HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-05-17 City Council Meeting Minutes
CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE 12800 Ravine Parkway Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016
www.cottagegrovemn.gov 651-458-2800 Fax 651-458-2897 Equal Opportunity Employer
MINUTES
COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL May 17, 2023
COUNCIL CHAMBER
12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH
REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 P.M
COUNCIL CHAMBER
1. CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, held a
regular meeting on May 17, 2023, at Cottage Grove City Hall, 12800 Ravine Parkway.
Mayor Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience, staff, and City Council Members stood and recited the Pledge of
Allegiance.
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Tammy Anderson called the roll: Mayor Bailey - Here; Council Member
Dennis - Here; Council Member Khambata - Here; Council Member Olsen - Here;
Council Member Thiede - Here.
Also present: Jennifer Levitt, City Administrator; Korine Land, City Attorney-LeVander,
Gillen & Miller, PA; Tammy Anderson, City Clerk; Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director;
Zac Dockter, Parks and Rec Director; Pete Koerner, Public Safety Director; Brenda
Malinowski, Finance Director; Amanda Meyer, City Engineer; Mike Mrosla, Senior
Planner; Emily Schmitz, Senior Planner/Interim Community Development Director; Dan
Schoen, Community Engagement Officer; Eric Rigby, Communications Manager.
4. OPEN FORUM
Mayor Bailey opened the Open Forum. As no one wished to address the Council, Mayor
Bailey closed the Open Forum.
5. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Council Member Dennis made a motion to approve the agenda; second by Council
Member Olsen. Motion carried: 5-0.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 2
6. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recognize Jerret Wright’s Years of Service to the Planning Commission
Mayor Bailey invited Jerret and his wife to join the Council in front of the dais for this
recognition. He stated both Jerret and his wife have been very active in our City in a
number of ways, including taking photos, being involved with Strawberry Fest, and
serving on commissions. He asked Council Member Khambata, the liaison to the
Planning Commission, to speak about Jerret; Mayor Bailey stated the reason we’re
doing this recognition tonight is because they’re moving out of Cottage Grove, and
we’re very sad to see that happen.
Council Member Khambata stated he had the pleasure of working with Jerret on the
Planning Commission when he was the Chair of that commission; in those years, Jerret
was always insightful, brought good questions to the table, and he truly believed Jerret
was a large part of the process that led to a considerable amount of economic
development that Cottage Grove has experienced. His are big shoes that we’ll have to
try to fill when we add a new Planning Commissioner. As someone who had the
pleasure of working with him and helped mentor him, he’s really going to miss him.
Council Member Dennis spoke about Jerret’s character; in 2018, Jerret ran for City
Council because he wanted to make a difference, he liked the direction in which the City
was going, and had a very positive aura and spirit in everything that he did. Getting to
know Jerret through that process, Jerret actually created friendships with many of us
here. Having been a long-term Council liaison to the Planning Commission, it was his
pleasure, along with support of the other Council members, to interview Jerret and offer
him a chance to join the City Council. When Jerret left for a military deployment, he and
Jerret kept in touch; when he returned, he was willing to be part of the team again,
which was absolutely fantastic. He’s always been professional, dignified, respectful, and
caring, and that’s something that’s very important when it comes to running the people’s
business, making sure we’re doing the right thing on behalf of the community.
Council Member Dennis stated Jerret has a special car, a 1967 Mercury Cougar,
which was a gift from his dad when Jerret turned 16, and Jerret recently found it again.
It’s blue and it’s called The General. Council Member Dennis stated he had something
in his collection, a Redline Hot Wheels 1968 Mercury Cougar, in the same blue color
with black interior. Its a very cool collectible and he knows Jerret is going to work on his
car and maybe bring it to car shows at some point in the future; he thought this was
something he could put on the dashboard and remember our time together here.
Council Member Dennis thanked Jerret and his wife, on behalf of all of us here in the
community, as it’s been a pleasure.
Jerret thanked the City Council for this recognition. He never expected to run against
the current Council Members, who had become very good friends and family, but he
definitely learned a lot, too. He thanked all of them very much for their friendship; he
hopes he can still visit them in the future.
Mayor Bailey and Council Member Khambata presented the plaque to Jerret on
behalf of all Cottage Grove citizens, our staff, and the Council, and thanked him for his
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 3
years of service. He wished them good luck where they’re going and told them to be
safe. Everyone applauded.
B. Emergency Medical Services Week Proclamation
Staff Recommendation: Receive a presentation from Public Safety
providing an update on the Heart Safe City initiative and proclaim
May 21-27, 2023 as Emergency Medical Services Week.
Pete Koerner, Public Safety Director, stated he thinks everyone will be impressed to
hear what a great paramedic EMS service we have. He’s extremely proud of our
service, which began in 1974 as the first agency that had police officer paramedics.
There have been many changes over the years, and its now transitioned to the Fire
Department, so we have fire paramedics. Regardless of what patch is worn on the
sleeve, he’d put our services up against any community in the State. Last year, our Fire
Department had talked about making us a Heart Safe community; Council supported
the Letter of Intent with the Minnesota Department of Health. With that, we’ve really
been moving quickly on this and have had a lot of success.
Director Koerner stated with the Heart Safe communities, we want to increase public
awareness by placing AEDs wherever people live, work, and play. Educating the public
on how to used AEDs and administer CPR is a big part of that. We need 800
Heartbeats (the term for scoring) to be a designated a Heart Safe Community; that
requirement is based on the community population. To date, we have 805 Heartbeats,
so have accomplished that goal. Categories include: CPR and awareness events; AED
locations; Early advanced care; Community Heart Health; and Sustainability.
Our CPR Goal was to have 2,000 people trained in hands-only CPR; since starting
this last year, we’ve already had 1,600 people trained, but we need to train 400 more
people to hit our goal. We’re doing training at all events possible, including Night to
Unite, and businesses have really embraced this training. We’ve done training at 17
different events, but we’re only required to do 14; our Fire Department has set a new
goal of 25 events where they’ll be doing training. Every time we hit a goal, the Fire
Department sets a new one, which is good.
Our Cottage Grove Lions Club hosted a meeting at the Central Fire Station; prior to
that meeting, they did the training. Every time we post photos on Facebook, we get
another five businesses who want to participate in the training. Getting people to
participate has been really successful.
AED Location and Mapping: Right now, we have 53 AEDs identified in Cottage
Grove, including Cub Foods, the Ice Arena, Woodridge Park, and many others. We’re
encouraging more, and earlier this year we added 36 AEDs to our squad cars, even our
unmarked squads and our ATV have one; that was through a grant of over $82,000 we
received to purchase those. Now our Fire Department has a new goal of 75 AEDs, so
they keep pushing us to get more of them installed.
You can help with this initiative: Spread the word to businesses, organizations; Send
AED locations to Cottage Grove Public Safety-Fire Division, Deputy Chief Jon Pritchard,
jpritchard@cottagegrovemn.gov; Learn CPR! If you’d like to schedule training, contact
Deputy Pritchard at 651-458-2859; that information is also on our website.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 4
Council Member Dennis thanked Director Koerner for his presentation and reminding
people we have a great organization to serve people in their time of need. It’s an honor
for him to read this proclamation, as he’s wearing his National Registry EMT pin tonight;
for many years while in law enforcement he had an opportunity to make a contribution.
Our community is served very, very well. He read aloud the Emergency Medical
Services Week Proclamation.
Motion by Council Member Dennis to proclaim May 21-27, 2023 as Emergency Medical
Services Week; second by Council Member Thiede. Motion carried: 5-0.
C. Public Works Week Proclamation
Staff Recommendation: Proclaim May 21 through May 27, 2023 as
National Public Works Week in the City of Cottage Grove, Minnesota.
Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director, stated next week is National Public Works Week;
it’s a great time of year to really thank all of the Public Works professionals that we have
who many times do a lot of unsung work in our community. They make sure you have
water and sewer, treated drinking water, the roads are plowed, parks are maintained,
and our mechanics make sure all vehicles and facilities are maintained. The work that
they do is very important. We had a lunch today for all of our workers to thank them for
everything they do at Public Works, which they really enjoyed. Everyone knows the
amazing work our staff does; this winter, in particular was the third snowiest winter of all
time. On April 1, even those who were on annual leave dropped what they were doing
and came in for that snowstorm; that’s the type of dedication that they have to take care
of our community. He’s very thankful for that.
Council Member Olsen thanked Director Burfeind for allowing him to stop down
today to say thank you to the hardworking men and women of Public Works and Parks,
who spent so much time in plow trucks this year. Council Member Olsen read aloud the
National Public Works Week Proclamation.
Motion by Council Member Olsen to proclaim May 21 through May 27, 2023 as Public
Works Week in the City of Cottage Grove, Minnesota; second by Council Member
Khambata. Motion carried: 5-0.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve the April 19, 2023 City Council Regular Meeting minutes.
B. Response to Open Forum on May 3, 2023 (Spooner).
C. Response to Open Forum on May 3, 2023 (Ebbenga).
D. Approve the issuance of rental licenses to the properties listed in the
attached table.
E. Approve the service agreement with SafeAssure for workplace safety
consultant services.
F. Approve the professional services agreement with First National Insurance
for insurance broker services.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 5
G. Authorize entering into an agreement with PMA Asset Management, LLC,
for investment advisory services.
H. Authorize Public Safety to accept a $14,000 UASI grant through the
Washington County Department of Emergency Management to fund the
purchase of a multi-gas hazardous materials monitor and technical rope
rescue equipment.
I. Adopt Resolution 2023-071 authorizing the preparation of a feasibility
report for the 2024 Pavement Management Project for portions of the
Thompson Grove Estates neighborhood, Prestige Estates neighborhood,
Hillside Trail, East Point Douglas Road, and Jamaica Avenue.
J. Adopt Resolution 2023-062 approving the plans and specifications and
establishing June 9, 2023 as the bid date for the Grange Trunk Watermain
Project.
K. 1) Adopt Resolution 2023-064 approving the Final Plat for Ravine
Crossing. 2) Approve the Ravine Crossing Development Agreement with
Tamarack Land, LLC. 3) Adopt Resolution 2023-073 approving the Ravine
Crossing Plans dated March 22, 2023, prepared by James R. Hill, Inc.,
subject to final approval by the City Engineer in writing.
L. Adopt Resolution 2023-065 approving a one-year extension of the
preliminary plat approval for Preserve at Prairie Dunes.
Council Member Dennis wished to pull Item G, Investment Advisory Services, for further
comment and/or discussion. He stated this is a process that he, Council Member
Khambata, Finance Director Brenda Malinowski, and City Administrator Jennifer Levitt
worked on. We put out bids looking for an investment management company to help us
be able to react a little bit more quickly to market forces more intrinsically, through more
of a focused eye, toward how we manage some of our different assets and available
fund balances. We want to ensure that we’re handling that money in the very best way.
We interviewed three different firms, and started with qualifications, the firm’s
background, and with whom they’ve previously worked. We also looked at staff
qualifications, including experience levels, strength of their organizational charts,
capacity and backup, so they’re big enough to be able to handle us and their other
clients. We also wanted to see if they fit well with Cottage Grove, in terms of this
organization’s philosophies on behalf of the community. We looked at their investment
approach, including security, quality, safety, communications, and completeness of
proposal; we wanted to have a very good idea of how these companies would handle
our finances and make recommendations for us in real time. We also looked at
investment philosophy and strategy, to include completeness and clarity of proposal and
understanding of Cottage Grove’s unique portfolio. We also looked at communication
reporting and value-added services: Report formats, communication techniques on a
monthly and quarterly basis, and other no-cost services that might be available to lend
us to find more value by working with a given company. We decided to go with PMA
Asset Management, LLC, as we felt they would connect more closely to the
conservative nature of how we like to handle the funds and act as stewards relative to
that money. They are a local organization that happens to be the right size to do the job
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 6
for us; one of the primary people in that business is Pat Harris, and he was on the City
Council in St. Paul for a number of years. He also has a tremendous background of
being a very high-up leader in some different investment houses. We like that because
he understands what we deal with as public officials here and how to best bring all of
this together on behalf of our community members. Another notable thing about PMA is
that they only handle public sector organizations, so they have the background and
experience to do a great job with us. He asked Director Malinowski to add any key
information he might have missed that she’d like to share with the public and the great
job that we did in the negotiation process to make sure that we got even better value for
the community.
Director Malinowski said they’d received a proposal from PMA, and we had gone
back, talked as a team, and decided to negotiate their rate a little bit. We were able to
go down one basis point for the first $25M. The other value added that we found with
PMA Asset Management is they also handle the 4M Fund, which is through the League
of Minnesota Cities, so that will give us more synergy and streamline our cash
investment. So, we had further savings that way because of that short-term money
being able to go over to the 4M Fund quickly.
Council Member Dennis stated all of us have a copy of this on our dais tonight; this
is our AAA Bond Rating that we recently received. Thinking about handling money,
being able to align things, and bringing more value to the table is something that he felt
was important to share with the community so people will know we’re always focused
on bringing the best possible return, business wise, that we can to the process. On
behalf of himself and the rest of the team that worked on this, we’ll ask the Council
tonight to accept PMA as the company to work with.
