##VIDEO ID:MmQcQdtRhis## okay we're going to call the meeting to order tonight and is there a motion to adopt the agenda I'll make a motion to adopt the agenda I'll second the motion and all in favor say I I opposed and that passes we first tonight are going to have the council member uh correct uh update it's okay so council member Smith if you could come up and give your updates please good evening Commissioners Jim Smith city council I just have a a short update actually last night of our meeting it was interesting because the power was going in and out and it was like we were at a cycle store or something it was just crazy but uh the cop that you guys recommended for boat world we agreed with what you did and the thing is we added three conditions and one was for marine equipment and boats and pontoons so that way there it stays that way and they don't bring in something else or if the property sells then they just can't come in and do what they want so that's we agreed and we voted on it so thank you for your recommendation that's all I got great thank you thank so next we'll go on to the approve approval of the minutes does anyone have any corrections I do um on minor one and a slightly less than minor one uh line 152 which is on packet page four um you need to add the word the between was and most so you read this was the most sensible solution and then on the fourth line the name of the business that was there was called Thistle and Ivy yeah not thisle Ivory Thistle and I iy Thanks for catching that welcome that's all I have anyone else okay do we have a motion to approve the minutes as corrected make a motion to approve the minutes as corrected second and all in favor say I I opposed and that passes and now we're going to go into the public hearing section of the meeting today we' ask you when you came in if you're going to be speaking to put your name address um phone number I believe on the the sheet here and it's uh just so that when we're doing the minutes we know the name of the people that we're speaking basically and when you do come up to public hearing we just test that you go up to the microphone and speak into the microphone try not to do a lot of turning around and pointing at the maps because it's not caught on the recording okay so we're going to start with the first public hearing which is a variance hearing thank you madam chair members of the Planning Commission uh this is a variance request to the general regulations for a detached accessory structure to be placed nearer the front lot line than the primary structure um this property is located in the Oak Glenn Estates and is in a rural residential zoning District the applicant's property is over two acres in size however one acre of the rear yard is Wetlands low lands and a drainage and utility easement Property Owners requesting a variance for the placement of a detached accessory structure closer to the street than the primary structure due to the drainage and utility easement restrictions as well as the subsurface treatment system septic system placement on the property section 14-4 permits a 2 acre parcel and accessory building of 1,800 ft in size section 142f states that no accessory building or detach private garage shall be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building with a bunch of exceptions this case does not meet the exceptions uh section 66 255 requires the minimum building setback from the delineated Wetland edge of 25 ft the septic tank and septic Mound are located east of the attached garage and while the well is located on the west side of the residence section 74-44 requires the minimum setback from a septic tank to be 10 ft and from a septic mound to be 20 feet however section 7445 permits the building official to reduce the setback from a detached accessory building uh or a garage with no basement by 50% or 10 ft additionally since this variance is a request for placement in front of the primary residence according to section 427 B2 the front yard setback distance for structural placement is 40 ft therefore if a variance for this placement is approved the detached accessory structure would still need to meet the 40 foot front yard setback the consideration of a variance requires the Planning Commission consider a three Factor test for practical difficulty the first Factor test of reasonableness means that the landowner would likely use the property in a practical way but cannot do so under the rules of the ordinance it does not mean that the land cannot be put to any reasonable use whatsoever without the variance for example if the variance for an application for a building too close to a lot line does not meet the required setback uh the F the focus of the first factor is whether the requested placement of a be building is reasonable in this case accessory structures are permitted as accessory uses in the rural residential family zoning District uh the septic system is located on the west side of the property a second factor is that the land owner's problem is due to circumstances unique to the property and not caused by the land owner the uniqueness generally relates to the physical characteristics of the particular piece of property that is to the land and not the personal characteristics or preferences of the land owner when considering a variance for a building to encroach or intrude into a setback the focus of this factor is whether there is anything physically unique about the particular piece of property such as sloping topography or other natural features like wetlands in this case the property is over two acres in size however as I stated before over one acre of the rear yard is a drainage and utility easement lowland or Wetland Wetland setbacks as defined by a state statute require a 25 foot setback from the delineated Wetland Edge and the placement of a SE setic system is prohibitive to the to the placement of a detached accessory structure within the setback rules of our ordinance the third factor is that the variance would not alter the essential character of a neighborhood this factor is used to consider whether the resulting structure will be out of scale out of place or otherwise inconsistent with the surroundings for example when thinking about a variance for an encroachment into a setback the focus is how the particular building will look closer to a lot line and if it fits within the character of the neighborhood in this case the minimum structural setback in this neighborhood is 40 ft and primary residences on neighboring properties were built at the minimum 40 ft structural setback the Planning Commission should review the requests hold a public hearing and recommend approval of the variants to the city council as presented in the