Okay, we're going to call to order tonight's um July 8th, 2025 planning commission meeting. And we will begin with roll call. Um Commissioner Zachman here, Commissioner Hargrees here, Commissioner Kaziki here and Commissioner Brummond is here. Just make note that Commissioner Lind is absent. And I'd invite you all to stand and say the pledge of allegiance with me. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, we're moving right along to the agenda approval tonight. It's a pretty light agenda, but is there anyone who has any um requests to make changes? If not, then I will make a motion to approve tonight's agenda. I'll second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Anyone opposed? Okay. And at this point in time, we uh usually are typically open up the floor uh for public comment opportunity for anything that is not on the agenda tonight. Before I go into the spiel though, I will just note that there is no one from the public present tonight. And so we will um open the public forum and then also just close the public forum. And I'm double checking here. I don't think we need any. We don't need a Yeah, we don't need a motion for that. Okay. And then uh we'll move on to the minutes from last month's meeting, June 6th. Is there anyone who uh needed to make any comments or corrections? And if not, then I will make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from June 6th. Second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Anyone opposed? Okay. And then that takes us right into our new business for tonight, which is just one public hearing regarding the city park remaster comprehensive plan amendment, and that's going to begin with a staff report. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will start this by um announcing that at the last city council meeting, city park was formally renamed to Heritage Park. So that's why we're in a transition stage where we are referencing it to right now as Heritage City Park remaster. So bear with me on that. But um we uh we are working with the uh parks and recck manager and communications to roll out the name officially. So um I might switch back and forth between the two names tonight here. So the item tonight is just a comprehensive plan amendment to clean up the site plan application that was already reviewed by the planning commission and was approved by city council. So this is a city initiated comprehensive plan amendment. It's specifically for the property two 20400 county road 50. This is the western parcel that makes up Heritage Park. It's actually two different parcels that it's made up of. So, as a part of the heritage park remaster, utilities will be brought through the site and stubbed to the property for the following uses. The new park building, which is on the western side, and then the potential splash pad to be included in a future phase of park improvements, and then irrigation for the entire property. So, both sides. Uh so it is important that we have utilities available to the site for it to function as the site plan is currently shown. So if approved, the comprehensive plan amendment will be updating our staging plan and our 2040 comprehensive plan so that the western parcel is moved up from what is currently shown as phase 3 2030 to 2035 is the approximate time frame associated with that to our current phase which is 2020 to 2025. So our staging plan reflects anticipated timeline of sewer st services for areas located where regional interceptors from adjacent communities will be extended. It provides anticipated growth in 5-year increments and creates an orderly logical growth pattern based on development anticipated development patterns and the availability of the infrastructure. Uh for comprehensive plan amendment our comprehensive plan is a living document. it can be amended at the discretion of the city based on new evidence and it is not uncommon for it to be amended. So consistent with staff does believe that the request tonight is consistent with our overall sewer service anticipated for the park since the eastern side of the parcel is located in phase one. So we're just extending that boundary to encompass the entire park. Now, the western parcel was not obtained by the city until after the creation of the 2040 comprehensive plan, which is likely why it has a different uh staging phase right now. Uh, additionally, utilizing the larger western parcel for the park building and eventual splash pad will allow for an enhanced site that enables more amenities for the public's use at the city's largest park. Uh further uh some reasons why we believe it makes sense to make this change is that the pro proposed amendment does support the city to achieve three of the goal three of the goals like outlined in the parks and trails chapter. I believe there's six goals in total but um goal one is to implement the parks and trails plan based on the need of Corkran residents and park system patrons. develop a park system the public values and visits and develop a system of parks and trails with a variety of active and passive uses that reflect the special character of the city its history and natural resources. So the in other words saying that the fact that we'll be able to offer a new park building that will allow for community meeting space it and it's reflective of the city's history while also offering a new amenity. We do believe that it's in line with the overall goals of the comprehensive plan. So the recommendation tonight, the planning commission should open the public hearing and take any testimony and staff recommends approval of the draft resolution approving the comprehensive plan amendment. Thank you, Natalie. All right. At this time, we will open the public hearing. And again, making note that because only in-person comments are accepted um for those who may be joining on Zoom, there is no one from the public here tonight. So, I will also then make a motion to close tonight's public hearing. I'll second. All those in favor say I. I. Anyone opposed? All right. And so then we can just go ahead and move forward with any discussion questions and then our ultimately our recommendation. So is there anyone who had uh questions or um issues they'd like to discuss? I just want to clarify the phasing is the Musa phasing or correct. Yep. So it's Yeah. For the sewer service area. So you would have to be in the Musa to get sewer. Okay. So we're just extending the Musa to cover that part of the park. So it's within the Musa. It's just it was it's in phase three. Yeah. So, all right. At first, I was thinking it had something to do with the park itself, the phasing of the park itself. It does a little bit because the eastern parcel is phase one for utilities and or water and sewer specifically and then um the western parcel right now is phase three. So, we're moving up the western parcel to phase one and that's because we want to build the building this year. It will it'll Yes, the building it will be under construction this year to my to my knowledge. um that we are moving forward with site work imminently. Um but the the utilities will allow for the park building as well as irrigation on the western side as well. Okay. Are they basically planning on doing the whole park other than like splash pad and uh so we are doing the first phase. There will the the eastern side will also eventually need some improvements that are not included in this first phase and I believe there is still desire to eventually have a splash pad which would be located on the western parcel near the park building but that is not included in this first phase. The first phase really includes the park building and that playground and then the um we're updating the fields quite a bit as well. Yeah. Yeah. But I think that the goal is to perhaps find a partner for any future development on the west for a sports complex type thing. That's what the No. Okay. Never mind. Um I don't know if I don't know if there's a partner aspect. The um I don't recall that being discussed, but we may do with the park dedication that we currently have. So, the rest of the improvements will be future phases as park dedication becomes available. Did they decide to pave the whole parking lot or are they going to have They did pave the whole parking lot. Yep. Okay. Well, this will be exciting. Does anyone else have any uh any of the other commissioners have any questions? Are there any pickle ball courts? No, not at this time. Not that we I think we have some space carved out for potential future pickle ball courts, but not in part of the current. Okay. What on the site plan there's a series of rectangles. What What are those? I believe that's just showing how different field setups can happen. So, I believe one's a uh soccer. Yeah, several soccer courts are showing B and that one's not baseball and cricket. Believe one's a cricket. Cricket. Thank you. Okay. I was going to say bad, but that's not the right. Are you going to have cricket? We already have cricket. It's very popular at the city park. Is it really? Yeah. Yeah. We have like we have a distinct like we're one of the only cricket or one of there's a cricket club that specifically considers it their home park. Oh, interesting. I know it. Cool. I do have a question just for for clarity sake. Um so when the city city council approved the site plan in May that approval stated that this was in phase one when really it was in phase three. No. So yeah it said that the park was in phase one and that was an error on my end. The eastern side is phase one. The western sides is phase three and that I missed in my initial review. Okay. So they approved it as as if it was all in in phase one when in fact it was phase three and now we're just reviewing to kind of align with what city council had envisioned for Okay. Correct. Yeah. Otherwise we would have done this at the same time. Otherwise it would have been at the same time. Yep. It would just been a part of that initial step. So that was an error on my end. If there are no other questions or discussions, then because of ultimately what you just highlighted, then I think that we could feel confident in making a motion to approve the um comprehensive plan amendment. Are you making a motion? I will make a motion. I will second the motion. All those in favor say I. Anyone opposed? Okay. And so that takes care of our only new business tonight. And so then what we've done on a short night like tonight is use the rest of the time to do some yearly planning commission training. And so that's going to be another staff presentation. Yes. So this will be it's a long presentation. So I try to keep my presentation short. That does not happen on training night. Um and then we have an interactive component at the end. We're not going to do the same thing we did. No, a game show. The game show. It's not going to be Jeopardy. It's a different game, but it is a game. It's not exactly the same, but take notes. Feel free to take notes. This is You're going to learn the history and foundation for the basis of the planning commission. And Peter's really competitive. Okay. So, um, I actually don't go too much into the history this time because I wanted it to be interesting for I tried to switch I had to switch it up a little bit. Um, if you are interested in the history, I can certainly send you last year's presentation which may have a few more contextual slides for you. Can I make a formal request for that? I'm sorry. Can I make a formal request to receive last year's Okay, I can get that sent to you. It It's actually for the most part there are a lot of slides that I I've reused, but there are a few different slides on the in both presentations, so I can send that. Thank you. Um, so for starters, why do we plan? The planning process evaluates the community's past and provides vision for how to address anticipated changes in the future. And so through planning, the community can anticipate how to protect our community character and our natural resources, drive economic development and investments, provide cost-effective delivery of services, and participate in intergovernmental cooperation with neighboring cities and um other government entities. and balance the community interests with private property rights. The municipal planning authority comes from a couple places. The US Constitution grants general police powers to the states. Police powers limit an individual's rights in the interest of the larger community. Uh you'll see this wording a lot in municipal planning to promote public health, safety, and welfare. That is referencing to the police powers. Um, states delegate police power to local government units through enabling legislation. Uh, and then in Minnesota, that's specifically statute 462.351 where municipal planning authority is granted. And then the US Supreme Court upheld the use of zoning as a police power uh in 1926 in the court case village of Uklid versus Amler realy. So that's just kind of a it's a fairly you hear the term Ukavian zoning and that usually is referring to that court case. Oh my goodness. Are you okay? Um so and then the Corkran city code establishes the planning commission as the city's planning agency in chapter 34. So that's where we get our power to act as the planning body for the city. Oops. So then as far as the role of the planning commission, it the this type of commission is created