##VIDEO ID:ORi8tDWaKj0## this conference will now be recorded So finally just takes a while yes finally finally it's Tak a long time all right call meeting order any changes to the agenda yeah is it motion to I move we approve the agenda is printed second all right [Music] approval of the minutes there one correction in the first item buer that made the motion in the item number one Jo made the motion I second I'll make a motion to approve as amended I'll second then them good all in favor say I I I post St carries 500 uh public hearings we've got three minutes to go before the first one pardon me out there before we start that's fine is that right yep so uh 4 a regarding a minor subdivision at 819 fth Street West yes you can see here this is Clyde henrik's land he's applied for minor subdivision for his land which has been surveyed he'd like to partial off 4.59 Acres of his from parcel offers current home resulting in two separate tax Parcels the reason to approve this was to promote development within the city limits of zambro resulting more economic activity and larger tax base their survey of the property was provided by Mr Henri and so the minor subdivision would look something like this this is a rough drawing but it'll basically come down from here about wait excuse me start this there we from here down to right about there go across now create his own Homestead parcel and this land will then be separate from his home land he does have three accessory buildings and within that size of lot he's allowed three accessory buildings uh the setbacks will work just fine for this and so he's just separating it land so the large chunk of land nothing's being done he's just drawing a boundary right there where you can see those blue lines I'll open the public hearing then so so is there are the Henri's here or or a representative I don't know anybody representing the HCK this is their daughter were there any comments from them before I allow no okay uh anybody here uh has an opportunity to ask questions or make comments on this proposed minor subdivision if anybody wants to um speak uh one thing to keep in mind is from a zoning standpoint as long as the new proposed lot the the split of the building site complies with the zoning ordinance as far as lot size and dimensions and setbacks then we really don't have much say on whether to on on denying this so that's something to keep in mind is if the proposed split meets the zoning requirements we pretty much have to approve unless there's some drastic reason not to anyway anybody have any comments and if they do uh please identify yourself I a question do we need that Brian yep and I'm one of the property owners that has a town home um Brian you want to right right in that area there exactly and so I I have no issue with Mr henrik's doing the the lot line but I do have a question what who would then own that piece would he continue to own that piece of property where the line is drawn through yeah he okay all right is there do we know is there is the city interested in purchasing that larger piece for development at this point the city is not we haven't talked about okay and to my knowledge there hasn't been any developers looking either recently okay so I know there's been different things along the way that inquire on that land but we've got nothing right now okay so I guess I have one concern and would ask um the the Eda to just bear in mind that if we do at some time in the future develop there that we have some sort of an easement that runs along there so that we can access our backyards like if we need to bring and heavy equipment to take trees down and that type of stuff cuz we've had some issues not being able to get access to the backyard so you know and I don't know if there's some way that we could work with a developer with that but just does that make sense it does make sense I you know that's not something the city could could guarantee I know uh there was a house in my neighborhood who had to have a crane to take a tree out of their backyard um so so that happens uh but whether an easement yeah that would have to be set up with a with a developer yeah just kind of trying to look yeah to the Future and trying to prevent problems ahead of them happening yep we'll keep that in mind if if anything comes up there okay all right thank you Sue Henri if this does get developed do you have a proposed continued six Street or how does how would a street be in that Development Area uh that's probably for someone who's been around longer than me uh I know that Sixth Street there is a a curb cut there to continue Sixth Street along I believe there's a curb cut there I haven't seen any uh any future plans Scott are you aware of any this is a Scott huni he's um our our project engineer from whks um and I don't know that there's been any preliminary anything done in that area no just kind of looking at the site there um where an access point would need to be it would have to follow the the regular guidance from City rule so um really six Street looks like the only opportunity that you'd be able to come off of right now because if You' come off um Fifth Street you don't have enough room with the intersection of Jefferson so the develop would ultimately come up with a plan of showing how the roads would all all go in there but that seems like the most likely spot and then if that you know continues over to park you know possibly there would have to be coordination with the other property owners if that would happen yeah and again this is just the split we don't have anything um there'll be a lot more public hearings if anything comes up to uh to go in there and then you know we'll gather a lot more input at that time uh again if something comes along long so far nothing I talked with Clyde one day I'm my land of joins Clyde to the West can you identify yourself Dwayne Henrik Sixth