resolution thank you so we're going to start with the public hearing portion and what I like to do is just ask the people who are not the property owners if you if there's anybody that wants to speak um come up first ask some questions um show your concerns and then we'll have the property owner come up afterwards if there's anybody else who wanted to speak tonight so we're going to open the public hearing and first of all does anyone want to come and speak to this matter that is not the property owner and if not we'll ask the property owner to come up if he or she is here not okay so then we're going to close the public hearing and we will open this for discussion among the Commissioners the Commissioners did you see the last attachment in the packet for this property um that shows this is the site plan uh where the intention of putting the detached accessory structure will will be in relationship to the house driveway the street the drain field as well as the well however in the backyard you can see there's a drainage utility easement and lowlands or Wetlands the next picture here that I've highlighted for you shows that over an acre of the backyard is not buildable and there's also a drainage and utility easement that's 15 ft wide on both sides of the property line on this side of the primary residence therefore building a detached accessory structure anywhere on the property other than where their requesting is virtually impossible thank you very much okay gentlemen any comments um I noticed the placement might um uh do something about the the front porch View for the residents to the east I believe um but uh yeah I mean looking at that Wetland layout I mean there's there's really no other spot to put this unless they reduce the size um minimum or the maximum accessory structure was 1,800 Square ft and the layout is for 864 square foot so that's less than half the size um of the maximum uh I think it'd be nice if um maybe the property owner were to discuss this with the neighbors but um yeah there's really no other place to put an accessory structure on that plot of land and they have all received notices and you've received no comments city has not had any calls or comments or emails on this uh public hearing y I usually take that as a sign there aren't objections yeah right I'm okay with it you're good no when it says that the other primary structures in the neighborhood are at that 40 foot minimum setback like I see the the houses on the East and the West are those the ones that you're talking about there so the one to the east is approximately 40t the one directly across the street is definitely 40 ft yep um so those are the two in the neighborhood that would definitely be at the 40 foot minimum set back so when this this neighborhood was platted the developer or the Builder could have built as close as 40 ft to the front and then the access to the building is going to be a driveway off of the kind of a stub off of the drive I mean they are allowed um two driveways in the rural residential he would the applicant would have to apply for a permit however according to the layout presented by the applicant it does appear that they intend on using the existing driveway uh here and then making entry into the what new proposed garage from the West Side off of their existing driveway so there wouldn't be a need for a second driveway in that short little um 200 foot stretch of of Frontage I don't really have any reason to object especially with yet the other houses in the area being set back I agree the same or less okay like to make a motion oh agre go ahead a motion to approve the resolution granting a variance for the placement of a structure nearer to the front property line then the principal structure for the construction of a residential detached accessor structure on the property located at 4141 226 avenue pin number 0233 2314 04 with any and all staff recommendations applied thank you and is there a second I'll second okay any other discussion if not all in favor to the motion say I I and opposed so that motion uh carried and that will be on the city SE 9th city council meeting will be the final decision on that variance request okay September 99th September 9th all right the next public hearing is going to be about a concept plan on Viking Bullard one second to get to the agenda item here and I have to toggle back and forth between a couple different slides of different sizes so um if there are any questions let me know this is the aerial view of the property right now now uh the Planning Commission is going to be asked to hold a public hearing and review the concept plan for a three lot rural residential development at 3400 34 the 3400 block of Viking Boulevard Northeast as you can see from the screen it is currently vacant land that's why it does not have an actual address it has not been assigned an address yet um this property has two vacant Parcels uh totaling 60 Acres located within the rural residential zoning District approximately 35 Acres of the proposed lots are Wetland and likely unbuildable with the rural residential zoning District the minimum lot size requirement is 2 Acres with a density not to exceed one unit per two and a half acres all Lots within this proposed subdivision would meet the 2 acre minimum lot size additionally each lot meets the minimum 200t width at the um right of way front yard setback there are no internal streets proposed in this plan each lot would need to obtain an individual access permit from the enoka County highway department the New Concept plan uh if approved tonight would land on the um East bethl Parks Commission agenda of the next meeting um the standard Park dedication fee for a new development is $2,000 per new created parcel uh next steps based on the feedback received from the concept plan the owner can modify plans prior to making application for their preliminary or final plat approvals once a preliminary plat application is received it will be forwarded to the city as well as the County engineer for comments and final approvals staff is requesting that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing take feedback on the proposed concept plan and informally advise the developer SL owner on any adjustments to their plan prior to the creation of a preliminary and final plat application thank thank you so then there'll be no motion tonight is that correct just informal feedback that I can provide to the developer or land owner on his proposed lot split that's correct no no formal motion okay thank you unless you're feeling strongly about something and want to turn it into a formal motion you certainly can all right so we're going to open up the public hearing on this and first of all we'd like to ask