this is the finding commission meeting for August 2024 staff do roll call please commissioner wise present commissioner Alvarez present commissioner C burbach present commissioner Gad booy present commissioner muick pres commissioner Roth Roy rothy sorry about that pres and chair B and sta staff leaon I should mention myself Riley Grahams the community development director and we have our Public Works director and uh assistant Public Works director also here this evening city council correct all right with that we have the agenda in front of us um I would entertain a motion for adopting the agenda I'll make a motion motion from commissioner Ry second I'll second second from commissioner Weiss uh any discussion on the agenda adjustments all in favor say I I I so we have an agenda um the next item on the agenda is approval of the July 10th special meeting minutes there any comments any discussion on the not I would entertain a motion to approve meeting minutes from the July 10th 2024 special Planning Commission I'll make that motion motion fromion G second a second second from commissioner muick all in favor say I I iOS okay through this quick um next item is meeting open to the public if there's anyone a member of the public who would like to for try to limit your comments to three minutes um you can stand give your name and address talk about things that are not on the agenda John SCH 2750 Chisum Avenue whatever happened to the fence or orance August 20th at Council it's a good thing I asked the question nobody knows that except for the people in this room thank you item on the agenda I will ask staff to present all right thank you um so this evening we are here to actually conduct two separate uh public hearings for a new student build house located at 20076 Street North so we will uh first conduct the um conditional use permit um but a little back history for those of uh you who are not up to speed on this um the student build housing program uh with the city dates back to 2004 it involves an agreement between the city of North St Paul in the Northeast Intermediate School District 916 um also known as the Career and Technical Center CTC um fantastic program provides um excellent on the job home building and remodeling experience for students um and for the city uh eliminates um hazardous homes it expands the city's tax base uh and single family housing stock it's a fantastic program um and I think this is our 15th uh home that we're uh looking at here this evening so well well used um with with really good results over the years um for this uh particular piece of property um this was a a larger piece of property that was uh that the city had approved a uh student build home uh which actually was a remodel uh located uh to the south at 2001 6 Street North that used to be one large piece of property it was um lot split to create the second lot uh which is uh addressed at 2007 6 Street North uh with the idea of a future student home uh student buil home location which is why we're here this evening uh back in uh 2015 the north uh St Paul housing Redevelopment Authority was granted a condition use permit for special infill housing for that property at 2001 6 Street north um it was constructed um I I don't have the the when the original um plat was was created and and and when the when the existing house was built but the existing home uh was constructed within uh within that District's setback requirements so it is um again I don't I don't have the full backstory about when that was built and when that was platted um the surrounding area though is comprised of other single family homes like I mentioned to the South and to the west and then across the street to the east is the Webster Elementary School uh and the property is zoned R2 mixed residential district so uh a couple of things to look at when we're um uh thinking about approving a conditional use permit request um the first is uh what is the what is the permit request for and for this particular property to be for special infil housing uh that is uh administered by city code section 154 4.6 C and then uh Table Three uh lists uh conditional uses allowable as infill uh housing so the requirements are that the parcel must be within 10% of meeting the minimum um uh conventional minimum l WID and area for that zoning District um this this property does fit that it's a um the minimum lot width is 50 ft this current lot lot is um well the width is about 108 ft and their square footing minimum for f R2 is 3,630 Ft this lot is 596 ft so it does meet that uh requirement um number uh b letter B the the proposed house must be of uh quality design utilize high standard uh materials uh governed by a uh Superior development plan um with respect to location driveway parking Landscaping accessory buildings if there are any um we do find that this uh request does meet that uh all of those requirements um and then C is uh due regard has been given to adjacent properties again uh this is an area comprised of single family homes located in the same zoning District so that does uh fit in with the the localized area uh and then letter D is the first floor or main floor area of the proposed house shall be a minimum of 600 ft we're looking at a proposed uh house with approximately 2,24 Square ft on the main level um I I'm going to Brie through that this is this is sort of the standard conditional use permit consideration so these are the things that that staff looks at um that is governed Again by the city code when it comes to whether or not a conditional use permit uh would be uh uh used here um so the first the first bullet item is the use is consistent with the general intent to the comprehensive plan this area is zoned R2 single family home this is exactly what it's going to be um the use will not adversely affect health safety or general welfare of the city nope it's not going to it's another single family home in this location um the use is compatible with the present and uh future land uses of the surrounding