24.5. Um, call for order. Uh, first item agenda is approval of the agenda. >> Uh, well, we got to put the agenda today. >> The agenda. November 24th. >> Second that >> system. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> So that's approved. Um second item is approve the minutes October 27th here. So it's like a motion to >> I approve the minutes from October 27th. Second that. All in favor. >> That's approved. Um first item public hearing looks like it's property. Uh can you tell us a little bit about that? >> Yes. Uh thank you chair, members of the commission. Um the first uh public hearing we have this evening is for a front yard setback variance um at 5995 Luring Drive. Um the applicants are working on a remodel project and part of the project includes um looking for a covered front entry. Um however, given the proximity of the existing house to the roadway, it's already within the front setback. So um in order to uh build the the front porch as they would like, it's within the setback. We don't give an exception to covered front porches only if they're uncovered. Um so thusly we needed the variance here. Um, in your packet, um, as I always do, I outline the standard, uh, criteria for you to consider the variances. I'm certainly feel this project, um, is consistent with those criteria and meets all of them. So, um, I won't go into great detail unless there's questions about that. Um, we did send out our public notice. Um, and we did not get any written comments or, um, oral comments regarding the, um, request. Um, so with that being said, um, planning commission should hold the required hearing. um give anyone the opportunity here to speak um and then close that hearing and then discuss amongst yourself before making a recommendation to the city council. In this case, staff would recommend um the planning commission consider recommendation of approval um based on the findings in your uh staff report and subject to the conditions um I think one through four. >> Yep. Nine and 10. Yep. Okay. Um, let's open volunteer. Anybody here speak of that property? It's not for volunteering. Raise their hands. Um, I'd like to hear from the property owners if they have any property. Um, see questions. Um the name and address please. >> Anna Wilkerson 5995 Lauren Drive. We have a remodel which includes u an addition that is going through the processor that's been to the city for most of it is within the setbacks but um the porch is not >> right. >> Our current home it has it had an addition done in 1990 long before we had it. And that part of the house is already on top of this. So the porch that we are asking for is behind that. So excess plan did show that kind of the red portion as >> terms of the >> There it is. >> There it is. Yep. >> So the existing home shows what it is. You can see that that front post portion is already on top of the setback or whoever but the red portion is what the covered porch is and that is the part that would be fine. So please anything else would you like to ask questions? >> I saw the property it makes sense. Are there any other >> there's no threat to anybody neighbor that I can see. >> Do you think there's any other reason you would need a variance or any other part of the model to explain this? >> No. >> Okay, perfect. >> Awesome. Well, >> I don't think we have any questions. Appreciate your time. >> Thank you. Um we'll discuss uh if anybody have any objections. >> No pretty straightforward. >> Yeah. >> Would anybody like to make a recommendation? >> Oh my gosh. All right. I move that we approve the variance of 5995 in Minnesota. And um what do you say those numbers? Um >> just with the conditions that we've outlined >> effective uh with the conditions one through four >> with conditions one through four. >> Okay. >> Uh so we have a motion recommended city council approval of 5995 long drive uh to reduce the sack from 35 to 28 uh 9. Correct. Excuse me. Um we have a second. always. >> So 28.9 that is very exact. If it's 28, let's say it's 29. If something varies to that degree, is that a problem? >> Well, 29 would be better. So you'd be fine. >> If it's 28.6 >> even we're aiming for the we're aiming for this is the best. >> And that's >> right. I mean it's based on the information submitted. So I mean >> do we want to I mean >> the tolerance of plus or minus what >> I mean we don't I mean unless you like to require an asbuilt I mean they show proposed compliance it would be approved. >> Yeah they for good question. >> Um so do we have a second >> second? All in favor I >> I pass this. >> So that's a recommendation. It'll be forward to the city council on December 8th for final action. So it'll be on probably on the consent. You probably don't have to plan to attend. So >> and you're free to leave if you'd like. >> Yep. >> Tell us about >> Sure. Let me pull it up here. >> So the second public hearing tonight is a uh setback variance um Lakeshore and Sideyard um at 5415 Cedar Point Road. Um another situation here where applicants are remodeling their uh property and the current structure is non-compliant with regards to the setbacks. Um the the