any interested parties to come up to the microphone if you have anything that you'd like to say if you have any concerns that might be answered by the landowner anyone want to speak on this and if not we're going to close the public hearing and we'll open up the discussion for this item Erin did you have anything else that you want to add I just pulled up the um concept plan proposal it's really hard for me to get it all onto the screen but as you can see uh from the previous slide it's these two large Parcels that are farmland and Wetland right now they will be combined and split the Long Way North and South to a 13 and 13.85 acre parcel a 14.47% those would be a single family home under this proposal that is really fine print yes so so then each one will have a a driveway off of Viking each one will be required to have their own driveway off of um Viking Boulevard approved by the County engineer Viking Boulevard is also an NOA County Highway 22 uh and the city cannot Grant access through the County's right of way the county has has to do that so if there are any driveways spacing concerns or bypass lane concerns or driveway widths or access requirements that will all come through a driveway access permit from Anoka County and obviously we would not let them build until they present us with an access permit yeah do you know if there's any intention that on that lot three that that someday might be subdivided or do they intend to keep it as big so lot three is tricky um I would say most of that flag if you will on there is all Wetland uh this this 40 acre parcel on the backside um a buts County Park Wetland property already uh as you can see from this um photograph here well maybe I'll get it in screen here with the exception of this line little bit of land right here um this is all Wetland and unless someone's willing to pay and a substantial amount of money to trade Wetlands for actual land I don't think that that will ever be developed I I don't want to say ever but it's very expensive so there's going to be um a residence towards Viking and then the rest is really just kind of open land I I believe the owner applicant wants to place his home on parcel number three uh closer to the trees back here um if you drive by today I think there are some storage containers kind of tucked back into the trees I'm assuming that's where we're going to start uh building but nothing's been approved at this point no applications for homes have come in either but those will be long um substantial driveways okay has this uh land been under the ownership of the current property owner for some time now it's a recent purchase so you had to buy the two lots then correct they were both for sale in one package and he purchased both of them okay so we either make him combine them or he plats them and that's why you're seeing what you're seeing tonight sure platted three different ways correct I notice right here there's Wetland but it it shows that it's you know know not as bad as what's behind it are they legally allowed to move that remove it fill it in or does something have to be done there is that um so the the um next phase of development would be a wetland delineation unless the delineation has already actually been done um they would then have to make application with uh Minnesota Board of soil and water mhm to determine if filling that is is acceptable or what exchange rate they may have in order to pay for wetland banking in another location to exchange for that which is a two to two to one rate um I don't want to speak on on behalf of the owner but my assumption is that's going to sit as raw land and be for sale and it's going to be the next buyer's sure problem to deal with but that's just my my my uh hypothetical scenario and that was going to be my question to you too about is do you think that the landowner is kind of aware of those regulations about what Landers he's just yes we had it on he and I had conversations correct okay does anybody have any concerns about doing this no not at this point not down here either nope okay do you have any advice for the land owner I think this would be a lot different if there was a proposed road with a culdesac and 17 to 20 21 homes proposed in there but we're literally dividing up some current vacant land that was probably being taxed egg that will now be taxed residential uh or potential residential um it's a 13 14 and 32 acre parcel our minimums are 2 Acres so we're well exceeding the minimum requirements by our zoning code on on these three Parcels as well so yeah so it's kind of BU or beware situation with the the new people coming in well there'll be a lot more work to do this is just concept plan as you remember with a couple of other subdivisions that we've had in in our recent history uh this is just step one basically of is is this something the city would support or not um and if if you guys make the recommendation and the council says yeah go ahead then a larger investment will be uh encumbered by the land owner at that point for preliminary plat and final plat so okay well I would say that will did you want to say something I was just going to ask are there are there um houses across the street here I been yes you can see these dashed lines here those are likely Parcels I I can pull up the map yeah I'm trying to find it on my tiny little phone okay it's on here yeah oh there you can see them there's actually a street there and one of my concerns was that there's like two-thirds of that this property has a bypass lane uh for the Naples Street turn that is a concern that I brought to the County's attention and the county said until we have a preliminary plat to review we're we have no comment so I hypothetically think that they'll have some conditions to meet with the county but like I said we're not going to approve any building plans until the county approves an access so okay well I we I think we'll just move on without aemotion then and not a lot of advice other than everybody kind be very aware of what's going on with the wetlands okay agre so then the next item is going to be on resoning and I'm going to be passing gble just in case you to Gabriel I'm going to recuse myself from this um convers well from voting I might have a few comments but I I just want to recuse myself because my property is right across the highway from from where we're talking about res zoning okay wonderful next item resoning the parcels along the west side of 65 in an R2 zone between kond de drive and 207th Avenue Northeast Aaron thank you Mr chair members of the Planning Commission how' that sound Mr chair I I'm blushing you okay all right at the the formal request of the city council the Planning Commission should review a rezoning request