presentation or No, I don't think
so. Um so the
All right. So, we're we're down to Ella Magnet and Cliff Fen. And in the would
you like to see a pickle ball complex at your park?
It was fairly comparable. Um 34% said yes to Alamagnet,
28% said Cliff Fen yes. Um which other park would you most like
to see? And they could do multiple choice. Um, Alam Magagnet had 80. Cliff
Ven had 62. Hollows Park had 89. So, Hollow's Park actually
was very high on that one. Rose Park was the highest, but she's gone. Um,
and then are the current parking conditions suitable?
Ala Magnet was 54% said yes. Cliff Fen was 33% yes. Hollows Hollow Park was 29%
yes. So that was not good. Um I'm actually good with either
» What about votes for opposed? Well, I think one of the things that was very
critical was close to residence was a critical item on and when we
looked at at Cliff Finn because it was all industrial all around that was like
Rose Park where you have industry all around so you wouldn't be um affecting
residents. Yeah, that's definitely a benefit of that park for sure.
» Cliffn and Cliff fin had soccer in it in the mix at that time of the survey as
well. So, >> correct. Correct. Um, but it's changed
now and so it appears to me that >> the BCA is saying, "Yeah, we're going to
move everything." And because North River Hills is really a beautiful soccer
complex, >> really beautiful.
So, >> so could you pop up that map again so
that we can put the P like just put a little spot to where that would be
» very close to Red Oak. >> Yeah. Well, you can take a look at
» Cliff >> what you had showed before on the little
crosshairs >> because there's all industry all around.
» Right. But we're we're looking at like where is it in relation to the to the
others. Okay. So, that crosshair would be which is pretty good. um where Cliff
Hen Fen would be and then Alamagnet would be about go so so so so so
right in there. So again, pretty good for not being directly by
another another um public pickle ball court.
So I I think they're both good. I don't I don't think we can go wrong either way
at this point. >> The one thing that I would say with
Cliff and why I really liked it is because it's all industry around and
it's not going to have uh a residential impact.
» Well, I mean, we have [laughter] we already have ball courts
at Alam Magnet. Like there's already ball courts there. So, like I I
understand what you're saying, but that that would be totally correct if there
were not >> other ball courts already there.
» Yeah. But there's a difference between
base softball, baseball, and over at Alam Magnant
than pickle ball and what we experience from residents
that have um that live next to Red Oak. >> Oh, and I have one more question,
Garrett. For the volleyball courts that are at Cliff Fen, are we looking at
perhaps moving those anyway >> because they're on the other side?
» No, this is just an council member Schultz. Um there there would be no plan
to replace those volleyball courts unless we chose that as the location.
And then we talked back on October 15th of 2025 that if we did do that, it might
make sense to put it at a Crystal Beach or something like that. Right.
» Okay. That's Yes. Okay. I wanted to make sure that that was still on discussion
that um if we are looking at moving those volleyball courts, Crystal Beach
might be a better location for those. So, thank you. Okay.
» And Crystal Beach is where they play volleyball right now.
» Yeah, >> correct. We we have league play at
Cliffn and Alamagnet and and Crystal Beach is
» on any nice day. It's there's almost always people out there using that
location. >> Yeah,
» that is correct. >> It's a pickup.
» I'd also like to add I'm also okay not doing pickle ball at all at this point
um >> as a viable option.
» I understand. So the thing is the question the policy question is council
members do we want to continue with the pickle ball project
» and do we agree that cliff park is what
staff should be focusing their attention to
» when did we when was this originally supposed to break ground like what year
» 24 I think No, >> like we're three years ago, right?
» Two or three. Yeah. I mean, goes back that long.
» I mean, I'm I'm actually kind of with Vince.
» I mean, it's [clears throat] >> surprisette.
» It's been three years. from my perspective is the integrity of
our communication with everybody, the pickle ball
community as well as the residents and and all of the other stakeholders.
