all right and at this point we're going to call the October 3rd 2024 Planning Commission meeting to order um we're going to start with attendance commissioner brummond is here commissioner Hargreaves here commissioner kazaki here commissioner Lind here and commissioner Yang here and at this time I'd like to invite members of the public to join us in standing for the Pledge of Allegiance hi pledge allegiance to flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all and at this time I'd like to ask staff or the Commissioners if there are any amendments that someone would like to make to tonight's agenda if not I will entertain a motion to approve the agenda I'll make a motion no oh no just I'll make a motion to approve the agenda is there a second second all those in favor say I I anyone opposed on that note really quick is it helpful for us if we State our names when we're saying who is making a motion or no um at not at this time our planner is the one doing the minutes they're doing that at city council because we have a new city clerk gotcha okay um and at this point in time what I'd like to do is open the floor to uh the members of the public who are here this public comment well we call it open Forum what this is is if you have something you would like to bring up before the Planning Commission that is not on tonight's agenda uh but something you wanted to bring forth uh as something to our attention for members of the um commission to consider I just want to go over the rules of decorum before we get started um and that is just so that we have the opportunity to show respect for one another and for the process so if at all tonight you do want to make a public comment um opportunity whether it's open Forum or during our planning um agenda item I just want to remind you that open forum is an opportunity to be heard but not to debate an issue um there will be people who are recognized by the chair but anybody else should refrain from commenting interrupting a speaker at the podium or conducting conversations with members of the audience just because it does make it disruptive um chatting back and forth in the audience and we want to make sure that the members of the commission the employees and the speakers at the podium are just given the respect that they deserve this will be enforced throughout the meeting and those who don't abide by the rules of decorum will just be asked to leave uh we will remind you we're not going to just ask you to leave and then the last piece of business is that comments are limited just to in um inperson participants if we don't take comments over Zoom any longer so if there's nobody who wants to make a uh address the members of the commission with an open Forum issue then we will move on um to approving our minutes does anyone want to talk about the September Planning Commission meeting minutes formally on record do you want to make the correction just one just one edit would be to note that there were three planning Commissioners present in the meeting versus the five that stated in the minutes thank you okay so if we uh make a note that that number is corrected it's like in the first sentence from five Commissioners second sentence 5 to three then I will entertain a motion to approve the September 5th 2024 Planning Commission meeting minutes do I have someone willing to make that motion I'll make the motion and and I will second because I was there all those in favor say I I anyone opposed okay and now we're going to move on to tonight's new business um which is going to begin the public hearing and the new business is regarding the 309 Edition preliminary plat rezoning and comprehensive plan Amendment which is City file 23-27 and we're going to begin with a staff report from Kevin Shay thank you chair uh so chair and members of the commission uh before you tonight is a comprehensive plan Amendment rezoning and preliminary plat for what is considered the 39 Edition uh so I'll go through what each of those applications are for so the comprehensive plan amendment is to reclassify from rural a residential to rural service commercial and it's not to reclassify the entire property but to essentially adjust where the boundary is between those two um existing land use is on the property associated with that then is the rezoning from rural residential to rural commercial and then also um transitional rural commercial to rural commercial so this would be um for the portion that is rural residential with the uh land use request for the comprehensive plan Amendment would then go to rural commercial um and I'll go into transitional rural commercial as a holding Zone District to wait for when development H development happens and then it gets rezoned to rural commercial uh and the last one is a preliminary plat to create four residential lots and 15 commercial Lots um so to give you a little background on the property I know it's kind of small CU I included the entire land use map in there but we're in the northwest corner of the city um the property is 66 acres and right now it's currently split uh down the middle between the two land uses being the uh a residential um land uses um so it's guided rural service commercial today and Zone transitional rural commercial on the west portion the red portion uh and then on the East portion it's guided rural a residential and zoned rural residential on that Eastern portion which is the almost white color um the property as it sits today is part of the um non Musea boundary area so it has is it's part of the development rights program uh which grants one development right per 10 acres uh so this property has seven development rights given its size of 66 acres oh I include a biger image here so uh that's where it was on that northwest corner um I'm going to go over just some quick background on this uh application previously so there wasn't a concept plan submitted on January 24th 2024 um and that was to review the concept in the development rights program uh Council directed staff at that time to review the deel development rights program and it came back to council there was an interim ordinance put in place to the staff could study the development rights program on August 22nd 2024 Council updated the zoning ordinance to clar if development rights and retain the program so what that did essentially was amend the ordinance to clarify in this case the difference between residential and Commercial and how it applied to the development rights program um but the number of development rights uh did not change um so with that this site does have seven development rights um with the proposed 19 lots that does exceed the number of development rights for the property so they're proposing four residential and 15 commercial um where only seven Lots would be allowed uh under the development's rights program um and commercial and residential lots both use development rights so a commercial lot uses one development right a residential lot uses one development right there is no difference between the usage of that development right only that in this case the the property would only be allowed to have seven um so with the comprehensive plan Amendment the commission's um I always put this on here because of the difference between applications so comprehensive plan Amendment from the city's perspective is a high level of discretion meaning um there's a lot of leeway to use um when reviewing the application it's not as cut and dry as a preliminary plat let's say which is basically meet these conditions if you do we have to approve it kind of thing whereas the comprehensive plan Amendment there's a lot of other factors in play um so this comprehensive plan Amendment would adjust the portion of the site guided rural a residential to be approximately 15.4 acres in area um that is a decrease in the um rural area and an increase then in the commercial area um so the