of parcels from an R2 to a B2 to better align the use in this area with the city's overall goals City staff have received requests from the owner of 20454 Highway 65 the former hunters in for a rezoning of the property in order to facilitate the sale of the property this property although once an active commercial use in a residential Zone has been discontinued for more than 365 days as a non-conformity it loses its ability to be used as a legal non-conformity after one year of discontinued use this provision is also contained in East bethl city ordinance as well as State Statute additionally City staff have responded to zoning information requests for the property at 1351 kondik Drive Northeast which is currently on the market for sale as a corner lot it may have more value as a commercial parcel than a residential parcel due to its proximity to Highway 65 these two properties are located in a larger area approximately 120 Acres Zone single family and town home residential R2 which stretches from kondik Drive Northeast North to the area of 27th Avenue Northeast although there are two single family residential Parcels directly on on Highway 65 in this R2 Zone it also contains over a 35 acre salvage yard which was approved by a conditional use permit back in 1996 when the area was originally a B2 Zone uh in summary according to the Anoka County tax assessor Alex guggenberger as long as the existing use of a property Remains the Same the tax classification would remain the same tax classification is how property is assessed not the underlying City Zoning classification the property zoning designation might change but that would not change the actual use or tax classification the underlying zoning classification helps determine the highest and best use of a property from a valuation perspective if a rezoning were to be approved the two residences located within the area would allow to be remain a residential use located in a commercial Zone and taxed as residential the rezoning would also create a continuous commercial Zone on the west side of Highway 65 from Sims Road Northeast South to 197th Avenue Northeast uh the city's met Council sector representative has been consulted and does not believe that the Met Council would be opposed to rezoning of this area currently outside of the Musa boundaries in the city's 2040 comprehensive plan commercial and Industrial Development is allowed in our future growth area which is north of the Musa provided each site can be supported by a viable septic system um staff are waiting on more definitive answers to determine how this change will require an administrative comp plan Amendment now or if this can be updated during the next required update since this change is outside of the M boundary what I can tell you is that after this report was created I did receive a call back from our city sector representative Eric WJ who told me that um because this area is outside of the Musa boundary they have no issues with it and we would not need to do a comp plan Amendment at this time Additionally the southern portion of this area is classified as a sign ific natural environment the primary purpose of a significant natural environment uh overlay district is to protect resources and functional values that have been identified by the enoa Conservation District the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Metropolitan Council as providing benefits to the sustainability of Natural Resources in the community this classification by ordinance requires properties be developed by a planned unit development in order to provide maximum flexibility and encouraged devel development that enhances natural characteristics and values natural resources on a uh parcel or construction site the Planning Commission should review the information hold a public hearing and make a formal recommendation to the city council regarding the rezoning of the identified area from single family and town home residential R2 to Central Business B2 in order to better align this area use with the City's overall goals thank you you get your light reading in for the day we're going to open the public hearing again if you would come up state your name and address clearly into the microphone so that we can keep it on record um and we'll open it now anybody who wishes to speak come forward anybody no holds bar Thomas thls 1218 Klondike Drive uh the red outline there is a lot bigger than the one that got mailed to me so what does that mean yeah so the the parcels that are identified are these in purple my mapping system doesn't allow me to whittle down this red box any tighter um but it would be the areas here in purple um the parcels in purple that were identified by address and parcel ID number in that notice that you got those specific Parcels you guys had mentioned that it goes all the way to Sims so there's currently a commercial Zone north of I will pull up a different map here that'll explain um it will make it easier if I just go this way so these properties here and these properties here all the way to Sims and I'll put on an overlay here so you can visually see what I'm talking about are currently Zone B2 this purple color so if we follow that down it we're this the council is asking for a rezoning of those Parcels I showed you which would then extend that commercial Zone down here to Klondike which is already a B2 as well so to be one continuous commercial Zone along the west side of Highway 65 with that commercial zone is there any regulations on like 24hour businesses or any is there any so each each business that would come in um would be required to apply for a permit and uh the proposal the use um there would most likely be a public hearing for each applicant um under under this proposal um where everyone would have an opportunity to say their information just like tonight about the potential uh happening there thank you thank you Thomas anybody else anything you want to bring up sorry remember actually here speaking on behalf of my father the owner of 1351 perfect1 my name is Robin Mets I live on Breezy Point Drive okay uh my question is you talked about a little bit about um sustainable use could you expand on that a little bit I'd just like to understand what we're talking we do have that property for sale currently yeah um this was I mean I've only been um an East Beth employee for two years so this was when doing research on this area I came across this information um I will pull up the overlay so that everyone can see what I'm referring to um as you can see this green hatched in area has been identified by Anoka County the Met Council uh and the DNR as containing um species of plants Andor animals that they would like to see protected although it doesn't