p.m. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisibley and justice for all. All right. Um any changes to the agenda? There are none. All right. Anyone want to make a motion to approve the agenda? I'll approve the agenda. All right. I'll second. All in favor? I. All right. Um, public comment. So, this is the opportunity for public to comment on items not listed on the agenda. And then are there any announcements? There are none. Okay. Approval of minutes. Consider approval of the following for October 29th meeting minutes. I thought they looked really good. I didn't see anything. Was not here, but I was fine with them. You're fine with them, too? Okay. All in favor, or I'm sorry, motion. I'll second. All in favor? I I All right. Public hearings. Uh, Park Meadows August Adventures LLC applicant consider application to amend PUB ordinance 297 and per plat for Parkway Meadows. Yep. As you guys remember at our last meeting or those that were there, you probably read in the minutes uh if you weren't there, we decided to um continue the public hearing until this meeting due to the applicant being unavailable um for comment at the last meeting. Uh since then, he has contacted staff and withdraw withdrawn all of his applications. Um so we're just asking you guys to close the public hearing and no other official action is needed on this item. Okay. So, I can just announce closing it. Yeah. Okay. I will close the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. All right. Uh, another public hearing. Consider amendment to title 11 zoning and title 12 subdivision of the city code regarding time limit for appeals. Yeah. So, um this item is being held in a public hearing because um based on recommendation from our city attorney, um she recommended that we move away from the state statute of 6 years for a time limited appeal um for anything uh city regarding um so we're asking to amend title 11 and 12 um to switch that from six years to 30 days. Is that pretty standard? I guess I don't know. Um I'm not saying that she's not right. I'm just Yeah. Well, I I think what prompted it is there was a Supreme Court decision recently that upheld a city's um a I don't know which city it was, but a city had in their ordinance a 30 or 60 day appeal time frame and uh that up was upheld at the Minnesota Supreme Court. And if you think about it, if uh we approve a plat six years later, it's all built out. I mean, but uh by the time six years later, uh the developer has made investments to put streets and utilities and private property owners have probably made investments to build on those lots. Um so the chance to appeal really should be in the early stage. Um it encourages somebody to appeal early rather than late. So yeah, I just wasn't sure where the six years came from. I thought that was a long time. Yeah, I guess it's some historic statute that still in place. Um, so she's re uh I think Lakeville has amended their code as well. She's the city attorney for Lakeville. Okay. I don't have any further questions. Anyone else? Okay. So, I'll open the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. So, anyone have a comment regarding the amendment to title 11 zoning and title 12 subdivision of the city go code regarding time limit for appeals? Please stand. State your name and address for the record. Is there anyone online? There's not. Okay. All right. I will ask again if anyone has public comment on this public hearing, please stand. And I'll ask one more time. Okay. Public hearing closed at 7:06 p.m. All right. General business. We have to do something with that or Oh, yeah. I don't know. Yeah. Okay. We need a recommendation um for approval to the city council. Or make a recommendation. Okay. Or motion, I should say. Motion to recommend. Motion to recommend. Motion recommend. I'll second it. All right. All in favor? I I Okay. All right. General business. Uh, Dakota Acres, second edition concept plan review. True North Development LLC applicant. Okay. Uh, today we'll be discussing the concept plan, the most recent concept plan received for Dakota Acre second edition. Uh, the applicants are in the room. if we have questions after the presentation, um they're here to answer those questions. Some background, the property was originally acquired by the city in 2006 when the original de developer defaulted on assessments. The city sold it to Global Properties in 2018 and reszoned it to R4 Highdensity Residential as a condition of the sale. Um later they sold that to True North Development in 2024. The current proposal is for the development of one apartment building which is 35 units and development of town homes 18 units. Uh the neighborhood conditions surrounding the neighborhood to the south are uh apartments high density residential uh apartments that were recently constructed and to the south of that is commercial. To the west of that is a rural residential property. To the north is a mix of rural residential properties and rural agricultural properties, undeveloped land, um that's in the process of being marketed. To the east of that is the original Dakota Acres, um town home edition development. The comp plan guides it to highdensity residential, uh which guides it to 10 to 30 units per net acre. The zoning, it's currently zoned R4 highdensity residential. Apartments and town homes with more than eight attached units are permitted uses in the zoning district. The density is uh 32 to 96 units are the required density. 53 is proposed. So it does meet the density requirements. The property would have to be reszoned PUD or planned unit development due to the requirements associated with the city's subdivision ordinance concerning private streets. This currently the submitted concept plan does not um meet the criteria for PUB zoning. The applicants have not yet provided any information related to incorporating design elements uh for example construction materials, landscaping, lighting that exceed the city standards to offset the effect of any variations for granting PUD zoning. Uh lot sizes and setbacks here. Um, I'm not going to go through each one, but the proposed concept plan does appear to meet all light lot size and setback requirements um for the apartments and the town homes. Height requirements. Uh, it's 35 foot maximum height. The proposed apartment building is a threetory apartment building and the the height is currently unknown. The applicants have mentioned that they are not intending on exceeding 35 ft. Uh if they do so, a conditional use permit may be required. Getting into some miscellaneous requirements. Uh the building facade finish for residential uses shall consist of only class one, class 2, class 3, and class 4 for highdensity residential. Um 25% uh yes 25% of the entire apartment facade shall be composed of class one materials. 25% of the front-facing facade of the town home shall be composed of class one materials. It's currently unknown based on the plans if uh the exterior finish requirements will be met, but staff will need additional information to verify that requirements being met. Staff notes that the planning commission does not review the building designs, but that the above requirements are still imposed upon the builder. 