Motion by Council Member Khambata to approve the Consent Agenda; second by
Council Member Olsen. Motion carried: 5-0.
8. APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS
A. Approve payments for the period of 4-29-2023 through 5-18-2023 in the
amount of $2,234,737.95.
Motion by Council Member Dennis to approve disbursements; second by Council
Member Thiede. Motion carried: 5-0.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None.
10. BID AWARDS
A. Summers Landing 3rd and 4th Additions Final Streets Improvement-Award
Bid
Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-072 awarding the bid for
the Summers Landing 3rd and 4th Additions Final Streets Improvements
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 7
Project to OMG Midwest, Inc., dba Minnesota Paving & Materials, in the
amount of $366,575.00.
Amanda Meyer, City Engineer, stated in all of our developments we do a final street
project, we remove the wedge, do some curb and sidewalk replacement, and then get
that final layer of pavement completed. The Summers Landing 3rd and 4th Additions
are more in the North and a little bit on the left side of the Summers Landing
neighborhood.
We again got good bids; with this project, we were working with the Engineer’s
Estimate of $521,750 about the same time as the Mill & Overlay Project; you will see it’s
a bit higher than what you see in our bid results. The lowest bidder was OMG Midwest,
Inc., dba Minnesota Paving & Materials, at $366,575. Like we saw with that Mill &
Overlay Project, those bituminous prices are coming down, as are the concrete prices.
We were very happy to see the lower prices.
Motion by Council Member Khambata to Adopt Resolution 2023-072 awarding the bid
for the Summers Landing 3rd and 4th Additions Final Streets Improvements Project to
OMG Midwest, Inc., dba Minnesota Paving & Materials, in the amount of $366,575.00;
second by Council Member Olsen. Motion carried: 5-0.
11. REGULAR AGENDA
A. 7404 Lamar Avenue Proposed Restaurant - Minor Subdivision, Rezoning,
Site Plan Review, and Variance
Staff Recommendation: 1) Adopt Resolution 2023-068 approving the
minor subdivision to combine a half acre from 7400 Lamar Avenue and a
remnant parcel from 7310 Lamar Avenue, located to the north of 7404
Lamar Avenue. 2) Adopt Ordinance No. 1065 approving the rezoning of
the half acre being combined to the 7404 Lamar Avenue from R-3, Single
Family Residential, to B-2, Retail Business. 3) Adopt Resolution 2023-069
approving the variance to construct a parking lot setback 2.5 feet from the
side property line when 20 feet is required when adjacent to a residentially
zoned property. 4) Adopt Resolution 2023-070 approving the Site Plan
Review of a proposed restaurant in the existing building located at 7404
Lamar Avenue.
Mike Mrosla, Senior Planner, stated Wayne Butt has submitted an application for a
Minor Subdivision, Rezoning, Site Plan Review, and Variance. The subject property is
located at 7404 Lamar Avenue; the property is currently guided as Commercial in the
Land Use Plan and is zoned B-2, Retail Business District. The site is approximately 0.9
acres in size.
Planner Mrosla reviewed history of the site beginning in 1938; in 1980, the site was
redeveloped into a landscaping business, which is pretty much the building currently on
the site. The site has been adjusted and compacted because of that use over time.
Different landscaping companies and commercial uses have been in and out of that
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 8
building since that time; most of the uses in there have been commercial, related to
landscaping or construction. The Applicant purchased the property in 2021; since then,
he has pulled some permit applications and added a patio in 2022, which leads us to
the next point. The Applicant has been in constant contact with City staff since he
started working on the site so there is a lot of history with the site and a lot of history
with this current proposal. We have worked with the Applicant through many different
proposals, different ideas for uses, planning applications, and building permit
applications; he’s had meetings with many Council Members and staff throughout the
process on site and at City Hall. With our ongoing dialogue, staff worked to find
solutions for the City to support a use. We worked really hard to try to find options,
including a Zoning Code update, among many other Planning Applications at the time.
Use: The Applicant submitted a Planning Application for a catering establishment, but
the catering establishment proposal also referenced a restaurant or catering
establishment; those are two different uses. In our Zoning Code, the definition for a
catering establishment is an establishment that prepares food for offsite consumption;
the food is made at the site and provided offsite, it’s not meant to be served onsite. A
restaurant use is where an establishment is open to the public where food or drink is
prepared and offered to the public; to be considered a restaurant, at least 50% of the
seating shall be available to the public during hours of operation. During the Planning
Commission meeting, one of the commissioners asked a question about why that is; the
reason why it was drafted that way is to kind of separate a restaurant from an event
center. Event centers are where the intent is to rent a facility to host groups, private
social gatherings, banquets, meetings, weddings, etc. We wanted to separate those two
uses. It’s also worth noting that a catering establishment is a permitted use in this
Zoning District and so is a restaurant; however, when we looked at the use that was
submitted, we went with the restaurant use as the approval as it’s the most intense use
and the supporting documents support a restaurant use. Floor Plan/Seating Plan: The
Applicant submitted those plans as part of his application. The proposed interior plan
shows 90 seats, and the exterior patio plan shows 30 seats; so, again, we reviewed that
against our Code as a restaurant use. Because of that, it’s worth noting that all of these
uses, planning, and application on the site are connected. Not one of them can stand
alone, but all are dependent on each other. Minor Subdivision: Since we’re doing a
restaurant, the existing septic system on site on 7404 Lamar Avenue is not large
enough to support a restaurant use; it can support about 15 persons. So, the Applicant
has to construct a new septic system, but as previously mentioned, the prior uses of the
site have compacted the soils so the existing site is not able to be used to support a
septic system. The Applicant owns the property of 7400 Lamar Avenue, to the North,
and also the property at 7430 Lamar Avenue. So, that’s a unique opportunity for the
Applicant to be able to construct a septic system on that property to the North, as it can
support it. Because of that, City Code requires the septic system be on the same
property as the principal use, so the Applicant has to do a Minor Subdivision or lot
combination. The Applicant is proposing to take approximately .5 acre from 7400
Lamar, and there’s a little exception parcel on the northern part of the parcel there from
7310 Lamar Avenue; that’s actually from the Furber Farm. The Applicant wants to take
about .5 acre from 7310 Lamar, and on the right is what the lot would look like once
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 9
they are combined, so it’s about 1.4 acres once it’s combined. It’s also worth noting that
this Minor Subdivision is in compliance with City Code. Rezoning: If we combine the
lots, we’re going to have to rezone them as 7400 Lamar Avenue and the lower
exception parcel of 7310 Lamar Avenue are currently zoned R-3, Single Family
Residential. They need to be rezoned to B-2, Retail Business District, because that’s
what the principal use is; that’s what the Applicant is proposing here. It is not proposed
to rezone 7400 Lamar Avenue as part of this application. Another thing worth noting is
this proposed rezoning is consistent with the Land Use Plan in the Comprehensive
Plan, as the properties are guided on the Land Use Plan as Commercial. Site Plan
Review - Parking: The proposed building has an occupancy of 99 persons; the
Applicant is proposing 99 seats. So, we took the occupancy and used that to calculate
parking. Every use in the community has parking criteria; for a restaurant, it’s 1 stall per
3 seats, so in this case, they require 33 total parking stalls. The Applicant is proposing
36 on site, so an excess of 3 stalls. The site is compacted and is very limited because of
the stormwater pond, setbacks, etc. Also, as part of this application, the Applicant is
proposing 3 on-street parking stalls that are in the public right-of-way, in front of the
building. They can be used by anyone; they are not included in the parking calculations
for this site. There will also be 2 ADA Handicap Parking stalls, also located on the
street; that’s similar to the adjacent uses, they were all kind of grandfathered in with
their on-street accessible parking. Parking Lot/Driveway Setback Variance Request:
The Applicant is requesting a Variance from the minimum required parking lot setback
and driveway setback of 20 feet from the residential lot line. The Applicant argues that a
2.5-foot setback is required due to the following site constraints: Narrow shape of the
lot; Wellhead location; Previous site uses had similar setbacks to parking lots and to the
property line. Site Plan Review - Outdoor Seating and Dining: This use is all dependent
on parking, so we had to work around parking when we reviewed it because the site is
confined by the amount of parking it can support. The Applicant is proposing 30 seats
on the patio; per the City Code, if you have 30 seats or less, you do not need to park the
patio, so that’s why the Applicant is only proposing 30 seats. Only the indoor seating
has to park per Code. Our Code also has a section that requires the patio seating area
not to exceed 30% of the total square footage of the building, or 657 square feet; the
intent behind that is the patio is part of the use but not the primary use of the building.
The use of the building is the interior, the patio is secondary, so that’s the intent behind
the ordinance; the Applicant is proposing a seating plan that fits that requirement. Our
City Code requires a patio seating area be setback 150 feet for residential Zoning
Districts, unless sufficient screening and other impact-reducing elements are provided.
The Applicant is providing a 6-foot, zero maintenance privacy fence along the southern
property line; he’s also planting landscaping around the patio to assist in buffering and
screening the patio from the adjacent residential use. The residential use is
approximately 43.5 feet from the property line, about 65 feet from the actual house;
however, there has been thought put into putting the landscaping there to help reduce
the impacts of the patio seating area from the adjacent use. Site Plan Review -
Landscaping: There is a very detailed landscaping plan, which is in conformance with
the landscaping ordinance. There are overstory trees throughout the site, arbor vitae
buffer trees that grow quickly, grow tall, and are thick; they will help with screening the
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 10
use. There are also numerous perennials and other decorative plantings along the
patio. Neighborhood Meeting: A Neighborhood Meeting was held on March 7, 2023; the
Applicant sent invitations to 31 property owners within 500 feet of 7404 Lamar Avenue,
and 4 residents attended. Discussion focused on future restaurant uses, use of the
property, site history, the site, and street parking. Public Hearing: The notice was mailed
to 31 property owners within 500 feet of 7404 Lamar Avenue and was also published in
the St. Paul Pioneer Press on April 24, 2023. Staff received two written comments that
are included in the Council packets and were also provided to the Planning
Commissioners. The Public Hearing was held at the Planning Commission Meeting on
April 24, 2023; one resident participated and asked questions about on-site parking.
The Planning Commission asked questions about the comment letters, trash enclosure,
seating, the proposed septic system, and stormwater. After discussion, the Planning
Commission voted to approve the request. Recommendation: Is on the screen, but it’s
worth noting that all of these are tied together; all are dependent on each other. Planner
Mrosla stated he’s available for any questions, and the Applicant is also present.
Mayor Bailey stated before Council asked any questions, he wanted to ask City
Attorney Kori Land about the history of this site. Mayor Bailey stated he and Council
Member Dennis were also part of some of the meetings about this site, but maybe
Attorney Land wanted to share more details on this site.
Attorney Land stated the information was provided at the dais and was presented on the
screen; there’s a very long history with this application so she doesn’t think the
Applicant can say that the City was ever out of touch for long since he has owned the
property. When she started looking at the history of it for tonight’s meeting, she was
able to put together some documentation that she thought might be helpful for the
Council. She didn’t do it in sufficient time to present it in the Council’s packet, and it’s
thick, so she’d like to submit it into the record. She’s going to go through it now in some
pretty painstaking detail because she thought it was really important for Council to
consider tonight for this hearing; so, she submits this into the record:
What that documentation shows is beginning in January, 2022, City staff, as Planner
Mrosla mentioned, had met with Mr. Butt on the application and on his building and
what he wanted to do with the use. He had submitted a building permit, and at that time,
he had said his intention was to convert the former building into an event center.
Then we fast forward to April, 2022, and it was discovered that there was some
activity going on at the site, and the owner, Mr. Butt, wanted to confirm what uses would
be allowed at the site. He was confirming that the use would be either a restaurant use
as a permitted use, and he wanted to confirm that an event center was not a permitted
use. He submitted that information at the time to Community Development Director
Christine Costello; she confirmed the property is not appropriate for an event center, as
that’s not allowed in a B-2 Zoning District, but a restaurant would be allowed. So, that
was confirmed as long ago as April, 2022.
Later, in that same email chain, there was a Stop Work Order because again there
was some work going on without permits, and the City staff needed to understand what
construction was being done in the building. Mr. Butt’s response was, “I’m just
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 11
repurposing the building for a future use, to be determined later.” So, unfortunately, staff
must determine what building permits are appropriate and available, and what must be
done based on the use. So, to say that I’m simply repurposing it or doing some interior
remodeling is not sufficient for City staff; we need to know what the use is going to be in
order to know what rules to apply. So, staff continued to poke and find the building
plans, and there were some construction plans that were submitted so that there could
be some interior remodeling. Staff provided building permits so that the construction
could continue.