comprehensive plan amend would guide the land to allow essentially by having 15.4 Acres of it be rural a residential you would then assign two development rights because you round up um to the residential portion and five development rights to the commercial Lots um and so with that the the development proposal connected to the land use guide plan Amendment does not comply with city code standards and cannot be approved because there's more development rights um trying to be used by creating four residential lots and 15 commercial Lots versus the two and five that would be allowed um the rezoning request is related to that so whenever you um do a land use or uh guide plan Amendment uh you rezone the properties to be consistent with those land underlying land uses so um the rezoning the TCR property or the transitional commercial rural to rural commercial um would then shift the line between the commercial Rural and the rural residential district to align with those land uses as they shift the boundary um so that's why the request for the reason in it's a pretty standard practice for the transitional commercial rural to be rezoned to rural commercial because transitional rural commercial is a holding Zone essentially until development happens so with any development of a property that request would come in essentially to rezone to rural commercial um so as you see on the map here uh it's transitional rural commercial on the west half and it's rural residential on the right half or the East and West uh so the proposed plat is for res residential lots ranging from 3.01 to 4.65 Acres the residential lots are on that right side of the image or the east side of the property that's those four residential lots the 15 commercial Lots range from 2 and a half to 4.72 acres and that's everything west of the street that goes north and south um and so those are all proposed commercial Lots they are larger lot sizes for a plat um and do comply like larger lot sizes for a plot that complies would have would be expected when you have reduced development rate so if there were only seven Lots on the property there'd be larger lot sizes um no development is proposed at this time uh so these are all just building pads with um you know the associated septic sites shown on there um but no development at this time so it's essentially to put the improvements in place to make it development ready without actually developing the individual Parcels or Lots um so site just to note that site plan review would be required prior to development of lots um with that coming forward as each individual lot were to be developed um so the preliminary plat does not comply with ordinance standards just because it exceeds those development rats again so uses the residential lots are planed to be used for single fam so there's four of those shown the commercial Lots because there's no defined use at this point it's just uh expected user which is office and Warehouse uses um for utilities for the site this site is located outside of the Musa the municipal urban service area uh so it will be served with well and septic which they did show on the plat the um preliminary and secondary septic sites shown on the plat which is required by henen County um to show those on a plat drawing uh for parking the plans Show 14 parking spaces uh per commercial lot depending on employees at least 50 15 would be required for most commercial Lots so there is concerns with parking conflicting with some of those septic areas but again that's something you typically would work through when you have a site development plan uh that would know the exact parking accounts that would be associated with it along with some locations of the septic sites um access for this was proposed off of what's called Street a which is the road that connects to County Road 30 on the south side of the site in the Southeast Corner um then there's streets B and C which are offshoots from Street a but those would be internal roads that would provide access um with this project initially there was a feasibility stun feasibility study that was done uh and it warranted an eastbound left turn lane and Westbound right turn lane uh are required through that feasibility study for that access onto County Road 30 as far as Trail and sidewalks go there is an onroad from the comprehensive plan there's an on-road Trail shown on County Road 30 there's also off-road trails shown on both the North and East lot lines those so that North Boundary and the East Boundary uh so plans for this development would need to be revised to show a 20ft trail is me for the off-road trails is shown in the comprehensive plan um so that would just shift some of the potential landscaping and things like that that would be in those areas um there was a landscaping shown uh buffer provided on the North and the West lot lines so the North and the West on County Road 19 along with additional Landscaping shown for a reduced buffer on the south lot line and then additionally all the base landscape requirements are met so the landscape plan is good in terms of ordinance standards for providing the required buffers um and the setbacks for those buffers along with the base landscape requirements as well um so with that I just kind of went through everything really um high level from what's in the staff packet um but staff does recommend that the Planning Commission move to recommend approval of the draft resolution denying the request so there is only one um draft resolution before you that we handle all three applications or all three applications from the applicant so with that I'll stand for any questions um from staff otherwise you can move into the public hearing portion the only question that I have for point of clarification is that each additional because you said there are three the comprehensive plan Amendment the resoning and the preliminary PL and they are each conditional upon the approval of the larger umbrella is that correct correct so you only need to make one motion if you were to follow the resolution that's before you in the form thank you appreciate that okay and at this point in time we are going to open the public hearing so this is going to be the opportunity for you to make comments and ask questions regarding this um business this point of business or this application um just a reminder that public comments are limited to inperson comments speakers uh that have filled out a card at the start are going to be given priority and then Natalie will call you up to the podium uh when it's your turn anyone who didn't fill out a comment card will have the um opportunity to approach the podium we're just going to do it in that order first um I just want to do a reminder that or give a reminder not do a reminder give a reminder that we are going to enforce a 5 minute timeline 5 minute time frame thanks um so when you come up to the podium um we won't like I'm not going to set a timer but we'll just kind of watch it and then uh I'll try to give you like a knot or something if we're getting close to that five minutes and then if you do have a question because I want to um let you know how we would handle those we wouldn't engage in a back and forth during the public hearing um because it's your opportunity to make comment but we will make note of all of the questions and then once we close the public hearing then we'll address any specific questions that were um brought up does that make sense okay so Natalie who do we have first um the first the card that I have was for Aaron Dean and I'm sorry I forgot to mention if you could just state your name and address when you come up to the microphone then that's helpful for um our planner who does the meeting minutes thank you well thank you very much Madam chair and members of the commission my name is Aaron Dean i a construction and real estate lawyer at lawon Barnett in Downtown Minneapolis