30% of the site shall be landscaped and a landscape plan shall be submitted to the city um with city engineer approval. No landscaping plan has yet been submitted. A delineation uh was previously completed on the site but is now expired. It showed no indication of wetlands present on the site. Staff will not be requiring a new wetland delineation for this reason. Uh, another miscellaneous requirement related to refuse. Um, a location for trash has been depicted on the submitted plan. However, design details relating to the enclosure have not yet been provided. They must meet the requirements listed in city code section 1143 here. Basically has to be an enclosed um building or properly contained in a closed container and it it shall be screened from view basically. The city also requires that all exterior utility utility meters and/or fixtures shall be located in interior side or rear yards when possible and shall be screened from view of adjacent properties in the public rightway. No plans have yet been submitted which indicate the location of the exterior utility meters um andor fixtures. Utility plans have not yet been received, but sewer and water are available on James Parkway via stubs. Looping with the existing town home development to the east would require private agreement with that development. 10- foot wide perimeter easements and 5 foot wide interior easements are required and depicted on the concept plan. Additional easements may be required uh for in structure or drainage as determined by the city engineer. There is a storm water pond currently located on the north side of James Parkway which serves the property. It may need to be um slightly enlarged based on the final plans as determined by the city engineer. Parking uh for apartments, one and a half spaces are required for one-bedroom units, two and two and a quarter spaces for anything above that. One enclosed space per unit is also required. the apartments meet the required spaces and actually exceed it by four spaces. Um the developer is free to uh get rid of these spaces if they wish to replace it with additional facilities or features. 35 spaces must be enclosed. 35 are proposed to be enclosed for the town homes. Two attached garage spaces per unit and two driveway spaces per unit are required. Additionally, half a space of common parking space per unit for guest parking is required. Uh the plan meets the requirements here. The nine guest parking guest parking spaces staff recommends shall be located as close to the town homes as possible um and shall be labeled as such so to avoid use by apartment residents and visitors. Access is currently available off of James Parkway, which is a minor collector. A traffic study may be required based on the projected traffic generation of the final layout. staff do um uh want to point out that a a snow area site has been identified in the southwestern corner of the property. The submitted concept contains an unnamed private street running north and south. Uh city code contains the following requirements related to these must be 24 feet wide to accommodate two-way traffic through the site. Staff do have some concerns with the unnamed private street proposed on the concept plan due to ownership over the different portions of the property which may complicate owner responsibilities related to maintenance and upkeep in the future. No additional sidewalks or trails are required for the development. There is an existing trail on the north side of James Parkway and no identified sidewalk or trail corridors are identified through the subject property on the 2040 uh city's park and trail plan. For the parks, the city requirement is land dedication of 8% pre-development uh value or cash contri or pre uh sorry land dedication 8% of the pre-developed property or cash cont contribution of 8% of the un undeveloped property value input will be sought from the parks commission and in 2016 it was sought for a similar apartment plan for the site. The parks commission at that time recommended cash in loo um due to no search areas identified near or on the property. Nearby parks that serve the property include Wagner, Whispering Creek, and the Eagle View School facilities. 10. The city requires 10% of the site area shall be usable open or recreational space for project residents. And this can be indoor or outdoor. Both active and passive uses count towards this requirement. So, it could be something as simple as a a patch of grass for a dog area or it can actually be like an active walking trail. Um, developer must identify 13,896 ft within the development to fulfill this requirement. Currently, the play area depicted on the plan is 576 ft. Uh, indoor space is currently unknown, but the town home resident shall have access to any indoor open space located within the apartment building. Um, also any proposed playground equipment will require city approval. The city engineer has provided comments and stated that permission will be needed from the gas company to allow for encroachments into the gas line easement. Input from the public works and building inspection department has not yet been uh solicited. Police department asked if the apartments and the town homes could flip locations. The reasoning is less traffic by town the town homes and better access to the apartment buildings in case of emergencies. They also commented there's only one entrance and exit um and they will need to ensure that adequate access for emergency vehicles is provided. Input from the fire department has not yet been received, but the locations of any uh fire hydrants will need to be reviewed and approved. Staff does note the following general comments. The development is uh generally compatible with the surrounding land uses. The pro proposed development generally meets the intent of the 2040 comprehensive land use plan. Apartments containing more than eight units are permitted use in the R4 zoning district and town homes containing more than eight units are also a permitted use in the R4 zoning district. Further input will be sought from the city's park commission regarding the desire for land dedication versus cash in lie of land dedication. The public works and building inspection department's input has not yet been solicited regarding the current concept plan. Staff recommends the following conditions for the submitted concept plan. First of all, uh we'd be requiring it to be reszoned to PUB due to the requirements associated with the city's subdivision ordinance related to private streets. Staff are currently unaware of any potential plans to subdivide the property. Um city staff must be aware of how the ownership of different buildings will work if left unsubdivided and staff have met with the applicants and discussed that issue. Um, a conditional use permit is required for any structure that may exceed 35 ft in height. The exterior of town home dwelling units shall include a variation of building materials. A minimum of 25% of the front facade shall be class one materials. Minimum of 25% of the entire area of the multifamily facade shall be composed of class one materials. and no class 4 material materials are allowed as a primary exterior building facade finish for highdensity residential districts. A landscaping plan uh must be submitted meeting the minimum requirements of city code. Trash trash receptacle details meeting requirements of city code shall be shown on future submitts. A lighting plan shall be shown uh meeting the requirements of city code on future submitts. A tree inventory prepared by a forester or a landscape architect must be submitted which identifies the location of all significant trees on the property. If no significant trees exist, uh the city must get a statement from a qualified professional stating as such. Perimeter and drainage utility easements uh must be depicted on the final plaque consistent with the city engineers recommendations. Grading and utility plans will need to be submitted and approved by the city engineer and public works director. Parking shall be provided which complies with city code um currently exceeding that requirement. Staff have concerns with unnamed private street proposed on the submitted concept plan uh especially related to future maintenance and upkeep. Any connection of the proposed private drive, Oral Street, to