City Council

Minutes Woodbury City Council Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Pursuant to the due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting was duly held virtually and at the Woodbury City Hall, 8301 Valley Creek Road, on the 12th day of March 2025. Call to Order Mayor Anne Burt called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., and she welcomed those attending the meeting both in person and virtually. Mayor Burt explained that members of the public may attend the meeting in person and may also join the meeting using a computer, tablet, or smartphone. She stated public comments will be accepted during the meeting both in person and virtually. Virtual questions should be submitted via the online Q&A feature within the virtual meeting link. Questions regarding the meeting will also be taken between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. via email at council@woodburymn.gov or at 651-714-3524. Questions received after 4:30 p.m. will be responded to in the next three to seven business days. Pledge to Flag Audience, staff, and Council pledged allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. Roll Call Upon roll call the following were present: Mayor Anne Burt, Councilmembers: Kim Wilson, Donna Stafford, Steve Morris, and Jennifer Santini. Absent: None Others Present: Ashleigh Sullivan, Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk; Eric Larson, City Attorney; Clinton Gridley, City Administrator; Janelle Schmitz, Community Development Director; Tony Kutzke, City Engineer; and Drew Boxrud, Engineering Project Coordinator Special Order of Business A. 2024 Community Development Annual Report Community Development Director Janelle Schmitz presented the 2024 Community Development Annual Report. The report provides an extensive review of the department’s core functions. The report organizes and presents a robust amount of data including the status of public policy initiatives, current community demographics, and a collection of 10-year development trends and activity levels that can inform and support public policy discussions and initiatives. She acknowledged Jamie Fritts for putting the report together and the Economic Development Commission for their work on the report. Ms. Schmitz noted that the deep dive discussions that were identified were affordable workforce housing, CityPlace, TIF 15 Redevelopment District, and Northeast Business Park. She reviewed population, households, and demographics in the City. The City continues to grow in population and is currently at 79,504 and just under 30,000 occupied housing units. In addition, there has been growth in race, age, education, and income in the population. Ms. Schmitz stated the City continues to be a desirable place to build new residential construction. There has been continued growth over the years. 2024 saw a lower number due to no apartment buildings being built in the last two years. The City is committed to diverse housing. 2024 had 452 new residential units in the City. There were 7 new commercial buildings in 2024 totaling 267,000 square feet. The buildings included TopGolf, Woodbury Storage Condos (4 buildings), Washington County Service Center, and Woodbury Express Car Wash. She explained that the new construction buildings are included in the report based on the permit being pulled, not when the building is completely built. The City currently has 26,005 employees and has 1,894 business establishments. The City has 13,560,810 total commercial square footage. 37% of the total square footage is retail. Ms. Schmitz highlighted the Gold Line project. The opening day will be March 22nd. There will be free rides during the first week. Councilmember Stafford asked if the free rides would include the metro micro bus. Ms. Schmitz replied that it would not. Ms. Schmitz reported on Destination: Woodbury. Lodging taxes started to be collected in April of 2023, and 2024 is the first full year of revenue. The City hired the first Destination Marketing Manager, Eric Satre. Mr. Satre has been working on the website, which will launch on April 5th at the Community Expo. The DMO will also have a new park and trail map available at the Expo. Ms. Schmitz noted in 2024 7,982 rental licenses were issued, 77 percent of which were multi-family units, and 23 percent of which were single-dwelling units. Councilmember Wilson asked if it included apartment complexes. Ms. Schmitz replied that it did. In 2024, the City issued 26 HRA loans. There were 17 homeownership loans, 2 home improvement loans, and 7 first-generation loans.  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Ms. Schmitz stated the Economic Development Commission chose affordable workforce housing as a deep dive discussion. There were two large affordable workforce housing projects that the Council approved in 2024, which are Reserve at Settlers Ridge (252 units), and Meadows at Prairie Ridge (237 units). Meadows at Prairie Ridge recently received their State bonding allocation, which will allow that project to move into construction later this year. The second deep dive discussion was CityPlace redevelopment. In 2014 the taxable market value of the project was $12.5 million. In 2024 the taxable market value is $250,474,300. There are 425,000 total commercial square feet of places to work and 167,000 square feet of places to shop. City Administrator Clinton Gridley asked Ms. Schmitz to speak on the subsidies that the City gave for the project. Ms. Schmitz replied that there were none given. Ms. Schmitz reviewed TIF 15 Redevelopment District. It is a pay-as-you-go TIF. The public benefits that were achieved include removal of blighted buildings (Key Inn and former Spire Credit Union building), relocation of access to south of water tower, reinvestment in multi-tenant office buildings, and construction of a new development (Chick-fil-A). The final deep dive was the Northeast Business Park where there is 2,079,634 commercial square feet of development, with just over half of the space, 1,112,304 square feet, currently occupied. She showed a map of new buildings that have been approved for the Northeast Business Park as well as the existing buildings. Mr. Gridley asked if there were any subsidies from the City. Ms. Schmitz replied that there were not. Mayor Burt thanked Ms. Schmitz, her team and the Economic Development Commission for putting the report together. Ms. Schmitz stated that they would add the report to the City’s website. Councilmember Morris noted page 24 of the report and mentioned the mayor’s business outreach program. He expressed his appreciation for the outcomes of the program. Mayor Burt added that it is a nice opportunity to connect with businesses and leaders and hear what is important to them. She mentioned that there was a recent discussion on how to improve the program. She added that she is happy to meet with business leaders to hear feedback. Councilmember Wilson mentioned her comments were intended for the Met Council and noted that the City needs the Metro Micrp to expand into the northeast part of the city since there is plenty of housing out there that could benefit from intra-city transportation. Mayor Burt mentioned that Metro Micro is a new transit service that includes minibuses that run in 13 square miles of the City, but the City is 36 square miles. It is a pilot program and they are hoping to expand the program in the future. Open Forum The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting where a maximum of three persons will be allowed to address the Council on subjects, which are not a part of the meeting agenda. Persons wishing to speak must complete a sign-up sheet prior to the start of the meeting. Give the sign-up sheet to any staff person. Speakers are limited to three minutes each. The Council will listen attentively to comments but, in most instances, will not respond at the meeting. Typically, replies