I have the privilege of representing Craig sherber his company Craig sherber and Associates he asked me to come before this commission and come directly from a trial in outstate Minnesota and um I agreed to do it and I'm worried I'm worried about where we're at with this commission I want to tell you why I'm worried that we are on a cision course that the actions taken tonight if you do um accept the you know the staff report and you do recommend to the city council to deny this application we will appear before the city council at the next meeting when it's brought up for business and if the city council follows the staff and any recommendations to deny the application there will be a lawsuit and it's that's a hard thing to say and there's never a good way of trying to make friends uh when you tell them that the consequence of a disagreement is a lawsuit um I'm going to constrain you know my comments to try to explain about three or four fundamental issues that I see uh that need to be taken into account by this commission before making a decision and I hope that you do reject the staff report and that you do approve the application and uh I'll make sure to make my points and follow your lead that um we can disagree with each other without being disagreeable um so I'll make sure to do that um for more than a generation since 1992 the Minnesota court of appeals has ruled that you cannot um arbitrarily enact an interim moratorium to the to delay or prevent a single project I mean that case law has been along around for so long that's even before I became a lawyer not by much but uh I became a lawyer in 1994 and the Minnesota court of appeals has said that in the medical services versus city of savage case on the court of appeals in 1992 that casee will guide how a district court reviews this case going forward um Craig sherber and his company submitted a timely App application on October 17th 2023 they were complete the only thing that still had to be done was something that the city had to do not that KRA sherber had to do and the city went forward and did its own feasibility study and concluded that uh we were complete as of March 14th 202 before we were complete 5 months earlier on October 17th 2023 the important point about this is no municipality can say we haven't done our job and done a feasibility study so you're not complete as an applicant that's not the law and that delayed it by five months and when the city finally said that we were complete on March 14th they also said the feasibility study shows that we're compliant that there are no concerns but at the same time the city issued its moratorium to not allow any additional um um any additional you know construction and developments as they kind of relooked at their Municipal ordinances that is targeting that's targeting one particular uh developer in the NFL that be FL yellow flag on Sportsman line conduct and I hope that you look at that the totality that you can't just Target one person and one applicant at the time that the application was submitted by Mr sherber city ordinance 1070 070 city ordinance 107.7 did not have any statement about um density requirements for commercial lots and then the city amended its ordinance after that that's another instance where you know the city is targeting one person if there was any ambiguity in that ordinance that ambiguity is construed against the city not against the citizen so the fact that we want 15 commercial lots and you saw they're all large sizes minimum lot size is 2 and a half acres that doesn't matter because there was no density restriction at the time that we submitted our application and that's a really critical point when you combine the fact that we complied with the city the ordinance and we complied uh and our application was complete as of October 17th everything that happened going forward has been designed to Target one guy this guy and I'm just asking you to think about the consequence of your vote that you're going to take if you vote to adopt the staff uh report if you vote to sign the resolution recommending to the city council that um his application is denied we'll be one step closer to that Collision that I'm really trying to prevent I don't want to have to sue the city of courtman I don't want to have to do that but there will be no opportunity to avoid that lawsuit if you if you adopt the staff report if you sign the resolution make a recommendation to the city council and if the city council adopts your recommendation I hope that you take a second look at this I hope that you don't blindly accept the um City planner's report I have no negative comments to make about the city planner none zero the city is wrong the city is simply wrong on three key issues we were complete in our application as of October 17th not March 14th the city ordinance 1070 070 had no density restriction for commercial Lots at the time we made our application and three that really in 1992 Minnesota court of appeals case you can't Target you can't bully one Citizen and one applicant and I hope that you're listening about the consequences and the the gravity of the decision that you have to make because I don't want to have a lawsuit please approve please approve our application reject the staff report don't sign that recommendation send us to the city council and we'll explain to the city council why he should be able to proceed with the 15 commercial lots and four residential develop in four residential lots and none of those four residential lots will be built by him thank you for your um for your attention I tried to keep it within five minutes and I gave you a little leeway it's okay thank you I just appreciate the opportunity to have this discussion and to try to avoid a lawsuit thank you do we have another card I do not have any other cards okay so at this time we've gotten through the individuals who filled out a comment card so we are going to open it up to anyone else who's here in person and would like to come up to the podium with either a question or a comment regarding this application I will and just a reminder please to state your name and address for the record my name is David oh you can wait till you get to the microphone cuz my name is davidy I live in Rush Boulevard I'm here more in solidary my neighbors I obviously don't live next to the four lots that you're not going to build and um I would like to comment in the sense that I wonder if there's been any consideration to traffic um there's 15 I don't know if if I read it right 15 parking spots per um commercial lot sounds like a lot of traffic on 30 and I know we don't have any control I'm assuming we don't have control over hton County Road 30 and stop lights and the noise pollution that goes with it I think you all got Kevin Dale's letter he's not here he had to go to a wedding that he couldn't get out of so my concerns are similar to his again I don't live right next to that property but I find it very con uh disconcerning that um I know these people don't want to sue corkran and I think the accusations has been made that you're standing up against this individual where I think you're protecting the residents more and I'd like to see that and with that I thank you thank you and thank you for drawing our attention we did all receive the um comments made by Kevin and Karen Dale they've been at the dis for each one of us so we do have their comments and it will be included in the packet that goes to city council and is a um it's a matter of public record so you guys can see that as well at at the packet that will be given to council so thank you for reminding me is there anyone else Yeah Tim Cruz 231 on the County Road 30 and I live right there where the easan is going down defense line which uh Frank Lin told me one of the best mayors of coring told me years and years ago Corin B that easement they got that Lots right in between my house