state that it can't be developed it just says that during the development of those part Parcels that have this overlay there should be considerations for the environmental items that have been identified so each one of these would be required a a planned unit development application which is more highly scrutinized by the council by the commissions by my staff in Community Development myself to ensure that um we can allow them the flexibility to make changes to our current standards so that they can protect the environment okay is there is there any documentation on what they found in that particular area that they thought required um I'm sure there is um I have in I I'm happy to do the research if you point me in the I can hand this is what is in our um city code on the the significant natural environment overlay district and the reasons why and I I'm assuming there might be some identification in there but it may just limit it to plants species animals whatever so we know that pretty well Prett much sa like we it looks nothing specifically special about it it looks like your dad's Corner isn't been identified okay um but the surrounding properties have been so Robin before you go to um I'll just point out that you know so we have the the property right across the highway from where you guys are so we're at kondik and 65 to and you see all those green lines and blue blotches or what we had to deal with when we were farming also and you know I'm not saying that you can sail through it but um we were able to to expand our farming on the property oh and Robin what was your last name oh sorry mat MC okay thank you thank you any other questions comments no what if this all gets zoned as commercial uh so south of kondik north of kondik all the way to Sims is all commercial now what does that mean for the water tower what does that mean for city sewer and water So currently um are you talking the proposed water tower you talking the existing system that we currently have you guys have been proposing a lot of water tower since I've lived sure yeah um uh the the most recent proposal that was pitched to the legislature on a bonding bill which would be State dollars paying for it um was proposed to be placed up near Sims so this would have to be a fairly lengthy extension of either the existing system or a new system to get to it it's probably still Out Of Reach at this point is your concern um having to hook up with the sewer yeah if the water up you came in I live on the corner of Buchanan and Klondike and 15 20 years ago when I was going to come through I could have put in three septic systems and saved money so just curious mhm than thank you thank you Thomas figure if we wait long enough we'll get everybody to speak Dan 20688 Canon Street So to that question If the previous proposal was for up by Sims and then this is rezoned can they make a new proposal to use this land if that one was rejected rejected for what for the water tower proposal resed as proposed would this be acceptable land to use for a water tower in the future the reason the proposal happened up by Sims that's twofold one the city already owns land up there that we don't have to acquire and two it's the closest possible location for us to get filtered treated and drinkable water to the elementary schools straight down Sims to Cedar Creek and East bethl Elementary now feeders off of that for the businesses in the area would ultimately benefit or you know expand business if if they're interested in hooking up right so if if this is rezoned um the city doesn't own any of it so we would have to purchase it from the private seller in order to even put in uh treatment system Water Tower or anything okay and then I guess while up here why other than what was stated in terms of like it being more valuable why is this now being prop like why is it a priority or what plans people already space yeah there so there are with the exception of um his Corner which is currently zoned residential but it's right on Highway 65 in Klondike I don't know if it makes sense to put it's a very small parcel I'm not sure you're going to get nothing more than one house on there um but it could potentially be a service station um well that's a matter of opinion I guess I don't I don't uh well whatever uses right it's it would be Zone commercial whoever buys it can propose whatever they want there I mean to that point traffic sure um I pointed out that 35 Acres of that is already a commercial space it's the junkyard is that one one business and then um the land owner or the the owner of Hunter in would like to sell it as commercial property so he's sitting on a building right now that nothing can happen with um we looked into uh potentially just rezoning his lot to help him sell we were told that that is not legal it's spot zoning so in order to help move some things in that area get things moving um as I stated I immediately questioned taxes on this and reached out immediately to the assessor the county assessor to question what's going to happen to these Parcels for tax purposes he tells me that as long as it remains a residential use if there's a house there it will still be taxed residential yeah so we're going to reone all this area for one person one person's business and nobody's buying hunters in to tear it down to put up an apartment building either it's right next to a salvage yard this so again this was a proposal by the city council so we're just moving it through the process if you have questions about those intents you could reach out to council members I thank you Dan are you the current owner of hunters in right now no no okay okay gotcha okay for for the sake of it being on record please do so when I had originally called about this you'll have to speak into the microphone for otherwise we won't be able to record what you say I had originally called about this 10 months ago sure what was your name again Doug Shuster I have the listenting okay and they had told me that the met conso and that was pretty highly unlikely that they would you know go down that road now maybe it was because of spot we were just looking at that one parcel you know I don't know so what is the process then from here to make that change you've said you've already had conversations with the Met Council and they I have personally as as a city city staff member they are not opposed to it they're not telling us we need to make a comp plan amendment in order to make this happen they don't even need an administrative um approval for a comp plan change because this is outside of the sewer water area as long as we keep density um when uh numbers in mind for future expansion um when approving plans for each one of these Parcels okay so I guess what I'm