area uh again uh that fits into what the r are to zoning is um the use and appearance uh is compatible with adjacent properties yes of course it uh is a single family home and a single family home area um the use can be adequately supported by public services including water transportation police fire utilities um sanitary waste disposal storm sewer disposal um all of those me uh uh fit this uh proposed use as well uh will not have any uh undue uh issues with uh Public Utilities or um fire police protection all of that that all that all matches here um the use will not create any excessive burden on existing Parks schools or other public facilities um we are not anticipating that with a addition of another single family home um the use will sufficiently be compatible um and separated by distance or screening from adjacent properties um that's a question of course that gets into um the variant side of things and we'll we'll we'll touch on that with the second one but um with proper screening we do feel that this would uh this use does comply with that standard in the R2 Zone um the use is in harmony with the general uh purposes as and intent of chapter 154 uh again it does it fits in with the R2 district and the zoning ordinance uh which allows for single family homes in this District um and then finally the use will not create uh any excessive noise glare General unsightliness um those types of things um not that's not that won't happen again another single family home in a single family residential area so uh based on those findings um the staff does recommend that uh the Planning Commission recommend approval of a conditional use permit to allow for special inflow housing located at 2007 6 Street north um so if there are any questions from uh Planning Commission um I'll be happy to answer them like I mentioned Ron and Randy and I I see our our uh Tom is also here from the school district to uh help answer any questions that um you may have yeah under C you you use the words regard for adjacent property is that a standardized thing under R2 like hey here's the specifics of what we have as requirements that would be uh regarding the adjacent property what does what does that look like um that's pretty much what it looks like it just says you you there's not a specific like certain number of feet set back sort of thing because that calls out to the lot or the lot set backs okay type thing yep so as long as it meets the lot setbacks it's normally considered proper regard for adjacent property okay thanks I guess pardon my ignorance but why is this being regarded as infill is it because there was a a prop there was a a home on that site previously that's been demolished yeah we we we kind of went back and forth with that internally as staff um we we noted that the the single family home to the South um also used a special INF infill housing cup um and felt that it was compatible the exact same as as the property to the north that we're discussing here this evening um and and really infill housing is you're finding obviously just Parcels of land that doesn't have anything on it within a larger geographical area that that would fit a single family home okay I guess I was just curious as to why it wouldn't just fall under just a general a regular yeah yeah yeah because there currently was only one home there and correct okay yeah um are there any other comments questions the uh applicant is the city correct it is the um City's housing and Redevelopment of technically yes that's owns the property yeah so there isn't any further comment in that regard um that being the case I think we can open the public hearing uh at 6:42 p.m. um and if anyone from the public would like to speak on this topic um stand up give your name and address and um speak your peace with regard to this proposed conditional use permit hi I'm hi Angela web and that's my fiance John wise we're at 2146 7th Avenue East so we're right behind what would be the east side I guess of the new lot so we're just wondering about if we knew the specifics yet about maybe the what the value might be of the property going in if we would know that yet how about that sounds good my name is Tom Spain I'm the instructor for Northeast Metro 916 current Technical Center um as far as the evaluation of that project I'm going to be basing that on some past historical data uh the homes we've done in the past have been on the open market and uh they sold for about 480,000 is that like on average or um the last three um 480 uh and then 460 and the one currently going on the market uh we have our final uh inspection on Wednesday August 7th and get our certificate of occupancy then then we can put that on the market and just talk the real estate agent um he's he's going to list in that 40 to 500,000 and so the home itself is about 1,400 Square ft those are kind of what we've been doing I think when you include the garage and we're up to that 2,000 square foot um building pad size so very comparable uh and as far as the style goes you know we always look at the neighborhood first make sure we fit in uh and we always end up with about a 1400 square foot main floor and then we finish off part of the basement as well so we end up with uh four four bedrooms three bathrooms is what typically we do for the city my question is um is there any intention to build a privacy yeah some sort of screening along the back property line yeah we I actually talked about that with uh public works this afternoon um there's arbites um behind the home that's already there the existing home and our our thought would be to either extend those or build a uh privacy fence along that backline those to yeah yeah sure but yeah we our intent is to include some some screening back there for sure that's part of why I asked that question of SE of regards for adjacent property like the setback itself alone without off fence is considered close Okay so the fence would be something kind of extra yes than what's required under current R2 for