and the house behind there and uh I'm not really right rightly sure is the residential going to be built in them lots right between my house and the house behind my and uh and they're going to come down in that easement build to road that have been taking care of for 39 years cutting the trees down that were dead and uh which is a a wind block for my house and I know my good friend Steve had known for a long time and he died that old net land and his wife sold it Steve would never let this happen and I don't want it to happen 39 years take that in consideration for all the na of now please thank you there's yep go ahead hi there my name is Denise La I live off of Rush Creek Boulevard um I guess my main thing is what happens with all of that water that with all of sorry keep talking what happens with all of that water with all the commercial Lots where does that water go Rush Creek if you guys have ever seen it it's already overflowing what happens with with all that runoff if that's been taken into consideration um and then I just want to clarify where does that road come through will that impact Rush Creek Boulevard sorry I ha this um you're doing great and I just it it really impacts all of us we moved out to corkran to keep it because we we love corkran how it is this is corkran it's not developed um and we want to keep it that way um and I just I don't want to see that impacted um I guess my biggest thing like I said is will that road go through Rush Creet Boulevard or will that stay will our Rush will our road stay as a culdesac um so that's but the water is the main thing and you know all of us residents just we do not want this to happen so please stand up for us and and protect corkran thank you thank you thank you so much state your name and address just as a reminder Rick Miller First Street Boulevard um to Denise's point when they added that development in birchville and the runoff that came in the water in that just in that little development started come down the um ditches went into the Colts and flooded their property flooded rais property flooded everybody's property and it went up from there so that runoff that she's talking about is not a small thing and if there's not I mean to the sounds like the development is still septic it's still all this other stuff and I'll be honest thank God it's City hookup because Lord knows where that's going with taxes and everything else so that is a huge concern from a time frame perspective I'm not exactly sure what this looks like I you know first thing my only question not shouldn't say it but when you went and asked about potential plots or density did you ask if or did you they didn't have one was that a loophole to go in and put something in if there wasn't something already stated or to after the fact you guys came in after the fact you said there's a a commercial density um restriction did you ask hey is there commercial density restriction no thank you I appreciate it asking I mean yellow on Sportsman like conduct but I've got a question ask the maybe it was maybe it wasn't I'm not saying but I appreciate the question uh we just don't want to during the public comment opportunity do it back and forth um but we have made note of all of the questions um so I appreciate you asking um but at this point in time I'm just it's just a point because everybody's looking for put potential loophole on on things to get and I you know pay development I'm not against that the whole NS in a lot of cases but when not my backyard I think at this point in time just regarding the framework of the question not necessarily having a specific answer that would be discussed at this point we would probably mark it down as a concern um I guess you could direct me if I'm but I think that's how we'd handle it at this point in time if that feels okay I appreciate the comments is there anyone else hi I'm Michael Kain uh 20913 County Road 10 uh we own the property to the south of that development and our water drains from there under 30 down that grass Waterway so I'm just worried if they break back that up then we're going to be flooded to the South so if unless they got a so how they can get get that water out cuz we got water coming from behind doin's comes through ours down so that's a big problem we don't want swamps all over the place so we still Farm it so thank you thank you okay is there anyone else who wants to come and make comment regarding this application could I it's more a statement oh it's okay one wait until you get to the microphone just because the microphone helps the minutes being recorded I on R it's more statement and I think in my area there on it's e are the second then not as nervous on Rush Street Boulevard you know we're we're kind of starting to feel like maybe like a War M of corporate we're an older neighborhood we have been there I've been there 42 years Diana 43 39 I mean we got a couple hundred years in that neighborhood um we used to vote in Kane Road in a in a wooden building there I we've been in the the neighborhood for a while so we really might to concern this excuse me to really look into this and don't fall threat to a lawsuit and that's the comment that I'd like to make we feel we need some kind of protection here I we don't we don't want these issues to go down right like I say I'm heing solid thank you okay and so uh just a reminder that because I know it's I know it is uh the issues feel very personal you live in these neighborhoods but I just want to remind you that uh we don't want to have conversation in the audience because it's super distracting for us to be able to stick to the agenda thank you we just want to minimize distraction so that we're able to make it through the process um but um I appreciate everybody's um uh input and um certainly um your uh participation tonight is there anybody else who wants to make a public comment opport okay so then at this point in time I will entertain a motion for us to close the public hearing someone want to make that motion I'll motion to close the public hearing is there a second I second all those in favor say I I anyone opposed no one is opposed so at this point in time um what we're going to do is give staff the opportunity to address questions um I think that if we were to find well buckets um and then if if there are any that the applicant specifically needs to address but I think most of them are staff because it's water traffic and then the question regarding the Rush Creek Boulevard remaining a culdesac um so if we want to ask so I will okay um yeah I can address a couple of those so I'll start with the storm water one I guess we'll just un C buckets um for the storm water one and the drainage for the site um when the site develops whether it looks like this or something else it will be required to essentially have a net zero for storm water which means anything happening currently today on the site in terms of stor water has to be maintained on this site um on the plan that's shown on the screen right now on the east side kind of tucked in between the two residential lots on the northeast and the uh Southeast there's a storm water basin uh that will be the area where all the storm water will be collected there's a series um and this is getting into like plan details but there's a series of storm water pipes that would feed into that Basin that would catch the storm water as it um essentially as it rains it would collected from the various areas of the site as it's developed um the city engineer did review this plan um and there are comments in here included um based on their review to make sure they comply with all the regulations and standards for storm water um so that's how it would get taken care of with the development um let's see what was the question about the Rush Creek Boulevard remaining a culac or with that road a yep um and I so the storm water basin and the purpose