based on the presumption that residents should be involved in the review and recommendation of land use applications as well as subdivision and zoning ordinances. Um the role of the commission is to host public hearings for development applications and ordinance amendments. That's a large part of the procedure that we uphold. And then mostly the commission will make quasi judicial recommendations to council. This is um the act of interpreting and applying written codes and ordinances. But there are times that you will also make legislative re recommendations to council uh such as zoning ordinance amendments or comprehensive plan amendments. Uh planning commissioners are not expected to complete their own technical review. They are expected to discuss how an application does or does not fit within the city's adopted guiding documents and provide feedback on areas where there is a matter of interpretation or discretion. As far as the role of planning staff and consultants, we interpret and administer land use regulations as provided in city code. We are the ones that typically meet with developers, property owners, and residents to discuss how they would like to use their property. And then we complete the technical review of land use applications and prepare prepare staff reports that inform and advise you the planning commission as well as city council. We research planning and land use issues, draft long range plans and special projects, maintain the city records and we provide the continuity in institutional knowledge. Um ideally it sometimes our staff turn over but we are trying to um at this point the planning division is um working on establishing that institutional knowledge and Kendra is uh with LMF is provides really the most significant instit institutional knowledge we have because she's been with the city for I want to say over 20 years. Um we also educate and assist the public and consider the voice of planning at city hall. I'll also note that consultants consultants serve at the pleasure and direction of city council while working closely to coordinate land use items with city staff to inform a recommendation to council. So when you have a staff report from landform and she says staff recommendation or it might be someone else on her team that's saying staff recommendation that is all done in consultation with u both with me Dwight as well as the public works team. So it's not a consultant recommendation. It is representative of the overall staff team's recommendation. Uh they also provide their professional advice and insight based on their experience with working in other cities as well as developers. And they also are invaluable when they provide services that the city might not have access to such as additional staffing and software. So they're able to respond a bit more when there's an influx of work. Um, and then there u they have software that can be very beneficial to have access to without us having to go out and buy a subscription to something to just use it once. Um so as far as guiding documents so again the planning commission um should have make their decisions based on the guiding documents that we've established as a city uh through the previous planning commissioners and city councils. Uh so the enabling legislation requires planning to begin with a comprehensive plan that and that needs to include an analysis of the community needs and goals um to have that as a basis. So, every city that wants to have a municipal planning body has to have a comprehensive plan. Um, but cities also in the metropolitan council area have to update it every 10 years and we'll get into that a bit more later. Uh, so we have um we have to update it regularly because of our location in the 10 cities. Uh the comprehensive plan acts as the guiding policy for community development as well as the zoning ordinance and any other land use regulations really sets the table. Any ordinances that we create need to be consistent with the comprehensive plan. And then just the subdivision ordinance you will find in title nine of the city code. And then the zoning ordinance you'll find in title 10 of our city code. And those specifically are the tools that implement the comprehensive plan. The supporting rationale of the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance should be provided by the comprehensive plan. They do need to interact with the two. And then uh the city also must keep in mind that regulations must be a reasonable means to meet legal ends. So, uh, if there is a less restrictive way to reach an M goal, then that should be, um, considered when we have zoning ordinance amendments or subdivision ordinances. Uh, so for a little bit more on the subdivision ordinance, this is what establishes the procedures for land division. Um and subdivisions we typically see them done as plats or we also have um a couple other of smaller subdivision processes right now such as a minor subdivision but this is simply the division of a parcel of land into lots blocks or sites and it's is required in order to sell transfer develop land they have to go through the subdivision process. There are a few subdivision types that can be exempt by state statute. For example, residential property that results in uh each lot being at least 20 acres with 500 ft of street frontage. They are exempt from city subdivision processes. Anything smaller than that for residential land anyways would have to go through the city's subdivision process. Uh but sometimes you will see land uh in Corkran specifically that gets carved up that we had nothing to do with really. Um and that's because it was really large parcels of land that they subdivided into. Um so again the subdivision results in a plat and the plat is basically the map of the subdivision that is the official document that gets recorded uh with Henipin County for the zoning ordinance. This regulates private property by establishing standards of development for individual lots, the use of land and buildings within zoning districts. It works in conjunction with the zoning map for the city and then it also determines different classes of uses within each district. So ours our ordinance has allowed uses um or sometimes they're also called permitted uses that which means almost no questions asked. This is a use that can move forward with limited ability to put conditions or really no conditions can be applied. uh sometimes you can have standards with it written within the code that you can apply but we can't add anything above what is already called out in the code. We also have accessory uses. This must exist in connection with a principal use like principal allowed use or a principal conditional use. Uh conditional uses are an allowed use that require additional stipulations to ensure it fits with the area. um and interim are also another type of allowed use that can be approved for a limited amount of time. I will also add that we have administrative some uses that we allow through administrative permit. It's very similar to an allowed use uh but sometimes it's just they have I think the best example is our accessory dwelling units. Uh we have about 10 standards that they need to satisfy um and that's reviewed through an administrative process. So, it's um it's kind of a step between allowed versus conditional, but uh because we're comfortable with the use and we've identified standards and we don't believe anything additional needs to be stipulated, we have that administrative permit as well. So, that doesn't have to go through the commission, the planning commission. Correct. Yep. Um and then you'll also see bulk and area regulations within the zoning ordinance. So this is height limits, setback requirements from the property lines, uh lot coverage or imperous surface maximums. And I would say that that's typically what we're uh what we have drafted in our ordinance. So this might vary a little bit with other cities ordinances, but that's typically how each zoning district is set up in our ordinance. So, as far as the types of application within the purview of the planning commission, we have a number and I'm going to just kind of skip through the slide because we're going to go through each one of these. Um, and then I would say there's also a couple of applications that are only reviewed by staff. So, this would be building permits, minor amendments to previously approved plans. So, there's a threshold that's defined. So, if if it's um less it involves less than 10% of the site, that might be an administrative approval for that amendment. Um again, administrative permits is another thing that would not go in front of the planning commission. And then there are some other applications that are only reviewed by city council. This includes sketch plans, final plats, uh final pods and uh minor subdivision that I mentioned earlier or drainage and utility, vacation, easements, things like that would only go in front of city council. I think this is a really helpful graphic, although I um I had one of my staff members today um change it because it's from the League of Minnesota Cities, but I disagree with two of the items. I'll go over that real quick. So, this is basically the pyramid of discretion. When we have the most discretion, it is with our comprehensive plan and our zoning and subdivision ordinances. When we are first establishing this, this is where we have the utmost discretion in how we are um lying these out as long as it's um as long as they are we aren't doing anything illegal constitutionally or on the state legislation. And that is where we are able to have the most creativity. And then amendments to these uh guiding documents is also where we still have a very high level of discretion. And then as we move up the pyramid to examples of applications that come in based on our ordinances, um that's where we lose some of our discretion. For variances, I would say we we do have a relatively high ability to deny or um well specifically deny a variance. Um approving a variance, we have a little less discretion because they need to as the applicant prove that there is a practical difficulty and it cannot be economic considerations alone. So just or or it can't even really be that well I don't want to do it that way, I want to do it this way. It really should be based on um there is a constraint on the lot that prevents me from building it to code. So for example, because of where the wetlands are located, um I would not I would not be able to build a house that meets all the setbacks without some relief uh from the front setback, for example, would be uh where a variance would make sense to apply. So we do have a lot of discretion to deny a variance because again that burden of proof is on the applicant and we simply um even if they do prove it we don't are not under any obligation to provide that relief. Um but approving it we have a little less discretion. They do have to meet those standards. And then conditional use permits we have um a fair amount of discretion. I kind of get a little bit more into that later. Um, and then subdivision applications such as plats, this is, I would say, relatively less discretion. Uh, if it meets the standards we have outlined in our subdivision and zoning ordinance, it must be approved. Um, and then we have the um things like plan review, which would be a site plan um or building permits. Again, this is where we have very little discretion. If it meets this the written ordinances that we have outlined, it must be approved. we can't decide to not approve it at that stage. Um so again, so this green area is where we have legislative decisions. Uh the yellow area is where we're going to have quasi judicial decisions and then these are more um well I'd say some of the red too is probably very little discretion and can be more administrative. Okay. So for a comprehensive plan amendment again we just had one so I won't spend too much time on this but um it is to be expected that there will be times where we receive new information where we want to amend our comprehensive plan. And so some general considerations to keep in mind when reviewing these requests is is the request consistent with our goals and objections of the overall plan? um are what are the impacts on public facilities and services such as roads and other infrastructure and particularly if there's really not a way to mitigate that impact might be a concern. Uh potential for resulting development to create an undue impact on adjacent properties and then development should still fit the physical character of the neighborhood or improve overall viability. So, um we typically have uh a bit more um laid out for our staff report based on um other considerations, but generally if you are comfortable with how it fits within those, then you it may make sense to approve that comprehensive plan amendment for a Yep. zoning ordinance amendment. Um we have two types. there is a map amendment and so this changes uh the district a zoning district boundary. So that's either um maybe you're adding to an existing uh zoning district um or simply just taking a piece of property um and changing that zoning district on that property. So it might be a larger decision to add to make the existing area larger or it might be that we're just we're going to go a different direction in this part of town. We have text amendments. So this