Observer Report: Northfield City Council, 5.5.26

Call to Order – 06:02 PM

Open Public Comment

• Kris Anderson, live behind Bridgewater Elementary & Middle School
  • Concern is that this development has just shy of the number of units required to trigger an environmental review, which would also have other evaluations done. Concerned about the amount of traffic that the neighborhood already gets with children walking to/from school. The south-crossing does not have a sidewalk or curb-cut, and the traffic lines goes right through the crossing, making it hard for drivers to see children. Want to urge the council to require the environmental review.

Approval of Agenda – approved

Presentations

Presentation of Northfield Hospital and Clinics 2025 Audit

• Mr. Belter, has done the audit for the past few years
  • A new debt issue this year. As part of the audit, did more unpredictability testing and didn’t notice anything with the pay/fraud issues. No adjustments that were made that were not noted by administrators. Alina Clinic purchase. Increase in operating margin from 2022 to 2025. EBIDA went from negative in 2022 to comparable positive in 2025. Number of days in accounts receivable is higher than industry average, and administrators are working to get that down. Age of capital purchases is higher than industry average, but most likely due to the amount of debt payments over the last couple years.
• CEO of Hospital
  • Proud of my team for coming through on our goals for this audit. Industry-wide, our organization is not that different. Our goal is to grow in a financially stable way to be here for our community. Industry struggles and headwinds, we’ve seen it locally and in the wider area, but looking to be here for our community in the future. Mayor Zweifel: With the large new acquisition, what can we expect to see in the future? We’re leveraged well to acquire that debt in the purchase, and we’ll account for that in 2026. There will be additional cost related to that, but there is a 2-year payback period on that, which will come through in the next few years. CM Holmes: Looking at the comparable institutions and their ratings, is there something about those ratings that is harder to achieve?
  • A-ratings are generally for larger institutions, we’re probably comparable to BBB, which is comparable to our size.

Consent Agenda – approved

Reports of Councilmembers

• CM Holmes: Nothing to report
• CM Dahlen: Nothing to report
• CM Beumer: We had an EDA meeting, we had a riverwalk market spring presentation meeting, we had a presentation from the LEDC
• CM Sokup: Nothing new
• CM Peterson White: I was also at the EDA meeting. I would add that the Latino Economic (Organization?) works not just with Latino small businesses, but also other small businesses and they have been just an amazing partner for small businesses in the community during Metro Surge. They do a lot of important stuff heling small businesses start and grow, capital acquisition and planning, etc.
• Mayor Zweifel: Attended the Asia-Pacific Event at the Library and also attend the mosaic workshop.

Regular Agenda

Presentation of Evaluation of the Performance of the City Administrator, Ben Martig

• Mayor Zweifel: City Council had a closed meeting on May 4^th to evaluate the performance of the city administrator, in accordance with state law. The City Council appreciates Mr. Martig’s assistance and looks forward to a full evaluation later.

Consideration of Resolution Accepting Tree Donation for City Parks and Street Rights-of-Way

• David Bennett: We have a donation from Carleton Alums. Lauren had a passion for the urban forest, especially the ash trees. City has over a thousand ash trees on public city property. After some development and improvements planned, there will be 422 trees remaining and this donation will go a long way to maintaining our green spaces.
• CM Holmes: Second what Bennett said in appreciation for this donation and the commitment to our community and our urban forest.
• CM Beumer: Ditto what CM Holmes said and thank you to the family sincerely to the donation to the city.
• Mayor Zweifel: Also express my gratitude, thank you very much especially at this time when we are facing climate threats to our urban forest.
• Motion to accept donation approved

Resolution for Harvest Hills 2^nd Addition Preliminary Plat

• Scott Wopata: The general overview, southeast of the middle school is a lot for the proposed development. This is just south of Filmore Street and Greenvale Drive. There is a proposal to develop this land. We put up public hearing notice in Northfield News on April 1^st, with other actions happening the following weeks. Preliminary Plat proposes 70 new homes, with a variety of complexes in accordance with our goals. There is a trail connection from the development to the middle school and Carter Drive. In some of the public comments and questions, as a development this is not a city project, this is a private property owner who is wanting to do this private development project. One of the main concerns that has been raised is the road connectivity. As we develop, we’re trying to get back to a grid structure. In the past, we’ve had similar challenges.
  
