Follow [Music] the order of the uh planning commission of the city of Columbus. It is 6:00 p.m. and make have the pledge of allegiance, please. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. Number three on the agenda is the consent agenda. Uh looking for approval of the meeting agenda for tonight and the approval of December third September 3rd 2025 planning commission meeting minutes. >> Do I hear a motion? >> Go ahead. >> I >> Yeah. >> I Kim would like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda from September 3rd, 2025 of the planning commission meeting minutes. Second by Mike. Take a vote. >> Susan abstain. >> Kim I. >> Mike I. >> Andy I. >> Robin I. Okay. Uh. Next on our agenda is the public open forum. Uh is there anybody here who would like to speak to us tonight about anything not on the agenda? Anybody at home? All right. And we'll move on to the Valera apartment complex proposal concept review. Uh this is not a uh this is just simply a concept review. Uh they're going to tell us what's going on and we're going to listen and then we're going to ask them some questions. >> Okay. >> Maybe I do. >> All right. >> I have uh uh Marty Okonnell. Are you on TV? You are Marty. Marty, if you'd like to step up here to the table, thank you planning commission members. Um, my name is Marty Okonnell. I am a developer with uh Valer Development Company and um here before you today to present our concept for the Hornsby Street property um next to the Caribou uh coffee. Um before I dive into that, just to give you some um further background on our group development company, we are an apartment developer based out of uh Richfield uh Minnesota. So we're local to the market. Um we've been around since 1999 and since that time we've developed a little over 50 properties encompassing about 3,500 units. Um our bread and butter so to speak was always developing um rent and income restricted housing um both general um occupancy non-agger restricted and senior um housing. More recently in the last couple years we've done more um market rate housing as well. Um, so anyways, uh, we're going to be, uh, pres I'm going to be presenting a concept for a 200 unit, uh, market rate housing proposal, um, at the Hornsby Street site. Um, Mr. Davis, uh, do you want me to go through the PowerPoint or do you want me to kind of just walk through the the proposal here? Um, as I'm doing right now, >> I think if you just go through the PowerPoint, that's gives everybody a real good background and we got some visuals and you got your concept. >> You can take a look at the the screens and then just give me a thumbs up when you want me to switch slides. >> Okay, perfect. Awesome. >> So, um, anyways, yeah, our mission statement's up there to provide quality housing aesthetically pleasing, environmentally conscious, and uh, built to last. As I'd mentioned, um we've typically done a lot of workforce and senior affordable type housing, but more recently we've done uh market rate um housing as well. Um and most of our developments have taken place within the uh Twin Cities metropolitan area, although we have done um a number of developments in Rochester, Minnesota, as well as a few um outstate properties as well. Um the development team for this project is uh Blair Development. And just for other quick background on our our group, uh we used to be known as MWF Properties. We recently underwent a name change uh beginning August 1st of this year uh to Valer Development Company and that was simply to better align with um our in-house property management group, Valer Property Management. Um they manage all of our properties and we share office space with them. So, there's a lot of synergy synergies there with um just understanding kind of the day-to-day activities at the site level and being able to react to anything that's going on at their properties um in a uh timely manner. Uh the architect would be Cosbolson Architects. They're also local to the market. They're based in Bloomington, Minnesota. Um we've worked with them on a number of projects and they actually are um kind of one of the leading architects, if you will, for multif family housing developers within the Twin Cities area. Um the construction contractor would be Eagle Building Company. Um as you can see they've completed 36 properties in the previous 5 years. So they have significant experience doing multif family housing. It's another group that we've worked with on many of our past projects. And then uh as I've mentioned the property management group is in-house Fuller Property Management. [Music] Um this next couple slides just give you an idea of some recent developments we've done. Uh here is a property called Concord Flats. It's a 162 unit market rate apartment building that was uh built in Burnsville, Minnesota, completed in 2023. Um the proposal that we'd be presenting to you here today, it'd be similar kind of in nature to this development here in terms of size and scale. It's this is a four-story building. Um there's a level of underground parking at this building. There's amenities such as a club room and game room, balconies, um a fitness center, things of that nature. Um here's some pictures of the inside of the building as well as a uh the patio and grilling station that we have outside of the building. Um and here's what inunit uh features look like. Quartz countertops. There's in-unit washer and dryer. Um LVP flooring. Um things of that nature. Um, and then this is just another picture of one of the recent development we've done um, in Bloomington, Minnesota, Lindale Flats. This has rent and income restrictions associated with it. So, it's workforce affordable housing. Um, but still a really nice looking product. And then here's some pictures of the interior of uh, the Lindell Flats development. Um, so the site that we're looking at here today, I won't spend too much time on the site as I'm sure you're already pretty familiar with it, but um, it's just off of 35W um, in Lake Drive um, Kitty Corner to essentially Running Aces. Um, and it's just north of the Caribou Coffee, the existing Caribou Coffee on Hornsby Street. Um, there's a lot of good connections to the site. Um Scambia Trail is, as everyone's aware, getting redone right now and we'll have a pedestrian trail that um runs along that entire street. And then Hornsby Street has an existing pedestrian trail and uh as Forest Lake uh does their kind of portion or of uh the redo of Hornsby Street. That pedestrian trail will get extended to the north up past Clear Lake. So, there's