for e it is 6:30 on March 6 and I am going to call the Planning Commission meeting to order uh first item of business is the Pledge of Allegiance flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands under God indivisible with liy and justice for all um item number three on the agenda is the role of the Planning Commission I'm just going to read this real quickly the Planning Commission consists of five residents appointed by the city council the commission administrators administrates the comprehensive plan zoning and subdivision regulations the commission conducts public hearings and provides recommendations to the city council it is the city council who may approve or deny land use applications um moving on to item number four approval of the agenda is there any changes no make a motion to approve second all those in favor I I do we need to do roll call since Peter's on or no I can't remember might as well do it it's up to you we're going to do roll call votes Jeff hi Paul I Nick I I item number five consent consent agenda these are routine or previously discussed items are enacted with one motion um the only item on the consent agenda is the Planning Commission minutes from February 6 2025 motion to approve one second uh we're going to do a roll call vote Jeff I Paul I Nick I all uh moving on to item number six open Forum open forum is for public comments that and are limited to 3 minutes for non-agenda items um if you're up here to discuss about a non-agenda item state your name and address the commission will take no action uh the items referred to staff group commenters are asked to have one main speaker is there anyone here for open Forum all right moving on to item number seven Council update okay so for the 11th we decided to have a work session with the Eda which we did on the 25th regarding uh tax forfeit properties um North Diamond Lake Trail we decided to go through with getting plans and specs for a trail along the north side of North Diamond Lake from uh River Hills entrance to the East and down to uh Vinewood um iup from home extended business we had a long disc discussion on that one it it pretty much mimicked what you guys had discussed um and what was approved was uh similar what you had discussed with the exception of the north driveway would be moved within I think a year or removed um after it got past the uh house I think that was the resolution uh we passed the garbage and refu change and then on the 25th um I may run out of power here uh 25th was a long meeting we had presentations from Kevin from care from Three Rivers Park District there was a lot of discussion about Three Rivers Park District and their land acquisition along the river uh DCM Farms we got a little presentation on some of the changes you're probably going to see tonight we discussed a One financing mechanism for the parkway neighborhood they um they are uh there's some uh basically it's the road going in there there there was some discussion on how to finance putting that in to the property uh conditionally used on um on that one acre lot to get uh impervious Services approval that was passed we did a uh voted to go out for plan Improvement bids on um LC Stevens Park and then there was some discussion on or no we on the LC Stevens master plan we approved that bid and then there was discussion on bids to do the area 21 Park BR uh witches and bber trails and then the um my own Gardens upgrade and then the LC Stevens phase three that went out for bid or was approved and then we had a long discussion on parking regulations similar to your discussion and we I think ended up doing nothing with it I believe so um and then the sign ordinance um I it looks like we uh I think it was to basically undo what we had done part partially approved so that they well Hayden can yeah related to increasing size of the monument height Monument sign height and then uh the uh language related to the right way essentially what uh you guys had um agreed upon at the last Planning Commission meeting that's it questions no no questions thank you yeah thank you all right moving on to item number eight public hearings item 8A is for DCM farms and I'm going to let John speak because a couple items that are on the agenda are no longer on the agenda sure comp plan Amendment so I'll start at kind of a larger scale so first where where this is located so this is off of uh Fernbrook and 113th so uh Dean country manners in the Southeast Corner uh the project involves applications for comprehensive plan Amendment a zoning map Amendment a plan unit development and preliminary plant uh the comprehensive plan Amendment uh the the property is guided from for uh low density residential um in the original application proposed commercial in this corner uh the developer now proposing to to plant that as an outlaw meaning it would be subdivided at a future date um and therefore the comprehensive plan amendment is not needed at this time so that has been removed as the applicant as the application um the comprehensive plan Amendment also happens to trigger a mandatory environmental assessment worksheet or EA for shorts um so being that the comprehens of plan amendment is removed the eaw is no longer um necessary although we've gone through the process of creating it would in our recommending that the EA continue so that can be used in the future um so let's see what else yeah the whole area uh generally it's a 91 acre parcel uh that're proposing 200 53 single family homes in 8 Acres of future commercial retail uh this project has been before the Planning Commission a number of times um it was reviewed fairly in depth in February the commission had recommended a number of changes I believe the applicant has submitted or applicant has submitted a revised plan that addresses I believe all the changes and that's what you see before you um the revised plans came in Fairly recently and staff has not had an opportunity to conduct a full review uh I guess our recommendation is if the Planning Commission is comfortable with the layout of the property uh the staff is recommending that you recommend approval we'll finish our review um prior to it going before the city council so normally uh the Planning Commission takes action in the early part of the month and the council in the late part of the month um if we're not able to complete our review or we find something concerning uh it might go to count a couple weeks later so that that's The quick summary uh changes since uh from January to February so uh I got look January uh the January plan had 266 Lots uh the largest number of lots were 103 lots that were designed as 40ft wide um the revised plan reduced the total number of lots from 266 to 253 number of 40 foot Lots reduced from 103 to 33 so there was a significant difference and um I understand it it's difficult to read on here but it shows the difference between I'll say the before and after number the primary change in this um one of them is setback so on the January plan these were designed at with 5ot sidey yard setbacks the revi the February plan is 7 and half so 7 and2 is the minimum uh property lines or Set Side aired setback that's required in the R3 District uh the January plan had shown this as a private Street uh it's been expanded to being a full-sized uh public street with on street parking um so as you can see the this skiner street kind of meandered around whereas this is fairly straight um it also reduced the um the amount of buffer along Fernbrook uh probably one of the largest changes uh this was a culdesac and then an intersection here that is now a connected Street which eliminated the intersection uh what else so there there were changes in the essentially the number of lots that were at at a certain size so like for instance the number of 55 foot Lots increased from 28 to 66 um and then as I mentioned before the commercial is planned as an outlot so that would be uh considered for planning in the future what else do I have and this slide just kind of explains the comprehensive plan so once again the developer has uh removed this from the application the plan on the top is what was included in the the uh January sketch plan so this showed the gas station daycare a coffee shop and a few residential or a few commercial buildings and that's all just kind of pushed off to the for future consideration with the eaw this is a a fairly lengthy or detailed study that I believe covers 21 different environmental aspects probably the one that's of most interest in this case is traffic uh so it's estimated that this project would add roughly 11,000 trips per day so a trip is um say one trip home and then one trip away so uh most of this traffic is tied to the commercial area so being that the commercial area is being removed from the project um that reduces considerably the amount of traffic that's associated with the residential there's still going to be a lot of cars here um the chart at the the lower end kind of is indicative of the say the grading of each intersection or the level of service so the level of service is graded on a through f scale um the currently if if this project were not built uh it's at a graded as an F for westbound traffic at both Fernbrook and 117th as well as Fernbrook and Rush Creek Parkway so essentially it's uh there's an inability of making leftand turn safely um if the project is built it's um not just left-hand turns but uh also right-and turns out of Rush Creek is the primary concern uh this image here shows a a planned roundabout so this is not part of the project um this is something that staff has worked on uh think we've had conversations with henan County but this is not a funded project so the idea of this is essentially it shows how a roundabout would be associate would work at Rush Creek 114th uh potentially 117th zoning map Amendment U the property currently is z A1 Agricultural and so the request is to rezone this from A1 to R3 with the Pud overlay is similar to sundan screens adjacent to the South with the Pud uh it allows deviation from minimum standards in the city code in return for a public benefit so in this case the requested deviations is the more narrower lot so whereas the R3 District allows Lots 55 ft wide this is proposing 40 ft um also the R3 District allows up to 30% of the the lots to be 62 ft or narrower whereas this project is proposing 7 57% of the lot uh the lots that are highlighted in yellow are the lots that are less than 62 ft okay you know in conversations with the count city council there's some concern about the appearance of 50 foot lots and and the developer I pointed out that we do have 50ft lots and Sundance greens um in this area that's outlined in red and this is these this is the homes that that are 50 ft wide uh let's see so PUD we talk about deviation so with deviations comes a public benefit the public benefit in this case is the developer will construct the roundabout at on 114th um this is roughly a $2 million project give or take think Jason's noing his head maybe what one and a half well yeah it's expensive um as well as improvements to 117th and we haven't identified what those improvements are uh the thought is that it would be a proportional share um at the January meeting staff had also suggested amenities uh this was brought forward to the park commission earlier uh the park commission did recommend the idea of uh perolas um so staff brought up the idea of having one that's at the storm water Pond and then a second one that's adjacent to the trail um after thinking about it a little bit it it might be better to place this in the corner here but I know uh there's storm water infrastructure that we'd also have to plan around so I don't have a a magic idea for this but we'll be looking for any suggestions um else and this is the grading plan just as a reference so I believe the developer is here but there's yep right in the so any questions and once again this was a public hearing or is a public hearing that's been continued to tonight one question I have and I don't know if you know the answer and maybe the developer does but if you added those amenities is who's going to be responsible for maintaining them I don't know if this is going to be HOA like a master HOA for some common are amenities um but is that discussion came up no okay um I think I can answer that I guess I'm assuming that it's HOA it's an HOA govern some n you know like the Villas those narrow lots are all grass mode you know the the landscape BMS coming up the the roads Etc I would see the only thing I would say in there that is an HOA um taking care of is you know the up in the northwest corner is that part of the city park that obviously would go with the city and those other four quadrants and then I guess you know the bike trails long term will go to the city trail system all right um do you want to say anything or do you want to just fill the questions I mean we've this is our third time I think so yeah I mean I think you know all uh gotten Clarity after after you know the different times we've been here um and so I think any of the changes we had you know suggested we we had made them um the uh you know on the EA I mean I think you know that really isn't a concern now I guess but the traffic I think you know is assuming you know maybe gas station how many tank you know does a gas station even happen obviously right a gas station is going to have more traffic than a daycare so um and and I haven't you know since the last meetings I did reach out to one gentleman I don't really know anyone owning an assisted living you know but I think that was a question you know the one gentleman I asked that I know in brainer do he's not interested in the cities the cost is too high um but I do see a need as I said you know I'm looking right now on my dad and those and so um but I think what I really wanted to come in is just the idea you know I I haven't marked to anybody and any and just you know to see if if there seemed to you know what the city's opinion was to have an area there but I think before we go any further really you know I know the Count's going to decide what kind of roundabouts built and it's probably really premature to do anything until that roundabout is is you know constructed we have any questions up here actually Mr chair I have a couple questions um first of all I want to com commend you Mr Dean for taking some suggestions and bring them back to the staff um it's not easy to take away Parcels I I get that but it in my opinion this is a much better plan than the one that was presented last month um obviously it's still a work in progress right so we don't know what that Outlaw is or when it's going to be constructed or when you're going to come back to the Planning Commission um the one critical area that I still want to see addressed a little bit is that intersection the 114th and firm Brook so we know supposedly that it's going to be a roundabout we just don't know what that roundabout looks like right and so there's still potential impact to those Property Owners just to the north there to make sure that they still have adequate access by approving this plan we're saying that we're okay with the alignment of streets and lots and all that stuff and those Ms of streets and lots might need to be shifted around if that roundabout just doesn't work in the configuration that it that we want to to work in you're saying if the roundabout shifts South correct if it shifts South the the plat they're going to it has is going to have to change or at least you know where public rights of way are or whatever it might be so just to take that in consideration um the other question I have here potentially is for Jason too so if we're looking at you know long-term plan here here if we're looking at a roundabout at 114th and potentially one at 117th is there an opportunity to petition the council to reduce the speed limit on firm Brook at that point um we could do that would be part of the intent of having roundabouts is to reduce the speed as well um to reduce the speed limit we would have to go through a speed study at that point it's at the mercy of the drivers because it's the city is essentially forced into uh selecting the speed at a certain percentile of traffic so it's you don't unfortunately you can't just pick your speed limit to inforce so correct yeah I it could certainly be evaluated though right I was thinking with the proximity between 114th and 117th being roundabouts you're not going that fast through there anyway so to continue a lower speed south of even 114th maybe to um to Rush Creek too I mean that's it makes sense to me anyway it would address some concerns that residents have along firm Brook as far as the safety and walkability of of fir Brook Lane right now um and just with those traffic Inhibitors in place it just seems to make sense I don't know if it's something we want to bring to um to hen County or not and again if if we even can I understand that um and then the third question I had is that you know obviously you're looking at this outlaw I don't what is what are your your best plans for when that might be developed I mean are we coming back here in a month are we coming back in a year three years 5 years what are we looking at so I would just know from us working at um up on Rush Creek in that Parkway we submitted a opinion based on what we were told to to dra draw up you know design and I think it was five times County made changes we made their changes they Chang them again um you know and maybe maybe Jas can add to this but I would imagine there's probably a year you know for the county to or at least it take all of 2025 and that's probably a 26 construction and and and to your point really to come in and plat say uh any commercial area let's say that that does shift right and then it it's going to you know 8 Acres might be seven seven and a half and and realistically just how it lays out with the park or you know 114 on the north side of that if if it does shift South all I can see being there is Green Space anyhow you know you're not going to put a house there so um so I think that's that's really as as much as any reason is sitting here talking to to table that is just let's get that designed really you know figure out you know it's no matter what I say probably even you guys right it's going to be the Count's you know stamp of approval okay all the questions I had thank you yeah I'll just can you go back to the plat map John yep I think this will help myself and maybe some residents that are concerned because just echoing a little bit of one of Jeff's comments is I really we need to protect those residents uh if a roundabout goes in to make sure they can access the driveway and there's just a lot of unknowns meaning the timing of when 117th is becomes a roundabout or what if it comes a signalized intersection and then they can't even loop around to come back in the driveway um but I think explain Tom how you envision the staging happening of that 114th extension to Fernbrook in the first place of you know as development happens where's that fit into everything um the roundabout no the 1114th from Glacier to Fernbrook because my understanding is 113th is still going to be used to access this development until I I would imagine us first building this this connection Street here and and not not building this it'd be foolish for us to build this here and maybe have to tear it all out so I see you know it would be running 113th to to Glacier and then Glacier up and so once the roundabout design is complete that's when it'll extend from Glacier well that or when the other timing kicks in that's when it'll extend yeah and then 113th gets abandoned and so by the time that happens Council everyone needs to be realizing that I guess I'm not a huge fan of the idea of not having a median where people are shooting at a roundabout trying to make a left turn in their home but they might not be able to because they're southbound traffic I think it I mean granted traffic's moving slower at least so it's that if there's a rear end when you shoot out of a roundabout and someone is waiting to make that turn um so I would prefer that we can figure it out without with either having the roundabout at 117th or not having a median um that blocks their driveway and I think I think we were thinking if there was a meeting hopefully the goal would be to you know have like a peninsula you know the sign and maybe colored you know colored lines if there was a car that had to get in between there yeah oh so make it wider so they almost have a little bit of space to wait to make that left hand turn so cars can go around them no I was thinking so you say you got a triangle at the far tip um you know and then instead of running a median all the way or uh yeah median all the way to the roundabout there would be a cutout maybe for to get into the driveway you know 10 ft or whatever they can make the left turn in okay I think that's a little bit of what we talked about with staff yeah that's my biggest concern and it's just a lot of uncertainty because there's things outside of your control too with the ones 17th yeah and I think if if at the end of it you know we kind of just putting out there lining close to the existing one but you know I think as you get in there and really have discussions with the county right we probably pull it as far south as we can right so it doesn't affect southerly people I think that just makes sense more we can nudge it South too the more of a buffer we can give to the first property too right now that that RAB is right at it so I think I think literally as it looks it's going to it's going to flow South a little bit yeah just clarify to on the Villas in the northeast corner um the changes to that Loop Road Tom are they two lane two-way traffic around the whole thing and parking on one side or yes yep okay yeah those are made full full streets now Okay so and then the other thing you noticed we we probably would have had three or four more houses lost in the count you know like 250 but then staff really wanted that existing house