Based on the context provided for the City of Farmington and the content of the transcript, this is a **Planning Commission** meeting. The speakers include Planning Commission Chair **Brian Rody**, Planning Commissioners **Phil Windschill**, **Mike Teske**, **Christa Leato**, and **Mitch Snowbeck**, as well as City Staff members **Tony Wippler** (Planning Manager), **Jared Wold** (Associate Planner), and **Shirley Buecksler** (City Clerk). [0:00] [Applause] [Music] [0:38] **Chair Brian Rody:** All right, we'll call the meeting to order on behalf of the Planning Commission. I'd like to welcome our residents and viewers to this regular meeting of April 9th, 2024. On tonight's agenda, we have two public hearings and we have two discussion items. Before we get into the public hearings, we have one housekeeping item to take care of; that would be the minutes from our March 12th regular meeting. Are there any additions or corrections to those minutes? If not, is there a motion? [1:10] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Motion to approve. [1:12] **Chair Brian Rody:** We have a motion for approval. Is there a second? [1:14] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** I'll second. [1:16] **Chair Brian Rody:** Motion and a second. All in favor say aye. (Group: Aye). Anybody opposed? All right, the minutes are approved. We'll open up both public hearings at this time. The first public hearing is an ordinance to amend Title 4 and 10 of the Farmington City Code. Jared, you going to take this? It's going to be continued, correct? [1:31] **Jared Wold (Staff):** Thank you, Chair, Planning Commission members. So, a public hearing was scheduled tonight for ordinance amendments to Titles 4 and 10 of the city code. This was specifically in relation to moving general architectural design and material requirements from the building section to the zoning section. Staff, after consulting with the City Attorney, decided or are asking to request that the commission continue the hearing to the May 14th regular meeting just so we can finalize the language on that a bit. This will be the last round of the zoning code amendments from that list that I presented back in November of last year. We've had a couple rounds of those. [2:12] **Chair Brian Rody:** All right, thank you, Jared. With that, then, I'd look for a motion to continue the public hearing until our May 14th regular meeting. Is there a motion? [2:19] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** I'll make a motion. [2:20] **Chair Brian Rody:** You have a motion. Is there a second? [2:22] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Second. [2:23] **Chair Brian Rody:** Motion and second. Call the roll, please. [2:25] **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Windschill? **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Teske? **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Rody? **Chair Brian Rody:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Leato? **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Snowbeck? **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Yes. [2:33] **Chair Brian Rody:** All right, we'll move into our next public hearing. This is St. Michael's Third Edition. The applicant is the Church of St. Michaels. The address is 22120 Denmark Avenue. Tony, you'll take this? [2:45] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I will. Thank you, Mr. Chair, commission members. St. Michael's Church is requesting a preliminary and final plat for the St. Michael's Third Edition as well as a conditional use permit in order to construct a rectory on the property located at 22120 Denmark Avenue. As I had mentioned, the applicant is the Church of St. Michael. Again, the location is 22120 Denmark Avenue. Current land use: Catholic Church campus and vacant land. There is bounded by industrial zoning to the east, that being Dakota Electric. Medium to high-density residential zoning is to the north and south, and agricultural land is to the west. The existing zoning the property is R1, which is our low-density residential zoning district. [3:32] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** The final plat that's shown up on the screen and in your packet essentially combines a previous platted outlot—that would be Outlot D of St. Michael's Edition which was platted back in 1998—it basically combines that outlot with a larger parent parcel to create one large lot, that being Lot 1, Block 1 of St. Michael's Third Edition. The plat is adjacent to county right-of-way, both County Road 74 and County Road 31, those being Ash Street and Denmark Avenue. Being that they are adjacent to county roads, they are subject to Dakota County's contiguous plat ordinance. The County Plat Commission did meet on March 27th and they did recommend approval of both preliminary and final plat subject to dedicating of 20 feet of additional right-of-way for County Road 74. [4:30] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** This will be a condition of approval and I do want to mention that the church's architect or engineer has updated those drawings. I just received those today, though, so I wasn't able to update the packet, but they did make the changes that are required of them. [4:45] **Chair Brian Rody:** Both of them, Tony? [4:47] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Both of them. [4:48] **Chair Brian Rody:** Okay, thank you. [4:50] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** There will be an easement vacation needed with this. Outlot