On May 16, 2022, Mr. Butt sent an email to the City staff and said, “We need to get
an inspection done because the building is being repurposed for a wedding venue,” so
he’s indicating that he’s still leaning towards an event center at this location. But then,
not long after that, on May 20, 2022, only four days later, he says, “I just need a current
permit application to reflect the work for the landscape building.” So, he’s sending mixed
signals to City staff; is it a landscape building or is it an event center, and it has made it
a very confusing project for the City staff to work on. Finally, on May 20, 2022, he
submitted floorplans for what he called the landscape building. You have plans in the
packet today, and Planner Mrosla showed them in a slide that clearly shows a dining
room with tables in it. At the time of the building permit application, that was shown as a
display room. So, there’s been some very, very mixed signals on this project. Then
there was discovery that there was a website being advertised as lakeside events for
this location, and people could sign up to reserve the place or to anticipate that it would
be open for business later that fall. City staff sent a Cease and Desist letter, saying it is
not appropriately zoned for an event center, you should not be advertising it as such,
and that would be a violation of our Code.
On June 27, 2022, Mr. Butt sent an email to City staff saying he’s ready to submit a
Text Amendment that would allow for an event venue; so, he was anticipating again that
he’s going to be doing an event center at this location. So, he wanted to know if he
could submit a Zoning Text Amendment to get that use so that it would be allowed in a
B-2 Zoning District because he was ready to “hit the ground running,” as he said, in the
fall.
On July 1, 2022, his first Zoning Application was for a Text Amendment to allow for
an event center as a Conditional Use in the B-2 Zoning District. Prior to that application
even being able to be considered by the Planning Commission or the Council, he
submitted another Land Use Application for a Conditional Use Permit on July 27, 2022,
asking for permission to operate a convention, banquet, or exhibition hall; that is the
same as an event center, but it’s not called an event center, so he was trying to get an
application for a use that was not allowed in the B-2 Zoning District because that
particular use is not allowed. The application was rejected for the Conditional Use
Permit, but the Text Amendment application was still live, if you will, as the staff was still
processing that application.
After Mr. Butt received the rejection letter saying that it could not be processed
because it was not an allowable use, Mr. Butt came into City Hall and he demanded to
meet with City staff. Unfortunately, everybody was out on that particular day except for
one of our Junior Planners; so, Conner Jakes sat down with Mr. Butt and met with him,
initially alone, and then eventually with City Administrator Jennifer Levitt. He took very
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 12
good notes of that meeting. In that meeting, although Mr. Butt was very agitated and
very angry that he felt like he was not being dealt with appropriately or fairly by staff, he
was able to calm the situation down; he explained that it simply was an issue with the
Land Use Application, and it was solely being rejected because it simply isn’t allowed.
It’s not an application we could accept. City Administrator Levitt did a great job of
explaining all of the different options that Mr. Butt had; we could process the Zoning
Text Amendment, but that would need to get through the City Council and be approved.
Then he would have to apply for the appropriate septic system to comply with whatever
use it was he wanted because the existing one could only support 15 people; clearly, he
wanted to do something different than a use that would only have 15 people in it. He
also needed to address parking issues and see if he had sufficient parking, based on
the use. So, she went through in detail again all of the things that would be needed for
him to have a successful project at this location.
On August 11, 2022, she thought that was the date when Mayor Bailey noted that he
and Council Member Dennis actually sat down with Mr. Butt and talked about his plans.
He indicated that he didn’t intend to open an event center at this location.
On August 15, 2022, he then withdrew his application for the Text Amendment. He
indicated now he wanted to open a catering establishment instead, and he thought that
was one of the things that Mayor Bailey and Council Member Dennis had discussed
with him at the August 11 meeting. They asked if he was a restaurant, an event center,
or if he was a catering establishment. Mr. Butt ultimately decided to withdraw that first
application, so now, at this point, we have no pending applications for the Planning
Commission or the Council.
Then, between August 15 and August 16, 2022, again staff discovered that there
was work being done on the outside of the property, there was some retaining wall work
that was being done; so, staff requested that Mr. Butt again submit the plans, tell us
what it is you’re doing. His response was, “We are all confused as to why a Zoning
Permit is required for our landscape business to conduct landscape at the property.” So,
again, sending mixed signals that he intended to open a landscape business now at the
property, when all intentions and indications had been that he was either going to do an
event center or a restaurant or a catering establishment.
You may recall that on October 19, 2022, Mr. Butt appeared here, at the Open
Forum, and extended an invitation to the entire Council to attend his meet and greet at
his new event center that would be opening at this location. I sent a letter the next day,
again similar to the letter that had been sent to him in June when he had done a similar
situation, and said you’re not zoned correctly for an event center. You have not applied,
at this point we have no pending applications for one, and so that use would be
unauthorized. If you have more than 15 people at your location, the septic system
cannot support that. So, your occupancy load is for 15 people, please be aware of that.
On December 27, 2022, he submitted another Zoning Application, this time for a Site
Plan Review and for a catering establishment and a Minor Subdivision because he
knew that anything that he needed to do had to support the septic system.
In January, 2023, that application, after being reviewed by staff, was rejected
because it was deemed incomplete. As you probably recall from many years being on
Planning Commissions, I’m sure most of you have sat at that table one time or another,
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 13
that City staff has 15 business days to accept or reject any Planning Application that
comes before them. So, by January 11, they sent a letter saying that it didn’t have all of
the supporting documentation for that Application, and it listed the additional things that
were needed. In addition, it mentioned in that January 11 letter that here’s the
difference: You have applied for a catering business, that is what you’re saying on your
application, and here’s what the definition of a catering business is; it spelled it out, that
it requires you to consume the food offsite. You prep it onsite, but it is consumed offsite.
On January 17, 2023, he then submitted four (4) applications. Now, granted, he’s not
doing this in a vacuum; he’s meeting with staff to find out what applications are going to
be needed. That’s why there are four applications; they worked with him to try to get this
project to work, that’s why there’s a re-subdivision of the lots to make the septic system
appropriate for a restaurant use. That’s why it requires a Rezoning Application, because
now that you’re combining the lots, not all the zoning matches. So, there’s that, and
then once you look at the property and realize this is where he wants to put the things,
there’s a Variance Application. So, he had four Applications, not just a Site Plan, not just
a Minor Subdivision, but he needed a variance as well as the rezoning application. So,
he submitted those four Applications; they were reviewed by City staff and again
determined to be incomplete because he was missing some pretty basic elements from
our Code, as well as an explanation for why he needed the variances.
He submitted additional information between January 17 and February 3, 2023, but it
was again deemed incomplete because it still didn’t have sufficient information. He tried
to submit additional information between February 3 and March 14, 2023, but it was still
deemed to be incomplete. More importantly, in that letter, it was pointed out on the
Variance Application, because he provided some additional reasons for why he needed
the variance, this is what the response was: City staff met with you at City Hall on March
22, 2022, where you presented your proposal. At that time, staff shared concerns about
parking on site with the patio design, as shown. Following the meeting, staff provided
your design team with the underlying Zoning District standards; instead of amending
your proposal to meeting zoning standards, you chose to submit a Permit Application,
this was for the deck, to construct a patio as presented. Due to the construction of the
patio, it now interferes with the placement of a compliant driveway. In order to support a
variance request, one of the required findings must include the following: The plight of
the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property that are not created by the
landowner. Because you created the reason for the variance, staff cannot support this
variance for the driveway, and will recommend denial. We strongly advise you to find an
alternative option for the driveway so that it can be compliant, which may require you to
move the deck or redevelop the property to the south, which you also own. So, the
variance issue was brought up prior to the deck being constructed, prior to him doing
any of that work on the property. He knew that he was creating a variance by installing
the deck in that location.
On March 23, 2023, he submitted additional documentation and at that point, March
23, 2023, is when all four Applications were finally deemed complete and processed
accordingly.
On April 24, 2023, there was a Planning Commission meeting. The Planning
Commission, based on staff’s recommendation, did recommend to the Council that they
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 14
approve all four Applications. At that Public Hearing, it’s really important that you note
this: When asked by one of the commissioners, as there had been some confusion
about if it’s a catering business or a restaurant or an event center, what exactly is your
intention, Mr. Butt replied that, “Everyone wants a restaurant in this town,” and that’s
from the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting. “He and Angi never wanted to
be restaurant owners, but that’s what the folks are asking for, and we can do a
restaurant. They will not be in there managing day-to-day operations, but we have a
chef in mind, and he’s ready to go. So, as soon as we get through the City Council, we’ll
start digging ground.” He told the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing his full
intention is a restaurant; that’s what all of the Applications are based on, is as a
restaurant.
After the Planning Commission meeting, he sent an email three days later to City
staff saying, “My Application included a catering establishment, too, right?” City staff
was very clear that a catering establishment is different than a restaurant; one
consumes food onsite, one does not. That was the response and the City has been very
consistent in saying that response.
Now, I’m sure you are well aware that within the last few days the Applicant is saying
on social media and in the public that he is being forced to open a restaurant, that he
does not want to open a restaurant; that he wants it to be a wedding venue, which as
we know is an event center, and he has been told and he knows that this is not allowed.
So, we have been very, very consistent in the message that an event center is not
allowed, that a catering business is not allowed; that this use must be a restaurant and
that is consistent with the plans that he submitted. His Application states “Restaurant,”
the one that’s in front of you states “Restaurant.” He said everyone wants a restaurant
and that’s what we can do.
Looking at the history of what he’s wanted to do over the last year and a half, an
event center, a landscape business, event center, catering establishment, now the
Applications are for a restaurant. That’s the only Application you can consider; the
question is do you believe him? Staff has really tried to make this Application work; they
really have, as you can see from the four Applications that are before you, and the
creative solutions that they’ve come up with to make a restaurant use work. But the
analysis and the recommendations are all tied to a restaurant use, that’s it. If you don’t
believe that he's going to open a restaurant in this place, you have no option but to deny
the Applications because that’s what the recommendations rely on, a restaurant use.
Without a restaurant use, everything is irrelevant. And that’s why I prepared the
Findings for Denial for you tonight; the Findings for Denial that you find at the Council
dais have all of the findings that she’s mentioned, as well as some of the things that
Planner Mrosla mentioned. So, they all support denial. She asks Council to weigh the
evidence after you’ve given the Applicant an opportunity to speak, and you are the
finders of fact. If you find that he will open a restaurant, we can support a restaurant. If
you don’t believe that he will, then she asks that Council adopt all four Findings and
Resolutions for Denial.
Mayor Bailey said this is the time now for any questions from Council.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 15
Council Member Thiede stated just as a clarification, in terms of eating food onsite or
offsite, there are restaurants that have takeout where the food is actually eaten offsite;
he asked if that isn’t almost like a little catering activity.
Attorney Land replied absolutely, it is. However, he has not indicated in the plans
that this is going to be a catering establishment; it has solely been pitched as a
restaurant.
Council Member Thiede asked if he could actually have takeout in his restaurant.
Attorney Land replied takeout is different than a catering business; a catering business
is intended to prep the food for consumption offsite, and that is the primary business.
Takeout is a subset or a sub-use of a restaurant.
Council Member Dennis stated that was a lot to take in from Attorney Land. He first
wanted to say that he’s very appreciative of the investments that Wayne and his family
have made here in the community. He’s had the opportunity to speak with him on many
occasions, including last night. One of the things he’s always been concerned with, and
it’s not necessarily the government’s job to want to protect somebody, but when you’ve
got a community member who’s putting a lot of money on the line, you want to see the
right thing be done for people and not fall into risk. These are some of the conversations
that we’ve had. This is a tough thing. He asked if there was any appetite to make a
motion to go with the staff original approvals; if there’s not as we would go through a
process, then we’d look for a secondary option that we could fall back on.
Mayor Bailey stated at this point where we’re at is we haven’t even heard from the
Applicant yet or any witnesses; he thought we were at a point right now for Council to
ask questions of staff. Then, he will invite the Applicant up to speak before the Council,
as well as anybody else in the audience that would like to speak on this topic. At that
point, we obviously have some directions that we as a Council can do.
Council Member Dennis stated having been in the meetings and having had a lot of
dialogue, the target has moved, and he’s been concerned about that. He’s talked with
Wayne directly about that at different times. He doesn’t want to see him make a
mistake, he doesn’t want to see a mistake on behalf of the community and see
something fail. His concern is as a person, as a representative of the community, and
as a fellow business owner, somebody who understands what it might take to be
successful; he doesn’t want to see something go in there that would not work. He
doesn’t want to see that loss happen for him or the community. At this moment, he’d like
to open this up to the rest of the process and just see where people are at and how we
want to go with it; maybe we can hear again from Mr. Butt if he wants to speak about it.
We just need to try to come to a reasonable outcome here for everybody.
Council Member Khambata had a couple of questions for Attorney Land. He asked if he
was correct that this was previously a landscape business.
Attorney Land replied yes; she didn’t know when it closed, but obviously prior to his
ownership.
Council Member Khambata stated in the timeline that Planner Mrosla provided to us,
he didn’t see an application for a building permit for a commercial kitchen. He asked if
there was a kitchen onsite, if that had been constructed or is it in process.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 16
Attorney Land replied that Council Member Khambata was spot on, as the floorplans
do not show any kind of kitchen, which has always led us to be a little suspicious; at the
same time, he’s calling it a restaurant, he’s put on the Application it’s a restaurant, and
it’s showing a dining area. So, we are treating it as a restaurant.