need for variance here is to correct um the existing roof pitch um and have a more aesthetic um and functional appeal from both the lake and from other adjacent properties. Um again outlined in your staff report is the uh standard variance criteria which we do feel this request complies with. Um seems pretty straightforward. Um we did send out our notices and we did hear um verbally um from one resident in support of the applicant's request. Um so with that being said again hold the required hearing um and then um close said hearing and discuss amongst yourself. Um if there's any questions um feel free to ask. Otherwise um the um findings of fact for a recommendation of approval are outlined in your staff report as well are um the recommended conditions added to said approval. So >> um >> let's open the public anyone other than property owner here to speak um >> um properties building of course there um issues And and this has really come about just because that they're the edge of the house is within 50 ft of the water. Yeah. >> They're not really doing anything to go closer to the water. >> No, it's just it's basically >> memorializing existing conditions because of the change in the elevation. It's ever so slight change. If you look at the um elevation drawings, there's really minimal increase in the building height, but because there is technically an increase, um we have to go through this process. >> Probably the only concern I had was just to ask or at least ask the property if they were if they were making sure that the contractor was doing um mitigation to make sure that they didn't have. I mean, they're complying with all the the hard cover and such. So, um, >> you think like a silk fence or something? >> Um, just just to make sure that, you know, construction degree or anything. >> I could speak. They're very neat neighbors. >> Yeah, >> I can testify. >> Any any mess, that's for sure. >> Any other concerns? >> All right. Um, would anybody like to make a motion? >> I'd make a motion that we approve the variance request for 5415 Cedar Point Road and we'll recommend we have >> and and the U guidelines one through four on the motion. >> Is it? >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> All in favor? I >> same situation. Uh this is a recommendation. It'll go uh on December 8th before the city council for final action. I would also say you don't have to plan on attending. It'll probably be on consent agenda. So, all right. Thank you. >> Yep. You're very welcome. Have a good evening. >> All right. One more. One more. We're on the rules. >> Correct. >> Yes. Be 7:30. So, good. Yes. Uh thank you, chair, members of the commission. Um the last item, public hearing on your agenda is for a conditional use permit um to allow for a guest home over 1,000 square feet at 7655 um County Road 15. Um when guest homes exceed either 30% of the primary dwelling or 1,000 square feet, a conditional use permit is required. Um so we are going through those motions. Um in your staff report um we have outlined the um standard criteria for which to consider a v um a conditional use permit. Um and when looking at these factors um if there's anything of concern that's where you would add then a condition to the approval to mitigate those concerns in any manner. Um however with this guest house and the large lot um it seems relatively pretty straightforward um from a guest home standpoint. So certainly think that um you know all the criteria for a guest home have been satisfied. It's been carefully designed uh to match the primary uh structure on the property. Um there are conditions attached to the approval relative to those uh standards pretty straightforward um from a guest home uh cup. Nothing abundantly um out of the ordinary. Uh the only thing would be um it did look like there was a deck shown on the guest house. Um, and depending on the height of the deck, that would need to meet the required building setback. Um, but if it's less than 30 inches, we typically treat that more like a patio, just with the the low elevation. Um, so that'd be something they need to consider uh when looking at the project. But other than that, seems pretty straightforward. Um we sent out our required notices and have not heard from any neighbors um regarding this request and like I said certainly feel it satisfies the guest home um standards and intent of the um city ordinance. So with that said um the recommendation would be for approval subject to the conditions um 1 through 10 um with there. So yeah, hold the hearing as required um and look for a motion. that they did confront with their decision. >> Right. >> Right. Yep. And also that's a condition of the approval as well. >> And does that mean that they in it future? >> I mean unless city ordinance changes um which in which case it would probably be some form of a subdivision um would be what probably would prompt them to be able to convey it separately. Um, so then we'd have to review that. It would come through your um you guys as a commission and through the city council. >> This is if they sold the house >> in the future if they were to