I see by the clock on the wall that is 2 minutes after 7 I would like to call to order the Tuesday April 2 2024 meeting of the mountain Planning Commission this is a regular meeting roll call please Jennifer commissioner Aro here commissioner Rosner here commissioner srom here commissioner Baker here good here commissioner heel here commissioner Wacker here and council member m here I have not seen any amendments to the agenda and seeing none uh chair would entertain a motion to approve the agenda as distributed motion to approve as second we have motion to Second discussion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying iose nay motion carries we have the March 19 2024 special SL rescheduled meeting minutes you had them in your packet are there any changes additions deletions noted motion to approve is written have a motion to approve second we have a second discussion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I I nay motion carries Board of adjustment and appeals planning case 24-02 recommendation SL review variance for house remodel additions project at 4360 Wier Boulevard applicants Paul and Christy wolf Miss Sarah all right good evening uh as you stated the application for variance is at 4360 Wilshire Bo bouevard um the property is located on the north side of Wilshire Boulevard just near uh the bridge that goes across to Spring Park um the currently if you had a chance to look at the property it is a single family home with a two-car attached garage um the project or the home was constructed in 1960 um so this lot is considered a lot of record and so we'll have those relief um that we have in the zoning District um as we included in a packet uh staff did find in the file that there was a 1995 variant uh that did allow for the construction of a back deck um and it did reduce the rear yard setback by 13 ft actually I should say the Lakeshore setback which is normally 50 ft um it allows um a 13t intrusion intrusion into it um as was noted in the pack of applicant is um is proposing a multifaceted um project home remodel project uh most of the elements are meeting the zoning code really the only element uh that is needing your review this evening is on the the rear of the property uh the applicant currently has a deck uh in the rear of the property and they are planning on replacing it with a Four Season porch as well as a deck uh the other elements that we'll just mention uh they are planning on replacing the garage uh there is a stoop on the east side of the house that will be removed it um and that area will be kind of reconfigured with a little Canever um and there will also be some basement windows uh so some windows for basement bedrooms and there'll be some window wells um so if you haven't seen what those before those are kind of the the circular shapes um we don't see a lot of those on the variances that you have seen um and then the entrances will be adjusted uh so the proposed home these are all of the elements kind of the different um views for the elevations the home will still primarily be a single family or a single level walkout um as you can see you can also see from this kind of where um the rear elevation is probably the best in terms of seeing the porch That's proposed and the adjacent deck um the applicant has indicated uh that underneath the deck they will keep uh concrete um underneath the porch but they will have uh Landscaping underneath the deck and I'll talk a little bit about that as it relates to hard cover comprehensive plan guides this area for low density residential and the applicant is continuing um that use with the single family home that's on the property uh the zoning is r1a so that is a residential designation um as I said it is a lot of record uh they are meeting the side and front yard setbacks with the changes that are being proposed um hard cover wise um the maximum hard cover for a lot of record is 40% um as we noted in the packet there are a couple of errors with the survey um and and staff if you decide to recommend this to move forward we'll work with staff to kind of get those um things fixed there's a small error that we noted just with um the proposed survey kind of has the wrong hard cover cut culations for existing according to the existing survey that we have hard cover is shown as under 40% um so if they want to move forward without a variance they would need to keep proposed hard cover also under 40% um there was some question uh when we were working uh through the documentation about whether or not they would be able to meet the 40% um the deck as I understand it from just the conversation I had today uh with the applicant is they are proposing to not have any um concrete underneath the deck so if as long as it has quarter quarter inch spacing between the boards then Mound policy is that you wouldn't have to count that as hard cover because you can have rain that goes through in between the slats of the deck um and so they would propose to put Landscaping in that area um so at this point my understanding is the applicant is not requesting a hard cover variance um if that's the case we would adjust the conditions to make sure it's very clear um that they would have to maintain that under 40% and and the area underneath the deck um would need to be clear about what it's going to be used and how much of it is going to be used so that we maintain um that maximum 40% hard cover um the picture just kind of gives you the existing which is currently a deck and then the proposed U the variance that is being requested is because the proposed uh for season porch is larger than the deck currently is which will um decrease the setback that they have to the lak shore so the fundamental question for all of you is whether or not um they have met the criteria for practical difficulties um for the need for having a porch um that will extend farther into the lak shore stepback than the deck variance that they currently had uh we did distribute this uh to the neighbors for comment