the adjacent town home development, which is not currently proposed, will require an agreement and cross easements with the adjacent homeowners association. Exterior utility meters meeting the requirements of city code shall be shown on future submitts. The developer must identify additional um square footage for open space to meet the city's 10% requirement. The requirements of city code pertaining to central services must be satisfactorily met. Public utilities and services including fire protection services must be adequate and no structures shall be erected within the gas line easement. Now staff are asking the planning commission for feedback related to the proposed concept plan prepared by the applicant and dated 10224. Staff do note that the submitted concept plan does not sat currently satisfy the criteria for PUD zoning. Additionally, staff have concerns that the applicant may be unable to satisfy the city's 10% usable open space requirement. Um, these outstanding issues shall be resolved prior to any approvals granted for the development. As I do want to note that the applicants have sent over an updated concept plan. Um, it's not here, we're not talking about that one tonight, but it does appear that they believe they can meet the 10% open space requirement based on their calculations. Uh, so here's staff's concept plan review. Uh, if you have any questions, the applicants are here. Thank you. Thank you. I'm just blowing it up on my screen. It's hard to packet too. So, so with regards to the police department, so asking kind of for travel purposes or easy in and out like flipping like switching them, right? That was just kind of their first glance. Sure. comment at it. Um that made sense in the chief's mind. Okay. Yes. On the drawing, the easement is the dotted line. the the gas or so there's a gas line easement is that red line that's slanted kind of through the property. Well, there's three of them. Yep. Okay. Yeah. So, one's the center line of the gas easement and then it's I can't remember 35 ft each direction or something. Okay. On that line. Um so that's part of the reason why the applicant located the town homes to the north and not the south is just that easement kind of prevented. Yeah. So, the police chief's comments, just simply flipping them doesn't work because of that easement, right? Unless you turn the town houses the other way and then you can maybe put a small one, a medium one. There's different avenues to do that, but so yes, the town homes need to be nine or more attached units to be a permitted use. Um, so if they were anything less than that, they would need additional special approval from the city as part of the PUD. The current ones are fives and sixes and fours. Mostly fours. There's I think a couple fives and a seven and a one. Yeah. So, I don't think I have much of a problem with changing the quantities, but if it makes sense for the fire department to I don't know. I mean, to hear from the fire department. Sure. Are they a different association? It would be. Yeah. And that's the concern with the the streets. Not necessarily. So the concern is the apartments and the town homes. So if it ever was two different associations one day, a town home association and an apartment association, they share the same road. um a couple other shared facilities. Who pays for what is going to be the question 30 20 years down the line. So just the idea I think the and I know that um the applicant has submitted some information to the city attorney's office. I think it was more just concern of the 35 apartment units going through the what's perceived as the town home private street and long-term was will that work well um for the people that live in the town homes and then backing into you know if you put the apartments up there you've got people backing out into you know a lot of people possibly backing in and out of that same roadway, you know. Sure. So, there could be flip. Yeah. Reverse problems. How many town homes are in the existing? Uh 49. 48 or 49. Okay. Then the current apartment is how many units? The next proposed one would be talking about the one that's already built. Already built. Yeah. Yeah. And there's they have plans to build another one to mirror it. Yeah. How many units was the code acres first? Uh the existing town home development is there's a total of 49 units there. And they use one axis as well. Maybe a compare comparison you you'll recall I know most of you on the commission I can't remember if Casey was or not but in that Dakota acres there was originally the two access points and the one was removed um always intended to be removed on the advice of the city engineer. So, there are the 40 or 49 units using that one drive there. Haven't gotten a lot of complaints on that. I thought we'd get more, but so far we haven't. Yeah, I'm just trying to play out how traffic would work and that's what I was traffic not only there but I mean you're adding so be 107 total apartment units there 60 or yeah and then 67 town homes. How is that going to impact the traffic going on two to 35? It's already a cluster right now with that south side. Yeah, two can two can handle the traffic. There's bottleneck at at the interchange. So, yeah. Um I think it's been the city's position. We have been communicating for years, ever since I worked here. We have been trying to advance that project with MDOT. And our position has been as a city, we're not going to stop growing because you're not doing your job and taking care of your infrastructure as the interchange. Um, we could stop growth in our town, but New Prague and Lucer County and that interchange feeds uh serves a 300 square mile um area. So, it's the rural area isn't going to stop growing it. It's our position as a city. We're not going to stop growing because MDOT is not funding it. Commissioner Wolf has been working on it for years and you know from the county's standpoint. Yeah, we had a pretty positive meeting with our MDOT representatives. They came down a few months ago, maybe two months ago, and they're hearing from constituents as well, and they're seeing the backup. It's over a half mile long, and it's really unbelievable. and they're finally, I think, getting the picture. They thought those stop signs was going to be a great um they modeled a number of different scenarios and they their traffic engineers told them the stop signs were going to be the best uh scenario and Scott County and the city said that's what you think. That's not what we think. We thought the stop um the temporary traffic signal that was there at one time operated better than the stop signs are operating. Um and so that's how I Well, are the applicants? Yeah. Did you want to share anything about your concepts here? I mean, it'll be helpful when there's the additional information that we need um for sure to get more feedback fire department and stuff. Yeah. I think of like safety and the maneuverability for them to get in and out and Okay. Um, that would be very helpful. Now, with the easement, you can put pavement over it, right? But you just you can put curb and gutter and parking and snow storage, stuff like that. I mean, I don't know. I I think I would go more all town houses there because of that reason. But, you know, a mixture of the two might be kind of a legal nightmare later on if ownership changes between the properties, you know, or associations change or whatever. So, as has been described in Larry and um Alyssa can confirm this more that your plan would be to either condo out the units or you know sell the townhouse units but all the common area around would be one big outlot. Is that right? One association. One association take care of everything. Then you have your common elements and your limited elements that basically