pursue some sort of subdivision that city ordinance wouldn't permit. Um otherwise they can't convey it separately. There's no way to do so. >> You can't separate, >> right? >> Right. >> Right. Um I just have a question just from um learning this year and past um examples where there's different requirements around um you know how we call it like the actual kitchen if you were doing that things like that. Is there anything when it's a standalone versus above an existing structure like a garage which is like limiting how you can build out the um >> No, I mean >> so you could do a full >> and that's the reason for the guest home is when you have the full everything that becomes a dwelling unit for the city ordinance and that's why we're going >> on top. >> No, it's it's depends on the amenities you provide. So, if you're not providing a full kitchen, full bathroom, full everything, then it's technically not considered a dwelling unit. So, like the one on hard scrabble is what I think you're referring to. That didn't have the full amenities to be considered a dwelling unit. >> They're on septic >> here. They're on septic. Yes. And they're allowed to have a separate septic system. So, >> they they're allowed to consult with them. >> They certainly do. That's and that's part of the approval is the you know um obtaining all necessary permits and approvals is number seven. So, um, Henipin County would have to approve all that. And we wouldn't issue a permit without proof of at least a septic review from Henipin County. >> Usually a separate booking that >> Yeah. I mean, I guess they would have to cons That's private utility. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Awesome. All right. Well, um questions open up for public hearing. Okay. You >> have any other questions? >> No. >> Anyone here speak other than the property owners? Obviously not. Um >> we don't let the property owner speak. >> Do you want to? >> I'm just trying. It looks like a great place to live. >> Um, >> can I be irrelevant? >> Very reasonable. It's a big property. I think it's very generous and love to support the public, especially for why you're using it. >> So, I mean, everything seems pretty straightforward. All sets apply. Um straight forward. Uh you guys have any questions? I'll go through super. >> Yeah. Let's make um make a motion, please. >> I'll make a motion to approve. Um the request for commissioner use permit for the guest home uh at 7655 County Road 15 uh to be guided by the conditions one through is it 10 >> 10. Yep. >> 1 through 10. All >> favor. >> All right. Same thing. December 8th city council. Um again probably don't plan on need to plan on attending. So, >> thank you very muchelcome. >> All right. Number three on the agenda is staff reports. >> Yeah. Um I don't have a whole lot for you guys. Um one thing I did want to bring up is um as we're looking at the calendar for 2026 um I know city council's moved their start time up to 6:30. Um, and wanted to bring that up if that's something the planning commission would be okay with just for consistency purposes. I know sometimes people come here at 7 and then they end up being a little bit later to the council because they assume everything starts at 7. Is there any issues with um if we do go down that route of a 6:30 start time? >> Uh, no. The only question that I had is when we have the backtoback with parks. Well, the parks would I was just going to follow up with that would probably start at 5:30 would probably be the >> Has it ever gone more than 15 minutes? >> Well, I mean, we could keep it that way. Um, I just would maybe like to give us at least a little bit of time in case >> No, they usually don't take very long, but I have had them at times take closer to an hour. So, um, is there any issues with with that? >> Well, 55 is a little bit better. just trying to at least probably are in the same boat of juggling family. >> Okay. Well, it's something we're considering. I just wanted to run it by you guys to see if there was any immediate issues with any of that. Um, >> so that's good information. Thank you. Um, the only other thing I have is obviously we don't have a meeting in December. Um, so enjoy the holidays the rest of the year. Um, we will have a meeting uh fourth Monday in January. So that'll be our next one, first one of the year. Um, I don't think anyone here's term is up, >> Trisha and Sarah. So, we'll get working on them to see if their intent on coming back. Um, and then I guess the only other thing, um, Peter might touch on it is the tree lighting is the December 4th, right? Thursday, >> on the holiday tree lighting. Um, so feel free to attend if you can. Um, but yeah, that's all I have. Oh, you're up. It's all I got. Pass the torch. >> Well, yeah. The uh tree lighting is Has anybody been to it before? >> Yeah, it's a lot of fun. Uh they have all sorts of public works vehicles there and the kids have a great time and they also have wine and beer. Parents have a great time. Uh, and there'll be fireworks and then >> amazing fire truck. >> Oh, that's good. Never seen a fire tree. >> Got to see it. Uh, and then they