regard to adjacent property and I I I should have connected those dots I apologize yeah with with respect to how close um within that uh setback you're right we would we would look at the adjacent properties and say okay this is really close you know for privacy sake we would add either some vegetation or offense got defense and I I certainly think if if that is um the you know the direction of the Planning Commission we can add that as a as a condition of approval that would then be forwarded to the council any further public comments if not we can close the public hearing at 6:46 and um other obviously um commissioner Alvarez brought up the question about the perimeter screening um there are obviously different varieties of plantings and different sizes of plantings that you could put in there so vegetation could certainly do the job but but a fence or and I wasn't even pushing for a fence I'm just asking what's the standard for what is required so screening is is generally either a fence or Landscaping sure yeah generally and what I was trying to figure out is is the setback alone considered what's normative and and like my home you know when we talk about these changes when I bought my home I have a nice patio that I use all the time and the house next to me was way way back in the yard when the new house got built when they had a fire it got put right next to my house that's about 12 ft away that's life mhm because they met the setback I'm on the setback and so that's that's what it is and and that is that is the purpose of especially in residential areas the the setback I mean the purpose there is so you're not on top and it provides some screening in the sense of but the setback itself is sufficient is what I'm understanding the set well well we're and this we'll get into the next um public hearing that we'll get into but the setback is is uh for uh the rear lot line is 25 ft we're proposing it at six mhm so in that case adding some sort of a screening whether it's vegetation or fencing I think is very appropriate here gotcha gotcha that makes sense yeah so in that case we would probably add some sort of screening prob a little more robust more substantial yeah but I think um it may be appropriate to to to May to make it a condition but how do we quantify the condition is what I'm trying to figure out if maybe there's a quantif quantifying in other words it has to be of X number feet height or it has to prevent view when standing to such and so you know that kind of parameter can we put something in there I'm I'm not sure what it would be um my recommendation would be to I I would I I think the intent here is very clear that we don't that we want to have sufficient screening um and so in that case I would I would include a condition that allows staff to come up with something yeah that would then be put in you know whether whether it is expressly written as a condition or that you know that uh it could say something the effect of um screening that is uh approved by staff or something I mean something vague enough where it gives us an opportunity to look into it you're not you're not screening from a whole bunch of different neighbors you're screening pretty much from one neighbor yeah and so I think that some direct interaction there would make it fairly easy to come up with something to them and see preferred and it might be a good idea to wait until the project is well underway see what it looks like and be able to say oh yeah well this is my concern it might give you something more concrete to stand on both from a from a resident standpoint and a staff standpoint then you could look at it and say yeah look at you know if I drew a line here you know give your give yourself some some strength of decision-making there if you will yeah I was wondering as to where that could be part of the requirements is that to say staff shall work with the Neighbors at X address to come up with a satisfactory screening screening and it's 2146 7th right so would that sound reasonable yeah I was there when they were building the you know redoing the house that was the duplex that shot got shot into so you know I bought the house but there police so the work they've done so I'm happy with the work it really nice you know the theot right there we're on a higher slope and what that is so I'm trying to I've been seeing her like how are you going to do that but the way that our house faces it's bedroom window bedroom window bedroom window what face their what shows up on their survey map is their Pao so I was like that's not IDE so um can I ask for a motion should we should we talk about what we add to the conditional use as a condition first or should I ask for a motion you make a motion um subject to a condition however you want to State it mm uh condition of approval okay um I would entertain a motion to approve the conditional use permit with the additional condition we're discussing someone would if someone would make that motion I'll make the motion motion from commissioner muick and a second then I'll second a second from commissioner Alvarez and the condition being uh staff will work with adjacent property owner to resolve uh satisfactory screening privacy screening from proposed patio maybe just say proposed property proposed property would be more generic that's probably a good idea say we need to change the angle of the house stop it right at okay all right um any other discussion on the motion if not all in favor say I I and opposed none okay um now for the second uh public hearing this is to approve the setback variance for the student build house at 2007 6 Street North uh North uh again that is um governed by uh city code section 154 4.4 e uh which admin ministers lot variances uh there's a number of requirements uh again I'll go through them um one is the purpose uh of a variance uh from Theon code for those of you who don't know um is to allow a modification or variation from the literal uh provisions of the chapter where it's determined that