take care of apartment. people live for that particular open space. Obviously in that type of arrangement the association set up. Okay. And I think under the Apartments would be a condo, a condominium too. Ownership of the apartment and either owner. Yeah. You know, you put covenants together and bylaws. That's correct. All of those documents we'd like to do. We've been going around gas, but for some reason they don't they don't want to pull that wine because right now we're still talking because obviously they'd rather to make it financially feasible. Did you ever think about turning some that way or or wouldn't that work? Yeah, just we're still quantities. We're talking to a couple weeks ago and we know exactly where it is, how deep it is. So, we're looking right agree. And your building pad wouldn't affect it, you know, because you're you say it's so deep, right? It's 8. Didn't they just move that a few years ago or like 10 years ago or they moved the Did they actually pipe or I don't know. They put the pipe in at that corner to change the It used to go right through the property. Yeah. Moved it towards the edge of the property, but yeah, that's why I wouldn't think that that would be a a speestous pipe or whatever because it wasn't 10 15 years ago. Maybe 20. I don't know. Well, it was before my time with the city, but I think it was when Dakota Acres that was originally being originally being proposed. So, it would have been in 2005 time frame. Um, I believe that's when the easement was rerouted along more along the property line. That's what I think it was because I was I was here when they did it. I would think so because it did come total diagonal through that lot like basically right you can see where the uh you can see the lines where the angle Yeah. probably went right through where the apartment is planned. Yeah. Originally right and I was part of the planning back then and I think that's when they diverted around the property. That's correct. And Jake, what did you say the density was with this particular layout? Okay. Okay. I don't have any additional questions. I don't know. I mean, I guess I don't have any questions for the applicants. I mean, I think I kind of agree with Brad. If everything could be town homes, that'd be easier. That'd be the best situation. Best scenario. Yeah, they could get up to the east. but the same issue. Yeah, his layout was uh you know skirted around those um yeah, he got around them, you know, but then that of course that road from the other association uh went through. It was just a big U basically. Mhm. Mhm. So, I guess I one thing I did hear you say is that you want to see the fire department turning radiuses so we know that the fire department can I that would be a tight corner from the town houses to the apartment to get back to, you know, if the garage and back was on fire or something, you know, to get through the corner, you know. So, we'll have to have a civil engineer traffic engineer model those turning radiuses. I think you have for emergency vehicles. Yeah, I think the question just is whether when you're in your proposed uh development, if you're coming south through those town homes, if a fire truck could make that um turn uh to the west, there's kind of a like a S-curve or reverse curve there. It's a quick right. Yeah. Yeah. They might have to adjust those curve lines or radiuses. Okay. Or painted curb lines. I mean, you know, painted asphalt would be easier to drive over than a curb with grass in it, you know. I think the last proposal we put rock under. Yeah. Yeah. That was a little different because uh you you know we couldn't get to the back of the building where this one you can you have access points on three sides of the building. Um yeah. So you had a like a gravel pad underneath the whole back of the building underneath the grass so a fire truck could have stabilized there in your old apartment layout. I guess we just got to get a little more Okay. Yeah. Oracle apartment buildings. I don't know. I mean, just like you had it before, I think, right? You were part of the group before. No. Yeah, I think I remember. Have you considered a big apartment, one big apartment building like the last? Yeah. Okay. or two smaller ones. I don't know. I'm sure the value is in building one building compared to two buildings. I'm sure there's a loss of value. Yeah. So, here you're just diversifying your risk building some town homes and some apartments. Sure. I think it would. I agree. Yeah. If you could work with your easement people, I mean, that would be like you say, if you could get your because looks like the Dakota, what is it? Uh, what are the town houses called? Dakota Acres. Dakota Acres. Some of those properties are actually their back doors are right on your property, right? Or the easement. Yeah. Yeah. I remember I was like, "Wow, that's going to be kind of risky." But but at one time when it was designed, it was all part of one. Yeah. Yeah. It looks like you're in far enough. 30 ft it looks like. So you've got room there. So make doesn't feel like you're two feet from the edge. Yeah. Be a little little uncomfortable. Don't recommend that. Sunbathing out there. Where's the sun? So, I think ultimately I heard a lot of different things, but we're going to be asking for a pretty specific recommendation regarding this concept plan. So, I've heard, you know, you kind of toss out, well, it'd be nice if it was all apartments or nice if it was all town houses, but the I guess the reality is this is what is being asked if you would support this. Um, well, I would say turn the town houses to the back and and turn them and then put the apartment to the front. That's what I would suggest and don't make a nine unit minimum. If you're going to have a PUD, you might as well make it whatever they are, four and six and eighth or whatever the buildings would be if they turn them the other way. That would be my recommendation to look at it on a, you know, you'd have to draw it out and see what it would look like. My question with that would be like if and I'm just throwing this out there hypothetically speaking. So if you did flip them and the town houses or I'm sorry the apartment to the north, right? And the townhouse is to the south, right? Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Yeah. If you if you were a future buyer, would you want to drive through by the apartment complex to get to your townhouse? You also have that roadway that would go through. You would have to have the easement, too. What do you mean roadway that would go through? The one that's right now down there that will not happen. That that homeowners association will not allow connection. And they have that right. That's a private street. Well, we had that with the firehouse, too. We didn't correct. Yep. They worked on that. So, well, Kate was Kate was open to connecting to her parking lot um at the firehouse. She wasn't opposed to it. This association has said no upfront or um has been discussions I've had discussions with individuals on the board, not the board as a whole. Um that would that lead me to believe this I mean you can ask that yeah I think it would be impossible well work on the ements I guess I mean if let's say this this property was developed could the same assoc association management company manage the new one to help with like the through road and stuff like that or not saying that might be the best best situation but I don't I believe they use I don't believe they utilize a professional management company. So private management they just use their the residents. I appreciate that a lot actually but okay. Wow. Okay. It's a pretty new association. So the developer um was running the association until such time as there were not enough units built and sold