Street would go straight through my property okay up to Park okay and I asked him if the property would go down to the corner of Jefferson and uh Fifth Street if that would be included in this and he thought he he said yes so you're not including that now Sue do you know anything about that I can't comment you didn't cuz I thought that little jog was going to be included in the whole thing yeah I can't comment unfortunately oh okay okay would be included in this what he's doing now or the future this boundary right here between the two yeah chunks of land right there where my cursor is that's all we're talking about today okay because I talked to him one day and I asked him what about the corner down there and he said that's all in plut so that's all I know still part of his land yeah yeah talking about included in this oh well nothing's for sale I'm guessing yeah the rest of it will probably be for sale at some point I would think or again there was a sign there at one point but um so I can only theorize that he's splitting his his home off in anticipation of putting it back up for sale at some point okay that's all I got anybody else all right I'll close the public hearing and uh let's see we can actually take action on this it's not a separate agenda item down below right C okay so is there a motion to recommend one way or the other to City Council on approving the minor subdivision I would move that we uh recommend the city council they approve this time accept visit I'll second it any further discussion not favor say I Iain Carri 5 z z and next item 540 public hearing Berg Homestead preliminary plat all right the last meeting we spoke about this so uh Scott huni is here there are seven single family home lots with access to 190th Avenue will be added to the Berg Homestead uh the preliminary plat is attached you can see it's page four and page five there for your viewing pleasure the zoning will be a PUD du the front yard sitb backs of 20 uh feet if approved the planning zoning commission will send uh to city council for approval on October 17th uh meeting and Scott H is here for us I can open the public hearing any comments on the proposed Subdivision plat or if Scott has any additional information that's Now's the Time to bring that up Scott nothing more to add uh from what Kurt had said the champas were not able to make it here tonight so I'm I'm here just to answer any questions um as we talked last time all single family houses is is what they're Desiring to put up there one a question on mechanics or Logistics if we're still thinking of a reduced front yard setback because of the slope uh I know it's still let's the the the default zoning is R1 right now isn't it since we annexed it so if we did a plan unit development overlay we'd just change the U front Less in the front yard set back and at least in the past we've just Incorporated that into a developers agreement and then staff kind of keeps the internal file to remember what we did as far as creating P right yes so the question is where do we sometimes we've done that at the same time as the preliminary plat rather than call a separate public hearing for PUD I don't know if that's of what we're looking for right now or if that's something that would be discussed at another meeting it would make sense to talk about it right now part of the whole project yeah I mean that was the kind of the the request when um when we set the hearing so what is the set back r one is a 25t front yard set back and these are looking for for 20 foot setbacks I believe that right yeah read it there immed but so yeah we could use that kind of as a an ad along or a coat tail to the preliminary preliminary plat of so approving a PUD reducing front yard setback that seems appropriate for further development it would already be there and we wouldn't have to do more Public public hearings that would be proposal yeah it would be incorporated into a developers agreement then staff would would have a record of it when it comes time for building permits anyway anybody else have any comments on this I got questions the driveway is going to be coming up to are the driveways going to be coming up to uh the dtha road or are they going to be coming out on Jefferson on the bottom top on top oh it be on Ninth Street okay what's going to happen between the Ninth Street uh where gills are down to the rest of the uh Ninth Street coming up is anything going to be done with that not right no that's going to stay as is uh for at least five years unless development keeps happening up there and and the developers finish that road thank you any other comments on this proposed subdivision if not I'll close the public hearing and what type of action does the commission want to take on this be another recommendation will the developer finish the road when this is all done then or who takes care of changing the gravel road into a nice tar road with KB and gutter well a so there were some monster assessments up there um and along the way we made the decision we're just not going to be feasible to do the whole road right now uh so we made a commitment to not to develop or finish the rest of the road for five years from a city standpoint you part of it the gravel part of it right for for five years so now if uh if the champas keep developing if if their lots are selling like crazy and they keep going down there um and then along with the the um the I call it the old WF property but um you know if development keeps happening then it would be the developer responsibility to finish the road uh if it doesn't happen if if the Rocks you know are not selling and they're not going to keep developing then uh the city would revisit that in five years will the um who's going to pay who's going to pay for the curb and gutter and all that when that goes in does does the de developer pay for that what a developer would pay for that