is changes to our district regulations or other performance standards. Um so for example having a new use such as aggra businesses added to the um to a district is considered a text amendment. Again, this is a legislative decision and overall it must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. If you have a zoning ordinance amendment that is not consistent with the comprehensive plan, you need to back up and fix your comprehensive plan to move forward or you should deny the zoning ordinance amendment. Um, and overall it should not be have any zoning ordinance amendment should not have a detrimental impact to the immediate neighborhood or community as a whole, the natural environment. again um that can't be addressed through mitigation. There are a lot of mitigation strategies. So there it's a fine line to consider. And then the city's ability to provide efficient public facilities or services should also not be impacted by a zoning ordinance amendment. May I ask just one quick question before we move on? We've had some trouble with that word detrimental impact, right? When it it comes to defining that. So and I know that law is language, right? But when if you were going to parse out or flush out detrimental impact, explaining it to neighbors, right? What is the what would be the legislative or legal sort of definition of detrimental impact? Yeah, it's a great question. It is it can be subjective um to some extent, but I would say a detrimental impact is um you are losing the ability to function on your property entirely essentially. Okay. So, to have a a nightclub um put right next to you and you're in a rural residential area and you're not immediately adjacent to in a nightclub that's going until 4 in the morning and um I would say that that probably could be detrimental because it's just it's not consistent with the overall area. Um it but it unfortunately it is a bit subjective. There isn't a clear standard. Um I think the other what we've tried to do in our code though is you know we try to tie it back to things like property values. What's difficult with property values um is we don't have a lot of clear data to be able to say yep this is going to decrease property value or this um is going to increase property value. I would say a lot of the uses that we have in front of us um we wouldn't consider it a detrimental impact because even if you find like um gas stations for an example um when they the studies that have been done it doesn't show that the property values go down. It's just that they increase less than other properties that are further away from a gas station. So it's not detrimental. Um but there might be a situation where there might be data to support that such a situation would be detrimental because it made the properties around it valued at half of what it was before. Something like that that would I think would be closer to the detrimental uh that would couldn't be mitigated. Uh but simply having your property values increase at a slower rate that I don't think would be considered detrimental. Okay. So, um, so yeah, we I could certainly do a little bit more digging on that, but it I believe our code tries to when we talk about our CUPS tries to kind of give you some guidance as to what would be detrimental. And then what you would want to do as a city is use every ability to attach stipulations to try to mitigate those potential impacts before you say that it's not allowable. Correct. Okay. I have one question and it may be getting a little off topic, but um are there some things that could be very detrimental to the community that we don't as a city don't have any control over? And here's an example. So when my husband and I first bought our property back in ' 83, literally we soon found out that Henman County was looking at Straler Road to site a landfill and they had a public meeting. A lot of people showed up obviously very concerned about it. They luckily did not end up citing a landfill there. They decided to build the incinerator in north Minneapolis or north of downtown there. But I think that was maybe something the city had no control over because it was led by Henipin County. I don't I I don't know the the history on that. I don't know that I was here for that particular request. Um but the right now our code does not allow we have a couple of districts where we would allow for a recycling center. Uh but we would don't have anywhere that we would allow for a land. The county doesn't have like the power to come in and supersede the city's zoning. Not to my knowledge. They could potentially do it as part of a zoning ordinance amendment um which would have to go through the process. Right. Exactly. So and they might be able to mitigate it to some extent. I mean, we do as a region, we do need landfills. So, I would assume that if every city just said no more landfills, um that then it might pressure the state to all of a sudden have to kind of override the municipal planning aspect of that. Um but I don't know that I don't believe that's a protected use. We do have some uses that they've have done that. So, for an example, a protected use would be um res residential. There's someone trying to get in. if you could let them in. Um, residential homes. So, for people, not residential homes, the group homes. There we go. Residential group homes. We c if we allow for single family homes in a district, we cannot prevent a group home from going into that district. Um, we can to some extent require a license such as a rental license or a lodging license depending on how many people are in the group home. Uh, but we cannot prevent it. uh because it was one of those situations where cities started to my understanding cities started not allowing them and it caused such a crisis that the city just said no you can't decide to do that. So it does happen um and cities do want to be careful about simply not allowing it. I think like we don't allow storage facilities as a city and I don't think that is not a protected use. Well, we don't allow any more new ones anyways. We probably and that's not a protected use. So we're fine there and I think we have done our we comparing us to other cities we have way more acreage of storage facilities than our neighbors. So I think we have done our fair share. Uh but theoretically if it became such an issue where um no more storage units were being created then yeah the state could potentially say well we need more storage units. There's a huge demand for this and um could all of a sudden make it so that we can't regulate that through zoning. So it's a fine line. Well, a good example is the cannabis. We have to we can't say it's not an allowed use in the city and we had to find the zoning and create the ordinance related to what was um at least a minimum set out by the state and that wasn't that wasn't a a city-led initiative. A good example. Yep. Yeah. So, um, again, so it's like you we want to be careful as cities to not abuse it. Um, and to make es and again, if if there's other people in the region that are offering those uses, then I think it's less of a concern. It becomes more of an issue when all of a sudden everybody in the area is preventing these uses from being created, then um, we might get some push back later on. Um, so yeah, that's zoning ordinance amendment. Reszoning is a zoning ordinance amendment. It's the same as the map amendment, but sometimes we will call it resoning. Um, so again, if the it does need to be consistent with our future land use map in our comprehensive plan when we decide to change the zoning district on a underlying prop or on a property. Um, and so and I would also just say uh on this slide, spot zoning is something that the city does need to avoid. So this is zoning a single piece of property completely out of context and out of compatibility with the surrounding areas. So um you will see uh areas of residential areas all of a sudden on the corner of a collector road there is a small strip mall that is not spot zoning. Uh the it is determined that two major roads even if it's surrounded by residential is compatible with a neighborhood commercial area. But um to put a 2 acre industrial site in the middle of a residential area, that would likely be spot zoning. So it really depends on the compatibility in in the surrounding context. Um but you do want to avoid spot zoning. You uh you don't want to simply um decide in a residential area to put a single warehouse building. That does not make sense. Okay. Okay. So for the variance, so we've talked about this briefly before with the discretion, but this is a zoning relief mechanism that approves a departure from the standard ordinances. And a variance may be granted when there are practical difficulties, but approval is not required. And economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. And so we do have a lot of variance requests that I would say are based on economic considerations um that staff typically will recommend denial for. So I would say uh staff's probably harder on the analysis of variances than than our city council, but um you know it can again there's is some subjectivity. Um, but personally for me, I don't like to really recommend moving forward with the variance process unless a applicant can tie it back to a physical constraint of the law. Sometimes that's not quite what gets pushed forward, but that's typically what I would want to see from the staff level before I recommend approval. Use variants are specifically not allowed in Minnesota. And I will stipulate this a bit further that what I mean by this is if a use is not currently allowed within the district, you cannot grant a variance to allow a use to go in that district that use to go in the district. Um so that we when we talk about variances it's more to the um like the bulk standards the those kind of standards that would be what we would grant a variance to. We uh we don't grant it to uses. If we want to allow the use in the district we have to do a zoning ordinance amendment. And I'll also say if we have a lot of variances for the same thing it suggests that we should be doing a zoning ordinance amendment as well. Um there's a bit of disagreement on whether or not a variance can set a precedent or not. Um for the most part, variances do not set a precedent. However, uh they can set a precedent for applications with similar facts and within the same time frame. So, if we grant a setback variance um for a deck for a deck um because the lot is weirdly shaped maybe um and then a neighbor nearby also has a very similarly shaped lot could theoretically ask for the same variance and if it's within I would say a one-year period or so um we really should approve that as well if that was the findings of fact that we based the variance on now if it's further out in time like let's say it's three years later or something like that I think we have a bit more standing to be like actually we learned from that variance and we don't want to keep granting it we do have some ability to say that we've learned from previous mistakes uh but u I have seen some land use lawyers say that there is somewhat of a precedent set when it's within a very similar time frame and has the same findings of So just something to keep in mind. Uh again for variance prior criteria for review. Uh this is an area in our code that needs to be revised and updated to match the state language. Um when I do variance staff reports, I do kind of slip in the state standards within what we have when we uh complete our review. Uh but this would be something I would like to have updated. Uh on the state level the criteria for review is property will be used in a reasonable manner. There are circumstances unique to the property not caused by the land land owner or their predecessor and unique circumstances are typically interpreted to include physical characteristics as I've said. So this is wetlands slopes odd shapes and the variance must not alter the essential character of the locality. Um and then conditions can be applied to a variant if granted but must be directly related to the impact created by the variance. So we can't require um what would be a good example? We can't require additional landscaping on an area where we're not also granting a variance on setback. Yeah. Yeah. I would say yeah, we can't require additional landscaping if um I would say that's actually something that we typically do require when we're uh for most variants. We we want to kind of buffer it from like whatever we're granting the deviation. We want to make it so it's not very visible. Uh but like we an example of when we maybe wouldn't include a variance for landscaping for buffering is if it's not really visible or if it was I remember one application where it was the request for the additional landscaping wouldn't have been on this the property line where the setback was. Right. So you can't say well I want it all in the back. Yeah. I want I want I want you to I want you to do landscaping in the front yard but you're asking for a rear setback. Yeah. Yeah. So it needs to be directly related. There needs to be a nexus. Um, conditional use permits are super fun. Um, they are an anticipated and allowed use within the zoning ordinance, but conditions may need to be added. We have some conditional uses in our zoning districts already have some conditions that they need to meet