So
staff is waiting for us to say do we move on with a pickle ball
and it's cliff the next. I mean there this had been worked on with staff and
the communities both the pickle ball community and the soccer
community. So >> I've already said move on with cliff
fence. Okay. >> Just waiting for the rest of them to
figure it out. >> I'm actually uh no for doing it at all
at this point. It's we're we're way past. So,
» well, people still [clears throat] [snorts]
are saying to us that they they would like pickle ball and uh we said that we
would proceed with a project and have set aside money for it. Dan Keelley.
» Uh I think there's a an open question on that we should
address. Do we have any data on what the current trends for usage uh and demand?
I know I continue to hear people going to other cities that can't get on Red
Oak, but uh and of course there's private uh providers popping up. my
couple of my family members go to Lakeville where they can swipe a card,
get in and play um without any staff being there. It's kind of like a
self-use gym sort of like but um [clears throat]
do we have any data, >> Garrett?
» Uh Council Member Keley, I will reiterate that all of the information
that we've shared tonight is from our past projects. We have not updated any
new information on this in regards to community engagement,
uh, studies on number of people in Bernzo playing, anything like that. So,
» okay, >> Madame Mayor, I'll I'll I'll share some
information that just popped up. National trends, younger, faster, and
dominated by entertainment. The numbers are staggering. According to Sports and
Fitness Industry Association, the active pickle ball participation hit 24 million
Americans. Experts project active player numbers to easily clear 27 to 29
million. The demographics have flipped. The stereotype of pickle ball being for
seniors is dead. The fastest growing demographic is actual players under 24
years old >> which is the Gen Z.
» Today roughly 70% of all players are under 45 and the average player age is
sitting in the mid-30s. >> [snorts]
» the top golfificication of the sport. Simply building concrete
slabs and public parks is no longer enough to meet demand. We're seeing a
massive wave of private capital flowing into the massive indoor entertainment
venues, social hubs featuring professionalgrade courts, high-end food,
craft cocktails, and lounge areas. We're not going to be in that business, but um
» it >> because that's what the younger crowd
want. >> Yeah. So, what you're saying that there
is a demand. >> There is there is still huge demand.
too. They're looking for a little bit more than just public
» public courts. They're looking for, you know,
» what I'm seeing is that Vince, you're saying you don't want to do a a ball.
» I'm just I'm in different I you know, if the three of if there's three votes to
move forward with cliff, I'm not going to fight you on it. Um,
it's just a lot of money to spend on >> Well,
and Cara, you said you don't want to move forward with the pickle ball.
» Yeah. I mean, that's that's pretty much where I'm at. I'm not I'm not like
» not as I'm not I'm not a hard no on this, but I am definitely not a yes on
this at this point. It >> Okay.
that the time to do it is like when it's doing the upswing. But yes, now we are
and I do understand the having public courts because you're not paying to use
those, right? Um,
» but man, I'm just not >> I'm not I'm not enthused after after
after >> after three years of this and it and and
it's not even going to break ground until what May of 2027.
» People have been patient with our process. I am trying to be
to have the integrity because people have been patient with
our process and we're arrived here at the point
where Rose Park isn't um a viable option for us anymore but Cliff Fen is
and Dan Keley you have read an analysis that it's still a high demand and people
still want to see a pickle ball uh pickle ball courts in Burnsville. So,
I'm a cliff fan because from the very beginning it was the one that isn't
close to any resident. It's around uh an industrial area and
so it's not going to have that impact on people. So, yes,
» I just there's a sort of a takeaway statement here. Pickle ball is no longer
just a trend. It's cemented itself as a standard piece of municipal
» and commercial infrastructure for cold weather states like Minnesota. The next
phase is growing into highquality indoor access,
» but that doesn't replace, you know, the sort of the the need for
» public >> free public courts for those that want
to play. And it does say it's even though the the growth is in the Gen Z,
it's still multigenerational. There's still a lot of people
» uh seniors who still play it. It's kind of um they were the the first
demographic to really pick up on it. >> Yeah.
» Um so I I I would say I haven't changed my position. Um I liked Cliff Ven the
last time we talked about this. I still like Cliff Ven.
