[Music] Good evening at 6 o'clock. We'll call the meeting to order. Abby, would you take the role, please? >> Commissioner Hoyman >> here. >> Commissioner Wagner >> here. >> Commissioner Steeler >> here. >> Commissioner Young >> here. >> Commissioner Andy Uh, Chair Gerard >> here >> and just noting for the record, Commissioner Stender is absent this evening. >> Thank you. >> We are ask if you're able to please stand and join us for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the stand indivisibley and justice for all. Chair is looking for a motion to approve the agenda as presented or with changes. >> Motion to approve it as is. >> I have a motion to approve. I have a second. >> I'll second it. >> I have a motion and a second. It's a non-debatable motion. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed? extensions. Motion carries unanimously. This is our open forum comes next. This is where if anyone would like to speak about any issue, they are more than welcome to come up at a lectern and state your name and address for the record. Once we have spent a couple minutes giving your thoughts once we have heard from everybody um we will close the open form and move on to our next agenda item. I will point out that uh we do have two public hearings tonight. um both for the uh interim use permit for the Smoky Oat dispensary and for the Chestnut Creek second edition. And there will also be a time at at that time the there will be a public open public public hearing that we will welcome comment on any of those applications. So with that we'll open the open form. If anyone wishes to speak at this time please step up to the lecture and state your name and address. Spend a couple minutes giving your thoughts. It's for either issue >> you can talk on either issue the development or the >> you can you can speak on any issue. Now there will be also during both applications that are before us tonight there will be a public hearing section where we will also take public comment at that time. So you can speak at either one of them that you prefer. Is that is that clear? Any of the three. >> Anyone wish to speak at the open forum? >> Seeing no one come forward, we'll close the open form and move on to the consent agenda. We have one item on our consent agenda. Approve the minutes from the regular meeting of August 13, 2025. Chair is looking for a motion. I move that we approve the m uh regular meeting minutes of August 13, 2025. >> I have a motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> I got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> Opposed? Abstensions. Motion carries unanimously. We'll move to our first regular agenda item. This is a public hearing for an interim use permit for Smoky's Smoky Oats Smoky Oats Oaks dispensary at 115 Lake Street North. Abby, I believe you're presenting. >> I am. Thank you, chair. Members of the commission, as noted, Smoky Oaks LLC um has applied for an interim use permit for retail cannabis shop to be located at 115 Lake Street North. As a reminder to the uh planning commission, the city has approved adult use cannabis products in uh or um businesses in different zoning districts within the city. This is the downtown mixed use district which we allow for retail sales. And as long as there is not another cannabis based business within uh the required buffer distance, the city can consider IUPs. the interimm use permit that IUP is very similar to a conditional use permit where conditional use permits run with the land forever. IUPs are a little different in that they are interim and we can put a timeline on them and we additionally can impose conditions generally speaking they are personspecific to that property as well where a conditional use permit will run with the land forever. Um so the existing uh tonight the planning commission's asked to make recommendation to the city council on the IUP. The planning commission does not have outright authority when IUPs are contemplated. So again, in that downtown mixed use district, uh we would be or the facil the business would be looking to operate pretty standard hours as noted in the code, 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 11:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday, 11 to 6 on Sundays. Part of our IUP process is site plan review. the it the retail sales uh would be located within the existing building located at 115 Lake Street North. That is a vacant building. Many of you probably realize the property has been vacant for some quite some time. Um they would the retail sales would be the entire main level of the floor um fronting Lake Street North. um site plan review. Really the only exterior change is that the applicants would be proposing uh HVAC to help with the air filtration system, odor control and mitigation that could be located on the outside of the building or will be located on the outside of the building. I'm going to kind of zoom in here kind of tucked away um likely visible from the street but very minimally visible with um some screening in front of it. very small unit um being placed in what is a really small unit uh tenant space on the on main street. Additionally, the code contemplates what kind of signage uh businesses can have. They are proposing two temporary banners for the business until permanent signage can be installed. Permanent permanent signage was proposed as part of this um application. So this would be the temporary banner would be located on the roof line or on the uh par kind of the front false parapit roof and then um permanent signage was proposed as noticated noted in the staff report. Uh where the signs are located is not allowed for permanent signage. We just don't allow for roof signs even when they're located in that false uh kind of false front. So staff is working through with the applicant signage that would be compliant with the sign code and the cannabis license or the cannabis uh interimm use permit code that that signage would be located on the windows um to also help kind of dress up those windows some. One of the things that um the state requires is that the products on dis or for sale cannot be visible to the public. And so as you'll see in their application, they are proposing frosted out windows. Um the desire to kind of have a walkable, pedestrian friendly downtown. Generally, frosted windows aren't necessarily the most pedestrian friendly. So, looking at incorporating that signage into those windows to try to make it a little bit more appealing on that main street uh pedestrian scale is one of the things that we're still working through with this application. The signage will conform though to the code itself. Um when we received comments from our agency partners and other staff at city hall there just a couple are worth noting the building permit uh the building department did note this is going to require a building permit for the interior space. This space has been vacant. This could be considered a change of use and there could be uh requirements needed to meet accessibility requirements fires life safety requirements. So all those will need to be met through the building permit process. Those are just fairly standard after any sort of planning zoning entitlement. Um, additionally, though not really related to the interim use permit, the city does have a program in conjunction with the state to remove lead copper um, service lines. The this property has been identified as having a lead copper service line and it will need to be replaced in a 10-year time frame. Staff is bringing this up now, though not tied to the IUP. We want to put the um tenant and the owner on notice that if they're going to be doing interior repairs, now might be the time to be replacing that lead copper line to become compliant with city and state regulations. As noted in the staff report, the the proposal um meets the findings of fact required for issuance of an IUP. Included in your packet is a draft resolution for city council's consideration, which does include 14 conditions. Um, your task tonight is to take take public comment, discuss, and then take action on the I the um the draft resolution. Staff's recommendation tonight is that you recommend to the city council the approval of draft resolution 0922501, which would grant an IUP to Smoky Oaks LLC for a retail cannabis at 115 Lake Street North for a period of five years. Any questions? questions of staff question. Um I know signage is being reviewed by the city. There's they're allowed to have a temporary banners. >> Do should we be looking at that as to what that is or that the city's going to >> city staff would also approve the temporary banner? We have a temporary banner regulations in our code. Businesses are allowed with them a couple times a year for a limited amount of time. >> Okay. Susan, >> this business will be required um to have the Forest Lake Police Department um conduct regular enforcement actions as it does to a cigarette or liquor dispensing establishment. Correct. I can't say that they are like um cigarette sales or liquor, but the use is required by state to be inspected at least one time a year by law enforcement. Um we are still uh working through what that program really looks like, but they will meet be have to meet those statutory requirements of being inspected annually. I did notice that I I don't see that um unless in in condition number 11 applicable standards established in the city of Forest Lake city code. Um if if that if if non-compliance with with age um restrictions >> is included as a potential. >> Sure. So, the city does have a two-step approval process. Um, I'll I'll maybe just run through the whole cannabis process for everyone. Um, the first thing they need to do is get preapproval from the state, which includes the plans that you see tonight. After they are pre-approved by the state, they need to get their zoning um approval. They need to build out the facility before the city can issue a license to um Smoky Oaks LLC specifically for this. The license itself has conditions for those inspections, non-compliance, that sort of thing. Our entitlements process does not just we have a little bit of degree of separation. We really look at land use, not as much of operations unless those operations start spilling out into the the public. Generally, our retail is it's retail use, keep it in the building. That's mostly what planning zoning is focused on. So, after they're able to obtain their if they're able to obtain their city license, then they can go and get their final license from the state, then that would start those triggers for annual inspections or any sort of um random compliance checks, that sort of thing. So the planning zoning IUP or the city's IUP doesn't necessarily talk about inspections of that nature because we address it through the licensing. >> And just to confirm, this would be the second establishment in the city. Correct. If if it continues through the process. >> Correct. This is the second IUP the city has um would have approved for retail cannabis in the city. >> Thank you. Other questions? Yeah, I have a question about the the door, the front door. Does it have to comply with ADA specifications as far as being wide enough for for wheelchair? >> Um, I believe that is so that is one of the comments that our building uh inspections division did flag is the property's ex accessibility um in general, not just necessarily that front door, but whether or not there's sufficient maneuvering space throughout the retail facility. they'll need to meet those requirements at the time of building permitting. Um, it could change that front entryway slightly. Um, at the moment I don't have details on that though. >> Is consumption allowed or samples allowed? >> No, not on the retail. So, the state licensing has um I don't know, half dozen, eight different types of cannabis, adult cannabis use or cannabis businesses. There's um retail, general retail that like this would be. There's also places that allow for manufacturing. Um on-site consumption is its own type of use and we don't allow for that type of use um in conjunction with the retail use. Is there anything in the city's code about the products being sold being consumed outside of the facility or on neighboring properties? >> Um the state law um defines where adult cannabis may be used and generally does not allow it in public places. Additionally, the city's code does prohibit it from being um consumed certainly in public parks. I would have to go back and look at that ordinance to see if we defined it in any public space, but I know we specifically had a exemption to allow to not allow it in public parks. >> Okay. Because I think there's the large communal parking lot behind all of these buildings. That would be a very suspect area for that to happen. >> Yeah. And I believe that that is in violation of the state law requirements because if I remember correctly, you need to uh consumption can only happen on private property and I think that there is like even maybe an indoor requirement. All of the parking lot behind the property is um public parking. Those are good questions and I can follow back up. I don't have the answer tonight. Abby, on the on the other one we approved, can you refresh my memory? Did I thought we had approved that for three years versus five years? >> Um I believe that this body wanted to reduce it to three years um but the city council approved it for five. >> All right. And then my second question is Abby is um is the city have a cap on I know we have to allow at least two. Do we have a cap on the max number in the city or are we just going to let the free market dictate? >> Um, so, uh, just for everyone that's in the room, the state law does require one license, um, is required for every 12,500 people in the city's population. So, because we have a population over 12,500, we have to allow at least two. Um, if our population exceeded 25,000, then we would have to allow at least three. the cities too would be u meeting that state requirement. We have asked the city council twice now if they would like to cap the number of um retail establishments within the community. Thus far the city council has not wanted to do that. They have wanted it to be a kind of a free market. Uh when this goes to the city council, we do plan staff does plan to ask that question. Again, there are a couple just small little areas that I think we need to kind of ask some questions and get a little bit more detail. Currently, the city does receive about three two to three um inquiries a week for new businesses and most are surprised that the city does not have a cap. And so staff has maintained with the city council that we should have a cap. Um we can always start small and we can always expand later but should we all of a sudden um you know have many many businesses it's hard to scale back once you've kind of permitted things. So uh going to have that conversation with the council. I think this is forwarding to them September their next regular meeting. Don't know the date off the top of my head. >> Thank you. Any other questions of staff? The applicant here wish to add anything? Have you know if they're here? >> Oh, yes. Yep. >> Do you wish to add anything? Sir, we we ask you to step up. State your name and address for the record, please. >> Hi, how's it going? >> Good. >> My name is Scott Hansen. I'm one of the principal owners of Smoky Oaks. So, uh, I grew up here. Scott, do you have an address, please? >> Oh, yeah. Sorry. So, I uh 14,000 Pocama Lake Road, Pine City. So, I live up in Pine City. Uh I grew up here, Forest Lake. I actually grew up going to that uh specific boat launch for Fourth of July every year. I moved to Oregon and have a lot of experience in this. And I understand there's like probably a lot of worries with smoking in public and security. Um I want to stay on top of that. I just want to mention that that we're like hoping to work as closely with the city as possible to make sure we're following all the rules and just making that area still a really safe place for everybody. Um, I also just wanted to say I did send a couple other photos of the signage and I changed some things based on the uh um the meeting today. I read through the whole planning commission. I said they they wanted me to remove some things and so I sent some extra pictures just so you could see what um other kinds of blockage we would have for that front area. So, uh don't have to do it tonight, but if you have them, you can. >> So, I just found them. So, I can show them here. There's two different options that Scott had emailed over. >> So, this is a kind of like a more idea, right? I'd probably pay an artist to really do really good work here and then put that up and put our logo kind of on the window. So, art probably on the inside of the window and then put the logo on the outside. The other one that I gave was uh some curtains and I figured, you know, if I get some nice curtains that could work, too. But, I mean, I just want to give options and show like we're willing to work with you guys however we need to do to make it as safe and, you know, as compliant as possible. I know I worked in this for seven years in Oregon. I've helped them expand into other states. Uh couple different companies into New Jersey, Missouri, and uh I know the number one thing is always just staying compliant and like working as closely with the city as possible. If you're not doing that, I just feel like the the business doesn't thrive, you know, in general. The public wants it to be a safe