to the concerns expressed will be made via letter or phone call within a week. Abdulahi Abdalla, 9994 3rd Street, St. Paul, stated he was there on behalf of Congresswoman Betty McCollum. He mentioned he works in the Congressman’s St. Paul office in an outreach capacity. He noted he would like to address the Council regarding Community Project Funding (CPF). Each year, members of the United States House and Senate can sponsor a limited number of one-time funding requests for local community programs that do not easily fit within the existing grant programs or appropriation request. Cities submit a project proposal directly to the federal legislator. CPF grants provide investment in a wide variety of projects such as housing, homelessness prevention, workforce training, public facilities, park resilience, planning, and other critical infrastructure and services. There is no guidance from the House majority on whether CPF will be available in fiscal year 2026, or what eligibility requirements will be if community project requests are allowed. Congresswoman McCollum encourages applicants to submit proposals for projects that have a strong demonstration of community support, which include examples such as letters from local officials, resolutions, State or local funding commitments, projects that are shovel ready or are able to quickly move to utilize funds. Requests should not be for one year of funding for an ongoing commitment, or for general program funding. Once FY2026 is announced, there will be a short window to apply with the office. He encouraged the City to reach out with any questions. Mayor Burt noted that the City has worked with Betty McCollum’s office over the past few years and has appreciated the work that she has done to get some federal money for projects in the community. Consent Agenda All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion and an affirmative vote by roll call of a majority of the members present. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered a separate subject of discussion by the Council. Item A Approval of Council Minutes – February 26, 2025 Item B To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-36 Page 2 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing acceptance in the amount of $5,000 from the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Statewide Health Improvement Partnership (SHIP) Grant Program through Washington County to the City of Woodbury; approving the associated budget amendment and authorizing staff to execute a grant agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney Item C To approve the Cherry Meadow, Final Plat, Project No. 31- 2024-00544. staff further recommends Council authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to execute the Development Agreement with all approvals subject to the following conditions as listed in Council Letter 25- 62 Item D To adopt a motion to extend the project approvals for Gerber Collision and Glass, Project No. 05-2023-00535, subject to the conditions as listed in Council Letter 25-63. Item E To adopt a motion to extend the project approvals for Kiddie Academy, Project No. 05-2023-00539, subject to the conditions of approval as listed in Council Letter 25-64. Item F To approve Sienna Grove Second Addition, Final Plat, Project No. 26-2025-00571. Staff further recommends Council authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to execute the Development Agreement with all approvals subject to the conditions as listed in Council Letter 25-65. Item G To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-37 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota awarding the contract for the Dale Road Project, authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute an Engineering Consulting Services Contract with WSB for construction administration services, and authorizing use of the Phase II Major Roadway Special Assessment, Central District Trunk Storm Sewer, and Trunk Water and Sanitary Sewer Funds. Item H To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-38 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota awarding the contract for the Bailey Road Water Tower Watermain Project and authorizing use of the Trunk Water and Sanitary Sewer Fund. Item I To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-39 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota awarding the construction contract to A-1 Excavating LLC., authorizing a professional services agreement with Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services (AE2S) and approving a budget amendment to the Water and Sewer Utility Fund for the East Wellfield Manifold Pipe Project. Item J To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-40 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute an engineering consulting services contract with WSB for construction administration services. Item K To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-41 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota awarding the construction contract to Pember Companies, Inc., in the amount of $1,347,612.80, authorizing a professional services agreement with AE2S and authorizing a budget amendment to the Storm Water Utility Fund and the Water and Sewer Utility Fund for the Victoria Park and Edgewater Drive Stormwater BMP project. Item L To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-42 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing he professional services agreement with Barr Engineering Co. for the Future Development Environmental Planning Study, amending the 2025 Park Dedication Fund budget, and authorizing use of the Central District Trunk Storm Fund. Item M To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-43 Page 3 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving the Release and Settlement Agreement with Universal Services Telecommunications Technicians Inc, National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford, accepting payment of $5,300 for damage to City of Woodbury storm sewer, and authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to sign said Release and Settlement Agreement. Item N To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-44 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota acceptance of the Congressionally Directed Spending Grant and execution of a Grant Agreement for Federal Participation in Preliminary Engineering for the Weir Drive Improvement Project, north of Tamarack Road. Item O To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-45 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota awarding the Bailey Lake Lift Station Improvement Project construction contract to Minger Construction Company, amending the agreement with AE2S to include system programming, authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to sign contracts, amending the Storm Water Utility Fund Budget, and authorizing the use of the Central District Trunk Storm Sewer Fund. Item P To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-46 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving the Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Woodbury and the Metropolitan Council for Mutual Aid and Emergency Assistance with Law Enforcement Services. Item Q To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-47 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving the labor contract between the City of Woodbury and Law Enforcement Labor Services (Firefighters). Item R To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-48 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving applications for Minnesota Lawful Gambling LG214 Premises Permit and Minnesota Lawful Gambling LG215 Lease for Lawful Gambling Activity for Merrick, Inc. to be conducted at Carmine’s Restaurant and Bar, located at 9900 Valley Creek Road, contingent on completion of a background investigation with no violations. Item S To adopt a motion to renew the Tobacco Sales Licenses of the businesses listed in Council Letter 25-78 for the period of April 1, 2025 through March 31, 2026. Item T To adopt a motion to renew the liquor licenses of the businesses listed in Council Letter 25-79 for the period of April 1, 2025 through March 31, 2026. Item U The abstract of bills includes payments made from the operating or project budgets for expenses of the city. The expenditures are from all funds of the city. Any purchased contracts requiring signature of the mayor and City Administrator is hereby approved. Staff recommends approval of the abstract of bills for February 21, 2025 in the amount of $1,379,125.41 and February 28, 2025 in the amount of $1,196,506.19. Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Stafford, to approve the Consent Agenda items. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Public Hearings Page 4 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Mayor Burt reviewed the City’s Public Hearing process and stated that in order to allow for a full airing of all speaker comments, individual remarks may not exceed 10 minutes each. If a speaker determines that more time is necessary, they are advised to m ake a request in writing to the Mayor at least three days prior to the hearing. If there are more than three (3) green sheets submitted to make comments at a public hearing, the Mayor may reduce the individual time allotted to each speaker so that all interested parties have the opportunity to provide their comments within the aggregate thirty-minute (30) public comment period of the public hearing process. Remarks or points already made by someone else should not be repeated, unless simply to state that they are “opposed” to, or “favor” the issue. Remarks should be limited to the subject at hand only. Speakers are encouraged to coordinate presentations to the extent possible. Those in attendance at the Public Hearing will refrain from applause, or other expressions of emotion, whether in favor of, or opposition to, any particular application or argument. Inappropriate language, outbursts or criticisms aimed at individuals or groups are not allowed. A. Slick City Woodbury Conditional Use Permit, Project No. 01-2025-00572 Mayor Burt declared the public hearing open. Ms. Schmitz stated Mike and Annie Kelly have submitted an application for a new commercial recreation use to be called Slick City. Slick City is an indoor slide and air trampoline park proposed to be located within the existing building at 587 Settlers Ridge Parkway. No exterior building modifications are proposed with this application. The property is zoned BCD, Business Campus District and is guided as Places to Work on the Land Use Plan. A Conditional Use Permit is required for commercial recreation uses over 5,000 square feet in a multi-tenant building located within the BCD, Business Campus District. Ms. Schmitz noted Slick City is proposing to occupy 50,000 square feet of the building as a commercial recreation use. The City has identified that commercial recreation space is a supportive use to the Places to Work land uses. However, it is the intent of the Comprehensive Plan to deliver Places to Work uses within this land use category, and therefore the Settlers Ridge Industrial is proposed to be capped at 28 percent total tenant space as uses considered commercial recreation. The proposed cap on commercial recreation use is higher than the caps established recently for the Hudson Road Office Park and the Royal Gateway projects which had caps of 15 percent. Commercial Recreation uses are commonly seen in light industrial buildings throughout the metro area as the buildings provide higher ceilings, more affordable rents and complementary parking availability with adjacent businesses. Ms. Schmitz mentioned the Applicant is proposing to utilize the existing access point off of Settlers Ridge Parkway and Diamond Drive for site vehicle access. Staff is proposing a parking ratio of 1 stall per 647 square feet or a requirement of 77 parking spaces for the proposed use. She pointed out a graphic that identifies the location of 79 parking spaces with the parking in the front of the building proposed for customer parking and the rear parking for employees. It is anticipated the use will have 25 employees during the busiest shift. Ms. Schmitz noted the Planning Commission reviewed the application during the March 3, 2025 meeting and recommended approval with a 7-0 vote. She introduced Planning Commission member Saurin Shah. Mr. Shah provided a summary to the Council. He noted the commissioners were overall positive about the project and that it would be a good addition for the City’s needs for indoor activity and play areas. The key points of discussion included customer parking in front of the building only, ensuring disability parking provisions, the parking capacity for Slick City events, peak hours, and the cap at 28% for tenant space. The Commission voted 7-0 in favor of the project. Applicant, Mike Kelly, 1080 Heritage Lane, Wayzata, MN, expressed his excitement to be in Woodbury and that they are the first franchise in Minnesota. The first location was in Maple Grove and the second one will be in Woodbury. Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to close the public hearing. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Date, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Mayor Burt opened opportunity for discussion and questions from the Council. Councilmember Stafford mentioned she watched the Planning Commission meeting and there was a comment regarding 5:00-7:00 p.m. Friday, Saturday, and Sunday being the busiest hours. Mr. Kelly agreed and mentioned that the majority of the business comes from Friday at 5:00 p.m. to Sunday at 5:00 p.m. Councilmember Stafford expressed her concern that traffic from Eaglebrook Church services, which are on Saturday at 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. She wondered how the traffic would flow since there would be about 1,500- 2,000 people coming out of the services. Ms. Schmitz mentioned that people can exit Slick City from Karen Drive. She added that the employees would be using Diamond Drive instead of the customers. Councilmember Stafford expressed her concern that Goddard School is being built in the area and mentioned that she is concerned about parents coming and going on Friday evenings. Councilmember Morris asked if the intersection of Settlers Ridge Parkway and Eastview Road was signalized. City Engineer Tony Kutzke replied that it is not signalized. The street was reviewed last summer for a signal and it did not meet the qualifications for a signal at that time. Councilmember Morris suggested having a condition that in the next five years the intersection would be reviewed. Page 5 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 He asked what the normal practice was for review. Mr. Kutzke replied that the typical practice is for every development that comes in, the City is updating the traffic studies and reviewing the intersections. There would be a regular review that would happen if another development comes in. Councilmember Morris noted that he was fine with the answer from staff. Councilmember Santini asked if Slick City included any ramps in the play areas for accessibility. Mr. Kelly replied that he has not put a lot of thought into it but would like to be innovative and inclusive and would like to ensure participation for everyone. He imagined it would be a part of a future concept. Councilmember Wilson asked if the cap the City was putting on the recreational uses in the warehouses was in order for the City to maintain some control over what is put in. Ms. Schmitz agreed. She commented that adding new businesses to the Northeast Business Park is another reason for Metro Transit to consider expanding Metro Micro services into this part of the city. Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Wilson, to approve the Slick City Conditional Use Permit (CUP) via the RESOLUTION 25-49, a resolution adopting findings of fact, Project No. 01-2025-00572 subject to the following conditions listed in Council Letter 25-80. 1. The CUP approval shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted. 2. This approval does not include signs. A separate sign permit is required for all proposed signage. 3. No customer parking shall be permitted in the rear loading dock area. 4. Any ground-mounted and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be hidden from view with materials that match the materials and colors used on the building. 5. The Settlers Ridge Industrial Building shall be limited to no more than 28 percent or 50,000 gross square feet of the building to be used for commercial recreation. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Mayor Burt asked when Woodbury’s location would open. Mr. Kelly replied that they are going to push to have it opened by the end of the year. B. Red Rock Farmers’ Market Interim Conditional Use Permit; Project No. 20- 2025-00570 Mayor Burt declared the public hearing open. Ms. Schmitz stated St. Paul Growers Association has submitted an application for an Interim Conditional Use Permit to operate a Farmers’ Market proposed to be located at 3311 Commonwealth Avenue at Red Rock Elementary School. The property is zoned R-4, Urban Residential District and is guided as Public/Semi-Public on the Land Use Plan. Ms. Schmitz noted the City requires an Interim Conditional Use Permit (ICUP) for farmers’ markets to ensure compliance with zoning ordinance standards and to review parking, signage, duration, neighborhood impacts and the like. An interim use is defined as a temporary use of property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until the zoning regulations no longer permit it. The Applicant has an Interim Conditional Use Permit for a farmers’ market at Central Park, but due to the construction at the site, they were not able to operate there last year. Due to the last-minute change of venue in 2024, the Applicant was allowed to operate at Red Rock Elementary under the temporary outdoor event allowances. With the Applicant’s preference to return to the Red Rock Elementary location in 2025, they were required to obtain a separate Interim Conditional Use Permit. Ms. Schmitz explained there would be movable directional signs, and portable restrooms. The farmers’ market would be operating on Sundays between May and October from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The Planning Commission reviewed the application during the March 3, 2025 meeting and recommended approval with a 7-0 vote. Mr. Shah stated the commissioners were unanimously positive about continuing the farmers’ market and felt it fulfilled the Woodbury City culture and citizens' needs. Key discussion points included the interim use versus a permanent location. Discussion included having the location closer to the City Center, with an ideal location being Central Park when it is completed. The commissioners suggested having the Conditional Use Permit reviewed annually. There was discussion regarding parking and traffic flow at the site, with two added conditions to address traffic flow and parking. Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to close the public hearing. Page 6 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Voting in Favor: Wilson, Stafford, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Mayor Burt opened opportunity for discussion and questions from the Council. Councilmember Santini asked for clarity about the parking and traffic flow in the area. Ms. Schmitz replied that there is parking identified for the farmers’ market. Councilmember Santini mentioned that it would be helpful to have a more consistent traffic flow since there are so many pedestrians. She wondered if there could be a one-way design in order to help with the traffic flow. Ms. Schmitz noted that it one of the added conditions is for staff and the applicant to review the traffic flow at the site. Councilmember Wilson noted she received a few phone calls last year regarding the parking situation. She asked if it was decided that there would be no parking on Commonwealth Avenue. Ms. Schmitz pointed out condition 11 which says there would be no parking along Commonwealth Avenue. Councilmember Wilson asked if there would be parking allowed on Commonwealth Court. Ms. Schmitz replied that the Council could amend the condition to include Commonwealth Court as a no parking area. Councilmember Wilson asked if the condition regarding Commonwealth Avenue included both sides of the street or just one side. Ms. Schmitz confirmed it included both sides of the road. Councilmember Morris noted condition 11 says that the farmers’ market will enforce the no parking and asked if the City could provide the temporary no parking signs. Ms. Schmitz replied that the City could do that. Councilmember Wilson asked if the farmers’ market would move to Central Park when the construction is completed. Ms. Schmitz noted condition 1 says the City could elect to have the farmers’ market at Central Park, and the city would discuss this with its partners before such a decision was made. Councilmember Wilson moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to approve the Red Rock Farmers’ Market Interim Conditional Use Permit with an amendment to condition 11 to include Commonwealth Court as a no parking area during the farmers’ market via the attached RESOLUTION 25-50, a resolution adopting findings of fact, Project No. 20-2025-00570 subject to the following conditions listed in Council Letter 25-81. 1. The Interim Conditional Use Permit shall terminate upon a change in zoning regulations which would prohibit the use, upon the City electing to have the farmers’ market at Central Park, or the violation of the conditions under which the permit was issued. 2. Upon the occurrence of the date or of the criteria for termination set forth in the Interim Conditional Use Permit, the City shall notify the Permittee in writing that the Interim Conditional Use Permit shall terminate not later than 30 days after the date of such notice. 3. The Interim Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed annually but may be reviewed at any time if the City Council is of the opinion that the terms and conditions of the permit have been violated or if one of the criteria for termination has been met. 4. The Red Rock Farmers’ Market will be open on Sundays from May through October. The hours of operation will be from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. 5. The Applicant shall be allowed four (4) off-site temporary signs not to exceed 24 square feet in area and not more than six (6) feet in height. Temporary directional signs must not exceed four (4) square feet and be located onsite, at least 15 feet from the back of the curb. The signs shall be permitted to be installed on Saturday evening and removed on Sunday evening. 6. The farmers’ market manager shall ensure the site is cleaned up after market hours. 7. Parking for vendors and customers shall be restricted to asphalt areas only, no parking on the grass or in medians will be permitted. 8. The Interim Conditional Use Permit shall be executed prior to the farmers’ market becoming operational. 9. Prior to opening the farmers’ market for the season, City staff and the Applicant shall meet onsite to identify the final traffic flow, cone placement and traffic signage locations. 10. Barriers and cones shall be present at all times when the farmers’ market is in operation. If operational issues are identified by the City, the Applicant shall work with City staff to revise the traffic circulation plan for the site. 11. The farmers’ market shall actively enforce no parking along Commonwealth Avenue and Commonwealth Court. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye C. Adoption of Special Assessments for 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project Mayor Burt declared the public hearing open. Page 7 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Engineering Project Coordinator Drew Boxrud stated the purpose of the meeting was to provide the Council with the project background, hold an assessment hearing, accept written objections, certify the assessment roll, and approve the resolutions. Mr. Kutzke mentioned that item 7C was the hearing, while item 7D was the resolutions associated with the project. Item 7D is not a hearing. Mr. Boxrud noted that the project location is primarily in the Fox Run area and is bounded by Hudson Road on the north side and Woodbury Drive on the west side, Powers Lake on the south side, and St. Johns Drive on the east side, except for Eastview Road. The project also includes Central Park Place and Promenade Lane, which were added by Council’s direction so that it would coincide with the finishing of the Central Park project. Mr. Boxrud stated there has been significant public engagement with the project. Public engagement began in the summer of 2023 with a neighborhood survey. Since then, there have been three neighborhood meetings (February 2024, July 2024, and March 2025), 3,500+ letters sent, 125+ people in attendance during meetings, and 2,030+ webpage views. There have been 150 survey responses, 35+ responses via email or phone call, and 12 in-person forms. He reviewed the Council interactions throughout the public process. He mentioned that the neighborhood has been included in the Capital Improvement Plan for the past eight years. During the process, there were a number of memos that were sent to the Council, including multiple items to note for the project. There was another memo sent regarding traffic calming considerations as directed via the Public Improvement Hearing (PIH). Mr. Boxrud noted the general scope of the Fox Run area project includes pavement removal and replacement with spot curb repairs, minor storm water and storm water quality improvements, Forrest Hill Drive removal and replaced with a trail, signal installation at Hudson Road and Lake View Drive, and appropriate traffic calming measures. Mayor Burt noted that there are some private roads that are intermixed in the project and asked if they were only doing City roads. Mr. Boxrud agreed and pointed out the private roads. The general scope of the Eastview Road project includes mill and overlay of pavement with spot curb repairs, enhanced pedestrian crossings, turn lane removal and trail gap filled, and a trail to Fox Run Park added. The general scope of the project for Central Park Place and Promenade Lane includes pavement removal and replacement with spot curb repairs, and trail replacement along Promenade Lane. Mr. Boxrud reviewed the City funding sources and explained that there are additional funding sources because there were a number of projects that were added. He noted Phase 2 Major Roadway Special Assessment fund is for the stoplight that was added at Hudson Road and Lake View Road and will be paid by development and will not be included in the assessments. The SWWD Cost Share Agreement had a large water quality device that they wanted to add, and it made sense to add to the project. It will be 100% paid by the South Washington Watershed District and not included in assessments. The pedestrian improvements that will be made on Settlers Ridge Parkway will be funded by the City with a small portion being paid by the school district for the portion that is on school district property, this is also not included in the assessment calculations. The 3M Settlement Eligible Funds from the Water & Sewer Utility Fund are anything from the extra storm water quality improvements that are being done in the project. The total project cost is just above $7 million, which is $1.1 million less than anticipated when the additional pieces with outside funding are excluded. Mr. Boxrud mentioned that the proposed assessments include single-family properties ($3,065/unit), Waterfront Drive multi-family properties ($1,529/unit), and all other multi-family properties ($1,302/unit). The City Walk area and commercial areas vary significantly from $44-$65,321. Special assessments are a charge imposed on properties for a certain improvement, it benefits the owners of the selected properties, and it is a levy the City uses to finance or partially finance a certain public improvement. The City follows two policies for guidance: CD-ENGPW-4.2 (roadway construction and rehabilitation financing), and CD-FIN-5.5 (special assessments). Mayor Burt explained that the Council creates a policy to do roadway rehabilitation and how to do the special assessments. The engineering staff follow the policy. The City charges the lesser of the calculated assessment or benefit appraisal amount. The City funds the remaining balance. It is a 15-year assessment term. The assessment hearing is held prior to the project award. There is a 30-day no-interest payment period. The first payment would be due with the first half property tax payment in 2026, and the interest rate will be 3.20%. Mr. Boxrud encouraged community members to sign up for project update emails through InTouch by going to woodburymn.gov/intouch. Alice Roberts-Davis, 10422 Kilbirnie Road, explained that she wanted to talk about the roundabout at Lake Ridge Drive. She mentioned she has a background in property acquisition, planning and construction for Target locations, and has spent a number of hours in committee and Council hearings. She added she has been a State commissioner responsible for real estate. She is currently the Vice President at the University of Minnesota where she is responsible for the planning and real estate for the University’s five campuses. She expressed her appreciation for the City’s desire to address traffic calming if it is warranted. She stated she is not in favor of the roundabout at Lake Ridge Drive because it is poorly placed and does not meet its intended purpose. The roundabout is roughly 300 feet from a stop sign, so vehicles do not have enough time to build speed before it gets to the roundabout. She added that there are more opportunities for traffic calming measures where there aren’t any for thousands of feet. The roundabout is too large and makes the left- hand turn difficult. During times when it snowed this year, the temporary roundabout was difficult for both cars and snowplows to navigate. She added that the roundabout is an eyesore. She asked what is proposed as an alternative to the roundabout, and if it absolutely needs to be in the location. She wondered if there could be a four-way stop sign if there needs to be traffic calming measures. She wondered if there has been an investigation to post speed limit signs since there is only one on the road. She wondered if the speed limit could be posted at 25 miles per hour instead of 30. She added she is open to using speed bumps for traffic calming measures. She Page 8 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 summarized that the location for the proposed roundabout does not make sense, it does not meet the intent, and there are better locations along Lake Ridge Drive. She asked that the Council reconsider the roundabout. Rob Watson, 686 Mariner Way, asked when the roads were paved last. Mayor Burt replied that it was probably when the roads were installed. Mr. Watson asked if taxes had been paid on the roads since then. Mayor Burt asked if Mr. Watson could ask all of his questions and then staff could answer them at once. City Administrator Gridley asked Mr. Watson what he meant in asking if taxes had been paid on the roads since they were put in. Mr. Watson explained property taxes have been paid. Mr. Gridley noted property taxes are not used for the roadway. He