» Okay. >> Um I think it um Vince's point is very
valid. It's it's a budding a >> Yeah.
» Uh a nature preserve. It's going to have the same type of negative impact. So,
both locations have that. Um, it's in an industrial area where I would prefer to
see it because of the noise. Um, I think, you know, I think I might have
said this last time, the inventors of the sport didn't really think through
the ball texture and and uh makeup like >> tennis ball. It's a lot quieter. Well,
they they could have actually made a ball, but they threw it together and it
just caught on like wildfire before they could even perfect it. Mhm.
» So, it is what it is. Unfortunately, it's noisy.
» So, you're you're >> I'm in favor of moving forward with
Cliffn. >> Okay. So, um
» that's very >> There are three three votes to move
forward with Cliff Fen. >> Okay.
» Is there anything else that you need from us with regard to the policy
question? >> Madame Mayor, there is not. uh we have
direction to continue with the project and to focus on cliffn as the location.
» Okay. >> And then you can let the pickle ball
community also know that what what transpired tonight.
» Yes, madame mayor. We would uh as I mentioned, we would plan to do an
engagement time period with a popup at Cliff Park. Um do a mailing like we have
to the neighborhood around there, businesses, uh etc.
make sure that the Burns Athletic Club was invited to participate um and
continue to share the information. So, >> okay, thank you very much.
Okay, now we um move on to round table and
there is a signed ordinance amendment on a round table and I believe council
member Keely this is yours. >> Yes.
Uh, council members and mayor, uh, the primary reason I'm asking for the
council to consider an amendment to our signed ordinance in uh, in a couple of
zones, types of zones, is is that the upper facade, high level roof line
signage for multi-story office and mixeduse buildings has some real
benefits. And when we talked about this back when we were doing the signage in
the HO hotc, there [snorts] was one building that came to mind. And I didn't
think about the second building. Um, and I wondered why they didn't have
anything. It's a four or five. It's a five-story building because as you drive
around the Twin Cities, you see all those buildings have signage that um
runs along the very top edge of the building. And from my retail side, I
think, well, every retailer wants that, right? You know, you want to be able to
say, "This is where I'm at, right? This is my company." Um, but in the in the
case of office, it's it's more about being a key employment hub. Um, and a
lot of large companies that are looking to locate do want to put their sign up
because um, they might be a large user of square footage. They might be a
company that's bringing some good jobs and they kind of want that branding out
there. Um, it provides visual navigation along corridors, of course, and it
serves an e as an economic development tool to attract major corporate anchor
tenants for brand visibility, which happens to be what happened here. Um,
there is an application that has been in the city for a while in the building.
Um, it's called um >> well, it's the only
» uh grant it's a gateway office plaza. >> Yeah. It's the only fivestory office
building that we have. >> And um and that's the building that I
remember thinking about when we were redoing the zoning thinking like
monument sign there that doesn't. And I don't I couldn't even find a sign. If
they have a monument [snorts] sign, it's not showing up on Google Maps. When I I
did the street view, I was thinking they must have something like that. But um
couldn't find anything unless it's it's hiding behind some bushes.
But that's the that's the circumstance that drew our attention to it, which is
kind of the way even when we go through the code and we do a thorough review,
you can't predict everything. And that was the one that I remember thinking
about like maybe we should allow signs like these types of buildings have on in
other cities. And we didn't address it at the time because there wasn't really
a driving need. Now there's a there's a there's an inquiry. And I thought about
it. I thought, well, there's another building. Um, Grand Market Square is
» We do have a sign for Grandtory. Yeah, it has the
» There's It's right on the at the top. >> It doesn't have a brand sign. It has the
» building name sign, right? Not not the tenants name.
