e and are okay we're going to call the meeting to order this is the Planning Commission meeting for uh April 4th 2024 and I'm gonna uh do roll call uh brummond is here kazis kazaki Kaz kazaki here kazaki and commissioner harre yes all right and then if you guys would like to stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance with us I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all okay and I just want to make an announcement that uh due to some prior commitments tonight's meeting will need to adjourn at 900 PM due to a loss of Quorum uh as such the public opportunity public comment opportunities will occur at open form for anything that's not on the agenda and during new business as instructed uh the Planning Commission will not be taking public comment during the reports and information portion of the meeting as that will be limited to Planning Commission discussion due to time limitations there will be a five minute time limit uh requested for each speaker all right and so with that we're going to move on to the agenda approval uh so Commissioners do you have or staff does anybody have anything that needs to be amended on the agenda okay and with that I will uh entertain a motion to approve the agenda for tonight all right all those in favor say I I all those opposed say okay and we're going to move into the open Forum then this is an opportunity for anyone uh who's here tonight to um approach the podium and address the commission uh with anything that's not on the agenda already tonight is there anyone here who would like to speak during open form and then Madam chair we do need to approve the minutes thank you I was going to do that next okay but I will no it's okay it's number five but we'll do that now um unless there is anything that anybody needs to amend will entertain a motion to approve the um Planning Commission minutes from March 12th 2024 okay all right all those in favor and those opposed okay that's approved and no one moved during open Forum but I'm going to give you the other opportunity so that we're back in line with the agenda does anyone have anything that they would like to approach the Planning Commission with that's not on the agenda for tonight okay we'll keep moving then uh what we are going to do next is um item agenda or agenda item 6C is not a public comment um opportunity sorry Public public hearing excuse me it's not a public hearing but we are going to allow for public comment so if there's anyone here who wants to make a public comment regarding agenda item 6C now is the opportunity and that is the Red Barn Pet Retreat variance it's not a public hearing that particular agenda item so we're allowing anyone who's here who would like to make a comment on that agenda item to approach the podium and make comment on that issue right now the discussion for that issue will take place but at that point in time we won't be taking public comment so that's why it's a little bit out of order because it's not an actual public hearing have questions the that we sent out I a comment okay so there will be a staff report that happens during the time that we get to agenda 6 uh C the Red Barn Pet Retreat variants so what I would suggest is if you're interested in that if you would stick around for the staff report and then the discussion that takes place with the commission at that point in time if your questions aren't answered you can always send an email um or uh come and and um talk to any I apologize chair I'll just I can I can speak to the map real quick so basically the the blue is the site that we're discussing the red Red Barn Pet Retreat and then all the red selected properties around it are within the 500 foot radius to receive notice of the meeting occurring so that that's simply what the map is showing but that's that's what the map is that answers your question but um so you don't have to wait for that for that question to be answered okay and with that we'll move on to agenda item 6A which staff do we just need to make a motion to approve that yeah so I I can speak to that so the um the applic applicant and staff are continuing to work through uh some alignment with a another property that will also be going through the subdivision process right around the same time uh so that item is still being worked through they have requested an extension of an additional 60 days which puts their review deadline out into July um at this time they're hoping to be placed on the May agenda so because we already mailed out public hearing notices we do have to make a motion to continue the public hearing to May 6th okay does that make sense okay all right and so then um I will make that motion to continue the public hearing for the chass Tec Farm um to May 6th of 2024 all right all those in of well it passes right because we have a first and a second all those who vote of all those approved say I and anyone oppos say nay all right no he was just along with us okay and that brings us to item Six B which is the sharber garage conditional use permit and up first is Staff report yeah so thank you chair brummond uh six item 6B tonight is uh a conditional use permit request uh for the sharper garage cup um the applicant is James sharper he's the property owner and he's requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow an accessory building uh to be built in his sidey yard with uh sidewalls that exceed the 10 foot uh sidewall height limit the property in question is uh 6650 Pion your Trail uh so like I said the structure is uh being proposed to be placed in in the sidey yard and um it does exceed all the required setbacks um so that's the the side setback the closest is I think like 90 feet and the rear one is 78 feet um the accessory structure footprint itself uh he's proposing a footprint of 1 15367 square feet uh which is just a shade under what the allowance is for his property which is uh 1,531 Square ft um again the proposed sidewall height for the garage is 16 feet U which can be allowed through the cup um and while the the sidewall height does exceed that 10- foot limit it doesn't the structure height itself doesn't exceed uh the zoning District height limit of 35 ft um the applicant is proposing pre-finished steel panels for the sighting and the roofing um which staff finds the the standards of section 1030 and 107.0 to0 uh for the conditional use permit have been met with the proposed conditions um so pretty standard with most of these uh requests for the taller sidewall Heights um staff would suggest that uh a conditional approval should be added that the structure can't be used for commercial or accessory living purposes without uh first obtaining the proper City approvals and um during our analysis we uh notice that there are two existing sheds that are on the property one that has a square footprint of 89.2 five square feet and the other one with 114.4 square feet uh city code allows for one of these sheds uh to not count towards the allowance of the allowed footprint of uh 1531 um so as it stands right now if the new shed were to be constructed and uh the two sheds were to be remain on the property then the property would be out of compliance um so I brought that up to the applicant and he has notified me that he plans to remove the S the southern shed uh after the construction of the the new garage um so a condition of approval should require that the existing shed be removed uh within 30 days of completion of the new garage uh in addition Additionally the applicant should deposit an additional escrow of $1,000 to be held by the city um which would be released once the uh shed is removed from the property and so at this time staff recommends that you open the public hearing and take testimony uh and then staff recommends that you approve or recommend for approval of the draft resolution with uh the added conditions that I had previously explained right thank you and at this time then we will go ahead and open up the public hearing for the sharber garage conditional use permit so anyone who uh would like to make public comment please approach the podium state your name and address and then um share your thoughts with us and just please remember to keep it around five minutes is there anyone who would like to address this particular issue and we didn't receive any cards no okay so then I would make a motion to close the public hearing do I have a second all right all those in favor say I anyone oppose okay so now we get to um have any discussion if necessary is there someone who would like to take the lead on that I think it looks pretty straightforward and looks like there's trees screening from the neighbor's property so I wouldn't think it would be impinging on their property at all it's a pretty good siiz lot it's just a the total height is within the range so yeah I'm okay with it so am I uh the only and it's is uh I feel like we're ready to make a motion on this um issue the question that I would have is I feel like this is number four three okay so I the only reason I want to highlight that is if we're looking at things that need to be addressed potentially this is Maybe one of the ones that we're seeing most often um is that V the conditional use permit because of the sidewall height okay so with that being said does anyone want to make a motion to approve the sharber garage cup yeah I'll make that motion to approve the shriber CP with the staff conditions of approval thank you a second all right all those in favor and anyone I anyone opposed okay and that takes us to agenda item 6C which is the Red Barn Pet Retreat variance thank you madam chair this is pet bar I guess you were the only one on the council or on the commission last fall but if you're in the next slide uh this is on SE Road and 101 on the northwest corner the applicants requesting approval of a variance to allow development of the parcel within the Metropolitan urban service area the Musa in advance of Municipal Water being available to serve the property sanitary sewers available today but not Municipal Water last September the council approved the comprehensive plan Amendment resoning preliminary plat and conditional use permit and site plan uh to allow development of the Red Barn Pet Retreat which is an expansion of an existing uh doggy dayare just down the road next slide this is the site plan just for reference that was approved and um the utilities are available as I said both SE and water are stubbed but the water connection is not available because we're still building the treatment plant and the water tower so next slide they would like to begin construction this spring and open uh in the fall and a variance is requested because the city water system will not be online until it's estimated to be option operation by the end of this year so there's a period of time where they would not they would have to wait until that's Operation we we cannot issue a building from water we uh talked with Maple Grove uh that would require an amendment to our agreement um St believe this is the best path forward the applicant will provide a private well and a water suppression system in the interim so they will have water and fire suppression and they will be required to connect when water is is available and staff finds as outlined in the staff report that in this case the variant standards have been met next slide and we do recommend approval of the draft resolution approving the variants to allow uh development in the Musa in advance of Municipal Water and I'm happy to answer any questions thank you uh and so because this is not a public hearing item then we can just go right into any discussion that the commission may have I will say that was um on the at the initial concept meeting when it was um presented to council um and then H when it came before the commission as well and this was a discussion item that we talked about at that time and the commission did um at that time vote to um allow the variants of were in favor of offering the variants and then just with the stipulation that once flatter became available that they would hook up to water so that's the history as I know it so with as it sits I am uh ready to make a motion unless other Commissioners have discussion they'd like to bring up I have a couple of questions uh the properties that are east of 101 what what are those zoned as east of 101o I don't know the answer to no I think they're residential property but I don't know Maple grow zoning oh okay okay and um perhaps this has already been gone over and since I'm new I'm