that are clearly outlined. Um, and then the city can also add additional conditions in addition to that. Um conditions such as buffers and screening can make the use more compatible, but the use may not be appropriate on sites where these conditions can't be met. Uh with a cup, you cannot attach a time limit. These run with the land in perpetuity. Uh unless a condition is violated, that is really what would be uh a triggering point and it would have to go through a revocation hearing if uh there were something to be violated with the CU approvals. And that hearing is with the city attorney. Uh the hearing would as city council council. Yep. And then so the city council can choose to revoke it. Yes. Um but again it has to be something called out in the resolution as a condition. Again, not I would say maybe as stringent as the nexus required for variances, but conditions that are added must be reasonable and directly related to the use. Um I think we have a little bit more flexibility compared to a variance just in terms of how that's discussed in some statutes. But um you do want it to match with okay, we are concerned about this impact. So adding this condition will address that impact. So a cup must be approved if reasonable conditions make the use compatible with the existing neighborhood, confirm conforms with the comprehensive plan and meets the applicable standards within the zoning code. Um, findings of fact for denial of a CUP must explain why conditions cannot mitigate the impact of the use on that specific site and cannot be so broad that it could be concluded that there is not a reasonable pathway forward for the use to be located within the zoning district in which it is allowed. So for example, if we were to say that um a nursery which is allowed by a cup in the rural residential or greenhouse like a retail greenhouse um if we were to say that um uh we aren't going to approve the cup because the um we are have become aware of potential pollution that has happened at other greenhouse sites in the city. that would not be a finding of fact that would really be helpful if that were to be contested in court because it suggests that any greenhouse would have that concern. It's not sight specific um and suggests that there is not a reasonable pathway forward for approval within the zoning district itself. So we have when we approve a CUP, it really does need to be a reason why this site does not work, why it cannot be why conditions cannot address the um impacts that granting approval would result in. Interim use permits are very similar to a CUP, but it has a sunset clause. We have a few examples of these in the corporate zoning code, but um this is actually wrong. That's my Whoops. Accessory Delling units used to be IUP. So, that is a typo on my end. The But we have conditional home occupation licenses. Very confusing in how it's named because you would think it's a CUP, but it's not. It is an IUP because we have a three-year time limit where um city can review and potentially um potentially have they aren't meeting their requirements. It's not as hard as a CUP to have it revoked. And additionally, we can tie other time stipulations such as if they were to sell the property, then at that point the license expires. Um temporary living quarters are also an IUP. Uh, and we have a few other examples as well. I think we have like um a farmers market in one of our mixed use districts that we have as an IUP. So, again, an IUP should be granted when the use conforms to the zoning regulations. The use is temporary and will terminate on a specific date or event and the city will not incur additional costs by granting the use. Approval and the applicant. This is an interesting line that's included in state legislation. the applicant agrees to the conditions. So, it's kind of I don't know why they specifically call that out for an IUP. Uh but I guess if the applicant does not agree to the conditions, then you should not approve it for preliminary plat. Um these can um again this is how we process our subdivisions. Um, this is a preliminary plat is going to include really what we're looking at is the lots, but it's also the proposed street and the layout of the lots, lot sizes and dimensions, the easements, existing streets, location map, general contours. Um, so this is really the first step in a subdivision process. Um, preliminary plats have an automatic 120day review and it's the only application that has a automatic 120day review period. Everything else has a 60-day review period um, per state statute. And then the final plat is really where all of the conditions of approval uh, for the preliminary plat are addressed and you have the final layout and that and that is what gets um, just approved by council. So the planning commission will take a look at the preliminary plat. This really your chance to see um see and discuss where it may or may not comply with city ordinances. Um and then once we get to the final plat uh then it's I wouldn't say a rubber stamp, but it's much more just confirming that all the res all the conditions of approval for the preliminary plat have been met. There can be some changes made between preliminary plat and final plat though. Correct. Yes. So typically the changes that you see though are because of conditions of approval. So the changes that can be made are to accommodate the conditions of approval essentially. Um I would say that you can increase the amount of or sorry decrease the amount of lots without it really needing to start over. But once it's there's a material change and typically that's an increase in lots or um something more significant like oh well now we're going to remove 23 homes and we're going to put a whole bunch of duplexes or something. And so I think if that were to be the case then um you wouldn't want to have it go back to the preliminary plat at the very least and then the preliminary plat approvals. Okay. Um but yeah, there are there are typically changes, but again typ um I would say the most changes that we're usually seeing are because it's we're um trying to get the conditions of approval finalized. Plaid approvals can only be conditioned on compliance with items contained in our guiding documents. Uh provision and it has to be what's in place at the time of a complete submitt. provisions of public improvements or financial guarantees and satisfaction of object objections raised by other uh government agencies. So um for the most part if it's a preliminary plot that does not have any variance request um we are very limited in what additional stipulations we can add to that application. I would say for the most part what we do see in in practice is there's one or two variances and so that's where we usually get to maybe a negotiation of how we can condition something a bit beyond what uh you would do for something that does not have a variance for site plan review. Um, this is a review of a rendering, drawing, sketch of a proposed project's design and layout on a single parcel typically and can be required of allowed and/or conditional uses. We require site plan review for anything that is not agriculture or a single family home. Um, everything else, um, yeah, I would say everything else does require site plan review in our city code. So even if it's a um a permitted business in our commercial district, they still have to go through the site plan process. Uh so we are looking at the consistency of the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances, relationship to nearby uses, locations and dimensions of buildings, proposed grading and contours, screening and landscaping, utilities, parking, access, lighting and signage. So this is I'd say the plat is usually a very uh it's a more macro overview and then when we get to the site plan it's much more a specific lot and then another common application that we see is planned unit development and this usually come this does come in tandem with plats. So I think that's why a lot of the times we think that we have more especially when we're dealing with a lot of planned unit developments and then all of a sudden we have a straight plat and it's I think sometimes as a city we get a little confused as to what we can stipulate because most of what we have approved in our um suburban area has been a part of a planned unit development. That's not always true. We have some examples of some straight plats now that have been improved. Uh but and we have straight plats in our rural residential area all the time, but especially with our large our largest developments in the city have been plant unit developments. So a PUD is a specific reasoning request and it reviews several buildings and our uses as a unit. So it also acts as a site plan approval as well. And then this is um a zoning district that is outlined in section 1040.140. And the city went through a intensive process to really update our standards for PUB. And I would say we have probably some of the most stringent PUB standards in the state. Um not that it's a bad thing. uh but that that is uh we wanted to make sure that it was resulting in development that truly have public benefits. And so um the idea of a planned unit development is to promote creativity and efficient use of land. Also I would say that um the theory behind PUDS is that we by the time we have written our ordinances they're probably out of date. So the PUB allows for adaption to market demands on the fly a bit more than what our standard ordinances will usually allow for. So again allows flexibility and regulations and can also allow for a mix of compatible land uses. It is useful for very difficult sites with many natural resources where compliance with byite zoning can be difficult or um so I would say when we have more than one or two variances it probably makes sense to have a PUD uh because if we have a site that's so challenging that it would need five variances or something like that it you might as well just kind of start a have negotiate a new planning district. Um and it should provide benefits to the city. So public benefit again is a huge component of the planned unit development. Uh so the theory being that um the city and users of the site and neighboring residents uh have some kind of benefit that would not have been obtained through straight zoning alone and this is a legislative decision as well. And just to visit that second to last bullet point because I remember and we haven't had quite as many PUDs in the last couple of years, but the defining a benefit similar to defining a detriment. Um a city benefit when when that language is in there, it's it's viewed not as an individual resident would consider a benefit, but what the city considers a benefit. Yeah. what the so the city is supposed to be acting in the community's interest at large and so that might include like so where it might seem like oh well that's not the city's b that's not a benefit to the resident because it's the city that's saving money I would argue it is still benefit to the resident because it's saving taxpayer dollars so yeah it's but things like streets stop lights are are considered they would fall into the category of benefit um I would say infrastructure um has has not typically been something that our current council has defined as a public benefit. Um there was a time where significant road improvements or um sometimes significant utility improvements were considered a public benefit. So I believe like uh Ravenia there was there was probably some of that for Ravenia and Tivera and I believe weather. Um but then there has been a departure from that and so uh to to your point um the public benefit aspect is fluid. Well it it was very fluid and then we established a policy now where we have identified I believe 27 public benefits that we want to see. there is still some ability for someone to come in at a concept level and say, "What about this? This wasn't included in your um your policy, but what do you think about including this as a potential public benefit?" So, there is still some ability to have that, but uh not without also including some of the public benefits that we've identified. Uh and infrastructure is not currently something that's on that list. And and I guess this is not but I think about that list because I remember that when we were in the middle of doing that and like some of the things arguably like are in the greater states legislative are less uh an immediate benefit as they once were. For example, the charging stations, right? with some of the shifting that's happening in other governments like that's not necessarily as u as much of a benefit. So I guess my question related to PUDS is how often will we be reviewing that list of like 26 like what does that process look like if all of a sudden five years from now we're like hey actually those things we outlined as benefits there's that shift again and we're trying to look at what Yeah. So, I think as much as the city would like to, we could theoretically review it. Uh, I think the charging stations, you're probably talking about the Northeast standard. So, it's not a public benefit. That's just an underlying standard of the Northeast District. And they have a list of like eight resiliency strategy. So, they don't have to do EV chargers. Um, we have seen a couple of developments that have chosen that as one. Um, so that u that's a little