to go away and and it seems like uh I talking to my cousin he's he's not going to be there long term you know he he actually going to be there very short term so we'll we'll end up taking that house out and then that added a few others yeah and complete that corner and this uh stub Road I'm assuming that would be a private driveway that serves those private similar to The Alley you know the alley would be the only public road is the loop going around the other two would be just like going into a town home you know private any further questions to the applicant no I like to update not having that first entry I can't remember road that was but it's nice to thank you smooth that out thanks y this is a public hearing um at this time if members from the public want to come forward and speak on the project feel free um your comments are going to be limited to 3 minutes especially if there's a lot now we're not going to be sticking to it but there's a lot of people in the room I just want to make sure everyone gets a chance to speak so prepare your comments and think about them no one wants to come forward nobody wants to be first huh nobody wanted to be first nobody wants to be first um Lee hquest 11471 for Brook Lane I have the northernmost house in that row of six uh um the concern I haven't that I'm come here consistently with is drainage nobody's you know I'm pumping a lot more water than I'm using so it's not like it's coming from my septic system my well it's coming from the ground somewhere and nobody's addressing it I don't I haven't heard anybody talk about it here and Tom said he'll fix it and and I believe he'll do his best but I I need to be sure that you're not going to keep pumping water into my house um so I don't see anything of that in the plans and I guess I just want to have an idea what's going on as I understand it the hill behind my house is just going to be wiped away gone is that um nobody's actually said that but I that's how I understand it to be to uh Jeff's comment walkability on Fernbrook is non-existent you're taking your life in your hands out there um my other concern right now is wind blown garbage I picked up a 50ft roll of seill seam this week in my yard and uh last week I picked up a piece of 4x4 inch and a half pink Styrofoam insulation um there's all kinds of it in there on that field the county had people out last week pulling garbage out of the west side of Fernbrook Lane or of Elm Creek Park Reserve I'm sorry um I don't think I should have to go out and pick up somebody else's garbage and I certainly shouldn't have to pick it up out of my yard so and then my other concern is the the cost of all of this to me I mean I'm subsidizing the develop basically because I'm going to have to get I'm going to get an assessment I'm going to have to buy some kind of super fancy valve for like 5,000 bucks I'm told to shut water off so I'm out like $26,000 before water touches my property and I don't think that's fair I think somebody ought to be subsidizing that for us so anyway those are my concerns for right now um I'm sure I'll be seen somebody Tuesday so yall have a good evening yeah thank you oh come on I know you want just a note Mr chair we also do have one person online with their in so hi hello Mara Grover 11320 from Rook Lane I live across from where he's wants to put his commercial development um first of all I want to say in this day and age you can have anything you want delivered to your door within a couple hours whether it's groceries clothes applian tools you can even have cars delivered to your door so you know many brick and mortar stores are going Belly Up Joanne Fabrics and PES and Maple Grove is just an example and JC Pennies has been sitting there empty for years so these buildings at DCM will probably end up empty just like over at rain tree Plaza that that thing has been struggling for 30 years secondly i' I'd like to refresh your memory at the last meeting discussing the proposed gas station one of you said and I think it was you said Champlain has a bill superet among houses and they don't have any problems do you know that for certain did you talk to the city of champlin you're comparing apples to oranges when you do that because the bill superat on West River Road has no holding Pond right next door to it nothing the nearest holding pond is on 121 on the champin Dayton border also um they don't those people that live there they all have they all have city sewer and water we have wells do you know what wells do have you ever driven on 121 every house on 121 from the Maple Grove border to the Champlain border has a well they don't have city sewer and water so we don't get our water from Rogers we don't get our water from Maple Grove we don't get our water from Champlain we get our water from the ground underneath our yards so and and um the third thing is I got this dinky little map in the mail from City of CH city of Dayton you know it's really hard to see especially when you're old like me um but I did notice that there's a little teeny tiny Green Line running from a holding Pond to my front yard you can't hardly see it it's real easy to overlook and the city didn't tell me anything about that I found it myself Mr Dean didn't say anything to me Mr seal didn't say anything to me nobody said anything so I did email Mr seal and he said it's for drainage drainage where is this holding Pond going to drain into my yard do you think my yard's going to drain into the holding Pond underneath 121 there's no communication in 52 years we have never had standing water in our front yard so you tell me why do we have to have a pipe from the drainage Pond into my yard no one has ever talked to us about anything regarding that project not one word I feel there should have been at least a couple of meetings with the residents across the road from this area and Mr seald and Mr Dean the only meetings were with the six houses down the street and um why do you think it's okay to let a developer run a a pipe into my front yard I don't understand it maybe you can tell me but I don't understand it I think this is just kind of showing how the city is in cahoots with the de developers they don't tell the citizens anything so thank you we need to communicate better with the citizens evening guys evening Keith Grover 113 Fernbrook I think you all know where I live um some of the issues that that keep popping up and I want to commend Tom for for doing some of the things that that he's been doing I mean this isn't a hate Tom thing it's got nothing to do with that this is about our quality of life in the homes that we've lived in for 50 60 years and looking at specifically across the street from us we know there's going to be houses out there you guys need to decide the best way to let people put houses in there I have a real problem with the small Lots they've done something about that I still think they're too small but then I think my lot is too small right and it's 150 ft by 250 ft that's for you guys to figure out you all know how we feel about those small Lots we don't like you deviating from the plan that the city has the other thing that jumps out at me is is noise you know and getting back to whether we have a commercial piece of property there or don't have a commercial piece of property it's I think it's great that Tom took that set off his plan for now but I still see that in the rearview mirror you know whether it's next year or the year after that I didn't plan on moving anywhere I'm in my 70s I planned on living in that house you know till I didn't have any place else to worry about living okay um I don't know if that's going to be possible because you're going to change our quality of life there drastically um the noise coming from a piece of commercial property is way different than it would be if I was looking at neighbors across the street I have neighbors to my side I never hear them unless we're both outside and we talk to each other I would have Envision houses across the street to be the same way you know that I don't hear from them they're far enough away um the other issue with commercial property is the light pollution I've I've heard nothing from you guys or even questioning them when they were talking about commercial property there and whether or not the light from that property that's going to be lit up commercial always is 24/7 for the that's going to be you know shining in my living room window or my neighbor's living room window nobody talks about that you talk about um when you're talking about a commercial piece like a gas station or a convenience store I wor you about crime I mean I grew up out here in Dayton it wasn't something we thought about when we were kids but now if you watch the news how many crimes how many carjackings how many robberies how many card skimming scam out fits run from those convenience SL gas stations I I mean that bothers me what are we doing about that is that even a consideration when we're talking about putting commercial property in the middle of a housing project the water runoff my wife talked about that line that's running across the road you guys need to help us with that you send us the map we want to know what that what it you know what it's actually telling us the holding Pond is across the street from us there's no ditch in front of my house to drain water from to a holding Pond there's no ditch in front of my house the road comes down it's soed right into my yard the water that runs into my yard runs around both ends of my houses and between our neighbors houses and it goes into to a drainage Creek that's behind our houses it's been like that since before houses were there it was a farm field and it was Farm back in the ' 50s that's where the water runs so there's nothing to drain from our side to the west the water doesn't run that way never has and and I don't think you can even make it run that way can't make it run uphill unless you know something I don't know the the speed limit issue that you guys talked about and that's been brought up here before the speed limit on 121 it's too fast it's too fast for the amount of cars that are on that road it's too fast for the access points that are along that road like I I've told you guys before there's 60 some access points from the southern edge of border of Dayton to Pine View Lane if you drive through there they're just access points all along there and there's really no there's no safe place along that road to drive the speed limit you put 55 on there that's not what people drive we all know that there's people go by there 65 70 80 miles an hour I think they had the the the uh police department had their their sign up there for a while and I went out and talked to one of the reserve officers and I think they had some clocked at at close to 100 Mil hour through there that's insane I mean they're again with all those a point access points and now we're we're putting all these kids into the mix from all these new houses that are coming out there to me it's just scary I've uh you know we've lost children in the neighborhood on 121 before you know something you guys to help make that safer so it doesn't happen again Le talked about the garbage you know I'm on garbage detail two three times a week and they're not even building across the street from me it's off it's off to the south of me how that stuff gets from point A to point B is beyond me but it ends up in my front yard along my trees along my fence and it's not people throwing stuff out in the road I'm used to picking up a cigarette pack or a beer can or some stupid thing like that that's not the issue it's all construction material it's wrap it's it's shingle packages it's all coming from those construction jobs that are over at Sundance and that's all ending up in my yard not just my yard like Lee said it's all up and down the whole Road it blows into the park it blows into the church it blows into the hay field that Jesse young owns that I cut hay for him on at um 112 in Fernbrook there's just tons of garbage and I don't I don't ever see us doing anything about that sure we pick it up once in a while and somebody calls in a complaint but I think we need a little more proactive on that stuff the the the speed limit thing this one thing I want to mention on that you know the the the patent answer whenever we bring that up is well it's a county road we don't have anything to do with it I think we do have something to do it because we live here we elect the county officials that direct the people that engineer that road it's not impossible to have a 40 mph speed limit on that road and the answer is if you just drive the road now you'll find that if you go down to Cy Road 30 in Maple Grove it's 40 m an hour all the way to Cy Road 81 and then it picks up once you get past the territorial roundabout it picks back up to 55 miles an hour and it's 55 miles an hour all the way around to Pine View you go down the hill in Pine View again in Dayton it drops back down to 40 m hour so somehow on the southern end of Fernbrook Lane or 121 one they managed to drop the speed limmit down to 40 and on the north end of it they dropped it down to 40 my question is why in the heck can't it be that all the way through there getting more specifically to the to the issue at hand here with the the development um every time I come to one of these meetings I think we take two steps forward and for me three steps back I'm looking at the traffic routing from the this new this new development and of it's going out on 117th that has an improved intersection has left turn Lanes it has right turn Lanes it has a straight through Lane that's it's not good it probably should be a roundabout or a stop light there but it's way better than what you're looking at on 113th there's nothing there there's no right turn no left turn and really there's no room there for it to start with you know so taking that out of the equation is a good thing but to tell me today that we're going to rout all of that development traffic the trucks and all of the cars and all the new people that not only live in the Sundance on the south side of3 but now there another hund whatever the heck homes it is on the North side that for the next several years we're going to root that traffic down to 113th that's just crazy 113th when that development starts that road should be blocked if they want to get in and out of that development they go out go up to Rush Creek Parkway that has a controller more controlled intersection as though it's designed horribly at least it has turn Lanes so that people can get off the road when they're turning to get off and not have somebody run them over from the back and the the and we get up to 117th I just mentioned that there are some turn Lanes there that uh that make that intersection a lot safer too but to root that traffic on 113 that is that's not going to work I think last week when we came down to a council meeting there was another accident right in front of our house because somebody was making a left turn to go down towards Sundance and it wasn't a little vehicle it was a huge commercial garbage truck making a left turn sitting there with his turn signal on the first car behind him stopped the second car didn't and it hit the car behind the truck total both cars they W they both went away on the truck luckily um the young man driving the car didn't get hurt and the young lady with her two little kids in the back seat of her car did not get hurt but that's not going to be the case all the time we lock out we keep locking out we just need your help on this you know if you need us to go out and get petitions signed to send to the county that's fine I mean we can do that I'll volunteer to do that but it just seems like we get no leadership from the city on that subject we need some help thanks thank you do we want to go to the person yeah let's go to the person on line sure all right Stacy if you can hear us please state your name and address for the record and feel free to go ahead can you hear me yes yes last time we had trouble um said again Stacy Smith Donley um 1143 one for Brooklyn um I'm the second house up on those six houses um I guess I I didn't receive a new updated plan this updated plan I can't quite tell but the the path is remains anyone give me feedback on that um you're talking about the the path behind your house yes yes okay um okay well I'm happy to hear that that's stay because that's really important to us um I I just want to like I guess kind of uh I can't think of the word it's been a long week a long day uh I guess like in terms of like the roundabout I don't you know and like the the businesses I'm not a fan of leaving the businesses lot undeveloped because just because like I not quite sure if we have any guarantees that you know our concerns around the light and the the traffic and the possible pollution to our water even though we might be you know getting water from another source not all of us will be it sounds like so I'm just wondering about that and like and then you know Tom had said that we'll try to make the roundabout more southernly and what guarantees do we have about will try you know like that just seems kind of murky and it would be nice to have that reflected in the plan because as it's currently presented it looks like it's still very close to our house and the house Southern of us and my husband made a good point that like what happens like I was just that new roundabout that's at the end of Ferb close to 81 um you know you see you see people all the time like on an icy day just like flying off into into the the the the off the road right there so what happens when they're flying off the road into our house you know because that roundabout is just so close and so it I really would like that reflected in a plan before we're approving this I don't know if this was true but on one of your slides it said that there was um the plan submitted in mid-February which I'm guessing this is um hasn't been fully reviewed so I don't know what that means but and like there was like recommendation to send to approve this plan with you know to let it with like some pending before you approve it for the city council I don't know what exactly that elment but I don't think we should approve this plan without it being the plan that we're actually going to be utilizing which maybe that's just like my ignorance around like the process and whatnot but so yeah if someone could address those questions that'd be lovely thank you thank you is there anyone else here to speak on this topic my name is Kathy TOs and I live at 11461 Fernbrook Lane and I've been sitting back there and listening to all the conversations that have been going on and the vast majority of it seems like this roundabout is a major issue maybe we should think about roundabout some other place on Fernbrook Lane 117th I know there's been talk about that but there's so much disruption on the 114th and with you know and I do live on one of those six houses there but my concern is like Stacy was saying and my and herandez that live on the two South End houses I don't know how you're going to make that work and even moving it Southward I just don't see that that is going to make it work from an engineering stand point I just can't see how that's working and maybe there's a better way of putting a roundabout someplace else and I I mean I'd love to see a roundabout up on Rush Creek and um Elm Creek where the church is I'd love to see that happen or and I think it'd be better to have one there and one on 117th rather than having one on 117th and then you move up a little bit and now you got one on 114th and there's so much going on on 114th that I it doesn't seem like it's realistic to put one there so I just would like you people to really sit back and think about a better plan and help Dean with it maybe there's another way to do this instead of you know what he's proposing because I just don't see that being really workable thank you thank you um I really just have a couple comments and and one is is to the grover so we're not draining our pond um into their front yard I think I think it's just seeing some survey lines that may just been um there's a catch base in that goes from west to east or east to west yeah but I think it running down I think it's both off the plans D it's going to go to the north of that where where the natural Waterway is already I think the plans are showing future curban gutter yeah on that section right they're showing future improvements to Fern Lane which include curban Gutter cbon Gutter needs to be drained right so there's probably a proposed little point there to to bring that water across the street yeah but it isn't going into there yet it's not no it is it is draining that line there is the cbon gutter from up the East over to the but it goes all into the pond and then goes goes over that's what it looks like to yeah TR to pick up and phone and then you know I think right probably roundabouts at all three spots would be ideal you know but at 114th I mean we still have the 114th Pro that needs to get out 113th I I do know from our discussions before about the l i with the county is when we did sundance's greens is that's what you know they wanted the intersections to align I'm the one to propose the the roundabout cuz I do agree right I mean I think that's the best thing to help slow down traffic I would reiterate with everybody and if somehow you know that traffic could be lowered all the way I think it'd be great you know but but I just wanted to touch the drainage yeah we would wouldn't go dumping it water where it wasn't Tom can you clarify one of the previous slides from staff was that there was a roundabout that would be funded through this project can we clarify which which intersection was that it was a was the slide your well we have back keep going there was a slide that that it mentioned when you had mentioned to Jason that it was a $2 million roundabout whatever it might be what intersection was that uh that was 114th that's what I thought 114th yeah that's the one I mean I think