going to ask the question anyhow ask away but on on sheet three of the the design shet that was submitted there's there's dashed line indicates of P the saac what what are those are those properties going to be developed further and do we know what those are we do Kendra would you like to address that I would so that is not part of the discussion item today uh and I'm happy to meet uh and talk through that but that was discussed with the preliminary plat yes that is uh right away that's planned and the applicant intends to use that land as part of the the Red Barn Pet Retreat now that'll be walking trail but longterm that can be developed with uh commercial uses so that's already been discussed like I said I hav history with this so um just going to fire away yep and happy to chat offline too but yes that would need a a new plat uh to subdivide this lot to create that okay in the future but we are planning for that with the co act and one final question when it comes to some you know some of the environmental issues uh such as um light pollution animal waste and all that business is that going to be discussed at a later date or that has that already been discussed yes that was part of the September discussion they do uh they are required to comply with Section 1060 of the city code which establishes our lighting standards and they did have a plan for how they deal with the animal waste that was I have a y list of things I since it's already been discussed I I don't need can get that packet or you can look up that packet September and happy to chat about it too I'm fine thank you okay so I will make a motion then to approve the variance for the Red Barn Pet Retreat City file number 24-7 second all those in favor say I I anyone opposed so moved okay and then that takes us to reports and information other business item agenda item seven a number one thank you madam chair so this is a discussion item for the Planning Commission uh related to a commercial and Industrial District standards update that was started in 2023 so as in 2023 City provil identified a a goal to adopt um new standards for underlining Zoning for commercial industrial land uses and this would impact seven districts in our code AS outlined including our commercial ro ro commercial neighborhood commercial Community commercial Business Park light industrial our downtown mix use area as well as general mix use area an initial work plan was adopted on November 20th of 2023 and then the Planning Commission had an initial discussion on December 5th of last year that was mostly related to uh looking at some of the standards and uses and at that time the commission asked for a table of uses to be brought back so that some additional discussion could be had um to compare uses ACR Ross districts since that time we also staff completed a business Community survey which is uh sent to either business owners in the city or land owners Within These districts um through and that was open through January 2024 the results of that are expected to go to Council next council meeting on the 20 not next so two Council meetings on April 25th um and then since that time a question has come up of how development rates are to or to not in our rural commercial district and the city after that adopted an interim ordinance on March 14th to address that question and then subsequently just a couple weeks ago on the 28th a revised work plan was adopted and that was outlined in the staff report for you so we're looking at basically three stages but tonight we're going to try to address all three topics so related to task one development rights and Rural commercial in our transitional rural commercial area uh I provided some background on development rights in the staff report I'm happy to clarify any questions the commission might have in regards to that basically the questions are asking tonight is uh what are the planning commission's thoughts about moving away from the practice of using development RS as a way to limit development density or intensity in the rural area of the city should uh particularly when it relates to our commercial Rural and transitional rural commercial district there really is no discussion at this time about moving away from the residential side and then should the city move away from using development rats um what do we think about the minimum lot size of two and a half acres in the rural commercial District does that need to be increased to to what um so just something to keep in mind is lots in development do need space to accommodate storm water uh in this area they have to accommodate two septic system sites a primary and an alternate there are parking needs and we also want to make sure that the lots are buildable and usable Lots uh and uses within this District regularly need exterior storage this is where we allow contractors operations and similar uses that rely on exterior storage uh and that's not allowed in all of our commercial industrial commercial or industrial districts allowed to some limits in some and then others it's outright not allowed um and then for the if we do move with the larger minimum lot size does that make sense for all uses in the district for example if we move to acres is that something we want to see for gas stations and dayc carees versus um contractor operations other District standards changes we could consider at this time would be the impervious surface coverage limit of 50% and step backs do those me sense with a larger lot size and then if a 50 acre so these are some questions on just the practicalities of how we would apply it so uh right now if if a 50 acre lot with five development rates is partially reson to commercial Ro or transitional commercial Ro how do we handle the assigned development rats do those just go away or um what exactly happens to those and then in the instance of a 50 acre lot with Redevelopment rates uh because two are previously used and then 10 acres are resed to a commercial rural District how do we handle the assigned development rates when it's not clear a they use some and if we're going to take some of the land uh is proportional assignment or do we just reassign it based on the land acreage at that time that that would remain rural residential um and then how should the city handle the concern that people particularly those who already used or exhausted development rates we'll request to reone to commercial R once it's understood no development rates are needed if they rezone uh are there some areas in the city where some additional commercial rural areas make sense and then any other feedb back for the city council's consideration and so we can come back to these slides when we're ready to start and then task two is looking at our Mini Storage we have a storage moratorium right now um the last Planning Commission and obviously we have two new planning Commissioners so we we can definitely re-evaluate as at the last pening commission I believe the direction or recommendation was to uh move away from allowing storage uh in terms of Min storage and Self Storage uses um is that still the case do we have some additional thoughts at this time uh Al an alternate would be to consider additional standards for Mini Storage or Self Storage I believe I outlined a couple of options in the staff report and I also provided our existing standards as well for reference and then for task three it's the comprehensive review of commercial industrial districts um I I would ask that the Planning Commission affirm the summary I provided on page two three of the staff report uh that that is their accurate understanding uh and then if there's any additional information that would like to be added at this point to forward to council you can certainly do that and then uh the table of uses was created and so uh some questions for the table of uses where is there room for simplification I think there's quite a bit of room and I'd love to get your feedback on that what uses are missing the table what does or does not make sense for where does it or does it not make sense for use to be included in one District over another and then what uses should or should not be permitted versus conditional or inum use um so happy to answer questions I also for reference I have our zoning map our future land use map and development rights map if you want to refer to that at all so thank you Natalie okay so it is time for us to begin um our discussion so I think it's best if we take a look at each um item and because of our time tonight we'll just kind of uh go with the discussion but if we approach a time when I I want to make sure we have time for all three so I'll just kind of Ward us off if one seems to be taking over over the other um and so I'd like to open it up for who would like to ask their questions or to share their comments this I'm to ask one this would be on one which is the um development rights in the commercial rural or uh commercial transitional rural um correct if you have any questions for clarification on what that process works feel free to ask yes um right now the minimum acreage is two and a half acres per rural commercial is that what I understand correct so historically how it's been applied is uh we have we have um commercial lots that show development rates on them and we have instances where it's been applied where if they try to subdivide we did use development rats to subdivide to balance the overall intensity with the lower lot size of two and a half acres but the minimum lot size at this time is two and a half acres for that district is that mainly to be able to situate a well and a septic on it because you need that minimum distance definitely part of it and parking is the other part of it have we found that that's enough or it could be less possibly in certain situations personally I wouldn't recommend going less um we do have an existing um our existing Industrial Area here off of 116 and 10 that corner um they have lots that are they range in size but some of them I thinker as well about two and a half acres and yeah the meat locker that used to be there that one even less that one's very small and they've had a very hard time um moving forward with it um I think with when you on sewer and you can have bit more Consolidated but when you're dealing with an area where sewer and water is not available um it bigger Lots tend to be better if it is small businesses like that do they ever have where the business shares with the with the neighboring business and you can use the combined acreage to put to situate a well like shared a well with two or three properties share the septic or is that not a thing so um my understanding of shared septic is not ideal um and typically where we've allowed shared septic um we do allow for it in our open space and preservation plat but it all of a sudden it triggers the need for Planned unit development because of the additional agreements that need to be put in place to be able to upkeep that um and then there's been I my understanding is there's been other communities that have seen significant failures with community satic so again I wouldn't recommend that for commercial lot I don't know that we're I don't know that I don't know what I guess about the well C that might be a little more discussion but I would say it's probably better for each if it's not a part of a like an association it's probably better that they have their own Wells on these individual LS right I have a question I would I would assume that the city went through a quite a bit of effort identifying the 2.5 as a development right and my question would be how does that of if you know I was looking at the map that was included in the um item where it has all the development rights Associated for each property how does that impact the or does it impact the master planning of the city or does it impact the master well I think that's some of the questions that we asking because I think I think right now uh the 2 and a half acre minimum lot size for commercial Ro has been offset historically with the use of development rates um these development rates were initially assigned to the original Parcels at um a rate of one well I shouldn't say original it's changed a couple times and and it's been a difficult program to track and I think I discussed that in the staff report so it's not a perfect system but it is the system that we're working with and overall it does provide some flexibility because sometimes some uses or some land owners would like to carve off a smaller chunk which they can