» Uh, so, uh, you know, as a city, um, we certainly want to attract corporate
tenants, uh, because they usually bring good paying jobs. Um, in past years we
we did a process where council member Scholes pride up eliminating building
heights in certain zones. Hard the city was one, the mall center village was
another, and then I think it was maybe a portion of Highway 13, and maybe that's
just all part of HOTC, but I remember you specifically saying like Highway 13
and like I35, but that might be encompassed in the HOTC. Um, and so we
did we we removed the building height. So we were hoping that would draw some,
you know, when when some of those areas get redeveloped, some of those office
complexes that are one-story, if somebody comes in and buys it and they
want to do a multi-story building, that'd be great. Um, so I think this
this is not just about that one application. This made me think broadly
about um these two major zones with no building height and the future. what is
it going to attract and how could that be enhanced to attract more people who
might build a multi-story building especially if they it usually starts I
mean office construction isn't pure speculative they usually have two or
three major tenants lined up in advance of acquiring the property and building
the multi-story building and those major tenants will look for can I have my
brand on the outside of the building in our city right now they cannot um so My
suggestion is to for us to consider changing our ordinance for buildings
that are three stories or higher uh that are office or office mixed use. Right?
This is not meant for residential or apartment buildings. This is strictly
business buildings. And we have two Grand Market Square and Gateway Office
Plaza that would fall under this. So here's some examples of what you see
when you drive around. Health Partners corporate office in Bloomington. Um
formerly Seridian the Day Force headquarters. uh multi-story buildings
in suburbs. Richfield has Best Buy, of course, that's ginormous uh multiple
buildings. Um St. Louis Park has Bridgewater Bank corporate headquarters
and they're a first tier suburb. Eden Prairie and Minnetonka have uh Optum
United Health has some monster buildings and of course they want their brand on
the outside. >> So does M Health here in Burnsville.
» Yeah. So, it's I think we we just didn't have something compelling at the time to
draw attention to it. Now, we do, and I think it's the right thing to do, not
only for today, but for the future, for both of these buildings and hopefully
some future buildings that get built. Um,
I think that it's a it's a common sense recommendation because it's really not
uncommon in other suburbs and certainly cities. And I think I would suggest that
we adjust the uh the ordinance to allow these to have and and I'm talking very
specific. These are right along the roof line. These are not down on any given
floor. These are only uh what you would uh consider a roof line sign and it
would have to be individual backlit letters the quality that we require uh
in the rest of our city. uh fitting within a particular size that
can be those kind of details can be worked out by staff uh if they bring it
back to us if the council agrees with this concept.
I agree that we need to amend our sign ordinance, Dan,
but it's from my perspective that's something that we're going to
have staff would have to do a lot of work to look at that and to do it
throughout the city. And uh I believe there is amendments coming in I think in
a second phase for zoning. Jeff, am I correct in that? The zoning amendments
that would fit right in to that. But I want to address
what this applicant wants and we can make I think staff had a
pathway for this applicant to get that done for what they want to do at the
gateway building. And then because the bulk of the work in looking
at a comprehensive sign ordinance is going to take time but I want to address
the immediate need um for this particular applicant. So, if
we can do that and then have staff look at the sign ordinance during the work
that they're doing with the second phase of the zoning ordinance
and so they know that we want it throughout the whole city, but I want to
get this one done for this applicant for gateway if that's okay. Yeah, I think I
just I wouldn't want >> I think we have a concept that I I
believe they have a concept they want to bring to us and we can amend because
this is only about the DOT the the transit oriented development
» the to do they have to pay >> that's that's the one that Yeah. And
what they're proposing is I have a picture of it. It's it's a sign that
runs right along the roof line. That's [snorts] exactly what I'm talking about,
which is what other, you know, that's why I'm saying
» let's just address that so they can move forward.
» I don't have a problem with that. I just don't want to go I don't want them to go
through any additional expense as a result of them coming in as a special
because our ordinance doesn't support it. I think our ordinance is wrong and I
think we need to fix the ordinance and that they or anybody behind them can do
this like a normal assignment. >> I agree with that. But this is this is
the concept. They're not going to be it's like any concept development that a
a developer brings before us before they spend any more money. You know, is it a
go or no go? >> Yeah.
» So, [snorts] that's all I'm saying. It's it's not something that we haven't done
with concept development >> and and I think that's what staff had
asked them to do. It's not going to cost them any money
» to do the concert. >> Is that correct? City Manager Lindber.