you're going to wait for the county to fund it right right so yeah so DCM Farms public benefit 114th roundabout is that a suggestion that the 114th have roundabout is constructed as a part of this development and funded as a part of this development yes okay and then 117th would be partially funded through this development a contribution towards that roundabout right yeah and I don't you know what it what's that amount right land everything so but I mean get that there's a huge amount right that normally is on a county road that where it's way more benefit than just our project yeah and uh and then I think there is if you do look on the bray burn um development they can get out to 117 through there I mean we can't we can't exit 117th right because it's too close to the intersection but that's all I have since you're up here Tom just because I we keep hearing a lot of comments and I get that there's a timing issue that people are trying to understand like how it's going to impact the wind round what are going to be constructed when you in best case scenario say you start moving dirt in spring when's the first home evening going to get built it's probably not till fall late fall um I would imagine if it's fall it's up by the park you know everywhere we have is right up by the park is where we'd work in the first phase those 65t wide Lots yep um but there's a good chance there's definitely nobody living there this year and even if any any houses get in there you know if I could get the util I mean my goal is weather permitting we can have streets in before freeze up right and so the goal that the city people on conso the PC need to figure out too is how to manage all that timing of all these events because you know as you're moving dirt you're figuring out the 114th roundabout as that gets figured out if it gets shifted or not shifted that's when we solve it you know there's obviously going to be this my biggest concern is the uncertainty is what happens if those two homes just get cut off with access and there's no 117th access and I don't really know how to answer that until probably a year from now and we know what it looks like and it's hard to give people guarantees but I understand where they're coming from but that's the hardest challenge I'm having and and I I mean I think we've we've talked and and love to get you know with the county as soon as possible you know yeah and and uh I mean if somehow we could figure out how to get it done this year I mean I think we're just making the Assumption nothing happens quick at the county but if they could have a plan and that's the first thing in spring I mean that's you know it it it actually helps my Pro the project too you know what I mean just right so thank you all right is there anyone else here to speak on this topic if not it is 7:28 we are going to close the public hearing um before we get into discussion I think a couple of these got checked off um but just a couple questions to staff what is left to review what is incomplete that that's partially maybe what you want to get to versus what's not in this packet sure so for one this is a plan unit development and so it's expected that there's going to be flexibility in lotw so I'm not looking at you know say lot one is that 62 feet wide you know no it's going to be something else and that's up to the commission and the council to say that something else is good enough so kind of what I'm looking for is does the Planning Commission want to change anything um on the review I I know we're still working through the engineering review um we're missing a landscaping plan so there's some smaller detail things that it's probably not as big of a concern but it's um if there's a list of things to check this isn't checked yet okay okay um and yeah that's all I've got for staff uh any other questions for staff before we have a discussion all right well will we see the planting Plan before table it okay um so I guess with that I would ask the commission Prov any recommendations so specifically what I'm thinking of is uh if there's any desirable Landscaping along firm Brook and I will just note too for people's understanding the last plan that was provided had a landscape plan but with the revisions there wasn't an updated Landscaping plan that was provided um and just a quick summary on that the landscape plan showed a significant um amount of buffering along what is to be the new um alignment of 113 and then uh I believe that there was a note in the last um staff report related to a less than 10 tree shortage on the buffer requirements along Fernbrook in the Northeast area so um minor minor revisions were required from that last one and with this new plan we'll expect to see that okay um well it seems like the first question up here for the Planning Commission members is where's everyone's Comfort level moving forward before we have more discussion and can be part of your discussion I guess too I don't think the missing items are are critical to um the way I would look at the application as far as landscape plan and whatnot do we have like a majority that are in concurrence on that yeah I'm fine with that yeah I think if it's just the landscape plan I'm not going to say just the landscape plan but I have faith in in the staff that that the this development will meet our minimum requirements and maybe exceed those minimum requirements or push for that uh ultimately this gets approved by the council so we could certainly have that review at the council level as well to make sure that landscape plan is is adequate okay all right um you know Jeff you already mentioned to the applicant I uh I think the changes that were made are very positive um I kind of view this as two types of developments and when talking to staff you know the average lot width outside of the northeast corner is 66 feet and we only have a 62 ft minimum so really the question in my brain is you know for this deviation and the public benefit is it worth it are we okay with the alley homes I don't love a 40 foot product but they do have a place and they do have a market and it's a pretty it's the first one in Dayton um I'm so happy the developer really cut down that number of lots so I think it's more appropriate so I I don't have a problem with the lot list lot size and I think the public benefit is pretty important with the round theot at 114th um and there's a lot of timing issues involved and a lot of uncertainty that I think that uh those out there that are directly impacted with that access you should know that uh it's on everyone's brains to make sure we do the best we can to manage it and have you have normal access yeah it concur I mean the roundabout should move as far south as we can get it away from those homes reasonably um I don't see a negative impact on future commercial or whatever that parcel might be uh a little bit of alignment on 114th in the the east side that would have to happen but um while I'm also not a huge fan of the smaller Lots it does provide the density that met Council requires um you kind of need to have that to have some of the larger Lots I do like the the street facing front of houses with the the Main Street and then the buffer before Fernbrook so we're not just looking at backs of houses along Fernbrook um and if we maintain the same quality that Sundance and the development south of um has had along the Fernbrook there and we continue that up here I think that's going to be great yeah I think if if there's a spot to have higher density it's it's tucked up against Fernbrook right um I I think the way you had had presented it in that the rest of the Lots get to be larger because of it um for me I I think that's a reasonable spot to try this product type it provides a variety of housing choices for the market which is important as well um yeah I agree mostly with everything uh said right now um couple concerns I have number one uh and I don't know if we have a a minimum standard requirement that we could get a hold of through henpen County for roundabouts and Lighting on roundabouts um anybody driving through the roundabout on you know on firm Brook and close to 81 it's lit up like a an airport right so I was shocked the first time I went through there um I think I was able to see like in people's in you know in people's yards because of how bright that's lit up and I get that that's a temporary uh thing but um having that kind of set up around any of these roundabouts up here might be uh pretty critical as far as uh the light intensity and and light pollution as well um you know I I know there's a comment made about um us not addressing uh noise or light pollution and I I do think that is critical also to look at uh I think we're premature in that right now because there's no definite plan for that outlot but that's certainly something that's going to be on my mind when a commercial development goes in there as far as what's the type of noise that could be made there um how are we going to screen it um what's the lighting standards look like I know that we made mention of um our our light and noise ordinance might have some holes in it that need to be looked at potentially so that's something that um I think we should continue to work on the other question I have and I don't want to throw a huge monkey wrench in this but what is the potential or is there even any way or does it even make sense if in the the narrow Lots there is there any kind of way of punching one of those streets to the norm North to 117th so take that Western Street I know there's a holding Pond there which is probably sized accordingly on this plan but if you take that Western Street and you punch it North to7th that would give all of those properties the ability to go North to 117th instead of Meandering South through the entire development to try to get to 113th where all those people th those residents I don't know the name of that street there um are going to see all that traffic coming down through there um back and forth uh people are take the path of Le lease resistance and when they find their route and their routine they stick to it right so once they find out that this is the fastest way I could get to Fernbrook they're going to use it every day over and over and over and over again uh until something comes up where they have to change that pattern I know that throws a huge monkey wrench in things or potential does but it would alleviate some traffic concerns on 114th uh it would add some traffic concerns on 117th and intersections and so on and so forth but it might be a a good way of solving an issue and helping alleviate some of those other concerns that might come up through this development yeah that feasibly yes it could be physically connected um but the proximity to the fern Brook intersection would be more troubled than I think would want to be tolerated for that so um the the location that was selected in brayburn East was uh strategic if you will with the spacing along there if there's no more discussion I guess I'll entertain a motion I'll make a motion to approve recommend approval do we do it all at one time do you think map we can land unit development and Murray plat of DCM Farms is that all of so you said what what did you list say zoning map Amendment plan unit development and prary plat second all those in favor we're going to do roll call we'll start this way this time all right Paul I myself I and I uh motion carries 4 Z this will go to the city council on we don't have a date so we need to complete our review and then it'll go forward to the council Perfect all right thank you thank you moving on to item number B consent plan at 17051 117th Avenue North opinion all right all right thank you Mr chair members of the Planning Commission uh tonight you're asked to review a concept plan uh for an industrial speculative building um the property here is located on the east side of Dayton Parkway Round about and south of 117th Avenue um directly east of the uh cubes building uh the overall site is 3.24 acres and the first phase of development consists of uh roughly 15 Acres um uh there's a mix of land use guidance from the comp plan consisting of industrial in the purple uh Business Park in the light purple and then commercial in the red uh currently one of the properties is zoned i1 which was in relation to the development of the cubes project uh and the uh I guess the extension of Dayton Parkway in that area um and this is in the current uh staging plan for the uh urban service area all right so here is a uh cut from the site plan here showing the uh concept development and uh the outlined area in red is the uh identified first phase uh this office it includes office space warehouse and distribution uh the building is 200,000 Square ft um the plan also includes clud loading docks for semi- trucks on the north side of the building uh the initial uh elevation shows 17 dock doors initially and 39 knockout panels uh for future doors uh totaling 56 um there's vehicle parking on the south side of the building and uh there currently based on the plan there was an unidentified number of uh parking spaces proposed the applicant has indicated that they uh do not wish to pursue a planned unit development in this regard so the expectation with that would be that they would meet the parking standards uh for warehouse and distribution including the office space um also included here is 38,000 squ ft uh roughly area of outdoor storage and that uh is inclusive of any uh areas to navigate their maneuver around the outdoor storage area and here's a aerial image of the site looking South uh just looking at the site plan and the proposed building layout uh regarding building setbacks uh as you can see all of the uh proposed locations um show compliance to what is required in the i1 district which is what this is assumed to be uh rezoned to at the time of them coming back for uh preliminary plat application and here's just another table regarding the parking setbacks also in compliance and then here's just some detail on site coverage the impervious surface coverage uh proposed is 69% uh the foot the building footprint coverage was 29.9% and the proposed structure height is 37 ft with a clear height of 32 uh some considerations uh through the review that uh staff identified and uh just to preface the discussion this is for informal feedback to the applicant uh no formal action will be taken tonight on this item uh though a public hearing will be held to uh get some added discussion from uh residents who um wish to provide them um the parking areas as I mentioned before are uh subject to the ordinance um the parking ordinance related to office warehouse and distribution um and uh including the accessory semi-trailer parking uh access and circulation consideration should be given uh to whether the proposed access from the north on 117th Avenue uh is needed at the time of this initial phase or if uh the uh proposed uh One initial access off of that uh last roundabout leg on the southeast of Dayton Parkway um would suffice for this 200,000 ft building and the outdoor storage area shall be designed excuse me and uh screened in accordance with the zoning ordinance um section provided General Landscaping uh shall comply with the zoning ordinance as well um and uh because uh Dayton Parkway is identified as a uh a major road uh in the future here a 35t landscape buffer shall be provided on the property that is consistent with our buffer requirements uh to Major roadways um the building orientation uh consideration by the applicant should be uh taken to um the building layout in general um and if there's any possibility that the building could be rotated so the uh vehicle parking faces north towards the what it proposed future commercial area um including the Wetland that uh phases uh and that also includes uh reorientation of the office area within the building right now the office area is proposed to be on the southwest side of the building um staff had uh provided a recommendation that that uh be uh I guess swapped to the Northeast area so it faces Dayton Parkway the Wetland area and then the remaining commercial area and that would also allow for the dock doors in the truck area to face the existing Industrial Park um that is 113th Avenue uh the applicant also did provide this sketch uh related to a u potential realignment of the Dayton Parkway Road within this area um basically the the concept here that they provided was uh to acknowledge that they would not be in favor of uh such realignment of this area as it would obviously not make the uh south portion of these properties developable um so they essentially that was the exhibit that they uh provided to show um just talking uh among staff preliminary estimates of uh only realigning the roadway and utilities uh is would expect be expected to exceed $10 million and that doesn't include any necessary RightWay Acquisitions to the east um or future improvements beyond that uh realignment um and also another uh major factor that was uh considered was the um need for the cubes building's newest occupant States manufacturing to utilize that North access uh right here onto Dayton Parkway for uh their services uh here's just a list of future future applications that uh staff would expect to see at time of preliminary plat um not only the preliminary plat but the rezoning application uh comprehensive plan Amendment uh for the land use designation which is uh specific to that commercial area in the Northwest the business park and Industrial land use designation both allow for warehouse and distribution so the first phase of construction would otherwise be considered consistent with what the comp plan shows in that area um there would be required conditional use permit for the outdoor storage area and then of course a standard site plan review and all these applications uh listed above can be applied for concurrently and just again to reiterate uh the role of the Planning Commission is to review the concept discuss it and offer input and any desired changes or improvements for the applicant to consider uh also hold a public hearing for the plan notice was sent out to surrounding properties within a quarter mile of this area and uh all comments are advisory only and non-binding and no action will be taken at this time and with that I'll open it up to questions thank you any questions to staff what was the impetus of the exhibit showing the revised alignment there um was that staff driven to Staff feel like there is still a possibility of that extension occurring um even after the discussion with City Council in June about the alignment of the regional roadways through that area I I can't remember which months we've had discussion so we had a previous workshop with um the council and the Planning Commission which uh the majority direction from the council and the commission was to explore um moving Dayton Parkway to the East and then we had the I think that was the June discussion of what is the history of Dayton Parkway the Dayton Parkway alignment um and then it the conversation essentially stopped until there was an applicant that um was in this area and here we are so um this is the point where a decision does need to be made if Dayton Parkway is going to follow the current alignment or if it's going to move I mean I would argue it's maybe a little bit too late since infrastructure is already built but we can get there I just want to know the history a little bit more there okay um is the applicant present that would like to come up and hello good evening uh my name is Jay Moore with opid and Investment Company 400 Water Street Excel here Minnesota he Mark Anderson civil engineer with satech representing Aiden and um we worked on the concept plans along with mohagen Hansen Architects so appreciate your time tonight of course our greatest interest tonight is to get feedback on this plan good or bad support or not so that uh oiden can make decisions on whether to move forward or not so we're available to answer questions and be a part of the dialogue is needed um I'll start off with a couple questions I first question just what's your when staff is suggesting slipping the building do you guys have a preference a response to that how that would maybe impact things good or bad yeah um we of course uh don't have a design on this site yet we just have a site plan and some initial layouts so um more details to come but you know the the large Pond Wetland in the middle is course the low side of the site and so we've orientated the building with the truck Court which is also the low side of the building project um and then the car parking is on the south which is approximately 4 feet higher than the truck dock elevation so the natural grades on the site tend to tell us we should have the truck court on the north um but we also understand that screening of truck courts and um you know the visual uh sight lines from Dayton Parkway are important so uh the landscape requirements do require 35 ft wide buffer along Dayton Parkway um that that can help screen um the truck cord as well as as noted here about image additional screening near the truck court so we're certainly willing to look at it as the design moves forward and we've got more information U but those are our initial thoughts on why it's orientated this way okay um this is not really related to the industrial which I understand is phase one but I'm very concerned about 130,000 ft of commercial space with the access you guys are showing so it only has one right in right out on Dayton Parkway and then it's got the full access up in the northeast corner on 117th that's a lot of square feet of commercial to only have one eress point and it seems to me that the road coming off the roundabout should be extended all the way along the south end of the property and not only does that help the city with adjacent development to the east someday um cuz we have a roundabout and direct s Dayton Parkway it should be connected in my opinion and if that Road extended all the way across the bottom then you could shoot up a Road North