do they don't need to have a 10 acre minimum lot size um but then um to keep the density and intensity overall um it the development rats kind of work in conjunction with that minimum lot size and so the benefit of moving away from the development rights for commercial Ral commercial uses is it allows for more commercial users the downside is some of the things that I outlined in the staff report is how exactly does that work when we've use development rights already um are are there areas that were that we would consider for possible rezoning in the future uh and it might be better to kind of think that through now um especially if someone already has an outlaw uh that has exhausted all development rights and really was never meant to be developed but um maybe they're on the a corner of two County Ro and they would now like to rezone it as commercial and is that something that we would like to open the door to because they wouldn't need development rights once it's owned as commercial under a scenario where we move away from the development rights and will that cause a lot of the rural residential to be rezoned as rural commercial I mean the city has that's way city has control over it the city has discretion over it but the I mean I think that it could open the door to more requests and so what do we want to be intentional about where where would that make sense to entertain that request um because anyone can request a resoning uh and so and I think there are I know of a few property owners who have a fair amount of land left but they've already carved off a number of pieces and so now they're down to three development rates or however many development rights and they have you know multiple acres and they would like to do something and they feel like they um that the rural residential they're kind of waiting for an update in the program and I think that that would probably be some of the first people to request that they'd be reson to commercial If This Were to go through so I think a lot of what would keep people from doing it too is access I mean we have large Lots out there and you may have the back of your property that you'd like to do something with but there's no access to it these properties are have County Road access have to have access I think is is one thing that limits the ability to take rural residential and make it commercial because if you don't have the access or if it's in a neighborhood that's basically all rural residential then there wouldn't be an opportunity to for somebody to take and carve off the back of their property for commercial or there may be if they they could submit an application for that I I think they would I think you'd be able to rezone it without the development rates I think it would if we're talking about it's kind of hard to talk without an actual parcel in front of us um but I mean I I know for the parcel I have in mind um I don't want to point it out on the maap I'm not trying to put anyone on blast but they do have County Road access um and um and it's not that the city has to say yes I'm not trying to say that this is going to completely unravel everything it's just how can we be intentional about moving forward if this is what we want to do so um I think talking about access is a good point um and I just think that that's something that could very likely happen where there'll be at least probably one or two people who would like to reone their property because they've already exhausted development rights so I'm just gonna uh address the um development right the shift from that process in and of itself and I am not in favor and there are a number of reasons why um and the first is just that it is the same Foundation that we use for residential as well as commercial and so even though we're talking about two different zonings once one is changed what is to keep the other from being changed and so that feels to me um because and I've addressed this in the in asking like why is land not zoned agriculture anymore and it's been told while historically the develop M development rights were awarded because then that became the land owners 401k and so now to shift that for one and not for the other feels um feels like we're either going to eventually end up having to shift it for both which dramatically changes what our rural residential um landscape looks like or we uh or we have to be um super clear that the reason for making the change is such that it's it's we have enough grit and enough teeth to justify that it was was worth separating out from the other program and I am not um confident that the reason that issue has has bubbl to the surface has enough teeth um in in that area I feel like the the I feel like the priority of looking at Commercial and Industrial standards overall throughout the city has been hijacked a little bit um in this narrow Focus around this issue and I just want to make sure that we don't lose sight of that overall because because there's so much here that would have to be looked at and I would want to make sure that we did it well um that sort of this rushed timeline I don't think gives us the the path forward to to do it well to consider all of the impact to make sure that um that we are planning for Access that I I really think that there probably are areas where we might want to rezone commercial residential in the outlying areas but I think that takes talking to um Madina talking to Hamill talking to Greenfield what are their plans especially all along that 19 area what are their plans for future development so that it makes sense what we're doing and not that it just looks like we rush to make a lot of commercial um areas available in the in the rural so those are my concerns that's why I would recommend that at this point in time um that we continue moving forward with the development rights as they've been assigned however um I am open to a part of the larger discussion around our commercial industrial taking a look especially since what we have coming up is the 2040 50 50 plan that maybe this gets tagged on to say let's you know I know that primarily those look at Musa areas right where Municipal sewer and water are available but if in that same process we evaluate sort of those areas out in our world to say is there any place where we want to extend that Cal I think that that marries really well together at a time frame and a timeline to do that but to do that when with what we were looking at feels rushed and hurried to me and I'm afraid that we're going to make a mistake that we regret later in the development of the city as a whole I have a tendency to agree because that was when I started reading about this it seemed as if the current path seems reasonable and what you just said makes a lot of sense to me and I also agree is is I I think we should take this slower and not rush to it and I don't know what that means or how that you know I'm not sure what that means but I like the idea of um making the discussion more in line with resoning or whatever happens with the 2050 comp plan too because then we're looking at a cohesive view of everything and it just might be a little easier to put it in the context that it needs to be in as far as looking 10 20 30 years down the line and I guess part of what is influencing my thinking is um just uh well right now where that muine comes in is such a stark line right like we've talked about that applicants who or applicants who come in and they're right at the edge of that line and then residents who are on the other side of it that feel like they're you know that line is a sharp distinction and so now if we take this into consideration suddenly we have you know Medical Office Buildings abutted right up to what's rural residential so like how does that even change that process moving forward now someone's got rural residential on two acres but they aren't in mua you know I just I just feel like it would be a little bit of entertaining um more issues than than we would want to take on complicating which bogs us down from from really planning the city well um but also achieving some of the things that were on the agenda for this year um if we were to consider because that's obviously my overarching opinion um but if we were to move forward I with the lot size so I know that corkrin has shifted on that minimum lot size a number of times because I feel like it was five at one point in time then it was 2.5 then some Lots were even if they were 2.5 they didn't they had too much low lying area so all of that to bring up that when you're out in in the rural residential the amount of space you need I would not be in favor of reducing that um minimum um and I even even with um at this point in time even regardless of the usage like I think about a gas station and I think about a um child care and they're certainly not going to necessarily need that amount of space um but they do have to have wellend septic because they're going to need facilities and so I just don't know how you could do it on do it well in the rural area with less than 2 and a half acres also I feel like there are people who intentionally live in the rural area for that lower density and so then to all of a sudden be increasing the density of commercial um it the change happening in the city is already quite difficult for those residents and so I think then to feel like um to feel like the commercial is being expedited and intensified uh regardless of where even though they're in the rural area I think that would be um a a difficult um people group to consider and then lastly my concern overall is for and now some people may only go to their grocery store but I go to my neighbors and my my Farmers like that's where I get my food and so for me what does the increase of commercial property do to their taxes that and and it does it only further push our agriculture business out unintentionally I I don't think anyone here is trying to intentionally push that out but if all of a sudden we intensify or we make it far more desirable to sell um in you know what I mean to turn that business into a commercial rural or transitional commercial rur I'm afraid that that that what we're saying on intentionally is that that type of business is far more important to us than our um Agra business and our Farmers so that's my other just two kind of soft um concerns with moving away from the program we still have some time left to continue discussing this issue so feel free to jump in I absolutely agree with um doing what we need to to promote our aggra business in in our neighborhood especially out in our kind of rural area outside the Musa the more small Market Farmers we can get out there it would be lovely to see Cork and get a farmers's market we really don't even have one yet so or maybe more than one so yeah the more we can promote something like that and discourage things that would that would keep that from happening or or make that harder for people does anyone else have anything else they would like to specifically talk about in regards to the development rights issue otherwise we'll go on to task two which is the mini storage and Self Storage Madam chair I could no fine I think so I I I think that's great I do think it would be helpful to answer some of the questions the assumptions that Council does want to move away from the development rights in the so how what are some of your thoughts on the practicalities of how we can um apply development rights once we kind of have a situation where we're moving away from okay so if they decide to move away from the development rights as it is we're going to take a look at some of the questions that they have and that is primarily uh what would you like to see the minimum lot size as do you want to see it increase or you you basically have on here that you've called out one acre but we are we operating on one acre or two and a half I was in I looked at the wrong dist so we're talking about two and a half do we increase or decrease I so I don't I I don't think we should decrease I don't think that's really the discussion it's more of it's two and a half acres enough if we're not balancing it with the development rights anymore have we had requests for Rural commercial on 2 and a half acres that we don't feel like it's it's enough that it should be five acres is are there problems there with hitting what we we feel needs could be on there historically the concern is not initially but with expansion with an opportunity if I'm incorrect come you're not incorrect I would say our existing downtown