  Moving on to public comment, our community has done a really good job of communicating and engaging. To highlight a couple, rental vs. ownership has been a big voice in public comment. Our zoning allows for rental and does not dissuade from rental in this lot. There’s been discussion on if Northfield has too many rentals. From studies, we are not overbuilt on rentals, and this development falls right in line with our hopes for development in our community. We don’t critique neighbors based on rentals/owners; there is no difference in the quality of their residents. Emergency Service access has been a big discussion as well. We do a development review committee on development plans and give guidance to make sure they conform to emergency services access guidelines. One concern was brought up, and that has been satisfied. Some positives we’ve heard is that it is the right level of density in terms of a development. It’s not a massive change to the community, but an opportunity to let people live in our community, especially for young families with its proximity to schools. There has been a narrative, especially from our school superintendent, has mentioned how single-family homes bring in more students. While that is true, rental units with multi-family homes can produce more students based on other attributes. If you look at the data differently, of how many students are generated per-unit, if you look at it based on per-acre, this is the optimal development design.
• Bennet: I’ll talk a little about storm water and runoff. Based on city rules, a development cannot increase storm runoff. There will be a significant reduction in downstream flooding with the development. In terms of traffic and safety, as we grow there will be more traffic. On our plans, there is a collector roadway which will tie into other highways/roads. We’re open to reviewing the crosswalks in the neighborhood and looking at tools for speed reduction. One thing we like to do for crosswalks is making sure they are justified, making sure they are the paths that students use.
• Wopata: To paint more clearly some of the concerns I’ve heard, the concern was people seeing water in their backyards currently. From our standards and policies, the development will actually decrease the amount of runoff we’ll see.
• Bennett: One other thing we haven’t seen in other developments is they’re planning on using the runoff to water their lawns, reducing the burden on our own city water.
• Wopata: There have been requests to put off the decision. We at city have all the information we think we need. From a metric standpoint, this does not trigger a traffic assessment. This does show a public desire for city to do some on the groundwork looking at pedestrian counts and to see what traffic patterns look like and suggest and move forward based on what that data tells us. Essentially, it would be the same outcome as a traffic study but not be one official which would delay the project. There has also been some confusion about zoning and plat history. There was a preliminary and final plat to develop this area, which was approved by Council and was for single-family homes, but the owner abandoned the project. There is no requirement from future landowners to abide by the same previous plat. This one is in line with our development code.
• CM Holmes: To that last point, to clarify, if we were being presented with a plat that was different from the one proposed in 2003 for single-family homes, it would not align with our goals, correct?
  • Yes, our goals would not allow only single-family homes.
• CM Sokup: I’m hearing concerns about school traffic. Would it get worse with this development? Have you heard about anything from the school district about changes in their processes that might be available?
  • We’ve only begun this process, so we haven’t really talked with the school district yet about drop-off in the back. There might be opportunities to change how the school directs for drop-off/pick-up.
• CM Peterson White: For folks not familiar with the process of the potential for a roundabout here, can you talk about the timeline and decision makers?
  • Bennett: The state legislature authorized the turnback, hoping to have the cost for that later this summer to present to Council. With that we’d move right away to the plan we’ve already had community engagement with, to be constructed in 2028/9. Would involve improvements along the corridor and improve the safety on some of these roads.
• CM Peterson White: One comment that I’ve heard a few times about this, regarding the environmental review, that this development falls just shy of the requirement. Obviously, there is a level that requires it, we don’t use an area around it. But I’m curious what is that metric and how is this proposal in relation?
  • I’m not sure what metric they were referring to, our estimate is that the development would increase traffic trips to 90 trips. Typically, we’re looking at 7 trips per household, so we’re not at the point where we think that’s true.
  • Attorney: The threshold is for a project is one that would generate 150 units which would require a mandatory environmental review.
• CM Beumer: What materials are being used for the proposed retaining walls? Building off that, looking at the stormwater plan, in most cases it looks like we’re looking at a 2-foot drop from the in grade up near the house down to top of wall. The grading plan appears to be set up to allow the water to drain over the retaining walls, which is a big no-no in the construction industry. Is there something we can do to proposal a change that would prevent this?
  • Bennett: Certainly, something we can explore with the developer. There is probably a balance with the ratio of back patio and the swail. I don’t have the details in front of me, but I think it’s a modular block retaining wall, which I think is typically built.