different than the PUB standards. Um I think we do have one standard that would allow for incorporation of new technologies. Okay. But it's not specific to a particular Yeah. It's not specific to a particular technology. Correct. Um let's see here. Okay. So some uh underlying procedures to keep in mind. Uh we as a city do use Robert's rules of order for our meeting procedures. Um, but we do this fairly uh fairly informally for the most part. Um, and but the idea behind Robert's rules is it keeps meetings fair and organized and efficient and make sure everyone has a chance to speak while helping the group make clear decisions. So, um, that is uh something that we do try to follow as much as possible um even if we kind of deviate from it at times. And then the open meeting law um is something that is a a state law meaning that our meetings must be open to the public. Whenever there is a quorum of planning commissioners is considered an open meeting law. So if you if three of you were to go to the same city event, we have to post for that as a public meeting even if it's not our typical planning commission meeting. Um because once we have a quorum, it's technically an open meeting. This also applies to our communications over email um and things like or just communications in general. And that's why you'll see that we tend to we should be blind CC seeing you on emails that go out to the planning commission as a general so that you don't have a chance of hitting reply all and now we have a quorum of planning commissioners. So if you do ever see that you've received an email and you can see all the rest of the planning commissioners, please don't hit reply all. It was a mistake. Um, and then we also have in Minnesota a 60-day rule and we have to comply with it. So, this is simply that any land use application that the city receives, uh, which could be as simple as um, I believe even building permits are subject to it, we have to make a final decision on within 60 days. We with the exception of preliminary plots which have that automatic 120day review period. Also, the city can grant itself a one-time extension of addition of of an additional 60 days. Um, but then once that's exhausted, there is no ability for us to extend it. Um, but the applicant could grant the city as many additional extensions as they desire. U, so it's really a rule that's meant to protect the applicant uh in terms of making sure that they receive a final decision within a timely manner. But that's why sometimes it'll feel like uh decisions are being rushed. And I think that's a common complaint from the public like, "Oh, we're just finding out about this now." Um is because we are working on a very small timeline to get these done. Um for the meeting procedure, so uh typically for an item, the chair will announce the agenda item and clearly state the subject and staff will have a small presentation. If there's a public hearing, we do need to formally open the public hearing, take any testimony, and close the public hearing. And we do that with a vote. Not all cities close the public hearing with a vote, but we do. And so, that's important that we make sure we honor that step. After that, we typically have clarifying questions. So, this might be questions um that the commission has of staff. This is also an opportunity for staff to clarify any questions that may have come up during the public hearing testimony. And then how it should go per Robert's rules is at that point we should have um the chair should invite a motion and that motion should be seconded and then we should go into discussion. That is not how we typically do it and it's not how city council does it either to be fair. Uh but theoretically uh my understanding is you actually want a motion on the floor before you really get into uh deep discussion. Um But that's why I say we follow these loosely. We can go that route. It might carve some time off, but we Well, I think that's the idea is like you kind of kind of start with that. Um so that you have like really the discussion on the table is do we want to recommend approval? Right. Are we all already in agreement? Right. Yep. instead of well and sometimes like especially since this can happen at city council all the time, we'll spend hours um revising a resolution just for it to get denied when we finally get to the motion in the vote. Um so it's um or it just it simply doesn't pass. So I think it's supposed to kind of set it up a bit better so you're a bit more efficient. I don't like I I haven't really seen this actually get applied. So whether or not it's more efficient I couldn't tell you. Um so anyways after all have spoken have had chance to speak during discussion and the chair repeats the motion on the floor and then the chair calls for a vote on the item and then the options are yes or a or I sorry no or to abstain. However extension should be used on a very limited basis. Commissioners should have a sound reason for choosing not to vote as their vote for recommendation is a crucial duty of being a planning commissioner. So, examples of why someone might want to abstain um include a conflict of interest. Um and this is be um I think I get into this a little bit later, but this there's a it's typically a conflict of interest is when you have um usually a financial interest like you would set to gain uh to benefit financially if this were to be approved or denied. So, you really shouldn't vote if that's the case. Um, and then or just a feeling that you lack the information needed to make an informed vote. Uh, I do my very best so that that is never the reason, but um, that would be theoretically a reason where an abstension makes sense. If you do abstain, do you have to give her a reason? You don't. I would just say it's not like we're going to really um, I don't believe you have to. There might be an applicant might ask for reasoning. I believe um I could ask the city attorney just to clarify on that. We've had we've had city council votes where there's been abstensions before and we have not asked for the reasoning. However, I would say the issue would be probably something that comes up more like if someone is constantly abstaining. Um then that suggests that they are not fulfilling their duties as a planning commissioner. And so at that point then it might become more of an issue uh to be like we we need to understand why you're not voting on items and choosing to just not vote. So, I think if you're just doing it truly because you're trying to make the best decision um with what you understand, uh it really should happen on a very limited basis. So, I don't think it' cause issue. It really be that person that's using it that's abusing it. Um that would probably be where we would have to figure out how to handle it as a city. So, and then the chair announces the result of the vote. Um, chair seeks clarification from individual members on their votes if necessary. So, if we didn't hear it, maybe there was a couple people who voted I or voted name, we might need to understand who voted what. And then sometimes, especially with a denial, it is we would um we have not necessarily always, but we have kind of gone down the road to explain why it was denied. I think that happens more on the city council level, but um that does happen. Um yeah, I think that's about there. Okay. Legally defensible decision. So, uh this is this is the record that we have to set up. This is what um evidence in the record. It would this is if we were to get sued on a land use decision. Um this is what this is usually why staff recommending something that might not be very popular is because we're trying to set the city up for the most legally defensible decision. So um there is uh things to keep in mind such as the subject matter jurisdiction. I don't know why I said decision. I'm sorry. Subject matter jurisdiction. So this is did the body decide a matter that it is empowered by statute or ordinance to act on. Um and the record should reflect that. And then use of proper procedures. Did the body follow open meeting law, public notice, the public hearing? um in order to uh h have a proper record set up application of property standards. So did the body apply the proper standards in making their decision. So that's why we should refer to the standards that we have outlined for Cups or plat review when we add conditions and then the rational basis for the decision. So this if a court's looking at this they should be able to answer like if a court's looking at this they want to know that could a reasonable person have reached the same conclusion. Um and then evidence in the record. Do the facts in the records of the proceedings support the decision? So if all of the facts in the record really support an approval and at the very end we just just decided as city we're not going to approve it because we don't like it. Um that would not be a legally defensible decision. So u it is important that we go through each step and again this is probably um why plan staff is recommending or even maybe ering on recommendation for not even I don't want to say error but um recommendate recommending approval for something that might not be very popular for the community uh just because we're we believe that there are reasons that suggest that it is the most legally defensible decision to approve it. Um but that doesn't necessarily mean that things couldn't come up during the public hearing or during the deliberations that could change that uh recommendation. So it's just as far that based on the facts that we have during our technical review um we would recommend approval because of you know how we're applying the ordinances and things like that. So this is kind of where some of that tension I think comes from trying to set us up for success. Quick question um and it takes interwines into this slide as well as the last is that we typically have always given the applicant uh time to speak and that is not actually a part of the Robert's rules necessarily is it um I just remember one tense meeting where an applicant was denied the opportunity to speak and um and I I don't know if that is considered use of proper procedure or Is that is that a scenario where then somebody could ultimately say you didn't give me my public hearing was open, public hearing was closed? Yeah. So the public hearing is not usually for the applicant. Now sometimes the applicants get confused and they stand up during the public hearing and we're just kind of like, okay, that's fine. Um but typically we do if they would like a chance to speak, we do honor that. I do think that that it really should be honored um to have them a chance to answer questions and just kind of say their five minute spiel. Um I can look at the Robert's rules on it. I guess I don't know off the top of my head if if there is something specific on there about having an applicant speak, but I do know typically as a city we we do let them speak. So to largely depart and kind of be uh have it be at a discretionary um I do think is dangerous because we have a history of letting applicants speak without making a formal um determination that we're not going to allow applicants speak and I don't see what the benefit of that would be at that point. Um then I I would recommend that we follow our processes from the past. Sure. Yeah. Um I do think at a certain point the chair and the commission however it's the the deliberation's over. We have a motion on the floor. We're going to take a vote. We don't have to you don't have to keep having a back and forth with the applicant especially if it's not going anywhere. But I do think it's important to have that initial um opportunity to address speak and there's usually a time limit on it anyways. So no, there's not a time limit for the applicant necessarily. But again, if they're being if they're being um argumentative, if they're being argumentative, our our Yeah, we have a a different policy in place that we could enact if that was the case. Yeah. Um but the but yeah, the applicant doesn't really have a time limit because there might be some back and forth with questions um that they might be better poised to answer than staff. So um so also, yeah, people may bring up valid concerns during the public hearing. Uh but when the city uh officials simply don't like something, they should defer to applying the ordinance as written. So there might be um there might be something that's like, oh well, the traffic or something like that. That's always a valid concern and we do our best to study that and mitigate that through the development process. Um and but if you simply don't like it and there really isn't a concern that um if there isn't a concern that that cannot be mitigated. Yeah. If there is a concern that cannot be mitigated, that would be a valid reason. Or if evidence is shown that the application isn't what the application is by a neighbor who comes in, then actually I'm about to get to that. Okay. Um, so hold on that. Put a pin in that. Um, that that can I might even have it in here. Might be on the next slide. Um, but yeah, so valid concerns can get brought during the public hearing and we should have a discussion how to mitigate it. Uh, and then when in doubt apply the ordinance as written. And uh, Hoy at all versus the city of Minneapolis. I bring this up because it is an example of what not to do as a planning