going to be a lot of good connections to the site that we're really excited about. The site will also have good visibility and access to 35W. Um, you know, we anticipate that, you know, a lot of people that potentially live at this project will be people commuting in and out of both the Twin Cities metropolitan area, um, as well as, you know, Forest Lake and surrounding communities. Um, so the actual development proposal, as I'd mentioned, we're looking to develop up to a 200 unit market rate apartment building with a mix of studio, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom units. uh it' be a four stories of residential um units and then one level of uh enclosed parking under uh that structure. Total parking, you know, give or take. And again, this is kind of a concept at this point, right? So, um we don't necessarily have hard counts on the parking, but we're looking to do about a 1.7 um uh parking ratio, which is for every one unit, there'll be about 1.7 parking stalls available. Uh a lot of that parking again will be enclosed and underneath the building and then the remaining amount of parking will be uh surface parked all off street. Amenities include an outdoor patio, uh an outdoor playground would be a dog run, community room, club room, game room, fitness center, a package room, and also community Wi-Fi. Um, in-unit features would include stainless steel appliances, uh, kitchen tile backsplash, quartz countertops, LVP LVP flooring and washer and dryer. Here's another view of the site, the actual aerial of the site's about a 5.3 acre site. Um, we connect to the existing storm water ponding facilities that the city owns both to the north and to the south of the site as shown on here. Um some other things we like about the site as well is you know the surrounding land uses are guided and zoned for commercial um uses. So like this could be you know commercial or excuse me restaurant spaces or you know um maybe it's a pharmacy things of that nature. So things that people that are living in this building could either work at and walk across the street to go to their um place of employment or they could obviously shop and do convenience type activities at those surrounding locations. Here's how our site plan or our concept overlays on the actual site. Um it's a large L-shaped building. I know it's kind of hard to see on the actual screen in front of you here. Um, so I'll kind of try to explain, but uh the entrance to the building is um kind of at the corner of the the inside corner of the L. Um, as as well as the patio area and then just to the right of that would be the playground and uh the dog run is kind of in that area as well. Um, there's two little drive lanes showing to the underground parking structure of the apartment building. And again, I apologize, it's a little bit hard to see on this um screen here, but um and then we have about uh you know, 195 uh surface parking stalls shown in this plan and approximately 1 acre of open space or open area on the lefth hand side. Um we also have a walking path that encircles the entire building. Um, we're also, you know, again, this is a concept, so we're flexible on where we can locate or where where we will ultimately locate maybe some of these amenities. Um, we're certainly open to to feedback. Here's some pictures of some developments that we've both done and CS Wilson, our architect, has also done. Um, this kind of gives you an idea of what the building from an exterior perspective could potentially look like. Again, there's balcony shown here. Um, yeah, just wanted to provide this to show you some examples. Uh, some key benefits to the city. Uh, one would be, you know, this development would represent a very large increase to the property tax base to the city. Uh based on our estimates, uh you know, we're we'd be projecting about $550,000 of total property taxes that'd be getting generated between the city, the county, and state uses. Ultimately, that boils down to what the property is assessed at um at the county level. Uh but this is a projection of what we would um anticipate for the amount of property taxes that would get generated on a 200 unit building. Um it provide new housing, 200 brand new units of you know highquality rental housing. Um as we all know there's a big need for housing across the metropolitan area and uh this would help fulfill that need. Uh it benefit the surrounding commercial users. Uh ultimately um commercial uses are driven by obviously their customers and nearby households. And this is sort of a big injection of new potential households living in the area that could um you know that would be looking for convenience stores nearby or restaurants or things of that nature. Um and then lastly, you know, in in our opinion, it's it's the highest and best use of what we see as a key development site in the city, right? It's a very prominent um site that is visible uh has a lot of visibility to Interstate 35W. Um and you know we're proposing what we believe is a high quality uh and also dense development at this at this site. Uh this is just a really preliminary timeline of what we would see as next steps in the development process. Um a lot of this is going to be you know dependent on um you know financing conditions in the marketplace and um the speed at which we can work through uh you know finalizing a purchase agreement if we you know were to move forward on this and go through the entitlement process with the city as well. So um it's got a long lead time. We wouldn't anticipate closing on the land and starting development until, you know, probably over a year from now. Um, and it could take longer than that. Uh, it just kind of depends again on um, uh, market conditions. With that being said, I know that was a lot uh, and there may be a lot of questions, so uh, feel free to ask me any questions you may have. And thanks again for giving me the time to present this concept today. Thank you for coming up and seeing us today. Um, I just had when I was looking through this earlier, um, I noticed that you're going to be looking at this point. I I know we're talking a long way out, but um, for basically two exemptions possibly or variances of our one of our parking and two of our density. So, it is something that, you know, I am aware of. It's not something we have to deal with tonight, but I just wanted other members of the of the uh board to be aware of that that they are two those are two, you know, fairly big things, but I think they're certainly doable. And you answered my other question about the open space. Is that where you're going to put everything else? And no, the answer is no. That's not where you're putting all the other outdoor stuff. So that's good. >> Yeah. Um and we can certainly look at putting stuff there if that's a preference at all, but um right now we're setting it aside as open space for people to just to use, you know, to maybe walk their dog or whatever it is, right? >> Yeah. Yep. I think that's good. I think that's good. Um your timeline, you know, understand it's a long timeline. So, um, I appreciate that you come in this early and let us know what's going on and, uh, that way it's on our radar and, uh, as we get closer, we'll remember that you've been here once before and, uh, hopefully we remember you've been here before and we'll, you know, have more discussions as, uh, time rolls on. Anybody else have any questions? >> I'm good for right now. Well, I thank you for your time, sir. >> Yeah. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks, plenty, commissioners. >> Thank you. >> Um, I also did want to address the changes that you mentioned about increasing density and um changes to our parking regulations. That is something that we've been talking to Marty um and um Valer about um in our code while working up to doing this potential project um and working through how to do that through a PUD process um which allows some um wiggle room with specific code lines uh depending on other improvements that are done on the site. So we have been discussing that. Yep. >> And the other item too with this in regards to the parking, there's that essentially 1 acre of open space which could be used for location some of those shifting of those amenities that can also be used as an area for potential parking expansion if needed through proof of parking approval on that. Uh I will say we've been dealing and talking with Marty for about 6 months now. They've been very good to work with and uh I think they recognize that in these negotiations it's always a two-way street and they've always been willing to listen to what our requirements are. We've been listening to their needs and we've come up with something and just so you're aware is they sent us a proposed purchase agreement today which we'll be looking at and possibly working on too. So I think they have a good proposal and I think it's essential that uh this property be developed in this nature for all the reasons that he gave. One of the other reasons too and he mentioned and alluded to it briefly is the property across the street. We do have a purchase agreement in effect now with the local developers who's looking for to do for essentially retail, restaurants, professional and personal services. He is very excited about the possibility of this coming in and thinks it will enhance his opportunity to market that property in a more timely manner. Also, >> I I was thinking of that as well when I was reading through the proposal that we had talked about that other >> property across the street >> and I thought, "Oh, that would be fabulous." >> Yeah. And and ju just think of these two addages. Number one is that retail follows rooftops. The more rooftops we can get, the quicker it's going to be to convince some of these other type of businesses that we'd like to see come in. It's going to enhance that. And the rising tide floats all boats. So, there's lots of spin-off effects to this. And it's a good deal, I think, for the city in terms not only the property tax base. it'll increase, but it looks like it's going to be something that would complement what we're looking for in terms of architecture and exposure of that intersection to proper development. >> Yep. Excellent. Okay. Uh our next item on our agenda is the La Meer uh subdivision variance request. If I could have you uh theers please step up. [Music] Hello. Um, I'm going to uh give you guys the preamble on this one. Uh the La Meer family is proposing a subdivision of their property at 14561 Ferman Street. Um their concept is to combine uh the existing partial with a portion of um a landlocked 40 acre track loc located located in the rear um of the lot in order to meet the minimum acreage requirement and then subdivide that property into two parcels. Um the reason for the request um and coming before you at this point is the um existing parcel has a road frontage of 225 ft. The minimum requirement um in the rural residential district is 220 ft. Um so any subdivision of this property would therefore require a um variance um from the city code's road frontage and access sta standards. Um, we've met a few times um, regarding this proposal and prior to having them fill out all of the crazy paperwork and spend a lot of money and time on this proposal, they wanted to first present it um, we recommended first presenting it in a more informal setting to see if there was any um, consideration for this variance. So, I would like uh to hand it over to you guys and see um what you guys >> just tell us a little bit about what you're hoping to do, why you're hoping to do this. Um we get a general idea from your own words. What >> Thank you. Uh thanks for allowing us to be here. Special thanks to Eleanor and Jack too for helping set this meeting up for us. So, currently our son uh and daughter-in-law, they live uh just over the bridge um south of our property. And the idea here is we're trying to find a way to bridge all the gaps um and get consideration for the variance that we're asking for so they can build a house an ADA compliant house on the property uh with their daughter-in-law's disability. Our plan is to to the east of our existing lot lines. The Pruy state had 40 acres which my father-in-law uh has recently purchased from his siblings. Our plan is to purchase 20 acres of that from him and that would allow us 28 acres of land as Eleanor spoke to to at least initiate having us enough land to provide them by the 5 acre lot or whatever you know minimum would be required. Uh, you know, we we understand, uh, speaking with Eleanor and Jack, you know, the the things that the city have in place with, um, lot lines and and road frontage and all these different uh, concepts and and things that are in place. So, understanding that, we're here to ask if a variance would be possible with what we have kind of laid out on the screen. >> Um, yeah. Can you pull up that one, please? Mhm. >> So, this one and and we realize that what what we we would end up with is a fairly skinny front end to our lot, right? And we would have to create, from my understanding, an