if you really want to put all that commercial up there you want to go I mean we yeah we'll probably both comment on this but the commercial area of course isn't an area that opid in is pursuing at this time they don't intend to so the land owner um May sell to others or who knows may even develop themselves this site plan was the basis of the EA that was prepared I think somewhere in the order of two years ago and it's not to say that there couldn't be additional access up of 117th um to help facilitate the flow of traffic for the commercial development that's something that could be looked at but I think it's fairly clear that the access off of Dayton Parkway is right in right out only with the divided medium so it is somewhat limited there um but certainly um how that commercial area develops it's going to have to certainly look at access and it might be significantly different than what's shown there today um it seems like this is our chance to get the access right though and so that's why and I know we've been talking about intersection spacing and I'm guessing that that's fact I measured it's close to where we'd want the spacing anyway so I don't think there's any other ways to solve it to get access to it other than coming from the roundabout yeah and I get that's going to completely shift the plan and one thing I thought about and I don't know if you guys have looked at it but why not I I understand bigger buildings are more economically make sense um but if you chopped it up in the smaller buildings and had them going um vertical north south on the map um you could get almost the same amount of square footage I think if you did that and still have room for a road coming through and part of me says that why not look at the whole site as industrial too I mean it's going to be a tough site to access for commercial period yeah the commercial Vitality really depends on the future extension of Dayton Parkway well it depends on access as much as anyway certainly and and 117 French Lake Road um the the South roadway alignment that we referring to uh certainly makes it difficult if not impossible to put an industrial building on the south portion of the property due to the roadway itself the RightWay and setbacks and um I've also worked with the landowner client here with the eaw and so on and he's of the mindset he already donated right away for Dayton Parkway a significant amount of his land was was granted for that already so he's not interested in cutting up more for more Road right away on his property ayen do you have a picture of the the road that from the roundabout that's going to go down to the right yes Dar would you suggesting if there's not a road to connect to kind of loop the lot that doing an all industrial um kind of site would would benefit better the northwest corner could maybe become commercial someday but you know you just took 130,000 Square V commercial down to you know something a lot less that can maybe handle just one access point and a right and right out so I think there has been some analysis of the Road Connections maybe Jason if you're goinging to comment on them uh that might help us a little bit in understanding what the options have been yeah the primary objective of that I'll say unused leg of the roundabout is to connect and reun out the access for 113th with the thought being as as Dayton Parkway grows and becomes busier and that intersection at 81 is upgraded the connection at 113th would not be feasible anymore or for for users to to make the Ingress and Ingress movements so an alternate connection point was needed we did look or we we started with what's showing on the screen today um when we weren't making process as a a reserve if you will we were um holding as an alternative um what was mentioned that road extending East and then South and coming into the I'll call it the East Terminus of 113th creating almost a horseshoe if you will along there so that was an alternative um we have been working with the property owner from which the RightWay would be required for as it is showing we're actually in process just finalizing a plat for his property to create that tract to be purchased for the RightWay use in the future future so that is well along not that it has to be used for it it could be rerouted and that could always be vacated or used for other purposes if found necessary or beneficial but um we have moved forward with the plan as as shown um with the thought being as as long as this is secured as our alternate connection to 113th the road to the east would not be necessary at least for those purposes yeah if there was reasons to go East for other reasons other purposes that could be and just so everyone's clear the reason go east is the 78 Acres between East French Lake Road and this development um we've had lots of discussions on land use and the land current land use plan still follows Dayton Parkway and Dayton Parkway shifted um I just think it's a it's shortsighted not to connect that area to this roundabout I think it creates a lot of opportunity for the city when something happens versus um trying to figure out how to someday when people sell there because all everything on East French Lake Road on both sides are in current staging so those people could be selling their land and there are conversations with some people about what they might do with it and so it's going to be in our lap sooner than later and we need to figure out how we going to how is that area going to be accessed and what's it going to become and from a city perspective not a applicant perspective we need to do a better job there and we still haven't addressed it and it makes hard evaluating the site because you know if that all became low density residential or medium density residential on right it's a different story than if it becomes industrial and that's where I'm coming from um Jay and Mark is that there's a decent chance that East could become industrial that's why I think it should be connected to the roundabout could it connect to 113 w't the r about come down this way and what you're going to you could do that way but yeah to me you'd still run that road and you could even still drop that road down well unless the spacing is too tight with the intersection they drop it down safely and you know just from this concept plan's perspective I guess I'm struggling not of saying that I get that that industri building would worked perfect there but I think we just punted on the whole rest of the site and that's why I know that you guys are focused on the industrial I get that makes sense but I'm a little focused on well we got to solve the north half how it's going to get access yeah there was a traffic study as part of the EA for this so that's something that we could take a look at as and see what and like I said so that building's running East West now if you fli them um you could still get quite a bit of square footage ability in there granted there's smaller buildings but I'm guessing that that the SPEC Building you don't know if it's one tenant or three or four tenants and so the smaller buildings might still work it just you're eliminating the one big ten doesn't work financially just doesn't triple the cost probably yeah oh I'm a real estate appraiser and I know it works so it's not triple the cost okay but it it costs more and more difficult I get it yeah I think the other challenge for this particular parcel size is uh the dimension to the east of the Wetland SL Pond area is not enough tough s standard very tough sight um so and and even the north side if that wanted to be industrial I don't believe the dimension is sufficient there either so the only one that is south of the Wetland Pond that and and it's it's tight even in the South position so if the road were to continue to the east I think it would rule out industrial on this site it would shift the building types for sure and whether that is feasible for you or even the next markup Testament because it it's difficult that's com you know just from a land a Land Development you know this portion of the Southern site is the most valuable right and so that's the current owner is you know trying to maximize that value and we're trying to maximize our return for y what size building can come in here and so you know from a from a feasibility from what we think is a logical use from it could be one tenant it could be two but we don't think it's 20 right you know this is this is what we're trying to solve for and there's there's demand for this type of building in in your in your city so this is uh this is what we would like to see be accomplished if possible it's why we're here I understand the grading issues of trying to flip the building 180 makes a lot of logical sense uh it's a little unfortunate to put the front of your building kind of facing away from any kind of Entry or visibility uh for any tenant signage um and just the athetic of the building uh you can plant a whole bunch of trees along D Parkway and it's still going to see the building right I mean you you're going to be still smaller than um the cubes across the street but um it'd be nice to it's something we're certainly willing to look at once we have you know full gr design and on how that yeah see what the cost impacts and feasibility impacts of that are I'd appreciate that um I think regardless if there's anything you can do to that West facade to just make it look a little bit more like the front of your building or just some more windows along there um would be really nice just to open it up I think even um I think Tom's in the back corner there you know like Corner houses like make a corner house look like a corner house don't just make a corner house look like an individual house with no windows on the side right like make the corner of your building look like the corner of the building you know that's what everybody sees pulling into your property uh for tenants visitors whatever right so um you know address that side as much as you address the front face um I prefer um integral color concrete with an acid ET or sand blast instead of painting any day um I think it just looks more natural to the material uh it's a long longer lasting product you never have to paint it or do anything to maintain it it's just pre-cast will last forever um painted pre-cast will need to be painted in the future and just doesn't quite look as nice uh so if you can look into that as a feasibility appreciate that um I think just because of the scale of the site and especially if this stays the same orientation um you know do you pull the signage down into the metal panel bump ups at the doors um so it's a little bit more pedestrian scale because you're not seeing this from a long distance um it maybe give that kind of bumped up metal panel a little bit more of a presence in a purpose uh if it also hosts the signage for your tenants uh and gets a little bit more over the doors um otherwise nice job on the the entries adding in a little bit of you know maybe it's some kind of wood feature there or metal panel uh with the little canopies um that's very helpful um you know I I like Windows but I know there's cost to it so um you know bigger taller whatever might be is always nice but um I think the rhythm of Windows that you have will provide a lot of daylight into the building which will be good um little surprised to see more along the truck side than along the front face maybe it's because you have them all down low on the front but um that's kind of all the kind of architectural things at this point is the question for so if this property were to develop with just this one building you've got the axis off the roundabout in the south the dve any kind of connection up to French Lake would not occur at this point right so your only axis would be off the roundabout for all truck and car traffic yeah the the staff reported indicated that recommended access to the north for emergency vehicles actually considered gating it so that the trucks don't go that way but for emergency access just to have two points yep I would agree with that I don't know if there's anything with that entry drive you know just trying to separate cars and trucks the best possible um you know who knows how heavy truck traffic depending on your tenants uh you might have half of it might be a baseball training facility or something right and you have zero trucks and or you might be a warehouse where you're just running trucks all day but um you know that's always a cause of concern when you have trucks and cars I think you always have to plan for the the worst possible scenario or the most intensive possible scenario in any building right so that's where traffic counts and accessibility and I mean how many loading docks are there I think it was 56 that's a lot of loading docks right at least 17 of them were identified as uh the ones that would go in right away correct right so I mean obviously the potential of this building is pretty heavily industrial used um so yeah we should make sure that all those connections are are planned for accordingly so sorry Paula no that's fine I mean I think just you know if nothing else changes with the entry driver or whatever do you just make that entry just a little bit wider with a Boulevard or something just to help divide those obviously truck turning all has to work and be functional but I mean even though the back of the building shows those Punch Out panels This is meant for office warehouse so it's usually not like right across the street at the cubes that is complete distribution that's where all the trucks and they have them every 14 ft this very unlikely that they were be more than 15 or 20 Doors Max yeah is what we envision although it's hard to totally predict that but that's the likely scenario yeah sometimes when people see these really big buildings they think they're naturally going to be just warehousing distribution but these buildings are flexible they can be manufacturers they can be warehousing and the challenge with spec buildings is making sure that what we approve You' you've provided the flexibility to meet the parking and stuff like that where for example that outdoor St storage could be parking if a big manufacturer came in I don't have anything else yeah I I just I think all the other Commissioners did a good job of um initially taking a look at this and given some input I would just reiterate the the foot flopping of that building and take a look at that too I I concur pretty well with that um for all the issues that were brought up um you know people traveling south there to see a front of a building and not the back of the building um so I think you understand that pretty completely but I I just wanted to say I I agree with that sentiment so um we didn't really individually talk about the whole Dayton Parkway rerouting but I'll just say that as much as uh it seemed like the right thing to do like I would love it rerouted it we're beyond that point I mean the right answer would had it be different in the first place but it's not so that's my opinion yeah I would agree we we routed it without knowing where point A to point B we're going to connect and who knows if it's right or wrong but there's no reason to reroute it now and we still don't know the connection between point a and point B we're just it's kind of second guess to ourselves I think where it is now is is point a it's just too late yeah what head about not being able to put the toothpaste back in the tube right so I think that's we're at um and and we deal with with the current infrastructure and try to make the other development work around that so and I don't think the decision that was made in the past was the wrong decision necessarily right it was the decision that was you know available at the time yeah the decision it's kind of how development works it's you know it's iterative and I don't mean that the Hound on that South Road but that's what I'm trying to avoid is us cutting off something because again and I'm directing this now to staff and Council but we have to look at those land uses we can't just keep waiting for the applications to come in like we should have made those land use changes already that way we can properly evaluate [Applause] this I think the land use map is in here yeah the current one mistaken yeah what is east of this say currently it's a mix of commercial light Industrial and low density and medium density it's 78 Acres the comprehensive plan that was passed in 2022 does not follow the Dayton Parkway Corridor that was built yeah so the corridor shifted to the left so that commercial the cor was yeah so and that's that's just where I'm making sure that whatever goes there it has the access and if we knew what was going there it make it easier for us to give you better advice believe this is supposed to be a public hearing yeah this is a public hearing thank you we might have some more questions or you guys can come back up if the public has some questions thanks thank um it is 8:12 and I will open the public hearing is anyone in the room to speak on this matter so please come forward good evening I'm Joan Duda I live at 17050 117th Avenue North um my total concern about this um is the access points and I'm glad you're discussing it looking at it um really all I have to say um just I'm really concerned about the traffic on 117th now the way it is and it is getting very very scary and I think that needs to be looked at as a additional Point thank thank you how's it going uh my name is Colton Ramsey I live at 11481 East French Lake Road uh kind of the closest adjoining property to the south of the outdoor storage and warehouse distribution building I guess my biggest concern would be my house is right off the corner of the outdoor storage my bedroom window uh just my land is currently zoned residential so in the future there will houses there and I'm backed up right to a outdoor storage and giant building so it's kind of just my only concern so thank you Keith Grover 113th in Fernbrook every time I I look at this this whole process when you guys are laying this stuff out it kind of bothers me you all know you screwed up when you put aund you put the extension in over to 117th I heard the council talk about it I've heard the Planning Commission talk about it this is your last chance to change this forever not just for your couplee term that you're sitting there but forever for the city this is the main access point that we're looking at to get in and out of Dayton off from the Parkway Dayton Parkway if we screw this up now it's screwed up forever you know you messed up you know it's to fix it I understand it's going to cost money to fix it but this piece of property that we're talking about here is the only way to fix that and realign that with the French Lake Road and then on over to the north where we all think that road is supposed to go but you're right you know the city has blinders on we don't we haven't looked at the land use we haven't laid a plan out there saying this is where the road is going to go so people can look at it make decisions like these gentlemen have to do with that piece of property they're looking at now we need to look ahead you hit the nail right on the head Darren we need to figure out how that road is going to go across there we know it's going to go all the way across the city we know it's going to go right by the the new city gar and head north and at some point maybe go over the river but down on this end is something that we have control over we screwed it up it's our only chance to fix it if you don't fix it now it's going to be that way forever the other issue I have is I worry about these people having all this stuff in their backyard again you know if somebody's laying out a plan that has all these residential lots just like we talked about on Fernbrook they've got all this industrial coming up there what are we doing screening wise so that these people aren't looking out into their backyard like the gentleman just says at a huge piece of property that's got God knows what stored on it or looking at a huge building if you go down to the on to farther west on French Lake Road the development that we built just west of French Lake there's several homes along there some of those folks are friends of mine if you go in the back of their backyard and you stand in their backyard now what you used to look at was Farm Fields what you see now is a 40ft high wall for a building and there's virtually no screening other than what they have on their property we didn't protect them we didn't protect their screening whatever lighting comes from those buildings shines into their backyards we have to look at all these things because we're you guys are designing a a city that it's going to be here long certainly long past me I'm getting old you guys are all young it's going to be a long here a long time it's a permanent fixture I really think you need to look long and hard about whether that's exactly what we want to have the main road coming into Dayton look like that's that's all I got thanks is online if you'd like to speak during this public hearing uh feel free to use the raise your hand function not seeing any okay um all right uh I just want to add one more comment about Dayton Parkway and this is coming from my perspective but I feel like if Dayton Parkway would have shifted it would have been easier for it to extend North it's not that it can't extend North and it's still going to affect properties no matter where it touches today or if we move it East it's just my opinion that if it were moved East it would be easier to probably work its way north than the current situation where it has to go through a bunch of five 10 15 acre Parcels um but with that all being said there's a cost involved and I don't know when it's going to happen but the question is is it cheaper to continue its current path which I think the answer is yes versus the other path because it's still all going to work out it's just going to be harder to work out now and uh that's what I kind of mean when I say I wished we would