wondered if Mr. Watson was asking if tax dollars were being used to pay for the road. Mr. Watson replied that he is wondering where the money they have been paying for property taxes has been going. He asked if there has been money set aside to improve the roadways and wondered where the money is at. He asked how many bids the City received for the project and who the contractor will be. He asked how long the contractors would stand behind their work since winters can be hard with potholes. He asked if property taxes would increase since the roads are improving. He asked how many hours a day construction would go on, what the schedule would be, how long the project would take, how many employees would be involved, and where they would park. Mr. Gridley suggested addressing the questions Mr. Watson had offline since many of the questions were detailed, execution type questions. Mr. Watson asked the audience if there was anything the public would like to hear. An audience member mentioned parking. Mr. Watson summarized that he would like to know how the assessments were determined, and why the City Walk area does not have the same assessment numbers. Mayor Burt replied that the staff would be able to address the big picture questions now, and follow up with the detailed questions at a later time. Councilmember Morris noted that the Council received an email from Sandra Cullen, 877 Lake Ridge Alcove, and asked if it could be entered into the record. Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to close the public hearing. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Stafford, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Mayor Burt opened opportunity for discussion and questions from the Council. Mayor Burt asked if staff could speak about the roundabout. Councilmember Wilson asked if the community wanted to object to the assessments, if they needed to do that before the hearing was closed. City Attorney Eric Larson replied yes. Councilmember Wilson asked that if residents wanted to object to the assessment, they need to put it in writing before the hearing was closed and give it to the City Clerk. Mr. Larson replied that it was not correct. An objection from a resident has to be brought to the City prior to closing of the hearing. It can be brought in writing, or by coming to the Council meeting and indicating opposition and the basis for it. Councilmember Wilson asked if the objection needed to happen prior to the hearing being closed. Mr. Larson agreed. Councilmember Wilson asked if the hearing had just been closed. Mr. Larson agreed. Councilmember Wilson stated she was making a motion to recall that and reopen the hearing to give members of the public an opportunity to object to the assessments in writing, if they choose to. Mr. Larson added that they can do so verbally as well. Councilmember Wilson noted that the City has typically had objections in writing and suggested the community members have it in writing. Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to reopen the public hearing. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Stafford, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Mayor Burt asked the public if anyone wanted to provide a written objection to the assessments. There were no objections. Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris to close the public hearing. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Stafford, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Councilmember Morris asked that in the future when there are assessment hearings, to have something in the process to allow the public to make objections before the public hearing is closed. Mr. Gridley suggested adding it to the Council letter as well. Page 9 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Mayor Burt asked for staff to provide more information about the roundabout. Mr. Kutzke explained that it is not a roundabout, but a traffic circle, which is a traffic calming feature. It is located at the first intersection north of Eastview Road on Lake Ridge Drive. Throughout the public engagement, there was a lot of concern from residents regarding traffic speed. It was included in the public improvement hearing to have traffic calming on Lake Ridge Drive. Staff agree that the traffic circle is only 300 feet north of East View Road. Staff had noticed that once drivers get a few hundred feet north of the traffic circle, vehicles start to speed up to their normal speed again. There are traffic calming measures of bump outs proposed for five locations. Through the Safe Streets for All action plan, it was proposed to have a demonstration project to install a temporary circle at the location, which was included in order to evaluate how the plows, emergency vehicles, and general traffic would work going through the circle. Staff set up a camera to watch traffi c flow through the circle. It was shown that cars slowed down in the intersection. There were some issues with plowing because the snow that built up on the edges of the plow would catch the plastic pieces on top of the pavement. The Public Works department provided feedback that they would be more comfortable if the circle was concrete. Staff noticed that vehicles return to their normal speed further north of the intersection. Staff would like to install a permanent circle at the current location. Mayor Burt noted that the circle is planned to be included in the project. Mr. Kutzke replied that staff have included the circle in the bid for the project. Council could make changes at this time but could have cost impacts. Following the public improvement hearing, staff took directions to include more traffic calming measures along the section of roadway. Staff provided a memo to the Council with the proposed plans. Councilmember Morris mentioned that in the email that Sandra Cullen sent to the Council, she asked about pedestrian movement around the traffic circle since the intersection is so tight. Mr. Boxrud replied that current roadway standards are 28 feet wide with a sidewalk or a trail. The older neighborhoods are 32 feet wide with no trail. It is 20 feet between the circle and the curb, which is 4 feet more than on the rest of the street. He mentioned it does not feel like that much space because there is a portion where pedestrians must walk on the road. He added that the temporary circle does not have concrete barricades while the permanent one would have curb and concrete. Councilmember Morris wondered if the circle was in the right intersection since there is no pedestrian refuge in the area. He added his concern that it is only 300 feet north of Eastview Road and understood that it is important to slow cars down. Mr. Boxrud mentioned that if the traffic circle was not there, then staff would recommend bump outs instead. This was the only intersection that was wide enough to do the circle due to the four-leg intersection instead of three. He added that the three-leg intersection would be significantly more dangerous if a traffic circle was put in since it would give two directions of traffic a green light to go. Councilmember Morris mentioned that he did not want to force the traffic circle as something to try and added that he does not know if it is in the right spot. Mr. Kutzke explained that their priority is to slow vehicles down. The alternative to the intersection could be bump outs. Either way, vehicles will be sharing the road with pedestrians since that is the nature of the entire roadway and is not unique to the intersection with the traffic calming circle proposed. Councilmember Wilson mentioned if bump outs were included, it would narrow the roadway for pedestrians. She agreed that there could be some traffic calming and is in favor of reducing resident road speeds to 25 mph. She wondered if an elevated table could be put in. That way, pedestrians would still have the shoulder, but it would