Council Member Khambata stated January 19, 2022, was the first interaction that
staff had regarding this project; he asked if that was accurate. Attorney Land stated she
actually didn’t know; she’s sure Planner Mrosla could answer that question better than
she could, but that’s the first time she had documentation.
Council Member Olsen stated that was a lot of good information, and he appreciated the
exhaustive explanation of the information because he was not a part of some of those
conversations that Attorney Land mentioned. It was definitely helpful for him to
understand the nature of that dialogue. He stated she had mentioned the Planning
Commission meeting; the comment made was essentially that the community wants a
restaurant, that’s not something that we’re familiar with or something that we really have
a lot of experience with, but yet we want to provide something to the public. He thought
that was admirable. We know that Wayne and Angi have worked very hard over the
years to build the business at Furber Farm; he suspects they weren’t wedding planners
before that either, but they tried to learn and reached out to subject matter experts. He
also mentioned that there was a chef who was prepared to join the group and help with
the development of the restaurant, which he thought was a critical element. Without a
commercial kitchen, you really can’t have a restaurant. So, if there’s an approval for a
restaurant use and then the use is not what the approval actually says, if we’re two
months down the line and it’s not a restaurant, it’s something different, he asked what
happens then.
Attorney Land replied it would depend on what the “it” is; if we discover that he’s
renting it out as an event center and he’s having food catered in, that would be a
violation of our ordinances as well as disapproval. So, we would bring him in for a
revocation of all of the approvals.
Council Member Olsen stated if the approvals were revoked, in essence the
business doesn’t have the ability to move forward. He stated that was good because he
doesn’t want to see something like that happen; he would prefer that if we’re in a place
where the restaurant isn’t really what is wanted or desired, or the Application isn’t
consistent with what’s wanted or desired, he would prefer that we just deny the
Application and then we start again with what do we really want to do here. It sounds
like staff has spent a lot of time, there’s been lots of communication, there’s definitely
been guidance in terms of what he wants to do or not do, but this is the way that staff
can help him. Staff is always here to try to help, to support any business that we have in
town that either wants to get off its feet or might be in the midst of a change or
something else. Again, that’s admirable; he thanked them for all of their hard work. This
has been going on for a really long time.
Council Member Olsen asked in order to think about that area, students from the
Humphrey School of Business at the University of Minnesota asked us if they could do a
Small Area Study of Old Cottage Grove; they did this for their MBA. So, we had a
chance to see that study, and it provided some pretty strong feedback with respect to
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 17
what people who were contacted in that area wanted or didn’t want. He asked if
somebody was able to encapsulate that for a minute and talk a little bit about the
feedback that was part of that Small Area Study because he really thinks it’s instructive.
Planner Mrosla stated the students did a Small Area Study. They held a
Neighborhood Meeting where they invited residents from the community to get their
feedback on what they wanted to see that area be long term, as we look forward to the
2050 Comprehensive Plan. They did surveys and then had a Neighborhood Meeting
where many people stated they didn’t want to see a change. They liked that area the
way it is. If there was to be a commercial use in that area, they wanted it to be small
scale, more or less like a coffeeshop, an ice cream shop, and be able to walk there. The
biggest takeaway from the meeting was they didn’t want to see a change; they liked the
character of the neighborhood.
Council Member Olsen stated when the students did the presentation, there was
reference to the new Boondocks Boutique out there, people really seemed to like it, and
it fit with the character of the neighborhood. He’s been in that business many times, and
they do a fantastic job there. He asked if there was any concern about this proposed
use that came out in that Small Area Study or if that was even discussed. He didn’t
know if this Planning Application was something of which the students were aware.
Planner Mrosla replied that yes, that conversation was had with the students, so they
were aware of it; however, to his knowledge, it was not really discussed at the
Neighborhood Meeting and it was not presented in the findings in the students’ report.
Council Member Olsen stated he asked about that Neighborhood Meeting, but very
few people attended, so it’s hard to get data that we would consider valid based on the
sample size from the number of people present. With that Small Area Study, the sample
size was much bigger; he thought it was very instructive, really good information. So, if
this isn’t something that people want, including the Applicant, first of all he’s confused
why we’re even talking about it if it’s something the Applicant doesn’t want. Secondly,
he wouldn’t want to approve something that nobody really wants to operate in the first
place because that’s just asking for trouble. He appreciated the feedback, there was a
lot of good information from the staff. He’s excited to hear from the Applicant.
Mayor Bailey asked Mr. Butt if he wanted to speak on this topic and asked him to give
his name and address for the record.
Ryan Kaess, Mr. Butt’s lawyer, stated he represents Angelayne, Lakeside Events,
Furber Farms, and represents Wayne and Angi Butt individually in a number of matters.
He wanted to make this very short; they’re asking Council now to approve this as a
restaurant. As of right now, we want this to be a restaurant. Mr. Butt owns this land, and
if Mr. Butt sells this land tomorrow, that’s really none of the staff’s concern. Mr. Kaess
stated he has heard a lot of these concerns and these comments, and right now, he
wants to be very, very blunt to the Council. We are asking that you approve this as a
restaurant. Does he know if Mr. Butt is going to open up a restaurant there? That is the
intention as of right now. Is it going to be fiscally possible? We hope so. He’s known
Wayne Butt for a number of years, he’s one of the most interesting and successful
entrepreneurs he’s ever represented, and he represents a lot of them. We are asking
and we are telling you that we intend to get shovels in the ground and put a restaurant
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 18
there. Will it work? He doesn’t know. Will we sell this tomorrow? He doesn’t know. What
we are asking this Council to do, and, quite frankly, what he thinks they have to do
because he’s not heard a legitimate reason to deny this Application; the staff not
believing my client he doesn’t think is a legitimate reason. If two months from now, or
six months from now, quite frankly, to be blunt, to build a restaurant, he doesn’t know
how many of them have been involved with businesses, but he’s been involved with
businesses when they try to start restaurants; it’s not a two-month process, it’s not a
three-month process, it takes a long time. And, yes, there’s infrastructure there, and
we’ll be back in front of this Council asking for more things. If Mr. Butt doesn’t have a
restaurant there, or if a restaurant doesn’t show up there, then Council will know about
it, and they can shut us down. But to have the feeling that Mr. Butt is lying to you as the
reason to deny this seems to be arbitrary and capricious. If, after two months, three
months, Mr. Butt is running an event center there, which by the way, in reviewing your
updated Zoning Codes, he believes he can have an event center there based upon your
updated Zoning Codes; he may be incorrect on that, but that’s a discussion for another
time. Right now, we are asking for a restaurant, that’s it. We don’t have to get into
anything else, we are accepting these 34 conditions; even a condition that he’s never
seen in practicing law 20 years, he’s not sure there’s any other city, and he doesn’t
know if you’ve told your restaurant owners this, but they cannot rent out their own
restaurants for private events. So, if you wanted to rent out a restaurant for the
Chamber of Commerce to come in and meet, you can’t do that in Cottage Grove. He’s
looked at this, and there’s no other city in the State of Minnesota that has such a
provision, but we’re willing to accept it. We’re saying do it, approve this tonight, that’s
what we’re asking you to do. Do we have some disagreements? Yes. Do we have some
disagreements on how the City Attorney has characterized this process? Yes. All that’s
water under the bridge. What we are asking to do, very simply, is to approve this as a
restaurant, and that’s what we’re going to begin starting tomorrow morning. If you have
any specific questions for my client or myself, we’d be more than willing to answer them.
Council Member Khambata stated he’s had the pleasure of working with Mr. Butt on the
Chamber and in numerous other capacities; you are a successful entrepreneur, and you
have been investing in this community for the better part of a decade; he asked Mr. Butt
if that was accurate, and Mr. Butt replied yes. He told Mr. Butt he wants him to be
successful, and he doesn’t think there’s anybody up here who says we don’t Wayne or
any other business owner in Cottage Grove to be successful. So, he’s going to ask him
some questions, and it’s not meant to paint him in a bad light, but as somebody who
has helped business owners acquire property, you’re asking for a Variance, you’re
asking for a Zoning Code Amendment; these are things for which you typically have to
present a practical difficulty or an unnecessary hardship. If he were the Chair of the
Planning Commission, like he used to be, these are the questions he would have asked
him: You would identify yourself as a seasoned investor, so to him, when you
purchased this property off market, he has to assume that you were not competing
against any other buyers; he asked Mr. Butt if that was accurate. Did you have the
luxury of time is the question he’s asking; when you acquired this property, did you
know that you were going to intend to use it for this purpose? Mr. Butt replied, “Not
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 19
whatsoever, no.” Council Member Khambata stated so you acquired this property, it
was a landscaping business; he asked Mr. Butt if that was accurate. Mr. Butt replied,
“Yes. Well, I would say landscaping/storage, ‘cause the gentleman that was in there
was storing nothing but landscaping.” Council Member Khambata stated maybe not a
very productive landscaping business, but that’s what it was zoned for, that’s what it
was being presented as, and for lack of better assessment, that’s what it was. So, you
bought this landscaping business; it wasn’t already a wedding event center, it wasn’t
already a restaurant, so there was no overarching expectation that that’s what it was
going to be. Is that accurate? Mr. Butt replied, “That’s accurate.” Was your Purchase
Agreement subject to getting the zoning approvals? Mr. Butt replied, “Not at all.” Council
Member Khambata asked why not? Mr. Butt asked, “The purchase? There was no
intent to use it as a, as anything. The goal was just to own the property. The goal was to
own the properties along Lamar Avenue, along with the Furber Farm, so we can create
a barrier around the Furber Farm to avoid noise complaints.” Council Member
Khambata asked, so, the property is still useful to you if it’s not an event center? Mr.
Butt replied, “Not at this time, not after the investment.” Council Member Khambata
stated okay, that brings him to his next point; prior to investing what he can only imagine
is a substantial amount of money into updates to the exterior, he hasn’t been inside the
building, but from the outside it looks like it’s in a lot better condition than it previously
was. He asked Mr. Butt had you determined what you wanted to use it for before you
started spending all that money? Mr. Butt replied, “Yes, so when the construction
started, the intent was to eventually, like the Furber Farm, get out an accurate, you
know, looking at the demographics of how we could sell weddings and start the wedding
process. So, yeah, the goal was to be an event center for weddings long term. And, so,
at one time as Kori Land pointed out, we, and if you look at our Application, it does say
catering establishment, which, at the time, if you Google catering establishment, it
includes restaurants, nightclubs, everything, whether the food is consumed on or offsite.
But between that time of stating catering establishment and restaurant, because we
withdrew the Application as per our attorney, you could host events. I called the
restaurant owners in town, and I’ve asked them repeatedly, even last week, can I host
an event in your facility at 100%, and the answer was yes. I said, no, you can’t, the City
just changed the Code to 50%.” Council Member Khambata stated let’s stay on point
here. At that point, when you determined that you wanted to use it as this type of
establishment, did you first seek this zoning approval before investing those dollars?
Mr. Kaess stated he had to ask this question; he’s not sure exactly how relevant this
is. He’s a little troubled by these questions; you’ve got a Planning Commission.
Council Member Khambata stated he’s trying to understand why, because in his
mind a practical difficulty is I have a restaurant, and I need to expand my parking lot, so
I need a variance. Mr. Kaess stated, “Correct.”
Council Member Khambata stated a practical difficulty is I have a restaurant and I
need more land; I’d like to rezone the neighboring parcel. None of that existed here.
He’s asking us to tailor make this parcel for an intended use that was never permitted
here prior to him owning this property. So, when you ask if we’re being arbitrary and
capricious.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 20
Mr. Kaess stated with all due respect, Council Member, these seem to be questions;
you’ve got a Planning Commission that voted 7-nothing, and in the last week,
something happened. He doesn’t know what it is, but something happened.
Mayor Bailey stated this happened. Mr. Kaess stated again, with all due respect,
that’s not relevant here.
Council Member Khambata stated he’s not done, he appreciated Mr. Kaess
interjecting, and if he’d like to answer for Mr. Butt, that’s fine, but he’d like to stay on
point. He asked Mr. Butt if he’d say he put a significant amount of money into this place;
when were you planning on putting in a kitchen in a restaurant, in a business that you
were going to feed people? This just looks so backwards to him, and he’s trying to
understand where the practical difficulty or the unnecessary hardship is.
Mr. Butt stated, “My question is why did the Code change for a restaurant to 50%
capacity when we can be a restaurant and host events?”
Council Member Khambata stated as your attorney stated, that’s probably a
conversation for another day. But that brings up a good point. He asked Attorney Land if
the B-2 Zoning District allows for a restaurant where you can cater an event up to 50%
occupancy. Attorney Land replied yes.
Council Member Khambata asked Mr. Butt what’s the stated occupancy of your
building? Mr. Butt replied, “100.” Council Member Khambata stated he heard 90 from
Planner Mrosla; he asked if it was 90 seats or if it was 100. Planner Mrosla replied it’s
90 seats, maximum occupancy is 99. Council Member Khambata asked Mr. Butt if he
was comfortable booking your place out for events that are less than 50 people? Mr.
Butt replied, “Absolutely, I’d do anything to make a buck right now.” Mr. Kaess stated,
“But he can’t do that under your Code.”