if there's a development if not it would be similar to to what we're doing here as far as an assessment project and it would be assessed to the adjacent land owners okay how close are you going further down nth Street down to uh 13th are they planning on that soon or is that in the fiveyear plan well yeah that would preferably be in The Five-Year Plan um you know we've looked at some different options for some temporary things there there isn't really a good good temporary and Scott can help answer that but there's not a really good uh temporary fix to to what's happening uh on the end of that you know down the 13th there's some pretty bad spots but the curbs are still catching the water and routing the water away uh you know we missing some Pavements so uh there's an opportunity possibly for some patching in the meantime but we really don't want to rework that whole section until until the whole road goes I know they did part of it when wbig came in and did his building yeah they had to I think they cut part of it out for water or sewer or whatever it was yeah yep and left the bad parts y anybody care to make a motion are we making a motion to develop these let him develop these Lots then approve the preliminary plat approve the plat or deny along with the U the Pud overlay reducing the front yard setback I'll move that we approve this proposed PL along with the the setbacks as noted I'll second it discussion and this is a recommendation of council all in favor say I I I opposed abstain I abstain because I have property reporters this both I you said I okay so carries 401 and then public hearing 4 C amendment to Schuman cup background c yeah so Paul one League of Minnesota City's attorney asked for a public hearing to amend the cup specifically number 12 which you have on page seven of your packet uh it's not in final language it's just a notice and you can see on number 12 at the bottom of page seven says the property owner owner shall comply with a three accessory building limit with access structures being removed D December 31st 2026 you can see what it's replaced instead of saying within 30 days substantial completion of the new structure it's been moved back to December 31st of 2026 CH from accessory buildings D to yard yeah because we pass yep all right I'll open the public hearing anybody here have any any questions comments on this proposed amendment to the conditional use permit not I'll close the public hearing and so then this would also be a recommendation to council what does the commission want to do on this one I'm sure how we do we send it to council nextd do we send this to Council next okay if all but three buildings are not removed by December 31st 2026 what happens then enforcement action violation of zoning ordinance type of issue and a notice would be served is that how they do it notices opportunity to be heard yes so everything else here is the same as what we had discussed early on is that the only thing that that's substantially the only change change yeah consider a building to be something that's permanently there or the trailers that are holding things that'll have to be sort of assessed come uh December of 2026 yeah to approve I'll make a motion to approve um the amendment to the shiman cop as written here second second any further discussion so this is a recommendation to council forther discussion now all in favor say I I oppos stain carries 5 z0 and then uh uh on to 6A uh Driscoll potential Driscoll land split Curt is discussion of what should be done for these uh people to move forward so Jennifer Walter and Glenn Crowfoot live at 450 Lancaster Boulevard Leah witchman lives at 455 SEO Lane uh they're looking to purchase land from Driscoll Southside properties located just to the West uh proudfoot and Walter would requ acquire 16,573 square feet for personal use uh does not fit the minimum requirement for an I2 lot and you'll I'll you'll know why I'm saying that in a second both homes are located in the myera for fourth subdivision both are zoned R1 the Driscoll land is not in the myar fourth subdivision it's listed right there what the subdivision is it's a lot of words and numbers possibilities include replat or deed restriction or certificate of survey I've been in contact with Christopher mun uh who's a professional land surveyor and what he told me as long as they are using it as an additional land to their current lot and state that it's nonb buildable for housing on the survey it can be done by a meets and bound certificate and planning will not be required uh with this Mr Driscoll added if it doesn't complicate things too much I would prefer to leave the zoning as is and add a statement to the title that the buyers understand that the property is located adjacent to Industrial or I to property that would be including for future buyers so the big thing is with zoning commission is what is it we should tell uh residents to do to move forward with this so on you can have in your packet there on the pages what land next to it so here's the witchman home and here is proudfoot here the land that they will gain from Driscoll's property uh the iron building cast iron is right next door if you know where we're looking at in the city uh so here's another so this land here will become part of the Walter profit property and this little triangle up here will become uh witchman property right there okay yeah so that's my question is what what should be the next steps purpose of keeping that I2 designation on there what would that serve well for future buers I don't know of in town I looked and I don't know of a place that has one parsel land that is two different uh zones but maybe I didn't look hard enough so Mr Driscoll from what I've read would like to keep that section of land I to for future buyers down the road but if they build a building on that land you know uh put a big shed on there