[0:00] Yeah.
Pledge of Allegiance?
[0:04] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
[0:08] republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[0:14] justice for all.
[0:18] » All right.
Um first thing on
[0:21] our agenda is to approve the agenda as
presented. Does anyone have any
[0:25] questions
or additions or changes to
[0:30] the agenda as presented?
If not, I'll take a motion to approve
[0:35] the agenda.
>> I move to
[0:37] » Okay, I got a motion by Shawn Ryan.
Rick, you going to second? Second by
[0:41] Rick Seiler.
If there's no questions, comments, all
[0:45] in favor say I.
>> I.
[0:46] » I. Any opposition? Okay.
Passes 5-0. Next item is our consent
[0:51] agenda. These are items that are
pretty routine in nature. Um does anyone
[0:57] have any questions or
issues on the items that are in the
[1:02] consent agenda?
[1:06] » I move to approve the consent agenda.
>> Okay. Second.
[1:09] » A second a motion by Maggie Bass, second
by Bruce Woolf. The only question I I
[1:14] just want to confirm that we will be
doing
[1:17] the elections at the new city hall.
>> Correct.
[1:21] » All right.
>> Okay.
[1:23] So, I got a motion and a second.
If there's no other questions, all in
[1:27] favor say I.
>> I.
[1:28] » I. Any opposition? Okay, passes 5-0.
Next on the agenda is government agency
[1:34] updates.
Dennis, if you'd like to
[1:39] come forward and uh
tell us what the heck the county is up
[1:43] to.
>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the
[1:45] council, thanks for having me again.
It's always a pleasure.
[1:48] Sorry I wasn't here last month. I was
enjoying Canada fishing, which was
[1:54] should be successful and it was, so
thank you.
[1:57] Uh what's going on in the county? Um
we're on our third week of doing our
[2:01] budgeting.
Um again, I'm no veteran. I'm only a
[2:05] year and a half into my position as
as a commissioner. However, talking with
[2:11] the county administrator and the other
commissioners, usually at this time
[2:14] we're
looking at a levy of double digits. I
[2:18] know, and then we have to try to work
that down into the single digits, but
[2:22] right now we're we're sitting really
good. They're really really really
[2:25] really pleased or
at uh
[2:28] uh
meeting with the department heads and
[2:31] figuring out next year's plan.
Um also after the after the workshops,
[2:38] we have a we're going through our
ordinances throughout the county. This
[2:41] is probably going on four or five weeks
of doing that, so we've had long
[2:45] Tuesdays. We've had our regular Tuesday
meetings.
[2:49] And now the workshops with the
department heads and now ordinances, so
[2:52] we're usually Tuesday we're there till
probably 3:00, 4:00 in the afternoon
[2:55] trying to get this out, but it's good
because we're taking
[2:59] four or five department heads at a time
rather than I guess in the past they've
[3:03] tried to cram this all into
one or two days, and it just gets really
[3:07] long. And then you're looking at
12-hour days.
[3:12] Um some of the roads uh you know,
obviously we had rain. There was rain
[3:17] anywhere from 3 to 7 in over in Lee
Shores, so some of our roads took a
[3:22] a hit, but I talked to our county
engineer along with uh assistant
[3:26] department head Robbie Kopet, which uh
he figured by today I talked to him on
[3:33] Friday afternoon, late afternoon, and he
figured by Monday, which is today and
[3:37] possibly tomorrow, they should be back
on par with having the roads all back in
[3:42] order.
Um just a couple highlights, our fraud
[3:46] investigator that uh
Sheriff Mason I I I think I told you
[3:50] this already, Sheriff Mason
designates a deputy solely to work on
[3:55] fraud in Le Sueur County.
And it's saving our taxpayers in Le
[4:00] Sueur County and the state a lot of
money. So, um
[4:04] just wanted that
uh a little fact for you guys to know
[4:07] that that uh
the money that we get
[4:12] is a grant money from the state which
doesn't
[4:16] cover his
salary, but we still think it's more
[4:20] important to
you know, in the long run we're getting
[4:24] that money back. It did The money that
we recoup from that goes to the state.
[4:27] The Le Sueur County residents don't get
that. It goes
[4:30] to the state and then
branches off from there.
[4:35] Um
>> [clears throat]
[4:36] » as you know, Mayor Nicklay, the state
baseball tournament's coming to New
[4:39] Prague, so I encourage any of you that
maybe have a weekend off or a weekday
[4:46] off, um
sign up,
[4:50] help out the city, and uh
it's going to be a lot of good baseball
[4:54] coming to town.
Um elections, I think I overheard you
[4:59] saying your elections our elections.
So, our meetings tomorrow Yes, the last
[5:04] Tuesday and tomorrow and the following,
I believe
[5:08] or no, just
tomorrow yet.
[5:11] Our meetings are held at the courthouse
cuz of the early voting is where our
[5:16] where we usually have our chamber
meetings. That's getting
[5:20] allocated by early voting.
Again, I'm getting phone calls or just
[5:25] in person people talking to me. As you
turn on the news, data centers. I'm
[5:29] getting a lot of people not wanting data
centers. My constituents, it's you know,
[5:34] the 90% please don't bring data centers.
We have no
[5:39] intentions. Right now, we have a
moratorium on data centers in the
[5:43] county, so nothing can be done anyways
for a year, but
[5:47] um
just to kind of put that at ease for
[5:50] right now, there's no one's at
approach the county wanting one.
[5:55] Um, again, listening to my constituents,
I have no interest in having one.
[6:01] All right. Any questions?
[6:06] Thank you all for what you do.
Appreciate it.
[6:08] » Thanks, Dennis.
>> All right, thank you, Dennis.
[6:12] Next on the agenda is our public forum.
This is an opportunity where uh
[6:17] people can uh speak to the
council. Um,
[6:22] there's not going to be really any inner
reaction, but uh
[6:25] it will be noted. So,
first on the list I have Brian Paulson.
[6:31] Brian, you know, state your name and
address, please.
[6:33] » Uh Brian Paulson, 206 First Street
Southwest. Uh may I remind the council,
[6:37] I just wanted to thank uh all you and
the chief of police and the city
[6:41] administrator for turning on the
transparency portal audit logs for the
[6:45] flood cameras. So, I noticed that was
turned on. So, I just wanted to thank
[6:48] you. I know we've been talking about
that for a long time. So, I just want to
[6:51] say uh thank you.
>> All right.
[6:53] » [snorts]
>> Thank you.
[6:56] Next on the list
is it Heather
[7:01] or
[7:05] » Oh, I think I I thought it was a sign-up
>> Yep, so that that was a sheet for if you
[7:08] would like to discuss
>> No, you do
[7:11] Oh, you you don't want to speak? You
just Okay. Well, that's fine.
[7:15] » you can't speak like Dennis, so.
>> Well, who can? [laughter]
[7:20] All right.
So, I Heather and John, you do not want
[7:23] to speak? Anyone else want to address
the council?
[7:27] All right.
If not, we'll go on the next
[7:30] item. We do not have any public
hearings. And number seven, we're going
[7:34] to go into the 2026
electric utility revenue bond update.
[7:40] Um, that sale would took place on July
15th.
[7:44] And um, it was presented to utilities
commission last at their last meeting
[7:50] last week.
And
[7:52] » [clears throat]
>> now we're just presenting it to the
[7:53] council.
It has been a the council gave the
[7:57] utilities commission the authority to
approve that bond. So,
[8:01] it looks like we have Brian Riley from
uh
[8:05] I Ehlers to kind of give us a quick
summarization, right Brian?
[8:11] » That is the plan. Thank you, Mayor.
[8:16] Um, I will try to be concise and brief.
As was stated, these bonds have been
[8:20] sold and priced and the next step is
closing, which is scheduled to occur
[8:24] just a few days from now.