Council Member Khambata stated that’s because we don’t allow event centers there,
but we allow restaurants, and now we allow restaurants where you can book out half of
your occupancy. He asked Mr. Butt if he was ever intending on booking larger than 50
people for weddings there? Mr. Butt asked him to repeat the question. Council Member
Khambata stated he thought in previous conversations he’d stated he wanted a quaint,
small wedding venue; he asked him what qualified as a quaint, small wedding venue
because he’s just looking at the facts here. If a restaurant allows you to have a wedding
there, but it can only be less than 50 people, and you were never intending on having
more than 50 people, he doesn’t see why he’s mad.
Mr. Kaess stated, “Time out, he wanted to make sure you can’t do that, Council
Member, and by your own ordinance you have to be public; you can’t have a wedding
there.”
Council Member Khambata stated that’s why he’s segueing into that. So, you can
allow weddings to be there, if you are a restaurant, which is allowed in B-2 Zoning. So,
you want to have the one part but you don’t want to do the other part. Is that accurate,
or do you want to operate a restaurant, and will you put in a kitchen?
Mr. Butt replied, “When the Application was made on December 27, his request was
for a catering establishment. On March 6, Mike Mrosla asked me to modify that
Application and put the word restaurant in there, and so my application, my writeup
reads restaurant or catering establishment. If you Google catering establishment, it’s a
laundry list of things.”
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 21
Council Member Khambata asked what does our Zoning Code say is a catering
establishment because that is what you would have to comply with, not what Google
says.
Mr. Butt stated, “Okay, if we’re a restaurant and now the Code all of a sudden
changed to 50%, where’d the 50% come from? Because if we could, if I can call
Junction 70 right now, and I just did a week ago, and I can rent the entire facility at
100%. I corrected him; I said no, you can’t. He said what do you mean? I said the Code
just changed on January 1 to 50%; he goes, I didn’t know that. No restaurant in town
knew that. The restaurants in town have never been informed of the 50% change; so, if
we could’ve done 100% like the other restaurants, we could compete for that big space.
But I’ll live with 50% to get us running. I can always come back tomorrow and submit an
Application to be an event center.”
Council Member Khambata asked where’s the kitchen? If it was going to be a
catering facility, wouldn’t you also need to prepare food there?
Mr. Butt replied, “Yes, you can use hot plates; you don’t need to invest a full-blown
kitchen with fire suppression and vents. The gentleman I spoke with at the Planning
Commission he wanted to do it plain Jane. We could run a sushi restaurant. Do you
need cooking for sushi? No, you need refrigeration.”
Council Member Khambata asked where’s your refrigerator?
Mr. Kaess stated, “Again, this is very, very detailed. My client has met all the
standards, your Planning Commission has voted 7-nothing. I understand there was
some sort of Facebook post, an intervening act that was highly inappropriate. You were
diving into; you’re basically asking my client why he invests the way he invests.”
Council Member Khambata stated he’s trying to establish the practical difficulty being
if this were already a restaurant, 100% if you wanted to expand your restaurant, I don’t
see that being a problem. But you’re asking us to do three things that didn’t already
exist there to make it so that it can be a restaurant.
Mr. Kaess stated, “And if he doesn’t open it, he loses money. At the end of the day,
the only person here that’s going to lose money is Wayne Butt.”
Council Member Khambata stated and I don’t want him to lose money.
Mr. Kaess stated, “I’m sure Wayne appreciates your concern for him, but I would
think that, you know, he’s gotten pretty old here. I think he can handle himself, and he
wants to own a restaurant there. He’s saying he can do it. What you’re telling me is
you’re telling the Council because of some Facebook post feels that they can better tell
Wayne how to spend his money. And if he doesn’t put a kitchen in, guess what? No
one’s gonna come eat at a restaurant with no kitchen. So, one of two things is gonna
happen; he’s either gonna have a kitchen or he’s not gonna have a restaurant ‘cause
nobody’s gonna come there. I just don’t understand this line of questioning; it seems to
be very personal in nature instead of focusing on you have a Planning Commission that
voted 7-nothing. I don’t understand most of what I’ve heard tonight. Mr. Butt has spent
lots of money in this community; you have people here that basically come to your gas
stations, hotels that are filled up by Furber Farms, and this has almost gotten so
personal, I’ve never seen something like this in my 20 years of practicing law. This is
amazing.”
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 22
Council Member Khambata stated my questions are to the point, as somebody who is a
business broker, the first thing you do is you get zoning approval before you start
spending the money.
Mr. Kaess replied, “So, maybe Mr. Butt is a bad businessman.” Council Member
Khambata replied and that’s fine; Mr. Kaess stated, “Then let him be a bad
businessman.” Council Member Khambata stated if he wants a restaurant, let it be a
restaurant; it seems to fit, we’ve got a 7-0 vote that they want it, but Wayne, do you
want a restaurant? Is that what you wanna do now?
Mr. Butt replied, “Tony, I’m looking you in the eye, and I’m looking at all my family
and friends, watching this video tonight, I’ll do whatever it takes. Yes, let’s be a
restaurant.”
Council Member Khambata stated that if we approve a restaurant, and you never
seat a person to eat there and you run events out of there, it’s not a restaurant; it’s an
event center. Mr. Butt stated, “And you’ll shut the place down, it’s illegal.” Council
Member Khambata stated he doesn’t want to go through an arbitrary process if we’re
just going to come full circle; he just wants to be clear on that. If that’s his intent, just be
honest about it and let’s start back at square one, and let’s find a way for an event
center to work.
Council Member Olsen stated he’s having a hard time interpreting legalese, so he
asked Attorney Land to do that for him. So, we’ve heard from the attorney; what am I
really hearing? Let’s break it down into common sense language.
Attorney Land stated she thinks Mr. Butt’s attorney is saying you have a
recommendation for approval for a restaurant. Regardless of what Mr. Butt has said on
social media or in the public, he is today telling you he will operate a restaurant. There
might not be a kitchen in it today; obviously, you cannot operate a restaurant without
one. She thinks perhaps the one thing she would like to clarify with Mr. Butt is when he
applied for a catering establishment, that does not mean it’s an establishment that
allows food to be catered into the facility. It means you prepare food at this facility, but
nobody eats it onsite. It is intended to be a catering kitchen where the food is taken
offsite to other places. That was the original Application, but then once it was refined
with City staff on the intent of what he really wanted to do, and he showed tables in that
area that originally was shown as display area, then it was determined that it was a
restaurant. That was the use that best fit. She asked Council Member Olsen if that
helped; Council Member Olsen replied, yes, that helps a lot.
Council Member Olsen stated he thinks where the communication gap exists, at
least based on what he’s hearing, is Attorney Kaess’ first statement was hey, we’re here
asking you to approve a restaurant use; that’s what we want, please do that for us.
That’s obviously the Application that’s in front of us, that went through the Planning
Commission, etc. But there’s been some additional dialogue that makes it sound like
please approve it as a restaurant use, and then we’ll come back to you another time
with a different use. That’s fine, he can do what he wants to do; we’ll deal with that
when that happens. He’s not uncomfortable with going with the Planning Commission’s
recommendation if that’s truly what the Applicant wants, and we feel confident that
that’s what he’s going to do. We have provisions in place that if he doesn’t do that, then
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 23
we can address it. He thinks that’s reasonable, but he stated he’ll let his Council
colleagues share their thoughts.
Mayor Bailey asked Mr. Butt if there was anything else he wanted to share at this point;
Mr. Butt replied, “Not at this time. Thank you, Mayor.”
Mayor Bailey asked if anybody in the audience wanted to speak on this topic; if so, he
asked them to go up to the podium and please state their name and address for the
record.
Patrick Vollmuth, 6647 Hyde Avenue South, Cottage Grove, stated he’s just here in
support of Wayne; he stated he’s known Wayne for a little bit. He grew up in a small
town, probably smaller than Old Cottage Grove; now, all the old buildings are gone, the
town is small, so he thinks we should give Wayne credit for preserving the buildings that
he has so far. He stated he can’t speak to the legalese of what’s going on, but he hasn’t
read too much about the ordinances and what they are, so he’s not going to speak on
that. He is just here to support Wayne and Angi, as they’re preserving a little bit of
history. He knows we’re probably short on time, you don’t need to hear a whole story,
but he is here to support Wayne. He thinks, in his opinion as a citizen and a voter in
Cottage Grove, that we should just slow down a little bit; don’t disapprove his plans.
From what he hears, the ordinances what they were, what they are, there’s a little bit of
confusion going on there; is it a landscape business, is it a restaurant, is it an event
center? As far as Wayne buying a building, at the time maybe he did or didn’t have an
intended something in mind; that doesn’t really matter. But maybe after he bought it,
hey, this would be good for this or this would be good for that. Wayne has bent over
backwards to do what the City Council and the Planning Commission want, so, he gives
the guy a little credit. Whatever he posted online, so what? It’s his First Amendment
rights; he’s mad, he’s angry. He wants to work with the City Council, he wants to do it
right. He’s a law-abiding citizen, so he just wanted to point that out. He knows there’s a
lot going on here for him to just kind of walk into this today, but he would ask you to
slow down and work together for a peaceful resolution to this. He’d love to go to a
restaurant. Thank you for listening.
Blake Kunci, 6100 Summit Curve South, Cottage Grove, thanked the Council for
allowing him time to speak here. He’s hearing things for the first time and then digesting
the information in this audience, in what’s being shared. He clarified his hearing aids
only amplify, they do not clarify, so he asked that they try to do their best to speak into
the microphone, as it’s been a little bit challenging so he’s been watching lips intently
this evening to follow along as best he can. He asked Attorney Land if it’s correct that
she said a catering business is a business that makes food and delivers food outside of
the facility; Attorney Land replied that is the definition. Food is prepared on site for
consumption offsite. Mr. Consul stated he’s been to Minnesota Wild Catering, had his
wedding there, and they made the food on the premises and they served it on the
premises. He’s also been to other wedding reception type venues where the catering is
there and they serve it there. He’s not too sure why, maybe that’s extraordinary or
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 24
maybe a different ordinance here in the City of Cottage Grove. He’s just noticing that
elsewhere, and he could be wrong, he could be remiss, but that’s been his experience.
Secondly, if there are disparate treatments from one restaurant to another in Cottage
Grove, he would hope that there wouldn’t be disparate treatment in any of the
ordinances. He gets the fact that this particular property might need a septic system, so
there might be different things for that regard, but as far as treating all the restaurants
as equal, please consider that. Thank you for giving me this time; he appreciates it.
Mary Marty, 7889 Lamar Avenue South, Cottage Grove, stated she was not informed,
but she heard that or read someplace during this meeting that they sent out only to
people within 500 feet; that doesn’t include very many since there’s a business next
door, they own the house next door, in back is a lake, and in front they might’ve had
three people. She doesn’t know how many they informed, but they didn’t communicate
to the City of Old Cottage Grove. Secondly, we do not like the buses and the drunks
that are imported from out of town into Old Cottage Grove. She heard Wayne Butt
himself say that there have only been two residential people from Cottage Grove get
married at that church or at that farm. That means that all those people are imported
from other towns, and that’s fine, but it’s not your neighborhood, it’s mine. If I had gone
about trying to get this business set up, and I had made all these mistakes, and I had
made all these bumbles and all these excuses, you would not have given me any
variance, you would not have given me anything. Now, that is speculative; I also want to
speculate that it sounds like Steve Dennis is in Wayne Butt’s pocket. It’s just what it
sounds like from being here and listening to everything; he had nothing but praise. I
understand he’s a businessman, I understand he wants to make money. Let him do it,
but let him go through the proper procedures, and I don’t think that he has gone through
the proper procedures. And when I saw that you guys were ready to approve everything
that he’s asking for, it was like how could you do that? That’s all she has to say, thank
you.
Council Member Dennis stated don’t confuse compassion with anything other than
care for another individual; don’t confuse that, and don’t make an accusation you can’t
back up. That’s what I have to say, it’s not true.
Council Member Olsen stated in response to Ms. Marty’s comment, he’s an old timer
so he was on the Council when Wayne and Angi came forward with the Furber Farm
plan. What he can speak to is through the course of that planning process, we had
several different speed bumps where we had to talk through making adjustments,
variances; one very specific concession he recalls was the difference between a gravel
parking lot and a paved parking lot, the expense of that, and could we find our way to
enable the business to use a gravel parking lot. The reason he points that out is we
work very hard as a Council and a staff with all of our local business owners, and when I
say local business owners what he means to say is any business that’s in town is a
local business. Target is a local business; we’ve worked with them several times on
adjustments in their parking lot due to a need for different landscaping or stormwater,
because those rules change. As rules change, we have to try to change with them. We
are very, very thoughtful about any sort of arbitrary or capricious behavior. So, if there’s
anybody who’s watching this at home or listening that has an impression that somehow
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 25
the City Council puts their finger on the scale, whether it’s if a City Council Member is in
somebody’s pocket or not, we’ve had that happen to us before. We’ve been accused of
being in 3M’s pocket when the incinerator was approved, despite the fact that we fought
it as hard as we could and we just lost the fight. People come into these kinds of
conversations towards the tail end, and we have the benefit of having been there from
the beginning. So, that gives us a lot of knowledge about the process, step by step, how
we did things. So, again, it’s very important for people to remember and to understand
that as a Council, we are dispassionate; we look at things from both sides, we are
bound by the law to do that, and we are bound to act within the confines of the law,
which is why we ask so many questions of our City Attorney, as she does an excellent
job. The last thing he’ll say is none of us, and he means this sincerely, none of us, it’s
important to note that, none of us have our votes for sale, ever. So, whether it’s one way
or the other, it’s all based on findings of fact and our best judgment and experience and
the input that we get from staff, residents, etc. So, he doesn’t like hearing somebody is
in somebody’s pocket, or that there’s some sort of a difference in the way restaurants
are being treated in the City, because none of that is true, none of it.