I right they have to be aware that there may be something industrial going in behind him right we speculating maybe it's for screening or something so he doesn't have if this is now rezoned R1 now is Drisco going to have to do something on the west edge of the is industrial to what does that allow for um it's a Vari industry yeah or small businesses too as well smaller businesses can be located in I2 but it wouldn't be commercial no indust if they did build something I2 they would still have to maintain some kind of setbacks so yeah that's why for example uh proudfoot that lot there that bigger one yeah that's big enough for an industrial lot it fits the minimum industrial lot where the smaller triangle up top does not so we a standalone lot separate I2 separate tax parcel don't have to worry about lot combinations of replatting it just be on its own I guess the question is do we need to worry about access and then the other thing is uh are if if we're not going to require replatting then um it's our ordinance say we can allow allow one split every five years or is it two because we're grading now three tax Parcels out of one right [Music] right T on the back side of witchman but we did restrict it then in a in essence we're sort of tying that in with with that residential lot so suppose an argument could be made that um I mean technically it is a separate tax parcel but if we're deed restricting it kind of isn't so maybe that's a way to get around um replatting we've we've done that before you know we got two different uh in different subdivisions so you can't just combine the two into a single lot uh and come and merge tax Parcels but instead of requiring a replat we'll just do a deed restriction that says from now on both these lots have to if there there's going to be a mortgage or a deed or a sale they all have to those lots have to go together if the structure is built on a on that on a parcel that has I2 would that affect the tax structure of that I don't know the differences in the tax rates between residential and Industrial that just a that' be the owner's absolutely I just think it's it's something that bears s though is a you know mortgage is a secondary Market Leah sells her house has to go this this addal lot goes with it mortgage company it's going to secondary Market mortgage company says okay r1's fine but this this triangular piece is still I2 I mean that could be a problem with in the world of mortgages and loans and things but um I guess that could be addressed right down the road could try to do a reone and I don't know if jisco would have much to say about it I'd like to know why he wants to at least maybe I understand why he wants to leave the larger piece I2 but why the witchman piece needs to stay I2 I don't unless it's for screening or something could we find that out or why that's so important I guess if we leave that bigger lot as I2 you know there potential something could get in there that wouldn't fit the neighborhood so much and I guess that makes me a little concerned too to did it that way on on either of them or the big bigger one yeah I think maybe was The Proposal some sort of shed on there Kurt yeah it was going to be which one point to it where one would fit the yeah what a pottery shed a shed I think they want to do Pottery inside the shed it's not a commercial only for personal use I believe so I I'm Glen proudfoot so we're the ones that are interested in buying that property and so it's we're thinking of uh putting we do Pottery so we're thinking about having our own little potteries studio just for us on the property and it would also uh part of it would be for pottery and part of it would also be to Store Lawn Equipment you know like tillers and snowblowers and so forth is uh what we're planning on doing with it eventually and as far as the remaining as a ip2 we would actually if if it would be possible we'd like to have it rezoned as residential and just have ours as one big lot it's what we would like can't can't combine them well it have to be another deed restriction because it's in a different subdivision but pardon I'm sorry we you can't combine the two as one big tax parcel because they're in different subdivisions but kind of the same concept you could do a deed restriction that ties the two lots together uh otherwise if it stays a standalone lot has a separate tax parcel I guess the other concern is there is an access right on from Landcaster or is that an issue access okay other than our driveway be you could develop an yeah there could be an access right or not you could put one on there but isn't it against code to put a access from residential into the industrial in that area that's what I've been told in the past so this is where they would other thing is you can't have a shed without a primary dwelling if it if it gets reson residential it's residen if it's commercial then it would be be able to do a shed without industrial industrial yeah because if you can't combine it then there's no primary dwelling so it wouldn't work as an R so we have to always think about all right what if this log gets sold off and uh how we got if there's a problem with access because this is an entrance to a residential subdivision then um is that is that an issue that we need to figure out now unless two lots are tied together and and it's always deed restricted that would make more sense yeah because if there was a house going on here on this we would allow an access for that right if it was reone to R and then yeah um oh you're here uh what what do you know why uh they want uh Terry wants to leave it uh I to I have no idea why he wants to leave it I simp I don't know Simplicity I guess or isn't it simple um we would prefer that it's residential yeah our our little piece yeah nothing's ever going to be built on there because it's not big enough for Access accessible either and he doesn't