easement along our existing driveway to properly get the road frontage on both lots. Um, you know, from from our point of view, you know, we understand looking at a plat map, this would not meet or fall to the current guidelines or standards. Driving by on the road, if a house was sitting on that lot on the north side of my driveway, it would look completely normal, you know, in our opinion. And so kind of in a nutshell, that's why we're here tonight. That's what we're we're asking, you know, what could possibly happen um from your group in terms of would we be able to move forward and and try and get a variance? >> Sure. >> Um I be able to >> Sure. Go ahead. just um understanding the the the uniqueness that this these lots would have in the in the surrounding neighborhood. Uh I just want to speak to the situation um from our side a little bit. Um about 7 years ago, my wife was diagnosed with something called spinal cerebellar attack. It's a genetic neurological condition that her cerebellum will atrophy over the course of her life. Makes mundane regular things difficult. Walking, eventually talking, uh, eating, stuff like that. The uniqueness of this is we want to be able to get ourselves in a position to be next to a support system. me being a she can't work. So, me being a single contributor, I go to work someone around like my family, my my parents living right next door, my grandfather and the lot on the other on the two lots north of of that one. Um, we just want to make sure that we can be in an ADA compliant home next to support and and that's our uniqueness that we're bringing to you guys. Thank you. >> Um, I guess my concern really is how close this other driveway would end up being to your neighbors, how wide of a driveway you would have to have because you have to be able to get emergency services to the back 20 or 40, whatever you want to call it. um which requires quite a wide driveway um between just the width of the driveway plus what needs to be on either side of the driveway to get an emergency vehicle down there, a fire truck. Um I look at that and I say I I I don't know how you can how you can fit that with only 225 ft. um you've in essence the way things are written right now is you've only got 5 ft to spare and I look at it as you're going to need at least 30 ft and I myself also I think you know I I think about precedent and God I would hate my neighbor next door to me to put a driveway in next to me so that he could or access his 40 acres that sit behind his house and sell it off or something, I would be devastated myself. Um, that's just my opinion on this. Um, I don't see where I would vote for this simply because of the dangerous precedences. I sympathize with you. Oh my god, I sympathize with you so bad. I really do. And I wish I would be able to say something different than what I'm saying, but that is my opinion. I don't know how my cohorts here feel. Um, if you would like to speak. >> I go ahead. I agree with what you're saying. I have two relatives that had a taxia and I understand the restraints that you're going to have and it's not if an ambulance or fire truck comes it's when and how many times and you know it is something that I think the space is going to cause a problem and it's not that I'm not sympathetic because believe me I do understand this firsthand hand and I don't know how to to fix it. >> Would I be able to ask a question? >> I'm sorry. That's my wife. >> Oh, >> I forgot she was there. >> Don't perhaps don't. >> I'm not coming. I'm not speaking from the heavens. I promise. I just had to be away for a business trip. I don't I'm trying to understand what you mean because there already is a driveway that already has fire trucks for many years up and down and ambulances up and down. So, I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. >> Well, my there's a 900 foot driveway there already. It's >> but city ordinance, if I'm not mistaken, requires that each home have their own driveway, their own address, and their own 220 ft of >> Brontage Road. >> The >> Okay, I think from I think I'm a Go ahead, Elellanar. I completely understand the reason at least when we were talking about the emergency vehicles that often come up when we're using shared uh when we're talking about these shared driveways um is that it does need to be wide enough and have a wide enough easement that they can pass each other since there's two homes on the end of that driveway now. Um so we do have that establishment or that precedent to um increase the driveway with when it's um shared and since and then establish a easement over it that could be turned into a road later down um later in the future. Thank you. Really stumbling over. I think yeah I think the concepts that we I think the concepts we submitted show the space um for a culde-sac that could be developed in the future. I actually shared the same sentiments and thoughts regarding the the driveway portion. Um, and from the standpoint of an easement thinking to future and not family members owning these properties, it's possibly not advantageous or attractive to future sales, future purchasers of having a large easement for the neighbor's driveway going through the property. and potentially at a certain point in the future a road perhaps a culde-sac or you know curb and gutter at that point. So that's where I went with this and also just looking at the topography of that that back parcel um looks to be challenging as well. So that was my thoughts in addition to the the road frontage as the as the code does require at this point. It just seems that for a family that's been in the in Columbus for 135 years that has will have a large number of acres um to deal with to be not be able to figure out a solution here um is of course disappointing understand and hear everything that you are saying but um would request that every stone is overturned. Um, we aren't new to the community. There is not um sales of these properties anywhere on the horizon. Uh, I grew up in the house to the north of where I live right now. Um, so I've been in in this area myself for for 50 plus years. So, um I guess I would ask that there's some work around this with the special circumstance and the disability and the request that families can be together and support each other that we don't just shut it down, but rather become creative. Um I don't know if you're up for that, but that's what we would request. I I can uh I can appreciate that. I really do. Um but there are also procedures and requirements we need for appeals