have moved it um any other there's no action on this is there any other comments before we move on I just have a question if the applicant has any questions for the commission yeah if you have what you need close public hearing all right thank you uh it is 8:19 and I will close the public hearing uh moving on to item number 8 C comprehensive plan Amendment city code Amendment uh related to the A3 District um yeah so first I I'll try to explain how we got here um it's been a while uh trying to remember exactly we've had a a number of few workshops on what would different ways to preserve uh the ruralness of Dayton and kind of what the uh the consensus was is to have larger Lots in the north and to allow continue to allow Suburban development in the South uh we had conversations with the me Council um of with the Met Council support take removing a portion of Dayton out of the Metropolitan urban service area uh so the Metropolitan urban service area Musa for short um is essentially the boundary of where the Met Council plans to extend sewer and water um at some point within uh by the year 2040 or roughly all of Dayton is within the Musa uh so again the question was with the Met Council support removing a portion of Dayton out of the Musa and the answer was no uh we were essentially too close to the uh uh sewer station in Rogers so the the plan is is that Dayton is going eventually we'll develop all with the sewer Regional sewer and water uh the followup question to that was can we do something different so um this area Northwest Dayton is the farthest from the line from getting sewer um the current zoning is A1 agriculture which has a minimum lot size of 40 acres uh the question was would the Met Council support allowing a a density of one home per 10 acres the answer was yes um as long as we maintain that density uh they would allow us to have the flexibility of having a varying lot size as long as the density didn't change um and as long as the ability of having sewer development would be preserved so you know again uh most of this area is either in the 2040 or the post 2050 sewer staging area um and that's at a minimum so again the point is is that this is decades from being able to develop with sewer we've had conversations with the Planning Commission on where the boundary for the A3 District again is so again the A3 District District the intention is one home per oh sorry four homes per 40 acre density or one home per 10 acre density um so again the the uh question that was posed to the plan commission and the council is what is the most appropriate area uh generally the answer was uh north of North Diamond no I'm sorry north of South Diamond Lake Road and West of the Dayton Parkway extension and granted as we just spoke in the last item we don't have a clear idea of where that of Dayton Parkway is going to go but generally it's going to follow Zanzibar um up to Vicksburg and then across to Highway 10 in Ramsey um so at the density of one home per 10 acres essentially uh Pro Parcels that would be allowed to be subdivided have to have a minimum lot size of 20 acres to begin with in order to have two homes uh that affects about 29 Parcels that are highlighted green here um the building entitlements are about 100 homes so altogether this area is 2,800 acres in size um but again with the one per 10 density that would result in about 100 new homes um the council and plan commission had a workshop in febru yeah February uh to just kind of discuss the outline of the A3 District um you I think we've got it fairly narrowed down so once again uh the density is 1 home per 10 acres the minimum lot size would be 1 and 1/2 acre 1 and2 net ACR so just say this is 1 and half acres of High Ground so this is intended uh to provide for both a house a well and a primary backup uh septic systems the lot width uh is 140 ft wide uh setbacks are similar to what we have in other zoning districts and then pvy service area of 30% let's see in order to comply with the directions that we have from the Met council is to uh is to to follow these six guidelines and I'm highlighting the ones that are probably more pertinent so the first one is to include the need to reserve land resources for efficient future Urban Development as part of the ordinance purpose uh so that's essentially just stating a purpose that the A3 District it is to allow unsu uh residential development it's an interm use or a temporary use the long-term or permanent use is going to be sewed residential whenever that occurs uh item number two is to identify Lane characteristics required to support future urbanization um the idea with this or the my interpretation with this is to require ghost platting that would demonstrate that this project whatever project is is capable of serving the higher density of three units per acre or whatever the the density requirement is at that time once T becomes available to be clear you don't we don't have to meet three overall the city needs to meet three or three and a half we just want to make sure that we can put maybe more density on these project yes um that's a very good point to make so but the the general idea if we say okay we're only going to meet one acre lots um it puts a lot of strain on the rest of the city to make up for that difference but you know that's a very good point uh item three is to allow no more than 25% of the developable land in a project to be developed reserving larger future Urban urbanization Parcels there's different ways to look at this so one is clustering and I don't mean a cluster septic system I mean clustering the homes together then reserving the larger parcel whether it's for farmland or for just a native area or some other use um there's different ways to look at that and I think with each development there's going to have a different purpose to that so we're going to see some projects where you know and I'm just making up numbers you might have 10 acre lots where it's just Hobby Farms in other cases you're going to have uh a development where homes are cluster together so you know let's say you have a bunch of one and a half acre lots and you're taking 75% of the land and reserving that as farmland or or open space or something that's not developed um so kind of the point is is there's not a one- siiz fit tall in this uh and then the fourth item is to protect future Urban urbanization Parcels with temporary development agreements easements or deed restrictions um I'm a little more uh hesitant with this and and the reason being it it's I think it's easy to make a decision today without knowing what the negative effects are decades from now so um you know again the the idea is to protect land for future development um but to keep in mind what that might what the effect is years from now um we do have I'm wild Wildwood grows Wildwood Estates I get that right okay Wildwood Estates in Northeast Dayton so that was developed in I think it was 80s or 90s or '90s um so this is North East Dayton uh is Ghost pled most of the the lots are two between two and 5 acres and size I was Ghost planted for urban services to become available so depending on the lot you might be ghost planted for three lots it might be seven Lots um so that's 20 30 years from now we don't have sewer and water in that area um we did not have covenants or deed restrictions that would prevent someone from building on two lots ghost Lots versus one so that's an example where this is kind of pushing it towards um it doesn't always work so I just want the commission to keep that in mind those are my slides so again the commission's discussed this for a number of times uh we did this is a public hearing we've noticed um quite a few people um have talked to a handful of property owners um just a question to staff here but in your packet you had some specific things that you might want us to provide more feedback on is there really much more I think really it's going to it's all going to be Case by case that's what I'm thinking that's why I was struggling with the idea of saying yes require ghost plant require this stuff because it's what you're saying it's an option depending on the parcel sure yep perfect U when we had the council plan commission Workshop I mean that one of the directions that came out of that meeting was the the the desire to have options so with ordinances it's always easier when everything's written in black and white but that's not always doesn't doesn't always work yeah any more questions to staff um this is a public hearing it is 8:29 and we will open the public hearing on this matter if there's anyone in the audience that would like to come forward um please state your name and address hi I'm Larry gal 15701 Shady View Lane and I do live along one of the parcels that's set for resoning and um I guess I don't have a problem with one house per 10 acres I don't want to see five houses per acre behind my house obviously but that's quite a ways off looking at the plat map again it's 2040 and post 2050 according to the to the map so for the smaller lot I'm going to be close to be dead by then hopefully not quite uh anyways so just to be clear so this will basically allow um I mean that's pretty much all of the tillable land left in that northwest corner that I can see I run those roads and on those roads pretty regularly so um but that will my assumption then is that is to allow uh the land owners if they desire to sell off Parcels for now do they have to sell off a a 20 acre subdivision parcel and have for you'd have to start with 20 acres in order that's what my assumption was based on what you said but I just wanted to clarify a 20 acre and then they're subdivided one to 10 acres okay okay um ify just so everyone in the room still on the same page like there's a person that had 40 acres they could put four homes in uh three six Acre Corner of it and leave the other 34 AC that's the one and a half acre I was going to ask about that so yeah thank you for clarifying that okay so thank you um uh that that was really my only question I just I just want to kind of hear what why it came how did it why did this come about I guess would be one question whether some particular land owners that are are looking to sell some parcels because they're they want to retire and yes yeah I mean that was my assumption also but I mean I figured there was something about it and I I know the part having discussed this for three or four years I think it's safe to say it was very city council driven meaning the city council members the majority of them would like to see this happen yeah more so than specific development I mean there obviously we've heard stories that some people want to take their parcel that's 20 acres and sell five acres to their kids stuff like that too but it yeah yeah and I know you know the spot behind me is um you know the owner does desire to develop it but his desire was in talking to him was to develop it with larger lot sizes because he kind of wants to preserve what Dayton is about and um okay let's uh that's all I had for questions but I am going to just uh make a couple comments in general that I think address some of the things that these people talked about and this is um out of the comprehensive plan and uh this is uh specifically on the land use goals and policies and it's um so the first one here that I'm just going to I'm not going to read them all I'm just going to read a couple that I think are important to myself and to a lot of people in this room hopefully you people also uh number one uh Community image uh goal one is enhance Community identity and sense of place through well-designed Community gateways signage high quality infrastructures and attractiveness of properties and I think you addressed that tonight with one of the commercial properties of wanting it to be attractive so that's that's good um goal five require appropriate land use transitions and buffers to ensure new development and or Redevelopment is compatible with existing areas and ab budding roadways um this is a section under Agricultural and rural residential policy one says preserve rural view shed on major roads open spaces and natural areas to promote the rural character of Dayton which I think is a prime importance uh policy two encourage infield development that demonstrates compatibility with existing neighborhood characteristics in terms of quality density Building height placement scale and Architectural care character um uh then there's another goal for housing types but one of the policies is um protect low density and Rural residential areas from incompatible uses by maintaining adequate buffering and or transition densities from such uses um and then the last thing I want to comment on was because somebody brought up about the lighting and they're actually in the comprehensive plan I don't have it here for the exact wording but there is a section that discusses Dayton as a dark sky area and that the goal is to limit upward lighting and to try to control lighting so that is part of the comprehensive plan I just want to say that that was in there so that's all I have to say and I hope the city council and the Planning Commission keep some of these policies in mind because that's what they're there for and let's not let's not forget the the policy are policies that are put in place to try to keep Dayton Rural and not to have a huge cluster of development right next to a you know an old residential area let's make sure that those transition zones and buffers are really there thank you thank you Larry hi there I'm John burnens uh my family owns a couple of the parcels that uh will be rezoned in this and very excited about this obviously but yeah Mr go yeah so John if you could just State your address oh sorry 17921 Dayton River Road um so yeah we own right behind Mr gow that is our intent one and a half acre to two acre lots just had a little question on the the so the 25% rule can you elaborate a little bit on what the expectation is there I I mean I think we plan to keep the majority of our property and agricultural uses but just was curious on that so in in your case it would be clustering so if you you take the property you put the development 25% you reserve 75% at as agricultural okay um it it's on the flip side like you know if you had 10 acre lots it's still a question how do you preserve um 75% of that when it's not intended you know when it's just intended as yard space okay so and then as far as the because we're working on some of the platting right now and some of that and then as far as the comments you made around future urbanization and being able to further develop those lots in the future is that something that we'll need to be considering in the design and development of the current planning we're working on yeah so I guess the example would be is where what how do you run sewer through uh or future sewer okay um I think Jason could probably expand on that better than I could uh well just yeah just where you could further subdivide into the additional lots to increase the density while getting utilities through to service those okay that makes sense so just considerations around where build building sites are placed in those lots things like that or potentially I mean that that's where ghost planning becomes really helpful of you know if sewer is going if it makes sense to sewer send sewer in a certain direction you know then plan that in the ghost plat um rather than build a house or something else right on top of where the road might go okay perfect um and then as far as uh roads and in some of these developments do you guys have any thought on what expectations are with some of those the roads that'll have to go through there I me I assume not curb and gutter just I think it'd be a r rural section we haven't really gotten that far into the detail of it so all right perfect yeah the only thing I think that came out of the code was that John correct me but if it's more than three homes the code says paved is that correct for the the int intention for an A3 district is um so I should back up we we had a conversation should be public roads versus private and paved versus gravel okay and kind of where we settled settled on was um if it's more than three lots it would be a public paved road if it's you know three or less then it could be a private road or an easement although um we've had challenges with easements okay and back up to the DCM Farms that we're looking at would have a private road with three homes on it okay so perfect I think that's all the questions that I had I assume you'll be letting us know on when this will go to city council date yeah um yes I would encourage you to keep reaching out the city staff with questions on it too so as you go through it you get their feedback because they'll keep having questions coming to us so we can if the intention if you know depending on what the planning commission's recommendation is if they recommend approval it would go to the Council on March 25th yep and we'll keep reaching out just wanted to as we're working on this make sure we're staying in line with you guys as it moves forward so thank you is anyone online Hayden uh if anyone online wants to speak at this public hearing feel free to use the raise your hand function not seeing any Mr chair um yeah come on up Sir two second question da blackton 1470 Vicksburg so I'm the guy down on the end of the Little P Gravel Road there so if you do a four homes in a 40 um like right now obviously it's gravel so uh whether that's petimus or or concrete um you know I'm the smallest lot there so if there's development left right or you know is that you talking about potential concrete or asphalt asphalts yeah um and then is that a special assessment or for you know existing guys that live there that are on a gravel road today what I you know so generally the developer pays for the road and and you're on it you benefit from itad traditionally yeah okay good all right that's pretty much it um if there's no one else here for the public hearing I'm going to close it there you all right Randy dohmer 15501 dat and River Road so I just most the questions were answered but a few questions if it's a on a county road is the county going to live give access to Parcels I mean know that that could be a it could be a challenge I think it's better that Jason might answer that question but it I think that access is going to be a case-by casee scenario that has to be thought through yeah know that that's a great question um it would be up to the the county to Grant the permits for that now they are obligated to give you an access to your property however they're not necessarily obligated to permit an access that serves a higher intensity um however the incremental I think we're talking with here I would at least sure hope they would be receptive to allowing those what I'm getting at is if you have a farm access now for example that used for agricultural purposes and you want to build a hotel they don't have to grant that that access permit it's my from one to two single family residences I would sure hope there'd be some leniency on that on their end yeah if there's any platting along County roadway the county has review uh abilities and then to give feedback back to the developer as far as what they are willing or not willing to allow for in that development access right that's why it's kind of wondering if you're if you pass an A3 Zone without any really knowing exactly going Case by case how does how does that get decided because you know in the end it could be different for every property I don't know if that's going into it is a good way to go because if you allow one for one use for somebody the next guy would want at least all that yeah I I think the thing that's going to eliminate some people from being able to do it is the feasibility meaning that if you have a tougher site that requires a specific type of access it's going to be tough right so it could be cost prohibitive in on a lot of these potential Parcels that you have certain and that was we talked a lot about access and it's a difficult thing because there's just different roads and there's even along long Longdale there was the conversation well do we allow more curb cuts on it because again is that going to hurt us 20 years from now now um and so that's why we were kind of Silent on it and because it's it is a case by case basis and one thing you could do too is have a private driveway that splits off into two homes so there's there's options but you know them them are always problems down the road yeah you better like your neighbor pretty good chance of that yeah my advice wouldn't be to recommend any of that but if you have if you don't have any criteria that's kind of what I was wondering if you are going to build up some kind of criteria before anything is approved if it's called if it's called A3 you know if it's agriculture you know that isn't Agriculture and it can be real gray a lot of these people might have the idea that once they get on that 10 acres it's you know cowboy country can do whatever they want and if there's no rules in the future when it is developed even if it's 50 years from now it'll be the same thing there people that are there are going to say well we don't want no development so as far as devel Dayton goes in the long in the long term my opinion is it's we might be cre problems for people 30 years from now yeah yeah the idea is to give flexibility for potential development uh a lot of time this is going to be a brand new zoning District right A lot of times what's going to happen potentially is in 10 years the council at the time's going to say it's just does not fit our vision or we need to make an amendment to better reflect exactly what we want to see happen you're right you don't know until you know that something will or won't happen and if the council desire is to push something in a direction that would help spur development or whatever it is that they want to see they'll make the amendment to that zoning District to allow it for to happen so I think you're starting at a kind of