area I feel like there's a lot of lessons to be learned in that area and they're all in very it's very Consolidated area with smaller law sizes and it's not great and that's even with it a lot of it being switched to sewer and water more recently but there's just a parking is an ongoing issue even without buildings expanding the buildings that we have seen to get expanded require variances a number of variances to be able to do it um in order to be able to retain business within the city that's kind of you kind of I think you're the hand kind of gets forced because you want to work with the property owner that's invested into the to their property to that point as well as made the choice to locate Quran um so yeah I think it it's the expansion is a concern but it's also just the storm water has been an issue in that area to the point where the city had to purchase some land to correct some of that issue uh within that vicinity because it wasn't working and I can't speak to that too much that' be something Kevin Matson our Public Works director can but I know that we had to purchase some land acquire some land to address some of that um and then um so I think those are some of the current parking is a huge one um and then just the long-term viability of the sites this area tends to be looked at for commercial operations quite a bit uh not commercial I'm sorry contractor's operations contractor's yards um and I would say two and a half acres is not going to be enough for a contractor's yard right yeah the secondary question that you said is does a larger uh minimum lot size make sense for all uses in the district um I don't know that it makes sense for all uses right like that's maybe where a gas station could fit on 2 and a half acres but certainly not a contractor's operations and not a contractor's operations with an outdoor um storage um in order to yeah so I would certainly think that for that you need a you know a larger minimum I guess I'd like to say five I'm you know the Public Works building sits on 10 10 acre plan right five I think it's 13 but I'll look so it's it's the larger than 10 and then the D and D like do you are you guys familiar have you driven out that direction 10 and 19 I live in that area so yeah so the Public Works building that's on 19 is on a 10 acre or larger site I don't believe it's any smaller and then the DND which is that newer Contracting that went in across that's a big L yeah that one 16 and a half acres Public Works is 11.4 Acres um so yeah there they are on larger lots and but sometimes I wonder if 16 Acres have enough for D and but I think there was a question for the proposal for the lot that is going to be on 30 and 19 on the north east corner that they're developing commercial lots and that they may be smaller than is needed or what they're developing I read something about that yeah I think that if we're talking contractor operations like I would look at a minimum of of of 10 acres uh with that outdoor storage however you know if somebody I mean if contractor's good their business is going to expand so I would assume that they'd want to come in big rather than be small and then have to move operations after they've uh been on site or in location um I guess it really depends on the business I know it's really hard to set a standard business you really don't need a lot of parking and I don't I don't know what corkrin parking minimums are do we have parking minimums sometimes par parking minimums are excessive there are parking Min minimums but they're not just specific to corkrin it's a it's a an equation that's quite complicated but it has to do with can be very excessive um parking can be excessive uh but then we have businesses in town where they're parking on streets where we don't allow parking and we it's turned into an enforcement Nightmare and so we it's simply to Simply continue parking where they're not supposed to park um but I think that we can certainly look at the parking standards that's not really in our current scope right now because our performance standards are outside of District standards it's definitely something to keep in mind as we consider the minimum lot size um but my concern would be that um based on our current experience with Consolidated commercial areas of that range from two to five acres or so U we don't have enough work for those uses are we going to have an opportunity for public comment at all not tonight on this so you're gonna keep the public completely out of this no sir there without any public input at all that's not fair this room could be packed from here to outside with what you're talking about tonight had people known about it so it's there yeah tonight it's not a public hearing tonight so this is just a discussion uh it's it's the preliminary work that's done before anything is ever brought uh available for public comment but you're welcome to submit any comments via email or letter to staff and get in the packet but it's not a public comment tonight don't get in the packet kept out of the packet okay sir it's not a public comment tonight so we're just going to continue our discussion so we're taking a look at the next sort of things would be impervious surface coverage limit of 50% or setbacks um those would be some of the other standards that we'd consider so does anyone have anything that they would like to speak you talked about access in terms of making sure that the Lots had access and so in your mind that is access to County Roads or major collector yes and I think you know there's definitely an issue with too many they only allow so so much access off a county road so even out in our rural area where we have you know homes they're no longer allowing people to build a home and access off a county road I don't believe I think you have to have a road off the county road into a neighborhood and and then access off there but I know there's been some things that have come up where they want to create another access off of like County Road 19 and it's not it's not allowed because it's a highp speeed highway well and that gets deferred to henen County is who gets to decide if there's a yeah I think so I think it makes sense that if we ever talking about reiding rezoning an area um so having basically a larger acreage be subdivided I think having nearby access to a County Road make sense it wouldn't necess make sense to require each lot to have direct access to a county Ro more like a frontage road or something there would have to be would have to be something to serve the development but when we're we're when we're zooming out and looking at a larger situation where're we're talking about resoning something then that I think does make some sense does henin County provide input regarding that ahead of time if the city was going to say we're looking at these areas transitioning that to something different uh or does the county wait until there's uh sort of like how sometimes a concept plan will come before Council Council gets to provide feedback does that sort of conversation ever happen with henan county in terms of like Hey we're thinking about this we're not necessarily doing but we want to know would you be open to or does that type of conversation not happen uh I I mean they they they are sent our comprehensive plan for comment when we start that process so if we wanted to look at potential are additional areas to add as commercial rural or in in that area um that would be a chance for them to comment I don't know that we typically reach out to henin county for changes in land use outside of that uh the Met Council would certainly have to be notified of anything that's a comprehensive plan Amendment um but the hin county they typically comment at sometimes we'll send them sketch plots we usually do just out of courtesy and then they definitely comment with a plat and so that's typically when it gets handled so then what I guess I guess my question is how then does that impact this process so if we're looking at access and we're looking at sort of those being the areas where we would consider changing something if we are limited uh we wouldn't know until we're providing them with a plat whether or not they would allow entrance into that so they have to if there if there's no alternative they have to approve it allow for some type of access can't not allow for access on a property um so the with the Herran Farms industrial park they didn't allow access at this time for that because it had access On LAN but if so as long as there was from a back yeah so but if they didn't have Lan then and that the only option was for some kind of EX on County Road 50 then that would have been then they would have had to say yes this is something that we okay I guess for me that would be one thing to consider as we're trying to decide whether or not we're going to actually um you know move into this would be the number of times um because a lot of these uh are larger um the plats that you had on your your map if you were to show it um yeah you know most of them tend to be that large rectangular shape right and so there's not a ton of um secondary access all the time I guess anyway that is something that I guess I would consider because that would be something that you'd want to plan for and plan well if you're creating a bunch of access um off of your you know 55 M hour roads and like ster road is a gravel road so when if you start looking at you know resoning that that's mainly agricultural there I mean they have they have centuries old dairy farms on that road so again it's hard to to think about standards without talking about uh something specific um so absolutely I'm having a hard time talking about setbacks impervious surface I'm always in favor of of um less right but at the same time um I think and you'll have to remind me if some of the like um uh gravel like you know so say you don't require a paved uh parking lot or something especially I'm thinking of a contractor's operation the gravel is still considered an impervious surface at that point in time or is it is it a perious surface that's a great question I believe it's impervious because that's how it doesn't soak in the same as it does on the ground right so it's still so even in that yeah I just am having a hard time wrapping my mind around something like that fitting on a um small lot but I could definitely see something uh making a distinction for a gas station or a uh Child Care um operation that has a smaller than the 10 you know 10 acre lots um but I think that it would if we were to do something like that well um then I feel like we would really need to take a look at the examples of what's out there and do some you know pretend plaing to figure or you know what I mean pretend developing in our minds to figure out with parking and then the runoff um what is a reasonable size lot um I I'm having difficulty understanding this without an example abely you know you're talking about specifics without specifics and and that's where I'm having a real difficult time about this because it's just difficult I mean to me it seems right now it's you have a it seems to me what you have now seems to be working relatively well Madam chair can I ask one thing just one suggestion um Natalie do you have the comp plan I think you said you had a couple of different Maps we have them in front of us is there one in that you'd want us to look at if she's got it up there that's that's your focus in you talk about streer Road you talk about all these other roads and stuff I think what us as Council and the mayor are talking about and looking at are obviously number one all of the areas inside the mus line which is really easy to see all of the pretty colors and stuff and that it's bordered by that line and then some of the other areas that are already zoned so to speak with with one being at at the intersection of County Road 30 and 19 all the way down to the DND and and um City Public Works and stuff all the way North where Natalie's pointing out right now um just to kind of Corral and get what I'm hearing you guys saying is a focus on properties that are designated what they are right now and and that reddish area on County Road 30 and 19 is what on your map service commiss P yeah yeah so right now that is the existing rural commercial area so I think I think where we might be getting hung up is on one of my last questions like how do we handle right requests to reone uh because is it unreasonable to think that once we once it's understood that development rates no longer apply