of a storm water basin is for it to infiltrate into the ground so no water would leave that Basin it would infiltrate into the underlying soils uh so there would be no water that would leave that site other than through storm water infrastructure um concrete infrastructure that's under the ground um so that's how that would get taken care of as far as Rush Creek Boulevard there's no plans to extend or connect Rush Creek Boulevard to this development or anything that happens here so Rush Creek Boulevard would remain as it is today currently um the only streets proposed as part of this application are shown on the screen here which is a north south connection um the axis from County Road 30 is in the bottom right corner indicated in red there um that street would extend up and provide a future connection for the property to the north when if that develops um and then there are two additional streets that provide access street they're called Street B and C on the plans which is B is the one running east and west and C is the one that ends in a dead end called a sack that does the fish hook um so that's the how the streets would lay out but there is no connection to Rush Creek Boulevard let's see what storm water last was down the EAS to get that so I think at this point What's going to be helpful is to give them the opportunity to address the questions and if you have specific questions that aren't addressed after the meeting is completed then you can send it an email and the reason I say that is right now this this PL what he's indicating is plan details are usually contingent upon the um the the first issue which is in order for this to be at the plan the site plan approval there have to be two other steps that would happen um am I saying that so so it it would have to one be uh have a comprehensive plan amendment made that would have to be approved and then a rezoning would have to be approved before this site plan would be approved so right now we're F like the questions that we're getting are focusing on some of the detail stuff um and we have to First Look at will the first two things be uh approved because if they are not approved then the site plan will not be approved as well does that okay so we're just going to give them a question to finish or give them the opportunity to finish addressing the questions and then if after the meeting you still have questions certainly send in your emails make sure that they are addressed and I know that water is a big um concern MH the last one I believe was traffic yep so there was a feasibility study performed as part of the application um that feasibility study looked at specifically traffic and the proposed impact um that the trips generated from the proposed uses so the commercial Lots plus the residential lots would have on County Road 30 as part of an overall traffic study um I'm not a traffic engineer so I'm not going to speak to the individual study and how it how they go about collecting the data and everything like that but as far as what the ultimate conclusion was was essentially that um that an increased traffic from those commercial lots and the residential lots warranted turn Lanes so when I was talking about some of the conditions on here um there will be a left bound turn lane and a right bound turn lane to enter the site from so as you're traveling from east to west there will be a right bound turn lane and as you're traveling from west to east there'll be a left bound turn lane to enter into this site to reduce traffic conflict because of the traffic that this would generate um there is I would note too that there is the feasibility study was included as part of the packet that was posted on the website and that's under review here tonight so if you want to you can take a look at that if there are any specific questions on it too um I would encourage you to read out to staff I'm not the appropriate person to talk in detail about traffic um but I do know what the conclusions made by the person who performs the study work and someone alluded to it earlier as well but that is a county road so that does go through the county um and it does not it's not necessarily owned um by the city so to address that as well is there anything uh Madam chair I it's up to you other comments you'd want me to address at this time or if you want to um it's up to you in the commission I think at this point in time we have addressed the majority of the questions we've noted the concerns and so at this point in time I would like to open it up to the other Commissioners to have the opportunity to ask um their questions either for staff or for the applicant and if you don't have um questions um then to begin to make your discussion um so is there somebody who would like to lead I guess my biggest question is as far as the zoning Amendment for the rural commercial transitional rural commercial and the development rights for these two properties from my understanding and I'm fairly new to the council but my understanding is it remained the way it was with development rights for commercial property in the rural District correct so um Madam chair commissioner kazaki the development rights shown on this property uh prior to the moratorium was seven development rights and that's how many development rights remain on there today um as far as the other components the there is a change in the boundary that this application is showing between the rural commercial versus the rural residential so that's why the comprehensive plan Amendment would be part of it um and then the resoning component would follow that guiding yeah I mean I don't know how far back this map goes before it was digitized but this shows seven development rights on it correct yeah so the that is the most historical map that we have so my understanding it uh I don't know exactly how far back it goes myself but I do know that it was basically updated handwritten through the years and finally in 2002 we digitized it to um make it much easier to administer the program but this was probably in place at the time any of these applications went into effect regardless of the time frame between March and October um I guess my other comment is on this is real close to 19 on 30 that's a t in the road it's already kind of an odd intersection they've kind of made a a weird little right hand Lane on County Road 19 so that traffic coming off 30 and taking a right turn and going north can kind of go into that lane and then get up to speed and merge in with traffic on 19 um it backs up during rush hour possibly as far as the entrance to this this plan development people may have a hard time getting in and out of there I mean there's turn Lanes so go going into it is probably okay they might have a harder time getting out of it um it's a County Road both are County Roads so I don't know what hanban county has in mind for that intersection but hopefully at some point they put in a roundabout or some kind of a traffic control there because if we're going to start developing out here especially with the density that close to that intersection that very well could be a problem I don't there was a traffic report done here and they seem to think that everything was fine there yeah um I can just just add that it it was a infrastructure feasibility stud so as part of that they do look at traffic and it's basically looking at what infrast based on the plan that's submitted what infrastructure would be needed to support it um and so um and is there anything you want to out on top of that I would just say that as part of the findings of the that study done there were no improvements suggested to the intersection of County Road 19 and3 as part because of this project um there that doesn't address any underlying traffic issues already existing today it's only how this project would affect the traffic on 19 and3 sure thank you how about a roundabout in that