to individual property owners. I can't remember if it's 75% or whatever. Then the residents took it over and I am not aware of any professional management association tied with that association. The same would be for Pete's Hill. I think they hire their own contract snow removal and I kind of like that a lot actually. But I mean that doesn't really work. I mean this is kind of like two neighboring farms then that don't like each other. Yeah. Like a nightmare. Actually kind of surprised the city loves that. Advocated for that for Whispering Hills when I was there for nine years. Oh well we don't control it. part of that in regards to this concept plan in front of us. Um I appreciate wanting to diversify and have two different things with the town houses and the apartments. I think it would be easier to have just all town houses or just all apartments. Um my I really want to hear back from like this for the safety aspect too. I guess one of my main things that I'm concerned about. Um, so I think that will give us a lot of direction on whether this is even doable. Um, sure. Yeah. Then we need a little bit more information. Yeah. I guess I don't know if that helps or not. Um, so could you speak up? Oh, sorry. Terrible with the microphone. And you talk quietly and I do. Sorry. Um I said in regards to this concept plan, I think I think either all town homes or apartments would be best. Um I appreciate that you want to diversify both the town homes and the apartments. I understand that aspect of it. I think my my main thing is I really concerned about the safety and the fire trucks being able to and whatever whatever else needs to get in there. So, I really would want to hear back from them um first to see if this concept plan even would work or if things need to change based on that. Does that is that helpful or not? I don't know if you guys have anything else or I shared Yeah, I agree with Brad. It' be It'd be nice to see if you could figure out something the gas line that's never going to be used. I mean, that's unfortunate that that's a limitation like that. Can't believe the state or the county can't tell you what's required to remove that. Yeah. Can you um talk to Mr. Speaker? I do not know. Uh utility companies are kind of like an act of god. They electric companies and gas companies, railroad Yeah, railroads, nobody can force, you know, once they own a perpetual easement, nobody can force them to remove that. Okay. Um, it's just a right that they've purchased at some point from that property. It runs with the land. We've been talking about taking it overons. It's not really Minnesota gas, Minnesota energy resources, greater Minnesota gas. Yeah. Yeah. I wish I mean this uh the cities just simply can't force it. We have no authority on that. Um it's good education piece. I just Yeah. Right. I think we do you have what we need? I think so. I don't think you're prepared to make a recommendation to the city council. So, we'll have to come back with you. Said there's a update to this that you're not sharing right now. Jake received a revised concept um that identifies some more open space. Yeah, it really just kind of showed the open space. Um there was an additional walking trail added and some landscaping features that were displayed. Um but it wasn't too much different to Yeah. generally the same layout. Yeah. Okay. Um We don't have a recommendation to the council. So, we'll be going to the council in December, I guess. Um, so um well, number one, they want to see the turning radiuses on on the fire trucks. Yeah. For them to maneuver the turns. I would say if it is feasible then all the additional information that the staff uh mentioned in that one slide. if that information would help as well for us to help um put this concept further um more definition on the open space. Thank you. Open space and the PUD were kind of the two outstanding items. Have you done any building renderings yet that I don't think we've uh I don't think you've shared any with the city, but you have exterior renderings on the building at all on this particular on the apartment building or assume the might be similar to the others. Okay. Yeah, 25%. Yeah, minimums are 25% on each side for the apartment. You just can't use vinyl for town homes. You can use vinyl just it could be a few different things. It can be um I can't remember if steel isn't But no, you can use anything I think except for the vinyl and wood. Confirm that. It's in the slide. I can go back to it. And did you look back at the old renderings of the townhouse layout that he had or have you seen them? Yeah, the old layout. of what they are going to the original of what that was proposed 20 years ago or whatever that one in that area to see the layout of the road and whatnot. I I think the aerial photo shows it, but see if I can find anything on that. Like I say, I don't think we're stuck on a 9 unit townhouse. I mean, no, it can be a combination, whatever mathematically fits. Yeah. I'm saying if you if you looked at it the other way and then maybe some the other way. I don't know. It depends on Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Uh yeah, steel siding is allowable. That's class three material. So you could use that on the sides. I can't remember. Is there like a minimum You have to have a minimum of 10 units per acre. I think the site is 3.1 or 3.2. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, right. That's that's the problem with the town homes is that um but that's part of a PU to could be we can't the M we we have to do a comprehensive plan amendment if they're going to go less than 10 units per acre then we have to reg it back to medium density residential under the comp plan and then you can and then that but town houses in a medium dense. Yeah, you can put them in either. Yeah, town houses in either. I think that might be in this lot situation. That might be about one of the best options available, I would think. So, I don't know what that entails, but you know, if there's an easement that it's like an act of God to get rid of and there's a roadway that can't be serviced through because of this issue, there's got to be other avenues to look at. So, right. I don't want to a project based on a statemandated thing that we we can we can you know we could override or do something different to make it happen. So it's been empty for 20 years. Yeah. No, I agree with you. But the easement I think at one time was going to be part of the green space or you know You can't really do anything with it other than pave over it, but you need green space anyways. I would recommend looking into I agree with that. It's a good idea. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. After Jake types up the meeting minutes, we'll try to get them done before Thanksgiving. Already almost there. Okay. Well, thank you. Appreciate it so much. Thank you. Yes. Yes. Happy Thanksgiving. Don't hit your head on the door. [Laughter] You looked up like, "Oh, yeah. I guess you're right." All right. Um, moving on. General business. Um, zoning ordinance amendment discussion. Fences. Yeah, this will be pretty quick. Um, at the last parks commission meeting, November 8th, it was decided by the commission to I'm sorry, uh, last year, November 8th, 2023, the commission meeting, it was decided by the commission to install bathroom enclosures for restrooms located in city parks. We plan to do one enclosure per year until all portable restrooms were enclosed. Boulder Heights Park was the first enclosure planned. Uh during planning work for that, staff had a desire to place the enclosure near the walking trail and the playground along Oxford Avenue due to access and maintenance. Uh the enclosure would be considered a fence, unfortunately. So fortunately, it's exempt from a permit due to the purpose of the fence. However, it still must meet the following requirements. Shall not exceed 8 feet except by conditional use permit. Um, we're expecting them to be about 8 feet in height. No fences shall be located within a front yard of any lowdensity residential zoning district. Uh, Boulder Heights Park is located on a corner lot and therefore has two front yards. So, the setback distances are a little uh greater on that location. Fences for special purposes and fences differing in construction height or location may be permitted in any district only by issuance of conditional use permit and upon evidence that the special purpose fence is necessary to protect, buffer, improve the premises for which the fence is intended, which we believe it would. Uh so here's just a little screenshot of Boulder Heights Park and what I'm talking about with this two front yards. Uh so there's the primary front yard and the secondary front yard. That highlighted area is um just the portion of the property where we cannot erect this structure. It's also where we want to erect it um just due to the ease of access. One of the possible solutions presented was to issue a conditional use permit for each enclosure that does not meet the requirements of a special purpose fence. Uh instead, staff recommend a zoning ordinance amendment which would create an exception for these types of fences for the purposes of screening portable restrooms on city-owned property only. This would allow staff to construct the enclosures in the future at locations that may not currently meet the requirements while avoiding the conditional use permit process for each and every enclosure. The planning commission is being asked to provide feedback and guidance related to the recommendation from the parks commission and staff to amend the z zoning ordinance to allow for this exemption. If the planning commission agrees, staff will draft an amendment for public hearing at the next meeting. Likely questions and discussion. You have a where this is? Uh yeah, I can pull up something. Just kind of understanding the concept here. You're familiar with Boulder Heights development, right? The location. Which one is that? Uh south of Boulder Point. South of the golf course. Yeah. on the where you used to live. KJ Walks Development where I live now. Oh, where he lives now? Oh, the cool people live. Fancy people. Our account our accountant lives there, too. So, do you like fences around your toilets? I got to see I got to see it myself. So, is this is on that corner right when you pull in and you left, right? The first left is that corner up here. What is that X there? Is that the toilet or what is what what is the big square there in the Oh, he's looking at that other The big square is the playground. The red square is going to be the future shelter approximately. Yeah. Okay. So, that's well within. You're not building in the yellow. Is that what you said you were? We want to we would like to show Can you zoom or can you zoom in more in that drawing? on it. So, wouldn't you put a restroom by a trail? Correct. That's what we're Because sometimes the portaotti people go on trails to service like at golf courses. Yeah, they do. So, I don't know if this is an issue because it's next to the playground that you want to have it closer to the kids or what. I don't you want to have it closer to the street. I mean, you're ask you're asking to be able to place a portaotti enclosure close to the street. Yep. For the reasons you said for access, for maintenance, and um I'm just going to throw out I'm going to be contrary to your recommendation, but they uh a porta port of people will be able to drive down the trail no matter where it's at. if it's on the rideway or if it's 50 feet down the rideway on the trail. If it's still on the trail, usually I mean I I don't know how big this trail is. How wide is it? It's 10 feet. 10 foot. Yeah. Well, I don't know what you're trying to How wide is it? It's eight or 10. I think it's eight. 10 feet. So, my comment is why can't the toilet go where you have it? I mean, they have 50 ft of hose usually that they just where the shelter is, you mean? Yeah. Um, so staff's recommendation is just we want it closer to the trail. It could go by the shelter. Um, we just don't want them if they have to drive across the grass. We don't want them driving across the grass. I understand that, but I Why did you draw it there? If you want it by the trail, that's the shelter. That's not the rest of the enclosure. That's a picnic shelter. Oh. Oh, wow. That the picnic toilet. Yeah. Where did that come from? Where where did the red shelter come from? Where is the shelter? You should pull it up on the screen and like point where with the mouse aerial view where it's supposed to be. Yeah. Uh so we don't we don't have a proposed location. We want it to go anywhere in pretty much the yellow north and south. That makes sense. Okay. All right. I would propose that it goes on the northern side of the playground closer to where Beard Avenue and looks like it's a Oxford come in. Dip there. It might be a slight grade, but it's that way you're close to the walking trail and you're close to the Yep. golf course. Yep. So that's like kind of Yeah. Exactly where we'd want it is somewhere close to the trail, close to the playground. This is not the Oh, you want the aerial now? Thought you wanted this one. Sorry. Oh, we have that. We're looking right at it. Okay. Isn't there one? Isn't there a a ice rink over in Rosene Rowena? Yeah. No. What is that? The over in Elco. Rowena's across from Wagner. Yeah. Hockey rink there. Hockey rink at Little Winds. Yes. Winds. That's what I'm thinking. Are they going to do a hockey in Boulder Heights? Okay. Is there do a hockey in Boulder Heights? There's not enough. Yeah, there is. If we have a hockey about your back on by the rink down there, right? There's a closure. No, that's actually at Wagner Park. The ice rink with the Roina Rowena. Yeah. That that just has a porta party like tucked in around some in trees. It's right next to the trail. Yeah. So yeah, this is what you're seeing here. So anywhere pretty much here. But what Jake is asking you is a policy decision. So take Boulder Heights out of the equation. This is a ordinance amendment that would allow um them closer to the right away. So um just what is that distance or do you support it at all? What do you think is appropriate? I'd like to see the park I mentioned in the Rose Hill or Little Windows Windows. Yeah. by the little windows by the Yeah. Right. Is there a toilet there yourself? Yep. Right here in between the basketball court and the playground. That's not a very hard spot to figure out a fence for. No, that one wouldn't need any kind of special. It It would meet setbacks in that location. So, this park wouldn't be How about the one down here that we said in Ruina? I just Well, we got some examples. You might as well discuss it. Rowas would also not be an issue because it would be located far enough away from the street in the property lines. It's right here. So, the guy drives back in there, right? Yep. He drives on that trail. That one's a little wider, it looks like. Yeah, that is wider. Yeah, the guys drive on it, too. Um, they service the parks. Are they going to the rink this year or if we get ice or cold once it stays cold for you got to talk to Corey about that. I digress. It's okay, Brad. So, how do we feel about fences around portaotties? We want to do I like the idea of a 8 foot fence around portaotties. Yeah, I don't mind it. I like it. I'd rather not do a conditional use permit for each one. I agree. Okay. So I think I think it' make it a lot easier ordinance that changes it to a city approved yes facility. Okay. No, it'll be a pretty easy exception. There's already exceptions listed. We're just adding another one. So we'll have something back for next month's meeting hopefully. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Uh miscellaneous planning commission meeting start time 2025. Um, so some years ago, I would say it's been at least five years, but we had had a discussion whether anybody was in favor of moving meetings up to six o'clock versus 7 o'clock. And I know at that time Brett was no. Um, but we're asking the question again if anybody is I'm open to it, but I'm one person, so I'm also open to it. That allows me to actually see my children or child before I before they go to bed. It doesn't work for you, Brad. I'm usually I work from home, but I usually am in my basement working till 5:30 and then I get up and make supper for the family and then get here just after supp. Today I made pizza from Domino's, so it was quick and easy and that's why I was here early. Do we want to wait for next month to see if Joseph and Probably because we're missing a few people. So, yeah, Joe, you know, he works I know he works two jobs. Melissa did say that she was in favor of um the six o'clock uh she when she text me that or she text me and just said that. Sure. But I think either either one works. So, but we should know um before the new year because we have to publish all of the meeting dates and times for the whole year. Sure. How does it work for staff? Either is fine. We don't have an opinion. Have an opinion. We're fine with whatever. Uh parks commission meets at 6. No. When do you eat, I think. Oh, when do it? It depends. Sometimes I'll go after work and get something. Otherwise, if it's going to be a quick meeting, I'll wait till after the meeting and get something on the way home. Well, you're already cooking for your family, Brad. Why don't you just bring dinner in? Yeah, I guess. Okay. Either works for us. Um, the city council, they have workshops at 6 and then their regular meetings at 7. But if they don't have a workshop, then they move their meeting up to six. So they are always at six at start. Okay. Okay. So more discussion on that next month. Yeah, we can we'll just continue it. And then community development updates. I have a whole lot of updates. We have a new mayor and council member starting. He's across the street neighbor, is he? Okay. Right across the street. Do you know him much? Yeah. Met him a few times. Yeah. Okay. Hasn't lived here for much more than two years, maybe. Yeah. Does he live in the one right next to that long gravel driveway or No. One year. Okay. Um we're doing orientation with them on next week or two weeks from now and this morning. So I don't have any updates unless you have questions on any projects that are going on. So has there any been any discussion on around here. I see this house is for sale. Are we buying it or no? We've been talking to the city council. All the basically all the properties here are for sale and they are not asking us to pursue purchase agreement on them. They don't care about my road ever going through. Well, I think they're waiting to see um we're in active discussions with this property owner that bought the Bart Bartness Bars property here that surrounds City Hall on whether they might make a connection to the north through their development, but we don't know when that might happen or if that might happen. But I think and the little piece of land that they own between here and there, they own that. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, that was kind of a convenient thing back in the 50s or whatever that was plotted out. Yeah. Yeah. To kind of shoehole uh shoehorn the city into a position, you know. Yeah. I don't know the history on how the this campus came to be here. Well, the railroad used to run right here. The railroad too over there. Yeah. But I mean, it was like these two properties that went right around this city hall here. I mean, it just both owned a piece north of it and to the east of it. So, it was just a weird weird concept. Yeah, I imagine that in 1990 or whenever this building was built, the city of New Market and it had a population of like 400 probably just bought the minimum they thought they needed for a fire hall and probably didn't want to buy anymore. But I mean, the the lot lines are just so Yeah. Yeah. But I mean this is a interesting property here, isn't it? I mean because that's where the road would go through someday. Yeah. Yeah. If the road goes there, it would Yeah. likely need some of that property. Rich has Rich drew up kind of a almost like a hand sketch, but how it would connect um because Bart Winkler did a wetland ation. So, we know the boundaries of the wetland or where you could sneak through there. Um, and Rich did do a drawing on how that connection could be made. Cuz how many owners are there right now? There used to be three. Now, there's one, two. Oh, there's two. Two two to three. The this uh Lois, whose house is for sale, and then Joe Free just owns two parcels. The city already owns one and then um Tracy Frees owns another one, but his wouldn't be needed for the road. What do we own? Um there was a house here that was torn down. We own that lot. We don't own all the way up to County Road 2. It's just kind of a little landlocked um piece there. That was for the road. Well, we bought it uh for two purposes really or three maybe. There was a blighted house on the property that was in terrible condition and we wanted to remove the blight. Um it was a garbage house and potentially right away for a roadway alignment and potential redevelopment. So, anything that wasn't used for a road, the road alignment maybe could be sold for redevelopment. What are they doing with Henry's old place? Um, Brandon, that is the house on Main Street. Oh, yeah. Way You don't have a schedule on that? No. Did they have to do any remediation for Has that been completed? Yes. Okay. Sure. Okay. Sure. No. None of that one. That one will be I don't know. The garage looked like something AI would take. So, yeah, he did look at them, but he wasn't really interested. He looked at the house, too. Yeah, I'm sure the house would be a lot of work. Yeah, he said it wasn't really worth worth his time. Sure. Okay. Any developments sold behind my property? I know they're developing. Yeah. See all the equipment? Yeah, there was a building permit that came in unfortunately the lot like right behind your house sitting on my desk. Brandon's reviewed it and I'm just gonna review it. It'll be the first one on that street except for the existing one. So, of course, all of all of the lot they've closed um so far. Yeah, just the one is the ones on the wetland developer campus. Yeah, one's getting pretty close to being done on the other side of the street. Yeah, they must be doing it them most of the work themselves or something. That one is Yeah. So, it's a daughter of a home builder from Wisconsin. Sure. And he's doing the house himself. I believe. Okay. We're like, why isn't sighting on that? It's been a long time. So, we just assume that somebody was doing it privately. Yeah. Like you're driving by like said drive by. Look at this big house compared to the little old house. Yeah. I'm going to be staring up at McMansion. It's great. I don't know. footage wise what they are. But yeah, yeah, they're pretty pretty nice houses really. Um I can't remember how many they closed on, but they closed on so Lenar um bought all of the lots in Ridge View Heights and they are set to close on all of the lots in Boulder Heights. Um but they haven't closed yet. They're shooting before the end of the year. They haven't closed yet. They haven't closed yet. They closed on a couple. There was a couple platted lots from the older subdivision that they closed