• CM Beumer: I was also looking at the tree plans, and the back of the units are showing primarily crabapple trees, shouldn’t we be looking at trees that grow quick and provide more shade? I know they’re beautiful now, but I think it would be advantageous to mix it up every other tree.
  • Wopata: We have a very specific tree policy, so we will be enforcing that when we get to final site plans and reviews.
  • Bennett: We do have species diversity regulations, so if they come in with a plan, they’d have to adjust according to those.
• CM Peterson White: Looking at the traffic counts, what is the estimated increase in trips per day and give us a sense of scale in neighborhoods in Northfield?
  • Bennett: A lot of the residential streets in the community are between 200-600 trips per day. Some streets in specific areas are more in the 1500. Washington Street is around 3000 per day. The expected on Filmore is within line and would be on the lower end of collector streets.
• CM Dahlen: Are there any data requests outstanding?
  • There are multiple data requests, some go back to 2002, which have been harder to fulfill. We’re still trying to fulfill the completeness of some of these requests.
  • Adm. Martig: The City Clerk might have more on that…
  • City Clerk: Yes, we do have one request still outstanding. It’s almost completely, just a few loose ends we’re tying up.
• CM Dahlen: One quick question, could you give us timeline or steps to be taken for County Road 1
  • Timeline depends on market conditions of future development. When we have private developments interested, city has everything set up.
• CM Ness: All this talk on streets and trees is in the development agreement and has nothing to do with the plat, which is what is on the agenda tonight, correct?
  • Wopata: From approval criteria, this is a type 4 review process. Planning Commission makes a recommendation with or without condition. They made a unanimous decision that this is a build-by-right instance. There are criteria that must be met and other that need to be considered, and staff reviews the plan to make sure it is in full compliance with regulations. This development is in line with our comprehensive plan. City staff’s recommendation conditions is the same as what went through Planning Commission, is that they develop a phase specific erosion and sediment control plan, install a 10 ft shared use path connecting the development to the middle school or Carter Dr., and an 8 ft path connecting the develop to Greenfield Dr.
• CM Beumer: Can the pedestrian crossing improvements that the residents are concerned about, can those be amended when we approve the final plat? Is that something staff can look into now and come back to us before the final plat?
  • Wopata: With the current timeline, with the applicant looking to get a final plat in June and us wanted to do counts in May, yes, that can be added to the final plat at that time.
• CM Holmes: Just to clarify, pedestrian improvements on this spot?
  • Bennett: We’re committed to doing pedestrian counts and maybe get the speed counter out there and identify areas of improvements. I think we’ll have to consider if there are improvements outside of this development, but that’s something we can discuss.
• CM Holmes: My question is that, if we amend the final plat, this is responsibility of the city, not the developer. This would be something we would be working together on. Could it be on the developer?
  • Bennett: My recommendation would be that it would be separate from the development and the plat.
• CM Sokup: I just want to make sure with the phased approach, with the 8 foot path on the east side, would that happen in the first phase? My concern is that we don’t end up getting that trail connection if it is in a later phase.
  • Bennett: Our recommendation is that the trails and paths would be required in the first phase.
• CM Ness: Confirmation, the plat is not in conflict with any state stature nor city code nor adopted plans, is that correct?
  • That is correct.
• Public Comment
  • Member of the public comment: Speaking on my own behalf, thank you to city staff for answering my questions. The phase two will nearly double the traffic in the area near the school. The 70+ units will increase the number of units in the area by almost 50%. The increase in traffic will make students and residents will make them much less safe. The council has the authority to trigger a discretionary environmental review, which should be done for a project of this size. The purpose of the EIS is not to stop something, but to make it better. Specifically, it should examine impacts of traffic and pedestrian crossing. Please require EIS as part of your efforts.
  • Member of the public comment: I’m here to ask you for something simple, but important: time. We feel there are still key pieces missing, including the zoning request and its legality. Just today, the neighborhood had the opportunity to meeting with the developer themselves, and had some issues resolved, but if we had the benefit of two more weeks’ time, we might move another mountain and some of those amendments might not be necessary. The neighborhood, the community, we’re not even speaking the same language as city staff. Some of the proposals you’ve seen have already been left on the cutting room floor. I wish we had done this sooner; we didn’t know that we could. There is a little more that we want, and two weeks could be beneficial.
  • Member of the public comment: I live on Carter Drive, just west of Filmore. We get a lot of traffic going back into the middle school. If we start adding all this traffic from down below, they’ll only have the one option to get out. If you want to do a study on traffic, do it soon because in a month, there won’t be anyone there because school will be out. Also, there are spots where there are cars going way too fast with little visibility, so take those into consideration too. Keep an eye on that.