D of St. Michael's Edition is encumbered with a blanket drain and utility easement, so it's entirely encumbered with that easement. It will have to be vacated as the church is looking to place the rectory basically where that outlot is located. A public hearing has been set for the April 15th city council meeting, being that vacations are approved through the City Council—that's who holds the public hearing for that. New easements will be provided with the Third Edition plat and those easements are acceptable to City staff. [5:23] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** As far as the conditional use permit is concerned, as I had mentioned previously, the property is zoned R1 and places of worship are conditionally allowed in that zone. The church is proposing approximately 4,550 square foot rectory on-site, again on that Outlot D location. The rectory would consist of a main level and a basement. The main level contains two bedrooms, two sitting rooms, a chapel, kitchen and dining area, and a living room. And then the basement contains two bedrooms, family room, kitchen and dining, sitting room, and mechanical and storage areas. Additionally, there will be a three-stall garage attached to the rectory as well. [6:10] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** As you can see with the elevations that are shown here and in your packet, the rectory will resemble a standard single-family home. The exterior materials consist of a mixture of stone, lap siding, and shakes on the front elevation, and then lap siding on the side and rear elevation. And additionally, there will be a deck on the back as well. The rectory exceeds all required minimum setbacks for the R1 zoning district. Access to the rectory will come from the driveway that extends from the parking lot to the north. The location of the driveway will require elimination of several parking stalls. Current parking count on site is 348 stalls. There's plenty of parking on site. Even with the removal of those stalls, they will still be in compliance with city code by a substantial amount. When the church originally constructed, they did a ratio of one space for every 3.1 seats. Code requires one per every four, so they went well above and beyond with what they were required. [7:23] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** As you are aware, there are six criteria for approval of a conditional use permit. Staff feels that all six have been met with this particular application. Therefore, the action as requested this evening is twofold: one is to recommend approval of St. Michael's Third Edition preliminary and final plat and forward that recommendation onto the City Council contingent upon: A) an additional 20 ft of right-of-way must be provided on the plats for County Road 74, and B) the instrument of dedication on the final plat must be revised to change the wording from "City of Hastings" to "City of Farmington." And then the second action would be to approve the requested conditional use permit to allow the construction of a rectory on the property addressed as 22120 Denmark Avenue contingent upon all necessary building permits being obtained. [8:24] **Chair Brian Rody:** Thank you, Tony. There are representatives from St. Michaels here. We have Father Frey and Mr. Woods. Anybody want to add to the staff report at all? Okay, if you'd be available for questions. This is a public hearing; we have a limited audience, but is anybody here who has any comments or questions regarding this? Seeing none at this time, I'll move to the commission. I will remind the commission now we're looking at two different issues: one is preliminary and final plat for the rectory; the second one is a conditional use permit also. So we will take those motions separately at the end because one is a recommendation and one is a commission action. We'll start with Commissioner Teske. [9:02] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Yeah, I don't have any questions or concerns at this time. I think it looks good. [9:06] **Chair Brian Rody:** Commissioner Windschill? [9:07] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** No, it looks good. Thank you. [9:08] **Chair Brian Rody:** Commissioner Leato? [9:09] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** No questions. Thank you, looks good. [9:11] **Chair Brian Rody:** Commissioner Snowbeck? [9:12] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** No questions, thanks. [9:13] **Chair Brian Rody:** Oh, I always got them, and I'm going to start—Mr. Woods, Father Frey, you want to both come up there? Small thing. Mr. Woods, I had mentioned earlier about the proximity you are to a commercial business with a pole yard, and it looks like on the map that I got, it's 40-some feet away. There's some noise, maybe some dust that could come from that. How do you intend to live with that or to resolve that? [9:45] **Mr. Woods:** Well, it'll be a combination of privacy fencing and trees. We're obviously well aware of our neighbors. But we—you know, we've been out on the site a couple of times, and on one of our windier days, I noticed that we're going to get a bit of a dust storm. So it's something that we're well aware of and they do the best they can to remedy that and not to have any dust, but you know where you're at, you know what you're dealing with. [10:14] **Chair Brian Rody:** And I'm glad you got at least a remedy for it going into the project so we don't hear about it later on. Okay, another question that I have might have is: how many