broadly right now with this A3 district and in 30 years it might be tightened a lot more closely to what exactly the council wants to see at the time yeah and like there's feasibility concerns that I think that alleviate a lot of stuff in my brain in the sense that if you have 40 acres you're not going to have some big Meandering Road through the 40 acres to Sur four homes it's just not going to be feasible and so they're going to you're going to have to figure out how to make it work with your parel and there are ways oh for sure I guess you know like I say my biggest concern is what without any rules at first how it how that you know plays out when I say rules I mean certain ordinances that apply to A3 yeah it's a new and there are some it's the hard the one that wasn't defined is what to do about access and because it's each Road specific too on top of it right I didn't see any you know how was written at all if there is anything written yet or not there there's a draft but you know again it you know this is just what we have is a A3 district and and what you're talking about would be implemented more through the subdivision ordinance and every project is a little different time together yep so when we have Suburban development or Urban developments you know the the tendency is you you plan a road from one end of the property to another it's harder to do when you have 40 acres and you're just building four houses at the very Corner yeah okay thank you to put my two cents all right no problem is there anyone else that would like to come forward um it is 8:47 and I am going to close the public hearing um discussion I'll just say from my perspective we I feel like this is the the best version of what we've went through for the last three or four years that I've been on the Planning Commission and I'm not 100% certain we're not going to create problems but I think that uh that's where when we review these concept plans it'll be very important to and we've talked about so many things to be on the lookout for so I I feel good about it um and I think that the way that ordinance is drafted is I like it yeah I'd agree I think this is a great way to allow land owners to you know do some development now and not wait till 2050 for the pipe to come through and uh will preserve um the rural F that we've all want it right to allow for a small or large lot density of housing uh to get developed out in this area and once that happens you know half these Parcels do get developed this way and the pipe comes by it doesn't mean they're going to expand and add more houses right it's just you know so it's it's a great way to preserve some beautiful land out there and it still allows for some development and sell property and um so I like the direction yeah I agree I mean like I said before this isn't the end the be all of end all of the ordinance right so of the zoning District either and then on top of that as as John was referring to is that there's other land use approvals that potentially might need to happen with developments that come through so not only is do they have to meet the underlying zoning criteria but all the the subdivision requirements and so on and so forth so not to say that any of this land stays A3 forever either right it might be a different zoning classification in 30 years so I like the direction that it's going um obviously I haven't been here for three and a half four years which sounds like uh the previous planning commissions have have really put their heads together and obviously work with the council to get uh a proposal in front of the council for the next meeting that makes sense um maybe it's not 100% but you're pretty darn close so I I like the proposed ordinance yeah and I think uh this is a good one to commend staff for sticking with it because there was lots of different directions this was going at times um uh the only thing I'll add to before we entertain a motion is um I know there's been discussion about the one per 10 and potentially going lower um I think there's risk in it and that's why I think that if the council chooses that route my only advice is that the code that we've written is that I probably would me personally would suggest changes if we go below that I don't think it's wise to go below it from a standpoint I don't want the risk on the city from the back Council breathing down us but if you guys were to do that I think that the code probably needs some more tweaks and Darren you're speaking of if we had a density that was lower than one home per 10 10 acres on average so I know that higher than corre we had five you know one per five five right right and don't get me wrong I'd love to see I wouldn't be against it it's just I don't want to deal with the risk of the Met Council and and likewise that we probably would suggest some different changes to the code um if there's no more discussion I will entertain a motion well I'll make it I'll make the motion uh recommending approval of the cont comprehensive plan Amendment code city code Amendment um related to the A3 District which is item number 08c tonight's meeting I'll second all right um we'll do a roll call vote uh we'll start over here with Jeff yes uh yes for me yes and Nick yes uh motion carries 4 this will go to the council I believe you said on March 2 205th okay Perfect all right moving on to item number 8D the Shany parcel zoning map Amendment planed unit development and preliminary plat thank you Mr Vice chair so this is the first test of the A3 District so um this project uh came in as a concept plan and I'm going to say back in the summer um so it kind of precipitated the conversation with should we have an A3 District in which the commission and the council is were both for that um the concept plan I should back up so this is 107 Acres off of North Diamond L Lake Road uh Northwest of Laura lake so uh Brockton is just to the the West maybe an eighth of a mile or so outside the city limits um when the concept plan came in uh it was proposed for 14 Lots uh the plan has been revised to comply with the A3 District as much as possible um we're trying to run this project through concurrently with the A3 District of course that being that we don't have an adopted A3 District uh staff's recommendation is to table action on this preliminary plat and let the A3 District be adopted by the council and then come back for the preing plan in April um so again this project is 107 Acres 10 Lots it meets the density of one home per 10 acres uh the Min minimum lot size I believe is five acres in this case and goes up to 20 um I should add that within the comprehensive plan it has a land use category called a Greenway overlay District in which case uh the intention is that any land that touches the greenway overlay is required to be a conservation plane unit development um the overlay district and I don't have this on the map here but um it does include this Wetland complex as well as Laura lake so again the idea of conservation puds is that you you're exploring what is the ecological value of the property and what is worth preserving and then what is the mechanism to preserve that uh the most recent conservation PUD that we've had was a Parkway neighborhood as an example so uh Parkway was is a large project it did require an eaw which uh uh identified you know what are all the the features and the quality of those features and then it was up to the Commission in the council to decide what it is that wanted to be preserved this is a smaller project even though it's 107 Acres it does not require an EA it's just the the information to judge by is what we know um we do have uh the Minnesota land cover classification system or MLS mlc CS uh which covers all of henpen County and kind of grades the quality of natural um ecology from a I'll say high quality to you know poor quality and to quality of of non say Disturbed with non-native species there's a very long acronym for it uh areas on this property is identified as poor or altered with Native species so kind of the messaging is is there's something there that's worth preserving but it's not super high value um in Dayton most of the land that is of high value is within Elm Creek Park Reserve there is some other areas that it's on private property but that's not the case here um so again referring to the A3 District um the items that are highlighted in granted every case is every project is going to be different is you know number one is include the need to reserve land resources for efficient Urban Development as part of the ordinance purpose um staff's recommendation is to require a ghost plat that would show how could this project be further subdivided at Urban densities and where is the sewer going to go um in this case there there is a whole lot of topography and so where the swer line goes is fairly limited item two is to identify the land characteristics required to support future urbanization so again identifying what is the devel able area what is the area that that is high ground that is more practical to serve with sewer and water and I item three is to allow no more than 25% of developable land to be developed um in this case it's a little bit more difficult so you talk when we discuss clustering where you're putting all the homes in a small area and reserving 75% of the land for future development that's not the case here because um you just have a lot of large Lots it's there's not the homes are not clustered um so the question for the commission is what is the appropriate way to to preserve that and I don't know if there's a great answer it's it's going to be whatever answer you come up with and then four is to protect future urbanization urbanization Parcels with temporary development agreements easements or deed restrictions um we spoke about this a little bit with the A3 District um is uh you know sometimes when you make decisions today it may not be a great decision decision 30 years from now so um just to be mindful of of what uh I think Darren used the term of unintended consequences are so again with this project what what we're looking for is recommendations on you know how can this project continue as rural unsued uh one home per 10 acre density while still preserving the ability of having Urban services at some point in the future so any questions what's the smallest subdivided lot the smallest subdivided lot then uh five about five acres oh what else am I missing um so generally speaking the the general idea of this is to mirror Thicket Hill development that's to the north um you know so Thicket Hill or is 10 acre lots that was developed in the 1990s um so this street would enter in or connect with North Diamond Lake Road um the Count's requirement is that this is going to be treated as a temporary access we do have right away for zanthus which lines up would line up as a four-way intersection there's topographical challenges that would um be problematic to extend this road or Zan this to uh the development so the idea is this is a temporary access once uh whenever this property is developed in the future uh the permanent access would be tied into zanthus um so the staff's recommendation when is to require ghost plighting that would also demonstrate how Zanes can connect to this road before we have the applicant come up here John but do you have two or three ways of the preserving 25% how you could options for us to consider because I don't have a good way so you know different option yes so in discussing the A3 District so you have ghost plaing where you know and I'm just making up numbers so you have a lot that has five ghost Lots you build on one you reserve the other for um as non-buildable um that's going it may or may not work depending on the lot and depending on the property owner um there's possibility you could have deed restrictions or covenants that would that would require the house to be built in certain area and prohibited in other areas and there's still the question of how do you enforce that or who enforces that you know so again there there's not probably not one good single answer right and there's some topography on this one too and I look at these bigger lots too and when the applica comes up here this is one thing I'd be curious to hear about but accessory buildings yes um so one other caveat with this is this is within the Shoreland District of Laura lake so the Shoreland District extends out 1,00 ft from the lake um and has restrictions for lot side so uh for unsued it's 40,000 square ft or you know just roughly 2 Acres um no it's 880,000 F feet so 4 acres and if it's sewer then it's uh 40,000 sare ft we get 20,000 Square fet think um one of the road correct to preserve the 25% is go the Pud route yeah and understand what the public benefit is okay uh any more questions staff um I see the applicants here would you like to come forward please hello I'm uh Zack Brown 13311 Arwood Lane North Dayton Minnesota do you have anything specific you want to say to any of our comments or maybe how your ideas on preserving the 25% um yeah I mean I think this whole thing starts off with we're we're preserving more than anything else could be set forth if you wanted to sewer and water this lot or this this parcel of land you you would run into a few things one 70 plus foot deep manholes for sewer and water service mainly sewer uh three plus lift stations which runs over a million dollars and then the this has a Greenway overlay which is a correct me if I'm wrong John but this this requires a certain amount of preservation uh Case by case yeah you would not be able able to preserve a single thing out here the amount of topography and soil types you have would require this to be leveled out like a sod field and everything would have to go every single thing for a gravity fed sewer system to work out here uh your sewer Lots would your city Lots with sewer would end up north of $300,000 a piece just just to be frank um this is probably the best use for the land that I can come up with I'm a developer and I I like sewer and water Lots this site is not going to work for that uh for numerous reasons like I just explained but also um as far as what you can do with it and how it's laid out this is the best use I could come up with I've had my Engineers scratch their heads and redraw it five six seven times this is it I mean this is the best we can come up with uh I get calls every day about this site I've got people that want to be here Dayton's a gem people want to be in Dayton this is a highly desirable site um there's not really much more you can do the site I mean I've had soil experts out there they call it peanut butter it is terrible it is not conducive for sewer and water development this is the best use we can come up with it's going to preserve the natural habitats that are there the ecosystems everything that's out there and with the greenway overlay and not being able to clear cut and then also with Lake Laura being an environmental Lake you can't just cut trees down this is the best use that's going to preserve it this is the best use that's going to allow it to be something other than a bean field and right now with the 10 homes we've we had 13 drawn originally but the Met Council said that's not going to happen I mean from what I've Been Told meet the density it's not going to happen right right so I mean I don't see a whole lot of other ways this piece can ever be split up I know theoretically we're all trying to hope that sewer and water's there someday 2050 Beyond whatever even I mean I like sewer and water I'm a developer I did Pine View Meadows I've done plenty of other sewer and water lights or sewer and water sites this one just does not it's it's not conducive um it's not going to happen so I think this is the best use for the land I think we can move through it in a short period of time I think it'll be a gem for the city of Dayton I think this will be kind of a crown jewel that could maybe move the needle a little bit and get that higher price point into Dayton because that's it unevitable that's what it's going to have to be it's just going to have to be somewhat of a higher end neighborhood but I think I think that with the Daytona golf course and Lake Laura and and all the different features that's SC going for it I think it can work um and we're looking to do it we're we're looking to put a a very investment into the city of Dayton and try to help um move things along but um it it it it's a very unique project people want privacy people want to buy their little gem they want to buy their little piece of Oasis they want their privacy they want to you know the way Dayton used to be was acreage the way Dayton used to be I lived in Dayton my whole life my parents bought a back in 1997 they bought a couple acre lot and I grew up on it I loved it it was great um I think people in dayon want to get back to that and I think that we've kind of gotten away from it and that's something that people want and I based on the amount of calls I've gotten on this site I know that's what people want uh what do you anticipate the price point of the lots to be I mean obviously there's a range there's different Lots with different appeal but it's still up in the air there's a lot of loose ends we're working through the County right now about if they're going to require an expanded shoulder upon the entrance on North Diamond sounds like they will we're we're trying to fight it because we don't want to do it but it sounds like they're going to make us do it um and and then between that and some of the storm water engineering there's some overages coming so I I don't want to be pinh old into quoting a number um but they're they're not going to be typical City Lots I mean they're they're going to be spender but that's why people are paying for it they want to be in Dayton they want to be in this Rogers school district they want to be their little private Oasis away from everything else if they wanted to buy in a lar neighborhood or a DR Horton neighborhood and have a community pool they would have done it they don't want that and there's a high demand for people that don't want that and Dayton's filling out right now with Dr Horton lenar and PTY and there's so many people that are sick of it they don't want it they want Custom Homes they want to be able to pick their cabinets I mean you go to DR Horton right now and they say you want a b or c you want white gray or black and you don't get to pick what you have you get a b or c that's it um people want to build their own home they want to have their own walking trails they want to have you know some people you can bow hunt on this land there might be people that want to take their kid out and do target practice with their bow and arrow in their Woods let them do it I mean it's not Dayton used to be that way that's where I grew up in was Dayton with that was how it was and it's it's totally changed and I think there's people that just they just want to go back to I want My Little slice of privacy I don't have any questions I think the only question I would have is that if if this is the only option for this property splitting the land land up as it is and only building 10 homes on this land it's not an interm use anymore is it uh for the Met council's purposes we're calling it an interm use so the idea is still through ghost planting is we're demonstrating that it can be subdivided into the three units per acre but what what the developer is saying is that that's never going to happen in his opinion right so what he's saying is only going to be developed for 10 Parcels for the point of the argument though and for met Council it has to just be shown that it could be that there could be sewer even if the sewer is a feasible and even even when you think about the ghost plat on this I would prefer something realistic if it happens to be one unit per acre meaning that you could just subdivide future Lots along the road as sewer came in it's going to be expensive and probably not feasible but at least we know what we're dealing with what we're because we just saw a development that was 3.7 units per acre that we have DCM Farms something like that 3.09 was the overall density 3 3.74 in the Northeast area so it's already above three so we it's to me it's okay if we're less than we don't need to try to show something that's three I'd rather see a ghost plat that's realistic so we just know what we're dealing with right and maybe it could make sense to pull some culde sa in here or there if there was actually sewer I get it it's probably not happening but that's what I'd prefer to see on a ghost plat just so we're checking the boxes of making that Cil happy yeah the shoreline regulations are going to require that they be larger lot so even though we're saying three units of it's going to be right less than that ghost plot it with that main road as the the Crux of your whole ghost platting which is going to probably limit Lots coming off of it only maybe one or two culde sacks you could throw in there so so am I hearing that you just want to have a ghost pla that shows what could be done in the future yeah not necessarily what cuz cuz my only concern is if I if I show you a ghost plat I I just just want to be realistic that there's a chance that some homes may have to come out because the elevation change cuz when you when you look at this piece and the mass grading that would have to happen there is some I think your plat lines are already established so that's what I'm trying to say is be realistic if it happens to only be one lot per acre cuz a 400t lot gets turned into three lots only mhm that's it I'm okay with it I don't I just want something realistic so we know what we are giving up and it it is what it is it's this I I agree this is a good product I don't want a ghost plat that you know ignores the topography and makes it look like you know it's going to be years at DCM farm right yeah we don't need that un unfortunately it's a check box that has to be done to be Council right for clarification and Jason you'll after correct me so for sewer I think sewer it's really two