as well as to staff and agency and consultant review we didn't receive any comments I know staff has received a couple of phone calls from Neighbors just questioning what the project was but there weren't opinions given about good or bad about the project but they did field some inquiries about it um your uh consideration this evening is to discuss the request it isn't a public hearing um the applicant is here to provide additional information and clarify anything that I can't answer um once you have that information then the requested action is to table it if you need more information and let us know what information you need recommend City approval city council approval or denial um and provide to us the findings either for approval or denial we did provide a list of conditions in here so if you were to recommend approval we do have some conditions that are starting point for that um staff did not offer a recommendation this feels like one of those cases um where it's uh it needs your perspective on whether or not it's a reasonable request uh just based on kind of how the history we've been going about um folks and where we're going and understanding what variance is appropriate or not appropriate staff didn't feel like they could weigh in that this was particularly meeting or not meeting uh the practical difficulties considerations if you need those I did provide them I have them with like what are the criteria for a variance they are in your packet we can certainly walk through those and that should be a foundation for our discussion this evening so with that I can answer any questions that you may have I had a question about the the governing bodies you didn't really name them but there's um the Mina Creek Watershed district and there's lmcd and I can't remember the jurisdiction specifically but I assume they were consulted for something that would be moving closer to the lake so when we do any um any of these types of requests the agency list that we send to involves anybody who is affected so it would include um all those agencies DNR would receive it as well um and then internally you know the fire building planning engineering all of those and then if it's on a County Road usually and it involves changes to the front the county would receive it um it just gets distributed actually it gets distributed at the beginning of the process um so people can make make comments at the beginning if they think something's missing okay so I think you said you didn't get any comments back that's the thing that surprised me because I didn't think they didn't give comments yeah you didn't think they did I didn't think they ever didn't give comments you know I thought they like to give comments um well mini Creek won't sometimes they do and sometimes they don't provide comments it depends if they're going to be involved in the process sometimes they like to have all of you weigh in before they actually provide comments um this is probably a situation um particularly from minihaha Creek Watershed District they're going to be concerned and and if the applicant moves forward and they have erosion or St Mar they'll have to get a permit from them but they usually don't weigh in so much um when it comes to like a single family home variance um usually when it's a bigger project that involves storm water they might get more involved with it pardon my ignorance but I'm looking that at that sentence on page 14 Candle levers were not included did and they count toward hard cover explain that for me please all I want to read the sentence first cuz sometimes I send a report and then it gets adjusted and I want to make sure I get it right um it's at the bottom of page 14 of the packet there also there was a notation in the proposed that the can leaders are not included and they count towards H oh okay um first can levers is that something that needs to be defined yes okay just just to check So Cal levers are where the house um bumps out and to provide additional space um for living just a second I was trying to there um so in this case if we are looking at the this elevation this part of the house you can see the brakes in the wall That's where there's a wall break that part of the house is going to be bumped out and so I believe that's not my writing but I believe my understanding from that sentence is that the count towards hard cover because the water can't um be under that that's I think what she's saying so that's what she's talking about is where they're bumping out into the yard and taking more space the hard cover discrepancy is likely to be more than it could be what we're seeing here yes the biggest message I heard and you can confirm with the applicant is their intention is to stay under 40% so they'll be working with staff to figure out what does that mean in terms of you know they have different options how the driveway is configured how the area under the port is configured so they are they're close enough that we can work with them to kind of make things work and on the hard Carver side you said we're under 40 currently but close yes they are very close and could you just summarize one more time the proposed areas of the house where the hard cover would change and wouldn't um well now you're that's a good question there just a very okay so if I look at the existing service I was trying to make sure I didn't turn it off so uh in this area there is some part that is hard cover but you this is where the garage is getting expanded so it kind of evens out in this area so that area where the garage is is currently hard cover right here in this Square block that's currently hard cover and that's going away but the new garage is going in that location there's a small stoop right here that's going away um completely uh that's where the house is getting bumped out and there's no longer going to be a door on each side of the house is just going to be on one side of the house um in this area there's a deck um and that area had been considered hard cover um