people do you assume will occupy the house at any one time? [10:28] **Father Frey:** Yes, so we've designed it so initially it'll just be me that's living there. But kind of looking ahead, there's a chance that down the road another priest, in addition to the pastor, would be assigned to Farmington, so we want to make sure that we could accommodate them. And occasionally there's a kind of a mid-term length additional cleric that might get assigned to different places like a summer assignment or something. So probably between two, maybe three clerics would be residing there at some point, but initially just me. [11:04] **Chair Brian Rody:** Sure, looks like a nice house, so you got plenty of room for as many as you're planning to have then. So, appreciate it. All right, thank you again. I did mention this is a public hearing. Anybody have any questions before we look to close the public hearings? If not, I'd look for a motion to close the public hearing. [11:19] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Motion to close. [11:21] **Chair Brian Rody:** We have a motion. Is there a second? [11:22] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** I'll second. [11:23] **Chair Brian Rody:** Motion and second. Call the roll, please. [11:27] **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Teske? **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Rody? **Chair Brian Rody:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Leato? **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Snowbeck? **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Windschill? **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Yes. [11:28] **Chair Brian Rody:** Okay, we close both public hearings and Tony, I'm going to do two separate motions as I mentioned earlier. The first one will be the preliminary and final plat with the contingencies that you had listed. You still say that this shows "City of Hastings" and not "City of Farmington" on the new one? [11:45] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** The new ones have been revised; that's been revised. [11:47] **Chair Brian Rody:** So that one has been revised too, but you want to keep them in there? [11:51] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Keep them in there, yep. [11:52] **Chair Brian Rody:** Okay, so then with the contingencies as Tony noted, is there a motion for a recommendation to our City Council? [11:58] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** I'll make a motion to approve. [12:00] **Chair Brian Rody:** Okay, we have a favorable recommendation for approval for the preliminary and final plat for St. Michael's Third. Is there a second? [12:08] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** I'll second. [12:10] **Chair Brian Rody:** We have a motion and second. Any more discussion? If not, call the roll please. [12:15] **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Rody? **Chair Brian Rody:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Leato? **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Snowbeck? **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Windschill? **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Teske? **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Yes. [12:20] **Chair Brian Rody:** All right, then in front of the commission is a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a rectory on the property addressed as 22120 Denmark Avenue with one contingency: all building permits are obtained. Is there a motion? [12:35] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Motion to approve. [12:37] **Chair Brian Rody:** Motion for approval. Is there a second? [12:38] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** I'll second. [12:40] **Chair Brian Rody:** Motion and second. Call the roll please. [12:45] **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Leato? **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Snowbeck? **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Windschill? **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Teske? **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Rody? **Chair Brian Rody:** Yes. [12:50] **Chair Brian Rody:** Thank you, gentlemen. Hopefully you find out your address that you were looking for at some point. All right, thank you very much. Yes, you have a good night now. All right, we'll move into our discussion items. The first discussion item is Vermillion Commons Third Edition final plat. Tony, you'll take this one also? [13:04] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I will. All right, thank you. All right, here we go. Yes, Lennar has submitted an application for final plat of their Third Edition of Vermillion Commons. It does consist of 67 townhome lots, is consistent with the approved preliminary plat that did include 276 townhome units over 75.7 acres, which yielded a density of 6.7 units an acre. The property is zoned R3 and is being developed as a Planned Unit Development. Front yard setback is proposed at 25 ft, side 15, interior side yard setback 10, and then rear yard setback of 10 as well. [13:49] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** The plat does contain 18 outlots in addition to the 67 townhome lots. Outlot A is 1.7 acres and will hold a stormwater facility. Outlot B is 7.3 acres, contains four natural gas easements and open space. Then Outlot C is 2.8 acres and again consists of stormwater facilities. Outlots A, B, and C will be deeded to the city as part of this plat. Outlot R is just over 11 