This transcript features the **Hermantown Planning & Zoning Commission** meeting from July 20, 2021. The meeting is chaired by **Corey Colquist**, with staff reports primarily provided by **Eric Johnson** (Community Development Director). [0:08] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** perfect good evening everybody welcome to the city of hermantown planning and zoning commission meeting uh tonight is july 20th 2021 it's currently 701 in the evening we're going to open up this evening's meeting with a roll call of members uh myself corey colquist here valerie roulette here samuel clark here shannon sweeney jorgensen beth wensloff here buckley simmons here and counselor geisler thank you very much second this evening is an approval of this evening's agenda i'm sure we've all looked at it can i get a motion please beth with the first can we get a second [0:54] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** call quest for the second thank you corey all in favor aye aye motion passes number three this evening is the approval of the minutes from the june 15 2021 meeting i think there was an update to one of those sent to us via email today can i get a motion on that either way [1:17] **Valerie Roulette:** i'd move to approve thank you valerie can we get a second please that means a second thank you mr buckley all in favor aye motion passes [1:42] **Eric Johnson:** great thank you mr chairman i'm just going to jump in real quick there that yes we had an amended minutes came out uh earlier today uh that reflects the uh initial vote that was taken on the um the king creek town homes project uh that with the um that was an amended um epic or amended um version of the plot that way [1:59] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** all right thank you very much thank you number four this evening is public discussion is there anybody here this evening to speak on something that's not on this evening's agenda [2:05] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** oh i'm sorry i can get a little closer to the mic is anybody here this evening on that wants to speak on something that's not on this evening's agenda not seeing any we will move on to section 5 which is public hearings this evening for 5a we have an application by meg johnson for a special use permit for the purpose of starting a greenhouse nursery including sales and production at the residence located at 41.65 this is currently located in an r1 zoning district uh eric what do you have for us [2:51] **Eric Johnson:** yes thank you very much uh as you mentioned yes this is a special use permit application for the creation of greenhouse nursery with the sales of production as you mentioned at the applicant's residence uh actually this one at one correction uh the legal address is 4168 lindell road i'm sorry did i read that wrong the um the property is located approximately a quarter mile north of maple grove road along lindell road it's located on the east side of the property the applicant has 18 acres in size of land area there's an existing home with the garage located on that site right now and what the applicant is proposing is to start this business what they're envisioning would be more of a seasonal type of use that way that would be occurring from late spring to early fall essentially the growing season that we have here they anticipate potential hours of operations from eight to five uh potentially up to 25 or 30 customers a day at that location uh what they're proposing is they have a small parking lot that's north of their home so they locate a couple different greenhouses on that property it was relatively small in size approximately 10 by 10 for one and 12 by 24 for the other uh they'd have some different growing beds located on that property also on the aerial photo associated with this there is wetlands on the property that those are located primarily to the east of this operation that way this type of use is permitted as a special use permit in the r1 zoning district as well as any of our residential zoning districts uh they're just required to uh basically adhere to that plan that they submitted and uh working on that same fact this is a seasonal type of operation that they're expecting okay [4:22] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** uh commission members any questions for eric this evening before we hear from the applicant [4:30] **Samuel Clark:** i have a couple questions uh i guess first off i was reviewing the specially used permanent r1 zoning why have it be under special use if it's allowed [4:47] **Eric Johnson:** there are a number of different ones that way like you said that for instance the if this type of uh was brought to us in our three zoning district in a small lot for instance that we would want to have much more public input so the whole purpose for a lot of these special use permits is is to have the public input so people could provide any comments concerns that they may have with the potential operation that way a special use permit uh is still ultimately approved by a city council so uh it is allowed use like i said if there's other extenuating circumstances it could ultimately be denied at a city council level but uh when you're looking at something like this it's a large acreage property generally in the rural area of our city that it it meets the underlying how does it relate to its uh neighbors that way in this case uh surrounded by other rural properties or very very large acreage properties so um it basically starts working towards that special use permit but it once again it does ultimately require an approval and it's more of a site-specific basis that way [5:58] **Samuel Clark:** okay and then the second question would just be taxes i mean this goes from a residential usage to a commercial or business is do our taxes are their taxes affected or anyone surrounding the property [6:14] **Eric Johnson:** actually it would still maintain its residential use this is end zoning that way it would not be rezoned to a commercial use st louis county may look at it a little bit differently in how they classify that actual property but from the zoning standpoint it will still remain as an r1 residential zoning [6:37] **Samuel Clark:** perfect thank you [6:41] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** some great questions uh i've got one what would the process be if they wanted to come back and expand the looks like a small operation today what if it really is super successful and they want to get into something more like gruesome dwarfs have over on midway road [7:02] **Eric Johnson:** sure with that they'd have to amend the suv so right now they can stay at this level there's nothing stopping them from coming back in the future to try and amend that [7:12] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** all right commission members any questions for eric [7:29] **Eric Johnson:** if you're probably thinking to something we just went through previously where uh about 10-15 years ago uh we used to write special peace permits that were non-transferable without the approval of the city and uh yeah and we have since ceased [7:48] **Eric Johnson:** uh at this point uh they don't indicate any signage and if uh the applicant might be able to answer that question i'd like to pose that to them if they have the ability to uh answer that [8:07] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** sure can you please get one of the applicants to come up and state your name and address for the record we might have a question or two for you guys yeah