their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties in a specific piece of property in this in this case we're talking about the front yard setback and the back it's called the rear yard setback um in the R2 Zone both of those are 25 ft if you take this piece of property take the 25 ft front 25t uh rear you're left with a 10t space to build on I don't think anybody's going to buy a 10- foot depth home so um that is that is the reason for the uh requested variance from the uh lot or from the setbacks um so there's there's a number of standards and I'll I'll go uh go through those here really quickly um the city May Grant a variance of the proposal request um um is um you has the following findings it's it's within Harmony and consistent with the general purposes and intent of the comprehensive plan of the chapter um yes it does um it is within Harmony I love that word that it's in the city code and consistent with the general purposes uh of the of the comp comprehensive plan uh the variant will not uh adversely affect the health safety or general welfare of the city again uh that is not intended um the variance is necessary to uh um for special conditions applying to the structure land again that we just talked about that if you if you do not approve a variance uh from the setbacks you're going to be left with a house that's basically unsellable um the variance requested uh is the minimum uh variance necessary to alleviate the Practical difficulty um what we ended up doing was uh matching the the front and the rear setback um for the principal structure that meets the same uh single family home located at uh just to the South again that other student build house at 20016 Street North uh so that is um the reasoning for where we came up with those for those setbacks so that is a it's again in harmony it's it's it it feels like a natural house that's going to be built there um and then the Practical difficulties that are caused by again by the strict application of the zoning code uh the property owner uh proposes that the use is reasonable um that is accurate that is true uh the plight of the landowner is not due to circumstances unique to the property is not created by the land owner I should say that is that is true uh the variance if granted will not alter the essential character of locality that will not happen um economic uh considerations alone uh do not constitute practical difficulties uh that was not considered and the variance is consistent with the officially adopted City plans and um that is accurate so um this is a survey of the property and you can see um U the R2 mixed residential lot requirements again the minimum lot area is about 3600 ft uh this proposed lot area is about 59 100 square ft the minimum lot width is 50 uh the proposed is 108 so that satisfies that um but then the two items in red is what you see is what we're talking about here the front yard setback and the rear yard setback is a 25 ft um each the proposed front yard setback is 18 ft and the proposed rear yard setback is at 6 feet uh and so with that um we do recommend that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the front yard and rear rear yard lot setback variance request located at 2007 6th Street north um and again we should uh if there's any questions from the Planning Commission this will be the time to ask them otherwise look to um conduct the public hearing I am curious as to how you came up with the the split on the front and the backyards the way that they are I understand the the sizing limitations but why not a little more in the backyard and a little less in the front yard what was the thought the thought there was to match it to the to that existing house at 2001 okay thank you so that it it looked uniform and normal okay thank you is there I mean I assume there's a there must be a a design further along than just this site plan right there is we've got some OB you know not too construction um ready do uh plans um that that I think maybe Tom can maybe allude to if if you wanted him to talk about it not specifics I'm just curious why my guess is and I could be wrong here that there's probably a prototypical design that's just getting put down here is that true yes so there are preliminary plans that have been drawn uh typically what happens I hand draw the set of plans and then through my connections with the building world I have an architect CSA who put some from my hand drawn onto a cad and so she just submitted the preliminary plans I'm not sure if was just the other day yeah okay they just came in the other day and as soon as I got them I for them out to the city uh and again the goal there was you know not to uh encroach on the visual sight of that exist ing duplex there so that was kind of our starting point we want to stay lined up with with that building and so that kind of determined our building pad if you want to call it that you know the size of the home so that's what determined that so yes there are some prelim drawings um they have to be approved you know by H as well but it's a good starting point to get going because school starts here at about another month for okay yeah no I appreciate that I you know I just was where where I'm my thinking comes from from is to me the property itself isn't that crazy that a design couldn't be found that would you know require um it's the six well we can get into this after the public thing but um yeah that was where my thinking was coming from just is it were we just taking one of the existing designs and putting it down or okay I wish it would be that easy but we had to get us a custom plan drawn for this lot specific without requesting more variances and and or going out obtaining more property we don't want to go down that road you know so we want to stay within the boundaries we have got it thank you any other questions no questions but I I do have a comment about the the survey of the drawing when it um assuming this goes before the council um we talked about an adjustment