Council Member Dennis stated he agrees almost entirely with what Council Member
Olsen had to say. One of the differences, having been here for a long time, and as
someone who had invested in the community, we initially went through some challenges
with signs, etc. that we had to try to work through; it wasn’t easy. One of the key
differences when people talk about the City and try to lump everything together, is there
are different components of the City: Staff Members: Operate in a very narrow band,
they stay between the lines, follow the ordinances, and the other processes that we
have. Commission Members: Volunteers from the community, who live here and pay
taxes here. They are able to take findings of fact or recommendations or guidance from
the City staff, and get to look at things in a certain fashion and apply their decision-
making process into crafting what their final answer would be as a recommendation to
the City Council. City Council: We are legally hired and elected officials, who are
representatives of the community. So, sometimes we look at things through a lens of
saying that we’re in the people business, and we are; people have heard me say it over
and over here through the years, we try very much to sell happiness wherever possible,
to do the right thing on behalf of the greatest good and the largest number of people.
Again, we have a little bit more latitude, and we have an opportunity. If we want to
exercise some care, compassion, empathy, or respect to anyone in the community that
we serve and represent, we have the authority to do that, and that’s what we’ve done a
little bit here tonight. So, this is not about putting fingers on scales, trying to manipulate
outcomes, being in pockets, those types of things; it has nothing to do with that. This is
about trying to do the right thing for the greater good. Thank you.
Edgar Marty, who lives on Lamar Avenue, stated he thinks this is pretty clearcut,
whether it’s a catering place, a restaurant, whatever; if you’re going to have a venue for
that, then you need a kitchen. You’re submitting plans and everything for something that
doesn’t even have a kitchen drawn in it. He doesn’t know how it could even move
forward; that’s like trying to submit plans for a body shop and not having a paint booth.
How can you sit there and say it’s going to be a body shop when you don’t have the
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 26
infrastructure built inside for that body shop. They’re saying it’s a kitchen catering place,
whatever, they’ll come back later, argue it; how can you sit there and say it’s a kitchen
or restaurant or anything if it doesn’t have the infrastructure planned in their own plans
for his own building. That really blows his mind, and that’s all he has to say on the
subject.
Mayor Bailey asked if anybody else would like to speak; nobody else wished to do so.
Council Member Olsen asked Mayor Bailey how he wanted to handle the various
elements of this; he knew they were all connected. He asked if he wanted separate
votes on each one.
Attorney Land stated she’d recommend that you consider the Variance Application
first because that will then dictate how you vote on the rest of the Applications. The
Variance Application in her opinion is the hardest because you have to overcome the
fact that it’s a self-created issue; he had some reasons that he originally stated in his
Application. He indicated that there were some obstacles in the narrow site; however,
he was warned ahead of time, prior to the construction of the deck, that he would be
creating the need for the Variance. So, if you could consider the Variance Application
first, decide how you want to address that and whether you want to approve it or deny it,
then that will determine how you vote on the rest of the Resolutions.
Council Member Thiede stated a point of clarification; he thought Planner Mrosla
said that these were all interrelated, so does that suggest that if any one of them does
not pass, then none of them pass?
Attorney Land replied that is correct because the initial one is based on the
restaurant use; all of them are based on the recommendation for approval, based on the
restaurant use. If he’s not going to use it as a restaurant, then you should not approve
them. If the Variance does not pass, then the remaining ones also cannot pass because
the Site Plan is dependent upon the Variance, which is dependent upon the use and the
Rezoning and the Subdivision; they’re all tied together.
Council Member Thiede stated so we’re talking about 2023-070; Mayor Bailey stated
2023-069 is the top one. Council Member Thiede stated that’s not the Variance for the
restaurant, that’s a Variance for the parking lot.
Attorney Land clarified the Variance Application is for a restaurant use; the Variance
Application specifically is for a setback for the driveway and the parking lot, but it is all
related to the restaurant use.
Council Member Khambata asked Attorney Land to remind him of the 34 conditions and
if one of them is that they be open to the public.
Attorney Land replied that’s actually the definition in our new City Code, which went
into effect on January 1; so, she’s not surprised that all of the restaurants haven’t been
informed yet of that requirement. But that is a requirement of the Code, whether it’s in
there as one of the conditions or not, it’s irrelevant as they’d have to comply with the
Code anyway.
Council Member Khambata asked being a restaurant, is there anything in our Code
that requires a kitchen.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 27
Attorney Land replied it’s sort of common sense; in order to have a restaurant, you have
to have a kitchen and be licensed by the Department of Health or at least Washington
County’s Health Department. So, in order to be deemed a restaurant, you have to have
an onsite kitchen.
Council Member Khambata asked in order to get the Certificate of Occupancy to
operate the restaurant, is it correct that they would need Washington County Health
certification; Attorney Land replied yes. Council Member Khambata stated without that,
they can’t operate a restaurant, to which Attorney Land replied that is correct.
Mayor Bailey stated what was interesting is Mr. Kaess made the comment earlier about
things that are out on social media are irrelevant; Mayor Bailey stated he begs to differ.
When an Applicant, before he or she comes before the City Council for a permit and
variances to open a restaurant, asks people to come here to voice their support for him,
knowing that he doesn’t want a restaurant because that’s what he says in the multiple
postings, including at the Chamber of Commerce, Mayor Bailey stated he’s concerned.
He sees Angi is here, and they both know he’s been to their establishment’s multiple
times, he’s been to their home, saw their grandson, pet the dogs, etc. We were trying to
work with our staff to make this work, make this property work. He understands Mr.
Kaess didn’t like the line of questioning that was coming from Council Member
Khambata, but told Mr. Kaess from his personal standpoint, he would have checked the
zoning before he bought something to make sure he knew what was able to go in there.
With all due respect to Mr. Butt, the fact of the matter is he just said, and it’s now on the
record, that today he wants a restaurant, maybe tomorrow he’ll come and apply for
another permit to do an event center. That is not what we want out there; that’s not
what’s called for on that spot, it never was, nor was it a restaurant, but we were trying to
work with him to make that happen. What bothers him about his comment, what upset
him the most about what he saw in the postings was Council Member Dennis and I
actually sat with Mr. Butt and some of the representatives with whom he was working to
make this happen; and he told us directly this is what I want, this is what I want, this will
be good, okay, that’s fine. And we worked with our staff through all of these different
variances and issues to come to a point where now he’s saying one thing to get people
here on social media, and then says another thing when he’s standing up here. So, he
has a concern with trust, okay? He’s just telling him that right off the bat. So, Council
can make the determination on what they want to do at this point, but one of the things
he values is people being trustworthy. He does whatever he can, he’s an advocate for
this community in every way, shape, or form. He was an advocate for when they wanted
to open the Furber Farms out there. In a couple of days, we’re going to try to attract
more businesses to our community for what our citizens are asking for, but on this
particular case, he can’t vote for this. He cannot move forward with a restaurant use
with the understanding of what Mr. Butt has publicly said and the basis of findings of
fact from our staff that has been provided to us today. So, depending on whatever
decision the Council makes, in this particular case, he will be voting no.
Council Member Dennis directed a question to Attorney Land: Remembering the time
that he spent as a liaison to the Planning Commission, when a Variance is granted, is it
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 28
correct that Variance stays with the property into the future, in perpetuity. Attorney Land
replied all of these Land Use Applications stay with the property.
Council Member Dennis stated just for us to understand, when a Variance has been
adopted to a piece of property, what would happen if you came back later on and
wanted to change that Variance? Attorney Land replied the Variance would need to be
amended. With any of these Land Use Applications, once approved, they are basically
written in stone; they’re recorded against the property, and they will remain there in the
current conditions, all of the words, unless the Applicant comes back for an amendment
or the Council brings it forward for a revocation.
Council Member Dennis stated then they would have to show again a hardship or a
condition requiring that; Attorney Land stated yes.
Council Member Thiede stated he’s known Wayne and Angi for a while, we’ve had a lot
of discussion in the clouds as to what would be neat in Old Cottage Grove, some kind of
old downtown shops and buildings, and things like that. So, he thinks while we don’t
agree on everything, he admires Wayne’s passion, etc. for getting businesses going
and having the guts to do it; he might not have as much patience as he needs in some
cases. Referring back to the study that the University of Minnesota students did, one of
the big things they advised about resident comments was people wanted a coffeeshop
or something like that, which was kind of like the restaurant. So, based on what he’s
seen, he knows that in any type of business it’s a struggle sometimes to figure out what
people are going to want; he guesses he supports a restaurant being there, and he
would support a Variance to allow a restaurant there. He has faith in Wayne that he
would do everything he could to make that happen.
Council Member Khambata stated he doesn’t see a hardship to justify the Variance; he
thinks it’s self-inflicted, so he’s a no.
Mayor Bailey asked if Resolution 2023-069 is the one that’s first; he just wanted to be
very clear. Attorney Land replied yes, the Variance. Mayor Bailey stated he’d look for a
motion to approve or to deny Resolution 2023-069.
Motion by Council Member Thiede to Adopt Resolution 2023-069 approving the
Variance to construct a parking lot setback 2.5 feet from the side property line when 20
feet is required when located adjacent to a property residentially zoned property; there
was no second on the motion. Motion failed: 1-4.
Council Member Khambata asked Attorney Land if he had to go in individual order on
the rest of these; Attorney Land stated once you adopt the Variance, then no, then the
order is irrelevant.
Motion by Council Member Khambata to deny Adopting Resolution 2023-069, which
was asking to approve the Variance to construct a parking lot setback 2.5 feet from the
side property line when 20 feet is required when located adjacent to a residentially
zoned property; second by Council Member Olsen. Council Member Olsen encouraged
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 29
City staff to continue working with the Applicant on whatever the actual desired use is
going to be so that we can hopefully find some resolution to that and some compromise
that will work for all involved. Motion carried: 4-1 (Nay by Council Member Thiede).
Motion by Council Member Khambata to deny Resolution 2023-068, Ordinance No.
1065, and Resolution 2023-070; second by Council Member Olsen. Motion carried: 4-1
(Nay by Council Member Thiede).
B. Norhart Architecture - Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and
Site Plan Review for Proposed Apartment Project
Staff Recommendation: 1) Adopt Resolution 2023-066 approving an
amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to re-guide 7.15 acres of
land from Industrial to High Density Residential, and authorize staff to
submit the amendment to the Metropolitan Council. 2) Adopt Ordinance
No. 1064 approving a zoning amendment to change the zoning of the 7.15
acres from AG-2, Agriculture, to R-6, High Density Residential, contingent
on the Metropolitan Council’s approval of the associated Comprehensive
Plan Amendment. 3) Adopt Resolution 2023-067 approving the Site Plan
Review for a 299-unit, five-story, market rate multifamily apartment
building on an approximate 7.15-acre parcel located on the southeast
corner of 100th Street and Hadley Avenue.
Emily Schmitz, Senior Planner/Interim Community Development Director, stated Norhart
Architecture is proposing a 299-unit multifamily building on a parcel that we’ve spoken
about internally as the “Zywiec 40,” located just south of 100th Street and adjacent to
Hadley Avenue. This particular parcel was part of a preliminary plat, approved in May
2022. There are two parts to this preliminary plat: The Zywiec 40, for which the
preliminary plat created four developable parcels; further to the south, there was a lower
density proposed project. However, given the market conditions, the Applicant at the
time did not continue to move forward with the Final Plat, so the project stalled at that
point. However, Norhart Architecture actually submitted a Final Plat, which was
approved in December 2022; the Final Plat was just for the Zywiec 40.
One of the applications as a part of this request is a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment; as you can see, this particular parcel is currently guided as Industrial.
However, as we’ve seen industrial development continue in this particular area, we’ve
come to understand that this uniquely shaped parcel isn’t necessarily conducive to
support an industrial development; therefore, as Norhart has proposed their project, we
recognize that the request to re-guide to a high density would be appropriate. There’s
also a request for rezoning from Industrial to R-6 High Density Residential.