and variances. And I have a list of A through F, A through F and A through D of conditions that have to be met uh for us to even be able to do this. Uh and unfortunately just the first two requirements eliminate you there uh in my opinion again you know this is just an informal meeting where we're just trying to tell you you know >> whether you want to pursue this or not >> and uh so that that is where I am at that it sounds like a majority of the board uh may feel that as well um that that is unfortunate. I know the kids have have spoken with their real estate agent. Um they have done a search in Columbus for ADA homes and 80day there aren't any. Um the closest is within Forest Lake and well out of a young couple's range of over a million dollars each for those homes. Um, I guess I would like to know, um, how I guess it's maybe a question beyond this planning committee, but it's one that maybe you need to consider as families do try to cling together and support each other through difficult times. And what is your, you know, this is this is a disabled person here, and is there not any accommodations that can be made for that? Scott, did you say you wanted to do >> uh Rob, but I did that. >> It's all good. Uh Rob Bush, I'm on the council. Um and and I just went over to Eleanor cuz I I was kind of confused on what we were working off there, but Eleanor, um I I believe it was not too long ago we had something similar with the uh Janinsky place and a shared driveway. is that what are the differences between that parcel and what we're working with here today? >> Um the difference between that parcel and what we're working here today is there is still requirements to establish a roadway easement over um that and then establish a development agreement to um develop the road at the um a later date or if the city wanted to develop the road that they could not vote against that action. >> Sure. Um and with this particular case, it is too narrow to even establish that easement. >> Okay. And that's based off the setback from the property line you're saying? >> Um this is based off of um >> width of the property. >> The width of the property. >> Okay. >> It is as narrow as we um allow. >> So just trying to be creative with you. >> I Yes. if if they were to move their driveway and and and and do away with the other driveway and move it closer to one side of the property. Is that doable that way? >> Um we can >> just trying to explore options, right? I know. Yes. >> The commission's fallen within what what they can only do, but I'm trying to find maybe a creative solution. >> Creative solution here. Um we can definitely >> not to step on everyone's toes either. I'm sorry. No, I'm I'm all for creative solutions. Like I said, it would certainly require that um road frontage variance um and set that precedent in this neighborhood. >> Okay. >> Um I think that the but we can explore it. The other things that we've talked about in the past is um we do have a um temporary family care unit which is essentially allowing a secondary apartment structure in their home. Um it's not ideal obviously if you want to have separate homes, different lives. Um but we do allow that as an option in our code to to allow both families to to remain in the same home. >> Um that's our current we've talked about some allowing um other provisions of that since this is something that comes up so often. I do I do get these particular um requests a lot. it. And the reason I bring it up, right, like they're trying to do it the right way. Um, >> yes, >> I think there's a lot of places around our community that there is people living in pole barns that we have no clue about. >> I I know that. Yes. >> I do thank you for coming in, you know, doing it the right way. But >> personally, I'd like I don't I don't know if there's a creative way to to do it and if the rest of the council will be on board. I don't know that. You know, I'm just speaking for myself and >> possibly being in your situation someday. So, >> I understand. >> I have a question. Andy Heinen. Yes. Um, >> how wide are your two neighbors property? And do you know the neighbor? Like, would they be able to say buy 15 ft from each neighbor? Would that require reszoning or >> um I think that would make both of I haven't measured exactly. Okay. um if that would make the neighboring properties too narrow. >> Okay. Because I was just looking because they obviously between the two of them >> between the two of them they have the narrowest one. So it looks like there might be a little leeway on that if you could buy 15 ft on either side. Get your 30 ft for your driveway. >> To answer your question, we know both neighbors pretty well. Um the neighbor to the north in between our property and my dad's actually is really in favor of this for the kids and is a contractor and wants to help them realize this. I don't know if they would sell or what we could do about property switching around, but I think that both of our neighbors on the north and south are really reasonable. >> Okay. Yeah. Cuz if you need 30 ft and you could figure out a way if it works with both of your neighbors to get 15 on either side, then it sounds like >> that portion of the >> that problem would go away. >> That problem would go away. >> Thank you. Thank you for the ideas. >> So if that particular problem went away, what would we be left with? I know it's a >> I might have brought us down a different road, right? And I apologize to everyone, but it's just I don't >> No, I think it still becomes, you know, still non-conforming and still need variances, >> right? Um, I was trying to think in how that would look as well. And um, I see quite a bit of of lot splitting and combining and um, getting to be that that narrow um, does pose challenges, not just against the code, but in in property lines and easements and and future development. Whether or not anything is obviously in the plans for anything currently or in the near future, that's not to say that it can't happen. So that's um that's my thought. >> Yeah, I think I mean it would still >> propose um challenges. [Music] >> Um one thing I you might have touched on it a little bit, but when you're as far as uh like conformity in the neighborhood goes, if you are standing on the road looking at this lot currently, you can't see a house. It's an empty field in between two how the other two lots. And so what he touched on at the beginning was um you put a house in that field, it you're driving down the road, you'd have to look at plot lines, which you know, of