area I really appreciate everybody's willingness to be here tonight but I'm going to have to ask you to keep your comments to yourself at this point in time because we've closed the public hearing okay is there anybody else who has questions for staff or questions for the applicant uh as we continue our discussion I have a question for staff and can you talk a little bit about the discrepancy that the uh gentleman mentioned can you talk to that a little bit yes I certainly can Madam chair and commissioner harre um yes there there is quite a bit of history on this application uh they actually originally submitted in 2022 and at that time we did notify that Fe infrastructure feasibility study is not was needed it's necessary for nearly every project in the city because we don't have existing infrastructure um even dominoes where there is existing infrastructure had to go through a small feasibility study to look at traffic so that is uh that is a common part of our practice and they were notified that in 2022 when they originally submitted but then they later withdrew that application so then in 2023 without any uh additional steps taken at the by the applicant to work with staff and to work on that feasibility study they resubmitted the same application uh they were not notified uh in October with a incomplete letter that included 11 items uh so it was not just the in infrastructure feasibility study was other items such as the Landscaping plan basic uh parts of our preliminary plat proposal our approval list uh were not included in that application and they were notified um and and there was limited discussion with staff until about January at which point uh the conversations with the city administrator led to the applicant moving forward with a concept plan which is Again part of our a typical process particularly when we're talking about anything with City discretion such as a comprehensive plan Amendment or resoning um so there the application was paused in January in terms of moving forward with it and then and that was based off uh a letter we received from the applicant team to pause it and move forward with a concept plan which we did and at that time the feasibility study was also postive part of that uh we had reached out and as a city and had asked for information to be able to complete the feasibility study that had not been submitted and then at that point it just was paused altoe um and then in February that was when the concept plan was reviewed um and the direction at that time was that in terms of council direction to staff was that they wanted to reevaluate the development rights program it wasn't necessarily to pick on him there was actually some desire stated at the meeting that potentially there could be some openness moving away from development rights programs in in the real commercial however the city does have historical uh cases where we have applied commercial I'm sorry the development rights to commercial uses including our own Public Works building when that was uh rezoned to allow for the Public Works building we had bought a development right um and then used that to create that use so there there in then there was um the dobzinski subdivision is a was a rural commercial subdivision that used the development rates um so there there was historical precedent that we have placed that this was what was intended um and then uh and we were at March that was the moratorium was proposed at that point the application still was not complete after they applicant was notified of the moratorium they did try to submit a complete application while the infrastructure feasibility study was still ongoing and even then we were still waiting on information on the septic septic sites which is still a reason for it to be incomplete so it was incomplete until after the moratorium was uh adopted so the and then State Statute does say that the moratorium um only by right exempts projects with preliminary approval which is not a project that had received preliminary approval so I hope that provides a bit more Direction um and or a bit more feedback as to the background on that it wasn't intended to uh specifically only apply to the site the moratorium was a chance to review the development rights and all of and how we apply it in all of our rural commercial and transitional rural commercial District it was a part of our larger commercial industrial update discussion um and then I would say the adopted ordinance also clarified things for how it gets applied in rural residential districts as well so the end result was to really clean up the program and make it very clear as to how this is how it has been applied and how it will continue to be applied I do have another question for the applicant if I may sure it seems to me that you you gentleman put together a lot of work on this I've been this for four years if you read the code before they put the amendment or change the code I'm sorry I'm being reminded that I need to ask you to go to the mic just because then when they're doing the minutes after the fact we can make sure that we hear you thank you so much read the code before they changed it it had nothing about density the only thing it mentioned was 2 half acre lots what am I to follow with the code that's the law we're not I'm not supposed to be a developer I'm not supposed to be excuse me a planner or or an attorney to read the code it's for the common man what can I do with my piece of property and for four years the staff has been fighting it's like no you you can't it's building rights well where does it say it in the code it doesn't say it well that's what we mean well that that's your problem not mine I follow the code and I presented it and then I withdrew it because I was getting nowhere and then the second time it's like okay this is the route I'm going to take the code's the code I'm going forward and then Kender kept throwing 11 different things why it wasn't complete we just kept we just kept it was just like guacamole and so call it incomplete and then put a moratorium on and then change to code on you can't do that the law just like the speed limit outside case law is the law many judges have ruled on this already you can't put a moratorium on when there's an application they've done it you can't change the code when there's an application they've done it that's why I hired an attorney so when you I have another question when you say Cod you're referring to the C city ordinance the city ordinance the city code thank you is there anyone else would you have do you have some questions commissioner Lind or I do comments you want in the pink I wanted do if you had any okay um staff how long have we had our building rights program in this city since the 1980s early 1980s okay um and at this stage in the process would it be normally expected to see like the trail easements or what like a couple of the things that were flaged as missing would that be expected to be in this plan at this stage or so it isn't uncommon for that to be handled as a condition of approval um and really would be the final plat where that would need to be absolutely a part of the application so it would say that it's um typically when you have a collaborative environment yes you would have revised plans that would incl some of that information um but that isn't necessarily um that is something that can be handled as a condition of approval okay can I State an opinion absolutely it's time for discussion and questions great well um it's been a a great evening to hear from everyone so appreciate that um I think the planning commission's duty is to conduct due diligence and and have responsibility of looking at our plans and of looking at the facts that's provided by staff um and to not act on pressure or threats um and I think based on everything that we've read heard um this application does lack some components that would I