so the part that is additional um would be part of this proposed porsch according to the applicants they said underneath here won't be hard cover it'll be a traditional Deck with a quarter inch spacing which means it doesn't need to count according to mound's policy and as long as they don't put anything underneath it um then they wouldn't have to have that counted as hard cover um there is also some adjustment cuz the door is here and it's moved back to here so there's some small adjustment in this concrete walkway um and how this is configured um otherwise I think the driveway is staying relatively the same that one of the questions was it's a three-car garage now it's going to be made a three car garage isn't it and there's only two car they only can have because of the hard cover they won't be able to have a driveway that goes all the way over oh they're not going to okay no they're proposing this okay does gravel count as hard cover yes because eventually it it does compact enough that it can't actually permeate through the depiction of the front elevation of the house that we received clearly I think clearly shows a three car garage I'm wondering if that's maybe I just misunderstood no what she's saying is they're not extending the driveway to the third because but actually shows us it does right and the original um survey that we had received had shown a three car um driveway but with the hard cover being so close there's no way that they can oh do that I didn't know if it was a okay error on there or not yeah so it's just a I think the original plan might have been to do that but when the calculations come back it's just not possible so I guess my first thought when I read this this afternoon was that this maybe should be something that should be tabled because of the hard cover considerations it seems to me that there may need to be some changes made that potentially could impact the decision that we maybe would make here tonight but now that I listen to you I get that staff doesn't feel that way I don't think we feel I feel like as long as they don't want a variance then those are things that staff can work out and have worked out with many people you can nickel and dime hard to cover on the driveway or something yep okay yep and we'll have those worked out before we go to the council we'll want to have those things clearly talked about in the conditions in my mind of yes you can't go over 40% that does mean you can't do this and this and this to make sure that it's clear that those are the elements but yeah I don't I don't think staff even when we prepared the report I don't think we felt like that was as long as they don't want a variance we can work all those things out because we do that on a regular basis with building projects all the time just to be clear so we're talking about a variance right now but it's for a setback reduction and you're saying if they don't want a variance you're you're saying we wouldn't be discussing or the the the variance associated with hard cover is not this in scope of what is not what they're requesting so you're not being asked to weigh in on that you're only being requested to weigh in on whether or not oops um the porch can be con and deck can be constructed so that they're closer to the shore than the previous variance allowed on the the topic of the rear setback then um could you help me understand let's say we agree with the notion of that there are practical difficulties and what would stop them from requesting us waving all the setback for example like why what what what make make this one okay and all of it not okay um so one of the elements of variance criteria number three is the the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the Practical difficulty and so that's where you walk through with an applicant the idea that this was really the minimum that they needed in order to achieve their goals and so part of that conversation is you know how if you're going to put on a fores import how how small can you get to make it even usable like if if you if they have to do it to the demension it was today is that really usable is that does that make sense or if you're gonna is it reasonable that they would want to put it on and how big is reasonable um so that's why you wouldn't wave all of it you would just wave wave the minimum amount needed to do what it seems practical um for it did that help it did okay and and I still don't on the topic of other Watershed District authorities they would also have say in how far the setbacks need to be they haven't commented or they don't have any say or no they would comment to like minihaha Waters District would be concerned about the erosion control plans how much um fill is being moved on the site is there fill being added those kinds of things they're typically not going to weigh they could weigh in but typically they're going to stick with those types of elements so this kind of conversation is generally just the city's determination DNR technically can weigh in but the rule is 50 so as soon as we talk about doing a variance we're already not doing what the DNR is and they'd weigh in if they were significantly concerned if we had a new building project those kind of things but these types of things they typically don't uh weigh in on so we're talking about six feet yeah so what's your feeling on number two in terms of the uh not conferring any special privileges on this house versus the neighboring homes are the neighboring homes in the same proximity do do they all conform to the setback or it looked like one was a bit close but I didn't measure it online right um the challenge of that number two um is that we usually look at it in terms of like what's special about this lot that's different from the Lots near it um my understanding from attorneys is like just because the neighbor got it we don't know what the circumstances were we don't know what the year was there's all kinds of other things I'll be honest like City feeling about things