can you guys hear me on zoom you guys are on the zoom yes we're on zoom perfect what's your name and address for the record please [8:29] **Megan Johnson (Applicant):** uh megan johnson and 4168 lindal road [8:34] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** thank you very much megan uh the first question is signage do you have any plan for any potential signage at that site [8:41] **Megan Johnson (Applicant):** um at this time we don't have any like super specific signage plans that we've thought about yet [8:47] **Eric Johnson:** okay we do have a permanent process for signage so what we would do is we would require them to work with jim rich our building official and uh we would look at this as a type of you know what classification of signage we have essentially a through f and uh this would probably fall more into that c or d excuse me d or c category that way but when it gets to uh for instance i get questions a lot of times people want to put up what you see i call them the yard sign type of thing and place them around town no those would not be permitted that sort of use in this order leading up from it you know just to clarify that you know that's something you guys making but i just think that just so we don't get some random signage it needs [9:27] **John Geissler:** i think that would be a requirement already but we can look at that that's fine [9:36] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** okay perfect it's just to clarify eric and what you said it sounds like if they did put any signage up that would require some sort of permit [9:45] **Eric Johnson:** yes it would not they wanted obviously on their property that way um the same thing you know getting into you know putting it up in a street corner things like that no we don't allow that for any type of use but yes if they had one on their property we would require that but i do concur with uh counselor geisler's thoughts that way i think that would be a good addition to this [10:05] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** okay uh meg do you have any uh questions or comments for us on this process [10:13] **Megan Johnson (Applicant):** um not not yet at least [10:18] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** okay can i ask your intentions on the the nursery in the greenhouse it just says flower beds on there are you looking to get into more like landscaping applications with shrubs and trees and stuff like that potentially in the future you're just starting with a small operation with flowers [10:37] **Megan Johnson (Applicant):** it'll just be a small operation the flower beds on the drawing are just where we're going to keep like our overstock [10:48] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** thank you for that clarification yep commission members any questions for meg on the phone [10:53] **Beth Wensloff:** um i just for my own curiosity i assume this is well and septic on this property [11:00] **Megan Johnson (Applicant):** yes it is [11:01] **Beth Wensloff:** okay so they would to have enough water to service a greenhouse that would be their responsibility they from the well i assume [11:15] **Megan Johnson (Applicant):** yep [11:21] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** commission members any other questions on 5a this evening for our applicant meg johnson is anybody in the audience here this evening want to speak on this matter eric do you have anything else for us on this one [11:39] **Eric Johnson:** no i do not [11:44] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** okay i will look for a motion on 5a this evening i'm sorry i have to close the public hearing first i have to close the public hearing at 7 13. i'll look for a motion on 5a this evening it's an application by meg johnson for a special use permit for the purpose of starting a greenhouse [12:03] **Beth Wensloff:** um i would move to approve the application for the greenhouse um item 5a at 4168 lindelro as it's written [12:12] **Samuel Clark:** as it's written okay can we get a second sam clark a second [12:18] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** thank you very much can we get all in favor aye aye motion passes thank you very much meg second up this evening is 5b it's an application by jlg enterprises for a final plat for a 10 lot and one outlawed subdivision located at 3956 stebner road the property is located in an r3 zoning district eric what do you have for us on this one tonight [12:47] **Eric Johnson:** great thank you um i believe the majority of you were on the planning commission last year was approximately i believe it was april of 2020 when uh the applicant jlg enterprises first approached the city about a platt the preliminary plat for what's known as payton acres at that time they were looking at two phases to start off with the phase 1a and a phase 1b there is a master plan that has been prepared as part of this project and which eventually will connect stebner road down to oak ridge drive through the bishops woods subdivision that way this would create essentially a looped road system not only for this development but also for oak ridge as well this is a project that has been proposed in phases uh what's before us this evening is phase 1b which is the 10 lots this is still adhering to and falls under that preliminary plaid approval that was received last year the final plat for the first phase 1a had been approved last year i believe it was june it's going to be july of 2020 and now the applicant is moving on to the second phase of these 10 lots these are standard r3 zoning type lots a minimum of a one-half acre in size minimum of 100 foot of frontage and meets all the setbacks associated with the r3 zoning district uh having the 50-foot front yard setback a minimum of 40 feet in the rear a minimum of 10 foot side there at setbacks uh for an aggregate of 25 total this project has gone through wetland reviews as part of it that had received approval for up to ten thousand square feet of wetland impacts across all phases associated with the project there is some wetland impact associated with uh this next phase here and they're still well within the thresholds of that ten thousand square feet from the wetland standpoint uh phase one a does have its own detention pond this phase 1b will also have its own pond it will be located basically on lot 5 of block 2 associated with that there will be an easement on top of that so the city could get in and access that pond in the future if need be to date the applicant has been constructing the road in utilities and uh not going the way of a letter of credit uh they have that ability to do that uh the way it's set up in our ordinance and i believe that they're going to continue that um that same mindset for this phase 1b that way uh right now phase 1a all the utilities are in and they're starting to work on the road section associated with it i have had some discussions with the uh the developer the owner of the sites that uh they're looking to have a letter of credit to finish out that first phase 1a so that would give them the ability to finalize the plat and start selling lots for that the letter of credit covers the paving of the roadway the sidewalk associated with this as well as curb and gutter that way so the same way as we move forward into a future development agreement we'd give the developer that same option whether to build everything first and then finalize sign off on the plat or come up with the letter of credit uh but this phase like all the other phases in here it will be a 28 foot wide