to the survey um I think it is not particularly clear um how the setback front setback matches because the portion of the adjacent house that sticks out is not visible we talked about that on the drawing so we wondered if this was a question that was going to be brought just for clarity well just for clarity I I'm very familiar with it so it's I I understand what's going on there but from from the standpoint of the documentation it would it would help clarify for council members I think um and then the other thing that I noted was the the distance from property line to curb is actually pretty substantial I mean it's probably at least 15 ft um so it does make for the front yard being appearing large MH yeah so that helps that helps quite a bit a large right of way and even larger right of way over to 7th so and when you're on the street in person it's going to look much larger than the requested this seems like it would be nice to be able to give them a little bit larger backyard if there some way to do it but yeah I think one of the other limitations was if we if we pushed it um further I guess this would be to the north now you're running into setbacks along with uh along the County Road which has a whole host of other issues so we we considered a lot of different variables in this on this property I'll have more comments that after we hear the public comments if there are anymore so with that um we should open a public hearing for the um variance request uh at 7:02 so if anyone from the public would like to speak on this topic um introduce yourself and your address stand up to the mic and uh John schal 2750 Chisum Avenue I've not I've only gone to two others variants um of hearings like this and both of them went down in a ball of fire so I'm looking at the chance that it's going to pass this time and guess when the city of North St Paul is asking the city of North St Paul for a variance guess what could be difficult anybody want to guess anyway uh so this one document that says uh uh the staff memo had said they want six and 18 18 for the front front six for the back as a setback am I correct in that interpretation okay now there's another document it's called zva 24-1 and on the I don't know does it have Pages no they don't have page numbers but I would guess it's the second page maybe it isn't maybe it's even the third page it doesn't have a number uh it says I can go find it again explain how you want to vary from the applicable provisions of the ordinance it says front yard setback to be 12 7 no it says 12 point and um 12.7 ft we don't use inches in this survey we use points tents interpret that when you get your 12in ruler out and then it says the rear yard setback to be 11.3 ft H H you find that to be confusing I do okay you need to correct that we will here tonight yeah it's um so this this was this was the original um front and rear yard setback when we first was look when we were first looking at the property it had since been I mean as you can imagine we went through many iterations of where the property's going to or whether the the building is going to be um that clearly didn't get updated in this is our online in in open go the the permit so that we will make sure that that is updated to reflect the request and that will be and feet and points itely it be 6.0 likely ex that is standard procedure for surveyors what decimal feet decimal feet decimal feet it's absolutely standard procedure yep they use base 10 instead of Base 12 yep it's closest thing we can get to metric sorry John anyway and the document this zva 24-1 I would hope that in that when you have other than City to City you get um uh more information rather than uh the questions uh that are answered yes and no even though it says why or why not as a question the city has decided ah we don't have to go whyde or why not we don't have to fill in that I'm sure that a private individual who was submitting uh Z One variants would e would be wise to say why why or why not in order to get what he wanted and not my experience with a prior two uh variance request as I said went down in a ball of flames uh we don't have to build that big a house on there do we but we don't have the HRA to ask how about a Tiny home how about a home that's more uh affordable that's supposed to be one of the Prime things of the HRA when building is to build things that are affordable none of this stuff is Affordable and you had a chance here to have more room leben's real or whatever it was called back in the 30s from a certain country you could put a smaller home on this property and somebody you know you can just see uh the child saying to the father let's go out in the backyard and have a game of horseshoes that's about it that's about it I just don't think that this has been thought out in the bigger picture let's build an affordable house I don't think there's many affordable houses but you could get a down to maybe a th000 square ft make a two-bedroom because there's a lot of those homes in North St Paul tell you a little story when I bought my house told my aunt she asked me where you where'd you buy your house and she I said nor St Paul and she was an eastsider and she went and she said that's where you can tell how many kids are in the family by the number of auditions in the house honestly God that's what she said but anyway there still are a lot of these smaller houses in North St Paul we don't need a $500,000 home anyway comments thank you thanks John anyone else for the public hearing that being said we'll close a public hearing at 7:09 any other questions concerns from Commissioners not a question or concern but I just to comment on piggy tail to piggy back on John's comment I as a builder and a realtor there are no small homes being built currently hardly that are more affordable in this current market when we try to get a young entrylevel couple in they're looking at 300,000 minimum um we find ones less but they need a ton ton of work and my my home is 1100t in North St Paul