change over time um and so this you could look at it as a situation while is like the house is where it is and so if they wanted to add a porch they can't do anything about it because the house is where it is you'd want to put it on the back it's reasonable that you'd want to put it in the back what is the size you also could look at it like you know this is the house and there's nothing you can do I'm sorry but we don't want to have things go to and we're just kind of perpetuating something that we want to do that's why staff didn't way in because we can help with findings either way um on terms of how this works or what's good or bad in the interpretation of is this the kind of thing that the city is supportive of um or not so that that was actually one of my questions too I think the house to the east is not only closer to the lake with the lake sh actually kind of Curves in yeah and I didn't know if you knew the distance that they are set back I don't know that I know that Sarah had looked into the files or was going to and if she was going to let me know if they had a variance or some other reason um but she didn't provide me that so I don't know that there's a specific reason why that house is situated the way it is I wasn't asking for why do you do you know set no and the current deck is is how how large and how big was the setback from the setback so they got a lease um of 13 ft from the 50 so that would what be 37 um feet and in terms of the size I can pull up the survey say it's plus I know that okay further questions for Sarah Sarah pardon me read I'm not no worri thank I that's my s's name I've been called that my so okay um did you have I did okay so is there a difference whether it's a three season porch or four season porch does that make any material difference to the variance uh that it doesn't make a difference to the technicalities that are in the code past planning commissions have had that conversation about whether it matters um but there wasn't clear direction that is put in the code relative to that topic and the Genesis of my question is if there's not going to be any installation in the bottom and they've got this much you know quarter inch and there's no installation is that really are you talking the deck or the porch because that's two different things the the Four Season porch is a I believe a four season so that'll be totally enclosed that will be not the P okay I was talking relative to the deck thank you yeah makes sense okay further questions for Rita okay um hearing none I assume the applicants are here would you like to approach the commission sure please come forward to the podium state your name and your address my name is Paul Richard wolf Jr um my current address is 15847 the net Street Andover and uh but we are we are the Property Owners of 430 currently um it was my grandparents place so I'm third gener third generation wolf and um yeah we just kind of we just kind of want to make this place our home um raise uh raise some future grandkids up here maybe and and create some memories I got a ton of memories from when I was a kid um I mean I really don't have anything else to say it's just that uh this property means an awful lot to me and I've seen it I've seen it deteriorate over the years CU my cousin is uh just kind of let it go to heck and I just want to uh I want I want to make it nice I want to make it nice to live in and uh I'm just looking for that extra six feet of variance just to uh add as extra living space nothing much the Practical difficulty just kind of just uh I don't really have any options except for going back a little bit so that's why I got the application so you guys have any questions for me I don't have a question but I'll just start when I review these I always bring the property up in Google Earth and Google Street View and take a look at it and then I drove out there tonight before the meeting and the changes that I've seen since Google Earth image on in July of 23 to today you've obviously done a lot of work out there it looks very nice yeah just to acknowledge that okay further questions for the applicant um I guess one question I guess I had was did you look at alternate ways to put a Four Season porch like on the side because you have 13 ft on one side 12T on the other side just reconfigure the side a little bit I know you have a a chimney on the one side which kind of impedes i' I've looked at I mean without without the variance you know you could we could just go that 8 ft that we already have and just go 8 ft x 24 but it's just kind of kind of an unpractical living space it's just more kind of a like a hallway an extended hallway and it just uh I didn't think it was very practical so that's kind of why I'm I'm uh just going for the porch look I think it would make the building look a little bit more appealing from the lake and you want to look at the lake I mean that's I mean you don't want to look at the side of the I looked at that space too though I looked at it as well and I thought well maybe I could hook around but really as you stated I don't I don't know if there is any other way to go except for back and you want to look at the lake you know I get that okay and my background is uh construction um had my own business for over 20 years built uh probably what eight of my own personal houses and um this would be the last one I probably built so um are you planning to move into this home okay plan on selling our house and over and moving on here okay that's the plan thank you for stating that I mean I I don't know if my opinion would change either way if you were going to rent it or have family living it but I just think that the fact that you want to make it I want you right that that helps understand the goal right and I live on Black Lake as well so I and I'm probably about as close as you are to the water I'm just on the other side of the bend and so I know that some of these houses on this Lake sit a little kitty wonkish but for the most part it does