» Madame Mayor, members of the council, I it is correct that there is a that our
team planning team uh has been uh talking with the property owners,
individuals involved. Uh there is not a current application. uh our team uh and
you might recall that there I shared with you in early June uh that our team
had offered the councils at the time brand new newly adopted consulate plan
review process in order to expedite an opportunity ahead of an application
ahead of >> the applicable fees for the applicant or
escrow that would be required uh in the city's adopted fee schedule. um the
opportunity to come talk to the council about the concept which is the spirit of
that that planning tool as it's now adopted into ordinance. Uh so um at the
end of the day >> uh hopefully that helps clarify process
and where we're at. Uh but there's no there's no application right now and
there wouldn't be fees until the point of application. But they they bring a
concept just like the >> I just want to I I think they'd be
perfectly acceptable to that. >> I think they were thrown a curve on the
success rate and it made them a little apprehensive. And so I just said, you
know, you can come back and and deal with staff. I want to deal with the
ordinance. The ordinance is changing is >> because it's not about them. It's about
Grand [snorts and clears throat] Market and any other building that might be
looked upon as built in Burnsville and having the ability to put those brands
along the top. >> I I agree with that, but I but that
takes such a long time, but they need to get this done now
» and we've done and we've done concept before. Uh look at old old Highway 34.
They came with a concept >> because it was a residential area. They
didn't have and so when we said sure go ahead they were able to move forward
then and then file an application >> cara
» so what is the cost
» of an application >> yeah madam mayor members of the council
I would have to look that up I looks like Jeff might have the information
available >> mayor council
» come in with a concept >> yeah I was just looking at our 2026
adopted fee schedule and there's uh for us uh concept plan review uh which is
the coming directly to the council for policy direction ahead of a formal
application. >> There's there's two charges that the
city has. There's the application fee which is $422
and that's to cover um hard costs of the city, right? Mailings and stuff and then
there is also as as we do with every development application a $2,000 escrow
deposit and that's to pay for any um external costs that the city
» may have to pay that for a concept to come before us. uh mayor, in the fee
schedule, it still includes that escrow for a for a concept plan review because
there have been a couple times where we've done um some
it's usually engineering consultants, not applicable in this case, or uh legal
fees, anything any um external costs that we incur, would they be paid from
that escrow? If there are none, we would re we would return that money. Um um
otherwise, we would pay those expenses and and reimburse the any sort of
difference between the deposits. Is this an engineering thing or or just a
aesthetics thing that we're talking about?
» Yeah, Jeff. >> I mean, when you talk about signs,
you're >> mayor and council. I would anticipate in
a concept plan review such as this, the I I would anticipate the only expense we
could incur is any legal fees that be necessary just to draft the ordinance
changes or or whatnot. But that's the only the concept uh fee I can anticipate
for this project. >> Yeah.
Okay. >> City manager, did you have a thought?
» Yeah, >> I was going to I was going to say I have
uh first of all, three stories I think is too high. I think it should be two
stories on signings if we're going to do signage. But we we do have a process
we're going through with our planning commission right now with the title 10
and title 11 and all that which that can be addressed at that. Uh staff has shown
us a way or shown this applicant a way to come in with a concept and we can
look at and say, "Yeah, we like that, we don't like that." and he can move
forward with it uh rather quickly. I I'm reluctant to just make an ordinance
change without looking at the whole city and all the different zones that we have
in the city and so that we get it right the first time and we don't keep
peacemealing this all the time. Uh you know, you referred to the track record
of turning down signs. I don't recall ever turning down a sign in the 20ome
years I've been here. >> Have you seen Bob signs?
» I'm not sure where that track record's coming from that he's concerned about
because >> you I'm not talking about leaving the
meeting >> whatever you're referring to.
» Well, you had referred that he was reluctant to do things because of the
track record of getting things done with the signage and
» it's not nothing to do with anyone but him.
» Okay. >> Well, what was the track record?
» Nothing to do with anyone else but him. >> I wasn't referring to any past history
of any other just his situation. >> Okay. So, he's had a track record with
other cities, >> not this city.