course, someone coming in to purchase land here or build a home, it they're going to look at lot lines. But um as far as conformity, the look of the neighborhood, the the cohesiveness uh visually it does look like there'd be one house. But yeah, >> from the road is what he's trying to say. The current the current home. >> Mhm. Yeah. >> I I have a question for Eleanor. So, say down the road, obviously this plot of land would go up for sale. Is there a way to just say that old house, everything's going to be sold as one lot, not two houses, two lots? Is it able to just be sold as one 28 acre piece, say 50 years down the road? >> Um, >> can you make that part of the agreement? >> I don't believe so. >> Is there anything regarding deed restrictions in our code? I didn't check before I came. >> I would have to double check what our deed restrictions are and um probably talk to our legal team a little bit about that. Mhm. >> Um it would be a requirement to if they were going to sell as one property at the end. Thank you. Um they would have to demolish one of the homes. >> Okay. >> Um we do definitely do not allow multiple homes on a singular lot, >> right? >> Um sorry. We're going to try to get a street view. So here >> so we can see what you guys were talking about. Maybe it's this one. >> That's it. >> Mhm. >> So, the smallest spruce trees are more or less the property line on the left side of the screen. >> Um, >> here. >> Okay. And then the fence to the south of our driveway is the existing property line. And then our our house right now is down at the end of the driveway. It's just shy of 1,000 ft from the road to our gas meter behind that ring of trees. So their house essentially would just be right out in the middle of that wide open field. And it, you know, without knowing all the regulations and and laws, it it it is frustrating and and we know that you're all aware, you know, what we're trying to do and the situation. It's a special circumstance that we we know we're trying to get, you know, past all the hurdles to get this done. Uh it is unfortunate that you know my wife and I could buy the 20 from her dad and end up with 28 and we really can't utilize it for what we're trying to do. >> Yeah. The and the the the lot lines flat lines were not created by us, you know, that was decided by the estate. Um, so that's hard, too. You know, >> and her dad's already kicking himself for not thinking in advance and making the lot lines a little more pleasant to be able to do, you know, something like what we're trying to do. Um, like wider lots instead of the more pencil lots. >> Yes. Y >> any >> I said Rob for sake of just trying to find out that location. You're about what? Halfways down Ferman. >> It's about We're about 2 miles off Crossway off of Lake Drive. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah, it's about a m It's about a mile. Well, Crossways Lake Drive is what a a mile or so off of Lake Drive and it turns into Ferman and we're about another mile down on the left. And >> sure, >> I think Heidi is I believe Heidi is fourth generation Peru and Justin would be fifth generation Peru and I it's just the family unity and and the support and all the things we talked about. Um yeah, I don't know it. Okay. Well, I I think um we have to come up with a more creative solution than what we can do as a planning commission. Um like I said, we have guidelines that we have to follow. >> Understood. >> And uh if it were come down to and I'd say just at this point, you know, you're we're you're early on, but at this point, I would say I would not recommend a variance. uh just simply because of the width of the lot. Um but you have to decide, you know, based on what you've heard here tonight from the other members as to whether you want to try and come up with something creative and come back to Eleanor and Jack. Um maybe they can come up with something so that we can get past our rules that we have to follow. Um if you can come up with that, I'm all ears. I I I I so sympathize with you. You know, um I've seen landlocked parcels a number of times and if it's not there, we've always had our hands tied by the rules and regulations that uh are set forth already. >> So at this point, I will wish you all of you sincerely good luck and I hope we can come up with something different than this proposal at this point. >> We appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Well, thank you. Thank you so much for the time and for the um the willingness to think it think about it. Really seriously think about it. Appreciate it. >> One one other thing from the staff perspective, we'll be more than happy to sit down and see if there's something creative that we can come up with that may meet your goals and what the plan commission has to work with. If you want to call Eleanor and set up a meeting for maybe one day next week, maybe we can sit down and take a look at a few things maybe to look at initially and come up with something else that could come back before the planning commission for their consideration. >> We'd love to do that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Davis. Appreciate that. >> Um I will reach out to you guys right after this meeting um with some of the feedback that I've heard from uh everybody else. We can talk to Kelly and we'll we can keep pursuing a different option if you'd like to do that. >> We would. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Bye-bye. >> Bye. >> Bye. >> Bye. Oh, ma'am, don't worry about that. >> Yeah. [Music] [Applause] All right. Um, next on our agenda here is we're going to discuss uh ordinance on fence regulations. Elanor, do you have anything that you would like to say first? >> Of course. Um, so we've discussed this a couple times now. Uh, we have some actual language on paper. Our current code does not have a formal fencing section of the zoning code, which is um fairly unusual to start with. um we have them kind of scattered throughout the zoning code in various different areas and it's a little bit vague. Um so the ordinance put before you right now is going to try to both consolidate all of the rules that we have um scattered throughout the code uh in one understandable section that is easy to find as well as address some of the issues that we brought up in previous meetings such as um formally um discussing the height restrictions of six feet um can be taller in commercial areas as um if approved as part of a cup um no corrugated metal or plastic fencing, no barbed wire or electrified fencing unless it is for