will the rest of these properties in this area zone and then are there other other areas that especially if they've already used development rights and now are kind of they realize that they' put themselves corner will they want and again maybe there's some areas that that makes sense if we go this route maybe there are some areas that are they have access to two County Roads and their pay or or maybe collector Road of some sort where it could make sense if that's theout we go um but maybe there's some standards to not necessarily standards but just like maybe there's some thinking that needs to go into this on the front end so that staff can direct people who come in uh with an outlet that they want to have reson well that's not going to work because you're not going to meet these you're not going to meet these access requirements that you really need for a commercial the problem with that is is setting a standard and then waiting till somebody comes and test that standard is you don't know what you don't know till you don't know it just you no I totally hear you so broad I was just trying to so anything that's in the Musa well anything that's in the Musa is in my mind that's a part of that broader commercial and Industrial this the thing that we're talking about right now does not include that because it's not commercial R and it's not the transitional commercial R right that's within the Musa so that is already something else um so it is everything that is is in that pink area but in my mind then what is to stop anyone who's all along 19 from being like well essentially and then for me you know Greenfield butts up to that and Greenfield is building residential right now and so that's why I think it takes a a a neighborly discussion too to say hey what are some of your plans I agree I'm just saying that we've got those designated areas are already defined the rest is rural residential rural egg whatever we Define it that until keeping all those things until someone else says reest to say we can always say no and there was a request to rezone the area around the Public Works building to rural commercial already that concerned me because seeing um DND D yeah down on 10 and 19 and I don't think a lot of residential people would like to have that in their backyard because it's not very attractive it's basically outdoor storage so again then that's that's moving farther south with that I think as far as the rural commercial too and maybe we can address this when we update the comp plan but it's pretty broad the acceptable uses in a rural commercial area somebody may not object to say a farmer's market in the rural commercial area even if it requires some you know asphalt or gravel Paving or parking but they would object to a bunch of outdoor storage with a bunch of you know vehicles and implements and and and whatnot um in their backyard so it really depends on what kind of rural commercial and if we just open it up very broadly and say this is rural commercial and you can reone this from rural residential to rural commercial but it could be anything from outdoor storage to you know somebody's hobby Farm where they have a retail shop that's that's really Broad and it and it's really going to make a difference on how the neighbors and the neighborhood accept it I just also think that is really difficult to answer the question on how do you handle assigned development rats or how do you handle if if something in that pink area is granted more development rights and then you somebody else who comes up and makes a request for more development rights because they've exhausted theirs um I feel like because we've tied that to um to people's investment I think that that's just a difficult thing to um to yeah to to reign in so how would that be handled I I think at that point in time you would have to do it on Strictly an acreage if you're going to move away from development rats then it would have to be um it would ha the thing that would have to guide oh my gosh that just would be minimum lot size at that point in time and then if minimum lot size is not a standard for every type of allowable use in the commercial role which she just mentioned is very broad then you would have to attach a new uh minimum lot size to each allowable use I guess in my mind that's the only way for it to make sense um so that would be uh at least you know with the time that I've had to think about it in the last week um so if there's other things that that uh churn I'll let people know but I think at this point in time we should uh any other feedback regarding this issue in particular and then we'll move on to the mini storage and Self Storage I don't want to cut anybody's thoughts off so if you have anything else left to share in regards to the commercial rural transitional commercial rule is there any specific question that we haven't addressed that you would like us to make we I just want to make sure I captured some of this so in terms of so you don't necessarily have to recommend any changes to impervious surface or St back because I'm not hearing that we want do that and that's fine it was more just I'm not hearing that I know what I want to do at this point okay so for as far as the larger minimum lot size I'm hearing that um for World commercial um at one point you had said you would like to see it possibly at five acres and then potentially requiring more for specific uses is that an accurate summary or do you have other thoughts on that definitely don't want to go lower than the two and a half correct that would be an accurate summary of my thoughts I I agree but I think leaving it the way it is is is kind of the consensus right now yeah so I that will be what I share with the council but I think it's also just important to that you have an opportunity to kind of give some initial feedback on these other thoughts because um I don't know that Council will necessarily agree with that con census um so I just want to make sure that we have you have an opportunity to give this initial feedback so what will happen is we'll go to April 25th Council I'll forward this feedback um and then council at that time will give staff direction to prepare a draft um and then we'll do a work joint work session in May that draft um and then from there go into a public Hearing in June with Planning Commission so you will have an opportunity to review the draft that gets Ed there will be a public hearing opportunity um as in the um in June is what we're currently projected for um so I I don't know exactly what that draft looks like I'll have more direction from the Council on the 25th but I just want to make sure that I have some feedback you to incorporate into the draft should the direction be um we're going to remove development rates from this area so how should we incorporate some of these other other tidbits um that you can opportunity to speak to both so this world this world great exactly um so um that's what I so that's what I'll for at this point is a minimum lot size potentially increasing to five acres um but then but to be sensitive to certain uses where it might really need to be 10 acres such as Contra operations um and then as far as um the how do how do we re assign development rates when a part of the property gets rezoned um I think staff would probably recommend that the area that is um retained in Ral residential the development rights be reassigned based on the remaining acreage at that point my only concern is in situations where prob below right where they might actually end up getting a new development right because of it because of they but I don't know the solution to that at this point um but I I think that would be my staff recommendation I don't know what your thoughts are on that I don't want to put words in your mouth as the commission but that would be likely how I would handle it if it were up to me um and then we talked about the resoning quite a bit and then any other feedback and then I think we can close this part out the only other feedback that I would bring up is that I my first year here there were two issues regarding uh development rights that came up and were were uh there was one where uh people were upset because somebody had purchased a development right from a neighbor I don't know if you all remember that issue I have a crazy memory and so but the neighbors turned out and so while this may not seem like it's a big deal I think that um that it would be um to to capture the neighborhood the rural residential neighborhood feel regarding development rates um would be an interesting step in this process um because both times that it came up um even when it wasn't there seemed to be something that wasn't on the up and up even though everything was on the up and up people were very concerned about that and and it was because the appearance of being awarded in a development rate is is um is the appearance of what happened as the outcome of that situation and it's not what happened it was purchased but all that to say so now in a situation where potentially some people are being given additional development rights I think that that's just going to have a strong reaction from that community so I'd be interested in seeing if there's any way to capture I mean we do have a way to capture that and that would be the public hearing so that's the last thing that I would say regarding that and then we'll move into the um and then the other is that I just Reserve to my right to have more opinions if if we specify that we're moving in One Direction or the other I think one more thing I want to say on this um it it does sound like a lot of the times the community gets upset and even the people here they get upset because they don't know what's happening and it feels like it's being sprung on them and a lot of times the public input comes after all the discussion is done and everything's been put into writing and then they're saying well yeah you'll put down my comments but does it matter because the decision's already been made so I don't know if that's perception or if that you know feels kind of like reality to people but is there a way to involve the public in a way that they feel included that they feel like they're being heard there's a lot of change going on in cor right now and it it's been I've been in corpin for 37 years there hasn't been a lot of change especially out in in the rural area amazingly little change and now all of the sudden I mean we see the explosion in the Musa area and we're even seeing a lot of lots big large Lots going up for sale and roads going through and neighborhoods going up people need to know what's going on so I will say that they count City Council meetings there are a number of public comment opportunities for forut to be received and I can certainly if people want to submit comments on this discussion tonight can certainly forward that to the city council packet uh on the 25th uh this is the lack of input on this we it was there wasn't a public comment opportunity and we don't have a quorum as of nine o'clock so that's why we're we had had to make that announce at the beginning of the meeting um because we are we're on 45 minutes we still have two topics to go through and one of them is a huge table so and then as far as other public input opportunities we did do a business Community survey where we asked for input on some of this not necessar the development rights but we ask for input on performance standards and Zoning what's working what's not working um from everyone that is either a business operating on the properties that are guided and zoned for this area um and land owners so maybe there's no business there today but they a land owner that might look at developing so we did request that business survey to um emailed sorry we mailed it out um and we requested that people participate if they wanted to and so we do have some data we'll be able to share with the Council on 25th um and then as far as additional public comment opportunities outside of the public hearing it would just change our work plan and it could potentially delay some of the ability to move forward on the projected timeline I I have no problem with that except for I know that we're trying to be sensitive with the timeline that we have um so that would have the direction from Council that we're deviating from that to include some additional public Outreach and public comment opportunities perfect okay so task two is to take a look at the Min storage and Self Storage um there are some questions that we