two-bedroom um I'm a builder so I put three baths in because I wanted to but there there they're small obviously um but when we get to the point and I don't know where we maybe talk with Tom about the the design there so I have buildings that I work with in St Paul where we have tiny Lots even smaller North St Paul and we go up and we do a two-story um with a basement and we get a little more square footage that way um so I'm just curious as we talk I know you were going to have some comments I I think that's might be a great idea I don't know the tiny host thing that's a whole different code that's a whole different code a lot of times when they do tiny homes they they fall out of the normal Residential Building Code but but still a smaller home and I know we do have code on that my neighbor when they rebuilt the house up by my house where I had to see it right next door they wouldn't let her build a smaller home she had to build it a certain size she wanted it smaller she was a single lady wanted to build it smaller and they wouldn't let her so I'm curious what the allowances are for that if maybe a two-story design I know there's a lot of work that goes into design time I I know that um so I know there was already a lot of work put into it but I would be curious to know what other options might be yeah I have to second that as well because I was thinking as you were talking about the price of the home you know that to me is a lot higher price than a lot of the homes in this area are going for I believe uh certainly in my particular area along fourth Fourth Avenue we don't have a lot of half million doll homes yeah so you know I was really thinking you know what a 250 or 300 ,000 home be be better for the neighborhood uh or or less but I understand you can't there's a certain it's hard to build that that cheap actually it is um but um like I say and and I I understand I don't understand the economics of it I just look at it from the standpoint of you know now I'm a single homeowner so I don't have a a spouse or significant other that's bringing in a contribution to the home but I just look at what it I'm earning a fairly decent salary and I think of how much I'm stretched to try to afford the place that I've got and my place is valued at about 225,000 now it's also you know it's also a 70y old home it was built right after World War II uh so it doesn't have a lot of modc coms and all that kind of thing that a brand new place would have but it just I just think about how much I'm stretched and think about you know a young family starting off so especially for using student labor I know that's a not a normative thing for building a home but I I wonder if that could play into that but so I guess quick question can you pull up the diagram where you had it on can you point to where the uh the 6ot variances between the between the homes that you brought up yep I'll try my best because it so this is the the rear lot line the proposed back wall of the home is right here so this is 6 feet okay so it's just it's more of a lot difference as opposed to difference between two homes I mean obviously there's some variance and visual and rooms Etc got it I think the distance to the the side lot if you will I think the distance to that next building to the South is probably 20 almost 30 ft from face to face a building 25 to 30 ft between the buildings between the buildings North to sou north to south okay yeah between buildings I'm I was just thinking about face to face of building 6 ft's just sort of a tough a tough distance and um you know building codewise even if you're at 6 ft you're going to be limited on the number of Windows you can put over there you're going to be limited in the exterior materials you can put there because of the fire separation distance so you're you're creating design issues by putting it that close to the property line um and I guess I would feel based on some of the stuff we've heard here tonight I would much rather Pull It Forward um and get at least 10 ft back there and then you know less um room in the front yard um it just to me it seems seems like it's uh I I I buy that there are issues with the property geometry that make it difficult um I I think I mean you know there's one of the um one of the student homes in in my neighborhood it's beautiful actually there's going to be two of them it's the one you said is going up for sale soon is right right next door um and I'm very supportive of the program and I think it's a great thing and I think um on this one we just me personally I feel like the six feet is is an avoidable thing um even if it's just for extra feet you're going to get a lot more buyin with that um building Cod issues go away there um so that would be my opinion um yeah and I don't know if there's wiggle room to adjust that location and say could we have 10 feet in the back and um 12 12 feet in the front 12 in the front to me that seems a lot more um reasonable to me but that's my opinion I guess it would be 14 14 yeah cuz it's 18 moving four feet basically move the building to keep the the visual on the front on the street side but I wonder right you know 4 foot is that really going to make that much visual difference you know we're we're looking at about the width of this table plus a little bit more I don't think most people are going to notice no most people would never notice it less than me you'd have to you'd have to stand there and cite it and also we talked about that front that the the property line is set pretty far back from what I'll call the curb line Y mhm but that 4T is going to make a huge difference in the back doesn't make as much I guess Tom is there any or Randy Ron any issues if we just shifted the whole thing forward four feet what you think uh my only concern I guess would be the driveway slope at this time and so we might have to adjust that take consideration yeah cuz it's at 8% now and this is I can't tell how how tall is this little retaining wall not very tall would that would be you