» No, that is not true. >> I think we'll just let staff handle it.
» Well, I'm Okay. I'm just saying I don't recall ever turning down a sign. That's
all I'm saying. >> No, I I never said that.
» Okay. >> Civility.
» That's not a track record problem then. >> I'm saying we're good. We're very pro
business. Yeah. I I believe. >> Yeah. So, so we can give some direction.
This is the policy question. Do we want to just focus on this one
application to come in for a concept?
» Well, that's a separate thing. What I'm presenting is a change to the ordinance.
This is I'm not >> that's just the thing that brought my
attention to the ordinance. >> I agree with you with that. It's just
that >> I think staff can handle that situation
» just fine. >> We have no problem change the ordinance
as we go through the process with planning because that's what they're
there to do. >> Yeah. If there are if that's already on
the boards to get and it'll get caught up in that scoop. Sure. Absolutely.
» That so yeah, and that's where I'm saying we're in that process. So
» that's a good idea. But this Yeah. >> Okay. So stay with the process that but
do we >> for the applicant let them know that
they can come in >> staff will handle it.
» Okay. All right. So >> next
» ju just just so we're clear uh madam members of the council the your current
your current current ordinance and how we would uh approach administration of
this uh would be either what the planning team has currently suggested to
the applicant which is come in for a concept review uh that would would would
then necessitate the fees and escrow that we discussed. Um uh an alternative
that council member Keley did suggest tonight and I just want to make sure
that we're we're clear would be a uh really at the end of the day and Dan
explained this well uh but as I understand it uh the the your current
ordinance current city regulations uh the TOD is the only zoning district
where this particular issue would prohibit uh top of building signage.
age. So a a potential shorter term opportunity would be deal
with that issue. If a majority of the council wishes to change policy
direction, deal with that issue, which then would expedite the process and
eliminate the need for a concept review. Now, that would be outside of what I
could do administratively, right? And that would require city council
direction tonight. So, I just want to make sure that we're all on the same
page when it when it comes to the most efficient and effective way through what
council member Keely has raised tonight. I I think I'm hearing general support of
the city council to >> Yeah. So, you're
» I like the second thing you said. >> Yeah. supportive of
looking at the ordinance amendment for >> simple change
» just the tod right itself we would narrowly have the council
address >> the the the tod the the the narrow topic
and then I've also heard the direction from the council that as part of the
plan title 10 and title 11 process we want to look holistically at the issue
of signage I need to talk to our team more about what that looks like to be
very honest with you there are many priorities ities that are going to come
up through that review process following the comprehensive plan and we'll have to
talk capacity timing. >> Yeah.
» Conversations with council to make sure that we're looking at the nuance.
Council member Gustoson, you brought up a good a good point. There are
» there are a number of factors uh across zoning districts that that would
potentially need to be dealt with and we can mark that for mayor to your
suggestion other suggestion the the longer term future solution if that's if
that's the desire of the council. Again, I don't want to get ahead of the
majority of the council here, but just looking for clarity and efficient and
effective outcomes based on where I think I'm hearing the majority of you
are are talking from. >> Yeah.
» So, to first part and second part. >> Yeah.
» Yes. >> Do do the comprehensive sign ordinance
review with with everything that's going on with title 10 and 11
» which separately from just the to as a carve out because That's yeah,
we can do that real quick and easy. >> And that's Yeah. And that's what I'm
saying. >> Address this item.
» Okay. Again, I didn't want to get I don't want to get in the middle of the
council's policy discussion here. I just >> You're just clarifying.
» You offered a fast lane. You know, if you've been to Valley Fair, there's a
fast lane. We're to the fast lane and let the other the whole rest of it take
the >> And that's what I said at the beginning.
Let's deal with this so it it expedites the desire of the applicant. Deal with
the heart of the city, the city with the to and scoop up the everything else.
» Yep. >> Yeah, I think that's what he said. Yep.