Proposed Site Plan: A 299-unit market rate apartment is proposed. It is five stories, so
there are two access points off of Hadley Avenue for an appropriate flow through the
site. Pedestrian connections to Hadley Avenue are also proposed, as well as future
constructed trails along 100th Street. Setbacks are proposed to meet the City’s
minimum standards. It’s important to point out a 30-foot setback from adjacent
residential properties is required; however, this Applicant is proposing a 180-foot
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 30
setback from the building to adjacent residential properties to continue to provide a
buffer to any of those existing residential neighborhoods, specifically to the north. The
height of the proposed project is 55 feet, which is permitted within the district. The
onsite parking they’re proposing is surface, as well as underground parking; they’re
providing 1.6 parking spaces per unit, which aligns with our City’s minimum standards.
Streets and Utilities: There are currently no streets that look like this on the “Zywiec 40”
parcel. It’s important to reference the Southwest Arterial Study that Washington County
completed in 2022; that evaluated the realignment of 100th Street and provided
connectivity between Jamaica Avenue, specifically down to Grey Cloud island, and
Hadley Avenue. This particular configuration has also been in our Comprehensive
Plan’s long range plans for many years. The South District Street and Utility Project is
the project to construct the utilities and the streets within this particular area. The utilities
will be installed as a part of this project in 2023, and the streets are planned to be
installed in 2024. Staff is working closely with the Applicant to be sure that they’re
providing a temporary access as they work to start construction this fall. Landscape:
Proposed landscaping on the site meets the City’s minimum standards. It’s important to
note that they focused their landscaping buffers adjacent to the public rights-of-way.
They certainly can’t buffer the entire building; however, they want to ensure that that is
complementing the building and the site as a whole. She pointed out they’re planning to
preserve an additional open space, kind of on the northern portion of this site, for their
residents. Architecture: We require Class 1 materials, and the Applicant worked hard to
ensure that they were proposing and providing those materials on this project; brick,
stone, and glass will be used, and a large portion of this project is glazing or glass.
They’re proposing greater than 65% on each of the elevations of the proposed building.
Neighborhood Meeting: The Applicant held their neighborhood meeting on April 11.
There were two concerns staff heard: 1) Traffic impacts, which we evaluate with every
project that comes into this particular area. We referenced the AUAR that evaluated the
traffic of potential development in the area, ensuring that we’re providing those
improvements as needed. 2) School District capacity impacts, with these additional
units. Staff works very closely with the School District on a regular basis; we typically
communicate on a monthly basis, providing updates on any potential development or
even thoughts of development that we might have in the community in an effort to help
the School District as they continue their long-range planning efforts. The School District
is currently making a huge effort to invite the community to provide their input and ideas
on resident surveys and community meetings.
Planner Schmitz stated she and the Applicant would be happy to answer questions.
Council Member Thiede stated he thought there was a parcel to the north, across 100th,
that we had for another apartment complex. Planner Schmitz replied we’ve been in
communication with a developer who is interested in that particular parcel.
Mayor Bailey asked if that was MWF. Administrator Levitt stated the red X that is
shown on the screen, the parcel she believes is in question, is currently under option by
MWF Properties.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 31
Council Member Olsen stated his concerns revolve around two things addressed in
Planner Schmitz’s presentation; traffic seems to be a concern whenever there’s new
construction that takes place in a neighborhood. He’s also asked if we’re being
proactive in terms of anticipating any negative outcomes from this facility relative to the
School District or any sort of roadway infrastructure that might need to change. He knew
it was a little bit challenging for Planning staff, or staff in general, to do that, but it seems
like what consistently happens is we build something, then we wait until a bad thing
happens, and then we address said bad thing. When he was a commissioner on the
Public Safety Health and Welfare Commission, we knew that the construction of new
homes in Timber Ridge, which definitely added a lot of cars to the road, would result in
some sort of issue at the intersection of Hardwood Avenue and 70th Street. We talked it
through and we all agreed, and then we had to wait until there was a motorcycle
accident or two before we could actually get stoplights put in there. He’d like to know
what sort of proactive dialogue we’re having with City Engineers, the developer, the
School District, etc. about ensuring that if and when this project comes online, that
we’ve worked proactively vs. reactively to address some of these concerns. The
neighbors will let us know if something is bad or something is wrong if we don’t try to get
out in front of it and correct it ahead of time.
Administrator Levitt stated that’s a great point; clearly, partnerships and forward
thinking is something that obviously we have learned from some of our lessons in the
past. So, when we looked at our Comprehensive Plan and we looked at actually how we
were going to lay out the streets, this was all forward planned. We looked at the AUAR,
we looked at all the different uses and the intensity of those uses, and what the traffic
generations would be. We were so forward in this that we actually had a full plan set out
to build the streets; then we saw a lot of development kind of take a bit of a back seat,
not progressing as far, so we modified the bid to actually just construct some of the
utilities and not all the roadways in what she’ll call the X. But we are positioned now, if
this project moves forward, to rebid that project and be under construction next year.
She knows engineering can come up and talk about the improvements that are being
made to 100th Street, as it relates to NorthPoint. Mayor Bailey can probably talk about
his meeting today at the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) at the Metropolitan
Council, as we’re looking to secure funds. We know that we have the design efforts
substantially underway, working with 3M as a willing landowner for right-of-way
acquisition. She would say we are very forward thinking in this, and this incremental
project will not have a negative impact on the traffic, and we are prepared to build the
ultimate solution.
Council Member Olsen asked Administrator Levitt to speak about the School District
as well, tell him what that dialogue sounds like.
Administrator Levitt stated she reported to the Council on Friday that we attended a
luncheon with the School District because obviously we work very closely together;
every two weeks we actually transfer data to them, tell them how many lots have been
platted, how many building permits have been issued, if it’s multifamily, high density, or
single family. So, they know exactly which school is receiving those potential students,
and they have ratios that they apply to that. They had already, before this school year,
adjusted the boundary to where these students would go, knowing the challenges that
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 32
they had at the Pine Hill Elementary School. They are still continuing to refine a future
referendum question that they anticipate being on the ballot in November; our project
did not cause the impetus for that, but we work together in partnership with them so that
we can develop a solution that works for everyone. We know that great schools actually
help provide our opportunities for housing and businesses; people want to be where
great schools are, so their success is our success.
Council Member Olsen thanked Administrator Levitt. It sounds like staff has really
gotten out in front of all of those issues, and he appreciated the update; that made him
feel much more comfortable.
Mayor Bailey stated regarding the School District, we had a meeting with them a
couple weeks ago. With this particular area and areas to the south, for any other
possible developments there, he believes Pine Hill is at capacity right now. Their intent
is everything on this side of the road is going to go to Pullman in St. Paul Park; that’s
because Pullman is being underutilized with students, so they have plenty of room there
and their intent is to bus over to Pullman.
Mayor Bailey invited the Applicant to speak.
Marybeth Wise, 1081 4th Street SW, Forest Lake, thanked the Council for having
them here tonight. We had a very productive workshop with you, and Planner Schmitz
did a great job of explaining the project we’re doing. She stated when they design their
buildings and our apartments, the resident is on top of mind for them; our main goal is to
provide, we go the extra mile, and we try to provide lifestyle living, luxury amenities,
convenience, and community. Touching upon community, that extends from just our
residents to the community around us; as Planner Schmitz pointed out, we made the
effort to really provide a large buffer so they’re not impacted with a view right up on the
edge of the property. We are also already working with the community and are
sponsoring a hole at one of the local golf tournaments; it’s nice to already be getting
involved, and we’re happy to do that. We look forward to doing more. She thanked
Council for having them here, and we’re excited to be building in part of the community.
Mayor Bailey asked should the approval go through tonight, what’s their timeframe.
Ms. Wise replied they’re looking to put shovels in the ground in November 2023, and it
will be a two-year project, so we’ll finish in November 2025.
Council Member Thiede stated with another apartment building and another aspect of
traffic, he asked for the latest on Washington County and getting to Highway 61 on
100th Street.
Mayor Bailey stated regarding what Administrator Levitt was speaking to, he’s also
on TAB for the Metropolitan Council. In our meeting earlier today, we had submitted the
100th Street project for financial consideration from TAB and the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) for just over $7M. We are now on that point where there are four
projects that are going to be added, and he’s speaking on behalf of our community and
Washington County for this project next month. If that comes through, then obviously
the goal would be that we have another $7M; we obviously have some money coming
federally, and we’re also working on a couple other grants to continue the funding
process. He said that’s a County road, and obviously we’re working through that; we’re
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 33
talking about pretty much everything east of Jamaica Avenue, and the goal is we’ll have
a new easy access road that will go all the way out to Highway 61 and the bridge. Our
intent in the future is to go over the railroad tracks so there won’t be a crossing; the idea
there is obviously truck traffic and residential traffic can have another way out of our
community from the south end of Cottage Grove.
Council Member Thiede stated if this project is going to take two years, and
NorthPoint starts opening up, we’re going to hit a situation like Council Member Olsen
was just talking about; all of that traffic is going to bunch up to try to get out via Jamaica
or go down through 95th Street or through an already busy Hadley Avenue. He thinks
we really need to be focused on whether we have to delay some things in terms of the
number of people that go in that area; otherwise, we’re going to have a mess.
Mayor Bailey asked Director Burfeind in the project we submitted to the Metropolitan
Council, what years it was for them; the funding for this project would be the next years,
2024 and 2025.
Director Burfeind replied that’s correct, 2026 was our goal for the construction year,
but he noted with NorthPoint that worked under our current plans and roadway
construction. For traffic, it goes in two directions; so, an apartment does not compete in
any way with an industrial user because they’re coming into town, and apartment
residents are leaving town or staying in town. So, actually, it’s those same uses over
and over again that really drive traffic issues in the peak time. These different uses are
actually a good thing in terms of traffic flow.
Mayor Bailey asked if there was anybody in the audience who wanted to speak on this.
Zach Hartfiel, 8068 Hornell Avenue South, stated the School District tomorrow is
meeting for the attendance boundaries for elementary and middle school; Norhart will
be going to Armstrong Elementary and Cottage Grove Middle School. That’s the map
they have drawn up for tomorrow’s meeting. That’s just updated information.
Mayor Bailey thanked him for that clarification, as he knew they’d heard that
Armstrong and Hillside are also underutilized.
Motion by Council Member Dennis to Adopt Resolution 2023-066 approving an
Amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to re-guide 7.15 acres of land from
Industrial to High Density Residential, and authorize staff to submit the Amendment to
the Metropolitan Council; second by Council Member Thiede. Motion carried: 5-0.
Motion by Council Member Khambata to Adopt Ordinance No. 1064 approving a zoning
amendment to change the zoning of the 7.15 acres from AG-2, Agriculture, to R-6, High
Density Residential, contingent on the Metropolitan Council’s approval of the associated
Comprehensive Plan Amendment; second by Council Member Dennis.
Motion carried: 5-0.
Motion by Council Member Thiede to Adopt Resolution 2023-067 approving the Site
Plan Review for a 299-unit, five-story, market rate multifamily apartment building on an
approximate 7.15-acre parcel located on the southeast corner of 100th Street and
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 34
Hadley Avenue; second by Council Member Khambata. Motion carried: 5-0.
C. Low Zone Water Treatment Plant and Public Works Utility & Engineering
Building
Staff Recommendation: 1) Adopt Resolution 2023-063 approving the Site
Plan Review for the Low Zone Water Treatment Plant and Public Works
Utility & Engineering Building, to be located at the northeast corner of
Ideal Avenue and 110th Street. 2) Adopt Resolution 2023-074 approving
the plans and specifications and establishing a June 29, 2023 bid date for
the Low Zone Water Treatment Plant Project.
Planner Schmitz stated she will walk through the planning parts of this proposal, then
Director Burfeind will speak more about the plans and specifications and the bid date.
Planner Schmitz stated from a planning perspective, the proposal is a two-building
site plan, so we view the site as a whole on an approximate 20-acre parcel that is
located in the northeast corner of 110th Street and Ideal Avenue. As we looked at the
site, we’re proposing to access off 110th Street to the south, as well as Hadley Avenue
to the west. This design allows for future expansion areas as well, to the east and a little
bit to the north. The proposed locations of the buildings on the site meet our minimum
setback requirements, as well as the minimum required parking stalls; in this case,
we’re proposing 95 parking stalls. She mentioned that there are lesser stalls proposed
as a part of the Water Treatment building because that particular building does not
require as many staff; so, those parking stalls were planned and proposed further to the
north as a part of the site. Architecture: Our consultants worked hard to ensure that the
architecture proposed not only met the City’s minimum standards but aligned and
complemented other City buildings. There are precast concrete panels, combined with
glazing, glass, brick, and stone was a focus. She displayed the renderings provided for
both buildings. Landscape: We are proposing to plant the minimum required
landscaping; however, Director Burfeind will give additional details on the planning and
location of the landscape.