look like they are all aligned up pretty good except for that neighbor to the right side encroaches out a little bit more so I'm guessing they were in a similar situation just with how narrow the lot size is Right further questions have you spoke to the neighbors about your plant yep I've spoke to both of them I've actually been working out there since last spring last summer um my cousin has done zero yard work lawn work uh trees were growing out of the foundation and brush and trees were you know on top of the house so I spent a good couple of weeks uh clearing clearing and cleaning up that stuff and I got to know Ry as Ray you guys probably know Ray maybe I don't know he's he's on the one side he's been doing remodeling for the last couple years and then um Mary on the on the right side and I I let them both know exactly what's going on and they're pretty excited I think yeah you know to get that property cleaned up cuz it's uh it's not very appealing the way it sits right now so yeah I've spoke to both okay okay further questions thank you sir all right thank you for your [Music] time okay uh discussion amongst the commission comments thoughts would it be okay if I asked read another question sure um do you have any comment on unusual size or shape I mean I'm just trying to find the justification for practical difficulties um reading here in your report unusual lot Sizer shape for example how can I wrap my head around this being an atypical I know it's a lot of record I know it's an older lot seems small and sized any anything we can hang our hat on for that yeah so a couple comments on um findings effect in reality you just need one you don't have to have a whole slew of them um obviously if we have more than one that's always preferred um when we get to unusual circumstances as I said we talk about we can talk about lot size lot shape placements of the building on the lot you know if they were starting over it' be a whole different conversation but if you are going to do something that seems reasonable this as you mentioned this is like the only reasonable place to put it um those types of things um that's the kind of things that you would you can't you know in terms of a lot it probably it's related to the fact that you know this is sitting squarely on the lot there's not one side or another that you could put it on the side of the lot and make it any bigger those kinds of things so if we were leaning toward approving this it wouldn't seem like a having trouble clearing the legal bar for practical difficulties in the findings okay no I think you can I we just need a few of them and we'll help write them as well um the challenge that we have at this point is just understanding where we're at in terms of doing variances or not um just kind of where where the situation lies of whether this seems reasonable or not reasonable um but I think you can talk about potentially you can talk about you know the project seems reasonable size this is the only variance that they need those are the kinds of things you might cover and then also note that this is your recommendation and then staff will look at it and try and see if you know there are any other elements to point to when we make the actual resolutions further question for re not that I okay further discussion comments I actually have kind of a belated question for the applicants if I may sure uh as I look at this the proposal here I think I have this right is three bed three like two and a half bath or something like that what is the home currently in terms of bed and bath it's one B okay finished there enough thank you okay other questions or comments okay well uh if I understand correctly we have three options uh first would be to table this proposal seeking additional information or changes the second would be approve the proposal with conditions and staff has seven of them um there perhaps could be more added by commission members and that would include um then recommend ation of approval for the setback change and then third uh disapproval of the of the uh of The Proposal primarily due to the setback issue did I get those right yes sir okay all right hearing those changes chair would entertain a motion well to get the conversation start I guess Mr chair I would make a motion that uh the Planning Commission recommend approval of the application with the seven conditions set forth um by staff okay we have a motion do we have a second second we have a second all right discussion makes sense sir yeah I think it makes sense I don't have any any concerns okay I think when we look at the expansion of the home and and what they're creating U because I think effectively they're taking some of the current living space converting it to additional bed and bath space and then using this Four Season porch to create additional living space um I think that's a reasonable expansion of the property and the way it's configured there's really no other practical way to do it and as I look at the map of the area overhead it seems reasonably consistent I think if it was much further I might feel differently but I think it seems reasonably consistent with the neighborhood and the character of the neighborhood overall the way the other homes are situated um and so uh on that basis I would vote to approve it further discussion I think go ahead oh I was going to say I you know I'm all for the project I do think that there is an undue um that threshold is met the only concern that I have is is just again looking at the encroachment of that variants and what that might mean to Wetland protection of Black Lake um but again if we've sent something out and they haven't come back to us and by them I mean the the Watershed District then I I I think I'm okay with it but again I think it's weird that we didn't hear anything back so I just I guess for me it's I I'm kind of hung up on that one little detail and I think I'm I just don't know Rita could they come back in the meantime and say nope you know we did review this