roadway it'll be paved with curb and gutter as well as sidewalk on one side of this so once again this evening we're just looking at now what's called known as phase 1b it's the 10 lots that are just moving to the east of the uh the existing work they've been doing so far [16:50] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** thank you very much eric commission members any questions for eric on this [17:01] **Samuel Clark:** um eric do we have a drawing of the whole development [17:06] **Eric Johnson:** yes uh what i'll do is i'll just bring this up to the the monitor so we can see it okay appreciate that i don't think there's is there maybe oh fancy mr wicklund are you able to oh thank you i run the ceiling nice okay so as i had mentioned this is the phase 1a that's being constructed right now this existing access off of stebner road this is the phase 1b that we're discussing this evening now this is a master plan that was created last year as part of this overall development the next thought would be they would move on to the phase two at a future date here because right about this point is the break in where the sanitary sewer can service uh these lots right here so there's an existing lift station that's in the bishops woods development down at this portion phase two will be able to access that lift station as well as a good portion through here uh the city has been looking at this overall development as well uh and there's starting to look at the possibility of having a another sanitary sewer location approximately in this location as well as a stub road that could hook over into that section 24. that's where our new sanitary sewer is done that would provide road access through there as well as access to our trail system that we have and take that pump offline that is correct and take that lift station offline thank you very much so phase two will exit onto what road is that down here this is the existing oak ridge road oh cringe okay but that that is at a future date right so right now this only has one way in one way out [18:58] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** when this was first brought to us that was what we wanted to see yeah sure any other questions for eric [19:08] **Buckley Simmons:** has the roadway been started on phase one yet [19:15] **Eric Johnson:** uh yes i believe uh today there was um basically sand and gravel they're based that way start to broad in start to bring that up to grade [19:32] **Buckley Simmons:** okay and then just uh with it being a hot topic last month what uh 28 feet is that standard and what i guess in comparison is on johnson road what did we put in there for them [19:45] **Eric Johnson:** sure there's this roadway here this is what's known as an urban section it's a 28 feet from curb to kerber gutter line to gutter line for it um once again that's a totally paved surface that way uh what happened in the there will be a uh underground drainage system essentially associated with that a storm water system for that now for instance in the johnson portland area that's what's known as a rural section the city standards are 24 feet of paved area along with two foot of gravel shoulders for that and then there's ditches for that i believe in that uh that other development there on portland and in johnson that that road varies from 20 to 22 feet in width and that was after numerous discussions with a number of the property owners within that development that they wanted to see the narrower section in addition when that road had been built originally it was not centered in the right-of-way so what would have happened if we would have moved that roadway and expanded it to that 24 people would have had the essential impression that their yard as they're viewing it to the edge of blacktop would have gotten much smaller so that was one of the rationales as well of why that road came in at a narrower width that way to kind of keep more of what had been there existing so 28 feet is a good-sized roadway yes it is that's our city standard [21:18] **Buckley Simmons:** okay and then the other question i had wetland impact of less than 10 000 feet so how does that work when someone buys a lot are all those wetland credits used up and does that become then the responsibility of the future property owner or how does that all work exactly [21:38] **Eric Johnson:** one of the requirements the development agreement is is well they have their other development is there's gis there's there's posts actually put in the ground with which says wetland and then there's also gis points associated with that so as a property owner they'll see the plot they'll have the delineated wetlands on it but on top of it they can look up their back window there's the post the wetland that's the limit of it so what happens in these developments is like you said all the credits or de minimis exemption is called are utilized for the development now if a property owner came in and said i'd like a bigger yard that is a very difficult process to go through to get the wetland filled it's called the technical evaluation panel it consists of the city st louis county the state of minnesota as well as the corps of engineers and they look at wetland impacts primarily for either the creation of a house pad or infrastructure or roadways that way looking into the creation of larger yard spaces generally not supported by that technical evaluation panel okay so and as part of it as well as the development agreement uh the developer is is part of their closing documents are responsible to give a letter to the homeowner saying that there are wetlands on your property and this is the extent of those [23:09] **Buckley Simmons:** i mean obviously the developer needs to find this out from a financial standpoint but i'm assuming all these lots that they're putting in can be utilized and sold off and would work for a family home as far as the lot side where wetland wouldn't be yes exactly limiting factor all of a sudden a bunch of these lots wouldn't be able to go online it might look funny [23:31] **Eric Johnson:** sure with that and uh they're the document that i put uh on your desk this evening here as well that shows um that shows the setbacks associated with it and as well as a potential building pad for that but what i've seen in other plats that we've done is it also includes the wetland information so people like said as a prospective house buyer you could look at that lot and understand that this is my buildable area or envelope and these are where wetlands exist on the property [24:02] **Buckley Simmons:** perfect thank you [24:07] **Valerie Roulette:** eric i have a question if you could just show me where that sidewalk goes does it go through the whole development one side how does that work [24:14] **Eric Johnson:** it'll be on uh one side of the property and we're still looking at the north or south we're still because it's not been built yet a lot of a lot of it what we're looking at is shadowing because the developers have done a great job seeing keeping a lot of the trees in there if you've ever have a chance to to go in there and look at it it's beautiful and they've done a really good job of working with the topography that's in there keeping a lot of the trees you know they've made a real good effort of even as they've been working on this that says need to shift this road 10 feet because i've got that ability to save that large mature tree there so they've been very you know cognizant of the existing conditions there so like i said you know we're still working with them he's a