Um, so just for your benefit, you should
[8:28] have the sale day report in your packet
and I'll just briefly walk you through
[8:32] that and I'll I'll preface by speaking a
little bit about the rating. Obviously,
[8:36] the city is rated but
our utility has its own rating with a
[8:41] different set of metrics and standards
that are directly applicable to
[8:47] municipal electric providers. And so,
the you know, the
[8:52] those standards are a bit different from
what you would think about from a
[8:54] general obligation pledge. Um, the
rating came out as an A and stable,
[9:00] which means there's no point of view on
whether or not the rating will change up
[9:04] or down in the next few years. And by
and large, if you go through that
[9:06] quickly, um, you'll note a number of
references towards relatively strong
[9:12] financial operations, maybe a few things
here and there regarding some
[9:16] improvements that can be made to some
long-term management, but by and large,
[9:19] the utility itself is viewed to be in in
positive condition and the A rating is
[9:27] is very reasonable for a utility of that
size and within your geography.
[9:32] » [clears throat]
>> I think what also speaks to that is as I
[9:35] get into the bids here, we went to
competitive sale just like you have
[9:38] traditionally done with your own general
obligation debt.
[9:42] Bids were solicited and received on July
15th as was stated.
[9:47] There were five bids offered which I
would view as relatively strong
[9:51] for a small communities electric revenue
with generation.
[9:55] And so you also you can see the benefit
of the competitive sale where we've got
[9:59] the winning bid coming in at about
4.16%.
[10:03] The worst coming in at just under 4.35
with a few scattered around 4.25. And so
[10:08] on the day of sale there were two buyers
who were very interested. Both the
[10:13] winning and the cover. We would view
4.16%
[10:16] on a 20 plus year structure as being
relatively attractive. I will say as you
[10:21] look back knowing that it's early
August, these bonds sold July 15th and
[10:26] while we're not in the business of
recommending timing the market, you did
[10:29] hit it at a favorable time. Rates have
been um
[10:33] pretty much up since then not
dramatically but you know, certainly to
[10:37] the tune of about 15 to 20 basis points
0.15 to 0.2%. That certainly does add up
[10:43] on a transaction
over 16 million dollars.
[10:47] On the day of sale, the pricing that was
received allowed the city to reduce the
[10:53] size of the issue.
We we make certain assumptions when
[10:56] we're putting kind of the pre-sale
package together and working with you on
[11:00] all of that and we make some assumptions
based on any number of things including
[11:04] the fees and expenses associated with
the issue. There's also a debt service
[11:08] reserve fund which is very common for a
utility revenue obligation.
[11:12] That is borrowed money that is set aside
as additional security for the debt in
[11:16] the case that revenues are insufficient
to support the annual payment
[11:20] requirements and then would be required
if there's ever a draw on it, you'd be
[11:24] required to replenish it.
So that additional credit enhancement
[11:28] proves to be a benefit and is kind of
demanded for an issue like this. And as
[11:32] a result, we were also able to reduce
that because the annual debt service
[11:35] requirements were less than originally
estimated. So, um, all in, able to
[11:40] reduce the issue size
um, roughly 600 some odd thousand
[11:44] dollars. Um, so again, a positive
attribute of this, coming in less than
[11:48] expected.
Um, you know, maybe I'll pause there and
[11:52] see if there are any immediate
questions. The bid tabulation shows you
[11:56] the final pricing, the coupons, and the
yields uh, for this issue,
[12:02] um,
and some other salient details.
[12:04] Adjustments are made on the day of sale,
and so, if you look to the bottom of the
[12:08] first page of the bid tabulation,
there's a few notes there that reference
[12:12] the adjustments, and then what the final
results are. Um, in that case, the sale
[12:17] day report also has summary level detail
um, on the cover.
[12:23] What questions can I answer for any of
you?
[12:28] » Anyone have any questions?
[12:33] » I have a general question, maybe not of
you, Brian, but um,
[12:37] just for our audience,
um, is the repayment of these bonds is
[12:43] actually [clears throat] coming from
money coming from SIMPA, if that's my
[12:49] understanding.
>> Correct. Yes.
[12:51] » Thank you.
>> We have an agreement with SIMPA that
[12:53] they would pay for the
energy that that
[12:56] generation plan could produce, and uh,
so, this is going to
[13:03] pay more than what the bond payments
will be by a couple hundred dollars
[13:07] thousand dollars each year. Isn't it
something?
[13:10] » I just wanted to make sure that that was
said, so, um, our taxpayers understand.
[13:16] » Right. This has no effect on our tax
levy or tax burden at all.
[13:22] » Right.
[13:25] Any other questions or comments?
No, I don't think we have any Brian. If
[13:31] you anything else you need to share?
>> I do not. All action has been taken to
[13:36] your earlier point. The the sale has
been awarded and we're proceeding
[13:39] towards closing. So informational only
and I do appreciate your time.
[13:44] » I appreciate your time.
>> Thank you.
[13:45] » Thank you.
>> Thank you all.
[13:48] » [clears throat]
>> Okay.
[13:52] » Um mention we mentioned this before but
this does give us added capacity within
[13:56] the city and added redundancy so there's
a a value to the city residents also by
[14:02] this agreement not just that it's uh
provides additional capacity for Sumpter
[14:06] but it it gives us a better
um
[14:11] service that we can provide.
>> Thank you.
[14:16] » [clears throat]
>> Okay. Uh there's no our city engineer
[14:20] and updates.
Matt, you just kind of want to breeze us
[14:24] how the 10th Street project's going?
[14:29] » Yeah, 10th Avenue is going really well.
Uh we're about a week ahead of schedule.
[14:32] Uh we actually had our first rain day on
Friday which is not normal to have a
[14:36] your first rain day in uh
end of uh July so that's great news. Um
[14:42] 10th Avenue and 3rd Street is still
closed. We still ask people to stay out
[14:45] of that area. Uh the roundabout is
I'm going to say it's 80% complete. Uh
[14:50] if you walked up there or up to the
signs you could see that the
[14:53] roundabout's in place but they're still
black dirt and sidewalks. Uh the trail
[14:57] will be removed most likely next week on
the west side of the road and repaved uh
[15:02] the following week. Um
so yeah, it's coming coming along really
[15:05] well. Mainly concrete work this week. Uh
curb replacement and sidewalk
[15:08] replacement.
>> Uh
[15:10] any plans to open that 3rd Street
roundabout?
[15:14] » Uh as of now no because it's going to
get have to be closed back down next
[15:17] week. Um so opening it up for 1 week and
they're still actually working in the
[15:21] roundabout, um doing some dirt work. So,
having it open for 5 days is just even
[15:26] going to be more confusing than
>> Oh, yeah. No, no, I was thinking like I
[15:29] mean if it's all done
and they're still paving. Uh
[15:33] » Yeah, so the contract reads they have to
have that roundabout open within 30 days
[15:37] unless approved by um
I guess myself or council. As of right
[15:43] now, it is up to the 30 days at the end
of end of this week, but as of right
[15:46] now, we're going to leave it closed just
because the
[15:49] uh second lift is only a week week and a
half old.
[15:51] » Okay.
Okay, thank you. Anyone any other
[15:55] questions on any
city engineering projects update that
[15:59] maybe Matt can answer?
All right, thank you, Matt.
[16:03] Next, ordinances for introduction.
Is this uh are we looking at a first
[16:09] reading here?
>> Uh yes, we are and I can give a little
[16:12] brief synopsis here if you'd like me to.
>> Yes, please.
[16:14] » Uh Mitch, could you throw me the screen,
please?
[16:35] That's not what I wanted.
[16:41] Uh so, Nicholas Borowski, the owner of
300 East East or 300 5th Street
[16:47] Southwest, um has a property down the
southwest corner of town that's broken
[16:51] up by 140-ft and 212-ft easements um and
rights of way.
[16:56] And he has submitted an application to
the city to consider vacating these. Um
[17:01] as as staff looked through these, they
are certainly supportive of these
[17:04] vacations
um as there are no planned uses for the
[17:07] alleys, utilities, um planned use for
these alleys or right of ways, and there
[17:12] are no utilities within these easements.
Um one thing to note is we do have a
[17:18] electric line
within the property that we are unable
[17:22] to find an easement for,
but we are currently working through
[17:25] that at this point.
This is just kind of an aerial of what
[17:29] the property
looks like. Um,
[17:33] Mr. Borowski owns the entire parcel here
and these are the right-of-ways and
[17:39] easements that are currently cutting
across the property. So, he is he's
[17:42] asking if the city would just vacate
these and come back to him as the
[17:46] adjacent property owner.