  • Member of the public comment: One of the concerns I’ve had, is that I’ve heard you say it’d be 71 new residents. In my thinking, most families have two cars, so it wouldn’t be just 71 new cars, it’d be double that, increasing that traffic.
• CM Beumer: I’d like to motion to postpone the vote until next meeting, so that staff can gather the necessary information.
• CM Dahlen seconds motion to delay
• CM Beumer: My main concern is that residents are getting the information that they’ve requested prior to us making a decision. I’m concerned that we’re getting that information over to the citizens.
• CM Dahlen: Additional time, I think is a good idea, particularly on the heels of the Carleton CBP. One of the things was that the neighborhood wanted more information and things didn’t go smoothly, so I think more time is needed here.
• CM Peterson White: A question for staff and CM Beumer, what do we think will be discovered in exploring decades of zoning regulations? Question for city attorney, what considerations are needed, if it is a by-right development and meets all of our regulations? How should the council view our legal obligations?
  • Attorney: A preliminary plat is given 120 days for City Council to deny or approve it. In terms of postponing, certainly it is Council’s prerogative to postpone and that can be done, if it is within that 120 day period. That would be the framework for making the decision.
• • Mayor Zweifel: What day is the day for the final plat?
  • Wopata: There isn’t a date set. The plan is early June.
• CM Peterson White: I just would like someone to address my first question. It is very unclear to me what we think that will reveal when everything is in line already.
• CM Beumer: I guess my primary concern is just making sure that we make our best attempt to give the requested information to the people who have requested it prior to us making a decision. I don’t think that we’re going to learn anything more than what we already do. To me it’s just trying to get that request fulfilled prior to making a decision.
  • Adm. Martig: Data request discussions have been a growing issue, there is a tremendous amount of discussion at the state level. You have the discretion within the time period, but staff is committed to meeting the law, we want to process the requests as well as can be. Some are difficult to search through, some things we are not legally required to produce new data or to package it together if it is already available. What is the intent behind that, it is about transparency and law, but also should be put in context to the ability to make public policy. It is important to have information available, but it is also important to make decisions that meet our process and provide the information to the public. I caution against holding off on decisions due to data requests.
• CM Ness: You may have said it, but when do the 120 days expire.
  • Wopata: I don’t have it in front of me, but we’re not close to that.
• CM Ness: I know the developer wants to have this done by June, would two weeks throw off their time schedule?
  • Wopata: I can try to look at how it impacts every single person if we delay, the reality is that we’ve been very clear with our development partner that there are phases and multiple processes. It is becoming a time crunched scenario in terms of getting a final plat, construction approval, and breaking ground. I don’t want to overstate the impact, but we are in the time crunch arena.
• Mayor Zweifel: I do not support delaying, and I would propose that the request be fulfilled at the same time as the preliminary plat is approved. We are committed to transparency, but we also should make decisions when we have all the information needed.
• CM Holmes: I appreciate those comments and I would emphasis that we are not the mediators between residents and private entities. We have the information we need, and we can make things better for the final plat, but I don’t think it is our role as council to postpone when we have the information we need.
• CM Peterson White: I agree wholeheartedly and I think it is important to recognize what our role is here. The Council has a different role in development than it does here. This is a by-right development that meets the zoning requirements. I have the strongest belief in the public’s right to request data and transparency, but I also think that developers have for their requests and proposals to be considered without undue delay. All the steps that the city has taken to get this project to its point, everything is clear. I think to be honest, I don’t think anyone is trying to delay for merely political reasons, but for us to set a precedent to delay for a data request that is going to be time-consuming that will not affect the decision, would be unfortunate. I think the precedent would be a big problem. I understand people’s desire to discuss and provide input, this is not the final plat, but we have everything we need today. Mr. Wopata did an excellent job in detailing the concerns that we can address and the ones we must set aside. I see no reason to delay.
• CM Sokup: I appreciate the motion and understand the desire for a delay given the relatively quick news that there will be develop, I understand how concerning it can be. I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time, there are still several steps in this development. I don’t support the delay, but I am interested in what we can find and implement in terms of traffic and safety. I am encouraged that the developer is meeting with the neighborhood and I hope that we as councilmembers continue to be open to meeting and city be responsive to requests, but I don’t see that as a reason to delay.
• Motion to delay: Beumer & Dahlen – Aye; Holmes, Ness, Peterson White, Sokup, Zweifel – No — motion fails
• CM Peterson White motions to approve preliminary plat