commissioner. Um, basic you do not want to make up your mind prior to the public hearing. You want to be open to the evidence presented at the hearing. And you do not want and I would say that when we say hearing, we're also talking about not just the public hearing with um comments from the public, but also the staff report as well as the applicants also testimony during the discussion. You do not want to advocate for or against a matter for which there will be a public hearing after the public hearing. I believe planning commissioners might be able to have a bit more flexibility in that, but city council should still be very careful until they have their public meeting date. And you want to remain an impartial decision maker. Whoops. So, you do really want to be careful about having your mind made up before you come to the meeting. You might be leaning a certain way and that's normal and human. Uh but you want to have the openness to change your mind should uh some additional evidence be presented. Okay, I'm trying to figure out where I had a note in here about that you want to make sure to that you are basing your decisions um on information that is presented at the public hearing to an extent. hearsay though um I would be very careful about uh because we have sometimes have people who try to weaponize um code enforcement and things like that or try to say that they called the city but there's no record of this call um there's no record of a code enforcement complaint uh so I would just there hearsay can be challenging to base a decision on um there have been times where uh someone has I think there was a public hearing at one point where someone had said that he doesn't even live at this property. That's the one I'm referring to. And but that um you as a commission did great with that. You um you made a decision really not based on that hearsay. What happened is I looked into it and I found evidence that that suggested he wasn't living at the property. Um, and I and so then I talked to him outside of the meeting and explained that the application type he was applying for was not the correct application type that he would need to go under a different application type. Okay. And he did not want to do that. So he withdrew his application. But um the city making a decision based on hearsay is is tricky. So it wanted so that well and you don't want to my the other concern that arose from that is that you don't want to encourage a mob sort of like spying on your neighbors that Yes. Exactly. Right. Yeah. So um I think yeah that application in particular that you're talking about was a very challenging application and I think the other thing with that is there there another difference with that versus some another application that was reviewed recently where similar complaints were brought up. Uh but the difference being code enforcement did get involved and code enforcement had its own pictures and data to support what was being said at the public forum. It wasn't just someone saying, "Oh, well, they're hosting services at this location when we don't have any evidence of that." Yeah. So, that's what So, there's I guess just the difference between evidence and documented incidences versus hearsay. Okay. Um not to say that what they're saying is incorrect. It's just that we didn't have any evidence as a city to support that. Okay. Um Okay. So, I think that it I'm trying to just thought there was another note, but we're just going to move on. Um so, important to avoid. So, kind of going again to what not to do. Uh advocating for a position until all information has been submitted. Exparte contact. So, that is contact between you all. Um, it's okay for you to speak with one other commissioner partic especially on agenda items that you you could probably reach out to one other commissioner but as soon as you start reaching out to more than that it starts to cross that line. Um, and it's also just um discussions between decision makers beyond the quasi judicial hearing. Board members are required to base their decision on evidence presented during the hearing. relying on information provided elsewhere could violate due process rights. Um so that's that was the note I was trying to find. Um and then fundamental fairness dictates that all parties are informed of all facts. So um just so yeah the ex party communications is just I would say be careful talking about um planning commission items before the meeting. I think that's generally the generally the consensus. But if you do have questions, you can always refer your contact staff. Um, um, and you want to also avoid making personal comments that may be derogatory. Conflicts of interest. Um, this particularly conflicts uh, where that are obvious that the potential appointes own personal interest is so distinct from the public interest that the member cannot be expected to represent the public interest fairly. So again, it typically is tied back to a financial. Like if you um let's say we had a developer on the planning commission um and his company is the applicant, he should not be voting uh whe should be abstaining from that vote because he stands to benefit from the outcome of that uh application. So that I mean unlikely to happen, but uh that would be that'd be a extreme example. Um it might be more likely that there's a realtor and maybe she has a contract or something with the developer to sell those homes and or is in line to do that and they should probably abstain. I think that that would be something that might be a little bit more likely. Um and yeah, discussing projects and meetings on social media can get you in a bit of trouble. So I would uh be careful with that particularly again before the public hearing. Okay. So the parks and trails commission training session had a like a quick session on how to read plans that I thought was really interesting like oh I probably should be doing that. I want to give you some quick tips on how to understand a site plan. Um so first you want to start with the title block. Um, this will tell you what the site plan is for, the proposed development, uh, the address of the parcel or location, um, the scale and who prepared it and the date it was prepared. And so that just kind of helps kind of orient yourself as to what you're looking at. I also find it's really helpful right away to look for the north arrow to understand how the site stimulated or the site is laid out. Um we like one example of where this really uh came necessary was with the hope development their plans just due to the site layout. Uh north was not where you expected it to be. So I would definitely look for that north arrow first because it might be flipped just because it makes more sense on the paper. Um, and then once you have an idea of the north arrow and the scale bar to kind of get an idea on how um on how to estimate the desk distances, the next thing I'd look for is identifying the property lines. You want to look for bold or dashed boundary lines. They show the legal limits of the property. So we'll typically show the existing limits and then there'll be a slightly different type of line that will show the new limits after right of way has been dedicated. And then um it's also really important to understand what these symbols mean. And not every plan is going to have the legend on it. Sometimes it's on the cover page. So it's really easy to flip past that. Um but that is really important. And I'll also say there are many times where I have a symbol that's not on the legend. And when that happens, if you were to ever notice that, feel free to reach out. It's probably something I've already worked through with the developer. Usually, it's because they're using a template that they didn't update when they had to add a new symbol. Um, it is really frustrating when I'm looking like where is this or like there's symbols that are not on the plan or um there's something on the plan that's not in the legend. So that can happen. Um, but I would first start with looking at the legend. I would say 90% of the time it's probably okay, but the 10% time that it's not, it is very frustrating and timeconuming. So feel free to reach out to me if that happens. And then next you want to look for structures, labels, and notes. Um, so the buildings are usually shown as solid shapes with labels like house, garage, or proposed building. and they want to pay attention to size, location, and orientation. And then words on the plans can explain things like the fence height or the retaining wall height or the setback um or where the signs are going. So I think sometimes you can even I like you can overlook there might be just a little note that actually might answer a lot of your questions. So um once you kind of get down to the microscopic level, definitely look for those labels and notes. Look for roads, driveways, sidewalks, trails, and utilities. Utilities, we typically have a utility plan by itself. And I would say for the most part, you can probably skip it, but sometimes it's helpful to know where the utilities are because it might explain why um why there's a certain layout or why there might be an easement somewhere. Um so that might provide that additional context, but the utilities are more analyzed by our engineering and public works staff. Um, check for parking and access points. Um, whoops, sorry. These are typically shaded or I'm sorry. Oh, no, that's the roads. So, for parking and access, you want to look for mark parking stalls, drive aisles, loading zones, and any labeled ADA spaces. Um, so note if the design makes sense for how people will access the site. So, um, sometimes I think we've seen that where like the access really doesn't make sense, um, with how the building's orientated. And I think that's a fair, um, even if it's not something that we might be able to condition it on, it's a fair critique to ask. And the applicant might also be able to explain why it's being set up that way. Um, locate natural features, contours, and landscaping. So trees, ponds, slopes or wetlands may be shown are generally shown and landscaping areas are often shaded green are marked with plant symbols. We typically have a landscaping plan by itself to help kind of keep it separated because otherwise trying to put everything on one plant can be very overwhelming. They're already very overwhelming as they are. Um and then note the setbacks and easements that are shown. These typically are additional uh dashed lines um separate from the property lines, but those are also something to keep in mind. The setbacks in specific are something that I typically spend a lot of time looking at. The drainage utility easements are something that for the most part are fairly standard on the lots um and also cover the drainage, I'm sorry, cover wetland areas. Um, so I don't know that you necessarily need to be too concerned about the placement of easements, but it might again explain why there's why this lot is shaped like this because we needed a building area because most of it is an easement due to wetlands or something like that. And then yes, ask questions when you are unsure. things do come up and I am available. Dwight is available to let you let you know if something isn't making sense or not let you know to answer your questions when you let us know if something isn't making sense on the plan set. So these are just I can send out these slides too. These are just um kind of some examples like of um plans that have been marked up to kind of give you an example. So the DNU easements for a lot are going to usually be a perimeter line that kind of goes around the property line. Um the property lines are going to have like these standard uh skinny but um non-dash line we have and then it's helpful to understand which side of the street has the sidewalk when you're thinking of the overall flow of a site. Um and then something else that we commonly see, storm water pond is shown right here. Um sometimes a trail corridor will be a bit darken compared to the sidewalks. Uh and then we most properties in the city will have wetlands and then we additionally also have a wetland buffer regulation that gets added on once a property subdivides. So we'll have that kind of a vegetated area that hugs the wetland. And then there's also a wetland structure setback. So on this side you can kind of see um there's this setback line that is really far from the other pro the rear property line and that's because there's a wetland structure setback. So it's a in addition to the typical rear setback. Um I think that's just more of the same. So, I um contours also sometimes give you a bit more context than and can be easily overlooked, but it might explain, oh, uh right here there's a six foot drop. Um it might also explain why a retaining wall is needed. It uh it also can tell you if you look at the existing condition survey compared to the grading plan, it can tell you, oh wow, they are really doing a lot of grading to level the site. Um and so that's some context that you can get from contours. Not that we would deny a property because of the uh change in contours. As long as it meets um engineering requirements, but again, it just helps to understand context. And if it is a PUB or something where we do have a lot of discretion, that could be something you might want to is there any way to keep some of these slopes because that is um