>> Go back to that picture, would you,
[17:50] please?
Do other properties
[17:53] east of that also have the same issue?
>> Uh, it's entirely possible. I do not
[17:57] have that information on
on top of my head with me right now. I
[18:02] would guess usually, especially as you
with all cities, as you get into the
[18:05] older parts, if somebody buys
property like across the line that was
[18:09] originally put on there in a plat from
100 years ago,
[18:13] yes, like these exist actually all over
the city if we were to dig into them.
[18:17] Generally,
at times some cities are very proactive
[18:22] with it. It does take a lot of research
time
[18:25] to really jump into these, but a lot of
times, at least with New Prague, we've
[18:28] always been a little more reactive
driven. If the property owner knows
[18:32] they're there,
they may request them and we'll consider
[18:35] them on a
piece-by-piece basis depending on if the
[18:38] city has plans for them or is currently
using them.
[18:41] » So, this particular plat in our packet
is from 1896.
[18:46] Okay.
>> Correct. So, that was that was when the
[18:48] roads were put down thinking they may be
needed and
[18:51] they have not been needed.
Or if they
[18:54] » As noted, the one that
Chuck was probably asked for to the east
[18:58] that's Southside Park.
So, that would not
[19:01] uh
>> Okay.
[19:02] So, that property butts up
That butts up to Southside Park there.
[19:07] Okay.
So, that's why there probably won't be
[19:10] an issue with that. All right, thank
you.
[19:12] Is there any Was there a thought that
Second Ave would eventually go through?
[19:19] » There might have been. If if that was a
thought way way back at one point, as
[19:23] Maggie pointed out, it's a plat from 130
years ago.
[19:26] » Right.
>> And I think in a lot of times when they
[19:28] do this, they
it is Now they kind of take a property
[19:32] and they try to map it out and put
houses on it. A lot of these old maps,
[19:35] they would take a four four square mile
area and just drop all the roads on them
[19:39] and you could start buying lots. So,
there may have been the thought at one
[19:43] point that that would be part of the
street grid.
[19:46] » I know that
sometime that further south of that is
[19:50] thought to be developed. And I don't
know if it's conceivable for that road
[19:55] to ever go through or not, but
>> I mean, if that's Southside Park, I
[19:58] guess the question of the council would
be is would it be like like would it be
[20:01] worth it? You are running into a train
track right there. And so, even if the
[20:05] road did go through, you'd either have
to come up with a way to cross
[20:09] or
that property owner would have to be
[20:12] willing to sell lots off, I guess. So,
um
[20:16] As noted, as staff kind of looked at
this, it is one of those that just kind
[20:20] of made sense that it's been around for
a long time and
[20:23] this is one of those that the city could
let go of.
[20:27] » Yeah, as part of this process before the
hearing, I'd be interested to know
[20:30] staff's
understanding or thought or
[20:34] would Second Street ever possibly go
through or not?
[20:36] » Yep.
>> And if we have a right-of-way, do we
[20:39] need it?
>> Yeah, those are I will say these are
[20:42] certainly good questions because as part
of this process with an ordinance, a
[20:45] public hearing is required. So, part of
what I'd be asking you guys tonight is
[20:49] to approve the attached resolution
that calls for a public hearing on
[20:55] our first meeting in September, which is
the 1st of September.
[21:00] Um
Well, wait.
[21:02] » No.
>> No, the 8th of September.
[21:04] » 8th it's not on this Tuesday. The 7th is
Labor Day and so it would be Tuesday,
[21:09] first two second Tuesday in this case.
So the 8th of September would be our
[21:13] meeting and that is when we would have a
public hearing
[21:16] that anyone can come comment on this as
well as
[21:20] Ken who normally handles these would be
back and so he'd be able to answer some
[21:23] of those questions.
>> But are you still looking for us to
[21:29] » So we'd be looking to approve approve on
the first reading and then do the public
[21:32] hearing as well as the public hearing
resolution.
[21:35] » And then if there's issues
we wouldn't we wouldn't do the second
[21:39] reading, is that
>> Correct. Okay.
[21:43] » Okay, anyone have any questions?
[21:49] If not I guess I'll make a motion to
approve ordinance number 366 the first
[21:54] reading of vacating certain rights of
way
[21:58] um in the on this plat.
>> I'll second.
[22:02] » I got a second by Maggie Bass.
Any other comments? All in favor say I.
[22:07] Any opposition? Okay, passes 5-0.
Next the resolution calling for the
[22:13] public hearing on September 8th.
Um
[22:17] I guess I'll make a motion to approve
that resolution just at the public
[22:21] hearing at our council meeting on
September 8th. I'll second. Go ahead. I
[22:26] got a second by Rick Seiler.
There's no other questions, comments?
[22:32] All in favor say I.
Any opposition? Okay, passes 5-0. So we
[22:36] will get this thing all cleared up and
answered and everything on September
[22:40] 8th.
Number 10 we have no ordinances for
[22:43] adoption, no resolutions.
12 general business pay grade update. I
[22:49] know this is a recommendation from the
utilities commission
[22:54] um
due to the fact that um
[22:57] it is hard to find linemen uh
at this time so we're looking to add a
[23:05] classification under grade two. And I
think Robin, I think you had talked to
[23:10] uh the company that did our comp study.
>> Yes. Um so, just briefly in Bruce
[23:15] Reimer's absence tonight, um I told him
I'd speak to any questions.
[23:19] So, um exactly what you said, Mayor.
Just um
[23:23] not having a big candidate pool for
qualified linemen that meet all of the
[23:28] criteria. We're looking to create a
position and add to our pay grade, an
[23:33] electric utility apprentice position.
So, I did contact AutoSolve to work with
[23:39] them for placement on our grade, and it
would be at
[23:43] our existing pay grade step two.
So, I included the pay grade in the
[23:48] council packet as well. So.
>> So, this the only thing is you just
[23:54] added this position at that grade.
>> Correct.
[23:57] » On the
in the existing thing. All right.
[24:00] » change in pay or anything, just putting
placement on grade two.
[24:05] » So, move
>> Anyone have any questions for Robin?
[24:10] Okay, I got to get a motion by Rick
Seiler to approve the pay grade update
[24:15] adding the electric utility apprentice
position on grade two of our current
[24:21] scale.
>> I'll second.
[24:22] » I got a second by Maggie Bass.
There is no other questions, comments?
[24:27] All in favor say I. I. Any opposition?
Okay, it passes 5-0.
[24:33] Next, we have uh concept review of the
Harvest Fields.
[24:38] Do we Are you taking this, Josh, or
>> Yes, I will take this one again.
[24:47] » [clears throat]
>> So, this uh this particular review is
[24:51] for a concept kind of a concept review
of um
[24:55] the southern portion of what we have
discussed in the past as the kind of
[24:59] Beswick land up on the northeast corner
of town.
[25:03] Um, generally with the concept review,
they kind of come in very, very high
[25:06] level and they are looking for just
um
[25:10] feedback based off of are there things
we like, are there things we don't like,
[25:14] is this something that we could foresee
them going [clears throat] forward with,
[25:16] is it something that we want to
completely throw the brakes on. I do
[25:20] also want to note that uh
and I'm hopefully I don't butcher your
[25:23] last name, Lucinda Spenner,
uh
[25:26] from uh JPB is here as well to kind of
introduce herself and the company as
[25:31] well as hopefully um being able to
answer any questions that may be about
[25:35] this, but I will run through some quick
background
[25:38] uh
that staff have been doing to this point
[25:40] as well as what both the park board and
planning commission have done.
[25:47] So, as I mentioned, JPB land did apply
for a concept review. Uh this particular
[25:52] development includes 185 single family
lots on about 63 acres of land. Um, of
[25:59] note, this land is guided single family
on the west side and medium density
[26:03] residential on the east side.
Across the entire development, lots do
[26:07] vary from 42 ft wide to 72 ft wide. Um,
of also of note that this particular um
[26:15] land would require uh a planned unit
development or PUD zoning which allow
[26:20] you some flexibility in your zoning
requirements. Um, that being due to the
[26:24] fact that lots under 50 ft wide
and with side setbacks
[26:29] um
lots current zoning code does not allow
[26:33] for lots under 50 ft wide and that
setbacks are set at 7 ft instead of 6
[26:38] ft. And so, to be able to meet their
particular concepts, um the cleanest way
[26:42] to do it would be to do a PUD unless
you're willing to do variances for every
[26:46] single lot. So, PUD just makes it much
cleaner.