the um keeping of animals, livestock or crop protection. Um and I did include the section about the tolerances on arterial roadways. That's what the the starting language of that would look like if we if we choose to continue to pursue that. I have heard some mixed thoughts about that in previous meetings. Um so trying to come to a consensus on whether or not we would like to include those um height exceptions as well as um any additional things that we would like to add to our fencing regulations, remove from our fencing regulations. Um I would like to kick off that conversation. My initial um just things that came to my um my thought right away were I didn't find anything that really was just clear and concise on setbacks. >> Mhm. >> Um you know, so basically from what I could tell is you could you could put it as I'm thinking of the road right away. You know, snow plowing um you know, snowmobiles, four-wheelers, really anything. And I think maybe there should be some setbacks established and kind of depending upon the height as well. Um, and then for the arterial road way, the height exceptions, um, is it specified somewhere that maybe I missed because I didn't quite see it here, but anything, you know, over 6 ft or even up to the 8 ft, um, would require a building permit? I think I had the question on that cuz I didn't see it specified. >> That can definitely be specified. I do know that per state code for building code, anything above 7 feet will require a building permit. Um in I think that can definitely be added to that. We included that as under review and recommendation of the zoning administrator, but adding building permit would make the most sense. Um for your mention about setbacks, we have never had setbacks for our fences. They can be right up against the the property lines. uh they cannot be in the right of way um but can be typically anywhere on your property that you choose to put them. Um when people reach out to ask I recommend go get a surveyor um because you're going to run into a lot of problems with your neighbor um and I recommend that they put up maybe two feet back um two or three feet back. It's not required. Well, you you you have the competent in here unless otherwise clearly >> that's pretty vague. >> Okay, >> that's that's very vague. >> Um I know in my previous house there was discussion between my neighbor and I where exactly our property line was and he wanted to claim was where he laid his sod down. Well, you were there first. That doesn't give you that doesn't give you five feet of my yard. >> It doesn't. No, it does not. you know. Um, so I I think that needs to be less vague. I don't know if we can require people to get a survey, >> but boy, I tell you what, >> you know, people have land and they're up out here and they're mighty particular about it. >> I know I am. I don't want to give up even a foot of my land. >> I do not. I'm the same way. >> I have a question. >> Yes. In where I live on the lake, we have a person next to us who put up the fence and restricted the people three houses down from be able to see the lake, including mine. >> Mhm. >> from our house. And I think when you're taking away somebody's view that they pay to be on the lake to see it and you're confined because of a fence, okay, it's a hard one to swallow. We have to have some guidelines that everybody can follow. >> Does the fence go all the way basically almost to the lake >> pretty much. >> So there's not like the ordinary high water line setback or anything like that for >> as a part of our shoreland ordinance. Um there is some setbacks for that regarding uh any sort of structure. >> Maybe they didn't follow that unfortunately. I >> I have a question about the setbacks. Isn't there like a 10-ft utility easement on every property? You have the buried underground lines everywhere. >> Mhm. >> So, if you build a fence, you could potentially hit a line. So, >> they are not typically utilized currently um for that. And it is up to um property owner discretion to call um before you dig. But I mean, if you want to add a setback, you just do your 10-ft utility easement line. That way, if the snowmoers coming through, no one's going to worry about hitting a fence. >> Generally, a fence is an acceptable use in that. And if there's ever any need for it for the drainage or utility easement itself, the requirement is the fence would have to be relocated. >> Okay. >> Mhm. >> I have another question and that is uh plastic fencing. What is plastic fencing? Is it um resin fencing? Because there's some beautiful resin fencing out there that I would have no problem with somebody putting that in. However, you know, plastic picket fencing, you know, we're talking something totally different, but a resin fence is usually a nice looking fence. And I I don't want the generalistic of plastic to include resin fencing. >> Okay. >> So, >> and then there's the big one that we were talking about, and that's the 8ft fences uh that line uh along our major thoroughfairs, if you will. M >> um myself, I don't want to see this. >> Mhm. >> Um for two reasons. One is we'd end up with a jagged landscape. 6' 8t 4T 6t 8t 4T. It you know I I think I think it would not look nice and I forgot what I was going to say >> for >> oh keeping keeping the uh uh the previous things that we have done with 8ft fencing around commercial properties and that is we've required an opacity >> uh element of covering 80% of the fencing. We have done it that in the past for particular projects but not as a standard. There are definitely 8 foot tall fences um in commercial and industrial areas that we have not required to be screened. >> Okay. >> In the past >> I would think this would be an area where that would be a place that we would want that >> 80% opacity. >> Yes. >> And I see that as a particular problem for homeowners >> Mhm. >> to actually be able to do that. They think that they might be able to do it, but I don't think most people realize what it takes to cover an eight foot fence to opacity >> when they do it. I mean, we're talking big trees and bushes. >> Real big trees and bushes. >> All right. Um, this exception would almost only apply to those who already have an existing tree line um at the edge of their property if you think about it that way. Yeah, they would have to put it on the inside of their tree line. >> So, those were my biggest concerns uh with uh the fencing that you know we're trying to come up with a with a good ordinance that's all comprehensive. >> Okay. So, I've heard a couple things about