acres, consists of future development and those natural gas line easements as well. And then Outlots E and I consist of private roads within the northeast portion of the Third Edition. And then all remaining outlots consist of common area around the various townhome lots. [14:36] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** This is the final plat. As you can see, it's kind of divided up into two areas: the northeast area and then the northwest area, with the open space and natural gas lines kind of in that center area as well. The fourth edition would be to that area to the south. Again, just the copy of the plats themselves. Access to the Third Edition will come from the extension of Denton Avenue to the north along with the western extension of 218th Street West. Lilac Drive will extend north from 218th Street on the west side of the development, and this road also provides future access to the adjacent property to the west, that being the Adelman farm property. [15:23] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Denton Avenue, 218th Street West, and Lilac Drive all consist of 60-foot right-of-way with 32-foot wide roadway. The private streets that would be in those Outlots E and I are measured at 27 ft in width with curb and gutter. An 8-foot wide bit-trail will be constructed along the northern boundary of the plat and continues through the central portion of the development. Trail is also provided on the north side of 218th Street West. A 5-foot wide sidewalk will be installed on the west side of Denton Avenue and extend around the cul-de-sac. Sidewalk will also be installed on the south side of 218th Street West and on the east side of Lilac Drive. On the map attached or shown, the yellow are the trails and the red would be the sidewalk being proposed. [16:30] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** 11 off-street parking spaces will be provided within the Third Edition. Additionally, the proposed two-story townhomes consist of two-car garages and space for two cars in the driveway of each unit as well. So the action that's requested this evening is to recommend approval of the Vermillion Commons Third Edition final plat contingent upon the following and forward that recommendation onto the City Council: 1) Satisfaction of all engineering comments related to the construction plans for grading and utilities, and 2) a development contract between the applicant and City of Farmington shall be executed and security fees and costs shall be paid. Submission of all other documents required under the development contract shall be required. [17:28] **Chair Brian Rody:** Thank you, Tony. With us from Lennar is Mr. Try—is that how you say it? Do you have anything to add to Tony's report? [17:34] **Steve Try (Lennar):** Good evening. Steve Try here. It's great to be with you on a beautiful evening. Tony did a great job; I'm just here to answer any questions you may have about the Third Edition. [17:40] **Chair Brian Rody:** All right, thanks. Before we start with Commissioner Windschill, just one question: is that a roundabout? If I'm looking at that right, is that what you guys are putting in there? [17:50] **Steve Try (Lennar):** It's essentially a roundabout. [17:52] **Chair Brian Rody:** I said cul-de-sac, but you're right, it's essentially a roundabout. Got it. One picture looks like a roundabout and the other one just looks like a circle. [17:58] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** No, that's it. Everything I think looks good. Can I follow up with that, Phil? [18:03] **Chair Brian Rody:** Go ahead. [18:04] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Will there be anything in the center of that or will it just be a cul-de-sac with just asphalt? [18:05] **Steve Try (Lennar):** That is a great question, and I can certainly investigate that and get back to Tony. I don't have a landscaping plan in front of me. My guess is that there won't be much of anything within that center. We typically don't want things in those islands—they become a maintenance issue, let's put it that way. [18:24] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Okay, just wondering. The one drawing shows a circle like there is something. [18:29] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** They do have a circle and they do show a couple trees in there. We may have them remove those trees. Often times as we get further in projects, we find out from the Public Works department that snow plowing becomes an issue. Hopefully, it's never an issue again in the state of Minnesota, but you know, this is one of those details that we put on a plan and is often changed as we go. [18:56] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Will there be snow piled in the middle of it or could there be snow piled in the middle of it? [19:04] **Steve Try (Lennar):** Um, I don't know that it's large enough for that... possibly. [19:08] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Well, that's my concern. I mean, possibly there could be. [19:12] **Chair Brian Rody:** Tony, can you look through it and just make sure one way or the other and not a "maybe," because a "maybe" is concerning. And you know from your point, Phil—you know more about this kind of stuff—trying to get around it with snow in the middle. [19:28] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Yep, we can certainly work that out. [19:32] **Chair Brian Rody:** Anything else, Phil? [19:35] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** No, that's it. I interrupted. [19:38] **Chair