asking is timeline you know if it was a change designations how long does it take for that process to happen um so these guys will make a recommendation tonight September 9th it'll go in front of the city council city council can make the approval uh and I need about two days to get everything formal and finalized and signed off it'll be quick it'll be three weeks month okay if if everything goes that way okay yeah yep thank you Doug is that it anybody else closing the public hearing any discussion Glenn will be back soon I'm sure when I was looking at our zoning District I didn't understand why it wasn't this way to begin with so I'm not oppos to it as I mentioned I think I found back in 96 that the salvage yard was already it was already a B2 Zone I don't know why they changed it back I wasn't here in 2008 when the entire comp plan of the whole city changed this residential Zone here doesn't make a lot of sense to me but the only hypothetical I can come up with is is the city was required to designate so many potential Acres of future residential development based on the bigger plan um and if that's the case when we do a comp plan amendment in the obligated one is every 10 years uh if we find out during that amendment that we have to redesignate other zones for residential we'll have to figure out the density then at that point but and that's why I reached out to the Met Council to confirm that they were approving of this before we even brought this in front of the council and the commission um and it takes some time for the Met Council to answer questions back uh and then moving all of these parts and components as you know our Planning Commission meetings have been fairly uh agendas have been fairly heavy uh with things that have 60 day deadlines and so this as a non- priority gets pushed if those priority projects come in which they have been so I mean I I feel it's consistent with everything else going along the way there you know I would find it strange if people started popping houses up in here right on 65 so I mean it makes sense to me from that standpoint in the recommendation part of this agenda item it mentions the city's overall goals can you expand on that any or no yeah so if you look at uh our zoning map uh I will bring that up here and if you take a look um at this colorful Stripe Right alongside of Highway 65 on either side of Highway 65 the plan is designed for that to develop uh commercially industrial as well as high density residential um the the yellow area outside of this stripe which is um identified as the Musa area right now and then the future use area down the road um this is where the main commercial industrial development is supposed to happen the core of development uh whereas outside of that area where you can see it starts to bleed a little orange and then goes to Yellow is supposed to remain single family residential so it' be it would be uh much more difficult for us to rezone a section outside of that Corridor area than what we're what has been proposed right now this is where this is where development is going to happen okay question you want back you I guess it's up to the chair I'm going to reopen public hearing for you Thomas and I want to hit the gavel if this does go commercial his property becomes a whatever business is there anything that the city has that would restrict 24-hour operation of that because there I get that it's going to be commercial but is right next to four residen m y they can I mean the one residence is 40 feet from clonic yeah they can put restrictions on so the proposed the proposed uses in the B2 Zone if this would be helpful these are the already existing approved businesses that could come in would be a club or Lodge of some sort a commercial florist a health recreation facility like a workout gym a potential condominium medical uses with the exception of a hospital so like a clinic an office complex uh public Recreation I'm not sure what that means fast food full service retail office or multi-tenant structure retail sales and service completely inside Financial Services like a bank or Credit Union uh Tavern bar Brewery or Tap Room motor vehicle service station so like a gas station with no repairs whatsoever allowed essential government like City Hall uh and then Brew Pub craft brew micro Distillery or we would allow food trucks and parking lots in this in this zone so no business restrictions for noise or lights well we have existing noise ordinances that everyone has to comply with whether they're a business or Not Right But holiday gas station's got their lights on and it's like the sun 24 hours a day I I understand that yep are there are there restrictions on that about how far light can be cast correct there are and they each proposal has to come in with a lighting plan and it gets reviewed by our city engineer to make sure that it meets engineering standards um prior to approval okay one more time closing the public hearing you know I in in response to that you know as far as health or recreation facility I know right on 65 somewhere there's that 24-Hour Fitness you know so that one would probably constitute gas station my personal feeling is without sewer and water it's going to be very limited on what businesses are actually able to develop in this area MH um with sewer and water it's an entirely different story any more discussion yeah on that same point I would think that we would be looking carefully at a business that was directly adjacent to a residential area and consider that as far as a 24-hour business if that were proposed um and have enough concern for our residents that we would decline a specific business that would require that so it's it's not just because it could be done it would be done as it would have to go through two bodies us as a recommendation body and city council we also have significant screening requirements if a commercial parcel of bots AR residential parcel there are extra hurdles that have to be accommodated in the development um section of our city code screening bming trees anybody want to make a motion I mean I'm looking at this in the the existing 35 acre lot that's is that you pull our parts there yes mhm I mean that's already considered B2 because of how it was voted in in 1996 so that being a significant chunk of this area that's proposed um I guess I I mean it'd be nice I I think to have a continuous along the side of I 65 to where it's all commercial but I I don't know that that's necessary here I mean if that middle 35 acres is a B2 Zone uh and they're happen to be R2 zones next to it um I I can see the the city having goals of wanting to develop along there um but I don't you know without like you said sewer and water going it's I mean this is