space and I don't want people ordering outside the building smoking and, you know, bringing down the quality of the I'm trying to build really trying to go for a high class location here. So, >> I think that's it. >> Any questions of the applicant? >> Thank you for your time. >> This is a public hearing. We ask if anyone would like to speak to this application for Smoky Oak dispensary, please step up the microphone, state your name and address for the record, spend a couple minutes giving us your thoughts. Once we had heard from all parties, we will close the public hearing. It'll come back to the planning commission for um decision for the city council. So, with that, we'll open the public hearing at 6:22 p.m. Does anyone wish to speak to this issue? I'll ask again. Does anyone wish to speak to this application? Abby, do we have anything to be read into the minutes? >> No. >> Seeing no one come forward, we will close the public hearing at 6:23 p.m. Commissioners, what's your pleasure? Oh, and just for your edification and knowledge, uh there's a nice write up with the 14 conditions and uh verbiage on page 10. It starts Hearing no conversation, I'll make a motion to recommend the city to approve the IEP request based on conformance with the applicable code requirements and criteria. when issue it through draft resolution 09-22-25-01 subject to the I believe it's 14 14 conditions >> I'll second that for you >> I have a motion to second any discussion any discussion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I >> I >> opposed >> no >> abstensions motion carries This will go to the city council for a final decision on I'm looking at you, Abby. >> Thank you. O September 22nd. >> September 22nd. Good luck with your project. We'll move on to item 7B, a public hearing for Chestnut Creek second edition. Two items, a preliminary plant and a PUD amendment. Abby, I believe you're presenting. >> I am. >> Thank you, Chair Gerard, members of the commission. Um, tonight before you, Dr. Horton, MN has requested the city approval of a planned unit development amendment and a preliminary flat for Chestnut Creek second edition. Um, for reference, I've got it up on the board here for folks or up on the screen. Uh, Chesnut Creek was originally designed, approved by the city and started in 2016 and that was a 220 lot subdivision that half of the property had been developed. So, we've got half a neighborhood that's kind of been sitting out there almost completely developed out for nearly 10 years. Tonight, um, the Dr. Horton has come in looking to develop the second half and this preliminary plat is the opportunity to vet through the proposal before you. It's about 52 acres give or take a little single family detached homes on both um 55 foot and 65 foot wide lots with a net density of 3.36 units per acre. They're looking to build um 119 new homes on that west side. So included in the staff report for you tonight is the notation that the property is guided for low family uh low to medium single family residential and needs to meet a density of 3 to six units per acre. That's a part of our comprehensive planning requirements and met council requirements for housing density within the city. as note noted in the staff report that net density of 3.36 um does is the um I think it might have been mistaken here that's our gross density our net density is no our net density is 3.3 regardless we have actually 2.3 units per acre with the current development site as proposed >> gross is 2.3 >> gross is 2.3 it's mis it's misstated in the staff report so We are even though we are putting quite a number of homes on those 52 sites, our gross density is our net density is not meeting our mandatory 3 to six units per acre. Susan's like looking at me. Regardless, depending on how we calculate our density, we're between 2.3 and 3.36 units per acre. Um, planned unit developments are allowed in our code to permit more creativity and flexibility. As noted already, this was approved as part of a planned unit development. And page two of the packet of the the development um report includes the bulk standards for the development and the flexibilities that the development is asking for as part of this development. So, the current zoning district is MXR1, which would allow for a minimum of 7,500 square feet per unit. The development was approved to have 7,700 square feet per unit. So, we are now allowing a minimum lot size smaller than what the development was originally allowed. There's two areas that the developer has asked for some relief, and one of them is to allow for the 55 foot wide lots to be located on 7,100 square foot lot. Um, uh lots and then to have a reduced sideyard corner. So if you've got a corner lot, your front yard is 20 feet, those sideyards allowing for 20 feet as well or the front is 25 ft allowing for 20 feet as well. Um water and sewer mains were installed through uh part of the development site with the first phase of Chestnut Creek. I should have been kind of going through here for you folks. Sorry about that. Uh the development would finish off the installation of utilities connecting to an existing line on 210th Street North. The extension creates a looped um system which is going to help improve the utilities in the area that are um that don't have necessarily the pressure needed for adequate service. All the properties in the neighborhood are serviced. It's just will enhance the service through this neighborhood. Condition of um of approval by the public utilities would that we'd be vacating any sort of old easements needed for those utilities. Storm water treatment is proposed in five different treatment basins. There would be some slight modification. Um no modification would be needed but part of the storm water runoff would be directed to those existing storm water and wetland facilities. I'm gonna scroll to this page here. Um, one of the things that the development is doing is trying to compensate for some of the issues that were a result of the firstphase development. So, in the first phase development, many of the homes um and their associated improvements were built encroaching into wetland buffer areas. So there's no fault of the existing homeowners that are there and that neither the city nor the wershed has taken action to uh for any sort of retribution to existing homeowners. What Dr. Horton has done is worked with the watershed district to increase wetland buffers on the west side. So this proposed phase to compensate for the buffers that were lost, the buffer areas that were lost in um that were lost in the first phase. It does require about an additional acre of wetland buffer area. Um so we recognized that that first phase buffer area issues were a result of just um multi-jurisdictions having some influence in the area and maybe not having well documented uh property records for wetland areas. So what the city is now requiring is that all buffers would be located within platted drainage and utility easements. Buffer signage would be installed in on each lot. Lot surveys would show all boundaries of wetlands buffers and sod limits. Uh those would be recorded against each property and sale disclosures would include specific language to wetlands and wetland buffers. Um the streets are proposed to connect to the existing street system coming in from separate neighborhoods are um both the existing phase one and the associated properties to the west. Connections would be made for future development to the north and the south and city staff has requested that the developer provide temporary culde-sacs on all of those areas where we would not have roadway connections. That is one of the things that the city has been requiring, city staff has been asking for and the council has been requesting because oftent times what will happen and a good example here is in lot 22 and 28. We've got our minimum kind of roadway there got houses on both sides. There's really no place for service vehicles, utility trucks, mailman to turn around and so we really do need those turnaround radiuses. Um trail and sidewalk connections would be proposed along one side of all public streets. The sidewalk would be the responsibility of property owners and the detach single family homes would be meeting the minimum parking requirements and um at this time no signage is being proposed. One of the other items worth noting is the developer is still proposing uh some woodland preservation throughout the site in areas that have not been disturbed by the existing grading that had happened on the property. Additionally, um landscaping would be installed on the properties and that landscaping would be done with respect to um making sure there was sufficient enough property or um landscaping within front yards and rear yards. If rear yard noted in the staff report, if the rear yard woodland area seems in excess, staff would necessarily would look to the planning commission and city council at final plat to accept that instead of the addition of additional trees. We don't want to overtreat properties. Um parkland dedication has been an item of discussion with the developer. uh during the initial fa uh development of Chestnut Creek, the city did not require parkland dedication as part of the either the first phase or the second phase. So, the developer is proposing tonight a lot configuration that is very um almost identical to what had been originally approved in the original preliminary plat that has since expired. As a result of that, no parkland is being proposed to be dedicated. This is going to be going in front of the city's park and recreation commission next week for their recommendation to the city council. Developer did hold a neighborhood meeting regarding this and that is one area that the neighborhood has expressed concern. Um that neighborhood meeting was held on October August 27th here at city hall. So staff recommends you review the preliminary plan PUD requests. um take public comment and then discuss the proposal before making a recommendation to the city council. Um staff has included the findings of fact which do do note that the project is in conformance with the 2040 comprehensive plan. It is consistent with our subdivision and zoning regulations plans consistent with that first the original PUD the first phase addition provides uniform lots circulation landscaping open spaces um it will not negatively affect the health safety welfare or create an unmititigated burden on the community um in that additionally um the project would be approved with flexibilities but otherwise is consistent with all other city codes and requirements. So, upon your discussion, staff does recommend you move to recommend the city council approve Chestnut Creek Second Edition. And there are four um conditions of approval, and we can go through those if you'd like. Do you have any questions for me? >> Susan, >> did you say that sidewalks will be the responsibility of the individual property owners? >> After the sidewalks are improved, maintenance of sidewalks are maintenance. Yes. Okay. >> The developer will be installing sidewalks. >> Yeah, that was Yeah, I recognize >> No, we're not going to pass that on to our future homeowners. >> Other questions? Just Another question is staff. >> Abby, do you know what the target audience is for these homes, especially the four and five bedroom homes? >> I don't know, but the developer is here and that's something that definitely you could ask them. I noticed that a lot of the lots are really close to wetland. Yep. And I was over at Shadow Creek Development and some of the one house there, it's like five feet to the downhill of the wetland, which would make it pretty impossible to raise children, >> you know, >> because I I mean, I grew up with a a halfacre lot and there was plenty of room to play, but I'd be afraid to raise a family where the child could easily easily get into the wetland. Is there going to be a requirement for fencing or anything for the wetland to protect the kids? And >> there there is not any requirements for fencing, but the wetland buffers are non-disturbance area intended to be non-disturbance areas where the natural vegetation should be a deterrent. Um but no, there is no requirement on the city nor do we have any code requirements to um put in fencing along water bodies or wetlands. >> Other question? >> Um kind of what Jesse said, are the homeowners going to be required to carry extra insurance for being the wetlands are so close to their houses? >> I can't answer that question. I don't know an answer to that. Um general public might be able to in public comment tonight share their experiences. Um but wetlands are designed as part of the storm water system. So, the city um does review the city and the wershed district do review the water going into the anticipated storm water going into this facilities and to make sure that the low floor elevations are above the bounce associated with the storm water or wetland areas as they water comes in, drains, goes up and down. And I also noticed with the landscaping, it looked like they were putting the trees in the front yards. >> We do have trees proposed in front yards. >> Um, do they have to be set back so far from the street? >> They do not have to. Um, they have to be out of the right of way. >> Okay. >> The developer and I have talked about that that can be a challenge when we do have these narrowed front yard areas in our MXR1 district. But do also acknowledge that there is probably opportunity to they don't all have to necessarily be overstory, you know, big trees. But yes, there they do need to be in the front yard areas. >> Susan Cher Gerard, you may you may remember this better than I. I could have sworn that when we did the first edition here, there was a commitment because of the small lots that there would be a significant park in the second edition >> that I'm I may be misremembering, but that's >> Excuse me, Susan. >> Yes, >> there will be a time for public comment. I asked for the quorum in here and to keep everything to yourself until it's the public comment section and we will listen to that person one at a time. >> Thank you. >> Um, >> that's okay. We're we're a long way here from any of our existing parks. Um, and that's that was kind of why I asked um what the target demographic is. I I answer your question. I don't remember. >> Okay. I need to go back. >> Chair Gerard, if I might just speak to Commissioner Young's comment at least. Um when Chestnut Creek's planned unit development was approved in 2016, the preliminary plat for both phases was approved. So the preliminary plat what you're doing tonight, um had already been approved without any sort of parkland. Okay. The reason we're doing this again is 10 years have elapsed and that preliminary plat approval has since expired us going through it. Now there is um discussion has been had with the developer and neighbors um in the public or the neighborhood meeting that when we are re-evaluating a development and we are kind of reopening or looking at amending the planned unit development and asking those questions. What are the what do we need? what do we not need necessarily now versus what we thought we needed or we didn't need 10 years ago. The parkland has come up quite significantly. I have discussed this with uh parks staff and public works staff. The thing that I will just share with the parks commission um which I don't have 100% prepared so I'm going to do it on the cuff for you folks. um pop off the sub. Can I get to the subject property in my mapping? For reference, this is one of the two subject parcels you're looking at the preliminary plat for tonight. Um we are talking with developers both to the north and to the south of this subject property. This is an area just to the south that the city has identified in its comprehensive plan as an area for potential parkland ac uh acquisition. The city is in conversations and does have a determined complete preliminary plat for this parcel here in which land dedication is being contemplated. And as we look at the development of these three parcels and conversations with any developer, we've been looking at other parkland that could be added into this area. Understand that is not in the boundary of this neighborhood, but one of the goals of the city is to try to achieve parkland within a 10-minute walk of our neighborhoods. This would be sufficiently within 10 minutes. Next, we do have park uh develop future development opportunities to the north, specifically along 210th where we do have an off-street trail that would be coming through to Harrow. Harrow also anticipated for an off- streetet trail. Um where staff does believe Parkland would be more responsible in that it is greater connectivity for more residents throughout the community when we are in those uh pedestrian pathway systems. Now, I recognize that that does not mean parkland today for this neighborhood, but I do at least want to acknowledge to the planning commission, and we'll share with the parks commission next week, that there are other opportunities for parkland within very close proximity to this neighborhood, both the established one and the new uh half, so to say, um that we anticipate would be forthcoming within a short amount of time. Now, I understand that that's not necessarily the short amount of time that this development is developing, though. >> So, that parkland and its development is listed in our 20 year capital improvement plan. >> Currently, >> um not in uh capital improvement in our comprehensive plan. Now, I