sidewalk on the north is it on the south how are we looking for shadowing ice buildup etc that way but that sidewalk will yes go entirely from the stubner all the way down into uh the bishops woods there so there may be the potential when the time comes as part of our road improvement project when bishops what is done that there may be the opportunity to create a sidewalk in that development as well so people living in these existing homes could access the sidewalks and walk entirely through this development or access our trail system over there to the east as well so the city's trying to look forward and kind of you know you know think ahead how this could work out [25:35] **Valerie Roulette:** thank you any other questions for eric this evening um i'm just i'm because i don't know how to read these plats very well if you could help me on on lot five so there's like an octagonal portion on there and i'm just not clear what this is here i see there's an easement here right what is this [26:07] **Eric Johnson:** okay so that'll be a lot five right here and what you're seeing i'm saying you're asking about this area yes that's where that storm water pond is is located at so that's the easement on top of that to be able to access that that possibility so it'll be part of that lot but it there will be an easement for it is that right easement for that for instance in phase 1a the pond is located approximately right through here and that's located entirely within its own outlet right so there's two ways that we look at puns that you know if we've got the ability we prefer to have them on their own outlot because more than likely the city will end up owning that when you get into interior like this you know once again we're looking at the topography of the property how it works out on the site in this case it this is where the pond it's the best place for it in that case we work with an easement that the city can always get to it from an access standpoint [27:00] **Valerie Roulette:** okay perfect thank you [27:04] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** commission members any other questions for eric this evening does the applicant have anything to say this evening mr gilbert [27:14] **Gary Gilbert (JLG Enterprises):** [Inaudible discussion] [27:35] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** commission members any questions for the applicant this evening we can have them come up to the microphone not seeing any thank you do you guys have any questions on this one this evening if you could please come up to the microphone and please state your name and address okay [28:01] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** bob hackle uh my wife linda uh we live at 4841 oakridge drive and i guess i'm confused as to i've got this diagram that came with the agenda minutes and then the diagram that you just showed i i'm confused as to what's what because we have a stake in our backyard that shows it's locked vibes [28:44] **Eric Johnson:** so what you're seeing here sir i'm going to put these side by side this portion is right through there so that's what we're seeing so if this is your property right below yeah you are seeing this state more than likely that corner i'm assuming okay yep [29:14] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** and so herman cohen marketplace now is is that right next to see i don't know i thought that we were over here farther [29:26] **Eric Johnson:** the uh what the gentleman is referencing is there is this property has a split zoning on it the r3 zoning is approximately i believe about this point right through here that runs through the middle of phase four and this land over to the east falls under what's called the herbenton marketplace so once assuming this keeps on developing in the future especially a single family what the applicant and the property owner would do is they would look at this as a plan in the development because they're able to continue that single family concept running throughout that wave because right now in the hermantown marketplace that's at least it's indigenous higher density residential at least with this master plan and this is a snapshot of time that we're envisioning that this will continue to be mainly single-family development that way once again this is a snapchat in time but the one the constants are the connection here that pushes down to uh old bridge the connection on the stepner and then there'll be that roadway connection across this location over to what's known as section 24 and that's the northwest property site it's right there [30:48] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** the problem is so is this this point here is this point here approximately yes okay and so yeah our concern then is that holding fund that's basically our backyard that retention point is going to is is going to be what looks like over an acre if i [31:18] **Eric Johnson:** actually will put this drawing up right here so this is the southerly property line of that lot in your in your northerly crossing line right yep so the pond is located it's uh north of that in this area so this is once again this is more or less the low point of this whole area through here of that that ponding area [32:00] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** so hermit on marketplace starts uh no i believe it starts further over so approximately as far as i know we're on the corner of the permanent home marketplace the what is your property 48.41 mr are you able to get up a copy of the st county land explorer actually mr geisler has a copyright here so this is this is to the west of your property because the um the market for zoning today i believe because i remember generally follows that line right there and this is the extent of what we're just talking about is this area through here so i believe from looking at this map anyway that they're holding approximately right here so um this is a little bit to the west of where your home is it's best that i can curb this [33:17] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** now then how come i have a we have a stake in our backyard that says it's like fire yeah i understand i understand where it is yeah and if you forgive me i'm going to do some quick scaling as best i can all right so to your appropriate 1268 feet okay with that being your goal there so now what i'm going to do is address engineering and apply i haven't seen that this is a 200 nice if we can see it's your address 48-41 48 681 800. surprisingly to that edge of this this phase so you were about another um about about two of your property lines that had 175 feet plus or minus this one right here if you look at that there's a lot of one right here that's referenced right here one here but there's two of them that's their home their okay this is like that there isn't a slot five pond isn't the one that they're talking about right see there's that there's that pond right there that is showing it on there with this that's just a wetland spot right with this one last diagram on right here is over farther [36:00] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** i guess your concern is um water flow maybe from that pond is that that the um the developer is required no because at that point this is this is now the new thing because right right but i was on the yard okay where would that one be right there no way from here you're going to take that natural variation and and create a retention point that that's going to devalue our property and put it on risk and that's why we've engineered designing