[26:50] Um,
this particular plan also does expand
[26:54] out Heritage Park um with an additional
1.4 acres as well as continues the
[26:58] Greenway truth trail through
um
[27:01] the development.
On July 14th, the park board did
[27:07] uh review this
and provided general support for the
[27:11] concept plans in terms of how the park
uh Heritage Park was expanded as well as
[27:15] the Greenway trail extension.
And then on July 22nd, the planning
[27:19] commission also reviewed the plans. Um,
there was not a pub- formal public
[27:23] hearing for this as it was a concept
review, but they
[27:26] um we did send out 250 notices to the
area um and kind of residents around
[27:31] that area. Overall, we had about 30
people in attendance um and we uh the
[27:37] planning commission did choose to take
public comment.
[27:41] Generally, and township people are here
as well, um but they have the township
[27:46] has uh expressed support for annexation.
Um, and just general comments were kind
[27:51] of about traffic and weeds uh on kind of
this development area.
[27:55] The developer did note um
that their build out is expected to take
[27:59] about 5 years, but that obviously
depends on market conditions and what
[28:03] kind of demand that they would see.
So, here is a large overall map um with
[28:09] that southern portion being their uh
concept proposal being dropped onto it.
[28:14] Of note, those blue roads
uh are and you can see that small
[28:19] roundabout are taken preliminarily from
the uh feasibility study for uh the
[28:25] realignment of Alton Avenue there, and
so uh it actually lays very well onto
[28:30] what our um potential projected um
roads would be for the north half of
[28:36] that property.
>> [clears throat]
[28:40] » And then here's just more of a zoomed-in
area. You can see um the larger lots are
[28:44] in the pink for this, and then you get
into uh
[28:47] the uh I guess we'll call them turquoise
which are your a little bit smaller and
[28:52] they kind of size up to the middle. So,
of the adjacent neighborhoods,
[28:56] the lots lot sizes line up pretty well
in terms of size and so nobody is
[29:00] necessarily getting a house built next
next to them that is significantly
[29:04] different than what they have built and
the smaller lots are tucked into the
[29:09] middle
also next to a lots of similar size.
[29:16] Some notes on this, the city engineer
did review and comment.
[29:21] And just kind of noticed some changes as
we've gone forward that they'd like to
[29:24] see for future submissions.
Both public works and utilities did not
[29:29] have any comments beyond what the city
engineer provided.
[29:33] The police department did note that the
siren nearby here
[29:38] has been
plugged since 2009 but it does still
[29:41] provide coverage.
[29:45] I'll be honest with him, I'm not sure
what that comment means. I'm assuming
[29:47] » Yeah, go ahead. I was
I found a
[29:52] Well, I found it when I was going
through looking at some of emergency
[29:55] management things and wondering why that
zone for that siren was smaller than the
[30:01] other five that we had.
So, I went and I did some digging and I
[30:04] found that
in 2009 there was a resident that had
[30:09] some type of medical condition that the
noise from that siren
[30:15] was bothering his
something to do with his health. So, at
[30:19] that time
Dennis Sawyer and Chief Wolschke decided
[30:23] to put some I guess mufflers into some
of the
[30:27] ports in that siren.
And I did have Bob Brazina with city
[30:33] staff go up there and check and just
ensure that that was still the case.
[30:37] And it is to this date and there's a
memo on that dating back to 2009. So,
[30:42] the ability there is to unplug that and
I don't know what that conversation
[30:46] looks like with that resident after it
was decided
[30:50] years ago to do that. So, um there could
be some additional coverage there if
[30:55] city chose to take those baffles out of
that um
[31:00] siren.
[31:03] » And that resident still resides there?
>> Yes.
[31:08] » That was my question.
>> Yep. That is my understanding right now,
[31:11] yes.
>> But, the fire department did not have
[31:15] any comments at this time and the
community development department just
[31:18] noted that
um the this concept did fit very well
[31:22] with not only the area um but also kind
of the comprehensive plan goals such as
[31:25] life cycle high is housing, park and
greenway expansion, and um protection
[31:30] and enhancement of natural features.
[31:34] Uh the school district school district
also provided a letter noting that they
[31:37] have um significant capacity within the
schools to be able to absorb kids or
[31:42] families who may move into this
neighborhood.
[31:46] Uh
talking about development fees, and
[31:48] these are the fees that are generally
paid um most of them right up front, but
[31:52] also some kind of as you go through.
There would be um with this particular
[31:57] development as it's shown, a park
dedication fee of either $383,327
[32:04] or 9.2 acres of parkland or a
combination there of both.
[32:09] Um an emergency siren fee of a little
over $10,000,
[32:14] a sidewalk fee of a little over $10,000,
a water area access charge of $177,000,
[32:23] a sewer area access charge of $378,000,
and then an electric area
[32:31] uh access charge uh ranging somewhere
between $475 to $500,000
[32:36] um
kind of based off of uh, electric usage
[32:40] and then
uh, last one I've got here is a saw and
[32:44] seal fee for $22,000.
Uh, this was a new one to me. I did have
[32:48] to ask Matt about it and he can correct
me if I'm wrong. Um, once we kind of
[32:52] stop seal coating because we were
spending money and not getting what we
[32:56] were looking for, uh, what we do now is
we go and we uh, cut the preliminarily
[33:01] cut the asphalt very similar to how
concrete is cut to create that
[33:05] pre-crack. Um, that way as it expands
and contracts
[33:09] keeps stays on the crack better and then
uh, so we'll make that saw cut and then
[33:13] we'll seal that up.
It's much smaller than the toilet
[33:17] papering you'll see around town. In
fact, many times you won't even know
[33:20] it's there if you're not walking along
looking for those cuts. So.
[33:25] Uh, and these are just kind of some
pictures kind of from around the
[33:28] neighborhood um, as of right now. So,
these
[33:31] » [clears throat and cough]
>> pictures are from the intersection next
[33:33] to Heritage uh, Park.
Uh, and then kind of looking out from
[33:38] there, um, these are to the south there.
This is uh, that area if you remember
[33:44] about a year ago that a bunch of those
trees were cut down. Is that correct,
[33:47] Matt?
Um, kind of looking to the north.
[33:51] Uh,
and then these ones are surrounding I
[33:54] believe from the uh,
east side of the area.
[33:59] So, ultimately staff's recommendation,
uh, the city does not take any formal
[34:03] action on concept plans. This is more of
a provide and the the ability for the a
[34:08] developer to get feedback short of
sub- having to submit formal plats and
[34:14] storm water and all those other various
uh, much more expensive plans
[34:19] to get some high-level feedback. So, we
are just looking for feedback from staff
[34:25] um,
uh, uh, to the developer as well as city
[34:28] council. Um,
a a hearing is not held on concept
[34:32] reports, but the city council, similar
to what the planning commission did, may
[34:36] certainly open up and take public
comment from anyone who is present.
[34:40] And then the next step in the process
would be to annex the property
[34:45] and then review the zoning that would go
along with annexation as all land must
[34:50] be formally zoned.
Part of the zoning process does include
[34:53] a traffic impact study, so it's at that
point that we'd get a lot more
[34:56] information on how these roads would be
affected. And then platting would follow
[35:00] that,
both preliminary and final.
[35:04] So.
We'll certainly stand for any questions
[35:07] at this point and as I said,
Lucinda
[35:11] Spahnier is certainly here and I know
she had a small presentation if the
[35:14] council wishes to hear it, just kind of
introducing the company and herself as
[35:18] well as any other thoughts that she may
want to share about the concept review.
[35:23] » Okay. Does anyone have any questions?
Just to clarify on the southwest corner,
[35:28] that open space, is that actually going
to be a water retention area or just
[35:32] left as a wetland area?
>> Uh
[35:37] you know, I am not 100% sure. I can I
think it marks it on the map if I could
[35:42] zoom in on it right now, but
>> I think it says wetland, but I just I
[35:46] » It does.