do recognize that there is the question of how do parks get paid for and that's how you put them into a capital plan. We can't put into capital plans though parks that we the development of parks we don't have. And so as the city acquires land for new parkland infrastructure, we would be putting those into our capital plans for buildout as well as well as maximizing parkland dedication in the areas to be able to develop those parks. >> But the the dollars to acquire parkland is in the 20-year capital improvement plan. So the um all residential development all develop all uh subdivision plat are required to dedicate land for parkland purposes within the city. Um residential plats are required to dedicate 10% of their land area. However the c city may accept cash in lie of land dedication. So when I talk about the development here, we are looking at a hard land donation, not a cash in loo for Chestnut Creek. If the city elects to not uh dedicate land but accept cash in lie, then that cash would go into the parkland system for future parkland development. At the moment, no. The city is does not have money in its current budget or its capital improvement plan for parkland acquisition because we have other mechanisms in place to acquire land for parkland. >> And I can think of at least one large residential development that we had neither dollars nor land. >> Well, that was before um my time and maybe before you had professional staff to help you through these processes. the law department of building that said that they were having their own pool. >> Well, um so I will say um the parkland dedication requirement, state law only allows us to apply that at the time of subdivision. So you have to plat property in order for us to lawfully um acquire land or fee in lie of land for dedication purposes. So So I can see how that may have happened in the past. Um, but I would hope that you can trust me in saying we are doing a lot better, I would say, at preemptively trying to not put ourselves in those situations with future developments. >> Other questions or staff? Andy? >> Um, I have concerns on how small the lots are to begin with. um asking to go even smaller and then there not being a park. There already is apparently disruption not disruption um opinion from other people in the area that the there's not enough park space. Um but I just as presented I just don't feel comfortable supporting this. Um I'd like to make yards great again. I think people being able to play outside their own homes in their yards with their animals is really the best way to go. And allowing this small of lots, forcing trees on them, forcing sidewalks on them, I just is I just don't see that as a great great neighborhood. >> Thank you. Other questions or comments for staff? Hearing none. Is the developer here? Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Good evening. Uh my name is Deb Rididgeway with Dr. Horton. Our address is 20860 Kenbridge Court and we are located in Lakeville. Um thank you for having us tonight. Um I we're here really to answer any questions and there are obviously going to be some questions probably and comments from the neighbors. um to answer some of the questions that have come up. As far as the target market, Commissioner Young, we are um generally it's a two-story home plan, so it will be families um typically with younger children, not always, but that's typically the target market. Um, and then to answer the buffer question, uh, yes, it does appear on the plan that the buffer does come pretty close to the homes. We actually, um, try to create a 20ft buffer from the building pad to the buffer. Uh, and the building pad doesn't necessarily have the whole house on that building pad. So, there's usually an additional 10 feet. So, there's about a 30 foot of soded backyard, if you will, till you get to that buffer area. Um, as far as insurance requirements um for flood insurance, we aren't aware of any based on um the requirements for storm water and the elevations that we need to create to keep um any of the basements or um houses from flooding. So, um I do we do look forward to hearing from the neighbors if there are any issues with that on the existing homes. Um as far as um the park, uh we are open to we did identify a location on the site plan that we could put a park if that's the direction that the city wanted to go. So, um we are flexible in that aspect. Uh and I believe that was it. If there's any other questions, we are certainly here to answer. >> Commissioner Qu, excuse me, questions of the applicant. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Um, yeah, I got a question. Uh, how close are the houses? Like 10 feet apart, 15 feet apart. >> They're about 15 feet apart. So, we are asking for the 7 and 1/2t sideyard setbacks, which is within the city's ordinance. Um, so they're minimum 15 feet apart and that'll vary because our house is um the widths vary um with the different product lines. So we do have different floor plans that fit into each product line. So they're not necessarily all going to be within 15. There may be a little bit a little bit greater space between them. >> Is that the is that the minimum or they going to go smaller? >> That's the minimum. City code requires seven and a half feet per so it's 15 minimum between the houses. >> Yes. >> So Jesse >> So if we if somebody had to get a service truck in the backyard to turn trees and stuff that would be basically impossible on your own property. >> Um I think that within the I yeah I'm not sure how how we this is standard for us and for national builders. In fact, most builders now have the minimum um with the 15 feet between >> because I know we had a tree issue in our neighborhood and people they had to ask me to use my yard space >> to remove trees. >> And if I would have said no, I don't think they would have it would have ended up costing a lot more money to remove the trees. Thank you, Susan. >> Do you you you've run your numbers, so do you know what the mix of the you've got a large number of four and five bedroomedroom model types. Do you know what your mix your plan your your anticipated mix of the four and five bedroomedroom homes as a paired compared to the um three-bedroom homes will be in this development? I do not. Um, and that really is dictated by our marketing team. Um, right now we do sell homes on speculation. So, we will build a house for sale, but we will also bring in um, like if a buyer wanted to come in and build a specific plan on a specific lot, we do do that as well. So, I don't have that information. >> No, I I I looked at the uh information on the the housing types. Um uh just upfront, my concern is that a four or fivebedroom home is going to need at least four or five cars. Um yes, when the kids are little, but as soon as they hit 14 um between the toys, etc. Um and have some experience with trying to deal with snow removal and park cars and um boat storage, etc., etc., especially in Forest Lake where we do love our toys. >> Yes, we do. Amy. >> Yeah. Staff may be able to help, but on the wetland buffer area, is that where the storm water treatment is also going to go or storm water ponding? >> Storm water ponding will not be in the wetland buffer areas. >> Okay. So, like the lot drainage, where does that go? What my concern is that where I'm leading with the question is, are there utilities potentially in those wetland areas or wherever the storm water management is that will also eventually need to be accessed for maintenance or cleanout? >> So, one of the things um identified in the staff report and in the engineers comments is the need for increased easement areas to access the storm water utilities and the the maintaining the ponds. That is something that we have talked with DR about that um the that will need to find the sufficient easement area on by the time of final plat. So that is something that we have identified as an area that does need a little bit of work before final plot >> because this on the maps that I've had a chance to look at I don't see any GIF >> um at the moment no they have the engineers comments do identify that we do need to and the developer applicant is aware that that is probably going to result in a re a slight redesign of some of the lots. >> Thank you. Uh what about uh light pollution? Are you going to have like street lights every block or every two blocks or >> So street lights are dictated by the city code. Um and we work with the electric company to identify those locations as staff reviews where they go. Typically it's on every corner and maybe every so many hundred feet. >> Yeah, generally every intersection for sure. We're going to have at least one street light just for vehicular safety matters. And then the city code does require street lights so many distance between each other. I don't have that specific number. I can look that up. But yes, the city does require all new residential developments to have street lights for safety purposes. >> And that's that's they're on 247 then or at at dust from dust to dawn. >> Probably at dust to dawn. I can get that answer for you, but not I can't have the dust to dawn answer tonight. I can get the distance requirements if you'd like them right now. >> Abby, if I can jump in, Mike Sue with Dr. Horton. The engineering report said every two to 300 feet for street lights depending on curvature of the streets and um intersection spacing. So, roughly around 300 feet every street light, but that may vary depending on um curvature of the streets and intersections. The only reason I asked that is um there's kind of a push for uh reducing light pollution >> in the cities and stuff in the um I think like foresight a lot of people still consider this rural and so you know being able to look at the stars without a lot of light pollution is is a desirable thing. So, >> and and we'll take the lead from city staff on what they think is the appropriate light for each of these streets there. As Deb mentioned, we work with the electric company to install them. So, there I assume there's a standard light that the city of Forest Lake requires and we'll follow that and we'll work with city engineering staff to figure out what's the right spacing to get the right balance of safety and not produce light pollution any more than we have to. Thank you. >> I have a question. So, we we're talking about the distance from the uh wetlands and you said you had about roughly 10 feet from the back of the building which would be the 30 foot setback. So, do do you have enough room for a decent deck on the back here? >> Yes. And that's why we oversized the building pad um from our house footprint so that we so that homeowners can add that deck without having to worry about soil corrections. >> Well, I'm more concerned. I don't want any variances coming to me. >> No. So, no, there would not be any variances for this. Chair Gerard, if I might add, um, early on before DR had even put pen to paper, we identified or let them know the issues that were identified in the first phase. So, the um issues with the wetland buffer encroachments directly had to do with patio and deck installations into those areas. So, that's something that the then staff and and the then city, we'll say, um, did not preemptively identify. And so when buildings were being proposed, they weren't necessarily taking a look at how close to that setback and would there be those future improvements, much less when a patio or a deck or something was approved, whether or not it was actually encroaching into those areas. Um, I do just want to at least commend DR for hearing the city staff early on that we would we are going to do every effort. We're going to take every measure we possibly can to prevent what happened in the first phase to those future homeowners. Um because I think you are going to hear from some of the homeowners tonight that do have challenges because of how that prior development had come to be. >> Okay. My second comment is just a personal one. I noticed and thank you for sending all the fronts of the houses. Mhm. >> You know, we got these nice sidewalks and and now some of your houses like the Elder and the Elorado are um garages with a doorway and personally just grates on me. But I I also can't dictate what somebody buys when I understand that. But >> I do like the ones that have like a front room or something there. But I also understand on some of these lots getting a threecar garage in there. And my main complaint on that is that if you drive on Northshore Trail down the lake, trying to squeeze as much house as you can on there, there's three street car garage and a doorway and it's not much streetscape. Of course, you take your life in your hands when you walk down that street, but that's a different discussion. >> So, that's my comment. Any other comments or concerns? Thank you. We may have more comments for you afterwards. >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. This is a public hearing. We ask if anyone wishes to speak to this application, please step up to the microphone, state your name and address for the record, spend a couple minutes uh giving us your comments on it. Um and then once we have heard from everyone, we will uh close the public hearing. So this is you're going to this is your time to speak and because then when we're done with the public hearing, it'll be our time to speak. So I just want to make sure I'm very clear on um the noise level in here. And we have two issues that we are discussing tonight. The the PUB amendment and the preliminary plat. So with that, we'll open the public hearing at 6:59 p.m. And anyone who wishes to speak and go ahead, sir. >> Sorry, I probably jumped the gun. So >> well, it's, you know, someone needs to be first. >> There you go. There you go. So So commission, my name is Mac. It's actually McKenzie Guptal, but I go by Mac. 7163208 Cove North. So I'm in Chestnut Creek phase one. And so, thank you for being here today. Thank you for your time. What I want to tell you is that what you got and what you heard um was some emotions of a community that's pretty close-knit. And you've heard some of the concerns that were referenced as it relates to the the uh wetland setback issue. So, I'm going to talk about four different issues and I'm going to try to be as succinct as possible. every house in that development but for maybe one or two were put together and improvements were completed um from 2016 all the way up to 2020. And there are decks in there. There is landscaping that's done. There's fences that were done. And about four years ago, I think it was Comfort Lake came by with a bunch of signs that says you can't improve on past this point. And it was points where it was already improved, meaning there were already decks. There is one house, I believe, where the basement goes up to the where the actual back of the house goes up to the wetland buffer. And this is a situation where anybody that's here that's a homeowner will tell you that the various builders pointed out, "This is where you can improve to. This is where you can improve to. This is where you can improve to." And then now they have a sign that tells them that they can't improve past places they already did. And they're concerned about that. They're concerned about how does that how does that affect the resale? And the reason why I bring that up is because that was a comment that was made either by the home seller sellers on behalf of the original developer. And another comment that was made by the various builders on behalf of the original developer or from the original developer was the idea that phase one and phase two are going to be harmonious and we're not just going to have this phase one which are beautiful houses. We're going to have phase two that's going to mirror that plus we're going to put a park in there and our original governing documents from the homeowners association actually identifies that. It references the park. It references phase two. So it references the park dedication fee. And we've all been hearing that all the way through. So when you hear and and you may have heard a little frustration from the back here, it's because of the fact that this close-knit community has continued to identify that these are the representations that were made all the way through by the original developer that was originally going to develop phase two. And again then that leads into the idea that there's a homeowners association that requires I wouldn't say vigilant but pretty specific upkeep to make sure that the houses are maintained to make sure that the yards are maintained to make sure that there are certain structures that we can't have. All to make sure that the community is kept to a certain level. And in that we have community um fees that are covered for the landscaping for the front, community fees that are covered for the maintenance of the monument in the front. All of which now phase two is going to use the same uh ingress and egress, if you will. And DL Horton says, "Yeah, but we're not going to be part of that community. We're not going to chip into that. We're not going to have anybody do any homeowners associate association payments." all concerns us because of the idea that there was this commitment to each other to maintain some consistency of the housing. And now here you have this second development or second phase where you're going to have a situation where the houses are going to be more compact together where there's not going to be the same type of harmonious um reflection of of what the original phase one looks like because you've got more houses, you've got them closer together, you've got them, for lack of a better word, pretty bunched in. And so I understand that there are set numbers of ration you have to look at for what your decision is and to a certain extent you have to make those pretty neutral. But I would say that our view or my view is that there is a complete lack of har of harmonious connection from phase one to phase two. And that the idea that there was going to be a park, now we aren't going to have a park. I mean, what you heard a little bit is, well, there might be one over here in this area sometime, but if there's not, then there'll be one over here in this area sometime. And that's what we heard all the way through. Different promises identifying that this is what we're supposed to have. This is what's going to happen originally. And so we see our community that is a set number of houses and a set number of of of kind of appearances and the representation was it was going to continue. And I I just urge you to the extent you can to to vote against any variances requested because of that particularly because I think there's just too many houses in too small of an area. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? >> Carl Ziggler on 20759 Greystone Avenue, just on the uh middle of the west side there. Um I think what you heard from the gentleman here is pretty much going to mirror what a lot of people are going to say. I'll make a few points that kind of uh are bulleted for him uh and everybody else. First of all, the the fact that there's no uh unmitigated impact on on the area, which is in the staff report, that can't even be possible with the amount of traffic just going to be a minimum of four-fold with 119 houses drops right right smack in the middle of nowhere with no easy access to 97, Good View, or any place else is going to give a lot of unmititigated issues to a lot of people. Uh so that's definitely going to be a problem um for just a traffic and construction as well as when the uh the final plat is finally if it's finally done with 119 houses. The number of houses in that area are just going to be way too many. I've walked that area uh many times. I'm sure some of the other people that live there have. I've also flown over it. That is one big wetland. And while it's got the drainage ponds for the uh for hopefully the mitigation of water, right now we've had water running down Greystone Avenue as the roadway, which has now become part of a wetland overflows and comes down the street. In fact, one of the neighbors called the city two years ago because he thought the fire hydrant had broken and it was just overflowing onto the ground. The other thing uh I've picked up from reading some of the information is I definitely take umbrage with the fact that we're calling this a planned urban development. It is not. It is just a wellpacked and stuffed residential area. It doesn't even meet the original ordinance for what a planned urban development is because I read it. So I'm not quite sure phase one was barely a planned urban development because it's still missing many of the components it was supposed to have. Phase two is not going to have any of that. And we added seven houses on top of the fact we got one acre of additional wetland. I'm I'm really happy about that. But that upper northeast quadrant uh on the development on the phase two is going to look like a mobile home park with the slabed houses all sitting up higher than all the other houses in the area. the houses that are on the 65 foot uh spacing probably will look pretty good. And I got to give Horton some credit for their uh the building that they they intend to do actually looks pretty good. And some of the buildings in in phase one, driving through that area, the housing actually looks pretty nice. But on the same token, we are not definitely carrying the same type of uh development area that phase one has into phase two with the density we're going to have there. So, those are definite concerns of mine. Uh, just pointing out from reading the material, there's definitely some uh conflict between what the actual summary says and what the actual ordinances say should be there uh with the spacing. And some of those yards are going to have like 20 foot backyards, which obviously you're not putting decks on. They're going to butt right up to the wetlands, especially on the on the east side, if I'm not mistaken. So, it's going to be a very, very dense area. The traffic flow through that area is just going to be terrible only because they're totally landlocked. And to say, well, we're going to wait till, and this is in the summary, I believe, uh, the planned development of the north section, which will hopefully finally give relief up to like 97. right now talking to some people that live in that area, Harrow Avenue, trying to get on to 97 in the morning, uh it's not only a painstaking process, it's probably dangerous because we don't have a a roundabout there and I've talked to a few people that actually go all the way around the whole area and come back out over to Good View uh just to get on a main thoroughfare. So, we've got multiple issues here. one of obviously it's lack of infrastructure trying to build this and uh I'm not quite sure which way the the traffic is going to go for the construction traffic but there's only one or two well actually really one convenient way and it's going to be through phase one from what I've seen and if you look at it from the air you're going to go there's no way they're going to be driving big construction traffic and and trucks through uh the the western side of that there's not there's not one straight code. So, those are items to keep in mind, but I think that need a complete review. I think it's doable to an extent and it's unfortunate that Horton got uh kind of left with a short stick trying to figure out how to put something in this development that would be workable. But right now, the those minuscule lots uh is going, like I said, it's going to look like a a park up on the north the northeast quadrant up there for mobile homes. uh and and the traffic. So, those are items I'd like to consider and I do thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Hi there. Good evening. My name is Nikki Searing and my address is 20710 Hamlet Court North. Uh we were early build 2017. So we were one of the first houses to be done. Seventh house in the neighborhood to be completed. We are in the way back corner. Um I've done some math over the last couple days. I'm a loan officer. It's in my brain. It's what I do. But I can't get this out of my head where I know everyone that lives there. We are a very close community. Our kids are close. Our families are close. Our extended families are close. And I go and look. There could be one, possibly two houses that have one individual living in them. So you take 110 houses times two. We have 220 vehicles right now in our neighborhood. You add in teenagers, you add in anyone that's coming, anyone that's staying with you. We have multiple houses that have three, four, five cars. They have multiple teenagers. We have over 150 children in that neighborhood. 250 children. 7:15 bus stop between Leela St. Peters, the middle school and the high school. 110 children waiting for the bus. My children included. I have one that just started at the middle school and one that's at Scandia. That's the 7:15 bus stop. Not mind you, the construction folks that leave earlier before that. We now have a 7:30 or an 8:30 bus that comes to pick up for Forest View Elementary. That's going to be about 40 kids. We have an 8:40 bus that comes from Scandia. That's about 40 kids. That transition stops at 8:40. Now you go to drop off. The first drop off from the middle school, Leela and St. Peters is 2:30. Your next one's going to be 4 o'clock from Forest View. Your next one's going to be Scandia from 408. How are we going to maintain traffic for these children? Where's the safety going to come in? We already have people April through November that park on our streets. And I urge all of you to please come drive through there. You have my address. Come sit in my driveway and watch the mornings unfold. Watch the afternoons unfold. all the additional traffic, the dump trucks, the cement trucks, everything that's coming and going, there has to be another exit. We have to be able to get out on Good View. Right now, we sit at 97 and Harrow for 15 minutes trying to get out. And that's if you don't go around 202 because that's also what I do because I don't wait anymore and I also don't want to be killed. You got people going 65 miles an hour. Now, we're going to add in another 240 vehicles to that entrance and exit with no exit, no way out. I just don't know how it's going to be maintained, how it's going to be managed, how we're going to care for the safety of everyone in that neighborhood. Number two, I am a victim of this wetland buffer. My basement has flooded three times. I still to this day have a foot of standing water when it has not rained outside in the back corner of my lot that the city has came put drainage pipe through all the way through five different houses. We now have water on top of that overflowing like a lake through our backyards. the wersheds, the water, the issues and the problems that we already have now need to be addressed, need to be fixed with the city before we continue on with these other people that are going to get the same kind of damage that we have. We have had multiple multiple 40 50 houses that have had flooding damage done because these things were not dealt with initially. I got told that we were going to have custom houses. The rest of the development, that's what it was going to be. There was to be no split level homes in our neighborhood. Two stories and ramblers. The last builder that came in, the city approved Capstone to come in and they put in 25 split level homes. It was never in the plans initially. So, I get the plans. I applaud them. I appreciate them. We want the people. We want the bigger community. But how us as neighbors, community members, how do we guarantee that the house plans aren't going to change? How do we know that we're not going to add in split levels after we're only approving two stories and ramblers, which was done on phase one, but now that didn't follow through on phase one? Those split levels got brought in. They got built by Capstone. somebody a builder that wasn't even approved in the initial buildout between LAR and the custom builders. Um, and I guess those are really honestly the major concerns. That's a lot of what a lot of us neighbors really have to worry about is our children's safety. Um, the in-n-outs, the waters. What can we hold the city accountable for? What's being approved and what's being followed through? >> That's all I have for you guys. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh, good evening. My name is Gary Beast. I live at 7209 208 Circle North in phase 1. Um, I'm I'm honestly a little bit torn because I do I have looked forward to this development since we moved in because this neighborhood I feel phase one desperately needs another egress to the west and I have been looking forward to Chestnut Creek being connected to Bridal Pass via 200 and 8th um for access to the middle school, for access to the high school, and for another way in and out of the neighborhood besides heroin. 197, which has been repeatedly stated and I will reiterate is frankly a death trap. I'd encourage anybody to look up the accident statistics for that intersection. Um it's insane. And yes, we do have the option of going out and around to the south. Um, but with the current plan for or proposal for a big public works facility and redevelopment down in that area, um, I'm not real, uh, I'm not real excited about that remaining a viable option either. So, Chestnut Creek does need another egress and it needs access that does not involve 97 for our kids to get a half a mile as the crow flies to the middle school and to the high school and for us to be able to access the roundabouts at 61 and 97 and at Good View and 97 because there's no there's no effective Safeway in and out of the neighborhood right now. The other thing is that when we moved in in 2018, um, as our HOA president, Mack Upill stated, there was there was extensive description about how we were going to get a park. There were promises about how there would be a park when fa when phase two happened, there would be a park one way or another, if not the land itself, the money to purchase a park neighboring it. It was going to happen. It was going to happen. It was going to happen. And I understand that you folks don't have any control over what happened then. However, I moved in in 2018 with a six-year-old, a four-year-old, and one on the way. I now have a 13-year-old, an 11year-old, and a six-year-old who have lived in this neighborhood now for seven years. The only accessible playground within a mile is down a two-lane road with no shoulder and a 45 and a 40 mph speed limit. It's unsafe. It is not safe for a family to travel to that playground by foot, by bike, by any other vehicle other than an automobile. We cannot approve phase two on another promise of someday there will be a park because it's already been nine years. And if another nine years go by, those of us who moved in in 2017 and 2018 are going to see our kids born, get their driver's licenses, graduate from high school, and move out of the house before there was any green space for this neighborhood as promised back in 2016. It's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. I'm Carrie Chavez. I live at 6992 208th Street North and I am the last house to be built that I believe in phase one. So I but right up to phase two and um there were there are some questions that I have um that I'd like to um possibly put in all of your minds tonight. And um I can say just with being the last build there um my sump pump, it has been a rainy season, but my sump pump has continuously gone off. I did have to buy a drain to push the water further even down um the back of my yard this year. And um being told that they're going to drain some of those lakes to make them or those ponds to make them smaller for this next build is a concern to me because where is that water going to go? um and I don't want any more in the back of my yard um or in my sump pump. So um I would say uh the I am also concerned about the current road uh that support our community right now and um can they support the proposed increase in population and I think Nikki was pretty accurate as far as the number of kids and um and the number of new cars that will be going through there. I think uh there are a lot of us that are really excited for that connection and for our kids to be able to not have to go on 97 and um and get to school, but um I've I've gone on that side and I don't see why many people will take that route out. There's lots of lefts, rights um to get out to Good View and on to 97 to go to work. And so, um, I propo I would assume there might be some some kids getting to school, some teenagers driving through that space. Um, but more often than not, people going to work are likely going to need to go up to 97 to get there. Um, so, and as you all know, that's a complete mess out there to try to get out and very, very dangerous. Um, so my question is, are are we um are our current roads that are available there able to support this second phase? Um what I was told at our first um discussion is that Dr. Horton um doesn't have to worry about any of that. So my ask to the city is do you have to worry about that? Do you help us with that concern um so that we don't have another 250 cars driving past our house and collectively probably more being Forest Hills and other people will be driving through there to school as well. Um, I'm very uh concerned about the sizing of the houses. Uh, they gave us a few floor plans and I did look at phase one. It does look like there are additional five houses at least that they've added to their uh current plan. Um, it does seem very small and not consistent with the way our current phase looks. Um my question would be does um does the housing mix that they're providing us um is that going is there some sort of consistency there? Is that tracked? Is there a number of potentially slab ongrade houses that can be built um and a max cap on those so that um it protects maybe some of the house values that are going to be built there that might be um you know a twole or a two-story home as well as the ones that are built in phase one. uh building some of the maybe more slab on grade homes and uh given the market the way that it is right now. Um that might be a more popular or attractive option. And um that worries me to think that we could have, you know, a very good portion of these homes being smaller and um maybe attracting more potential uh homes that could be rented out. And um again, that would affect our resale as well. Um the park is I do have kids too and and the park is a would be lovely. Um I know Forest Lake is very known for um just protecting the wildlife and really trying to um absorb as much nature as we currently have. I don't see this large uh development um supporting that. Um, but if there is something, I did look up a few just kind of park numbers and the National Park and Wreck Association said um, you know, for 575 people in a development. Um, they were maybe anticipating 3 to six acres of parkland as an appropriate amount to a lot there. Um, and that maybe isn't necessarily your park, playground park. It could be something as beautiful as um walking paths or something where I mean a lot of people like to walk their dogs and and bike. You know, maybe it's not necessarily a park, but it's something we could support forest lakes, nature, and wildlife and and provide some sort of acreage towards that. Um I think that's it. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Anyone else wish to speak? >> Good evening. Brian Nelson, 20873 Hardwood Road North. Um, just wanted to answer a couple questions. Uh, you guys were asking about insurance. You don't have to have extra insurance. You just better make sure you have the drainage piece of the insurance covered because it's considered drainage because it's a sump pump issue, not a flooding zone. So, just wanted to come up, let you guys know that. Um, I do wish there would be a park. I was the first HOA president in the first part of the neighborhood. Um, I knew Ron Best here, the developer and the Steve Saduski very well. I had many conversations with them and I know they were going to be putting in a park because it was either 400k or something that the city they would have to pay the city or put in a park. So, they opted that they would put in a park. So, I know a park was going to come. Um, and we were promised that. Another thing I'm hoping Dr. Horton uh keeps the beauty Our first phase is beautiful. It's rock fronts on the front of the neighborhoods. You know, a lot of brick and stuff and rock. It's not just garage in a door. You have a lot of visual on the front of houses. Um, and I know a bunch of trees were cut down when they came in to build. So, there was a requirement on trees and they did have to be over stories. I heard uh Dr. say or somebody said they don't necessarily have to be over stories but in phase one we had to plant over stories. We had to plant at least two over story and one under. So hopefully phase two will continue that so that in time it'll be mature looking. So that's it. >> Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? Sir, >> regard. Um, I live in uh 7213 uh 208 Circle North and here just to support uh the neighbors. I don't have kids anymore. My kid is 20 years 21 is in two weeks now. So, but I definitely believe uh families with younger kids or small kids uh they need a place to to play. Uh uh we moved in to Forest Lake uh 21 years ago. Uh the first house my son walked in was in Forest Lake and uh I I'm proud to say, you know, he's a Forest Lake, you know, so and uh we like the community. we have the opportunity to move somewhere else and we decided to stay here and it's very disappointed that uh we don't have the support from our city uh to to support what we need you know and our kids need a park they need a park to play uh it's really hard to to picture all my neighbors kids playing on the street not enjoying their wildness you know when you're a kid you have to be wild and you need a place to where you can release that energy And if you don't have that then you have a problem. Another factor is safety. Safety is is is high there you know. So we have uh you know cities uh our uh community streets and people like to speed ups from time to time and I don't see the police there you know. So I don't see someone to patrol the streets to to put some order there. uh my house uh faces on the backyard harrow and that street after the darkest hour you know uh it becomes in a little uh speed you know so and and I don't see the police there you know so I'm afraid uh you know when my son works nights you know somebody's going to you know hit him just because sometimes they even drive with the lights off you know just to to hide you know so uh it's u it's uh it's sad to see that you um one of my own safety precautions for one of my neighbors, you know, I see his little boy running around. I give him a safety cone, you know, just and I told him, I said, "Please put this out, you know, when your kid is playing because, you know, I want people to know that there is someone around, you know, and it's a little one, you know, so because I don't want to come home and and, you know, get the news that something happened, you know. So um I think that's those are my biggest concerns and on top of you know investment you know our house is an investment and now that we are learning that the next the new community is not going to be the same thing what we have now when we were promised that we going to have the same for phase two it's a big disappointment and it's also a big loss for us you know uh we are a few years to retire and we don't I didn't buy a house for fun I buy I bought a house because I need that money for my retirement and you're going to no offense you know everybody struggles and everybody needs some something to start but when you give us the promise that we're going to have the equal community for phase two and now something lower is going to go there then uh my money is going to go down so with that say it's all I have thank you thank you >> and sir if I may car one more one more quick comment it sound like there was a water problems are a lot worse than even I suspected. And one of the questions I did come up with uh later on was uh what data was used for the from the Comfort Lake Wershed District on both phase one and phase two. um given the the time frame if that data was from say 2014 or 15 given what we're seeing with climate changing in the area particularly here in Minnesota perhaps that data needs to be just make sure it's current for any any future reference or if we revisit this again uh and one other thing too obviously most people here from phase one I'm the only one from Greystone and most of my neighbors on the west side of the street did not get any notification or they weren't aware of it. So, I would respectfully ask uh if there's continuing conversations that a wider dispersion of information go to uh to the neighborhoods, especially up to like 210th uh and and west on the west side because we're all going to be impacted just as phase one is if we're going to have traffic going through the areas, they need to be aware of it, too. Thank you. Hi. Uh, my name is Corey Perkott. Uh, the address is 6991 208 Street North. We're across the street from from Kerry. Um, we bought up right up there's one house in between where the phase 2 is is coming in. Um, and we we bought the house in 20 we closed in 2020 with with no asp with no um false ideas of that it wasn't going to be developed. We wanted it to be developed. I mean, it's been empty. Our kids have had a really good time. They they there's a big pile of dirt that they they slide down in the in the the wintertime. The the neighborhoods uh people go through the trails. Um, we knew it was going to be developed, so this isn't a surprise. But what is a surprise is kind of the it it feels like there's a lack of consideration to this park. We've said it ad nauseium. We're I'm I'm on the boat like I wasn't here when promises were made or it was discussed. I understand that it wasn't part of the regulations or whatever it may be. But the fact that is that there's so many people have said it's it is truth and and I feel like our neighborhood, we want to make sure that our neighborhood has has a voice and has a field. And I just I've got some numbers for I'm a numbers person myself. Um and I'm just going to put these numbers out there and I feel like these numbers should matter to the city of Forest Lake opposed to just taking in like if um who brought up Capstone? Brought up Capstone. I think you brought up Capstone. They said, "Hey, we'll come in. We'll buy 20." They weren't part of the original plan. So, just because those big dollars are the these are some these are some real numbers or average I averages. So, if you want put pen and paper if you want to take a second to get those out, here's some averages. Since 2016, approximately each one of the houses in phase one have been about have provided about $30,000 of tax dollars. It's not directly to Forest Lake, that's from the the county. $30,000 a piece. about 3.6 million about 3.6 million of the 119 or so houses that are there. Not each people sitting in this room. Some people have moved in and out, but approximately 316 or $36 million of taxes from these properties, which is the point we want to develop. They they increase the tax the increase the tax rules. And we're asking for a park. We're asking for safe streets. It doesn't seem like it's a really really big ask to make sure that yes, we want the development there, but we want them to be a partner and just and be part of that community, too. So, that's that's really all I had to say. >> Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Carrington. So, there are a lot of kids in my neighborhood and we don't have a lot a lot of places to go to like to play in outdoors. Like the only thing I can think of is this big dirt mountain that we go in sledding on in the winter. Um, but I think a lot of the kids and me on like this one block would really appreciate, want, and like a playground in the neighborhood because there's a lot of kids like my age or younger. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Good evening. Uh Corey McCulla, 20701 Hamlet Court North. Um I think a lot of people brought up a very a lot of very good points, so I won't uh hit those. Um I just want to reiterate um the issues with like the lot sizes that are proposed. um with the the um the wetland buffers that have actually moved closer um a lot of those homes um have appear or appear to or are shown to have twocar garages as Susan had mentioned you know Forest Lake likes our toys right recently just approved this year was the you know ability for people to use golf carts ATVs safely around towns so more people are even buying toys now because of that change and you can start to see people use those so people have to have have a place to put those if you have a a a family of or a fourbedroom or more home um and you have the cars now on top of toys plus wetland buffer bufflers that don't actually allow you to put sheds on your home. >> Um so where where are you going to keep your lawnmower and your two your two cars for mom and dad and then the two children that may be living there? Um, so I just ask that, you know, we consider what size lots that we're putting in here and that, um, at minimum the the homes can at least have enough size to put a three-car garage on that home. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? Good evening. Uh Nicole Bartullik, 20644 Hamlet Avenue North. Um everyone else has hit on most of the topics. The one that um I'm going to drive home more for particularly is the wetland and the wetland buffer. On the two pictures you showed up there, it is already discussed that one of the ponds will be diminished. Actually, it even shows it's the largest pond on there that it just disappeared from the picture. Not sure how that happens. Um, where where is that water going? I am lucky enough in my particular house, our sump does not run that much. However, my house happens to be one of the tallest standing ones in the neighborhood at the moment. So, I lucked out. Good for me. My neighbors, not so much. Um, we our house particularly is just um a lookout. It's not a walk out, which is fine. And I think that helps us. Um my neighbors actually to the let's see south of me their pump runs so much that um our their neighbors say to south of them has even been hit with water several times as they're like walking trying to get between houses. Um it just the wetland buffer really concerns me. Um like I said luckily we have not been impacted but I know several in our neighborhood who really have and that fact that one of the um ponds just kind of disappeared in the plans really concerns me. That's all. Thank you. >> Thank you. I have to make my notes so my apologies. Anyone else wish to speak? This is your time. We will bring it back to the commission once we close the public hearing. So, uh anyone else wish to speak? Seeing no one come forward and before I close it I want to thank everyone who gave comments tonight very professional a lot of the quorum greatly appreciate it on behalf of the city and the planning commission so thank you very much for that so with that we will close the public hearing at 7:39 p.m. Commissioners, >> Chair Gerard, could I just make a couple points of clarification of some comments that were brought up tonight um that I want to just clear the air. Overstory trees will be required in the development. It's not that they won't be required to put in overstory trees. Um when we staff acknowledges the neighborhood's desire for parkland when the city council approved the the neighborhood in May of 2016 the approval was for a complete cash in lie of land dedication. So I don't know what was shared from the developer or the builders or the realators at the time but the city's approval was for land or for fees in lie of land. And then lastly, I just wanted to clarify um a comment that was made about wetland um going completely away. Um there will be an increase in buffers. There is no wetland bill proposed for the development. There's actually an increase in buffer areas. So I can um show you if you'd like on the screen if you'd like, but addressing my question. >> I'm sure if the chair >> or not, >> come on up. >> Um I guess maybe I misspoke on that. I realize the buffers are increasing, but if we've learned anything in phase one, a buffer does nothing. A buffer is literally just a stake in the ground and saying, "Hey, don't do anything here." That doesn't address levels of homes or where the water's going. And like I said, I'm not that the buffer's it may be increasing. the buffer may be increasing but like I said per the plans there is one pond that just disappears and like I said I don't know how that happens on that plan it >> sure and I might I don't have full civil set shown tonight because we just try to kind of keep it high level but we certainly um ponds are not disappearing and we certainly can show that to the >> I guess one of the plats that was shown I it shows water and And then the next plat there's just no water and it shows it a as a wetland buffer but it's the largest pond in that development. >> Um chair I'm just going to show really quick. Um cler so I think you're referring to the pond that's exists today on site. >> Um there's like four or five that actually exist today. Thank you. Yes, it's that one right there. So um it's the one to the North or south >> center. >> I can't if it's a colored map that you show. It's the one with the red around it. >> Show it shows a wetland buffer. >> It's the wetland to Abby. >> Thank you. >> The picture they have. >> No problem, please. Yeah. >> It's the picture they have is maybe at a time when there's more water >> in the on the site. So, the white line's got water in it. We We don't plan to change that. Okay. >> The wetland stays. We're not in the wetland. It's not a pond. But Mr. Bloom here with our engineering firm can certainly address more questions on storm water and such. And I can the commission so desires, but >> okay. That that was what we just noticed on the different looked like it disappeared. >> And yeah, and I just want to clarify nothing is disappearing. No wetlands are being filled. It just was trying to convey the buffers around those areas, not necessarily the the pond itself. >> That's fair. >> All right. Thank you. >> Abby, are you finished? >> I am. Thank you. >> Would you engineer like to come up? Um there's a lot of angst on water and and to be honest with everyone in the crowd, >> it's always an issue in forest because there's a lot of water up here. >> Thank you. My name is Ryan Bloom with Westwood Engineering. I'm the civil engineer for the uh Chestnut Creek second edition. And yeah, sorry I was a little patient, but yeah, so I I definitely have some information to add to the topic. Um when the first edition was complete, the entire second edition was mass graded. All of the future ponds, all of the roadways were subcut three feet for future. So and then it sat for the last eight, nine years. And what's happened is there's no permanent outlet control structures in any of the basins. All of the street roadways that were prepared for future pavement have filled with water with the tight clays that are there. And so and yes, the wetland uh areas and the storm water ponds are full. You know, we've had a lot of rain this year and the the soils don't infiltrate very well. So, uh the ponds are holding more water now than they were designed to. um they're going up to the the max level. And so with this development, there'll be storm sewer infrastructure placed that will be fed to the proposed streets that will connect into the existing storm sewer system that will normalize the pond waters, the levels of the wetland, the levels of the pond. Um and and the wetland buffers are designed for uh additional treatment for the wetlands that are there, right? uh you know we we've been talking about setbacks from the buildings to the wetland buffers. We're providing wetland buffers uh you know 50 feet 75 100 feet in some areas which is going to be better for the water quality of those existing wetlands right uh in this it's no mo areas it's natural vegetation and so so yeah I hope that that helps I guess in terms of why we're showing less water >> if I may ask a question and these people all live in the first path >> y Will any of what you're doing in the second half