and it does look like there's that this variance May impede on some of the Wetland of Black Lake and then how do we move forward with that if we've approved it so generally the practice has been that everybody receives the opportunity to provide comment and if they don't by the timelines then we continue to move forward okay um so I would be surprised if they would come back belatedly and say they could between now and the council um typically they get involved with the actual like permitting that you would need to have so erosion control um storm water management and they'll though they will have to work through those to the statisfaction of the minihaha Creek Watershed District so if there is concerns about water quality that will come through the permitting process and they will make those things happen whether or not you approv the variants okay and that's in there as the six steps so I mean I'm glad that it's noted um and it sounds like we've the city has done their due diligence to send that information out and no feedback has come back so and I stated our practice or my understanding over the last year is generally what has been happening is that we submit it and unless there's something large and complicated like those bigger projects we're hearing an initial feedback of like oo this is what we're going to have to do or they're going to have to do these kinds of things those we've been hearing initially but even then they won't make significant comments because they want the city to weigh in first before they weigh in so we hear about it from the bigger how do we handle storm water and if we need to come up with a strategy but otherwise the smaller projects typically you take care of and then they go and apply we do always encourage uh applicants to go and have a conversation um if we think that there's a concern or just to kind of start the process going um so I'm not particularly concerned with this one because it feels like um fairly typical with this kind of a project that we wouldn't necessarily have heard something from any of the agencies actually um It's Not Unusual for these kind of situations where we hear very little comment okay because of the nature of the project is just one lot so small um I think obviously if it was a lot closer there might be concerns um but this distance is things we've seen in other places on other Lots okay thank you yep okay further comments so I guess I'm torn a little bit I came in kind of leading against uh rejecting the variants based upon you know extending a existing variants and we've already had that discussion a couple times um you know the difference here is the neighbor to the east is actually further out versus kind of what we did before so that kind of takes away from the argument of extending it further I'm still kind of torn on you know did they meet the minimum does it have to be 14t out there could have been 10t out there could have been 12 feet out there you know my fiance's got a Four Season ports that's 12 x 12 could it have been a little bigger yeah um but I guess I'm kind of leaning either way I I I don't know I don't know if it's strong enough argument to say deny it because they want an extra two feet out that they had to go when the neighbor's house is closer than theirs yeah and I'm glad you brought that up because that really did make me I mean I zoomed in and I've been looking at it quite a bit that you know that is such a weird Peak how it kind of triangulates right there and it really does just add more to the the undo burden piece in my mind but yeah I was kind of kind of on the fence too but I think that I think that I if I was to vote Yes for it I feel like we would be I'm confident that we would be consistent with we what we have in the past like you said I think this is a slightly different uh situation than what we've seen in the past and and yeah that neighbor is set close closer to the lake than they would probably end up being if we were to approve it yeah okay further comments hearing none ready for the vote all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I I those oppos nay motion carries thank you thank you so folks uh I'm reading uh that this will come to the city council 9th or 2 either the 9th or the 23rd of April am I correct yes sir I asked um Sarah about that we'll have to let you know um obviously the 9th means we have to have a packet complete and ready for the council tomorrow so I have to talk to her and say see which way that we want to go with it and you would probably be well to go to that meeting just you'd probably be well to go to that meeting oh yeah okay great okay all right all right moving on uh planning case 24-3 review SL recommendation proposed amendments to mixed use regulations in city code section 129-139 and city code section 29 definitions for consistency with 2023 amendments to the 2040 Mound comprehensive plan all right good evening um thanks for all the good discussion last time we met which was only a couple weeks ago um we were able to make adjustments to the mixed use districts in that time we will be bringing the remaining items at your next meeting it just wasn't enough time um to craft those well in the the ensuing time uh relative to the mixed juuse District of updates I did make some changes to what we had talked about or what I had presented at the meeting when we had our discussion uh the biggest one is uh just limiting the height to 35 ft which is what we had talked about um so we don't need the table anymore um we can just say height is 35 ft uh there was also a discussion last time um about whether or not we needed to try and get at kind of bulk of a building and making sure a bulk um doesn't get too large um and I know there was a conversation about whether we really needed to do that given the densities and just doing some calculations it felt like it would be better for us to have something than not have something because you could if you had a large enough site and you had enough um units you