>> Not seen that before.
[35:48] » It says open space with wetland
and it may just be maybe Lucinda could
[35:53] speak to that.
She's certainly She's shaking her head
[35:56] that she can, so.
>> Okay.
[35:58] And they had a great presentation, so.
>> Yeah.
[36:02] I'm going to give the floor to you and
you can kind of
[36:05] give us a
who JBP Land LLC is and uh
[36:11] » Thank you, Mayor.
>> I do think she has a presentation if you
[36:14] if she'd open the podium.
[36:37] » Do I need to do anything on my end?
Besides putting
[36:40] » Mitch, does she need to do anything on
her end?
[36:49] Oh, yeah, sure. Typical IT guy.
Just control
[36:53] [laughter and clears throat] alt delete.
Just unplug it now. It'll come back.
[36:59] » [laughter]
>> It's not turned on.
[37:12] Yeah, maybe you need Are you off it now?
[37:20] » Yeah, you can find it there.
[37:24] Okay. Thank you.
Um but Council member Wolfe, to answer
[37:29] your question, the property has gone
through a wetland delineation process
[37:35] and it has a total of four wetlands.
Um all quite small.
[37:41] Um and the the area that you are
inquiring about is indeed a wetland.
[37:47] It's not planned for any man-made water
storage anything like that.
[37:53] » Thank you.
[37:57] » Yeah, there are a number of different
types of wetlands and sometimes it's for
[38:04] the untrained eye it may not appear to
be a wetland. You know, it doesn't have
[38:07] the canary reed grass growing and
visible water, but if it has hydric
[38:13] soils and vegetation that
grows in hydric soils, then it is
[38:19] classified as a wetland.
[38:23] Here we go. Yes, okay, wonderful. Thank
you.
[38:26] » All right, good evening mayor members of
the city council. Thank you for your
[38:29] time this evening.
Um, we are very excited to present our
[38:32] project to you um and hopefully get some
valuable feedback that we can take back
[38:37] to our engineering team
um and my colleagues back at JP Brooks
[38:41] Land um and um get started on our
engineering
[38:45] um drawings and um proceed as um
Josh mentioned with the next round of
[38:51] applications which are a petition for
annexation of the parcel into the city
[38:55] limits as well as um the PUD rezone that
we are requesting.
[39:01] My name is Lucinda Spanjer as
introduced. I'm here tonight with JP
[39:04] Brooks Builders and JP Brooks Land
LLC. We are a local builder and land
[39:11] development company based in Maple
Grove. Um all of the decisions that we
[39:15] make are made locally um and they all um
ensure that there's a consistent and
[39:20] unified community that's constructed
because we are starting it from land
[39:24] development all the way through the
construction of all of the homes on all
[39:28] of the lots.
[39:31] Um JP Brooks has been in business since
2013 and has constructed over a thousand
[39:35] homes in over 45 communities.
We are currently building 19
[39:40] neighborhoods in 16 jurisdictions within
the Twin Cities Metro and Western
[39:44] Wisconsin.
We have averaged 188 closings um between
[39:50] the years of 2024 and 2025.
And we are consistently ranked for the
[39:56] last seven years as a top 15 builder in
the Twin Cities market.
[40:03] And last but not least um
we are certified by um the
[40:09] Green Path
or actually I'm not sure who does the
[40:12] certification but um we are a certified
Green Path builder which um speaks to
[40:17] our dedication to um, energy efficiency
and efficiency in building materials.
[40:26] Oh, it's you, not me. Okay. Okay.
[laughter]
[40:30] All right. Um,
>> You got to deal with the monkey, okay?
[40:32] You're going to
You're the organ grinder.
[40:36] » So, uh, here's a look at our site plan.
Um, Josh did a nice job of summarizing
[40:40] what we have uh, presented here. I'll
just add a little bit more detail. Um,
[40:44] but that's been a whole lot of time um,
so the four different lot sizes for us
[40:52] work really nicely as a life life cycle
community. Um, you have an entry-level
[40:57] lot, which is the 42-ft wide lot. Um,
I'll I'll get into the product that
[41:02] we're proposing to build on those lots
here in a minute. Um, but that is for an
[41:06] entry-level buyer. Um, and then the lot
scale all the way up to 72-ft wide,
[41:12] which is going to be a more executive
home site. Um, we can do four four-stall
[41:16] garages on those homes. And so we really
have a nice mix of um, different
[41:21] households that we like to integrate
into a single neighborhood. Um,
[41:24] different [clears throat]
income brackets and so forth. And we've
[41:27] uh, really thoughtfully designed the
layout of integrating these four
[41:31] different lots in this 63-acre parcel
um, with the the smaller lots um,
[41:38] adjacent to other lots that are of
similar size to theirs. And um, not
[41:42] having those up against the existing
neighborhood that does have a little bit
[41:45] larger size lots.
[41:51] We are asking for your consideration of
a planned unit development. Um, this
[41:55] slightly deviates from your unified
development code standards. Um,
[42:02] these setbacks are
the same um, in the R3 district and in
[42:07] the PUD district with the exception of
the side yard setback. Your R3 zoning is
[42:13] a 7-ft minimum and we're proposing a
6-ft minimum. But otherwise meeting
[42:17] those setbacks
as you have in your R3 zoning standards.
[42:21] And then for the area,
like we have quite a range here. So our
[42:26] smallest lot would be
5,880
[42:31] sq ft. Whereas your smallest lot in the
R3 zoning is 6,200 sq ft.
[42:37] However, it is important to note that
the other three lots
[42:43] exceed the minimum standard and they are
the the majority There's of the lots
[42:49] that we're proposing are exceeding the
standards.
[42:53] And lastly just noting that those 42s
make up 28 total of the 185
[43:00] lots and then 52 we have 34 of those.
The 62-ft wide lots are um
[43:07] our most popular lot. So we are
proposing 100 in that size and then 23
[43:13] of the 72s.
[43:19] This slide is simply acknowledging that
we have reviewed your comprehensive
[43:23] plan, familiarized ourselves with your
goals and what you are seeking to
[43:27] achieve with construction of new
subdivisions, neighborhoods, integrating
[43:32] trails, natural amenities, parks and so
forth into them.
[43:37] And so we wanted to acknowledge that we
feel that the proposal here incorporates
[43:44] the life cycle housing approach that you
are
[43:47] explicitly seeking also which was really
exciting to see that our
[43:52] our goals were aligned on that housing
goal.
[43:55] And then we are proposing to preserve
existing wetlands and in fact
[44:01] incorporate one of the wetlands into an
open space to be dedicated to the city
[44:05] that is adjacent to the trail Um the
expansion of the Greenway Trail.
[44:11] And then um
we are also expanding upon your
[44:14] multimodal transportation network
through the expansion of the Greenway
[44:18] Trail
and um local roadways as well as minor
[44:22] collector roadways.
And lastly
[44:26] um
just highlighting that there is um
[44:30] been a lot of thought put into the
streetscape here with the curvy
[44:33] curvilinear roads, the varying lot sizes
with a variety of different views for
[44:38] each um
each area of the plan and then providing
[44:43] those important links to the existing
neighborhoods and infrastructure.
[44:50] All right. And then this slide touches
on the PUD benefits that are proposed.
[44:55] Usually there is um you know, a bit of a
give and take with the city allowing for
[45:00] some flexibility in their lot standards
and then a developer providing some um
[45:05] enhanced enhancements in the
neighborhood. And so we are proposing
[45:08] you know, the dedication of uh an acre
and a half of Parkland to expand the
[45:13] existing Heritage Park.
We are looking to extend the Greenway
[45:16] Trail from Bohemia Street to 7th Street
Northeast.
[45:20] Um we are also going to be contributing
to your park dedication and improvement
[45:24] fund as mentioned in the presentation.
We are preserving existing wetlands and
[45:30] uh incorporating them into the Greenway
Trail corridor.
[45:34] Our architectural standards that are um
just that come standard. Uh they are
[45:41] they exceed the city's standards. So we
will have enhanced architecture and
[45:45] we'll get into that in the next slide.