adding setbacks. How are we um feeling uh about adding some setback provisions to the rural residential districts? >> I'd be in favor of that. Do I have an idea what exactly those should be at this point? That is that goes into the the looking at all of our um >> didn't have much of a thought process for that as far as >> we need a little more guidance on that. >> Understood. Understood. I wanted to see what you guys were um clarifying what our current rules are and then you guys can see where where gaps are that we can add on to them. Um and then for moving forward if we want to take a informal vote at this point on whether we want to include the 8 foot exception for art roadways. Um just for my clarity if we can move away from that and start going into the other things that we've been talking about. We can we just want to sound off. So, in essence, you would like us to uh decide whether arterial roadways are going to get an exception. Is that what you're trying to say? >> Do we want to keep that provision of the code or or move into >> or reinvent a new code for arterial roadways? Is that what you're saying? >> Yes. Do we want to keep that section uh and continue developing it? um or cuz I've gotten mixed feedback on that. >> I think the arterial roadway height exception is not something I want to see. >> Okay. >> Plain and simple. >> Wonder. >> I don't uh I I don't see any beauty in it. >> Um we we I love our rural area, but I don't want to see it suddenly look like little fortresses. my opinion. >> I'm in agreement. >> I would agree as well. >> I agree as well. >> Perfect. >> I do not agree. >> I Good. >> Yeah. I I I um personally um I think there could maybe be some more workings to it to make it a little bit more >> to maybe more of the the liking. Um my thought process is you know if it's if it's a good material if there is some you know um screening and some opacity. Um, I guess it's also too my thought process, you know, it's my property and I would like a fence and, you know, I'd like to have it 8 ft tall and if I follow the rules that are written and get a building permit, um, yeah, I don't I I personally, my thought process is and my feeling is that it it it doesn't I don't have a strong feeling that I did. Yeah, I actually I'm okay with it. >> Okay, >> that was a long roundabout. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Is there anything else you would like from us, Eleanor, on this? Any questions? >> Going through the the guidance that I've gotten from you, just so I can clarify if I've missed anything. Um, is clarifying some of the materials a little bit more. Um, especially around the the plastic comment. Uh, that was a piece of code that already existed. Um, that was already a rule that we had. um the corrugated metal or plastic fencing so we can expand on to the allowed materials. Um some of the location stuff considering some um providing some options for setbacks that we could discuss a little bit further. Uh clarifying stuff in around Lake um overlay district specifically because that is a different um zoning district than the majority of um city of Columbus. um and making sure that that's included in our shoreland, protecting the shoreland from that. Okay, step back clarifying uh when a certified survey may be required. I did um look through a couple of other neighboring cities codes and it was often left vague on whether or not they would require a certificate of um a certified survey for fencing along property lines. That was language that other communities had used, but I can do a little bit more research on when to require that. Um and removing the arterial roadway exception um unless we want to bring it back at a later date. Um, for now we'll we'll remove that section. Is there anything that I missed there? >> I do not believe so. >> All right. I think so. >> I will come back with a revised version. >> All right. Thank you. >> So, anybody else have anything more to say on >> No, sir. >> On that before I move on to the next item on our agenda? >> N. >> Okay. Next item is my commissioner's report. And uh I just want to say I was remiss in not welcoming you. >> I'm so sorry uh to to our humble group of people here. And Susan, it is nice to see you back finally. >> Thank you. Good to be back. >> And that is all I have for today. Uh Elanor, do you have anything? Um, I don't have a ton to report. It is Columbus Fall Fest this weekend. Um, on the 26th, it will be uh hosting a movie night at Running Aces. Saturday the 27th, uh, we'll have uh having festivities here and in the the park as well. And then worship in the park on Sunday. And then there will >> pancake breakfast. >> Pancake breakfast. Um, and worship in the park on Sunday uh this weekend as well. Um on our next meeting, October 1st, um we will be having um a joint meeting with the city council. We mentioned this earlier when we were talking about the animal ordinance to discuss some of that as well as a non-binding concept review will be coming in um to present before both you guys and the city council uh so they don't have to come to multiple meetings for this particular um project. >> I lied to all you all be back for another meeting. >> We're looking forward to it. Hey, I don't I don't mind it. um for that meeting. We will also um potentially have a public hearing just for the planning commission. So, we might have to have a little planning commission meeting and then move into a joint meeting um as we go along to make sure that it all works out. >> Excellent. >> I will clarify that. Yes, >> Robin could be recognized. Thank you. Yes. Um, typically under the commissioner's report and the planning commission, is that all of the planning commissioners? Don't they each get a chance to report on something they might have done? >> I know the last few meetings and I just >> we've been rushing through it a little bit. >> But I just point of order really. >> Yeah. Okay. I I >> typically like that the council >> mayor would ask, "Do you have a report, Jenny?" and then go down the line. And typically it we might or might not, but >> sometimes >> in the future. >> Okay, I'll remember that. You guys remember that, too? Hold >> you hold me to it. >> Everyone has to have a fun little story to share. >> Nothing for the record. Did any of you have anything? >> Okay. >> Likely not for the foreseeable future. >> All right. Uh number 10 there. >> Uh this is Susan. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Take a vote. Kim I, Susan I, >> Mike I, Andy I, >> Robin I, we are adjourned at 708. [Music]