Brian Rody:** No, you're good. Thank you. Commissioner Leato? [19:40] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Um, yeah, I'm just curious. It looks like on one of the pages there's part of the flood plane, but I believe that's Outlot B that's going to be deeded back to the city. Does that look correct? Because I think that's part of the trail going up to the northern portion. [20:00] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Yep. We've already, with the second edition, we acquired basically that very northern piece, which basically is all flood plane and over wetland. So the city already has acquired all of that land. [20:13] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Okay, perfect. And then my second question—and maybe it's in a different edition and I apologize if I don't remember—is there any dedicated parkland in this particular edition? [20:25] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** There will. Part of that will be part of that outlot to the north; it will be parkland. [20:28] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Okay, great. That's all I have. Thanks. [20:30] **Chair Brian Rody:** Commissioner Snowbeck? [20:31] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** No questions at this time. [20:33] **Chair Brian Rody:** Commissioner Teske? [20:34] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Yeah, all my questions have been answered, so thank you. [20:37] **Chair Brian Rody:** I have a question and it's maybe as much for both Steve and Tony. You know, when I read these—and I've been out there before—but are you noticing there's enough off-street parking? Here, I believe you said there's 11 off-street parking, and you know, this isn't a very big one, but the first few that we had, I remember Phil had asked that question about that and we looked at outlots. Have you found any issues with limited off-street parking? I know you talk about two in the garage, two in the driveway, but is it enough? [21:13] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I know when we did the first addition, we did the calculation and—I forgive me, I don't recall the total number of additional stalls that were provided—I do know it met code. So, yeah, we looked at that as part of the preliminary plat, and there were more than enough off-street parking not only with the additional spaces off the private streets but also within the driveway and the garages. [21:35] **Chair Brian Rody:** And Steve, I've been out there, even toured one, and nice looking place. You guys are doing a nice job; appreciate it. And I'm glad you continue to grow around here. [21:46] **Steve Try (Lennar):** This is just the beginning. All right, so expect to see me back. [21:50] **Chair Brian Rody:** All right, we'll wait then. All right. In front of the commission then is a recommendation to our City Council on Vermillion Commons Third Edition with two contingencies as Tony outlined. Is there a motion? [22:01] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Motion to approve. [22:03] **Chair Brian Rody:** Have a motion for a favorable recommendation to our City Council. Is there a second? [22:05] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** I'll second. [22:07] **Chair Brian Rody:** Have a motion and second. Any more discussion? If not, call the roll please. [22:15] **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Snowbeck? **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Windschill? **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Teske? **Commissioner Mike Teske:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Rody? **Chair Brian Rody:** Yes. **City Clerk Shirley Buecksler:** Leato? **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Yes. [22:20] **Chair Brian Rody:** All right. Our final discussion item then would be the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Amendment update, and Tony, you're going to take this? [22:49] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I will, yes. Let me get out of here quick. All right. Yeah, we wanted to provide the commission with a quick update as to where we are with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and some of the things that we've been working on since we last met as a group. More specifically, when we met as a Joint Commission/City Council back in March. A couple of the things that we have done that are outlined in the memorandum from Rita Trap from HKGI: we've updated a couple of the strategies within the guiding principles. [23:40] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I think overall the guiding principles have been well-received by both Planning Commission and City Council; however, we did again revise two of those, and they're in your packet highlighted in yellow. The first one was dealing with the guiding principle "Quality Growth and Sustainable Growth." Specifically under number one, that strategy was updated. Before, it just read "Support phased development that maintains the efficient use and expansion of local and regional infrastructure." Basically, we added some additional verbiage to that at the end: "and enables the city to realize its long-term development potential." Again, just making a clarification statement to it. [24:32] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** The second one is dealing with the "Vibrant and Resilient Economy." Under number seven, letter D, again, we added just some additional verbiage to that. It originally read "Ensures that adequate land is available