these things so they did look at how much water is going in there we look at it up to the 100 plus year events so we have sizes do you want to see where it was so you got a quarter a mile of roadway and 16 or 10 or 16 driveways it's going to be dumping into that punch that's the way it would be set up size to take the surface associated yeah that's the city requirement and that's that elevation the elevation that i find is going to be above the elevation of our lowest level of our foundation so it's i i'm not sure what what recourse we have if anything but and i'm still confused about these communities [39:05] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** well do we have any i mean are we allowed any input what what recourse do we have that you know what input can we can we provide that you know that that might make a difference well you can tell us how you feel about the development how your experiences are with the land today uh what you think the changes might you know make and and how they might affect you uh we also have to go off the fact that it's a very reputable engineering company that's doing all the work for this project as well you know they do lots of work if i hire an appraiser and he says i'd be shocked by that to be honest with you we hear everybody talk about their neighbors devaluing their property when they build something on it it never seems to come to fruition but you're welcome to do that and i understand your concern you're concerned about the storm water retention pond that it would be between your neighbor's house and your house a couple hundred feet back in the woods yeah i'm not sure how far back it's supposed to go um from what i'm looking at is you know it's half the distance here a lot to where it starts so i don't know i don't know the depth on your lot i didn't dig that far into it no but i mean from the back of our lap right i'm saying it's about half the distance of the depth of your lot from what i'm looking at [40:48] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** so how deep is your lot so it's about 125 or so to the start of the pond correct yep how well i i mean i'd like to be able to to have some input to the thing at least have some i don't think it's staked out no because i walk back there i don't see any statements [41:18] **Eric Johnson:** yeah i personally have not walked that far into the development yet it was wet last time i was in there looking at it but i'm just going off of the drawings that we've been provided by the engineering company and i do know that the city engineer uh met with the project engineer and i'm not sure gary if you were out there or not but they walked that whole line and once again they looked at a number of different potential locations for the pond along in this phase 1b and as i mentioned before is you know this is the natural low occurring area within the site where the water wants to go to sure at the very start of the hermanton marketplace property there is a steep steep decline and it goes down to a huge goal and the decline goes east correct the decline goes east right and that's why they want to come in with the next phase of that development at the end of the road that you guys live on to take advantage of that natural terrain for the the slope of the sewer system [42:30] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** well i need to somehow yeah i record i guess need some kind of feedback to know that i'm on record as opposing this [42:36] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** we totally understand sir i totally understand you're welcome to come to the city council meeting as well or yes the city council meeting for this will be on august 2nd okay so august 2nd you're welcome to come to the city council meeting that evening as well [42:58] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** okay thank you very much for coming tonight [43:03] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** do we have the dimension of the depths of that estimated yet the volume i was more curious about the volume of the pond right yes that's correct yeah not necessarily the yes come on yeah we'd like the cubic volume of the pond if possible [43:24] **Gary Gilbert (JLG Enterprises):** gary gilbert jlg enterprises um one thing that i will assure you of is that we cannot give you any more water than you have today correct those are the rules so you're worried about water the rules state that you can not get any more strategically you said maybe a 100 i think it's more like a couple hundred feet off of your property line is the start of that is the engineer has spent lots and lots and lots of time and effort and like eric has pointed out the city engineer myself two of our engineers were out there to locate this in the city engineer's opinion which he reads things very very well for topography all of this water wants to run to the east not south it wants to go to where we're gonna go with phase two the bottom of the hill so we need to by rule retain that water treat it and then it will release not south it's going to release to the east and this retention pond will be which eric had mentioned earlier up front by 7. and i would say that the depth i want to say is it has to be it has to be done with several holes for sediment to fall into so that we don't let that water go south we cannot let that water go south because that would be more water than what you have today well i i think that your concerns will be taken care of by rule and by engineering uh you can't give you any more water than what you have today right there [46:56] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** i think we've lost control of this excuse me guys you guys are welcome to speak amongst yourselves all you want i i think we've gathered all the information that we need tonight does anybody have any other questions or comments on this [47:31] **Samuel Clark:** comment would be just based on what i've understood i didn't really see what was going on on up there or anything but the concern is excess water on your property with the developing development being put in and my understanding from this conversation is unless there there's other documentation that there's already a water problem here the development shouldn't cause a water problem on your property [48:03] **Bob Hackle (Resident):** yes you have a chance to make one more comment yes sir the other concern i had is appearance i mean if we can if there's no buffer zone between our property the back of our property which is very close to the property line the house is if if there's no buffer between this and that that retention pond some of these retention ponds look really bad if you go on red cedar street there's a small one there that looks terrible uh on the other hand in sterling pond they've got one that looks really good so you know i mean is it is the city if the city this thing gets turned over to the city i mean i don't think they've got the resources to you know to maintain retention bonds you know so i we would appreciate at least a buffer between our property and that pond [49:03] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** what do you suggest as a buffer should there not be vegetation there already there is no okay we have no control over it once it's sold to somebody else and to help out with that this is two our three zone properties up against each other right and then obviously the city does not have um any restrictions for any property owner right on tree removal yep they can clear cut the lot of it exactly as well as as they