are they closed on, but all of the stuff in the new subdivision they haven't closed on yet. So, yeah, we'll have a neighbor soon. Yeah, I I take that back. I think they closed on 15 of the older platted lots. Is that one built out now? Boulderheads, the the land, I mean, is it all roads are all in? Yeah. We're working on some punch list items and well I mean they're all been paved built and paved but are there expansions in the forthcoming or is it all landlocked right now? Um the expansions are determined on Boulder Heights. Yeah, Boulder Boulder Heights is I don't know. That's what I'm saying. Are they already done with all their phases? Boulder Heights is done with all of their phases. Um there's 30 acres to the south of Boulder Heights if you keep going down Oxford. Um that is within our comp plan and I believe might be coming on the market. So we might be seeing somebody inquire about development there. Was that the people that wanted the trend blow road trees? Um they're just to the west of that 30. Yeah, the 30 is agricultural. There's been a lot of sales of those acreage homes. Okay. Past few years. Yeah. I see. And I'm assuming Lydia Lane is never going to open up to Beard Avenue. Um, it won't open up as long as the township owns the road and it's not paved. Am I Oh, you know what? I'm looking at the other side of the road. I'm looking at I guess partially it's paved up until the rocks. I'm gonna share my screen. Are you talking about right here? The one that was always Yeah. Yeah. Yep. Yeah. So, as long as this is gravel and the township owns it, there won't be a connection. That was the the agreement the old city council had made with the township. The township um they wanted this street paved by the developer all the way out to 91. um it was part of the agreement to annex the property. So instead of the developer paving what was adjacent to his property, which might have been could have been one theory is that he would have paved beard and and paved to here. The township wanted him to pave out to here instead. So, the developer of Boulder Heights paid for that paving up to about here. I don't think it'll ever connect in our lifetimes. Um, but it could connect in the future. There is some property to the south of Boulder Heights that is owned by developers. Um, but they could access that through the public streets in Boulder Heights, so they wouldn't need to use beard. Yeah, that would again delay that. This is something that's kind of on our radar to start talking to um Scott County, Rice County, the township on how we're going to handle this Beard Avenue going forward. That's 10 highlighted there. Yeah, this um these three here to total like the 30 acres that are going to be coming up for sale. Nice. Okay. See which are you on that little curve there? H you see where that cuddle sack is uh right in that area. I see. So is that road down road? Yes. Unfortunately, uh it needs a street sign by the way. I don't know who's responsible for that, but JA needs a street sign. Um, okay. Yeah, they'll uh the developer is working on those last punches. Then I would say that uh Oxford and St. Andrews, somebody needs a stop sign. I don't care which way it goes, but we did discuss that with our city engineer. It's actually going to be on the city council meeting on December 5th. um his recommendations and I think it's on not on Oxford but down the side streets that they'd be excellent. So that road right there would go up to that 30 acres. So but the city council does approve those um recommendations. So originally I think they were planned but not until the development got so big where they would be needed. Now they're obviously you can tell they're starting to be needed. There's a lot of kids over there, which is great because I want to see that park thrive. But yeah, just people drive slow or do not drive slow. Do you see the park getting good use? Oh, yeah. Really? You see the walking trail getting Yes, actually I do. Even I do if I go through there like during the day and there's usually somebody walking out there with their dog or something. Yeah, I think there's I think that does that trail connect up to the town homes on Pete's Hill. Uh, Boulder Point. No, it does not. Yeah, it does not go up to Pete's Hill. There's a guy that walks an older gentleman that walks by our house every day and that's his route, I guess. Did they build those little lots right there on the east? Right there. Just north. Just that one lot. The one lot was it? I can't remember what we on beard. It's It's a pretty nice house. Very nice house. try to squeeze two in there at one time. That's a very nice house. Whoever got that one, uh, they did a good job. We should We should have done like a before and after picture of the site because it just I don't know how they could fit that on there, but they did. Looks like a pretty good size house. That's a huge house. It was uh It's actually the highest valued houseion issued a permit on. My son said a house sold over there for a million or lot did. I don't know what what he was talking This is over a million dollar house. This is like a million and a half. Thank you. Sweet. I don't feel bad. What's that? Oh, here. Um if they closed on it. Yeah, looks like they have um It's not in there yet. Yeah, this is just a lot price. So, I mean just the lot was 200,000. Well, I don't know what he was talking about. That's one that came to my mind, but I was Oh, that was probably the one. If you don't like if you don't like mowing your yard, the best house that's in the area is if you go scroll up town of Pete's Hill. That house right there. He does mow it though. That big steep hill. No, that one right there. Yeah, it's got a gigantic uh deck that you can It's a really nice view. Yeah, that one right next to it. The guy when I see him mowing that on his riding lawnmower going up that hill, I just I want to call the cops to have him on standby. It just doesn't look safe. Yeah. So is that you say almost built out or pil there or probably it's at least 75% because I think that's when they took there's probably what's that looks way different than when I used to go up there. Yeah, I like that development. The HOA is only the town homes, right? Yeah, I think so. Yeah, because the streets are all public unless they have some HOA related to the sign and the mailbox bank or something, but otherwise I'm not sure. Maybe they have covenants. It's nice to see them, I guess. Yeah. So, I guess one thing that we did forget to update you on is the at the last meeting, you reviewed a concept plan out by the school for that Wagner property, and the city council also recommended um that some kind of parkland be incorporated there. So, they sent it back to the developer and were waiting um to get their revision. Okay. Sorry, which lot is that? I'm sorry. Um I think Yeah, I think you were Were you at the last meeting? No, this was um Eagle View Estates that north of the was part of or people that were uh What's their name? Um, it's the Waggner family. I know, but wasn't uh one time it was at a purchase agreement with with Gary Tuby and Ted Quil. Yeah, Gary and Ted was on-site marketing. Yeah, it's it's not anymore, but it's that land. It's that land. It's 50 acres. and we reviewed a concept plan and there was some um differences of opinion about park dedication within this development. Um but the city council made the recommendation. They didn't say they wanted the full four acres or 8% but they wanted something there for kids in the area. Okay. Hoping we could see that tomorrow. Yeah. Any other updates or questions? Okay. Anyone want to make a motion to adjourn the meeting? I'll make a motion to adjourn. I'll second it. All right. All in favor? All right. Meeting adjourned at 8:29 p.m. Thanks, everyone.