could still do um a number of units like if you did a 2ac Acre Site and you had mixed use on the bottom that's 36 units and I would think 18 units on a floor would actually feel pretty big uh if we did that so the recommended recommended language um would be that you would limit the facade on any one facade to be no longer than 200 ft that number came from a couple of things one is that as we looked at precedence um there was the smallest precent we found was about 200 feet it ranged up to 350 um more what I used actually was kind of measuring the buildings um so like True Value Hardware the part of the wall That's facing the trail is about 185 ft Mountain Marketplace the parks you know I just measured just trying to see how big things were um and kind of went to a number that seemed like bigger um but not as big as the length of my Marketplace the front of um Commerce Place the wall one of the walls of our Tessa um and so that's where I landed on 200 ft can go up or down the idea is we're just trying to pres prevent um having a whole big wall that is one big gigantic wall and you may never get to that point it would only occur and I wrote it very specifically you would only have that happen if it was a mixed use building that had residential in it so if you had a mixed use building that had retail and office and that's mixed use this doesn't qualify really just focus on the residential component um I also wanted to address the question that was raised about whether or not we should really retain the mixed juice Corridor designation um because really in the comp plan we only have one mixed juice um I did note on your packet on page 29 there are a couple of uses that are different between the two districts um the uses that are in there of few of those actually reflect existing uses so I'm not sure we can just we can't just eliminate it and I don't think we really want those uses in the core of the downtown and so my thought is it's there it's been working so we can leave it we can certainly have a conversation to change it but that's really the only difference between the two districts right now are those four uses um and again that just reflects v um automobile repair Boat and Marine Sales kind of that Corridor along Commerce south of downtown just has a few more more uses with that I can answer any questions if you're comfortable with this language then a recommendation um to um make the amendment to the city code with these proposed changes uh would be great and then we will publish a public hearing um to have the official um consideration at the city council not next week it would be a couple weeks out Rita this is a comp plan guidance or is this city code this is city code okay so if somebody wanted to do something that was 250 ft they would have to come and ask for a variance yes or do a PUD technically they'll have to do a PUD anyway because this District requires a PUD but it would have to come through and be specifically noted okay so then that would come through here and it would go through city council yes okay so you'd have the opportunity to consider that okay as part of a project if anybody else it did want to go bigger I like the idea of having something that we that is is more stringent that we can back off on because going the other way is hard England yes and there was at least some basis in the numbers I tried to look at the buildings as best I could any other questions further questions for Rita and so just to be clear we landed on for the mud and the MU districts that they will just stay as they are those are not changing that is my recommendation if you would like to approach it differently we can no I just wanted to make sure I was understanding that was The Proposal so there's no change to the code as a result of it that stays the same but I wanted to make sure that we knew that I had looked at it and there was a reason why that was going to stay further questions further comments amongst the commission [Music] members okay hearing none um it's my understanding that staff is Seeking a recommendation to city council to approve suggested changes as distributed so I will make a motion to approve recommended changes to mixed use District as distributed in today's packet Pages 29 to 35 a recommendation to city council yep we have a motion I A second we have a second we have further discussion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I I those oppose nay motion carries moving on to old and new business Kathy anything from uh Council Lea on standpoint I do have a couple things um You probably all notice that the hybrid flushing started yesterday so that'll go in for probably a month before that ends um maybe I'm not sure how much you all know about the the bills that are going through called The Missing middle housing bill um well basically what these bills do it's hf4 009 and SF 3964 it essentially eliminates local zoning Authority related to housing along with removes moving any Resident participation um so the council did unanimously approve last week a resolution opposing this overreach um and if you haven't studied up on there I could have Sarah send out the LMC um consequences from this bill it's it's pretty tough bill I mean there' basically be nothing going through planning can I ask a question about that so I read the article on the Laker or whatever the local paper was and it said two residences per per per site which seemed very odd to me did they mean per acre does that me no so if you had a 6000t so it's a really kind of an appalling Bill the name of it is pretty misleading you know this is one of those bills where I scratched my head and go did anybody actually read this bill up in St Paul before but anyway I recommend um I'll have Sarah send this out to you guys it's it's really interesting and then I can have Sarah also send out the resolution that we passed last week I would really like that yeah and then you can reach out to the to your legislators and representatives once you've read it so just