have uh before we can move forward but basically there are do you want there are two types of in storage units right I mean do we need to go into that because one of the questions was do you want to allow indoor storage and just not the outdoor storage so do you want to explain what that means the distinction between the two yeah so Mini Storage Self Storage typically um what comes to mind with that is the the drive up units there are some cities that have that no longer allow those to be developed but have allowed indoor storage to be developed um as a way to kind of minimize the footprint that's needed it doesn't really answer the concerns about employment opportunities if that's the general concern behind it um but it could potentially alleviate some of the footprint that it takes up and on land that's zone for industrial is pretty or it's allowed in our Industrial and Commercial Ro districts so so basically it doesn't provide a whole lot of revenue for the footprint that it takes up so uh the staff report explains that tax revenue is really not the concern it's it's a great tax base for the services in return um but the I believe the concern is more of the lack of jobs that generates at this point in time I am aware of uh a number I mean primarily uh as you enter the city um and then along the 55 Corridor and I feel like um there is accessible storage so I would be in favor of discontinuing the use um my only concern is that in discontinuing the use um I know that in Maple Grove the Becker Furniture shares itself with an indoor self storage and so if you completely disallow the use um in your code and then eventually 40 years from now everything's built out and now you're like okay we you know there's some room for some flexibility how do you navigate that because you basically eliminated it from your code and is there any way to instead of doing that approach to take a different approach in in terms of not allowing any more new on to come in I know we don't numerically limit licensing like we do with other um so like having indoor storage units as an accessory use is that what you're suggesting no no no I mean like if we if we said okay you know what we're gonna we're not going to take this as a use in our any longer so it's it's no longer an allowable use right but um but 40 years down the road you've got part of the corkrin industrial park that now sits empty and somebody wants to move in and be like hey we can turn this into indoor Self Storage but you vacate it from your code by saying it's no longer an allowable use be a zoning ordinance Amendment at that time to allow it at that point could you just put a moratorium on it or there is a moratorium on it right now yeah and there're just a year while you decide what you want to do to move forward well I think you don't continually renew moratoriums you have to make a decision there there's there's no intent to renew it at this point so we have to be very efficient with the with the work plan as the Sal line right now uh and my greatest concern I mean one of my greatest concerns is the just the lack of employment opportunity but also when you get the amount um of the same type of business um it's homogeneous and I think that um you know uh moving it into a disallowable use would um would ask land owners to consider um or future business owners to consider other Alternatives because there are some things that can be done with that land there's not much you can do with the Mini Storage once you know there's a lot of them out there and at some point it's going to reach a saturation point and then they're going to be vacant and not rentable maybe I don't know I know there were some public safety concerns or have been and I know there were some questions regarding um that in the past it doesn't seem like something that could easily be converted to another use that's what I was thinking is once it isn't profitable anymore to have it as a Mini Storage then right also because most of them there's no septic or or water you know running on the property either so it's you'd be looking at redeveloping the site no longer a use but which is kind of true of anything eventually sometimes that's what happens to sites if they get redeveloped so I I totally hear what you're saying um and I think I think it's fair to what happens if the market gets saturated especially if that's our primary use in our industrial areas it's not our primary use right now but it's certain certainly could continue to we continue to see requests for it um I think as far as your comments about Public Safety I did speak with one of our officers and you can recall a couple of fires that have occurred in the units that they've been called out to and there's been a couple instances where people have um used their units as they're not supposed to and had unpermitted work completed to like add a mezanine um and so then our um our Public Safety team got called out to literally unbury someone from when the mine collaps so there's been uh there's there's been those instances I asked if what about you know what about burglary um they haven't we in corkran haven't really experienced instances where someone was caught stealing in the unit it did note that sometimes these units can be used as a place to store items that have sto uh again we don't have any data in terms of that happening in corkrin it's just something in terms of a public safety lens of their concerns with the use um I think those are couple of items that you touched on I'd be curious on how many of those units become makeshift residences there is I think that was a couple things they said too there's a couple times where homeless people will end up kind of sinking into the storage unit and and some some of that is handled you know but then then you have all people on Tik Tok giving tips on how to do it yes on how to do it y or YouTube yep here's how to live in a storage un and I would say that happens with indoor just as much as drive up storage units um it it's it is a concern but it's not necessarily something that um again there there's just not a lot of employees on site to help monitor it sometimes they usually have some kind of security system um but it's you know hasn't necessarily been enough to completely stop it I know our police have been called to to a couple instances regarding that and in all fairness someone's mishandling of a business the way it's supposed to be operating should not be the only absolutely thing that we think about when considering whether it's an allowable use however taking into consideration how many we have in our city um already uh that's really the primary reason um that and the lack of employment opportunity um would that I would suggest we move in a different direction yeah I would agree do do anyone else have any comments regarding the mini storage or self storage at this point in time if they were to move forward with uh continuing it to be in allowable use does anyone have any recommendations that they would uh attach to the self storage or Min storage that would uh that you would want to um be added to the standards that are already outlined if they keep allowing Min storage yeah if they decide to continue to uh continue making it an allowable use uh are there any addition standards other than the ones that are on page seven of eight they're listed the existing standards for reference are there any standards that you would want to see added um in addition to the ones that are outlined there well the the part here where they said um existing standards for reference units are to be used for dead storage only not to be used for retailing Auto Repair human habitation and Commercial activities so in St Michael they've built these things up by the 94 to10 I do believe and they're called supermax hideaways and it's literally like a man cave on steroids and they have Lofts and you could put a whole Kitchen in there and you can drive your toys right into there and then everybody gets together and admires all the toys you know they probably live there who knows so I don't know if that would even fall under this same category I don't know considered self Min s i I do think they are considered self I think they are I had to look it up I went by and I saw the development and I saw this sign and I said what is that and when I looked it up it's like wow that's different must be um units are noted foring Auto human habitation so so maybe don't allow for we don't want to see necessarily like a septic system because we're trying to avoid people from staying there for too long so I think that that's I think that under our current code that would not be something that really would make sense with our current standards we could certainly are you saying that you would like to see that or you no I'm just wondering if it falls under there and if I think it would fall under there but we could certainly look at that standard to make sure that that does cover it is it if you know well the fact that we don't have City Water we might kind of keep them from going too far overboard with that but true and then the parking that's the other thing that isn't explicitly addressed for reference um I don't believe uh in terms of but that's also one of the things is it's usually been only drive up because then there's a limitation on the total number of times you're supposed to they hours that you're supposed to be parked in front of your self storage so I think that just by default of not having parking um offered that deters more of that type of business but so it's not explicitly called out so that would be the only question that I would have if we're making adjustments um is do we have is there a requirement forious surfaces that's a good question well it depends on what district so if in our roal commercial it would still be that 50% perious surface and then in our industrial I think it's more like 80 I remember I think I believe it's 80 in industrial what about uh landscape buffering um landscape buffering would apply for new storage proposed at this point uh if it's surrounded by a residential district so it would depend on what type of residential district is surrounding it but what about what about anything I mean it would be nice just to kind of Tuck TOS away or you're saying add that as a standard additional bucking just to play the uh other side of that the concern is that the more High you make it the more you yeah the you know the more you kind of encourage but I I I hear what your intent is is to kind of provide more of a buffering between that where it meets residential neighborhoods not necessarily make it less visible altogether if I'm hearing you correctly I think the the most the best reason for saying we have enough is just there may be better uses of the land we have but who knows maybe it's only a 20year deal anyways and then it'll be done and then the land will be used for something else I mean the rural rural area isn't going to be developed but City Water and Sewer for another what 10 20 30 oh R so 2050 is our next plan and I don't obviously it's not my decision but I I doubt good years out so I think that we're talking at least 30 years before some of these areas would even really 30 years we have a lot of land in the Muse so I don't I mean even if it's not a great land use you know by the time we need that land for something else you're going to be old and probably torned up anyways so so you would be in favor of saying that it would be in okay like an allowable use right now still so keep in mind indust are outside of the rur it's the Bott also the purple other than Northeast District area that's the area where they'd be allowed yes they could so right now they'd be allowed in the purple and the southeast Southwest I'm sorry it could be allowed um in the existing downtown area that's purple it cannot it's not allowed use at all in our Northeast District so the northeast corner that purple could not have storage today um and then it's also allowed within the rural commercial area that you're talking about I wouldn't like to see them in the downtown I would not like to see them in the downtown area I think there's much B use of the downtown area then I would agree we already have according to our down town plan they wouldn't fit I mean wouldn't be well and to be clear it's I'm calling I call that our old downtown area it's like downtown industrial par so downtown mixed so light purp I apologize it's like a little bit Yeah and then on the west side yeah okay are ready to tackle task three which is the