probably have to do something like that similar if you move if you move the whole building forward yeah to keep proper drainage yeah between the two new building in the existing building we have to do some type of retaining wall yeah um I like un retaining wall is not to have line up with the garage because at some point you have to open up that door and snow so it's nice like push it off several feet access that would I'm not sure if that would encroach into that drainage hement or not I I don't think it is I don't think so yeah so we can have our surveyor move that house over and have shoot the Heights and see where work out for that M it's I don't think it's going to impact the drive all that much not for feet I guess I'm I'm still kind of curious if we were to try to shoot for a $400,000 home you know is would we get uh a practical reduction in size of the building and still make it something that's sailable well my experience with this is you know, 1400 square feet now which isn't really a large home the cost of buing just astronomical it is everything build yeah that really dictates a lot of sure there and there's things we can do to the to bring that price down but at the end of the day what product are we going to have out there right right home that's going to last gentlem said building industry make sure he's aware of you know are constantly Chang ridiculous I think keep driving up the cost and the consumer is the one that eventually pays for it yep right we are very conscientious and and with these homes they get sold on the open market public dollars for that so you can't just sell it you know to my brother or something like that pure a great deal um I probably would fly over very well so that's why we started going with the real estate company and they yeah thank you that's $348 343 a foot almost at400 ft with theot right okay and that doesn't incl it doesn't include the basement space right the 1400 ft does it there you go so cuz it's unfinished partially it's partially unfinished yeah finish about 2400 and is a two-story option at all an option we do that St Paul a lot where we just have these tiny Lots in St Paul and they just go upward yep yeah it is an odd lot yep it's true that area yep M I think U single story is more more appealing on that [Music] corner worry sight lines as you approach intersection that's a major road too it is y right travel Road yep you want it to fit in yeah so it sounds like there's getting we're getting some consensus here on on moving the building a little bit um is there anyone that would like to make a motion just because we were talking about setbacks from 6 ft and we were blocking a dog tonight so I roughly took a picture of where six ft is on that corner I show gole street view but it's Google Street View s that Stak right there is the corner that they had the corner lot on and so I'm standing you know I I shot at 6 feet so that's kind of what you're looking at from six feet from that corner yeah so I'll just kind of show you guys here yeah there's that stake right there showing that the property line uh corner so that's 6 feet roughly from from that coin you know six feet from E either direction just to give you guys a reference because I know look at Google Street View that's um a little bit different than you know looking at it with the stake there yeah was that's the northwest corner southwest corner southwest corner okay where kind of all three properties meet okay yep so I'd be standing yeah roughly right around here yeah a stake there okay yep thank you so I would entertain a motion to recommend approval um if we want to amend what is proposed then that has to be part of the motion as far as what what we're what we're um what is what is suggested in the I'm trying to find the right information sorry about that is that the setback adjustment the setback adjustment yeah so what what was brought to us was a setback of 18 ft on the front and 6 feet on the rear and I think we've got a general consensus going on here that it will be we will recommend different from that yes so I think the motion should represent 10 feet in the back 10 10et in the back and 14 14 in Fr and 14 in the front I'll make that motion motion from commissioner rathy is there a second a second second from commissioner Weiss any further discussion I think we've made that clear so the motion is um a variant to allow a 14t setback on the front which is the address side Sixth and a 10-ft setback on the rear all in favor say I I imposed none okay I think there's one item left on the agenda right is under uh commission business action and items and recommendations um I think some of you are aware we we've had some we've received some interest for uh Redevelopment of the marget Street Commons Redevelopment site which is just right across the street from us here um typically what happens is when when when we get some really good interest in a Redevelopment site it's usually best to go for an RFP that way it's free you know it's open it's transparent it's available um so I I what I'm recommending to the Planning Commission um that you should consider um posting for an RFP for um Redevelopment of that site you know typical RFP Sidle packages they can vary widely but typically they include uh letter of interest um development concept concept design which includes you know the land use the site layout Building Concept those types of things uh a public Outreach plan a financing plan and a proposed schedule um and so my recommendation um includes what I consider to be an appropriate RFP timeline um so what I would suggest is uh staff would draft an RFP bring it back to the Planning Commission at your September meeting September 5th uh for review and edits and recommendation to the city council that would go to the next council meeting which would be September 17th uh Council would uh adjust it or approve it it would then be posted the following day and then from that point forward then you know the the dates and times are you know