Um
[45:47] each one of our floor plans does offer
three distinct elevations and color
[45:52] schemes um to allow for some nice
variation at the streetscape.
[45:57] And um
the
[45:59] same
Let me word this properly.
[46:03] These same um
uh
[46:07] elevation or color scheme cannot be
built um across the street or next door
[46:14] to one another um because we do observe
uh an anti-monotony self-imposed
[46:19] anti-monotony code to make sure that um
there's a lot of interest from the from
[46:23] the streetscape.
[46:26] And I'm not going to go through all of
our architectural distinctions um but
[46:30] they are um provided in your packet if
you are interested um but we do a lot
[46:35] just as standard and basic that the
majority of builders [clears throat]
[46:39] aren't going to incorporate at a base
level but would do, you know, um added
[46:43] charge ups for.
[46:46] And then this is just a look at the
anti-monotony code um as was discussed
[46:52] at the planning commission meeting
last week. Um the same floor plan can be
[46:59] constructed. However, um this the
elevation must be different. So, each
[47:03] one of our homes comes in three
different distinct elevations.
[47:07] Um and then it would have have to also
have a um different color scheme.
[47:12] So, we've found a lot of success in
doing that.
[47:16] Here is a list of the floor plans that
we are proposing to offer in the
[47:19] community. As you can see,
um they range from two-story
[47:24] slab-on-grades, regular two-stories,
villas, split-level, multi-level,
[47:30] ramblers, um
and it and a variety of options for all
[47:35] three of those lot sizes there. And then
for the um smaller lot size, which is
[47:41] not pictured on this um table, the 42-ft
wide lots, they will accommodate a newly
[47:48] designed 30-ft wide two-car product with
a two
[47:53] or sorry or sorry um with a two-story
garage. Um
[47:57] and I'm going to you can take a look at
those on the next slide. There's a
[48:02] Yep, elevate um rendering of those.
So, these are currently in the process
[48:07] of design, so I don't have um all of the
specifics pertaining to square footage,
[48:11] um number of bedrooms and bathrooms, but
it's estimated to be between 1,800 and
[48:16] 2,400 square feet. It is a slab-on-grade
product with um two, possibly three
[48:21] bath- bathrooms, and uh three possibly
four bedrooms. And then these are
[48:27] » And this is for the smallest lots,
correct?
[48:29] » That's correct. Yes.
Yep, so this this home is 30 ft in
[48:34] width, and it would sit on a 42-ft wide
lot with 6-ft side yard setbacks.
[48:41] Um and have the um attached
garage.
[48:47] All right, and then I won't spend too
much time going through our repertoire
[48:52] of homes that we have curated for the
neighborhood, um but I am more than
[48:56] happy to ask answer any questions,
address any concerns, um but most
[49:00] importantly just receive your feedback
this evening.
[49:03] » You could um the the there was really
only one
[49:06] big question that was presented, and
that was the deforestation that happened
[49:11] already and anything that'll happen in
the future, and you can go ahead and
[49:14] answer that.
Because the deforestation that did
[49:17] happen, that was by a previous owner,
and I believe your plan is more
[49:22] environmentally
friendly.
[49:26] » Yes, Councilman Burseiler, so that that
was a focus of the discussion at the
[49:29] planning commission meeting. Um there
was a lot of concern that was voiced by
[49:33] residents of the community pertaining to
uh the removal of some trees on the
[49:37] property,
and um that was done um
[49:42] prior to our involvement with the um
with the property and um entering into a
[49:49] purchase agreement with the seller.
Um so we understand that that was rather
[49:55] devastating to the neighborhood and um,
our intention
[49:59] for landscaping um, would be to adhere
to the city's standards for um, required
[50:06] trees and um, any landscaping
requirements that the that the city has.
[50:10] Furthermore, um, we are um, we will be
needing to um, potentially mitigate of
[50:17] about .13 acres of wetland at a
two-to-one ratio. So, we would be
[50:24] » [clears throat]
>> creating uh, .26 acres in another
[50:28] location to um, allow for some fill for
a very, very small area of the wetland.
[50:33] Um, that just so happens to be in the
middle of a planned road. Um, so in
[50:37] terms of uh, environmental um,
um, consideration for this project, we
[50:44] um,
will be mitigating those wetlands, but
[50:47] outside of that, it's it's a farm field.
[50:52] » I think
>> So, if this goes forward, do you build
[50:57] a house once you have someone a buyer or
are you going to be building some spec
[51:01] homes or how's the process work for you
guys?
[51:05] » Sure. Um, Mayor, we do both of those.
So, we like to obtain model home permits
[51:12] and have the ability to get constructing
as quickly as possible. Um, ideally one
[51:18] model home on each lot so that folks can
have an idea of the offerings that are
[51:23] available for each one of those price
points. Um, excuse [clears throat] me.
[51:26] And then we certainly do build spec
homes and also uh, we do have um, lots
[51:33] that are for sale and an individual can
come and select the lot of their choice
[51:37] and then come into our um, design studio
in Maple Grove and select all of their
[51:42] finishes and cabinetry and so forth
unique to their home.
[51:46] » Okay.
One question I have as I look at this,
[51:49] um,
since I wasn't at the planning
[51:50] commission meeting, for the lots down in
the southeast corner, [clears throat] it
[51:54] looks like they're double frontage lots.
Um,
[51:57] are they exiting onto the existing road
or they exiting onto the new road?
[52:03] » Thank you for bringing this up. I I do
think it's an important part of this,
[52:06] uh, design here that we have considered.
And the proposal is for the new lots
[52:14] that have the double frontage to not
front on the existing 7th Street, but to
[52:19] instead have frontage on the new road
that we are proposing. We are showing
[52:23] an, um,
a
[52:25] added depth to those lots so that we
could have some vegetative screening,
[52:30] um, along the rear yards and along 7th
Street.
[52:35] » So, I'm not sure if I got you correctly
on that on the south south portion that
[52:39] road is that written on the concept plan
there, but it's not going to be there.
[52:43] Is that it?
>> No, my question was those lots down in
[52:47] the southeast corner are double frontage
lots, which means they're touching a
[52:51] road on two sides of the property. 44
and 45.
[52:55] » Can you point them out?
>> The these right down here. So, they're
[52:59] yeah, they're touching a street
>> and they're touching this street.
[53:03] » Yep.
>> And so, she just mentioned that they're
[53:05] going to be slightly deeper so they can
put vegetation on one side to help kind
[53:09] of create that buffer.
>> Okay.
[53:10] » And and that they will not front the
existing roadway. We did consider that.
[53:14] However, we didn't want to tear up that
road.
[53:17] » So, they're all going to be face north.
>> Correct.
[53:20] » Okay.
>> Yes.
[53:23] » Could you, um, have you
uh,
[53:27] already conceptualized how you're going
to phase this in?
[53:32] » We are currently having those
discussions. We have some informal ideas
[53:37] that we're generating.
Um, it it sounds like, um,
[53:42] sewer and water will dictate the first
phase in particular where that starts
[53:48] and it's looking to be about the
northwest corner area. And if public
[53:53] works wants to comment on that.
>> That is correct.
[53:56] Sewer has come off of Bohemia Street.
>> That doesn't have to but that's how we
[54:01] envision it. And then
Bruce said the same thing for power I
[54:05] believe and water
would need to come out of that northwest
[54:09] corner.
[54:12] » So near the existing Heritage Park.
>> So would it follow up Ironwood then?
[54:20] Or down Ironwood?
>> That would be a tie-in yes. So for the
[54:24] water wise the
water is a big
[54:27] for a looping water you don't like to
have dead end services
[54:31] uh
if you don't need to so I know Bruce
[54:33] mentioned at one time that Ironwood
would come up to north and it would tie
[54:36] into Bohemia.
Sanitary that would work fine for
[54:39] sanitary
once you get further to the east
[54:43] this lot or this development would kind
of get split where sanitary most likely
[54:47] would be going down to an existing lift
station to the south.
[54:51] But we haven't really dug into those
fine details of
[54:55] the first 20 lots where you guys
proposals yet or anything but yeah the
[54:58] northwest corner is where we envision
the sanitary and water and electric
[55:02] coming from.