Yeah, we'll end with fireworks and lighting the tree of course. So, it it a lot of people show up. So, >> what time is it? >> Uh, it starts at uh five o'clock, I think. Better check that. But I think that's right. >> Yep. So, that'll be really fun. Uh, so good way to end the the year. Um now as far as the city council uh uh at our last meeting we approved the uh contract with AES which is an engineering firm that will oversee the construction of the water treatment plants. Um so uh that's moving ahead. So that that excited that that's going to start this spring. So that that was a big thing. Um, we also completed a study of the uh storm water retention ponds and kind of picked out ones that seem to be the most in need of uh digging out and and refurbishing. So, I will start working on that, too. >> Is that going to be enforceable for the for the uh subdivisions? >> Well, I was going to try and skip over that point. Uh yeah, it's a real problem because uh some of the earlier uh subdivisions or communities were uh didn't have in their uh requirement from the city that uh they be responsible for the uh uh digging out and maintaining those ponds that you have to do every 10 or 15 years. So um I think that we're what we're kind of heading towards is we need to do it. I mean it it's it impairs the lake, you know. >> Yeah. >> So, um what we're thinking of doing is is maybe paying for those that it's questionable or we just can't figure it out. Do it one time and then try to negotiate that. Hey, you guys >> if they accept this, they would have to accept the new terms. >> Yeah. So, and then another course we're thinking of too would be maybe to do it kind of like we do with road improvements where assess the uh people in the area for the you know improvement at some percentage of the uh the total project and um that's kind of problematic because uh it's a little hard to know who's you know draining into that system. So any but anyway uh yeah that's it's a real thorny issue and that's why it's taken so long to really get to it. But uh uh now we have good information on all all the uh storm water ponds out there. So um so that's a big thing. Um uh we have settled on the uh increase in the water rates for next year. Uh that's of course part of covering that new uh water treatment plant and the the wells. So >> is that is that is that retention pond report available to the public yet or to staff at least? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I guess it I haven't seen it. So I guess >> Oh, but that doesn't mean it >> the city engineer showed it to us. >> Okay. Allison might have. I think >> Yeah, it's interesting. I'll give you a call next week about >> can check with Allison too from WSB. >> Yeah. So I think that's about it. Uh we did uh talk about their two properties in the U uh city that uh you know become collections of various things that they consider valuable but you know maybe the rest of us don't. So, so, uh, that that's been a lesson because, uh, if we, um, move to clean it up ourselves, uh, it costs a fortune and we probably never get it back, you know, and and then they have more space and they might start collecting again. So, um, so we're we decided we'd give them about a six-month window to really make improvement of of clearing out the properties. uh and um then decide do we want to go ahead with um enforcement action and uh it's a tough situation because we you know we don't want to spend the money to do that but at the same time you can't you know let those kind of things fester definitely don't want to encourage other people to head down that path. Um so um so yeah, I think those are the main things. >> Well, we really appreciate um you coming out and sharing that information with us. >> Oh yeah, you're welcome. Yeah, it's fun to see you guys doing this. You probably know um the city council takes your work very seriously and uh so it's very rare that uh I don't think I've ever had a meeting where they challenged, you know, what what you guys said. So, >> so I really appreciate what what all you do. >> And Peter, you sat with me on the on the planning commission six years before you went to the council. >> Yeah. Or maybe longer. >> I was seven, but yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. that well it's really good training for the uh council because you do get a feel for >> you know how the city's set up and and the geography of the city and and at least the rules on on that part. There's a lot more but that's a really good foundation. So keep it in mind if you want to keep expanding your political >> development. We have not seen a concept yet. So no it has not. >> Yeah. their feedback. >> Yeah, that's great. I just didn't know if there was like an interview where they also kind of went that >> curious. >> Yeah. Excited to hear about that. >> Hope you have a great holiday. >> Thank you. >> Are you traveling for in? >> No, no, we're gonna go out to restaurant. >> All right. Well, we get to that time. Um, anybody like to make a motion? >> I'll move to a second. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. Wow, you guys are ambitious.