comprehensive review of commercial and Industrial districts um and this is the table so Natalie do you want to start by just specifically walking us through the table unless you want us to just ask did anyone have question we actually deal with the easier question first and k since you're the one that attended I'm sorry madam chair I apologize um that since you're the one that attended December 5th um do that did that summary accurately reflect the discussion yes okay yep all right all right so then um do we can get back to the as far as is there anything further to be added that the end I just wanted to make sure that that getting forward to council still made sense and then um as far as the table Dwight here actually is the one that put it together so I would say there's some things that I believe we've talked about in terms of why do we call out some uses specifically and not yep why do we allow grocery stores and C2 but not C1 and if somebody could just explain what the difference would be between C1 and C2 I think that would helpful so uh C1 is a neighborhood commercial so the idea these are um Kender correct me if I'm wrong the idea is these are more smaller scale commercial uses um so one way reflected is we don't allow department stores in neighborhood commercial but we could allow it under C2 which is our community commercial so these are a bit um higher volume commercial uses and they're more oriented towards motorists um than a a neighborhood setting does that help a little bit yep okay did you guys get that or it was clear to you to begin with and I was just going to need dire okay um and so right now you are indicating going back to the grocery stores that grocery stores are permitted in C2 called out specifically but not in C1 but we do allow retail use what's the difference so where can we simplify it I think as some of like where does it make sense to call out specific uses does this make sense um what we currently have or do we make do we make use a little broader um for commcial is it better just to limit the size if the idea is supposed to be a size scale not necessarily worry about the use specific use as much um or is it really a design issue is it side it's really not the matter we just want to make sure the design works and um have different standards for that instead of necessarily focusing again on calling out an ice I don't think we call out ice cream job but you know sometimes it gets a little ridiculous yeah it's too specific yep so when I think of the difference between that C1 and that C2 I think you touched on it in terms of motorists so um I think that how much traffic are we driving to this location so instead of specifically uh you know know indicating what we perceive to be the businesses that are are going to um because I think that it is entirely possible to have a small corner I mean a grocer you know what I like a corner store for lack of something else but it's not something that a lot of people are going to do their primary grocery shopping at so it's not going to drive a lot of traffic so rather than calling out the specific use I guess I would look at the intention behind um why things why specific businesses have been placed in that residential and instead look at the common the the common themes in those businesses do you know what I mean and then try to create a definition from that maybe that's not I I no I I'm not disagreeing okay um at least that was what I initially thought I also think um yeah I think it's a lot um and so a part of what I would want to do is sometimes when I think about uh like when I thought about doing stuff with with my house where I live the more bogged down the paperwork is it sends me in two directions trying to figure out like what is the Greenacres property tax program when I try to go down that rabbit hole if it is confusing it is so much harder to to um persevere and push through or have the right people to ask and so it's a deterrent and so I think that is one of the goals in simplifying this is we don't want anything about the process to deter a a Visionary or a dreamer from coming to bring their business here um so that I think would would be a goal in in simplifying also I think to make it easier for all of us to be able to administer and understand like from a staff perspective um but I guess that's I would want to make it friendly for the user so somebody could say hey I really want to create this type of business or bring it is there a place where I fit in corkran um how can we make that the fewest like how can we simplify that process for them um so that there's not a lot of frustration prior to them getting the answer they seek uh that's some of my initial thoughts is there opportunities in the comp plan to redo some of the zoning too and kind of try to make this easier try to make there's um it form based codes that you can have written up for a city that make it easier to do certain things like if you want to walk aable downtown you get a form based code that would kind of guide some through you know what are the uses for a particular business and it makes it really easy for somebody who is maybe an entrepreneur somebody starting a new business that wants to just quick look at that and go can I do that here and it it's just laid out and and uh in a much easier simpler way to understand and it's zoned so that it's friendly to whatever the purpose is that your city wants for that area now that may require you know hiring a particular consultant who knows how to deal with form-based codes and put something in place help help us put something in place that would really make it much easier and maybe eliminate some of the variances in conditional use permits and all this other kind of stuff that the council has to take up on a regular basis Madam chair can I just comment on that yeah please just for the group just to understand a true form based code um really doesn't talk about uses a true form based code says if your building meets these design parameters setbacks height of materials it's permitted and one of the challenges and we've done several one of the challenges that we have with councils not just in Minnesota but in other states that we were because councils are reluctant to give up their discretionary view so from a business perspective form based codes are fantastic it's very clear what I need to do I can go in get my building permit and move on but it does take your discretion away as the Planning Commission because we don't have very many cups are variances because people just uh do that so I love the idea and it's something that certainly um worth talking about but for the purpose of Natalie's work I mean I think we're focused on the uses but one one thing we've been doing a lot more for cities is doing a hybrid code where we develop Graphics that are you'd see in the form base codes which is really one page with pictures that shows if I want to develop and see one this is what I need to do and it's right there and it's a picture I don't need to understand words about setbacks and things like that and you still have used tables Y and and some of the tables and stuff that they had were just much easier to read I think what Dwight did with this is something we're doing a lot is we're not doing in each district uses we're just doing a use table period one use table all districts I think that's a lot easier too yeah I just had questions on like Civic buildings such as City Hall libraries fire stations is permitted everywhere except for transitional commercial role yeah transition commercial commercial is kind of a holding zone for properties identified for uh eventual over commercial um so it tends to be still used for residential it's it's like a residential district um and then when it it's um outre the actual description here represents transition areas that have been identified as practical and generally suitable for future development as part of the rural commercial District let provide a holding Zone and landowner makes application for development um over time the city May res the effective property to a commercial consistent with the land use then and so permitted uses are pretty typical of what we see in our rur commercial set daycare facilities dwelling uh seasonal produce stands and residential for some reason agriculture isn't a permitted use but I that's seasonal produce stand I don't see there were just so many more things that were permissible in the commercial rural than in the transitional commercial Rural and I guess so if it's supposed to mirror I don't understand like yeah the point on the traditional or the transitional was we didn't want the council at time didn't want people staying there so okay you can continue to operate um as you are which your right should should include at because that's what most of them are but that at the point when you wanted to operate a business then you move then it has to Res gotcha okay that makes a lot of sense okay um so I don't know specifically the the table is helpful thank you Dy um is there any other I mean like I feel like I would need to um to like look through it line by line if what we're looking for is hey what do we need to change specifically and so like I would be happy to continue doing that as we work towards that next time frame I think this task number three was the farthest out um if there's immediate feedback that you're looking for tonight um I I would say yes there's room for simplification what's missing from the table um would be gosh I I already know for you it's the [Music] UMC gentlemen all due respect these this is their meeting please we we've listened to you guys many many times we're asking for these three people's input so please thank you madam chair it would be it would be the The Butcher Shop so right now I don't know how I mean people from our city are having to Outsource to other locations and the secondary location that a lot of these folks were using after we lost um our buter here in this city is has now changed ownership as well and so um yes I know that that is one thing that I would like to see added on there where does it make sense or do we simplify it to the point where it falls under something else a different use I know and so I guess so I will say that while I looked through the answer to the questions that are called out in here in terms of where does it make sense for one to be included in a district over another um those specific questions I really just tagged in the back of my mind that this was the farthest one out and so uh my commitment to continue reviewing those and kind of make some specific decisions um is where I'm at with those in terms of what should be permitted versus a conditional use um permit uh the question specifically was raised about animal I believe in the yeah keeping of animals and accessory use all of our districts does that make sense in some of our Musa District stuff so you know me I'm gonna say yes right like I guess the more well okay I know that it may not always but one of the things we had talked about specifically in some of the Northeast districts was the encouragement of restaurants where it's sort of this um onsite right that's generally not going to be animals Cu uh generally not going to be but maybe chicken I don't know to supply the eggs but I know there is a restaurant in duth that does that and they have rooftop uh it's it's um it's like hatcheries for a lot of the fish that they Supply the restaurant so it's not unheard of I guess that would be the only reason that I would think that animals would needed to to be kept in in that area but trying to think of like those kind of trendy uses where there's like goat yoga for sure for sure um but beyond that I think that sometimes those things uh self- eliminate um in terms of it being permissible but it just never being utilized I don't know um if that makes sense um have as accessory uses keeping of animals yes yeah so that means it it is allowable as an accessory is it's allowable commcial yeah I guess it doesn't really specify though that it's just like primarily livestock right I mean so keeping of animals I'm thinking Cat Cafe that's like a big thing have you guys never been you pay and one side is the restaurant and the other side is all the cats and like I mean would that fall into this I think so okay so I'm just trying go at the end of the day I think that they are I don't know I think the hope is that they get a f I have never been um but I think the hope is that they eventually it's like a yeah it's they get