that helps add to the character of the site instead of leveling it. Um that has been a discussion in the past. I believe it was a discussion with Cook Lake Highlands. So, um this is an example of a tree survey. Um so, if we have a tree inventory, the red trees, it's typically shown in red would be all the trees that are being removed. The green trees are the ones that are being saved. And then we'll typically have a landscaping plan on top of that that shows the new trees to be planted. So, yeah, those are just some quick examples of plants. Hopefully that was a little helpful. Um, and then let me know if any questions do come up because I again, you don't need to complete a technical review, but it is still helpful to look through the plans and let me know if something isn't quite adding up. Okay. And I also wanted to briefly touch on a comprehensive plan process because this is coming up. Um, so as a city within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, Corkran must adopt a new comprehensive plan every 10 years subject to approval by the metropolitan council and the commission will be heavily involved in this process. Uh so just a quick sidebar on the Metropolitan Council. The Minnesota legislaturator established the Metropolitan Council in 1967 to specifically address the planning and development of the seven counties including 182 cities that make up the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The initial intent when it was established was to address issues that were not being adequately handled by individual cities and towns during a time of rapid growth. and it was determined that coordinated investment in and improvement of infrastructure was needed for the region. The Met Council's role has since expanded since its creation. Today, it is responsible for planning for three regional systems including wastewater, transportation, and parks. They are also responsible for developing housing, land use, and climate policy to guide development within the region. They are required to create a regional development guide every 10 years and this is done slightly before we have to do our comp plan to be consistent with their guide. And then they also serve as the metropolitan planning organization and provide transit and wastewater services. So just they um the the statute has been updated to kind of start to expand beyond just the initial infrastructure goal. Um that was my understanding that was pretty specific to wastewater when they were first established. Who reviews their guide? Is it the Minnesota legislation? You know that's a great question. I don't know. I Okay, I will have to look that up. I don't know. I kind of just assumed that they did it, but I um I would assume someone has to review it. So, I will take a look at that and get back to you on that. Uh I'm more so focused on our stuff. Sorry. No, it's totally fine. I don't want to work for the Met Council, so some questions that I just I'm just trying to figure out their meeting schedule and it's a nightmare. So Oh, sure. Yeah, I will I will look into that. Um but so the so the 2040 comprehensive plan our current plan was adopted in 2019 and then the city's process for the 2050 comprehensive plan is anticipated to begin next year and system statements that will guide u that's basically the foundation for how we need to change our comprehensive plan are expected from the Met Council this fall. So this process is typically two to three years uh with several opportunities for public engagement and meetings and so we will be designing what that process looks like um likely at the end of this year and again planning commission will be involved in this process. There will be open houses that you'll be invited to. There will be meetings that this will be discussed both by city council and you as a commission. Um so there this will be um something that starts to consume a lot of our time next year. What time of the year do we normally do it? Um, the winter, the summer, the fall. It's I mean, it's a Yeah, it's not it's not just like a single thing. It's it's a two-year process. So, it's throughout. I would say some of the open the some of the community engagement events are in the summer, maybe maybe more in the summer. I believe we do some open houses as a city in the other seasons, but just because people are out and about and so it's kind of a a a good time to meet people where they're at. So there might so I would say so there's summer events that we might have more involvement than some other seasons. But so again the system statement it's called the dennial system statement. So it's individualized for each local government. Explains implications of system plans and capital budgets in that community. Provides forecasted growth and general development expectations. Prompts local governments to update their local comprehensive plan. And they say they are sending it out September 2025. And I don't have any reason to suggest otherwise, but sometimes it does bleed into October. Um, and then there are several changes that are expected, new requirements, um, that were that we've received notice of so far. This is not an exhaustive list. These are just the ones that kind of jumped out at me. So there has been discussion with this already but within our Musa the the minimum average density in that area will be going up from a requirement of three units per per acre to 3.5 units per acre. Other cities are having uh depending on how they are classified as a city they might have higher or lower density requirements but that's specific to us within our Musa area. Um there is a requirement to partner, engage, and collaborate with underrepresent under represented populations. Um and that's I'm not saying that as a bad thing. That's just something that we will have to make sure that we are specifically documenting. Correct. And then including a greenhouse gas emissions inventory is a new requirement. Uh including strategies to address natural system vulnerabilities. So extreme heat, localized flooding. That's so interesting that food system disruption is on there. It's Yep. And that was their wording. I took that. So, uh, and then residential categories must allow for more than one housing type in each category. That is new. Um, we technically already do that because we allow accessory dwelling units in our single family districts. So, I don't know that we need to change much. I'm actually more concerned about it for inner high high density residential district. we only allow apartment buildings and I don't see how we can allow for another use and still hit the density. Um, that was something that came up in a recent discussion that I had with me count. It wasn't just me. It was a group, but there was it got brought up that doesn't seem to quite make sense. So, I don't know if that might be getting clarified. I think the density is usually though for overall, not just one development. No, it's it's per development as well. So it needs so for example a development coming in for lowdensity residential has to be at least three units an acre which is the minimum allowed in that land use category. So it is um it's overall and it's the overall is the 3.5 units an acre that we're going to have to hit. That's just in the Musa within the Musa. Yep. And then we have land use. We have 15 land use categories. Not all of them are residential, but the ones that are that have a residential component all have a minimum and maximum density target that they have to be within. Um, identify goals and priorities for large scale agriculture and smallcale local production. You might like that one. It makes it make comical maybe a little too late, right? But and then residential areas intended to accommodate the city's required allocation of affordable housing units must now have a minimum density of 10 units per acre and it used to be eight units per acre. And I actually have a question related to that. Does the city or does the M council or the state regulate at all who owns that affordable housing? Because more and more we are seeing outofstate companies own affordable housing and it is not maintained. So I'm I'm just wondering like is that something that the city would stipulate or is that something that's regulated by a larger body that this is these are the limitations of Yeah. So I would say the we don't have as a city we don't have any uh money in affordable housing. Other cities do have money in affordable housing and so then they do have a lot of of ability to make stipulations on who they're providing funding towards. Right. Exactly. Um but because we don't we really don't have an ability to say certain applications will not be granted for licensing. Right. So we for apartment buildings we are we have they would have a rental license and they need to be they need to fit our um licensing requirements but they a company from Wisconsin would likely be able to do that. Uh we don't have a limit on how much property they own. Uh we do have a property maintenance code and we have the rental license. So that would be an ability to um enforce maintenance of the buildings. Um so I think you would do it that way, but I don't think we'd be able to prevent an applicant from coming in because they have a poor history in a different city is what I'm trying to say. If we had money in it, that might be a slightly different story, but we don't. So okay, we just don't provide funding for it. And most of the time, like true affordable housing requires some kind of government subsidy. So whether it comes from the city or the state um and again we don't our economic development authority does not have um does not have any policies that would allow for funding a project. Um so it would be something that's coming in from the state likely for us. Um, and then I theoretically if we were to have policies in the future that did have that allowed for funding and things like that for affordable housing, then we might be able to reduce the required density that uh there's like a credit provided based on your policies. But because we're much more market driven, we will be subject to that 10 units per acre. And I think that the Met Council in their mind, the more density, the cheaper, the more affordable the housing is naturally. So, um, okay. But, yeah, affordable housing is a fun topic. We'll have fun with that. Um, so I would say the bulk of what the planning commission is looking at would be the 20 will be the 2050 future land use map. This is our 2040 land use map. Uh, majority of the land is classified as a residential on the west side. And then the next biggest land use category is um I believe it's actually low density residential but existing residential we also have a lot of acreage as well in that land use category. Um and that's actually probably why we have such a fairly low um density uh average because these existing residential areas currently don't have a sewer and water for the most part. Um but we are saying that we would like to eventually get them those services and so we have to include them in our density calculations and that kind of brings down our overall average. And then we because low density residential is the next or is like the largest land use category within the Musa which has a minimum density of three units an acre. That's also why our average is pretty low. But anyway, so the we do have some commercial areas and industrial areas. A lot of those are pretty much built out now. Um yeah, I'd say that this is a good map to keep in mind. I think some of the questions that might come up during our comprehensive plan process is uh we are looking at potentially re uh classifying this piece to a residential category uh which is an industrial site of about 68 acres. It's off of Larkin. Correct. Yep. And um so one of the questions might be where could we potentially make up that loss of acreage either with additional commercial or um having another industrial area. So that might be a question that we are looking at during the comp plan process. Um okay. So then yeah again we have a 14 land use categories and we added a 15th category not shown in this table not shown in the uh comprehensive plan document if you were to just download that from the internet um because we um created a new land use category for conservation residential within the last year I think year or so uh that allowed for slightly lower density within the MUSA for new development uh with a range of 2 to three units per acre. And then the uh mucus density table that's currently in our comp plan shows that we uh have we've calculated each land use category for residential uh to come out to an average net density of 3.11 units per acre. This is now down to about 3.09 units an acre because we have since again have approved some developments that are closer to two units an acre. And so that's something that we kind of keep in mind as we continue to potentially look at regiduiding property and um it's something we'll definitely have to keep in mind because we have to somehow get this up to 3.5. Does the Met Council take into consideration the environmental constraints of a city when setting a density? So during with the um with each calculation that's done with a plat we are able to uh net out areas from the calculation that are protected by ordinance. So that includes wetlands wetland buffers. We can net those out and so that allows for