help their issue and where they currently? >> Well, I I can't speak to their home elevations, right? And and how they were built relative to the the existing ponds. I know from working with engineering here, um they're, you know, very particular on elevations of our proposed basements, high water levels of our wetlands and our ponds, separations from openings relative to emergency overflows that we have with these basins. all to ensure that we're not going to have flooding within uh but but in addition to that I mean we're looking at groundwater presence relative to basement elevations um to to avoid that non-stop some pump I mean the builders don't want that either right I mean we we want to prevent that and so that'll having functional storm water ponds that have a normal water level that's that's lower than what's currently out there. Um, I mean, it's it's all going to help th those those homes. Um, I guess I can't speak to to to these homeowners, right, relative to where they live, but our our water will be connected to the existing infrastructure that's there. And we'll be working through the the storm water pond system that is currently in place. >> Yeah. So, um, with the with the the project that was graded, there was a previous storm water, uh, management plan that was done, um, by the previous engineer. We've had to update it, and we're working with the Comfort Lake WHED to get their review and approval of not only the storm water ponds, but the filtration um, uh, the filtration benches that we need to be placed around the ponds. Those are currently not in place. Uh right now they're just you know mass graded ponds. So with that we'll be adding to that as well. So and and in addition to the storm water quality we have to meet the rate control um uh so that uh we're we're retaining the water and and and letting it out over time. >> I have a couple questions. One um setbacks are not are not storage. setbacks are treatment. Um, and so you're not storing any more water as you as you as you increase your setbacks. >> Um, what is the final outlet from pond to pond to pond um of the water that's in your your ponds? Realizing those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. um realizing how tight those clay soils are in that area. Um has that changed your calculations on storage requirements and has that changed your calculations on outlet and discharge from the ponds and which direction is that going to? because I live in the area big swamp is not that far away from there and it's it's all flat grounded there. >> Sure. Sure. So our storm water system and I don't if we want to pull up a overall PL and to speak to your other part of your question. So yes, these would be consistently called C or D soils. So what that does is it leads to a much higher curve number which means there's a more runoff you know and so that's how our pond calcs are designed. you know, if you have sandy soils, it's a much lower curve number. You're factoring in a lot of infiltration into the soil, you know, when you're >> uh so uh so our ponding that's in the center of our site, uh connects to two existing ponds that that will come behind the culde-sac there up to the north. Yep. Keep going. Keep going. And uh keep going up and then go directly east. I'm gonna keep >> I can um >> I'm just not going to do it right and I don't want to be. >> So She's got to get it up on the screen from that location. There we go. >> Okay. So, yes. So, uh this this is one of our proposed storm water ponds. It's already been graded. There's an existing wetland here. Um that's only going to capture the water that is within these backyards. So, all of the roads on this side will connect to this storm water pond, which will then treat it and run it to this storm water pond. which then will go to this existing storm water pond and then water connects. There's an existing outlet control structure right here off to the north and east, but that's where the water ultimately goes. So, all of the new roadways will drain to the three storm water ponds on our site um and then be treated in those ponds and then outlet that direction. What's your concentration time to your final structure to your final outlet? >> I don't have I don't have uh the calcs uh >> and my concern is because of of the soils and the and the slope in the area um the the potential for shortterm challenges is going to be much much greater. >> Okay. Well, uh, you know, we'll we'll take that under consideration and and obviously we're still, you know, we're still working with the wershed. You know, we did initial submitt will be subsequent submitts. We're still a bit away from a permit. >> Their main concerns are quality, not quantity of >> backflow. Any other questions for developers? loss are nice enough to be standing up here. >> Thank you very much. >> Yeah, I got some comments. Um, one to the community that showed up tonight. Uh, thank you for coming. I just want to let you know I hear you. Um, and I'm all about safety. Uh, I used to drive school bus and uh picking up little kids and uh driving down residential streets, they're not wide enough. It's it's it's a nightmare for the bus drivers as well. Um, and for the kids that you're grow that you have that are turning to teenagers and just teenagers just drive faster. Uh, I'm a 66 year old teenager. I still drive fast. Um, but teenagers just drive fast. And if the roads aren't wide enough, if there's not there's not uh wide enough roads, if there's not enough stop signs, people are going to get killed, not hurt. They're going to get killed. Um, so I hear you there. Um, I live in Timberwolf. Uh, the great thing about Timberwolf, uh, development is it has sidewalks, but the parks are still about six, seven blocks away. Now, I don't take my kids there. I take my grandkids there. Uh so I can either walk usually I drive because I'm not that good at health. But uh I hear you. I hear you uh on your water. Uh I live in a twin home and when it rains uh my sump pump goes on all the time. I'm right up against kind of a big pond. Uh I like my pond, but the the sump pump goes on. And I was talking to my insurance man. He says, "Get a get a backup battery." very well. I got a new new pump motor for my sump pump this year. Um, but if that if uh the power goes out, it doesn't matter. Um, and a usually uh a a battery backup that lasts about eight hours is still about $5,000, which I don't have laying around. So, I understand your your concern about about the water as well and about uh you know the water being that close to where your little kids play. Um my grandkids, I have some are 5 years old, seven years old, and I don't let them out in my backyard to get lost in my pond to die in my pond uh because it's only 20 feet away from the back end of my house. So, I I just want to say I appreciate you all showing up and telling your stories and telling your concerns. I'm all about safety. I'm all about better roads. Uh I also heard your concern about not letting it look like um uh a trailer court. uh you've had had um three or four commissioners here that have expressed concern over how small the lots are about not being able to play with your dogs and your kids in in a tight space. So I think we have I know I'm not I'm not going to speak for them. I'm going to speak for myself. I have heard there are major every one of your concerns is not minor. every one of your concerns is a major concern and I appreciate you showing up tonight and letting us know. Um, and I identify with quite a few of them. So, um, yep, that's all I have to say. >> Other comments, commissioners, questions? Andy, >> I I would just like to say again, I just uh the amendment to the PUD to make lots even smaller is just something I don't I don't think is a smart move. I was I was in that position when I got here today and I am only more confident in that hearing from the community. Um these decisions are not not made at the city level anymore. They're put on us by a bureaucracy above us and it doesn't work everywhere. And I think this is a perfect textbook example of someone that doesn't live in the community looking at paper making a decree and saying the cities have to follow this. The density requirements are too high. I'm sorry. You're too Well, yeah, they're too high and they're making it where you neighborhoods are dependent on the city being smart enough to put in a park because no one can play in their own yard. We are if you're going to have a 25 foot setback on the street plus put a sidewalk in there, how are you going to park two cars? >> And it's not a question. It's more of a statement. I just all of these numbers when looked at individually, yes, they can be defended and make sense. But when you take the feedback from the people who have been through this, I've been in a number of places where we bought when it was dry and it looked like you had an acre of land and then the the regular wet seasons come and you've got a third of an acre. And I think we're looking at hoping for that these these calculations are right and not wrong and that adding all this impervious surface to this phase two is not going to increase storm water. I I just the more I hear it, the more confident I am to not support this. Thank you. >> If if I may clarify a couple things. Back when this was approved in 2016, um we gave lot sizes, we gave lot widths, setbacks, and that's on page two of our report, which is page 21. Um, what they're asking for is less square foot on the lot to take it from 7700 square feet to 7,100 square f feet and the side or in a corner to take it from 25 to 20. Everything else has been approved. They're approved for 55 foot wide lots and they can build on that with 7700 square ft and a 25 foot side corner setback that correct me if I'm wrong Abby that's allowed. >> It was my understanding Abby that you said that the PUD has expired for second. >> Did I hear that incorrectly? >> The preliminary plat for second expired. the PUD remains with the property because it was acted upon with the first phase. >> Okay. >> The fact that they're asking for uh variation to the previously approved PUD, that's what kind of opens it up. The ask to go from 77 to 71 and from the 25 to 20. Um, if the developer came in today with all 7,500 square foot lots with 55 foot widths and 25 foot front and uh exterior sideyards, we wouldn't be able to have those conversations about the PUD because it conformed to the original approvals. The only hitch in the giddy app is since the PUD was approved, the city has reduced the MXR1 minimum zoning district's minimum lot size to 7,500 square ft. And so arguably if they came in today with 7,500 square foot lots, a 55 foot wide um with the 25 foot front and exterior side, they would be in conformance with the originally intended PUD and the underlying zoning code today. So So I'm I'm I'm processing that. So if if the original PUB, as you said, is is essentially still in effect, it is without the city's new MXR. Um, which was it is it is Jordy. It is what it is. And that was something that the city said, yes, that is part of our comprehensive plan. That's that's the the the scope that that we have here. Um what what would be the effect if we said and we want you with your original PUB requirements. >> So I think tonight you have the two actions before you both of make recommendation to the council right because this is an advisory body on preliminary matters. So before you tonight is an amendment to the PUD and the recommendation on a pre preliminary plat. Um this council can make recommendation to the city council to approve or deny the amendments to the PUD and same for the amend uh the preliminary plant. What I would say is that um this body asking to uh for the developer to conform to the original PUD requirements is I don't think an unordinary ask um thereby denying the amendment but what I would say is because of the history of the development and um because of uh the nature of our platting system um re recommend denial of the plat um outside of what would conform with the PUD. And I know that this is kind of talking a little bit in circles um is would be a little bit uncharacteristic. I don't know that we got great footing for that if that makes sense. >> It does. >> I don't know if that made sense to everybody. I um >> are we we have a limited legal scope of approval and denial. >> You have limited and you you're an advisory body. Um but you know generally speaking if their preliminary plaque conforms to the underlying zoning code the comprehensive plan and the original PUD we don't have um a lot of grounds to deny or recommend denial. Now that being said, I think this body could certainly can make recommendation to the city council to approve approve with conditions, deny, deny or approve approve with conditions that hold them to original approvals. Um, but beyond that, there isn't much else we can do in terms of asking for larger lot sizes than what was originally approved or even in the MXR1. And then then Abby in in um the amendment conditions of approval F is the final plat shall not be released until all parkland dedication requirements have been fulfilled. You said earlier that they have already paid for one and two. >> They did not pay for one and two. The motion for the council was to um accept the so I can the parks, lakes, and trails commission at April 19th, 2016 recommended the city accept 550,000 as parkland dedication fee in lie of land dedication. This will go back before the parks commission next week. They did not pay the full 550. They only paid the requirement for the subdivision that was final platted at the time. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. >> Sir, do you have a comment? >> I just have one comment. It's on lot sizes. We only have one lot that's at 7100. Otherwise, we have one lot that's 10 square feet under 7700. So if it makes it feel better or works for the group to comply with the 7700 square foot that was originally approved or the 7500 Abby, you'll have to help which which rule takes precedence over this one. But we could certainly do away with 17100 lot and spread it out because I think in the end by the time we get the pond access we're going to have to do something anyways. >> So we just take away the 7100 lot and that get us back into compliance. I don't we must have just missed something as we were coming through and realized we got one lot that we're we're discussing so much about. So, if it works, Abby, we could certainly adjust the minimum lot sizes either 75 or 7700 in the resolution and go forward and stay with what was originally approved. Do you know how many of on the corners that you have 25? >> That's the one thing I can't tell you off the top of my head is how many >> I thought I'd ask. >> I know. I I was thinking the same thing. How much does it change if we change from 20 to 25? And my only concern is we're also working with engineering on trying to solve the the easement widths and getting pawn access. So if we widen out some easements, it needs things to slide. And I'm afraid that if we if I say yes to 25, I may paint ourselves in the corner. But we certainly will work at it. And maybe when we come back to you with final plat, we can say, guess what, folks? We were able to solve the 20 foot to get 25. But right now, I would prefer to stay at 20 ft side corner setbacks. I mean, we've we've done it other places and buyers have not seem to buy. Homeowners do not call up and scream at us. So, um I think we're okay there. I think we're okay with our backyards because we do it in other places along wetlands and our buyers seem to be able to make it work and such. So, we'd be willing to for the sake of discussion change it to either 75 or 77, whatever the boss over there says. And then we would prefer to still leave the corner at 20. >> Okay. And Abby, they're the developer. This is an all new developer back here. They're not required to have an HOA in the development. That's up to the developer. Correct. >> That is correct. I understand that it, you know, these lots, this land was a part of the intention of the original Chestnut Creek, but there's nothing binding these properties to that original development aside from our planned unit development approvals. Um, now that being said, I can't necessarily speak to the HOA because that is a private legal agreement and whether or not the HOA docs and declarations were recorded against these two properties. Um, I can't say that for sure, but I don't believe they have. So, let me if I understand this right, Abby. So, we can't really vote this down because it's already been approved, but we can approve it with recommendations. >> Yeah, you're going to make a recommendation to the council anyways. And um you know, voting to deny something when it substantially conforms to the previous approvals, the zone zoning code, the comprehensive plan. Um but you definitely can and you're generally You can you can make a recommendation to deny it. We just have to have a basis for denial, right? We have to have that um rooted in our code of how it is not conforming to our code or comprehensive plan or the prior approvals. >> So, so we heard a lot of um a lot of opinions uh valid opinions walking to the park on bad roads, no shoulders, safety concerns about the width of the streets. uh a lot of safety concerns uh brought up by the by the HOA about the residents that that live in um Chestnut Creek Edition one. Um could they could we ask them to like come together formulate a list of maybe the top 15 10 15 items and uh bring it before the the