with access to urban services for commercial and industrial growth." We changed it to read "Ensure that adequate land for commercial and industrial growth is available with access to urban services by designating on the future land use plan in all phases and prioritizing commercial and industrial development along major transportation corridors." That's one of the things we did hear at that joint meeting, is dealing with the various transportation corridors and trying to guide some land around those corridors a little bit more. [25:20] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** The other thing that we've done is dealing with some of the maps that are included in your packet. We did update those to include those corridors within the map, similar to the one that's up here on the screen. For the future land use, it now shows that as part of the overall discussion. There was talk about adding some additional commercial nodes within the community. What we did was, in the Mixed-Use Downtown District, we did extend that all the way out to Highway 3—a block on the north and a block on the south. We also did extend it all the way down Third Street to Ash Street, one block on either side as well. [26:10] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** You know, when we looked at this back in 2020, I believe we guided land along Elm Street North and South for commercial. With this mixed-use downtown district, it's a little bit different than that. With just guiding it commercial, you kind of hamstring some of those properties, but with this new district, it will allow for residential, so it does provide for basically ultimate flexibility within that guidance. So it's a little bit different than when we did it 20 years ago. But with that said, I do anticipate having a number of discussions with property owners over this change because it will be a change. We will have an open house to go over this and we will invite all people who have affected properties as part of that. [27:00] **Chair Brian Rody:** And Tony, having went through it with you in the past, it may raise some concerns, but I think your explanation on the flexibility for property owners is that they can—it still will be treated as it is currently, existing, but if they have the option or want the option, they've got the flexibility to go either residential or mixed-use, as you said. [27:35] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Exactly. And that is truly the difference. Last time when we did it along Elm Street, it did raise concerns because it did limit them on what they could or couldn't do. They didn't have the flexibility and some of them didn't appreciate it. When we essentially took that away the last cycle, the thought was that area could potentially redevelop, but we weren't seeing that at the time. Instead of continuing to hamstring these individuals, we decided to move away from that, which I think was the right thing to do at the time. And like I said, with this new land use guidance, it does provide for that flexibility and I feel much more comfortable and confident that we could see some change there. [28:31] **Chair Brian Rody:** So I have a question. Have you considered or even thought about maybe doing that—not "Downtown Mixed-Use"—but maybe along Highway 3 and more in the "in town" area? [28:50] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** We haven't necessarily contemplated that. It's something we could certainly look at. I mean, part of it, it kind of jumps to: okay, there's some commercial, there's some residential, there's some more commercial. So to me, it might be as much "mixed" as along Elm Street. Highway 3 is kind of its own monster, so to speak. It is a mixture of residential, commercial, industrial. It kind of happened organically, but it has created a number of issues, specifically access and safety issues. As part of that, we have looked at doing an overlay zone to try to activate some change out there. Unfortunately, the way it's developed, you're going to need probably multiple parcels for redevelopment, which is not impossible, it just makes it that much more difficult for it to happen. [30:20] **Chair Brian Rody:** Just a thought. I know it—maybe others could be thinking of it also. Just keep that in mind. [30:35] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Absolutely. I may have interrupted you while you were still presenting... [30:40] **Chair Brian Rody:** If you have more, go ahead. [30:45] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I do have a few more. Yeah, the second area that we were looking at is in the northeast area, just north of 190th Street along Highway 3, specifically in the Fair Hill area. You'll see that we have a mixed-use commercial/residential node at the northwest intersection of Highway 3 and 190th Street. That's been in place for almost 20 years now; it's roughly about 25 acres. What we are looking at now is adding some additional commercial just to the north of that, roughly about 18 acres or so. And again, this goes back to some of the comments that we heard at that joint meeting. So that's one of the things that we're looking at, is trying to figure out where these potential nodes could go without completely blowing us out of the water from a system statement projection standpoint with the Met Council. We have gotten preliminary numbers back and we are a little bit higher than what they are projecting, but we're trying to work with the Met Council on that. [31:38] **Chair Brian Rody:** Tony, higher