[55:08] » This isn't a question for you so much
but for you guys
[55:11] I I see that Alton is uh
presumed to have this
[55:18] look to it. Is that we haven't seen the
study yet so is this from the study?
[55:25] That's and is this feel like the
county's approved this?
[55:30] » This yeah so this is the study that's
kind of been high level presented and I
[55:34] believe we may have even got a draft in
our emails here today for us to review.
[55:40] And this is kind of the alignment that
is being proposed both
[55:43] basically from the feasibility study
from the engineers. So, the county has
[55:46] seen this as well, yes.
>> And then how does that work when you're
[55:50] looking at Alton veering to the right
from the left?
[55:54] That property owner's now going to have
land on the west side of Alton.
[56:00] And to get that road connector in there,
we would need cooperation from that
[56:06] owner.
>> Correct, yes. So, let me put part of
[56:07] this process now with the feasibility
study and we've been talking with the
[56:10] county of kind of revising the MOU. And
part of that MOU kind of lays out how is
[56:15] property going to be acquired, who's
going to be kind of the lead on that,
[56:19] who's going to be the support. So, yes,
for property with Alton that is not
[56:23] currently there and that's a good kind
of veers off of it, there will be some
[56:27] sort of acquisitions that are probably
going to be made. Whether it is due to
[56:32] development of the land around there and
it's dedicated as part of the
[56:35] development similar to the dedication of
E streets, or if we get to a point where
[56:39] the city and or the county says, "Hey,
it is in everybody's best
[56:44] interest if we move this along faster
than maybe where development is in this
[56:48] one spot, then we'd be talking about
acquiring right of way
[56:51] to make that happen. But yes.
>> And just so I'm clear then, for this
[56:55] plat and I'm
totally supportive and conceptually of
[56:59] what we have got going here, but
there will only be three exits then on
[57:03] the plat then. Or not only, but there
will be three basically exits from it
[57:08] until Alton is constructed.
>> And so, that mean part of part of it
[57:11] will be
the traffic study will kind of help bear
[57:14] that out. If the traffic study says that
they're going to need more,
[57:18] it could be something too where we start
having to talk about do we need to go
[57:21] north and get one or two
in there sooner even if it's more of a
[57:27] temporary road knowing that it might
change a little bit depending on how it
[57:31] pokes out. But yes, that's That's
The traffic study will help bear out
[57:34] exactly what what is needed for this and
whether three is sufficient in the short
[57:39] term.
>> Okay, thank you.
[57:43] » Okay.
>> So, is there We don't have to take any
[57:47] action at this time, do we?
>> That's correct. There's no action to be
[57:50] taken. It's really feedback and um for
some of that, I would actually um
[57:55] look to Ms. Spanier to say, "Have Have
you gotten
[57:58] feedback you're looking for? Are there
questions that are unanswered that you
[58:01] would like from the City Council and or
staff at this time
[58:05] um as this concept review is really for
your benefit or JPB's benefit um with
[58:11] this?"
>> Yeah, I appreciate that um
[58:14] prompt
because I would love to have um
[58:20] my engineers start work tomorrow, but um
I would like to know that you are in
[58:25] fact supportive of the project um at
least conceptually uh at this point
[58:30] before we go ahead and make that next
step. And so, that would be um
[58:34] essentially what I'm looking for here
tonight.
[58:37] » And this would be I would I mean, I'd
like to remind like it would be a
[58:40] high-level support, obviously, until we
dig into the zoning and the specifics
[58:43] and all that. And things could change a
little bit um
[58:46] as we get into all that lays out. So,
>> Yeah. So, from what I've seen and have
[58:52] read, I am in support of the concept. Um
I would be very interested to understand
[59:01] the traffic study
um
[59:03] just because traffic in this area will
be altered significantly. Um I mean,
[59:09] it's a a neighborhood that sees a little
bit of traffic like on Heritage going
[59:14] out to 15, um but this is definitely
going to change those patterns a bit.
[59:20] So, that would be my only request is to
to understand the traffic flow.
[59:28] » Sean, you
>> Yeah, I'm very supportive. I think it
[59:31] looks nice. I like the style of houses
and um
[59:35] looking forward to seeing
when it's completed what it ultimately
[59:39] looks like.
>> Okay.
[59:40] » [cough]
>> Rick?
[59:41] » Yeah, it's great project actually the
and they put in a great presentation and
[59:46] I'm looking forward to the traffic many
or the traffic um
[59:49] study as well and um
oversight on
[59:55] assembling the roads is what I I really
we don't want no contractor roads. We
[59:59] don't want no temporary roads. Um
>> And and and when when I had mentioned
[1:00:04] temporary talking about Alton Avenue
there for some reason say you right now
[1:00:08] Alton swings to the west and the
proposal is to swing to the right in the
[1:00:13] future.
We wouldn't make them build some sort of
[1:00:16] road out to where it'd be sticking out
into the future farm field that Alton's
[1:00:20] not currently there and so you may
temporarily have it pause at the
[1:00:25] gravel road or something like that.
That's That's what I mean by not I don't
[1:00:28] mean throughout the whole neighborhood
we're building gravel roads and and that
[1:00:31] sort of thing.
It was trying to do it in a way that I
[1:00:35] know
government routinely gets um
[1:00:40] and maybe rightly so we build roads that
we tear up two years later. So trying to
[1:00:44] think smartly about how we design stuff
if we know that it is temporary in
[1:00:48] nature.
Okay.
[1:00:51] Bruce?
>> Uh no, I support the concept. I
[1:00:53] appreciate all the work that you guys
have put into it and I I think it's it's
[1:00:58] seems to be a lot of thought put into
it. So I really appreciate the work that
[1:01:01] you guys have done.
>> I also support the concept. I think it's
[1:01:06] something that is needed for the city of
New Prague
[1:01:09] as we continue to figure ways to
get more kids in the school district. I
[1:01:14] know that's a big issue that
superintendent does say, "Hey, we need
[1:01:19] more housing and things like that too so
that we can fill our schools up, so.
[1:01:24] » And
>> Appreciate the project and
[1:01:27] good luck.
>> Yeah, and also our businesses, you know,
[1:01:29] with the EDA going out and talking to
our various businesses, it's, you know,
[1:01:33] housing is needed to draw employees into
the
[1:01:37] the area.
>> Absolutely.
[1:01:39] » All right.
>> Again, I really appreciate your time
[1:01:41] this evening and
your support as well. So, look forward
[1:01:44] to seeing you soon.
>> All right, thank you for coming and
[1:01:47] presenting.
>> Thank you. See you on the next one.
[1:01:49] » Yep.
[1:01:53] » Next on the agenda is miscellaneous. So,
we're at this point. Rick, do you have
[1:01:57] anything to add?
>> No, I'd say no.
[1:01:59] » Okay, Bruce.
>> I can't believe we had 7 in of rain in
[1:02:03] Lee County this fall.
Um
[1:02:06] » And Henderson didn't flood?
>> [laughter]
[1:02:08] » Yeah, and Henderson didn't flood.
Um earlier on you were talking about
[1:02:11] elections at the new city hall. Uh
technically it won't be the city hall at
[1:02:16] yet at that time. I guess I've had
questions, will will there how will that
[1:02:19] all going to be laid out and things, but
I don't know that really matters that we
[1:02:24] have any more information on that. You
figure it out how that will work.
[1:02:27] » Yeah, I mean that's part of it too. Um
and I'd kind of mentioned in my weekly
[1:02:30] update to you all um on Friday that
we we begin we begin conversations with
[1:02:37] the architect. And I think part of that
conversation will be how how do you
[1:02:40] recommend we temporarily lay this out
like
[1:02:44] there's on certain areas or certainly
locked doors in certain areas, so kind
[1:02:47] of just shut just the building down into
two areas that we work out of.
[1:02:52] Um I believe the name that we submitted
to
[1:02:54] the um state was
new city hall {slash} election center or
[1:03:00] something like that cuz they wanted us
to name it, but we tried to make it
[1:03:03] obvious and as obvious as possible to
people when they read the name that they
[1:03:07] knew what we were talking about.
>> And if if we're not going to have them
[1:03:09] come through the front door, then we
should make sure we communicate that
[1:03:12] somehow in the future too.
>> Yep.