different projects so on the east side SE is likely to come from the East and on the west side all come from the south the the southernly portion would come off in North Diamond Lake roow up zanis is is how the plan is laid out um portion of it maybe could be served with gravity but be difficult um the Northerly portion to be honest I don't know how you get it there maybe a pressure system or something creative to try to service the area but it's it's not going to be economical and so we're not I'm not asking you to redo your plat I mean when you when you ghost plat it start with your plat lines you already think are don't change them so you're adding more lines to show what you could do if sewer came through and that might include tearing down a house might be 30 years from now and maybe that's what happens anyway yeah I mean this is could be a super nice area right like people are going to hopefully build every house as a custom home different from the one next to it and these people are going to live here forever and no one's ever going to develop it right but it's a check box that the me Council needs to see and how could it be developed for sewer even though sewer will probably never go through the street otherwise this can't happen right so yeah I I don't think it's like you said Darren I I don't think you change the the lines that you have you just ghost plat what could happen to split it more and I guess part of the debate that we've had too is like do you then try to say you have to keep houses within certain plots in order to leave that open or you just let them go wherever they want and deal with it in the future which I would prefer Case by case and I I on this property I wouldn't be suggesting the only lot that maybe you'd give some thought and maybe the city would come in is the Far Eastern Big Lot only just because it's so big um like right now and I don't know how hard fast those septic systems are where they're put um but the septic just pushed all the way to the east where you know maybe if you could push it the other direction or north and maybe that's not even possible that'd be maybe easier to someday in corporate sewer development some's going to love that property what's that that's going to be a nice pre that's going to be a nice property so so uh I know the sewer the septics were put in place based on where we found suitable primary and secondary spots we did have a we had NY the a professional company out and they they identified the spots that are you know represented on the map um and and and it you know not to say it couldn't be something someday down the the road but I think we've all established that the northern half right John probably is Untouchable I'm happy to ghost plat the whole thing I don't know if it's worth ghost platting the northern half because we've all kind of agreed it's not really doable but um we we can ghost plat it we've already done that we've got the whole Southern half ghost platted I don't know if that'll help with the Met Council but the the these House locations and septic locations are are based on boring samples we've done scientific studies on site everything that's on there is checked out based on on-site data and there is there was my first my engineer's first reaction when we started this was there's no suitable septic locations so the first thing we did was call in a septic specialist to come out and find it and their first reaction was this soil is peanut butter and that's that's how this got to be where it is and how it's laid out okay um accessory buildings I'm assuming that there's probably going to be an HOA on here um that architectural but accessory buildings um I'm just looking at a couple of these Lots this is the way the septics are too making sure that you know people can still get them in and get access to them MH um cuz most accessory buildings on the I forget the distance but if the lot's not exona deep it has to be in the backyard yeah put 150 ft and some of these lots are long enough that you could put FR yard so so our intent and this maybe doesn't matter to the city but this is our in inent is that all out buildings would need to be behind the rear corner of the home that's built and it would have to be built with L Type finishes to the home so the the out buildings would have to match the house and it have to be pushed back far enough on the lot that it's behind the rear corner I'm not saying it has to be behind the house as far as left and right but as far as front and back it has to be at least that far back we're not allowing any front yard building no auxiliary buildings that are just put up with cheap tin or anything like that they have to be built with like type homes to the property that's what we are going to require um and then again behind the rear corner of the home as far as depth in the lot how are you requiring that are you going to have any CH we're going to have architectural guidelines and strict covenants okay yep Ju Just just to make sure someone doesn't put a you know a a bright pain chicken cou right in their front yard or something like that just just just simple stuff like that so you've tested out the properties and make sure that that works for each it works for septics and it works for building pads as far as out buildings that has not been tested and that's up to the individual far Northeast property just because of how it's all laid out and the driveway comes from the north down to the South like what is the front and what's the back and that's a weird one aird the the driveways are proposed a lot of trees and everything up there too though so if an out building was off the driveway before the house it's probably not a big deal mhm yeah I mean I think this is the kind of development we're looking for with A3 um any yeah I me I mean just to go back to you know for all intents and purposes this is going to probably be a permanent type of development right I we don't ever see more than T well probably we'll never see more than 10 homes or this be further subdivided so you know some of the considerations should be made for that um that Thicket Lane intersection to North Diamond Lake Road in in the staff report it says it's a temporary connection until um zanis Lane is is obtained I I don't ever see that not being a permanent type of entrance into this development so again the intention is once sewer is available you know and granted okay soil conditions May dictate otherwise once sewer is available it it's the idea that this could be subdivided again as as well as the neighboring properties here um if if that's practical or not is another thing can the county come in once the sewer comes down down Diamond Lake Road and say you have to close the current entry and you have to get use zanis and because you have to line up the intersection if they developed um you could cuz the idea here is uh there would be right away that would be shown you know I don't know exactly where but somewhere in this area and then when this is platted it would then connect to that Stu and then this would go away so it wouldn't have to go straight cuz looks like there's a RightWay that goes straight up right and it right and it would cut in right into that property right next to the house the middle property I don't understand I mean there's a huge hill oh yeah yeah I'm saying the feasibility of it is yeah well it's none but pulling a road that goes up I just want to make sure we're not 40 ft in a short distance could I comment on that quick please I'm just going to walk over there just we get quick comment yeah so the way it's currently looking is the the current zamp this lineup the issue with it is from from here to here we've got a 30 plus foot elevation and you just can't shove that through it doesn't work um so what we've looked at and with John and Zach over time is somewhere on this flag shaped lot right here granting right away so that when these two pieces go they can have their zanis lineup but it would you know assuming these two homes were to go someday it would come in and hook over and we would have this te in here and I that's up to you guys whether this entrance ever goes away or not but it would essentially be we just part of our final plat approval would be right away granted right about here so with the ghost flight they would also go say ghost how Road can would how would it would be feasible to to swing the road around hey you're putting a lot of pressure in that inside lot then to connect to that then right that takes away a lot of developable land get that road over there but I yes yeah yeah okay um one thing I'm looking at to this is just to understand what where we end up going with this PUD route um with the 25% but on the Lots in the northwest corner we have the big chunk of Upland extending to the West boundary um is there a possibility so when you come back here um because we're tbling this tonight cuz A3 um I guess I'd like you to consider is if we put that into a conservation easement it takes it out a dens requirement and it might help meet some PUD too I get it so the property owner would still have exclusive rights to be used in it they just can't can't build something there right so you don't you don't have to spawn right now but when you come back I think that that would be a question i' I'd probably ask yeah I guess I'm I guess I just want clarification as to what your question is are you are you saying you want me to take the wet lenss in the rear of those lots and put them into a the wetlands for sure even the Upland um so the the Upland Corner how it extends all the way to the western boundary mhm it's so you could follow like the green actually John has it if if the green is the conservation easement uh so this is somewhat of an arbitrary line that just follows one of the Contours but the general idea is to try to link the two Wetland complex complexes so the Upland in that green area is already in a proposed potentially conservation easement we might ask but they're obviously part of lots um you just wouldn't be able to build anything back there restricting building to that area wouldn't be an issue uh one comment I had in in a conversation with John a while back was was a different conversation so building back there is not is not a concern um but some of these people are going to want to carve in Trails or you know maybe they want to do bow hunting or they want to do Bow target practice with their kids or have walking trails for their dogs whatever it may be um conservation easement I guess is kind of a loaded question how restrictive is it yeah are we talking they can't cut in a a walking trail with a lawn mower or are we talking they can't build physical structures because there's there's no need for a physical structure in any of those green areas and I'm happy to say sure let's do that but if you're saying you know someone wants to have a a shooting Lane for a bow and arrow and target practice with their kid or whatever that's a that's a different story in my brain I was thinking structures not the other stuff but I how that works with the staff was think it's a fine line so you know you think of like Elm Creek Park Reserve and you know that's a natural area that allows snowmobile okay so is snowmobiling a conservation use well depends conserving the land from future development so snowm Trail would require a trail with cutting trees or plowing cutting grass or whatever uh and that and that's pretty normal but I don't think anyone's trying to build anything on a wetland I mean I don't think that's a problem it's just more so like hey can I go walk my dog and take my lawnmower and carve a trail I I don't think that that's something we want to restrict but uh as far as building stuff I mean I I don't see a problem with that that's totally fine um but telling people they can't walk back there and carve a trail with their lawnmower I that's you know so by comparison so we have on I'm on Hing a little bit so on Wetlands we have a 30 30 no 25 foot buffer and then 10 foot setback then that buffer it's intended to be just left as a natural area yeah and that's not mowing yeah that's correct and that's inclusive of the Wetland as well there are pretty strict guidelines to what is permitted activity within Wetlands um and trails are limited to public Trails uh within those areas and I believe that that's consistent with uh Wetland Conservation act as well so so even you know with with or without a conservation use it still has to meet um the Wetland restrictions that we have in the ordinance as it is you know with or without the A3 District so so as a developer you're not looking at me to say hey you can or can't do this we do that right but then you put up the sign that says you can't do it right do not cut your grass yes got it good um this is a public oh wait sorry do you have an ad add- on so no um in doing the review for this for parks and trails uh the park parks chapter in the comprehensive plan does identify a neighborhood park on the north side of Laura Lake um I try to find you know where did this come from um and it comes from the 1988 comprehensive plan so uh there's some history with it uh the 2040 comprehensive plan also identifies a trail Corridor along North Diamond Lake Road as well as a trail Corridor um that cuts through this property north north to south from North Diamond Lake Road to Dayton River Road um when the concept plan was discussed at Planning Commission and Council um there was not support for neighborhood park here I believe there was support for trail quarter along North Diamond Lake Road uh when this was reviewed by the park commission the commission recommended that there would be a park on Laura Lake um as well as a trail Corridor on North Diamond Lake Road but not an internal Trail Corridor uh the parks commission's kind of recommendation was that it this would be a nice passive lake or passive park with a shelter not a playground nothing that's going to be very active and the term was is to demonstrate how Dayton used to be um in staff's kind of conversing about this of if the intention is to have a park on Lura Lake um is the north side the best location for that um it would be difficult to access as it is it might be more practical if it were along North Diamond Lake Road and along the uh Trail Corridor I would support a trail one or time in Lake Road I mean you know especially with being such a busy road like to be able to I mean that's a longterm thing but to start to identify easements for that and then yeah having since Laurel Lake comes so close to the road I mean that's where you want to put a little park with a shelter right off the bike path I don't think I invite people through the neighborhood to try to create something off the be trial I would concur more of a public amenity can I speak on that quick I'm just going to go over to the monitor quick so uh we've got private land owners on both sides of our access diamond and so right now we would have a dead end Trail that's about I don't know few hundred ft long and it would just dead end um there's a wetland right here and a wetland right here so it's not continuable on either end so even if this piece develops or this piece develops that's it that's all you're going to get it's not going to go anywhere it's not going to connect to anything and it's going to be an undue burden on this development for 10 lots to have to pay for if this gets redeveloped in the 220 Lots someday like it unlikely but might happen I think that developer at that point would be more eligible to take it on it's a pretty big burden for 10 homes for a short stretch that just dead ends here and dead ends here and private owner private owner Wetland Wetland and then it just goes nowhere so it would be an easement not construction of a trail right and an easement is great I'm happy to sorry I'll get back to the microphone I'm happy to do the easement for it that's totally good the construction of it's just it it just doesn't make sense well probably would't happen unless North I Lake was completely reconstructed right I mean can put a path through without that happening so I mean you're way down the road but yep um I would get the east yeah you have to we have to think ahead put the desire for it y easement and just one thing to consider is when we're considering landscaping and entrance monuments and the county is making us do an expanded shoulder coming in right there which is about a 6ot section by 10 and some foot long um that that is coming from eastbound going west that's going to be they are requiring us to do that um so I mean that might impact the trail a little bit but as far as just setting aside ement for it that's not an issue the fact of putting it in right now just it doesn't go anywhere it doesn't yeah it's a 400t stretch of blacktop that just dead ends on each end against Wetlands um I I would also add you know North Diamond l Road is the main Corridor we do require a 35 ft landscape buffer that that you know within that 35 ft you have uh storm water ponding that's way in excess of that MH um so I guess my recommendation will will be when this comes back of pushing that 35 ft Landscaping on the north side of the storm water Pond and there's I'm sure that there's creative ways that your engineer can look at it and try to figure out how to make sense yep happy to set aside easement I I just don't think the trail right now would make you know like I said a 400 stretch of dead end on each end no it wouldn't make any sense to building now but just planning for the future and it could be that the trailer wants to be on the other side you know who knows but yeah so the compant shows a trail on both sides sure yeah on a busy road like that makes sense y okay all right I am ready to open the public hearing Zach we might have a couple more questions for you if you have any more comments so you can come up after the public hearing but it is 9:30 and I am going to open the public hearing thank you thank you uh if anyone's in the audience that would like to speak on this application uh please come forward Hayden do we have anyone online we got a couple still online if you'd like to speak during this public hearing just use the raise your hand function on Zoom all right it doesn't appear anyone's in the audience and anyone's online so it is 9:31 I am going to close the public hearing um staff is recommending we table this but before we do that is there any discussion any wants to provide any further discussion I I just want to say that I like the development I think it's going to it's it is I think uh along the lines of what Mr Brown was saying something that uh Dayton wants and that you know people are want this in Dayton uh my only concern is how it's going to fit into the new A3 district and the requirements of of met Council so um 100% I want to see this go through I think it's going to be a great development for Dayton we just have to make sure how it actually fits in with our soon Tobe rules and regulations of the district yeah um if there's no more discussion do we need to formal motion yes I'll make a motion to table this item uh pending City council's approval of the A3 District I'll second all right we have a um we're going to do a roll call vote we'll start down here with Nick I call I I I motion carries for zero table it uh we will see this again probably next month probably in April yep all right moving on to item number 8 e city code Amendment related to public hearing notification requirements all right I will be brief after the Planning Commission and city council has dis discussed this a couple times about uh expanding the uh um notification requirements for public hearings um ordinance was drafted by staff to uh increase the required buffer from 500 ft to 1320 ft which is a quarter mile um happy to answer any questions this is a public hearing um so thank you uh any questions to staff um it is 9:33 and I'm going to open the public hearing on this matter the public is sing is anyone want to stick around and comment on this topic or is there anyone online come on Keith um it is still 9:33 and I'm going to close the public hearing um I'll just start out with this discussion like I think it's a no-brainer um it's about time we do it uh just more people that are noticed the better yeah I agree yeah it's good for transparency right try to try to get as much public comment as we can make sure we're not leaving somebody out that might want to comment on it have a stake in it you know a good good example is on the picture here these lots are big uh with with this you know 500t um notification radius previously you're only capturing a couple of properties so now now we can kind of get all the stakeholders and not to say they wouldn't be here anyways but now we can ensure that they've been notified is there impact on um cost yeah huge and staff effort right um so the the postage for DCM Farms was $500 for the or enlarged enlarged uh for the people that spoke yeah how do you send it uh just posted 61 cents I think it's 70 no long it's been since I bought stamps so is there a way of working in that anticipated fee into the um application the cost of the application to apply for these land use requests there is so by in our feed ordinance uh the the the applicant pays for mailing now in reality we're not charging for mailing we are charging for the public hearing notice that goes to the newspaper you know just by cost so um it's a little more challenging so you know for example we have I don't know 520 28 addresses a lot of them are duplicates you know so we can say okay you're paying for 528 stamps we may only send out 450 but or we just send them out anyways and we do not mail duplicates just to we it's you know it is the year 2025 and maybe we got to wait till the year 2035 but I can imagine that this is going to become email notifications that the city can figure out how to collect emails by homes if we can require people to have that uh well change State Statute level yeah so this goes to the property owner not the resent this the Drone that flies around right yeah so