calm the traffic. She noted in the Royal Oaks neighborhood, there are many tire tracks on the bump outs. She stated she would like to find alternative traffic calming measures instead of the circle or bump outs. Councilmember Morris added that the City is a statutory City so changing the speed limit is not an option. Mayor Burt asked Mr. Kutzke to address the 30-mph speed versus the 25-mph speed. Mr. Kutzke replied that staff have been watching the statutes regarding speed limit changes, but the speed limit remains at 30 mph on residential roadways, unless a city enacted a study of speed limits and adopted a change. There are a few cities that have done the study, including Saint Louis Park. Their speed limits were changed due to the study. The general findings from the University of Minnesota study following the lowering of the speed limits are that there was a negligible change in the traffic speeds. The City is looking to slow down speeds, instead of providing a speed limit sign that is being violated and creating unlawful drivers. The State has reviewed all the cities who have conducted the speed limit changes and have come to the same conclusion and found the speed limit signs being ineffective. If the City changed the speed limit with no additional measures, there would be no expected changes in vehicle speeds. The City would need to include enforcement, engineering changes to promote slower speeds, and various features from the Safe Streets for All plan. Councilmember Wilson asked if it was possible for the City to change the speed limits on residential streets. Mr. Kutzke replied that they could if the Council provided direction and the process within the State Statute was followed. Mayor Burt asked staff to address the option of speed bumps. Mr. Kutzke replied that speed bumps can be difficult. Roadways provide drainage and water flows down them. They would put in something called a speed table instead of a speed bump. In the case of Queens Drive, they put in a raised crosswalk, and it was successful since there were pedestrian facilities and a school. Since there are no pedestrian facilities in the area, there would be no raised crosswalk to put in. Instead, it would be putting a speed table in the middle of the roadway and would have to be in areas that would work for drainage. There were speed bumps included on Meadow Brook Drive, and the residents asked to have them removed. Speed bumps can be effective, but there would need to be many of them. He added it would be more of an annoyance for residents within the neighborhood than the bump outs. Page 10 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Councilmember Wilson mentioned that studies show that painted lines and painted shoulders on the road slow down traffic. Mr. Kutzke replied that there can be some effectiveness with striping on the roads. They do not generally want to add striping to neighborhood collectors like this area because it gives the impression that it is a faster roadway. If striping was included, pedestrians would not be able to walk side by side since there is not enough room. Striping would also create cars driving right next to pedestrians instead of going around pedestrians since cars would stay within the lines. Striping would also create the roadway need to not have parking otherwise people would be parking on the sidewalk portion of the striped road. Mayor Burt expressed her appreciation for the engineering team and the thought they have put into the area. She asked to address Mr. Watson’s questions regarding assessments. Mr. Kutzke stated that a percentage of property taxes go towards the roadway rehabilitation fund. The City uses the funds for roadway projects. A portion of the properties benefiting from the projects are charged an assessment. For the current project, about 22% of the project cost is paid for by assessments. Property taxes pay for the rest of the project. The portion of the project that is paid by property taxes is for mobility of the roadway, since everyone can have access to the roads. Roadways provide access to properties, which are paid for through assessments. Mayor Burt asked to discuss the work schedule. Mr. Boxrud replied that McNamara Contracting Inc. was the lowest responsible bidder. The general work hours that are allowed are between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The City’s Ordinance indicated work hours can be from 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. The contractor can request to work longer. The City typically allows this if there is a reason or a public benefit. Contract workers will park wherever it is legal to park. Mayor Burt asked how people would be able to get their mail during construction. Mr. Boxrud replied that in areas where there are bump outs, the City will be moving the mailboxes and everyone will have access to them at all times. Mayor Burt mentioned the City website lists out the construction schedule. Mr. Boxrud noted that the information is not listed yet since the contractor is waiting for the Council’s approval. Mr. Kutzke explained that if the Council approves the project, staff will meet with the contractors to discuss the schedule. Staff will hold an additional neighborhood meeting to review the schedule with the residents. Councilmember Santini asked why staff would not suggest crosswalks at some of the crossings instead of doing the traffic circle. Mr. Kutzke replied that a crosswalk would need to be at a more arterial roadway. Lake Ridge Drive is a roadway that is expected to have bikers and pedestrians on it. If there are trails or sidewalks in the roadways, then striping is considered. Councilmember Wilson asked if the City was reducing the speed on Eastview Road. Mr. Boxrud replied that they were enforcing no parking on the road since it is a State aid road. Mr. Kutzke added that they did not lower the speed limit on Eastview Road. Councilmember Wilson mentioned that feasibility reports are not public anymore, which makes it difficult to understand how the assessments are working when there are new numbers coming in. She noted that there is a minimum assessment that each homeowner is charged. In this case, some homeowners did not meet the minimum, so their assessments were raised to the minimum. Mr. Kutzke agreed and explained that the original preliminary reports are still available on the public website and show the full process of the calculations and how the policy is applied to the numbers. Staff have found that providing more data can create more confusion. Instead, the City sends a mailer to homeowners that makes it clear what their assessment amount is and staff encourage residents to call or attend the scheduled open house if they have any questions about their assessments. Councilmember Wilson stated she likes the reports and the last report that was posted was in 2021. The reports are helpful so people can see how the bid came in lower and how that affected the changes. She added she has been asking for updated reports in the past but has not received them. Councilmember Stafford mentioned that she lives in the area where the project will be done. She added that she received a letter from the City and was grateful that they were going to do the work because the streets are bad. The City anticipated that it would cost $1,550 for each multi-family property. The City has done significant work to get the cost down. She explained that the City communicated to the residents. Councilmember Wilson noted that the single-family properties have not had a decrease in cost like the multi-family properties. Councilmember Wilson noted that there is a lot of cost sharing in the project and that the roadway rehabilitation is not the only aspect of the project. Mr. Kutzke explained that the project cost based on the public improvement hearing for the improvements included in the assessment calculations is about $7 million. The original estimate was $8.1 million so the project costs have decreased. He added that the City had a great opportunity to combine projects since there was funding coming in. The City identified a section of a private school sidewalk that would need to be done in order for there to be connectivity. The City has had discussions with the school district and agreed to put the construction into the scope of the project. It is an advantage for the City to have one project for City staff to manage and the approach provides cost efficiencies for the project. Ms. Robert Davis asked if it was an option to explore the bump outs for Lake Ridge Drive. Mr. Kutzke replied that staff has evaluated the option and would recommend the traffic circle. Page 11 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-51 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving the special assessments for the 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – no Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye D. 