for what? [31:40] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Mainly it's population and employment. So, what I tended to hear from our discussion was it's okay to maybe look at commercial, especially on these major or critical thoroughfares and intersections rather than residential. You know, I stated before, if we were to have Pilot Knob over again, we maybe would look at more commercial along that than what there is. And I certainly hope this commission and staff and the Council look at some of the other major thoroughfares—Flagstaff, Highway 3, Highway 50 going east and west—and say, "Let's preserve some of that frontage for commercial." I'm not saying industrial; I'm saying commercial things that the residents in the area could utilize more. [32:44] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** And that's certainly what we're trying to do. Unfortunately, we can't guide every parcel because that would completely shatter every projection that we have with Met Council, and likely it would not get looked on favorably. [33:15] **Chair Brian Rody:** That's why I asked you what it would shatter, and you said it was residential growth. [33:20] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Mainly it's residential growth, but also we have to look at employment numbers. The Met Council, part of their system statement, they give us projections on households, population, and employment. All of those we have to fall within a certain range. So that's why we just have to be a little bit careful because, as you see, we do have a substantial amount of industrial located just north of Highway 50. There's a lot there. [33:50] **Chair Brian Rody:** Are there other areas where you feel—with your experience and training—where, in addition to commercial, you could do frontage? I'll get to the point: my sense is the Council may look and say, "I'd like just a little bit more commercial." [34:30] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I fully anticipate that, to be honest. I do. Again, when you start breaking down the acreages that we are showing for commercial, and not only that but also the mixed-use commercial/industrial in tow with the industrial that we have, it is not an insubstantial amount of acreage. It may look deceiving on the map, but in all reality, 25 acres of mixed-use commercial or industrial is actually a pretty good-sized development. And that's just one of these small nodes that we have. But yeah, I do agree with you, Chair, that I do anticipate some pushback—or feedback—from the Council specifically. [35:35] **Chair Brian Rody:** I don't know if "pushback" is the right word. I think they're going to be excited about it. I mean, I am. I'd like to see where we could do it. I think we should start looking at that. Maybe it isn't exactly written in stone here, but gosh, I think that's something that all the commission, staff, and the Council should all start looking at. [35:55] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Right. And as part of this, I mean, we do have these Focus Areas. If you recall, we are doing these Focus Areas, and as part of that, some of that will be flushed out. Specifically like letter A; that's one area that we would likely have some additional commercial-type uses along there. But again, we're not necessarily going to show that on our future land use map at this time. We'll have kind of a general guidance for what that area would look like so that when we get to maybe the 2050 update—within the next five years when we start that update—maybe that's the next area that we start to actually guide. [36:50] **Chair Brian Rody:** The example that I use: you can still have your residential, but you go up Pilot Knob further to the north and you see a Target right on the road, and then just right behind it you've got a higher-density residential and then beyond that you've got some lower-density transition. That's kind of what my sense is that might be where we could look at and do some with our major thoroughfares. [37:25] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Right. And I do think that's something that we will try to look at, specifically with probably more of those Focus Areas. We are showing some different areas up on kind of that "A" area where we have some additional commercial and then some low-to-medium density up in that area as well. I think that was roughly 15 acres of additional commercial that we're showing up in that area, which would be just at that main intersection of Flagstaff and 190th Street. So, we are very aware of that and we're trying to balance it. [38:15] **Chair Brian Rody:** You've got your job, which is always a challenge. [38:20] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Yeah, you've done a few of these. But those are the major changes that we're at least proposing as of right now. Obviously, we'll have to go through Council to make sure they're comfortable with it before we start doing an open house, because that's the last thing I want to do—have an open house, start having residents come look at it, and then it gets substantially changed. These are the changes that we are at least proposing as of right now, so I do appreciate any and all feedback. [38:52] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** Tony, how about you—oh, I think everything looks good. I have to say, I did ask to have the streets in there and it helps me immensely to kind of orient myself, because otherwise I look at all the pretty colors and I don't know what's what. So it's just with