adopted out or I don't think they live there permanently but um anyway I that's why I'm thinking you know to allow something like that cat cafe in the area uh where maybe there's a reason to just not eliminate it alog together um we have a few more minutes you guys have some thoughts you'd like to share questions you want to ask regarding the table is is that something that you guys feel comfortable with that if we just continue to review this and offer specific feedback or do you need to have that tonight no I think you're right this is the one that's furthest out so we have some time to be thoughtful so maybe we take it in chunks maybe next meeting we just look at the first page and go line by line okay you know what I mean and then just take it instead of because maybe it's just too overwhelming right now with it being like what it's one two three four five so we could take at least a p um you could probably take four meetings just looking at it Page by Page and for a few minutes yeah so I also feel like what's helpful for me sometimes is to understand there's an intent right that that isn't explicit in the table and so for I I would appreciate that just for the sake of being thorough because then I could confer like what is the intent behind this or what was the reason behind it and it can help us get at that standard rather than the specificity of a particular business I can try um just keep in mind that Kendra and I didn't necessarily all of and and some of Might Have Been by committees so it have been that it made sense one in the room but yeah the intent might not be very clear um but where where where there might be some reason that I can value I can certainly try to share that I feel confident that with the experience that you guys have you would be able to speak to a a reasonable amount uh like you would give enough of a reason why it should still be allowed or why it should not be allowed uh if that conversation comes up Natalie what I would like to see on the table because it's really a nice inclusive table but if you could do a legend for crtc c1c2 bp1 the all of these headings here you had the nice Legend no you had the nice Legend in your presentation but it just isn't included in the table itself in my presentation well if you flip black where it says you had all of the uses you you indicated what the codes were for and so at the top at the top you indicate what P but if you put CR TCR C1 C2 knew enough they just other than those so for the abbreviation commercial residential and transitional right just for the zoning because all of the um explanation of the abbreviations for the um uses that is including on the table but just not a legend for the zoning okay right do that yes okay do you want it on every page or would it be sufficient just to put on the just one page it's fine first page okay that it makes me think I've got a page back through everything to try to find it I'm sure it's somee you when this is your second meeting you're probably yeah I didn't even think of that so I apologize we okay um so then I guess then just the catch all of any additional thoughts um to be forwarded to Council on the 25th regarding the the overall updates that weren't captured already um either in the summary or t next discussion I thought that you captured especially I was thinking since the two other Commissioners couldn't be here tonight so when I was reading through it I was just just making sure that the things that they were really invested in were included in that discussion and they were so I feel comfortable with what you had already put together regarding that December 5th meeting and so um the height that was the other thing that we haven't talked about I'm sorry so one of the things that has been discussed is especially in the areas where this yep where this abuts to residential neighborhoods is there anything that you would like to comment on or uh suggest for transitioning from the you know the height to some of these um and then also the breaking up of the um larger buildings um and then I think the other question was impervious surface for uh lot instead of flat am I correct yes so the height transition that is being contemplated by council at this point is potentially um within 100 feet of a residential zoning District a building can only be 35 ft which is consistent with what's allowed in residential and then after 100 feet um it can go up to 45 feet and that's not that's not um finalized that was just kind of the idea that suggestion yeah that we're thinking through um so that one component and then um I'm actually not too sure what you by breaking up buildings further than what we already have no just requiring Windows I thought was part of it breaking up on the facade so that it wasn't just one large on that first level yes um and then the so sorry no it was regarding impervious surface for impervious surface so we're running into um more than one variance of fewd request where they want the uh impervious surface cover calculated on a plat basis instead of on a perlot basis and when you have storm water system that that actually could make a lot of sense uh another issue that we're running into is our Industrial districts um where we're going to see higher amounts of truck use naturally because we allow for manufacturing and things like that um we they want to have a shared truck Court in the back between two buildings and so they want two different lots and then the problem it there's no setback for the parking lot then because it's a shared Court space so how are we okay with having some flexibility called out for that as well so those are two areas where we're seeing a lot of requests either for variance or beauty and anytime we're seeing it again and again I feel like it makes sense to reevaluate our codes because it seems like our codes updated then if that's the current way to develop for those uses and so when you talk about the impervious surface for the storm water ponding you're saying that that makes sense because if they're doing s such as a business park they're going to want to have fewer storm water basins right rather than collecting that in each individual larger PS okay and so that I mean would I would be in favor of as long as the percentage doesn't shift right much when all of a sudden you begin um doing it on a a lot instead of per plat um I I love the idea of a transitional because I think it is respectful for the Neighbors I think like the size of buildings that are being built today are are different than um than what's been typical in the past so I guess what what primarily comes to mind is um the in the industrial just those large warehouses I think I'm trying to consider if it makes sense in the like Northeast District where you're going to have that residential up against what's supposed to be some of your business park and I know Business Park can be multi-level as well so I'm not I don't know if there's I don't know if there's enough of a reason to make a distinction um or or if you would just need to handle them both the same um but if it could be like if it could be accommodated I think uh I think it sounds like a great idea um to make that gradual transition to a um where it's at its you know most dense or or in within the industrial park rather than around the edge that to be where your greatest um height is and then I think for both the employees working inside of the building and for people who are looking at the building anytime you can break up a facade with natural light it's never a bad thing um but I also don't know how that works on the inside of the the building right because I'm not the building owner so um I would I would wonder if um if it couldn't be met with some other sort of architectural feature rather than specifically calling out a window I guess that's my initial thoughts and you would maybe be able to speak to that better than no I think that yeah you can't I'm not sure if you would be able to do it by breaking up the mass because that that obviously is going to add cost but you could certainly handle it through you know different materials uh you know possible you know small indentations in the facade things like that any last thoughts okay so this is something just to like you know Corral we're coming back to okay we're not at a finale but the first initial set of comments and and so just saying we can all look through it on our own in our own time as well and then may would be sort of the next opportunity we would have a work session around this yeah this time it's a joint work session is scheduled for the 23rd thank you 23rd at 5:30 so mark your calendars because that's not a usual meeting date for you all um or meeting time and it would be very helpful to have the perspective different perspectives of our planning Commissioners there to look at the first those dates in here somewhere I believe it yeah I believe the work plan uh in that in that packet for the commercial industri update it indicates it on the timeline so page four of that packet okay and so then anything else I mean that is sort of the planning project update I guess anything else that needs to be called out specifically uh usually we just uh confirm yep receipt of the packet the update I'm sorry I usually we confirm the um why is on calendar if oh yes yep yep um and so then you have and it will be your first time now I think it's always riveting to uh to show up in person um but you are welcome to join via Zoom as well if that works better for you but then next week next Thursday works for you yes okay well I'm gonna trust that you guys can look at that and if for any reason it doesn't work you can um uh let Natalie know and then she would be able to um ask for somebody else to cover it um and then I'm sorry chair um sometimes we with the city council report sometimes we ask for an update from delays we could still do that yep so if you can make it brief sir is there anything that you would like to share with us for your city council update we've got so much going on guys you guys have done a great job digging into this stuff you've given us input we get input from hundreds of folks and such so I believe the council and the mayor is here tonight also if you haven't met him we are listening to everybody doing everything we can um to do some of this stuff we've got to make some decisions that are good decisions as you guys have said they got to be sensible and stuff and well thought out and I I think that's what we're doing the time you guys have spent tonight is a fraction of what needs to be spent on this but we do have timelines we do have things that we need to deliver too residents land owners developers all those things we do need to deliver some information so I think we're accelerating stuff Natalie great job putting all this together tonight um D can pendra thanks for being here and thank you guys for being here um I know it's a beautiful night and such so um lot of great information this evening thank you so much right any questions about all of the stuff that's going on have any questions if I can ask one question Natalie um the uh page two Co Ling Center oh um has that been suspended has that been done I get a tremendous number of folks calling from the neighborhood as far as that status yes so the applicant provided us with a request to extend the review by another 60 days uh he has until May 10th to decide whether or not he wants to move forward with uh May third meeting or if he wants to uh withdraw the application at this time so it's on here as April 28 or 20 yeah excuse me it was March 28th cuz that's when it was scheduled to go before the council but it sounds like he submitted a request for an extension updated report oh I do no I'm been doing it all week I've been I've been thinking this is still March so it is April that's my fault yeah canel it's not going to go in April if it does go May 23rd at this point um but ton of different things going on the commercial Industrial Development standards um we've got a a report West in front of us and thus some Auditorium for us to focus staff very very heavily on this citing some of those things in your input tonight has been great so thank you guys you guys got any questions for me and like I said the mayor is here also I'm sure he won't turn down the opportunity I know you're on a time one all right no questions here so with that we will I will entertain a motion to adjourn tonight's meeting all right so all those in favor anyone opposed right thank you official adment sorry I'm just a filling