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project; Award Contract; Amend Budget and Authorize Use of Funds; Remove Stop Sign; Authorize Agreement with South Washington Watershed District; Authorize Agreement with South Washington County School District; Consultant Selection for Construction Administration Services Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-52 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota awarding the construction contract to McNamara Contracting, Inc. in the based bid and alternate amount of $6,931,936.80 for the 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project and authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to sign said contract. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-53 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota amending budgets for the Street Reconstruction/Maintenance Fund, Water and Sewer Utility Fund, Parks and Trails Replacement Fund, Capital Improvement Fund, and authorize use of funds from the Central District Trunk Storm Sewer Fund and Phase II Major Roadway Special Assessment Fund for the 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-54 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute an engineering consulting services contract with Bolton and Menk, Inc. in the amount of $577,241 for construction administration services for the 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project. Page 12 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-55 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing the removal of a stop sign for westbound traffic on Heather Drive at Bonnieview Drive as part of the 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-56 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute an Inter-Agency Agreement with the South Washington County School District regarding their participation in the 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project with work being completed at the Liberty Ridge Elementary School. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – no Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Councilmember Santini moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 25-57 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute an Inter-Agency Agreement with the South Washington Watershed District regarding their participation in the 2025 Roadway Rehabilitation Project with construction of a stormwater quality improvement Best Management Practice (BMP) system. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Page 13 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 E. Legendary Spice Woodbury LLC dba Legendary Spice, 8300 Tamarack Village, On Sale Wine and Beer Liquor License including Sunday Sales Mayor Burt declared the public hearing open. Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk, Ashleigh Sullivan stated Legendary Spice Woodbury LLC dba Legendary Spice has submitted an application for an On Sale Wine and Beer Liquor License including Sunday sales for their restaurant located at 8300 Tamarack Village. There are two owners with at least 5 percent interest in Legendary Spice: Yang Chen (20%) and Gaoxiang Yang (80%). As required by City Code, a criminal history check as it pertains to liquor licensing was conducted on each corporate officer and individuals with financial interest and no violations that would preclude the corporation from obtaining a liquor license were found. The applicant has submitted the license fee and background investigation fee. The City Attorney has reviewed the application and has found it to be in order. A hearing notice was published in the City’s official newspaper and hearing notices were mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the establishment. Mayor Burt asked what Legendary Spice is. Ms. Sullivan replied that it is a Szechuan restaurant and that there is another location in Minneapolis. Mayor Burt asked when the license would go into effect. Ms. Sullivan replied that it would go into effect on April 1 st and would be valid for a year. Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to close the public hearing. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Stafford, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Mayor Burt opened opportunity for discussion and questions from the Council. Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Stafford, to approve an On Sale Wine and Beer Liquor License including Sunday Sales to Legendary Spice Woodbury LLC dba Legendary Spice located at 8300 Tamarack Village. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Donna Stafford – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Discussion No items scheduled Transportation Report (2nd meeting of the month, May-October) No items scheduled City Administrator’s Report Mr. Gridley stated there has been $28.5 million worth of investment in the North Ridge Business Park through the Reserve in Settlers Ridge Apartments and the Goddard School. He highlighted in his report the projects that are going on, Metro Micro communication and outreach, the communication regarding the water treatment plant, and the Recreation activities. There are a number of public opportunities with Public Safety and recognitions listed in the report. Mr. Gridley gave a verbal update of upcoming City meetings. • March 18, 2025 – CSAH 16 (Valley Creek Rd) Corridor Study-Interlachen Parkway to Military Road Open House #3, 4:00 p.m., Ash Conference Room, City Hall • March 19, 2025 – Water Treatment Plant Pipeline Construction Open House, 5:00 p.m., Ash Conference Room, City Hall • March 21, 2025 – Audit and Investment Commission, 7:30 a.m., Ash Conference Room, City Hall • March 25, 2025 – Economic Development Commission, 7:30 a.m., Ash Conference Room, City Hall • March 26, 2025 – 2026 Roadway Rehabilitation Open House, 5:00 p.m., Ash Conference Room, City Hall • April 1, 2025 – Parks and Natural Resources Commission, 7:00 p.m., M Health Fairview Sports Center Page 14 of 15  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 12, 2025 • April 2, 2025 – Council Workshop Meeting Mayor Burt noted that the State of the City address would be on April 3rd at Eagle Valley Golf Course. Councilmember Wilson stated coffee with a cop would be on Monday and encouraged residents to visit the City’s website for additional details. Councilmember Morris explained that the legislature is in full swing and encouraged community members to be involved and speak with local officials. Adjournment Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Wilson, to adjourn the meeting at 9:54 p.m. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Stafford, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Respectfully submitted, _________________________________________ Ashleigh Sullivan, Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk Approved by the Woodbury City Council on April 2, 2025. Page 15 of 15