Director Burfeind stated there are a lot of trees along the eastern property line, which
is currently a residential property, so we were trying to provide some screening. Those
trees are actually above and beyond the minimum landscape requirements. We heard
feedback at the Neighborhood Meeting that they almost felt we were boxed in, we did
too good of a job screening with screening; so, we’ll work with them to maybe thin that
out a little bit. With the landscaping around the property, we have some small berms,
three feet high; we’re not trying to hide this building, as he thought we designed a pretty
nice looking building. It’s not a very intensive use; this isn’t some trucking operation that
we’re trying to screen. The Water Treatment Plant itself will have one pickup come and
go a day; we’ll only change out the treatment filters once every four-to-five years, and
that’s something that we watch. Vehicles will park inside the building. So, it’s very
minimal use. The Utility building will have about 20 staff, and it’s really a 7:00 a.m. to
4:00 p.m., Monday-Friday operation; it’s not a 24-7 logistical operation. We want to be
able to see it, we don’t want to create large berms; we want to have visibility for the
public because this is a very important piece of infrastructure. We don’t want folks to get
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 35
in there overnight and feel like they’re hidden from view and they can cause issues for
our water system; we want people to be able to see it and have visibility. The question
at the Planning Commission was why aren’t you building the huge berms that
NorthPoint is; that’s not our intent, we’re not trying to screen something in that manner.
The landscape plan meets all the requirements, which is important. The existing trees
are a big point of discussion right now, and he’ll speak about that shortly. He displayed
an overall site rendering and how those buildings will work and complement each other.
Future Expansion: The area highlighted in blue is the City parcel; the area highlighted in
yellow is the parcel owned by NorthPoint. This whole area is guided Industrial; that’s
one of the main reasons this treatment plant is there, it really fits into industrial guidance
in our Comprehensive Plan. Trees: We were asked about the trees at the Neighborhood
Meeting, if the remaining trees on Ideal Avenue were going to be cut down. At the time,
with the information we had, the indication was that they would have to be cut down to
install the deep sanitary sewer to serve this building. In reality, as we really worked
through the design up until last Thursday, we feel pretty comfortable now that we can
install that sanitary sewer and really save the trees that are still there north of 110th
Street. The two little circle areas, highlighted in yellow, is where the driveways go
through; we have to cut down the trees there because we have to get the driveways into
the property, but we’re going to do our best to save those remaining trees. He can’t
promise that every tree will be saved; if we get into the roots of a tree, you can’t leave a
dangerous tree that will fall down later, but we’re going to do our best to keep those
utilities and all the work on the City property, not on the right-of-way where those trees
actually sit. Our goal will be to save those trees. There was some question on the
species, they were talked about as a hawthorn tree; he had our City Forester go out
there twice, and he’s very confident they’re a hackberry. Either way, a good tree is a
good tree; it still has meaning and benefit, and they look very nice, so we’ll do our best
to save those. Water Treatment Plant: Some people have asked if this is a Sewer
Treatment Plant or what we’ll be doing here. This is a drinking Water Treatment Plant,
so we’re going to remove PFAS; this is fully funded by the 3M Settlement. This is very
exciting for the community, as the project cost is estimated at $32M, and no City funding
will be used to build this Water Treatment Plant. It uses the same methods we have
right now; we have interim treatment in place in town with big carbon filters with a lot
more specialized carbon in them. He displayed three photos: 1) White vessels, which
remove all of the PFAS from the drinking water; 2) A big green vessel that will actually
remove all iron and manganese, as there’s enough iron and manganese in our water
that it will create issues with those carbon filters and reduce the life, so we’ll get iron and
manganese removed. That’s what everyone sees when we do flushing twice a year and
our water turns brown; 3) Big pumps that will pump the treated water back out to our
system and back to the water towers. All of this is enclosed, and it’s a very quiet
operation.
Director Burfeind stated the two recommendations are before the Council; he stated
the first was a Planning Application, and the City is the Applicant, but it is a Planning
Application. That’s not approving the project from moving ahead from a cost perspective
or plans perspective. It is a Site Plan Review for the two projects on the site; we want to
be transparent, and that does not specifically authorize to move forward on those
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 36
projects. The real authorization tonight is for the Low Zone Water Treatment Plant, for
plans and specifications and setting a bid date. It’s very important to get that project
moving.
We talked about the Utility Building about a month or so ago, and that’s on a different
path; that would come back for plan approval and setting a bid date at a later time. So,
there is one Application tonight and then a different motion to approve the Low Zone
Water Treatment Plant plans and specifications.
Council Member Thiede asked what’s actually going to be in this first bid; you’re
probably going to do some other grading and property prep.
Director Burfeind replied when you look at sites, you want to do mass site grading to
balance things out together. So, there is some work for the overall property for the mass
site grading, but none of the utilities or other infrastructure for that Utility Building is part
of this plan package. It’s just mostly balancing out the site; if you move dirt twice, you
spend twice the money. So, if we have to dig out a pond and make things balance; that
cost is about $200K to do some of that grading, but that’s just setting up the site for the
future. It would be very expensive and costly to not do that right now.
Council Member Thiede asked if that would be putting in both of the retention ponds.
Director Burfeind replied that’s correct, just digging them out; Council Member Thiede
stated it’s making it pad ready, which Director Burfeind confirmed.
Council Member Khambata asked about the timeline.
Director Burfeind stated for the Water Treatment Plant, we’ll be bidding it out this
summer, and will start construction later this year, in September. Our real goal is to
have it operational by June 1, 2025; that sounds like a long time, but it’s a very complex
building, long lead times on things, so that’s our main goal we want to hit before that
summer. The second treatment plant he’ll be talking about later on this year, into next
year, which will be one year behind and operational by 2026; we have a very important
deadline of December, 2026, to have all of this in place with the new EPA rules.
Mayor Bailey asked if anybody in the audience wished to speak on this item; no one
spoke.
Motion by Council Member Olsen to Adopt Resolution 2023-063 approving the Site Plan
Review for the Low Zone Water Treatment Plant and Public Works Utility & Engineering
Building, to be located at the northeast corner of Ideal Avenue South and 110th Street
South; second by Council Member Thiede.
Council Member Dennis stated he felt like this was Custer’s Last Stand; he’s not
supported the Public Works Utility Building, but he does support the Low Zone Water
Treatment Plant. He’s been consistent all the way through; this is packaged in such a
way that the two are locked together. So, he just wants to be very clear to the
community that he supports clean water and safe water for everybody, but he doesn’t
support the cost factor for the Public Works Utility & Engineering Building at this point.
He’s not going to change his mind at the last moment, so he can’t authorize that; it’s a
nice plan, he knew a lot of good work was put into it, but he thinks there are other needs
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 37
we have. It creates some efficiencies of moving vehicles and things like that, which he
definitely understands. He doesn’t take this personally and doesn’t want staff to take it
personally, but he has his financial principles, and he just can’t authorize that kind of
spending when we’ve got a lot of other things that have to be paid off. He wants to
protect that AAA rating.
Council Member Olsen asked Administrator Levitt or Director Burfeind if this Site
Plan, both the Water Treatment Plant and the Public Works Utility & Engineering
Building, was reviewed by Standard & Poor’s when we went out to bond last time.
Administrator Levitt stated we disclosed to Standard & Poor’s our future debt service,
and that was included in it.
Council Member Olsen confirmed that was actually part of what they reviewed; he
knew we had just gone through that Financial Management Plan process.
Council Member Dennis stated there are other cost factors to be concerned; he
asked if he was correct that we’ll have to raise our water costs to people to pay for this,
which was confirmed. Secondly, there are always substantial Operations and
Maintenance costs associated with a project like this. He will say that our Public Works
team has done a very good job all the way through; we commented on all the work that
was done this winter with all the snowfall. These folks would make things work
regardless of what building they were in because they care and they want to do a good
job. He’s looking at the totality of it, and he thinks money is better spent for other things
and opportunities that we could have.
Mayor Bailey interjected, said that he’s also still working on some additional State
funding, as Director Burfeind and I had been testifying at the Capitol; he doesn’t know if
it will make it in this year to help fund things. Council Member Dennis stated if we get
that money to pay for it and alleviate the taxpayer costs, that would be a good thing.
Mayor Bailey stated that’s the goal, and we’re really doing this due to the fact of the
increased size and staff that we’ll need for the Water Treatment Plant.
Motion carried: 4-1 (Nay by Council Member Dennis).
Motion by Council Member Thiede to Adopt Resolution 2023-074 approving the plans
and specifications and establishing a June 29, 2023 bid date for the Low Zone Water
Treatment Plant Project; second by Council Member Khambata. Council Member
Dennis stated because he supports clean, healthy, and safe water for people, he will
vote yes on this. Motion carried: 5-0.
12. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
Council Member Dennis stated he’s looking forward to the trip that we’re going to make
out to Las Vegas on behalf of the City, the ICSC event. We’ve worked hard to put
together an itinerary for a number of individuals, companies, and investors that we’re
going to seek to work with and bring some opportunity here to town; things that people
have been looking for long term is kind of our target list. He hopes the community gets
behind this and wishes us well, and we can see some good things happen. Mayor
Bailey stated absolutely, he agrees with him.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 38
Council Member Thiede stated there are only four weeks before Strawberry Fest, so
definitely get excited. Also, if you have any groups that want to be in the parade, it
seems this is coming up quickly, but you need to get your registrations in to be in the
parade. There’s also a 5K and a walk and a softball tournament, and many other
events; you can learn about all of those at cottagegrovestrawberryfest.com. Everything
you need, including registration forms, is on that website. Get excited, we’ve got some
great bands, and a little bird told him there’s going to be great weather; if that’s not
correct, then it’s the little bird’s fault. So, get excited and let’s have a great time again!
Council Member Olsen stated there will be a Memorial Day ceremony, on May 29, right
here at City Hall, at 10:00 a.m. This is a time change; historically, we’ve had the
Memorial Day event at 1:00 p.m. It will take place at the Veterans Memorial. There’s a
very exciting speaker this year, our own Cottage Grove Fire Department Captain Nick
Arrigoni. Nick currently serves in the military as a Staff Sergeant, and is part of the
Minnesota National Guard Charlie Company, in the 2211 battalion; they are essentially
airborne medics. Nick is a medic, they drop into the war zone and provide medical
services to any injured troops, and if necessary, they provide a ride to a medical facility.
Nick has been in this role for about 12 years, so he’s certainly not new; he was actually
deployed for a year, in 2018, where he served in Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, and Syria. We’re
really looking forward to having Nick speak at the event, as well as others who will be
part of the event; unfortunately, this year we won’t have Council Member Dennis as our
coordinator. He’s put tons of time, energy, and effort into that event for the last six years
or more. So City staff, in conjunction with our Beyond the Yellow Ribbon team, will be
coordinating this event for the foreseeable future. We want the public to attend, as it’s
very important to remember the fallen, especially as this is Military Appreciation Month.
Memorial Day is a very somber day; it’s a time for us to reflect on the people who gave
all to protect us and our freedoms. He hopes we will see all of you here at City Hall.
Council Member Olsen gave a shout out to our friends at River Oaks Golf Course. We
had our annual Cottage Grove Lions Awards Dinner at River Oaks last night, the first
time we’ve held it there; it gets bigger and bigger every year, so we needed a little more
space. The team at River Oaks did a marvelous job; the food and the service were
great, they worked very closely with us on logistics, and really made for a fun evening.
He complimented Dennis and his staff, and noted Courtney really worked hard for us,
too, so he’d appreciate it if Parks and Recreation Director Zac Dockter would pass that
along to her.
Mayor Bailey stated at our last Council Meeting he had the opportunity to share that he
and his wife attended a play at Park High School, Mama Mia, which was amazing. He
mentioned there are many talents in our community, and an ice skating show will be at
the Cottage Grove Ice Arena on May 20, called America’s Songbook on Ice. If you want
tickets to that, they’re available online through the Parks and Recreation Department or
the City’s website. He encouraged people to attend to see some of the youth and adults
in our community put on a really great show.
City Council Meeting Minutes
May 17, 2023
Page 39
Mayor Bailey stated his wife went online and ordered her St. Paul Saints tickets, and
she said there were hardly any tickets left; he believed our City had a section, and it
said there weren’t many tickets left in that section. He thinks that’s a great thing
because that just means our community is really going to get out there and have some
fun. He encouraged anybody if they wanted to come join us and celebrate the City of
Cottage Grove, it will be on June 10; that’s a perfect date, because that’s a kickoff or
lead in to all of the events for Strawberry Fest. So, you can start to celebrate by taking
in America’s pastime, baseball, celebrate the City of Cottage Grove, and then head right
into Strawberry Fest and all those festivities.
Mayor Bailey stated tonight we have a Workshop, Closed to the Public, closed pursuant
to Minnesota Statute 13D.05, Subd. (3)a, to conduct a performance evaluation of City
Administrator Jennifer Levitt. We will be adjourning tonight’s meeting from there. He told
everybody to have a great evening and great upcoming Memorial Day; hopefully, we’ll
see everybody at the Memorial Day ceremony.
13. WORKSHOPS - OPEN TO PUBLIC - None.
14. WORKSHOPS – CLOSED TO PUBLIC
A. Close the meeting pursuant to Minnesota Statute 13D.05, Subd. (3)a to
conduct a performance evaluation of City Administrator Jennifer Levitt.
15. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Council Member Olsen, second by Council Member Thiede, to open the
meeting. Motion by Council Member Dennis, seconded by Council Member Thiede to
adjourn the meeting at 8:42 p.m. Motion carried: 5-0.
Minutes prepared by Judy Graf and reviewed by Tamara Anderson, City Clerk.