a higher density calculation. Um and then that's another strategy that has been somewhat floated by um discussions with city council and staff is looking at are there additional ways we can protect natural resources by ordinance um that would allow for further areas to be deducted so it's easier to hit that 3.5. Um, and then I think some other strategies we've looked at is do we now do we have to add a um had to kind of split up some of the low density residential acreage to a category that's between low and medium. So to kind of get the average a bit higher uh because right now we have um 2600 net acres and that's reduced that because we've developed a lot not 2600 acres but we have developed several. So, we'll be looking at a slightly different number with our 2050 plan. Uh, but basically, if we assume we have 2,000 acres net acres left, um, then do we take half of that 1,000 acres and put into another land use category that we need to create that maybe starts at four units an acre. Um, I don't know that those are just kind of some ideas that we'd have to think through. We'll have to calculate it. and we get some credit for the developments that came in higher than the minimum and there's a plat monitoring credit that we get. So, it's a it's not as straightforward as a formula as you'd think. Um, and we don't we I don't my understanding is we don't get penalized for plats prior. Um, but it is we do have a little bit of work to do to get to 3.5 is all I'm trying to say. But that doesn't take into account that's only completed Yeah. So, these are areas because it doesn't take into account ones that are supposedly Yes. That's where I get a little confused. My understanding is the existing residential will take into account because they're not currently receiving services. Okay. Uh but it won't take into the account. It won't take into account areas. What Zoom is is being crazy. Um sorry, they just exited because we've been idle. Yes. Um but anyways the what was I trying to say the so the areas recording in progress that have been platted that are receiving service are receiving sewer and water then that really shouldn't count against us when we're recalibrating the average essentially. Um, uh, another area that the city is going to have to take a a look at is our staging plan. Um, prior to 2040, the infrastructure for sewer relied on several sites for lift stations. Um, and then we hired an engineer as a public works director who took a look at that and said that's does not make sense. And um so for the 2040 plan they had identified this green line that's shown here, a southeast northeast district gravity connector trunk that reduced significantly our reliance on um lift stations to service sewer to our northeast area or from for our southeast area actually. Um, but for whatever reason, the rest of the staging plan did not really get adjusted to really factor in that we need development to pull this pipe down to here. So, right now we have um the pipe has gone to uh Brush Creek Reserve. So, it's right about here. And then we have pulled it um not well yeah we've pulled it across the county road 116 is my understanding uh it's part of the water treatment plant and water tower project and then hope um will be pulling the pipe to um actually this is another application that's coming in 30 uh well yeah they were supposed to pull it here per our plan um we are now looking at potentially an alternative route that would pull it down closer to 30. Um, and then not it these properties would still have access but really kind of switching this line over to the closer to 116. Yep. Closer to 116. So, uh, but with that in mind, we have several properties that are in, uh, phases that are much further out into the future. Um, that, um, simply doesn't make sense because we can't get the rest of this area to unlock, uh, outside of anything that's not this dark fuchsia until this pipe goes in. So I think for example this golf course that's shown in our second phase which is projected for 2025 to 2030 that's not happening. We will need to get this pipe in before they can go. Um and so I think we're going to have to really take a serious look as a city. Um and most everything in this in the uh southeast area that isn't already dark pink needs to probably go into the last phase the third or last phase. Um, and we have to really re-evaluate this um, northeast area to move some of these up. So, and this had been mentioned before, but obviously that area along 55 on the west. Oh, yes. Yep. And how that was planned for. Yes. So, as a part of the next comprehensive plan, an area other than that is possible that that's identified for the next phasing. theoretically. Um I don't think from discussions with city council there is a desire to expand the Musa at all. The issue with this area is it's unclear how it's going to be served. So she's talking about our southwest district here. Um Met Council per our last plan they were supposed to complete a study uh future study to address wastewater service. There was talks that would come from Lorettto Madina. Um now there's tax that it's going to come from Rogers I believe somewhere over here they have they have um obtained a facility that would allow for waste water treat wastewater service to come from there. Um however the feasibility of bringing that down through here is unclear. Okay. Um or would it mean that we have to bring it down here but then we now have a MUSA donut. So, um the issue we could theoretically just take that area out. Um the problem with that is there are several property owners who have been wanting to go and have been waiting to go for several years. And so my understanding uh with cities that have tried in the past to remove something in the Musa that has been shown in the Musa for several years, it turns into a political headache and it doesn't happen. So, I don't know exactly what we're doing with that, but yeah, theoretically we could take it out um and just say that area is going to remain rural for the time being. Um or we might have some other decisions on um where would the infrastructure come from? Does do we have to expand the Musa or do we simply have to have it kind of meander on the east side and go that way? I don't know. And it's that do we have to trade that land for something else is I think the thing that people are paying attention to because this is obviously a map that some property owners actually look at prior to purchasing where they purchase. Yep. Okay. Yep. Yeah. No, especially it's um it can be contentious and especially if someone purchased over here thinking, okay, we'll be one of the last to go and then now we have to do a musong 119, right? Um that could be really disappointing, right? So, um, there aren't great answers for this area at the moment. Um, but I I don't believe the study's been done by Met Council. Um, the last I heard from our rep with the Met Council, it was in the works. So, hopefully we have some answers in time for the 2050 content. Okay. Um, okay. And then last slide, just um, our official zoning map. Um just kind of tying back to how it really ties back to both our staging plan and our land use plan. Um so this the the future land use plan really shows like how a property is expected to be in the next 20 years. Um the zoning map might deviate from that because of our staging map. So I think the biggest thing is this dark green is our urban reserve and that is essentially a holding zone. uh we don't want really very much subdivision in there at all. There is limited ability to subdivide, but we want either really big tracks of land in that area or we want really small lots. Um, and so the it's fairly limited for these property owners right now until they are in the current phase of staging, which then they would have a suburban zoning district assigned based on the underlying land use shown in our 2040 land use plan. And I don't mean to keep asking questions, so I'm sorry, fellow commissioners, but uh, the city came before and asked for a change to the phasing. Is an individual applicant able to do that? Okay. Yes. So, I would say they can do that. The issue being in our southeast district, we don't have capacity without taking something that's currently shown in the fus fuchsia out. Um, now we and we might have some property owners that are in the fuchsia that would be like, oh yeah, I can go out, but the city might have alternative goals that we're not going to do that. So, we have, again, with a comprehensive plan amendment, we do have the ability to be like, no, if we don't like that, we don't want to do that. Um, different than some of our other applications. Um but the um it would be challenging I think for the southeast district to have to be moved up in the staging. The northeast district I think we have much more flexibility to make those kind of calls. Just the reality of sewer capacity in the southeast district. So okay. So yeah, I think that is a um bit more of a deep dive into all the moving components of what we are looking at as a commission. Uh is there any other questions before we wrap up with the presentation? Are you going to be sending this out to the Okay, thank you. That was really nicely done. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. We spent I I was trying to do it last week on my vacation and I decided no, I'm going to just take my vacation and um so I spent all day today on it. So that was it was nice. And I'm glad you decided not to do it on your vacation. Okay. So we are going to do a game. It's a bit definitely different than what we've done in the past. So, we're Court Squares. It's not Hollywood Squares. It is similar to Hollywood Squares, but slightly different. Who's the game show lover between the two of you? Okay. But this was his idea. He This was him do the I'm excited. All right. So, um So, if it's boring, you can blame me. If it's great, you can give you all the kudos. I read something that gaming, especially after um a long presentation. Yes. Actually helps you retain the material. have to leave it. So, um, we can go through the hosts of the of the game show and then we can assign teams because it's tic-tac-toe trivia type deal here. So, um, the Corkran squares are um, stewart divide zo name agatha culture. Agatha culture. Yeah. Gusty Fields, Randy Buffer Zone, uh, Silus Stainable, Grant Eman, a lot of Acres, and Barb Wire. So, those are the uh the Corkrin Squares, and they will um have questions for each of the teams, and the goal is to get tic-tac-toe three in a row. Um, so I don't know how you guys want to divide the teams. You want to do um just based on how you're sitting or if you want to do most experience and least experience. I don't know about the experience. We thought it might make sense for you as the chair and our new planning commissioner to team up, but we can leave that up to you guys. So, we need a team of We can we can we'll team up. All right. Okay. Um, so who's X is the interview assignment? But that makes me feel like a little bit of pressure, not gonna lie. Um, so then I guess commissioners Zachman and Hargreaves can be X and then Kaziki and Bremen can be Oh, I thought we were doing Bremen and Zach. Oh, sorry. Oh, okay. I mis I misread the situation. I Okay, so Zachman and we'll be X's. They can be. Perfect. Does anyone have a preference on who goes first or we can flip a coin? Paper, rock, scissors. There we go. Yeah. Each team captain do paper, rock, scissors to go first. Okay. Ready? Paper, rock, scissors. Okay. Ready? One, two, three. Shoot. We go first. Paper gets or scissors to paper. Fair enough. Okay. You have a preference on which I'll let you do it, Zachman. Um, we'll go with So, we select a person. Yep. Barbar. No. Oh, I forgot which one was not. Okay, I made the names up. They were catchy. Uh, so first question, what are police powers? And does he have to answer or we can answer as a team? You as a team answer. If you get it wrong, you don't go to the other team and it'll just go back and forth until I answer. They're the powers afforded to the municipal uh planning authority in the US Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution. That that is correct. Pretty close to states ability as an individual right pretty close. Well, no presentation. I would say that's pretty in my presentation. I can see how you got that answer. So, I wouldn't say it's wrong. Um because that is what you wanted what they do, not where they come from. Right. Right. Yeah. But I would I wouldn't I wouldn't say it was wrong. So, thanks. I like it based on the presentation. You get an X. Okay. Put an X there. Yes. He's trying. This is the practice run. All right. Uh so the O's? Five. Five. Uh the city has the most discretion when establishing and amending which three guiding documents? Comp plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance. That is correct. Woohoo. Way to go. Back to the home screen here. All right. Just a clarifying question. Did you have that uh those flipped on the That's from the pyramid, right? And they were the bottom three. The ones in green. Oh, they were there were three in green. Okay. Yeah. Subdivision and zoning margins were on the same line. Yeah. All right. X's. Should we take number six? How do you feel about that? Six. Yeah, we'll go with six. Six. Name two elements that would be included in a preliminary plat. That would be lot size. And