my brain and the way I work, and especially because I commute, so it just helps me to kind of orient and understand where things are. I'm really grateful for that. [39:15] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I appreciate that very much, thank you. Thanks for the suggestion, we appreciate it. [39:21] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** I was just curious about the 18-acre plot there. I mean, is there flexibility to make that more if things are growing in that area? [39:50] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** You can always do a Comprehensive Plan Amendment if necessary. If it develops and all of a sudden it makes sense to continue that type of growth in that area, there's always the opportunity for a separate amendment. [39:56] **Commissioner Mitch Snowbeck:** Okay, thanks. [39:57] **Commissioner Christa Leato:** I mean, much like all the other comments, I appreciate the roads being added to the maps and then again also the updates per our last Workshop meeting. I think it looks good for now until it continues to develop and grow more. [40:10] **Chair Brian Rody:** We've got some work yet to do. [40:12] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** We do, we do. But again, it's the magic eight ball; you just don't know. [40:15] **Chair Brian Rody:** Phil, nothing? [40:16] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** Nothing. [40:17] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Now that we've got a new City of Empire just to our east, is there any coordination with them along Highway 3 for development of this? Um, for the actual Comprehensive Plan itself, we haven't had any specific land use coordination. We've discussed in general with them. We are working with them on an access management study for Highway 3. Again, that deals more with the roadway itself and where accesses would be planned and where intersections might be potentially changed. But as far as the actual land use itself, no, we haven't had any specific conversations with them pertaining to the land use itself. [41:15] **Chair Brian Rody:** Because if you got a critical intersection, you know, there may be two quadrants in their city now and two in ours. [41:21] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Right. [41:26] **Chair Brian Rody:** Tony, could you go through—for our residents and viewers—the next phase or phases of this so that they understand where it's going? [41:31] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Absolutely. As we get a little bit further along, we'll take this back through our City Council to make sure they're at least on board or if they have changes. Once we have that, we'll be looking to have probably a series of one or two open houses where we invite basically anybody and everybody to come look at the proposal. And then later this year, we'll be ultimately holding a public hearing, which will be at the Planning Commission. Planning Commission then would make a recommendation and it would go to City Council. Hopefully, they would approve it and then at that point, we're working with the Metropolitan Council in order to get the actual update submitted and approved by them. [42:10] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** We anticipate this probably happening a little bit later than anticipated this year just because we are working on a couple larger environmental studies due to some potential development. Unfortunately, you can't approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment while you are doing an environmental review; the Met Council will just sit on that amendment until they get through that process. So we were hopeful to have this done mid-summer; it may be a little bit later than that, but yet this year is our hope. [42:58] **Chair Brian Rody:** Time it right. I mean, that's... one thing. And I mean, you mentioned the meetings with—I consider the stakeholders. That'd be like the downtown business group, residents, the property owners, and anybody else that may be interested. [43:08] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** Right, yeah, absolutely. And we haven't necessarily determined how those open houses will look like. I kind of like breaking them up into quadrants of the city so that you invite the people within those quadrants. To me, that's a little more manageable just from a staff-to-resident interaction. So I'm thinking that might be a possibility versus just an all-open house. But again, that hasn't been completely fleshed out just yet. [43:47] **Chair Brian Rody:** Okay, well, I appreciate it, Tony. I appreciate everything you're doing on this. All right, anything else on this? [43:52] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** No, that's it. I appreciate all the feedback. [43:56] **Chair Brian Rody:** Well, if we need to sit on it again with our City Council, we're glad to do that. Anything else from the staff? [44:01] **Tony Wippler (Staff):** I have nothing, sir. [44:03] **Jared Wold (Staff):** No. [44:05] **Chair Brian Rody:** Anything else from the commission? If not, I'll remind our viewers our next regular meeting is May 14th, and with that, I'd look for a motion to adjourn. [44:13] **Commissioner Phil Windschill:** I'll make a motion to adjourn. [44:14] **Chair Brian Rody:** We have a motion. Is there a second? [44:16] **Commissioner Mike Teske:** I'll second. [44:17] **Chair Brian Rody:** Motion and second. All in favor say aye. (Group: Aye). This commission is officially adjourned. Thank you. [44:32] [Music]