obviously preliminary uh in in future development for the city uh so I guess I can see myself going either way on it I mean it's so are you saying you you'd like to see it where instead of this whole strip it just takes on that 35 acre parcel with up poar parts as well as the the in that's being sold do you can you show that on the map like the um where it is in the R2 District right now hard to see but or is easy this is the salvage yard it bleeds onto this parcel here um and then this is the hunters in parcel there's a residential there's a house here and I believe there's one here uh this one is the vacant parcel on the corner of Klondike um this is a field agricultural field right now um and then a majority of this is Wetlands or swamp which you're not putting an apartment building or a house in the middle of a swamp either so yeah I kind of Stand By You know even if you did did it that way I couldn't see somebody coming in to build their house right on 65 so I I just don't have too much issue with resoning the whole strip there if we knew a little bit more about the significant natural environment situation we'd be better informed as to what kind of business could coexist with whatever they needed to prod checked over there CU definitely if it's like a wildlife Corridor area which I don't know why it would be but if it were a 24-hour lit business wouldn't make any sense I mean that would be polar opposite so those are restrictions that would be put on when a proposal would come in does it does it match does it align with uh my assumption is um because this area was identified by an NOA County um water conservation they're going to have input the DNR is going to have input as well as the city so um as you can see I pulled up the Wetland overlay you can see how much of that area is actually low lands or Wetlands right now um so looks like almost you know a third of you pull our parts 35 acres is wetland the other 2/3 is cars and I don't think that'll ever be developed Soh I guess I just see this as a you know obviously a first step on on a long journey it just it seems like that journey is going to take quite some time just because of the uh the uh snaa um just the uh the hurdles that have to be jumped through for development there what's um is is there a lot of resource um the city is allocating for if this was to be rezoned as a B2 um or is it just drawing new lines on the map pretty much what we're doing that's what we've been asked to do and this was again prompted by the city council so and you said what like two days of your time straight 12-hour days so Financial Resources none my time it's been ongoing for quite some time small bits of research here and there accumulating enough information to put this together for tonight but um as uh the real estate agent pointed out we've had this sort of request stuff happening for several if not longer 10 months or more um but to put everything everything together and get it all ready to go and then have the available commission time to hear it is also part of the equation so I imagine businesses too would be more drawn to an area that was zoned for what they were wanting to develop yeah I I mean I don't you know the surrounding area here is mostly sod Fields uh a few residences as we've pointed out um this is undeveloped land um this one's got a um swamp hole in the middle of it and a driveway yep a driveway to um and again we reach the salvage yard which is already a commercial operation we got this one that can't be used as a residential it would have to be tore down mhm this is a house and then this is farmland so my opinion would be the most developable piece for multifam is right here potentially here this doesn't make sense for homes no this has got wet lens running through it this has got um hole in the middle of it and we didn't I kept this one one out of consideration because of the amount of significant natural environment that overlay that's over the top of it so and eventually at some point these will develop into businesses as well CU those are already in the this is already B2 zoned this is zoned for high density residential but they can't build it right now because there's no sewer and water connections available they could go plat the land and build one townhouse and then the future plan would that one townhouse would be supported by its own septic and well and as soon as or if whenever sewer and water came through then the rest of them could be built based on the ghost plat so financially it doesn't make sense to do anything with this one either but that's already zoned um high density residential if I could just offer an opinion on the hunt hunter in it's the name of the The Old Pro business right I mean those guys really are behind between a rock and a hard spot because there's nothing that can be done with that that property it it would be nice to see a business there maybe a restaurant or something like has been there in the past but you nobody is going to build a house on that property and we don't know maybe um you our Parts is interested in that parcel but it's currently residential can't be sold as commercial at this point it's get only sold as residential so there's no there's nobody out there looking at it for a residential purpose so hypothetically if they did want to do that they couldn't expand their business to it because it's residential right now correct yep there's not a conditional use permit that would allow that to happen would like to make a motion I'm sorry are we making motions you are certainly welcome to Yes uh I'd like to make a motion to uh recommend to the city council rezoning the identified area from single family and town home residential R2 to Central Business B2 District um as outlined on the agenda of 27 August 2024 item 5c would be the draft ordinance revision okay we have a motion do we have a second I would second that take a vote all in favor say I you should take discussion first just in case I heard commissioner Terry with a little I'm getting excited sorry Terry any further discussion um I'm wondering why that southern part to kondik South of the um up parts you pull parts why does that need to be part of the consideration this one right well between that and the parts place so including the residential lot there why could it not stop at the foot of the upol parts and not continue further south there's a residential also just north of you polar Parts yeah what's that there's a house just north of you po Parts as well right but if we're talking about resoning I'm just wondering why it needs to continue all the way down to kondik so I don't know if you if you can see here commissioner Terry but there's tractors trucks trailers I'm assuming this is already