to um the latest I heard last Thursday was that that bill was dead but we will verify that and she can still send out the information because that that just means it's dead it doesn't mean that it won't come back the latest I had heard um before I had a a joint meeting with the Planning Commission and a council um from that toity the administrator is that they had set it aside for this year well that's good just gonna focus on Accessory dwelling units actually I'm glad to hear that because when I verify that because that was the last I heard that yeah last Tuesday they were still Yes tweaking it but but it still wasn't good for cities I would like to read it because the the paper the article in the paper just seem inconceivable and and actually not not possible like like from a building code perspective so I'd like to know what it really was and I just assume it's not dead it's it's hibernating until V2 comes their own so been in an evolution for a number of years versions of this this is just the latest iteration of this but thank you that's good to hear but I will have Sarah send this out because it is pretty interesting to read and it may resurface as you said it won't if it's truly done for the year it won't resurface this year that means could resurface this fall no they only have there's only one legislative session a year okay well this is news but next year is still to me so normally this time of year January on um everybody's tracking the bills as they go through and it's evolved some um but as I said the latest I had heard is that that they weren't going to move it farther and and further anymore this time but obviously things may um happen it had a lot of opposition from cities um when we were up at the capital for water I mean that's what everybody was talking about so it'll be interesting for you to read I hope that's the case that it is dead for the year but maybe we can have Sarah indicate that before sending yep that's my plan is that I will email my folks at the lead and just verify stat that'd be great and then um finally music in the park returns again this year and the first concert will be on Thursday June 13th and it'll be Chris Kelly and then there'll be another one on July 11th and August 8th that's all I've got tonight thank you you aware of anything from staff read no Sarah did not pass sending messages on to you all okay Kathy can I ask if there's any updates on the water situation from the when you were there I mean basically what's and you can always the the water on our website is completely updated okay but you know we did just get another I think almost 50,000 and we're waiting for the legislator to actually allow us to spend it um that's what we're waiting on right now but good things are happening I mean it's still going to be a long while but good things are happening $50,000 50 million uh did I [Music] missar I think we got almost a million oh okay I was going to say 50,000 I think we just got almost a million and but again we did just update that in the website so maybe check that and you can see but right now we are kind of on a hold waiting for legislator just tell us when we can spend the money and then we can go to planning planning the facility what just for my clarification so what is the projected need for for the water remediation is it how much is it a million is it 2 million or 3 million or you mean total cost how much do we think we would need I believe it was 36 million yeah CU I was think was 26 million yeah maybe 36 okay yeah and so we're still about 18 million short but they've been receptive to us and to several other towns okay um but we're still two years out even if we keep getting granted money we're but we'd love to get to the point where we can get it it into a planning I just put a $2,500 pole house system in because I didn't think we'd ever get it and now we probably will just because I did that so you can thank me thank you for doing that well you know the other thing too is that if you're watching the website there are tests you can do and if you have a water a water softener at home most likely that's taking care of most your maganese you know I've tested mine and I have no problems at all okay mine was not not even remotely glose not even remotely and there are different like on the island the maganese is so much higher did you do the dipstick one did you actually send it out for testing water from the pipes I was actually able to get water quality reports from the city because they monitor the well so closely for your household yeah oh I didn't know that but you can mail out for a test they're can $15 you could just look at my bathtub and tell how much Magan there no do Mages show up brown and greasy is that bad huh yeah where what portion of Mound you live in I'm right by the library oh okay yeah it's strange cuz I'm on the island too and I've never experienced an issue so I wasp surprised always to hear that how much on the island is bad and we I mean granted we have chemicals so we have an indoor pool so we're always checking it but you know my husband has swam in that indoor pool every day for 25 years and he's never had an issue so I mean we're constantly testing but again it makes a difference when you're putting chlorine in the pool as well kind of offset it but I don't ever notice a difference between our pool water and our our our shower water either so I mean we might have just been locked out for where we are but when this topic came up I was surprised how many people do have issues CU we ands for sure where the proc he's a ton of water you know we're constantly putting water in that pool but uh go to the website and it's all updated for you're interested checking into it okay further matters be brought for the commission hearing none chair would entertain a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn second we have motion to Second discussion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying iose nay motion carries thanks thank you for attending