could as well yep so okay uh we've heard your concerns sir and we understand them i i do appreciate that commission members any other questions or comments on this evening before i look for a motion on this [49:43] **Samuel Clark:** i guess i just wanted to just finish my comment that that is my understanding correct that there this development will not should not cause a water problem on this property and if that did happen it was documented that there would be the homeowner would have an opportunity for some sort of recourse [50:06] **Eric Johnson:** as mr gilbert had pointed out as per the city statute is they're required to design these two city requirements and as he had mentioned that water that comes into the site you know they cannot release water at a greater rate than existing conditions i will not stand on catastrophic events of 2012 when everything is out the door so i cannot say stuff like never or things like that but as mr gilbert pointed out is his first city requirements is yes that you know what is what is leaving that site today is the level that they can design to and once again those are 100-year standards that way we cannot design foreign or redesign for you know these catastrophic events [51:00] **Samuel Clark:** so it sounds like to then for a homeowner would they would probably want to work with the city engineer or have a meeting just to review if they need more clarification on what was there right now versus necessarily the developer yes something like that could happen yeah that's my that was my understanding thank you sammy [51:18] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** all right not hearing any other questions or comments this evening we're going to close at the public hearing at 7 52 and look for a motion on 5b which is an application by jlg enterprises for a final plot [51:38] **Buckley Simmons:** commissioner i move to approve agenda item 5b as stated [51:44] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** mr corquester the first can we get a second mr simmons with a second all in favor hi hi aye anybody opposed not hearing any motion passes thank you very much everybody this evening uh moving on to 5c is uh zoning ordinance text amendments by the city of hermantown amending chapter 11 planned units developments [52:13] **Eric Johnson:** what i'd like to start with is myself and the city attorney have been reviewing this document even further the last couple days and uh he has um provided a number of comments there are more or less clarifications you may be looking for some additional explanation in some of these areas so what i'm suggesting this evening is let's use this as opposed to taking an action or a recommendation but rather to obtain your input on this pud ordinance as revised and then this would come back to us in a consuming august in its final format for a recommendation at that point so given that what staff has done is we've taken the the concepts and the ideas associated with the ardc uh pud study and what we have done is if you recall that pud study there was a number of different sections that the ardc recommended some changes in the language too what the city did is we took those those recommendations and we added them into specific sections within this new ordinance in your packet we have a couple different versions we have what we call the marked up version uh we have uh where there's new text that's shown in red and where there's some strikeouts or texts to be removed that has actually been struck through and then at the back of that we do have um basically we call the clean cup if that's what the ordinance would look at or look like the um to help you out a little bit uh a number of the questions or comments from the staff standpoint had to do with section 1105 public benefit is uh one of the recommendations of arvc initially was to strike that section and instead use what's known as the um the project amenities to take place of that uh there's been a lot of discussions once again internally that we believe that we should still keep in that public benefit section and uh and also reference then uh project amenities as another portion to that uh particularly the um city attorney was looking at sections getting into the project amenities he was asking questions of who maintains these who owns these more looking at clarifications from that standpoint and he made very good comments that way i think that we have the opportunity to uh add some more basic clarifying text associated with those things uh he was also asking questions regarding the establishment of density now the way in this is currently written it speaks that at the initial pre-application meeting between the developer and the city uh after the review of what the developer is looking at in the city's review of the neighboring properties is that's what would be dense maximum density would be established at that time uh the attorney's opinion of that was he said we should strike that because there's languages that cannot be changed after that and he suggested that that language be struck in case after meetings like tonight that there is more um public comment that there may be different ways to look at a development [55:54] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** sure because in gilbert's case tonight with with their half their property in the hermantown marketplace district they could put up an apartment building that's correct right yes okay [56:09] **Eric Johnson:** so um really this evening i said i think i'd like this to have this more of a discussion of this pod ordinance and then like i said bring it forward in august but 99 of this document reflects what the ardc had recommended as part of their pd study that particularly we don't get into uh hard and fast numbers regarding density uh we do uh put a limit on height but we have that ability to increase that up to 25 looking at how the property or project relates to its surroundings uh you know you could have a 25 height foot height in 25 height increase to 42 feet but it would trigger things such as greater setbacks potential landscape plans things like that um the city attorney was also looking a bit more clarifications for uh where we speak about traffic studies and traffic memos uh just trying to get some clarifications on that if you recall uh what we discussed is project over either five acres in size or four units per acre would be required to have a traffic at least a memo associated with that so he's looking at some further clarifications for that because what we're hoping is that this document will be able to stand on its own for some time you know particularly until we get into our plan but at least you know have this pretty well ironed out to answer these questions uh right now um we've not had any new pud applications even though the moratorium has expired uh i have had initial conversations with someone looking to uh apply but they understand that we have to give this puv ordinance finalized before he makes that application so um that's kind of in a nutshell you know generally the changes that we're looking at for this document and once again it takes the vast majority of what was already there but added in these clarifying languages trying to get some of this more the concepts of the project amenities into this document which don't exist today and likewise i think we almost took this the same way with that pud study it was a lot of information for the board to digest at one time and we had looked at we'd extended it four weeks so pnz could get a better comfort level with it so um