planning commission again and have have those things be addressed by the by the builder. >> You don't have that legal basis. Um I'm not sure exactly what you're asking for. Um generally I know that there are some safety concerns. Um the development is proposing sidewalks, right? So like yes, it isn't maybe safe to walk in the streets, but we are requiring sidewalks. Um if it's things like I did hear from don't have my names list up um but somebody who did mention like busing schedules um certainly is something that by the time of that this body can make the recommendation that by the time of final plat the or at the time of final plat the developer will submit a construction safety plan addressing you know how to interact you know on the the neighborhood streets at especially at bus times, pickup, drop off type things. Um, but I'm not exactly sure what you would be hoping asking for. I I I guess what I'm hoping for um is some of their concerns like their say maybe out of the 10 concerns they have the top five you know most urgent ones um that uh maybe weren't people the builders uh weren't aware of this. maybe this commission wasn't wasn't aware of. Um um that they be addressed that they have serious considerations um you know plus number of them mentioned resale you know that the that their houses uh go up in value with the with this addition not down. That's a real viable concern. Um, just to give you an idea, when I moved into my neighborhood in June of 21 and a year later, uh, about um, 50 yards out my back door, they uh, the farmer sold his land and they they're putting up 130 single family houses, which I had no no c no say in. Um, so I understand I understand what you're some of what you're going through. Um, I guess I what I'm asking is that is is there any way that their concerns can be addressed as a part of part of the recommendation? >> Um, we heard a lot of concerns tonight and I do have them documented. I would say a number of them are being most of them are being met in some fashion or form through engineering review, planning, zoning review. That is hard to necessarily check every single comment tonight because none of it was submitted in writing before the meeting which is fine. That's why we have public hearings. I think it is in the purview of this commission if you want to table consideration of the matter and ask the developer to continue to work with the neighborhood. Um we can certainly help facilitate those conversations. Um but simply put um this group aside um you've pointed out a really great example of just what it's like living next to vacant land and some of these sometimes those are the concerns that we aren't going to be able to mitigate. Um I'm happy to continue to work with the developer and the neighborhood how we can. Um, I would say that staff would not have recommended approval of this tonight had we had concerns that this wasn't conforming to the city's codes and standards for development. >> Susan, >> we've got two two actions that staff is requesting of us tonight. One is the PUD amendment and I believe that I could argue that under the PUD amendment language that's proposed um item three the proposed PUD plan is consistent with Czechness Creek first edition and provides uniform lots circulation landscaping open spaces and public infrastructure is not met. Um I I I think that arguments could be made that would not be held up in in under review on items eight and nine um regarding the impact on EQ environmental quality property values and reasonable enjoyment. um PUD's planned unit developments. Um cities grant those in in a way to get something for the city and something for the developer and the and the residents. And I I'm still struggling with what the city got in terms of benefit for the planned unit development that is not what we would normally have of any development which is the the park dedication funds. With respect to the second thing that we're asked to deal with tonight, um I don't understand number two, the proposed project does not meet conditions for establishing a premature subdivision in section 152 of the subdivision ordinance. Abby, could you help me better understand that one >> so that I know that it's that that that is something that you consider a reason for us to approve the prelim preliminary plat. So, a premature subdivision, I'm just going to read directly from the code, is a sub subdivision um that should any of the conditions set forth which exist, a lack of adequate drainage, lack lack of adequate water supply, lack of adequate roads or highways to serve the subdivision, lack of adequate wastewater treatment, and inconsistency with the adopted comprehensive plan. Um and then um the last one, the last two is public improvements such as recreational facilities or other public public facilities reasonably necessary by the subdivision which must be provided at the public expense cannot be reasonably provided within the next two fiscal years and then the proposed subdivision is inconsistent with environmental review programs. So in other words, the first um number of items is if there is not the ability to provide the drainage to pull the water to develop the roads or the wastewater treatment system, that is a premature subdivision. It's not consistent with the comprehensive plan. It's premature with the subdivision. If you can't put in these other public improvements within two years or pay for the public expense of them within two years, that's an a premature subdivision. or if it doesn't meet environmental review. >> Thank you very much. >> Questions, comments, commissioners, where in the proposed um language you want us to approve, can we acknowledge that the developer agreed to honor the original square footage. >> Um, so what I would say is, um, if you were going to make a motion, so if somebody was ready to make a motion, they could do it in twofold. One would be to move to recommend approval of the preliminary or the PUD um, with the exception of the minimum lot area. And then the second motion would be moved to approve make recommendation to approve the preliminary plat with conditions all outlined in the staff report. Does that make sense Andy? Does it help? >> Wanted to >> Yep. I think that's >> second meeting just No, I know. Um so I think that's probably the cleaner way of making the motion on the PUD with the exception of the minimum lot area. If it is the minimum lot area and that 20 ft that's still an issue, it's make a recommendation to deny the PUD um would be the motion. I think just having a couple statements of that denial. I hear a few things out there, but um picking some of those findings of fact to help support that um is always a good solid clean way to help support decision- making. I remember the training. >> Pardon? >> I'm remembering the training. >> I'm trying. It's good. >> I guess I have a comment. That little girl that spoke that took an incredible amount of courage for her to come up here and and say what she did. Um and uh since I'm a new resident, four years Um, and I want to do right by the residence that uh my neighbors, even though it's kind of interesting is that my wife and I are realtors and we went for a drive by uh an open house in your neighborhood. So, we drove up and down all the streets that you were mentioning that you live at uh just Sunday by happen stance just to kind of explore more of Forest Lake. Um, and uh, I don't know if there's any way that the planning commission can do right by you tonight. I kind of hoping there is, but maybe they're not. Maybe it's maybe it's another avenue that uh, you might have to explore. >> You know, the square footage is one thing, but half of my yard is in certain amount that just sit with. >> We have uh both in the original approvals um and then the developer proposal minimum lot widths of 55 foot wide and 65 foot wide which is um somewhat consistent or exist within the first phase. first phase had some lots that went to 875. I think I'd have to pull that report back up, >> but there are minimum width requirements. >> I think in your minimum was 65. So, how do they >> Yeah. So, the way this works is they're doing a plan unit development and once you do a plan unit development, you can make exceptions within that development. And in 2016 when they came before the city for the original development they proposed 65 and 55 foot wide lots which the city approved. So now that we've approved these 55 foot wide lots in 2016 and within the PUD they get those in the second phase. It's part of the planned unit development. Excuse me. That that doesn't change. Um, I'm not saying you don't have a valid point, but sometimes, you know, with state statute and everything else, our guard rails get pretty slim before bad things happen to the city. So, we'll leave it at that. >> I have a qu in our table. The 55 foot's in red as though that's a variable that they're changing, but you're telling me that's not a variable that they're changing. That's fixed based on something that was approved back in 16 years ago. >> Yeah, the 55 was approved. It actually went down to 52 feet in 2016. Um, so they varied between uh 52 feet and 80 in 2016. >> I was just curious on that page 31 why the 55 was in red there. >> Let me just double check exactly what you're looking at. because I understand the 7100 we talked about that and that can be make go away and the 20 we talked about but that 55 I was just >> uh what page did you say >> 31 out of 55 >> I can actually speak to it was the narrative that we submitted with the plan >> so the 55 is where it doesn't conform with the zoning district that so it had nothing to do with comparing it to the existing PU was approved. Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Chair. If I might just um speak up. I hear I've heard a lot of different comments from a lot of different commissioners tonight that there is hesitation to uh allow for the amendment to the PUD. And I would say that that is uh what I'm hearing is the basis of small lots equals smaller yards and smaller yards and neighborhoods with no parks doesn't really meet our definition of being flexible. And so what I would say is there is probably good findings from this commission to recommend denial of the entire PUD amendment asking them to conform to the standards in place. Um and then approving the preliminary uh a preliminary plat that would conform with the original PUD. Um that would at least then provide the direction I think to the developer and to the council that the planning commission has heard from the neighborhood that you know parkland is important and even something small for the neighborhood would be appreciated. Um with that I think that would give the developer the opportunity to go to the parks commission and the council and see what both those bodies um also think. But I do think that there's probably enough um findings from things that have been said on this from this commission that um PUDS uh while yes, they allow for flexibility also should be offering something in exchange to the public. And what I'm kind of sensing from this commission is you don't you're hearing the public say we want to make sure there's not water in our neighbors backyards and that there's a place for kids to play. a lot of what we heard. I know there were more. I don't want to simplify it entirely, but >> thank you. >> Okay. Realizing that the city council can accept or reject our recommendation. >> Yes. I'm going to move that we deny the PUB amendment um as presented to us tonight because I do not find that it is consistent with the Chestnut Creek first edition um in terms of uniform lot circulation, open spaces and public infrastructure and that the the amendment the amended PUD uh will not um ensure that I hate double negatives will not ensure that the the plan will not u negatively impact environmental quality, property values, scenic views and reasonable enjoyment of the surrounding area. and that the amended PUD does not recognize that the um flexibility to the city code that is being provided um result in significant benefits to the city in design or proposed use. I have a motion to deny the changes to the PUB. Do I have a second? >> Second. I have a motion and a second. This there were uh any discussion. Susan, there were a number of uh recommendations that the city had. We're denying those. So, don't forget that. We raise what just came out of my mouth. Any other discussion that might be valid? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. >> Opposed. Abstensions. Motion carries. >> Mr. Chair, I'm going to move tableabling of the prelim preliminary plant. Um tableabling means that instead of denial means that they don't have to go completely back to square one with etc. But my concern is um I want to make sure from the city that the city will be able to provide the required recreational traffic water management requirements in it as detailed in number two of prelim preliminary plant requirements. ments within two years of the subdivision. >> Can you um can you you're tableabling on the basis of one more time. I just want to make sure I have this good >> and I want to make sure that the city can provide to these new residents the items listed. I want to make sure that all the things that would would deny this as a premature subdivision. In other words, providing the recreation opportunities, providing the um traffic management, providing the water management um as required um for a full mature subdivision. um can can be provided to this area within two years. Remember when you you you read me that the ordinance? >> Yep. Um so, um I did you have a motion. I don't know if you want me to speak on it, chair, at the moment, but I I think that >> and before it gets a second, I'm willing to modify. >> I'm just not certain that you have the ability to table on this. Hey, prove to us you can do this because that's kind of what you asked. Um, they're showing you the plans and asking you to approve them, stating that they're able, I mean, you know, with full confidence that they're they're able to do this. So, the two years reads public improvements such as recreational facilities. Now, as a reminder, our code says provide land or the city may accept fee. So, it doesn't have to build a recreational facilities or other public facilities reasonably necessitated necessitated by the subdivision which must be provided at the public expense cannot be reasonably provided for. So, if the developer cannot do it within the next two years, can the can the public pay for it within >> and that's my concern is because I I I live in that area. I know Harrow. I know 97. And quite frankly, every day when I go to work and when I have gone to work, I drive County Road 50 out to 61 just because otherwise I don't exit to 97 like normal people would. Um, it is what it is and that's my choice. But my concern is I I I really want our engineering folks to look at Harrow and at the traffic demand that this full development will will have on Harrow. It is not a standard width in many areas. >> So that's different. Um, what I would say is then you'd be tableabling requesting the developer to provide a traffic impact study on the impact to the surrounding transportation system for the city's review. Um, as of right now, we don't have any evidence that this subdivision is necessitating um transportation enhancements outside of the platted land area, >> which is an ongoing problem. We always develop and then they fix the road. >> Then we hope they fix the road. >> Well, that's Yeah, maybe that's >> How long have you lived on Northshore Trail? >> They're working on it. >> I was just going to say, I mean, it's it's a great example, Susan, of how we actually followed through eventually. Um, I mean, you know, some of these roads, County Road 50 and Highway 97 are state roads and and county roads. So, those are roads outside of our jurisdiction. No, I'm I'm worried more worried about Harrow to be honest. >> So then I think >> and you all know the curves. >> I hadn't heard that before and so that's where I'm concerned. It's not then necessarily that it's a a premature subdivision. It's uh you want further assessment of the impact to the existing roadway networks to make sure there aren't additional infrastructure changes needed as part of this development. It would be premature if Harrow is not capable of handling the traffic demand for instance. It would be premature if the area water management to remove water from this subdivision to for instance Big Swamp or um Hardwood. I think that's still in the Hardwood Creek area. Um is not sufficient to remove water before it backs up into homes. So it would be premature if those conditions are not in place. >> Yeah. And I think at this moment this body does not have that information to be able to say that. And that generally is something that happens. Uh asking for additional information or um additional study is common, but to just I mean what it sounds like is you're trying to table it indefinitely. No, I I I I I I just want assurance from our engineers that we are not going to create that that by approving this development, we are not going to create the conditions on traffic and on water management specifically um that would have otherwise made this a premature development. Mr. Chair, I'm going to withdraw my motion. >> Very good. >> There's no motion on the table. Commissioners >> can um what is out of all of these documents that we have, which one is the plat? >> I don't know if that'll walk us back to really knowing what we're talking about