movable but typically I like to allow for uh a couple of months for proposals to be AC uh accepted and then typically I I I have seen that there's a selection committee involving staff and some Planning Commission members um that would be reviewing the proposals selecting uh Concepts um that would then be provide um invited to uh present to the city council uh so you're talking early next year is when the when the council would be reviewing um sort of the proposed concept plans and then selecting a final concept plan and then that starts off the whole um sorry uh development process from that point forward but again those dates are all movable it kind of depends on what interest we get so there doesn't need to be really any action there doesn't need to be a motion here tonight in my opinion it's more of just a Yep this is a good idea yeah absolutely direction to staff to move forward with an RF I think it was it's your suggestion is consistent with what we heard from the council as well when that initial proposal was put forth that's right that was what where they went with it so I think um yeah I would concur I do have one request uh that when you do the RFP please mention that there is a uh the downtown bus stop is located in that block because I don't want to see uh a developer either get caught unaware by that or uh you know come up with a plan that requires us shifting that uh with at least not without you know notice ahead of time agreed thank you is there any kind of specific proposals that you're seeking um it would be you know that's really driven by the developer and what they think is a marketable um product there um typically we would see something with uh ground floor retail and then depending on how many units they can fit in what size of the units two maybe three stories above of that so that's typically what we would see but again you know a developer might have something completely else in mind and it might be a great great product and a great idea we aren't necessarily going to direct them a particular I don't think so you know as long as it fits within the zoning regulations comprehensive plan is considered Etc and this is happening because someone has come to the city saying like to do this and so you're saying hey let's make sure everyone gets a shot out absolutely yep there there was a early presentation um conceptual very rough conceptual since then we've had some additional yeah interest so it's great which is great yeah I think it's a great idea I'm glad I think the RFP is a perfect way to do it because like you said it's transparent everybody gets to see what's being um discuss to go there I think it's a great idea and it could possibly result in some creative ideas hopefully they're not going to hopefully they won't all come in and try to duplicate the other two new buildings that we've just gotten in downtown how big is the area between um in that open area that we're talking about you're putting me on the spot um about this big depending on the scale I can measure that from a fish perspective but that's a whole different conversation well they all have at least a 10-ft backyard yeah yeah uh hold on that's the property profile I can't read it's too small but is a 75 Acres yep yeah yeah okay okay so that's what we're talking about understood I think the path makes sense see wasn't I about right about right I was think okay I think I got Direction there so I will I will draft an RFP bring it back um here uh at the September 5th Planning Commission meeting okay with that we're to item eight on the agenda which is reports are there any reports we'll start with none for me one and okay none for you I don't have a report but I do have a question I'm wondering if anybody has heard about what's going on over at the uh asphalt company you know I know that they had their big auction a couple of months ago but I haven't heard as to whether that has changed anything have you heard anything Riley is anybody no we we just heard that they're getting out of the construction business they're just going to sell materials we know that's a pretty big deal yeah so they they don't have any con they're not running any construction Crews um and what we have heard is that they're just going to sell asphalt and recycle base and different things that they sell there but they are going to continue the recycling of the asphalt as far as we know well this as far as we know they sold all their Crushers but we still can go and dump stuff there so they're still taking that from other contractors kind of we know thank you I just kept kept meaning to ask and I kept forgetting so so that sounds like they're then going to acquire the crushed material from someone else having crushed it that's what it sounds like yeah hiding behind one of the [Laughter] mountains yeah true yeah I think they do have another property okay thank you commissioner I have nothing tonight start at that end commissioner Alvarez anything from you nothing sir nothing uh just a reminder that we have a primary election coming up on the 13th the 13th yes a primary election on the 13th okay your Congress and State get that stuck in my brain okay the only thing I have is to remind everyone that National Night Out is coming up and I don't know if anybody's doing anything in your neighborhood but we are we're going to have a little gathering at Silver Lake Park that night and I think word is getting spread pretty well in that neighborhood and I'm feeling like oh okay at least we're at least we're going to take some action and do something I'm not doing much with regard to it because I'm doing other things but I'll be there so see if you can arrange something even if it's just hey let's just go talk to each other and meet your neighbors that's all I have with that a motion for adjournment I'll make the motion motion from commissioner Roy a second I'll second that second from commissioner Alvarez all in favor say I hi and no one opposed we adjourn at 7:33 have any problem with or was ready