I'm That's sounds great. >> Okay. And that's
» Let's back up a minute here. >> It's
» so we've got lane too fast. >> We've got heart of the city. We're just
talking. >> So you remember that the heart of the
city is now the whole city. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's no longer HOC1 and
HOC2. The whole thing has been >> identified as a transit oriented
development. >> We're going to tot it.
» Um I'm fine with that. I again I didn't speak to this because I don't have any
background or understanding of that. I didn't even know we had that restriction
in our to um and it's kind of seems silly that we do now that I'm aware of
it. So, >> well, so
» because we have Hey, there's there's a grand marketplace
» and there is a and there's a grand market.
» I mean, I go down the road, you see the building where part of the city dental
is uh old national bank and that looks great there. I don't know why we
couldn't replicate that on Gate building.
» You got First National Bank and you also have the Ames Center. Madam, mayor,
members of the council, um, in spite of my attempt to be efficient and
effective, it looks like Jeff might have a question that I want to make sure gets
asked. >> Just mayor and council. [laughter]
» Nope. >> I am now going to listen to Jeff.
» This is a me problem. >> Again, just for Yeah, just for clarity.
» Um, I understand that the the discussion is happening, you know, doing a targeted
amendment for the TOD district. Just to clarify, that is for rooftop wall
signage for office and commercial buildings within the to district, not a
comprehensive review of the todd district.
» Correct. The the comprehensive is on your process.
» Yeah. The comprehensive one is on the process that's going on right now with
phase two of the zoning ordinance. Phase two of the zoning
» and that's why we have expert professional staff that aren't me.
[laughter] So, thank you, ma'am. >> Okay.
» No, that's good. >> Okay. Everybody,
» I think that's the only thing we missed when we did that to thing a few years
ago is just this. >> Okay.
» Everybody understand? We're just dealing with the amendment for this applicant
in the to >> Yep.
» Everything else is on your uh comprehensive view of um our
zoning ordinance second phase. Okay, everybody on board? Okay, we're moving
on. Um, and now
Michelle, you want to schedule a meeting to canvas the primary?
» Yes. Thank you, madame mayor, city council. We um do have a city primary on
the um primary election August 11th. And so we will need to schedule a special
meeting to canvas those results. uh the statute is not very flexible whereas it
says we are required to do it three days after which makes it August 14th
and um >> so we have to do it 12th 13th or 14th
» the 14th >> just the 14th
» the statute also >> just telling us we have to be here on
the 14th is what you're telling us >> the statute says
» the statute says that it we can do it on the 13th if the county allows us to and
we tried to do that one time and it was two two days is just too fast of a
turnaround. >> So you're saying the 14th. Is everybody
okay on the 14th? >> Mon Monday the 14th. [clears throat]
» No, it's Friday the 14th. >> August 14th.
» August. Sorry. >> August the 14th
» at 5. >> Yeah, go for it. I won't be here.
[laughter] >> It can be it can be at noon. It can be
» Yeah, I'm good any time of day on that day.
» Okay. >> Okay. So, uh, Vince and Dan G. Dan K,
» uh, the 14th. >> Yeah.
» What time you want to do it? >> Do you want to do line? Um, noon or
» It takes 10 minutes. >> Takes 10 minutes.
» Yeah. Oh, noon's fine. >> Noon.
» Noon. >> Noon. Sounds good.
» Okay. >> Okay. Very good. Okay. With that then,
um, reports, Vince? >> No reports. Oh, come uh watch uh Never
mind. We're good. [cough] Oh, >> what was that?
» I was going to put out a word for Burnsville. Burnsville is hosting the
MBL state baseball tournament at Sue Fisher
and Savage Community Fields this weekend. So
10A, it's very specific, but >> yeah,
» experience Burnsville cancelled their meeting on Thursday. Our next meeting
will be in August. Okay, Carol,
» Dad, >> I have a small
you don't have to listen. [laughter] >> Metro Cities Transportation General
Government starts Monday the 27th. All of us that are on assigned committees
will start probably that week if not before. Uh National League of Cities
held their summer leadership conference in Louisville, Kentucky. It's about a
three and a half day event. Um, it's held at the current president's uh
hometown which uh he's a council member in Louisville. Louisville if as I
learned >> actually that's how they say it.