because they're all kind of bundled together. >> I'd like to know So, I don't recall exactly how Chestnut developed, but if if the developer decided he only wanted to build part of phase one and so he may have just platted 25 houses, let's say, and then he came in for phase two of that. So that's why you may have had multiple phases. This developer is coming in wanting to do all the lots now. They're not saying yes, this we have a future or what we would often call a ghost plat. No, they're coming in saying here's what we want to build on the remaining property. There's there's not going to be phases as such. Now, my I doubt they're going to say build anywhere you want on this parcel. Um they're going to probably want to take it from one end to the other, but besides that, they're getting approval for the entire land area. >> This is the preliminary. >> This is the And this is the preliminary plat. So, they will come back to us >> for the final There's not much on the second hand. Where can we cit? >> This is just an advisory body. This body doesn't get to make a decision tonight. So they make re >> Sure. They make recommendation to the city council. The city council has the ultimate decision-making authority. Um, so long as the plaque conforms to the city code, the comprehensive plan, the city the city is in a very likely position to not be able to. They can do it, but we could just it's in violation of state law. >> That's fine. other concerns council. >> Yeah, this it all just depends on when this body um takes action and it goes back before the city council. All of these comments will be shared with the city council as part of those preliminary packet materials. >> Uh Chair, uh Commissioner Applicski had asked about which page the preliminary plat was on and the preliminary plat is on page 39 in your packet that is shown up on the screen. >> Excellent. So, if we either approve or reject this, well, I guess my point is we've already recommended not doing the amendments. >> Correct. >> Which the amendments are drafted into this plan? >> Correct. >> And I think the citizen concerns we can only tonight deal with the land that's on this map is the problem. Um, is there a way to table until Well, I guess you can't really if we're rejecting one, we can't table the other in reality, right? >> I mean, you can table this, but we have to have a reason for tableabling. What are we asking for? Because the table isn't like an indefinite. It's a table till you go bring us this table till we've confirmed this table till you've redrawn in XYZ ways. >> Is there a way for us to just not make a motion and then that gives them a chance to address the other things or does it have to get approved by us to get to council? >> Um the by statutory requirements the city does have to take action on preliminary plats within 120 days of submitt. Failure to act on an application results in automatic approval. So you can table it and give yourselves some more time, but I would say if you're going to table it, you we should be providing direction to the developer to provide us back with something. But it's what is that something? You could also table it until after the parks commission has had a chance to um make recommendation on the matter. Uh what I would say would be um more more um consistent with the code, the comprehensive plan and the necess the necessary findings of fact is to make recommendation to approve with modifications so that it conforms with the original PUD and consideration for parkland dedication if so desired by the council. So, so we could make a recommendation that the park goes in first. >> Not that it goes in first, but that you make recommendation that the final plaque comes back before you with parkland. It's >> just recommendation, but that gets I think across the s one of the primary concerns that all of you have heard and are struggling with is the original plan didn't include parkland. You can understand why this doesn't include parkland. um you think that possibly this should get some parkland. So therefore recommending hey council we think you should probably consider approving the preliminary plat once it's redesigned and meets those original PUD uh parameters and that parkland is included in as part of that. I I think yeah from what I hear from the citizens there that they were promised a park and the park never materialized. >> They were promis unfortunately they were promised a park by a developer. Basically the developer did not hold up their end of the bargain. So the city unfortunat is not responsible for that. Um, we're trying to make it better in phase two, but sometimes developers are de how developers are and some are better >> and some haven't been great. Susan, >> I'm going to move approval of the preliminary plat for with the provisal that we recommend. We recommend approval of the preliminary plat >> corrected to >> correct >> revised revised to meet the requirements of the original PUD >> and to include parkland dedication >> and and and for the park commission because I can't I can't tell them what to do. >> All right. and after consideration by the city's park commission of park requirements for the subdivision. >> I'll second that. >> I have a motion and a second. Further discussion hearing none. All those in fig all those in favor signify by saying I. I >> I >> opposed >> abstensions. Motion carries. >> So, you probably want to know next when does the park commission meet? >> Next Wednesday night in this room and I believe their meeting start at 5:30. I've got a whole stack of cards uh on the back table. Just shoot me an email and I can let you know specific time and any subsequent staff reports and get those sent out in advance. >> So, 5:30 next Wednesday for the park and then it'll go to the city council. So we are a recommendation board in this ca in this particular issues. We don't make the final decisions. They do in some other areas. So they will be taking up this issue. I'm not exactly sure when my calendar is giving cards back there. So when will this probably go to council? >> I believe it's October 22nd. Um, I have a feeling that um, it could be the parks commission is not able to make a recommendation next week. Not saying that's going to be the case for sure. Um, so it could get delayed beyond the 22nd, but give me just a second and I will check this date. >> And Mr. City Council member, you were listening carefully. I was >> September 22nd is when it's tenatively scheduled to go to the city council. Um so parks and recreation commission uh September 17th city council September 27th um 22nd. Um but again I have a sneaky suspicion our parks commission will have a hard time making a recommendation. I don't know for sure. So that could get delayed from that September 22nd meeting at the council. Any comments submitted to me in writing before those meetings can be distributed to those commissioners and the council in advance as well. So feel free to reach out. Anything in writing gets entered into the public record. But we will revise all of our reports and stuff to address all the public comments. Not word for word, not person for person, but in essence try to capture as much as we can of the concerns the community has. >> And email does constitute in writing. >> Correct. Email does constitute in writing. So we >> we have 120 days from the date of the uh determination of an application submission is complete. Um our timeline looks like uh November 20th is our expiration date. >> So planning commission held a public hearing. So from here on out, the public hearing's over. So the only time the comment would be taken would be during the open form. Um if you wanted to speak to an issue, >> correct? So um the each of those upcoming bodies don't have scheduled public hearings. So comments submitted in public, we'll include it in the packet. And then every public meeting has an open forum. So if there is a public um meeting that there is not a public hearing, you can share your public comments in the open forum section right in the beginning of a meeting. So >> So again, thank you all for coming. Have a good evening. >> Thank you >> and everybody. They don't want to stay for the finale. >> Um any public works? >> Yeah. So, if you could just give it a >> give it a minute. Uh, if if we can ask you to take the conversation to the hallway, please >> so that so that we can finish our meeting, please. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome to stay, but you just have to be quiet. All right, let's try item N eight again. The public works building steering committee. >> Uh the city council has elected to form a steering committee to help with the um input related to the develop potential development of the public works building. This is going to be a committee to help with things like design staff. Um either myself or Stephen will be included on that committee. Question was raised whether or not there's an interest from any member of the planning commission. There would only be one. We're trying not to oversaturate any comm any steering committee. Staff is happy to represent the planning commission because the theory is it's bringing forth the planning commission's um concerns. But it the question was raised if anybody on this body would like to also represent be represent represent represent >> what's it what is the steering committee do >> um they'll probably meet just a couple times over the next 6 to 12 months maybe a little bit longer uh to probably react to design things you'll be pulled in on matters that are more relevant to your commission your body um So when the exterior of the building, the you know site design, some of that sort of stuff, that's when your the planning commission, land use matters, um that's when you would ask to be a part of that commission. >> Is it a volunteer position? >> It is a volunteer position. Uh the involvement would most likely be during daytime hours, but probably late afternoon type of thing, maybe early evening. very nomn nominal amount of commitment but it would just be to have planning commission presence as part of the steering committee. >> How you can put me down. >> So I also saw another hand raised. So you guys want to draw straws or arm wrestle? >> I so I I don't see anybody else jumping up. >> All of us would be willing to help you if you want. >> We only just need one person. So that's where it's I mean stuff will come back before you. Obviously this building will have to go through like site plan review but this is just steering committee to help with the development. So I hear Martin would like to participate. Uh Susan you said you're you're good. If somebody else wanted to. So all right. Um all in favor of Martin say I. I. >> Great. Just moving right along into staff updates. Is that all right? >> Absolutely. We'll start with uh our esteemed council person, Mr. Larson. >> Quite the meeting tonight, huh folks? >> Uh chairman and commissioners, uh just nothing really too much to pass. Uh, just to let you know, there is a survey out there that the council is asking as far as tax information and where you'd maybe like to see selections as far as uh tax money possibly going to if you prefer public safety or parks or whatever. Takes just a couple minutes for you to to fill out and uh we've gotten some pretty good responses so far. >> Where is it? And how Has it been publicized? Because I try and stay on top, but I haven't seen it. >> It's on the city site. I put it on my site. Um I know it's on Facebook stuff, too, but also on the city's website. >> I can send out an email as well if you'd like for all to commissioners and then for you folks to share. I could It's probably just not a bad thing to see if our clerk's office could send it to all our appointed elected officials. >> There you go. Bam. Um, just something quick. Uh, kind of going through Abby, uh, Mark Sts and Jolene. We'd like to do some type of a recognition for our commissioners of all areas. So, we're looking at possibly hosting a barbecue at the park. So, we kind of tentatively pick like a ninth or so of next month roughly. We're still working on it in a time frame, but just to let you know, we'd like to put something together for everybody to come out and enjoy a hot dog or a hamburger and socialize and enjoy the day and thank you for your services. >> Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Larson? >> Y'all starting the budget process now? >> We've been working on it. We had a workshop and like I say, that's another reason why we kind of threw the email out. Uh we're looking for feedback from the community as far as things too. Uh we're a handful of people and we're trying to make the the right decisions for everything, but like you know when it comes time to sharpening the pencil, you got to be selective in what you're doing at West. So um we'd like some help. We'd like some input from the community. So we appreciate it. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Abby, >> I want to first introduce our assistant community development director, Stephen Gilmore, who's joined us tonight. Um, Stephen's on day three of the job. So, please, please be nice. I know he does. Yes, he has. Come back twice. >> So, we're really excited to have um his expertise and his support in uh the community development department. You'll start seeing his face regularly. Speaking of regularly, you will probably be having some pretty regular meetings through this fall. We've got um five subdivision plats in some form or another. You saw one tonight. Um and just as a heads up, all of the developers and builders think that they're still going to build this year. So, it's really fun. Um no, not all, but they're are all really excited to get moving dirt in Forest Lake this fall. So, that is something. Um wanted to let you >> all was with 55 foot lots. Um, no. Um, >> 45 >> 15. >> Thank you, Jesse, for that humor. Uh, no. Um, no, but you do see some with some requests for reduced lot sizes. And all of them have been advised as the developer tonight, too. 55 is a hard. We already we already went to 65 7,500 square feet recently. That was a big jump for Forest Lake. Um, so we Hugo. >> Nope. But we still have the same density requirements Hugo has. Commissioner Young, >> I I'm working. >> Yeah. Uh, another update for you. Um, Comfort Lake Forest Lake Wershed District will have their state of the watershed coming up. I think I may have sent out an email invite to everybody. Go ahead and feel free to sign yourself up for that if you wanted to. Um, and then I had one other note here and it just says neighbors. So, I'm not sure what that Oh, attended a neighborhood meeting tonight uh for Forest Lake Garage Condo. So, that is one of the plats. Not all plats are residential. Um off of Forest Boulevard that will be coming before you in October, maybe your second meeting in September. Might be cancelled, but then two in October. But, um but I did attend that. Um and when Stephen and I left at a quarter to six, not a person had showed up. So, was good. >> No surprise. >> Any questions for me um while we're here? >> Shy like that. It doesn't give me a lot of confidence. >> We have the environmental center down there >> and one of the things that the planning commission requested as part of the environmental center development was that there be in addition to the burm that there be significant plantings one. >> Uhhuh. 100%. >> I haven't seen them. No, you haven't. >> Okay. >> You, if I may chastise you for a second, need to get on the city email because it came out in Jolene's weekly report >> that it's taken care of. >> It's not taken care of, but we have been working with the county. Um, they did have a draft final landscape plan that myself and public works director uh Dave Adams worked through with them that puts in significant landscaping even including in the rightway. We are working through a development agreement amendment with them that they will maintain that rightaway landscaping for a couple years until it's mature. So then that way we don't have to take on the responsibility of failing um failing infrastructure before it even uh grows. Um, but yes, that had been something that had been working on. Thank you for bringing it up. I don't always remember to follow back with you guys on those things. >> Thank you. >> But now that Stephen's here, >> question to Abby, >> Stephen, anything to add tonight? uh this is the reason why I moved here that just seeing how great every the citizens of the city are and how passionate they are and respectful of everything is absolutely the just a affirmation that I made the right choice. >> Where where'd you move here from? >> Florida, you know, so it's going to be nice >> in Florida. >> What? >> They have zoning in Florida. >> Yeah. Oh, yeah. We're not Houston. Yeah, there's definitely >> Houston. Yeah, I've been to Houston. Yeah, it's it it's bonkers for sure. >> Well, especially date county. >> All right. Thank you. Welcome to the uh well to the humble planning commission. >> Yeah. >> Andy, anything? >> No. >> Susan, >> nothing. I I apologize. I I like submarine your earlier opinion. So >> Oh, no. It's perfectly fine. My admiration is still strong. >> Nothing. >> Jesse, >> nothing. Martin, >> great meeting. I have nothing to add. So with that, the chair is looking for a motion to adjurnn. >> I got a motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second. Non-debatable motion. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Abstensions. Motion carries. Thank you all for your time this evening. [Music]