[1:03:16] That's all I got.
>> Okay.
[1:03:18] » Maggie?
>> No, sir.
[1:03:19] » Sean?
>> Nope.
[1:03:22] » Josh, you have anything else?
>> I did have one thing that I wanted to
[1:03:24] mention. It sounds like we're
going to be two down, but if the three
[1:03:29] who will be at the city council meeting
on the 17th, we did actually receive an
[1:03:33] application
for a planning commissioner. I know that
[1:03:36] we've been short one.
And um
[1:03:40] Rick has graciously stepped up to fill
that role, but we did actually get an
[1:03:43] application here at the end of last
week.
[1:03:45] And so, if possible for the three that
will be here
[1:03:49] to have maybe an interview 15 minutes 10
minutes before the meeting on the 17th.
[1:03:54] » And then we're going to move the budget
meeting to a different date.
[1:03:58] » Correct. Yeah, we're down to three. It
doesn't make sense to have a budget
[1:04:01] meeting when half the team's gone.
>> Right.
[1:04:04] Yeah, that would work. We're room for
you guys.
[1:04:06] » I should be able to hear you.
>> Yep.
[1:04:11] » Oh, that's fair. I didn't even think
about that. Um
[1:04:14] as we were trying to get to the end
knowing that we usually on that second
[1:04:18] meeting
in September, we have have approved our
[1:04:23] preliminary in the past.
Um we do have an extra meeting and with
[1:04:27] labor Labor Day being late, it kind of
pushes everything back. And so,
[1:04:32] I guess the other option would be to say
on the Monday before Labor Day, we don't
[1:04:37] have a meeting. The 31st, we could also
do a special budget meeting too if we
[1:04:42] don't want to push all the way back, but
I guess that would be up to you guys if
[1:04:45] you're available
for the 31st.
[1:04:48] Then I know we can come in and just kind
of
[1:04:50] tackle it out and see if we could get
the preliminary kind of set from there.
[1:04:55] » Yeah, it works for me.
>> I'm available.
[1:04:59] » Sounds good to me.
>> Say all this as you speak. I'm sure I'm
[1:05:02] available.
>> Yeah, the only thing I have is a utility
[1:05:06] commission meeting at 3:30, so but
that's the 24th. Are you talking about
[1:05:10] the 31st?
>> talking
[1:05:11] » the 31st.
>> Can are do it on the 24th instead?
[1:05:17] » Do the budget meeting on the 24th, you
mean?
[1:05:19] » Yeah, you mentioned you told me that's
the 24th, isn't it?
[1:05:23] » Well, I got
>> the 31st?
[1:05:25] » So, for 31st at 3:30.
>> That's the utility.
[1:05:28] » Okay. It is the utility commission.
>> Right.
[1:05:30] » Yeah, the 31st at 3:30.
>> Glad you said that. I must have said the
[1:05:33] wrong date.
>> Yeah.
[1:05:35] » So, it like So, we did the 31st like
5:00. I guess I don't know how long the
[1:05:39] utility commission
>> It could be done by 4:30.
[1:05:41] » Yeah, I don't think we had any major on
there. Usually we're done within an
[1:05:43] hour.
>> And I yeah, I find I mean I guess I know
[1:05:47] four people are retired. I guess John,
would you be available at 5:00 on the
[1:05:50] 31st?
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[1:05:52] » Don't assume things because someone's
retired.
[1:05:54] » Yeah, fair enough. That's fair.
>> That's right.
[1:05:56] » That's fair.
>> [laughter]
[1:05:57] » Sorry, Bruce, are you available at 5:00
on the 31st?
[1:05:59] » Our days are busier than you think.
>> No, I know. It's amazing how that
[1:06:03] happened. [laughter]
>> Become my staff and
[1:06:04] » Yeah. Yeah, I got people. I'll take a
look at it.
[1:06:08] So, right now it's tentatively
on Monday the 31st at 5:00
[1:06:15] our second budget meeting.
Rescheduling from
[1:06:19] the one that was going to be handled
on the 17th.
[1:06:23] » Correct.
>> Okay.
[1:06:25] So, let's put it on the calendar.
>> Got that, Patrick?
[1:06:27] 5:00 on the 31st
of August.
[1:06:33] Show up in October, you might be late.
[1:06:39] That's all I have, then.
>> Okay.
[1:06:41] Robin, you have anything?
Tim? How's the new uh police station?
[1:06:46] » When my turn go?
>> I didn't I I said Robin.
[1:06:49] » He said Robin.
>> Did he say 5:00?
[1:06:51] » I know I was finishing updating on the
budget meeting.
[1:06:54] » you got to be
>> Okay, Tim.
[1:06:56] » No, no. Robin, do you have something?
>> Or are we on to Mitch already?
[1:06:58] » No, we're on Robin.
>> I think we're on to Patrick already.
[1:07:01] » No, I'll put you in before Patrick,
okay? But Robin, do you have something?
[1:07:05] » need like an hour of your time.
>> That's all?
[1:07:08] » Okay, since elections has been a hot
topic, I just wanted to clarify that we
[1:07:12] do have early voting here at the
building we're in right now, 118 Central
[1:07:18] Avenue.
Um for Scott County residents, Le Sueur
[1:07:21] County residents can go to the Le Sueur
County Government Center.
[1:07:25] Um
>> That is by county design, not ours.
[1:07:28] » County design, correct. Not our own
choice.
[1:07:31] » Sure. Dennis Sneak Outta Here, you know.
>> Um this Saturday from 9:00 until 3:00,
[1:07:37] this building will also be open for
early voting for Scott County residents.
[1:07:43] » Primaries.
>> As well, for primary.
[1:07:44] » Yes.
And primaries on the 11th.
[1:07:48] » Yes.
>> And that will be handled
[1:07:51] » at the new city hall.
>> Yes.
[1:07:53] » Building, correct.
>> So that'll be a good test.
[1:07:57] That'll be a good test for our general
election
[1:08:00] to make sure
>> Correct.
[1:08:02] » All right.
>> Yep. And of course we'll be spreading
[1:08:04] the word during that primary election as
well. That the general election will be
[1:08:07] occurring there as well, so.
>> Are you done now, Robin?
[1:08:11] » Thank you, yeah.
>> [laughter]
[1:08:13] » Okay. Tim.
[1:08:17] » Matt.
>> How's the new police station?
[1:08:20] » Uh it's really good. Um really thankful
and we're getting settled in there, so
[1:08:25] figuring out how everything works and uh
boiler inspection tomorrow morning that
[1:08:31] um
shouldn't be any issues with that, so.
[1:08:34] And we've got a lot of positive feedback
from folks that we've already served out
[1:08:39] of that building, and
so very good, positive feedback, so.
[1:08:44] It's great.
>> Okay, good. Matt, do you have anything?
[1:08:47] Mitch.
Patrick.
[1:08:51] Hello, are you there?
Brian, anything else? All right.
[1:08:55] Uh the only thing I'd like to say is I
know Dennis mentioned it that in a
[1:08:58] couple weeks we're going to start the
state amateur tournament. We are looking
[1:09:01] for volunteers.
Um I think there's a sign-up genius out
[1:09:05] there that if you can get a hold of
Nick Sheneker or I think the Facebook
[1:09:10] page is Memorial Park rebuild or
something like that. It's I think that's
[1:09:14] the Facebook page
that you can link up for uh
[1:09:18] volunteering on the different uh
committees that they have going there.
[1:09:22] So.
I don't have anything else. I'll make a
[1:09:25] motion to adjourn.
>> Second.
[1:09:26] » Second by Rick Siler.
All in favor, say aye.
[1:09:29] » Aye.
>> Aye. Any opposition? Okay, we're out of
[1:09:31] here. Thank you, everyone.
Couple minutes and uh we'll go into our
[1:09:35] closed session.
>> You're just full of humor today, aren't
[1:09:38] you, Chuck? I heard you on the radio
this morning. It was like
[1:09:41] » Well, gets a I come here and
>> [laughter]
[1:09:43] » there was cars all over. They had the uh
Lonsdale people there. Holy mackerel.
[1:09:50] Junior royalty and the royalty.
>> Yeah, well, yeah, that's right.
[1:09:54] » I could