» Uh just uh sitting on the executive committee we talked about the 2027
budget and the challenges um membership growth u managing cost. There's a giant
reduction in federal grants which is uh going to have a corresponding reduction
in staff because a lot of staff is there to um write and nurture grants. Um we
talked about the office of uh management budgets proposed grant changes which is
there's out it's a public uh comment period right now which is has some
significant impacts. We also discussed the success of the road to housing act
um and the large effort by NLC's lobbying and and membership cities
across the country. Um we also talked about u the new I think it's A250 it's
it's probably not that [cough] it's signing the Declaration of Independence.
It's a it's a website where you can go on and I'll I can share the QR code
where you can actually sign on behalf of your city. All of us can um essentially
reaffirming the Declaration of Independence. So, it's a effort that's
going across the country uh through the National League of City.
» So, my signature wasn't good enough the first time?
» No, it wasn't big enough. We need to do it larger. Um, and then they released
the uh the 2026 state of the cities report which uh which was a recorded
presentation and uh it included a panel which included Mayor Kim Norton from
Rochester uh who I I sat with and presented to the League of Minnesota
Cities board earlier this year on the civility um uh deal. So the sorry um the
civility index and etc. So uh she was there with uh a mayor from a really
small really small like a couple thousand people suburb of Birmingham
Birmingham Alabama. So we had fairly goodsized city and a really small city
represented u talking about all the issues which I'll run through them very
quickly. Number one across the country economic growth was the first priority
on city's minds. Infrastructure and housing are more are the most critical.
uh concerns for an infrastructure cliff with ARPA and IIGJA in the uh sorry uh
infrastructure investments act uh are ending and cities expect negative impact
on infrastructure investment. Then of course housing affordability is a
widespread structural issue for every city across the country and public
safety strategies continue to evolve. Uh it was a very interesting report. Uh
it's out and available on their website. And then lastly, the suburban municipal
council got together uh aka first tier suburbs uh which is uh one of the
councils uh under the national league of cities uh I've been a part of for many
years. I didn't I didn't join right away because it said first year's suburbs and
we're a second tier. So I thought we don't have a party we can join. And then
somebody told me just I mentioned it rand randomly to a member of the the
lobbing staff and she said oh no that's open to all suburbs. I went, "Good. We
need to rebrand that." That was [snorts] four or five years ago, 5 years ago. We
finally got it done this year and it's going to be called the Suburban
Municipal Council. And the reason it couldn't be Suburban Cities Council is
that is the same acronym for small cities council. So, they wanted a
separate acronym because they use that structurally. And uh so I'm going to
refer to it and I told them I'm going to always say it's the suburban cities
group council but suburban municipal council that will become officially
effective at November's city summit which is held in Nashville, Tennessee.
And we took a tour uh our group the council members took a tour to a small
suburban town that's going through some major um redevelopment. It's called uh
uh Jamestown, Kentucky. And uh it was very we had the mayor
there who gave a a nice speech and and their economic development director and
uh some other folks and and talked about what they have going on. The one thing I
will I will say to in close, they have a massive industrial park. When you look
at the map of their city limits, 40% of the square miles
is is an industrial park. It's enormous and of course it brings an enormous
amount of prosperity to the city. It's a huge income source. What they use, they
don't have property taxes like we do. They have an occupation tax. It's based
on your salary. It's like a an income tax that goes locally. And that is a
very big part of Kucky's economic model for cities is occupational tax. And
because they have that that largest industrial park I've ever seen in any
city, certainly a city of that size, um that provides a lot of financial support
for the city to operate. That's it. Thank you.
» I won't give a USCM report. >> Go ahead.
» Go ahead. >> It's okay. Uh and there's nothing else.
Burnsville Savage meeting is cancelled. Was supposed to be this Thursday. So,
but otherwise I know you need to go. >> Oh my goodness.
» There is nothing else. Anything from staff
with that? I did not. >> We stand adjourned by acclamation.