commercial use too in a residential Zone even though there are there's a house here for sure uh I'm assuming this is sort of a Comm operation I see gravel um it's a probably a construction company of some sort that's been grandfathered in so it's already has it already has a commercial use and then part of the salvage yard is already on this parcel as well so that takes that one out of the equation that that leaves you with this corner one mhm which is this gentleman's correct which is his and he's trying to sell as well I'm trying to find out how got to be yeah I bought it you're right B2 understand yeah any further discussion call for a vote all in favor say I I I all opposed and I'm abstaining on this one there we have it so the formal um recommendation to uh approve the ordinance change will reach the city council agenda on September 9th perfect lovely thank you Aron all right our last item is about meats and Bounds one second to get me uh in the right location here page 35 oh and and I do want to thank everybody for your comments it's not always easy to get up and talk in public but we really appreciate everybody's speaking all right thank you again Madam chair members of the Planning Commission on July 24th 2024 uh Nicole Shrek submitted an application for a meets inbound split of a 20 acre parcel located at 22645 Baton Street Northeast I'm not going to recite the pin number uh into to divide into three Parcels the first parcel will contain an original single family home and will be divided off as a 7.88 acre lot the remaining 12.50 Acres will be subdivided into a 6.0 acre lot and a 6.42 acre lot the property proposed for the division is in the rural residential zoning district and per city code appendix a zoning section 42 the minimum lot size for any division in the rural residential zone is 2 Acres with a lot minimum lot width of 200 feet at the public RightWay and 23,000 square feet of buildable area to be eligible to use uh meets and Bounds division as outlined in the zoning code section 12-2 the following conditions must be met the parcel must be a minimum of 5 Acres the parcel must have a minimum uh Road Frontage of 300 ft the parcel must contain 23,000 ft of buildable area it must have appropriate Road public utility and drainage easements as outlined by ordinance 151 in a Park and trail dedication fee as adopted by the city council uh must be paid at the time of certification of the parcels although this proposal this proposed split meets four out of the five conditions it exceeds the minimum lot requirements in the rural residential Zone the Planning Commission is requested to review this petition for a meets and Bounds parcel split and make a recommendation to the city council to approve or deny the parcel split with conditions identified in the attached resolution thank you and does This One require an official motion then approve or Den corre end no public hearing just an official uh formal recommendation any discussion Aon I am I think I know what it is but can you tell me which of the five conditions has not been met is it the 300 ft of minimum Road front that's correct okay and that's on all of them so each lot in this proposal yep um this the first lot the North Lot would have 200 feet of Frontage the existing home is on one that would have 260 feet of Frontage and the third parcel to the South would have 24.95 ft of Frontage now the minimum Frontage required in the rural residential zone is 200 ft uh under a meets in Bound split they're requiring 300 ft sure so if you take a look at the properties across the road um give me a second to get the address in here the properties directly across the street are less in acreage mhm have the minimum 200 feet of Frontage um not 300 uh in a subdivision so their request is to divide this is actually a family farm the parents have passed away the siblings are trying to split the land uh and sell off um to be done with the property so so is that one that AB buts 227th the or is it the it's this one right here in the middle y I've asked them in their survey to make sure that with the the home in this location and the accessory structure here as well as the driveway that they comply with all other zoning code regulations in the rural residential zone so the only thing that it discrepancy is 300 feet versus 200 fet but this whole area you can have a minimum of 200 ft MH do you know what the logic behind the difference of feet with the meats and Bounds is I do not I tried to research that because I knew someone would ask me that question I have no idea when I research uh meats and bound split it just has to do with linear feet I don't know where the arbitrary number of 300 feet came out unless that's an equal division of five acres in some form but I can't make that math work either so I'm not 100% sure but this would have more more than the required 23,000 ft of buildable territory it would have more than the 200 ft of Road Frontage which is required by the zoning district and all proposed um property lines meet the 25 foot setback by zoning code so with the exception of like I said 200 versus 300 this would meet the zoning code for the rural residential district per lot it's hard to be a strickler for rules when the rules don't have a logical explanation behind them yeah I can't explain it I have no idea I looked at other cities and other cities have different numbers as well so I don't I someone pulled that number I I can't make sense of it sure do you think we're setting any unreasonable precedence with this one I don't I don't believe so I mean each of these are Case by case and you can make a recommend whatever recommend you want to the city council the council can ultimately approve whatever they want whether it's based on your recommendation or as opposed to your recommendation so okay and we don't have like the three Factor test that we have to do that does not exist no okay do you guys have anything uh no it's sounds like they want to divide it up if it's just uh you know inheritance or passing it on to the next generation uh um you they're probably trying to make the most of what they have uh I I have I have no objection to it do we have a motion I will make a motion to recommend approval of the parcel split um with conditions as identified in the resolution is there a second I'll second the motion thank you and any further discussion if not we'll have a vote all in favor say I I and opposed okay that motion passed and um that will come up to the SE 9th as well city council is going to be busy all right thank you and my goodness we're at the end of the agenda no updates do we have a motion to adjourn make a motion to adjourn second all in favor say I I opposed all right thank you everybody yeah oh thanks