i would suggest that we still take that route that um like i said uh i will work with the city attorney to add some of this clarifying uh information and get this back out to uh pnz for their review but i encourage you in the meantime to uh to be able to review this and ask any other questions that you may have or statement concerns that you have at that point uh i guess i'd like to turn it back to you mr chair and engage the rest of the members on any questions or comments they might have [58:53] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** sure thank you eric i do have one question i think would you say it was 42 feet was the maximum height [59:02] **Eric Johnson:** that is correct yes [59:03] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** i think there's a house in my neighborhood that's taller than that there's a there's some big ones what we measure is when you measure it to the uh center of the roof peak okay so it just doesn't seem that high to me but i i think differently than a lot of people i guess [59:18] **Eric Johnson:** sure with that because um uh we've had one of the previous applications it was a three-story coming in at 36. so um 42 could you stretch it to four-story you know depends on what your floor plates are right if you could pull that off or not no okay commission members any questions or comments on this this evening any discussion [1:00:10] **Valerie Roulette:** do you have the sections that he was talking about the ownership was asking the questions of that the attorney was asking on where who owns that who does that do you do you have which one that was because i was catching some of that wondering myself so i was learning project amenities [1:00:19] **Eric Johnson:** okay that we start talking about the ideas of community gardens uh public recreation areas uh public plazas things of those natures right that that was i want to say on each and every one of those sections he wrote the same comment who owns who maintains [1:00:41] **Valerie Roulette:** right thank you that's what i was asking who answers that question [1:00:47] **Eric Johnson:** uh that would be uh staff would answer that we would we would revise this to um to come up with that and a lot and that's established at the time of many of these projects we do it's called a development agreement right and that's the agreement between the city and the project owner and those things are in the case of the jlg project there's a development agreement in place for the building of the roads sidewalks etc so let's say let's look at a pud it's going to be the same thing there's going to be a community garden associated with that say okay how's the ownership going to work out is there going to be an hoa associated with it is it under a common interest community we look at different type of activities that way okay establish those things [1:01:30] **Valerie Roulette:** okay so instance by instance [1:01:34] **Eric Johnson:** yes because a lot of things will be different different yes okay is you know preventing some of these outlets that could go tax foreign right so that they're somehow tied to a building or the overall development that way thank you [1:01:52] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** commission members any comment on this this evening [1:02:16] **Eric Johnson:** maybe i'll just keep talking because that's what they seem to do well shut up sometimes but um we the same thing the idea of where we looked at splitting preliminary and final puds once again triggering either over four units per acre or five units and or five acres in size that language is in this document here as well you know thinking back at least that was one thing that struck me the most with our conversations was the um basically not having the comfort level of a large development coming in and pnz only having one chance to review it so that was language that we made sure was in this one of the requirements of that pod ordinance the ability to split these and a to help a developer that they can come into the preliminary find out what can be done uh look more at a concept level type of design and then at the final pud get into those nuts and bolts type of details that way but at least have an initial read from planning sony as well city council as to the overall black veterans big picture of the project that way [1:03:15] **John Geissler:** counselor guyser any input uh no they're just a lot of hard work as you guys don't know all about your staff and my consultants and commission city councils looked at a few times so yeah [1:03:51] **Eric Johnson:** eric are you looking for us to make a motion on this are we pushing this out till next month well the question is is the comfort level of this um of the board to um to allow staff to keep working with the city attorney for the cleanup of his items if you're comfortable with that you can make the recommendation of um of the pud recommending the ordinance to city council uh what we would do is we would not have this on october receiving august second we pushed it to the 16th that that would give staff and city attorney up to about four weeks to iron out some of these these fine points that he's looking to do uh if the png the board is not comfortable and they want to see a final draft of that prior then we're going to continue this to the next meeting [1:04:47] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** eric i just have one quick question could you just summarize the uh the lifespan of this until for basically from today until the next application can come in and use this as an ordinance what are the next steps for this pud amendment from today to when a developer could use it [1:05:07] **Eric Johnson:** sure so uh when this receives a recommendation from pnz it then goes to uh the next city council meeting you know or we could extend it out two weeks past that but it has an initial first reading at city council and then two weeks later is the final reading at that point that is an accepted ordinance that then is then put into the city's um the city's code zoning ordinance that way at that point a developer has a chances okay i have this as my guidelines to work with the pud so in theory you could see something as soon as a month later an actual pud application but as we're standing right now the if we had an application today for pud we would guide the developer to need to wait until this pud is accepted the moratorium is off the third term no longer exists on puds but since the nature of this document that we would uh want to have this in place before an application comes in and then just one other question was there any going to be any uh public forums for comment on this this is one of them that no one's here does anyone in the city of hermantown know this is going on right now is this published out in our uh our different websites and things that we have that way so that's our way of being able to get the word out it's short of individual mailings to all residents [1:06:37] **Samuel Clark:** could you expand like the electronic survey more residents like when we did our google survey is there an opportunity for that [1:06:45] **Eric Johnson:** the uh we can send it out to um basically the initial group that had comment on it um and that's always a possibility but like i said usually with with ordinances whether it is or any of our ordinances we notice it just by our normal methods it's on the cities it's on the city's web page it's published in the star and and that's the extent of it and you don't really talk to individual people regardless of