the property owner might be California uh correct we've had property owners in Egypt and they come email comes back again right you know does does staff do like a um do you guys collect like an escro for these land use so there there is a potential ability to say hey look we have an overrun or or you know we only had to mail out 50 instead of 250 so there is a potential of of charging that back to the the applicant or the owner whoever might be through that process as well so um I'm not as concerned with I think upping it to the quarter mile especially in Dayton you're going to have the larger the larger Lots is absolutely the right thing to do 500 feet works well in first string suburbs doesn't work well in Dayton so I I think uh the cost is something that we have to work out if we think it's it's too overbear charge that think now would we have to mail so the statute says 350 ft correct we probably have to mail to 350 ft outside of that the city could probably in the future make a decision that people outside of the certain boundary get identified a different way well just for clarification on that uh with the language in the current ordinance and it still applies here with this ordinance Amendment um for the 500t requirement if there are less than 25 addresses or properties within that 500t buffer it there has to be um an increase in size to meet at least 25 surrounding Property Owners um that that's per ordinance so um not necessarily statute but again another uh instance where um Dayton had previously been above and beyond what state statute requires so to all of them so yeah say in the future sure one thing that might help is as we have a better website that has development updates on it I think there's going to be less public outcry in general because that's one of the issues today is you know there's just a Planning Commission packet there's no easy place to go find stuff yeah the only other area for development applications is the public notice page and it is essentially the exact same thing that they receive in the mail yeah so the website would go a long way to alleviate some concern that people have as long as people part of the website but so the neighborhood just to their North here that's got the large Lots if somebody wants to put a non-conforming you know secondary building on their property and it's a variance and that needs public notice Are We Now sending that out to 1,300 ft as opposed to 500 ft yeah so and every application every application is there a way to distinguish that kind of thing no no okay we've got to be consistent yeah um the idea of P you know the cost through a pass and it makes sense when you're developer not necessarily when you're asking for a variance for a shed or something yeah um I can't remember if it was last year or the year before we had a variance to have four ducks instead of three Ducks you know so the idea of that was a long conversation yes you know of of okay you're going to pay I don't remember what fees $800 in your fee in 3,000 escrow and then we're going to charge you $500 in postage um sounds a little unfair well that's a thing it seems to me that they should be asking for a zoning Amendment not a variance right but it would still be $500 in postage well yeah like you're saying you know for me one of those darn P home people you know that has you know a lot more uh density if I wanted a variance on my property I'm paying a lot more cuz the 1,50 is going to hit hundreds of properties not thing not just 25 single single property or something is there a way to distinguish between a single and and multiple home I don't know I don't what it does like it but just yeah what landed at 1250 what was the r out there 13 so it's an arbitrary number that sounded good quter M sounds good quter M sounds good I mean you went from 350 to 500 feet and then almost you know almost tripling it so I mean I think most of our applications come in will benefit greatly from this there's still going to be a handful a number that come in where it's like oh my gosh that's a lot of mailings for a shed that's 10t bigger than it's supposed to be yes yep but if there's not a way to distinguish it I think this is still a better conditionally use permits and variances cover a lot of different topics um so it's it's really difficult to decipher it's only 940 Paul you better have a better computer cuz you know I know this is actually surprising use a better um battery any more discussion I'm I'm glad you brought that up because there was an unintended consequence there that I didn't realize and I'm glad you pointed that out so we stay in tune to this because it might it might be something that backfires too that we have to revisit but I do think it's overdue the primary thing that we're doing right now is growing and developments right and so it's going to benefit that process greatly by having a larger notification boundary and and there there will be um some unintended consequences on some of those smaller asks but I think if you're exchanging that for being more transparent more open with your notifications on these really hot topic items I think it's worth it yeah well the public hearings that we had tonight we used the 1320 and the room was full we didn't have a whole lot of speakers tonight um but it did trct people here participation I still do think the website's going to help a lot because so many people that complain it's because their neighbor or someone that they know has the packet because it got mailed to them and they don't and then once they realize they don't have it they can go to the website and easily see what's going on that's going to help because now you it's even challenge to go find stuff unless you're used to it and that was another consideration that John and I thought about when we put this together was that you set a number there's still going to be people left out my neighbor got one how come I didn't 1351 I assume the need approval from us to go to council recomendation so can I uh recommend approval you can you just did I did not good all those in favor we're going to start down here with j i i i i uh motion carries 4 Z this will go to the Council on March 25th um all right item 18 new business none is that correct that is correct uh notices and announcements uh so preview the next slide uh preview for April so we'll have the preliminary plat for Shany parcel as well as for Parkway neighborhood second edition Parkway neighborhood so Parkway neighborhood so this is Southwest Dayton so the west side of 94 yeah so they're coming in for their preliminary plant uh for the second edition yes the Tome development yes uh so this one to go to where's the first south of territorial Street south of Territorial Road north of 81 no this is south of I94 big apartment building across Dayton Parkway okay down that corner are they are they going to start construction this spring is this the new phase one lot of questions um there's not a clear answer to that so planning wise you know phase one is the 180 unit apartment building uh phase two I can't remember how many I can't remember 400 some town home units and I'm calling them town home they look like Town Homes they're going to act as an apartment yeah bral yeah okay um shorter than this than tonight's meeting so I thought we did that's L feel like we're a little better Peter's not here you guys want to blame Peter that's okay but he's back the chair next week or next month um I can't so we've had a discussion or Darren and I had a discussion recently and it wasn't the first with with other commissioners of when it slows down not to say that April is of having a larger conversation of um what is the commission's expectations for what information we give to you you know in our how we write it or what's included in the staff report how do we present it um how can we be more efficient with our meetings um so going through a long meeting is a good good example of okay how can we get better at things yeah and I think a good thing that to talk about is on bigger plats like DCM Farms what do we really want to see to make sure that you get from the applicant like an example in this one is I would love to see a phasing plan okay um it just helps the public it helps everyone put things in perspective instead of us having to ask questions and guess on it there could be a lot of other things too but that's what we should you know we can talk about especially the name we're getting more participation from the community on these things just what I was going to say they'll see that we are in the process of having requirements established for applicants when they submit so they can like a go through a plat checklist to document all the items that they are submitting so we can better understand when we have complete applications to present to you guys yeah um easy question do you want a full plan set or do you want us to pick and choose what sheets you get and lean toward more towards the engineers because I I think they bias I don't think I don't think a full plan set's necessary right we need to see details and and whatnot but there are most of that plan sets pretty important right existing conditions are important um grading plan's important landscap plan's important to some extent you know if the are still important but there's probably some pages that aren't needed and that'll certainly cut down on the size of that package which is makes it hard to navigate Nick just said all the pages that I would used to see in as an appraise or two that I would like to see yeah but not everything right so I think of like a sewer sewer and water plan you'd have like the you know the full page not every detail so like DCM yeah you'd have the you site plan and then it gets cut up in six pages you're not going to get the Swip in a no in a Planning Commission packet so that gets a that's a little technical I think for a Planning Commission when you have you know find Folks at stantech that know what they're doing and can give us the information that we're looking for if we have questions about it right so I think if it's pertinent to a discussion if there's a question that the staff has regarding a certain issue on the plat or the site plan or landscape plan or a lighting plan or whatever it is certainly include that those those items in the in the packet regardless of the size of the packet it doesn't it doesn't mean that our meetings are going to be shorter right so we still have to go through the normal discussions that we normally would we just don't have to sift through all the all the other stuff that we don't need to or don't want to see um so whatever is easiest I think but just the pertinent information I think would be most beneficial for us I know the packets get really big like megabytes wise but the grading plans like I'm fine with just one grading plan even on DCM Farms as long as I can zoom in but I get it that can be more difficult to get to us hey don't need overall plan not the area plans right for a lot of it yeah I I just struggle with that maybe just a little bit for when we think of the way we use it what about the public too you always have to think about the public you know if if you're one of the residents that is immediately adjacent to the development and you just have the ability to print on 82 by 11 or 11 by 17 or something and you're like I have no idea what's going on next to my house like for us I just want to keep that in mind too the other concern is if it's not they could come get a copy of it if it's not in the packet right it's not part of the official record that we've looked at and made a determination on and it happens to then get on a plan that the developer is always going to do you know use the whole time along but we never it was never on any plans that we saw or Tak into consideration and now the public comes in and says what what about this thing I never saw this anywhere and any of the information that was given to the to the to the city tradeoff so I better just provide it all in the end I mean I think that's where you land but I mean the public record is a public record right so um even application forms when they apply for you know actually doing all the construction permits and all that stuff too that's going to be part of that public record as well so but It ultimately does get approved by the city council so yeah and all that you know there are subtle changes that happen so you know the opin for example they came in with a site plan eventually they'll come in with a they came in with the concept plan eventually they'll come in with a site plan um there might be a different shade of brown or different or whatever it is so I mean that's more staff is going to have some discretion of what is a minor change that doesn't need to be reviewed publicly or versus a a major change that would have to come back to the commission and Council if the Planning Commission wants to make a recommendation to go in front of council what's the process of doing that um do we vote on it do we and I guess where I'm going with is you said opin but we need to get that plan to the east of there figured out we can't just oh just give direction yeah so we need to have because we have to go through the whole public notice all that kind of stuff so yeah so the in that case I mean this is a bigger project so I mean it we would probably hire that out for consultant so I mean there's a little bit of cost associated with that but really it's giving direction so you if you're giving us Direction you know one project every you know in this case it's like I don't know how often this would occur that's simple if it's happening every month yeah um you know that blows our budget yeah so okay yeah um I I think what we would do is probably you know the Planning Commission would give us Direction we'd take it to the council see if the council agrees with it can we give you Direction yeah well my direction is to have we need to figure out how to get that guided appropriately that land e of there so yeah I would I'm going to land use and access um expand it a little bit so south of 117th yeah once we solve the land use it'll be easier to solve what we need to what how we care about access true I'd concur okay yeah I think I think having a consensus on the Planning Commission for that is probably beneficial so um so we're not just cherry picking what everybody wants to see happen so I do agree uh that that should happen or that we could propose that to the council to take a look at okay um all we we've had a couple of ordinance or proposal ordance amendments that um didn't go anywhere and took a lot of time to prepare so I would just uh caution like when you give us Direction um you know is it are we exploring different options or are we I I guess kind of where I want to go is we're if we're putting a lot of work towards something I wanted to end up with some kind of good out of it yeah and so as an individual Planning Commission member I would suggest if you have an idea you do your best to document it and present it to John who shows it up to us and then that now the council even knows you know it's not just us talking there's something more substitutive to it why you think it's it's just easier well I'll write up a well if directed by the majority of the commission everyone's Notting their head I'll write something out for propos it to the council um you know this is a bigger project it'll take some time to to go through so we'll probably talk more about it in April since there's only two items how would that time out with the current op mean I don't I'm not a fan of uh tabling properties but when they ultimately come in here if we don't have it figured out this is an example of why something might go up to the last day to make a decision because we want to make sure we're making the right decision and that's why I want to get ahead of this I keep saying you're concerned that they may move that commercial side my well my concern if they did that plan was the commercials I mean it's an afterthought in everyone's brain that I don't know what that's going to become and if it needs access but somehow we got to figure out if we're just going to cut off all access to it it's well we could we could do a moratorium in the area after this gets through well you could do that now too I mean this is at a concept plan stage it is kind of hate to do that yeah somebody but I think a good starting point is getting council's feedback on what they if you know if this is a priority for the majority to consult to well the properties to the East are residential still right so they're not even guided towards an industrial or commercial use they're guided towards commercial okay and light the corner though right on 117 and even the stuff so the stuff even to the South there's talk people are talking about development applications I'll just say that in that area it seems like industrial be still good use to push towards ice french the three Parcels directly to the east I thought I looked there was all the same property on yep yeah so there's a good chance that would all develop together and yeah and uh and I don't know is that if that's recent if if they purchased Properties or okay um but one of the adj makes it easier though right one of the Adent ones is already owned by oh yeah a developer or developer son yep um and so I don't it's the one on the corner isn't but it's the other three below it and the one on the corners and you keep going further south so the yellow Parcels too are kind of part of it I don't know what they should be but that's what we need to figure out so we need to know if we need to how we need to connect them or not we do the existing residential there and then we're gonna have residential on the right on the east side of French Lake right so and it's a big different if it if it becomes medium density residential then that plan presented is is not a concern to me you know they can get their access off East French FL Road you want to talk more about this now or do you want to wait till April I'm good it's 5 10 no you I'm fine you know I care about it hours for the night let's let's go um I'm just I'm trying I'm looking at Jason if what aren't we thinking of for getting direction or um well I mean it it's kind of a a this could be anything and so what is the highest and best use is it industrial is it residential what type of residential is it commercial it really could be anything I think it's industrial i''d be curious to see what other people think I just don't know how far south to go with it that's the Dilemma yeah what I'm thinking of if connecting to 113 maybe yes if we came up with say you know three or four different concept plants of you know here's industrial here's um you know single family versus multi or town homes or there's a lot of options I kind of think apartments are out I think it's medium density like if it's not industrial I think we stick with the low density transitioning to medium densi the corner um that's what I think yeah I kind of feel like 113th up to 117th could be industrial my industrial yeah 113 to 117th industrial and how you go south of there that's where you could keep pushing industrial salt if people wanted um obviously you got to be conscious of buffering the uh where Jeff lives mhm that's your neighborhood yeah my NE y um let's get into the cubes right there and so you know and the stencil Parcels is down there too I mean I know that I don't want to say that that been a challenge I think it's just a tough site um I don't know you put a different land use on it it really change it it's a tough site on that one that's still the idea is still to run a utility I know Road he's been straight up right yeah good the property now and you didn't get scared off um they were no we okay but they weren't excited because both of them had ideas for that land but they also didn't seem that opposed to a those two Parcels you know some people get concerned about different land uses how it might impact their value but the reality is in areas like Dayton the price per acre doesn't change that much based upon the land use unless you're getting a ton of density and then you have feasibility issues no different than salta 94 it's it's a challenge to build an apartment building right now marker so I think industrial would be good um I'll say this that I'm not against bigger industrial buildings but it's not three times more expensive to build a smaller industrial building but it's it's when you get too many big industrial buildings it creates a different burden too that and this is a funky area with the Angles and the wet land that I'm not I'm not I'm fine fine with smaller indust it's more exterior wall right that's where the cost comes yeah but same amount of roof and yeah all that yeah same amount of slot there's a spec there's two spec buildings well there's four five or six spec buildings on shock they got a million square feet and we're fortunate we absorbed ours because there's been sitting on theirs for two years now and their buildings are 200,000 and 100,000 and they're both saying that they're going to divide them into two or three tenants each building but they have no tents yet so maybe it ends up being one yeah so why do we keep hearing that it's that it's hot and yet they can't fill them what's it's Market sector by market sector I mean so Dayton feels hot because we just absorbed a million square feet about with the the half of cubes and uh inlands property next door Opus to the south I mean we just absorbed a lot Capital Partners building um so I don't want to call it hot it's just it's a good thing I mean there's still a lot of vacant Industrial in Maple Grove where they built all that stuff but they also have rents 30% higher good stuff in broken park off 169 getting filled it's getting filled is a lot going up there yep there's it's getting filled that they probably have two more years left and it's done unless something changes in the market no more a Falls festival feeling good yep make a motion to Jour second uh all in favor all I like you have one more thing e for