think provide that comfortability to the community that we're looking for for this type of change to our comprehensive plan Amendment including Trails adequate parking thoughtful transition between land uses um as well as um I think the lack of cooperation that's been demonstrated is concerning in this application so for those reasons as well as the building RS program um certainly not being respected in this application and needing to be revised which has been in place not going to get into any of those arguments that's for lawyers to do but I recommend um moving forward with the draft resolution that is put forward tonight and to clarify are you making a motion or are you making a Rec like just a recommendation at this point in time i' love to hear from my colleagues okay I have been around um long enough in terms of following the the process in the application so um it's something I am familiar with um and so I don't have additional questions um I think that staff and I believe the applicant has done um a thorough job in presenting the issue uh so at this point in time I would uh entertain if no one else has additional comments I would entertain a motion that anyone is I have additional comments yep go for it um is it correct that our city code did not state density requirements that maybe the only place that was was on a handwritten map and he was unaware of the density requirements so um chair not I'm sorry chair and uh commissioner Kiki the um where development rights are discussed in the code and it was in rural residential district and it said in that portion of code that the development rights applied to residential and non-residential units uh now there are other portions of the code that were contradictory but it also um but if you read those codes and then looked at the map where properties that were zoned R commercial also had development rights that was where we landed on them so that was part of what needed to get cleaned up which we took the time to do and make sure that was clear to everybody moving forward it also sounds like maybe there wasn't a lot of communication happening between the developer and the city there uh there was communication since 2022 um I think at this point we are the the opinions have been clear um and this is where we're at I have a question can I have make another have another question uh for for staff so if if the motion is made to uh support the recommendation of the city what happens when it goes to the Town Council or will it go to the Town Council ites that make the final decision this is the recommendation so this would it would go to city council for a final decision decision and they'll be able to uh they'll be able to say if they disagree with that recommendation or if they agree and it would go from there okay so at that point the the applicant would have another would have the opportunity to State their case correct the applicant has had their case so typically when staff and planning our practice as a city when staff and the Planning Commission are on the same page uh in terms of the recommendation it does go on consent because we are our city council agendas are overloaded um however there's an open Forum time he has a chance to communicate in the meantime via email I know he has been in communication with our city council members uh City our city council members are diligent and watching these meetings and discussing these me with staff so they are very aware of um what's being presented tonight um and they can always choose to pull from the consent agenda if they feel that that's appropriate okay so if okay that answered my question thank you very much so just one more question for me it seems that the developer was aware of the development rights at the time he submitted his plan for approval yes and staff has urged a concept plan from our very initial meetings to start this conversation um because even um even under their interpretation the the development RS shown in the residential don't line up because if even if we were to accept the interpretation that there's seven residential that development rates are only to be applied to um the residential lots showing 14 acres of residential then at most that'd be two residential lots so we needed to figure out okay if that's true then what happens to the development rate shown on the map if it only applies to commercial lot so there were a number of questions that needed to be figured out um and like I said when the moratorium was initially adopted it wasn't necessarily with the intent to say that we are going to continue this pathway it was a chance to review whether or not we wanted to do that and there was public Outreach as part of it there was a study that was done um there was communication with the Planning Commission UND determine what what would be best for our rural commercial area and our rural area overall thank you so I do have one question was the applicant aware of the moratorium when that decision was made and did the city notify that yes I we notified the applicant team of the public hearing for the moratorium they received an emailed correspondence and they confirmed your seat thank you okay so at this point in time I will um make a motion to approve um the um recommendation for denying um of the comprehensive plan Amendment the rezoning um and the preliminary plat for City file 23-27 and just to be clear that was making a motion is there anyone who is willing to second I will second the motion and all those in favor say I I I anyone opposed say n okay so that is the recommendation that will go forth to um city council I never heard what all of the VES were I think there was two Ved in sure we can we can call a revote so if you guys could just uh state your name I well I mean gosh is that okay I was like can we do a roll call vote okay so what we'll do is we'll do a roll call vote the motion was made by commissioner brummond it was seconded by commissioner Lind and then uh commissioner Yang how do you vote yay or nay could you repeat that yep I'm sorry uh what the motion uh before us is is for the recommendation for denial of the comprehensive plan Amendment rezoning and preliminary plat for the 39 Edition and so we're just uh asking if you're voting in favor of the recommendation for denial or if you are opposed to the recommendation for denial I vote in favor thank you and then commissioner hares favor and commissioner kazaki y okay again if anyone has additional questions that were not uh addressed feel free to uh email um and and reach out with your questions and I just want to thank everybody for your um respect for the process and the evening so appreciate you uh willing to follow the rules of decorum and with that we are going to move on to um other business um so if there's anything that staff has for us um in the planning project update or just anything in general I no I don't have anything but let me know if you have any questions sure the only planning project question I have and um is regarding the storage unit that's going in right off of Highway 55 before Greenfield um I drove by it and it says that it's storage and shed and it's promoting itself as being a self storage and a warehouse and so I don't remember that being something that was talked about or discussed during any of the application process in terms of I guess my assumption is when I hear Warehouse I think someone is working on site and I know that that's something we were concerned about regarding storage so I'm just wondering if I missed something no Madam chair you did not miss something it's just supposed to be storage units they're not supposed to be using it as a work space uh so the idea would be that they are they would be um they might be able they might have equipment there they might have vehicles there so it's very possible that they need to pick something up if it's like a contractor that's using it as a