whatever the type of audit is because it's just that frankly not feasible so but like i said this document is the vast majority of us it was what contains existing pd from before as well as the comments that we've all worked together for these last few months right so the question of us tonight is are we comfortable moving forward like it is without seeing a final draft that is correct okay commission members any other questions or comments on this this evening not hearing any i'll look for emotion on 5c it's a zoning ordinance text amendments by the city of hermantown [1:08:24] **Samuel Clark:** i moved to push it through to city council on august 16th we have a motion can we get a second [1:08:31] **Valerie Roulette:** i'll second that valerie will let [1:08:35] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** thank you valerie all in favor aye aye aye anybody opposed not hearing any motion passes thank you very much for all your hard work on that one there's a lot to absorb you know [1:08:52] **Eric Johnson:** oh there is and i want to thank all of you as well because we put in a lot of late nights on this oh yeah i believe that we receive you know a good product from the ardc that we still are able to achieve what we want to we still have that flexibility not only from a staff review but also pmd and council and but also i think we've given some at least some guidance or direction to future developers right was in end goal as well so uh well again thank you for all of your hard work these last few months [1:09:27] **Samuel Clark:** could we request a copy before before it goes to city council at least to be able to read in case there's something extraordinarily glaring [1:09:36] **Eric Johnson:** the you can get that but since we have taken a vote right i mean we wouldn't do any not that you i mean you could go you could go we could just you could show up at the meeting yeah that's that's my no no i know we could go that route because like i said i'm i'm going to be working with the city attorney putting your certifications in the same deck and um yeah but definitely i would say encourage you all to look at this oh yes section 1511 what's up with that [1:10:05] **John Geissler:** there are two there are two readings at the city council so right now certainly if there's issues right we brought to eric and he brought forward you know after the first reading goes to be made for just to be able to see what you're seeing would that be provided to the counselors prior to the meeting and would we have access to that so we if you wanted to you could go on and yeah look yeah good that should be the second meeting right that's what after my conversation with mr over today is is we both want to have enough time to go to the 16th go to the 16th yep should be the 16th and it would be september 7th yeah exactly for that so way i'll watch them if it's on the wednesday of the prior prior to the call well i think it looks great i don't have any i can't imagine you just would like to read the phone sure sure [1:11:06] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** okay uh moving on to six continuing business i'm not seeing any that is correct uh number seven new business we have 7a discussion on an amendment to a special use permit to add one town home to the property located at 4247 steubner road [1:11:32] **Eric Johnson:** and i'm going to hopefully make your lives easier the potential applicant from this called me yesterday and he said he does not want to pursue this oh he's reviewed his site he said that the topography on there he said this doesn't really facilitate the addition of a town home on this property so um i apologize i didn't get that to you prior good enough but at this point there is no item 78 to discuss [1:12:05] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** uh eight communications i'm not seeing any number nine commission memory reports corey colquist uh just a quick question are packets still being sent out via mail for these meetings [1:12:13] **Eric Johnson:** right now no we have uh i believe in the last few weeks that at least with the city council we've done all electronic and we've done that with our other boards as well um i'm assuming you like that yeah no it's not a problem i can get a copy i just wanted to make sure i wasn't missing it if it was coming to me so that was my only question so perfect thank you i guess how do the other members does that work for you i don't care it doesn't matter electronic work i'm a good grade number good either way especially when it's 51 pages yeah just this work great that's what we're finding as well is um some of these really large agendas just in the printing and the mailing and it's it's the same thing we have to get documents out by x date right and um sometimes you get pushed for time it gets a little tight that way so the electronic uh seems to work pretty well for people but same thing i mean if any of you said you know is this not working for me or my printer's down this week just reach out to me let me know [1:13:08] **John Geissler:** the other thing too sometimes uh i like to do all my stuff and and i put it my own but a lot of times i'll just have the city clerk from the agenda and put it on my desk and you or somebody could do that too [1:13:17] **Eric Johnson:** we can still do that exactly have a printed agenda on your i print everything so that i can look back and forward i'm still learning so i'm trying to absorb all that goes on [1:13:42] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** perfect uh valerie or that nobody part samuel clark no report uh beth winslow no report buckley simmons counselor [1:13:58] **John Geissler:** uh the governor lifted the uh local university regarding the pandemic and last night's council meeting we did that as well so that means there's some changes to the open meeting laws open meeting laws during the emergency were able to be zoomed and you were able to be remotely located after august 30th you can no longer be between the rebound and zoom in so if you're away on vacation or whatever you can't zoom into a meeting so if you're going to be gone you're going to be gone and missed the meeting but you know zooming in we're still going to do zoom um so that the applicants for public can zoom in but as a creation member council member you have to be here in person there's no more zooming in it will be allowed by state statute next month yet but after august 30th yeah uh and if you can't be here obviously let eric know so that was the new rule last night at consolidation [1:15:16] **Eric Johnson:** i guess we'll have some time after the august meeting but um i think also uh joe announced last night or gave us some information that the celebration uh ribbon cutting if you will of the new trail uh tuesday august 24th right brooklyn on that but uh we'll more information follow but it would be nice if people could attend that uh on the evening i think it's five on the 24th of august it'll be at the standard park potential for a couple food trucks there so um like what you guys have said a celebration of all the hard work everybody okay i'll just start yeah last night it was really nice beautiful scenario can't wait to see it expanded again [1:16:15] **Samuel Clark:** okay uh that being said we're looking for a motion to adjourn sam clark call motion to adjourn this evening's meeting [1:16:30] **Corey Colquist (Chair):** thank you samuel can we get a second with a second thank you corey all in favor hi hi uh with that the meeting is closed at 8 17 p.m thank you very much everybody