• CM Peterson White: I want to set aside the idea that there is something bad about rentals and the idea that rentals are bad neighbors. I want to put that aside, I know it hasn’t been part of every comment, but it has been present. Another thing I’ve heard is people’s concern about their property value. As an elected official, I don’t think that it is my role to protect someone’s property value. I do think the city has some work to do on the roads around this development. This is the preliminary plat, there are many other steps. I understand that change is hard, and when people think one thing will be happening and something else does, that can be a hard adjustment. This particular development is so completely within the bounds of what is good for Northfield, especially when we get the infrastructure up to speed.
• CM Holmes: I want to thank all staff for their work put into this, with FOIA requests and the Planning Commission. For those who did not watch, they did unanimously vote in favor, it is a by-right development. There were concerns about the streets and the traffic proposals, so to CM Peterson White’s point I think it is important that we are looking to the future and making it better and demonstrating our commitment to safety. I know the call has been strong for an environmental review and other studies, and I have heard from others in this room and from different departments, so I have faith that we are not making things worse for this neighborhood. I think we can live up to our ideas of Cows, Colleges, and Community, the latter has been a bit lacking, but I think we can use this to welcome people into our community.
• CM Beumer: Thank you to Mr. Wopata and other city staff for getting everything together here. Thank you Ms. Peterson for your work with data requests. I want to start off by saying I’m not against developing this area, but I do have major concerns, all of which have been brought up by my neighbors, I do live in this area. I am stuck in a rock and a hard place, between listening to my constituents and reflecting their desires and I’ve also talked a lot about housing and it’s role in our economic growth. This is one of those issues I’ve been torn with, so I’ve been looking at it from a more legal standpoint. Thank you CM Peterson White and others for those comments, I hear what you are saying. I’ve still not 100% where I am, the traffic is still a big concern and I recognize that is a city problem more than a development problem. I recognize also that this is all within the regulations. I encourage staff to get those speed counters and traffic counts done, I’ll know if they don’t. It would be great if some of the work happening to develop and grow our community includes conversations and connectivity.
• CM Sokup: I won’t repeat anything that’s been said, I do want to echo the thank you to staff for all the information. I appreciate the focus on talking about this housing development within the larger picture of housing in town and across the state and country. Sometimes it’s difficult when we get these developments that aren’t city-led because it is very separate, but this does fit into the neighborhood and the city. It is important to keep in mind the safety concerns, but with that said, this type of housing is a starter home. While it’s not what we’re used to, this is what is affordable for young families. While they are rental, they will be accessible to young professionals and working class. The ramblers of the past are unaffordable now.
• CM Ness: I want to thank every staff person and safety person in this room for all the hours put into this.
• Mayor Zweifel: My vote tonight is a yes, and. I will be supporting this preliminary plat and I am very much in favor of the staff’s commitment to review the crosswalks and traffic. I appreciate the neighbors who toured me around and showed me their concerns and I think we can address them concurrently as this moves forward. Also thank you to the developers for engaging with the residents.
• CM Holmes: As we are going through the revamp of the residence code, how do we engage and share with people before shovels are in the ground.
• CM Beumer: Couple of things as I was listening to the rest of the comments. I believe that the last presentation we had, the value of the unit was $350,000/unit. I do want to put out that my house, as it sits, is $360,000. I think it is important to note that just because the fact that they’re rentals rather than for-sale units, I don’t think that will do anything to decrease any home values. I think the facades that are going on these homes, the siding is the same as what I put on multi-million dollar homes. The point I’m trying to make is, I’m not opposed to the development of that area or this particular development. A lot of what I’ve done this evening is that I felt the need to show my neighbors that I am trying to do my best and that they are getting answers to their questions. I’ve made up my mind, so when we’re ready we can get to the vote.
• Motion to approve preliminary plat, unanimously approved.

Administrators Update

• Adm. Martig: Wanted to give some updates on legislative tracking. We are seeking legislature approval for a sales tax for some capital projects. I don’t have a whole lot of new information, but as the session nears its end, it’s very fluid and not always super transparent. I should have been more conscious of that phrasing, but the caucuses sometimes figure out the details themselves, so you might find out at the same time that I do. The good thing is that the Senate passed out an omnibus tax bill and we are one of many cities included in that. There’s probably about 22 cities with existing local sales tax and an additional 30 cities that are looking at something similar. We’re tracking it, I did a check in with our House representative, but hopefully we’ll see it come to fruition.

Adjourn – Adjourned