storage space but they're not supposed to be using it as an office or a repair facility or anything like that okay okay so how do we like like how do we handle that well uh Kendra is the planner that worked on that project so it is on my to-do list discuss so I'm not the only one who noticed it and sort of saw a red flag okay awesome well I'm glad that that's been brought to everybody's attention because I know that public safety's concern regarding Self Storage was sort of the use um and and some of the public safety issues that can arrive from from that okay thank you I'm glad to hear it do anybody else have any questions regarding any of the projects that are taking yes I do there was a U Town Council work session was there last the last yes there was what and I was there you were there yes what it was just a work session before the last council meeting oh is which is common there's work sessions that are are that are commonly held before Council meetings sometimes from like 5:30 to 7:00 was it good you know what this is what I will say is you are they are available for um you to view via zoom on the city website and so if it is a topic that is of interest to you I would recommend going back um it was the work session was regarding the business park um yes uh the only area in the city zone for the um business park so was this was it a collaboration between planning and Council or just no no it's just a council work session good questions so the only there's not going to be anything that is summarized and put out we have to go to the I believe so yes cuz well I mean meeting minutes from the work sessions are put together and I they were behind for a period of time due to some issues with um the technology and then um city so they but they are all caught up so you could certainly reference um the past meeting minutes once they're available I believe it's usually given like a month but if that doesn't summarize it adequately for you I would recommend going back to view yep anybody else okay and so again just a reminder touching on the liaison calendar that it is optional um and if you choose to participate um your presence is not required but you would not be receiving your packets so uh or the packets because they're no longer your packets so if you wanted to know what was on the agenda or what not you can just pull it up um via the city we website and so with that being said if nobody else has anything well I guess I'm sorry I skipped right over the city council report so we would like to um give you the opportunity to ask questions of uh council member ven Camp who's here with us tonight um or if you have anything you would like to let the Commissioners know great job this evening on all of your thoughts comments everything you had they are listened to as as uh chair mentioned and such thank you neighbors and everybody if you have questions you can reach out to me also on this I'm one of your neighbors I live down on Beck Road so I'm not far away chross from sherber dairy farm um but if you guys got questions Peter you had questions about that work session and such it was an open thing they aren't closed it was open and it was basically they came with the same concept as they did initially and we had already given them an answer on that uh not what we were looking for and it it turned out we needed to we needed we need to spend more time on that and they do too and uh not both sides were listening we weren't listening to them they weren't listening to us cuz we were already we'd already told him we didn't like it K if if I'm saying it right yeah I feel like but uh it it it's tough we've we've got we've got existing residents in our town that have been here for a long long time and to change stuff up and do things it's it's not something that's going to easily be done anywhere but in that General vicinity those those plans and such had been there for quite some time and uh we are we are doing what we think is right for our existing citizens and stuff so any any specific question off of that Peter or no no um I do have another question is there any way that the planning Commissioners can somehow get involved you know like what have transpired tonight all came out one you can come if you if you look at the open work sessions all those things you can come and participate make comments then okay um it to to involve the Planning Commission and and Natalie you can correct me if I'm wrong on a concept that they're coming to the council asking what we think initially that that it's a a step to reduce costs and to stick all kinds of money into all of the work you just mentioned Peter initially do we in other words do we have your ear what is your input and then we'll go back take that information and then maybe submit a plat a preliminary plat and and go through the planning commission you guys get to make comments and then they come to us with your recommendations and stuff so that's it I know you are a b weather resident um great neighborhood great Folks up there a lot of great input and such and and we're listening to everybody so it it's not just because I'm a bellweather resident no I I know it's not just you but all all of you guys a brth of everybody in our community is on the Planning Commission making recommendations for anything that's coming to us it's nice to have have the have the perception or the the the ideas from everybody in our neighborhood not just focused neighborhoods and stuff so I it's it's great I appreciate that it's also very nice to have the people from the community come to these meetings so it's huge so we can hear them it's huge and and in the past a lot of folks it probably felt they had not been listened to um the last three years I've been on the council that has been one of my focus um of listening to anybody that calls anybody that leaves me a message and stuff I do get back to them on their concerns and thoughts and stuff but uh again everybody is part of this decision and such the five elected officials up there are kind of making that final call that's what I was going to say is involve yourself early and often and when you go you just because you don't go in a liaison capacity any longer you go as as a citizen and you're still able to make as much public comment do just making it on behalf of yourself rather than the Planning Commission um the but often times I'll scan just to see what the concept plans are because concept plans are never a part of the consent agenda they're always something that gets timed and that is an opportunity to see like what is being thought about that would that's the preliminary step to anything a formal application being drawn up that would come before the uh Planning Commission so I know it it's I I used to appreciate the liaison calendar because then it was like I sort of knew that someone else was going to be there and then I could touch Bas the next month and be like so did you hear anything and now it just requires me to pay a little bit more attention unless we all want to still collaboratively you know um cover those whatever but uh yeah that's and so that's my uh last comment I guess is that um our recommendation right now was was for the application not to go through but this the land owner does have development rights and so if it is something that is uh of importance to you just continue to watch um what happens not because we want to you know uh Pitchfork and axes against development but because your your feedback early and often can help um shape the um the feedback um whereas coming along later in the process sometimes is a little bit harder so I um at this point in time I will entertain a motion for us to adjourn tonight's meeting is there anyone willing to make that motion not all at once come on guys I'll make the motion to adjourn is there somebody who will second I second all right all those in favor loudly say I I anyone opposed okay