take care of the trees that are on there and there's now dead trees and we just like to have it part of our lot lot you know so we can do that it puts a buffer between us in industrial yeah right right now as an IP it it could be developed tomorrow they could put something on there and we kind of like that buffer yeah so it's the it's the it's the Iron Works and then it's the concrete and then after that it's so that that burm serves like a nice buffer zone so we have the the trees here so we plan on leaving all of the trees and we plan on leaving the BM and we just we just would like to put a little accessory building in this area and keep the BM and keep the trees and maintain it with the I don't know would the residents of that subdivision have a problem with when they're entering it seeing there's a big shed there I don't maybe not that's my question that's my so far we've been improving this area here you'll see so we've been knowing that and taking care of it for the last three years and we've also been doing some work inside the with T's okay and so far all the neighbors that come by are saying it looks great and we're doing good work but you come driving in there and there's all those beautiful homes there they're very lovely homes up there and then to put a big shed where it's coming in it's kind of like up here where wol what wool big did up in our end of town who would have thought that we' have had this huge big shed like a shed based on on codes and everything so it would be an accessory building that we would would look like this like this shed that we plan on building okay and this is our house okay so it's not a shed same typ of design what's what's the urgency on this I'm wondering if we can uh if Kurt Kurt can uh get a little bit more information especially on the rec on the zoning and can we revisit this at the next zoning meeting or is that um are people needing something done yesterday me is there is there a lot of urgency get this thing approved right away or well it would be nice to be a this is what you're talking about that's what we're talking about before the snow comes so it'll be it'll look just like our house I think we might need to have a few more questions answered before we figure out a it we the 60-day rule this isn't even an official zoning request this is just a discussion I think a few more facts before we to come the next Le talk to him and ask him I don't care but uh that and maybe we have to look into a little bit further on the access issues and um I mean the cleanest just like the whole Golf Course proposal the cleanest thing is to require replat but so times feasibility is a little bit gets out of hand so we possibly do the deed restriction I mean the surveyor is just sort of going to bat for the client so I you know fact that surveyor interpreting the zoning ordinance a certain way doesn't mean that we're Bound by whatever he says but um okay the so is that a motion to table it I make a motion to table it at least till the next meeting second any discussion all in favor say I I I oppos abstain carries 5 thanks for coming for the discussion uh November 12th 5:30 then uh 6B the driveth through rezone yeah so WC Massie engineering and surveying is looking to finish the Caribou drive-thru at nielson's uh the commission approved a variance to have a drive-thru in February 2024 the new exit was accepted by good Hugh County the parcels of land where the drive-thru will exit are actually zoned R3 with the exit being an extension of the business a reone is recommended for reone to see a like the businesses itself is itself um the parcels affected you can see are listed there if approv the Planning and Zoning commission will set a public hearing for November 12th at 5:35 so you have a picture there of what the drive-thru will look like in your packet and then the next page or on the same page has the zone the next page has the zone you can see the buildings neon's itself is c1a and then there are actually two small one of is a small parcel just to the west and the larger parcel that has the uh Garage on it so this drive-thru exit around by the garage there's those new gas pipes that went in there and come out there will be screening and fence and screening put up so that such things as headlights that say it's in the evening or early morning will not penetrate that home that's all part of uh part of this need for the rezone yeah I spoke to Nick this week uh Exum me last week and he was yes he knew why to reone it how's that work with the loading docks there because that drives through their loading dock that's for neels to figure out logistical things to deal with in that um the county did mandate some uh basically restricting some of that loading zone so it's not such a wide opening uh and then to provide a little bit of background on this uh the uh Second Street is a County Road and the county has some um rules and ordinance about access on those roads and they couldn't quite make the turning radius right out of the drive-thru onto Second Street and so they had to go figure something else out and um what they figured out was they could come on to uh our seconds the BR Second Street um you know our ordinance would allow that it's far enough back from the stop sign the corner um and so it's a little bit goofy but it it it'll work um and uh so yeah just uh presenting that here tonight did you say Kurt this is just information and you're asking set a public hearing set a public hearing most of the traffic then we'll take a right and head back towards Main Street yeah y there a motion any other discussion otherwise there a motion to set the public hearing I move we set a public hearing to discuss this issue the next meeting 535 motion second any further discussion not all in favor say I I oppos stain carries 5 makes sense uh guess any other comments otherwise I'll adjourn the meeting what