[0:28] e [0:58] e [1:28] e [1:58] e [2:28] e [2:58] e [3:28] e [3:58] e [4:28] e [4:58] e [5:28] e [5:58] e e [6:53] Brian Douglas (Chair): Welcome to the City of Canon Falls Planning Commission meeting for October 21st. Roll call is: Hamma is absent, Johnson's here, Guesmi’s here, Fox is here, and Nobach is here. Can I get approval of the agenda? [7:15] Jesse Guesmi: Move. [7:16] Diane Johnson: Second. [7:17] Brian Douglas (Chair): Sure. Moved by Johnson, second by Fox to approve the agenda. Any further discussion? All in favor? [Chorus: Aye]. Approval of the minutes for September 9th. [7:34] Fox (Commission Member): Move to approve the minutes. [7:36] Chris Nobach: I second. [7:39] Brian Douglas (Chair): Moved by Fox, second by Nobach to approve the minutes from September 9th. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. [Chorus: Aye]. Opposed? Public input? Okay, it's just a church. You guys can talk during the public hearing. So nobody's here for public input. So, we have a public hearing scheduled for tonight for a conditional use permit for Bethel Rock Church. Before I open the public hearing, Zach, can you give us a little bit of a background where we're at here? [8:25] Zach (City Staff): Yeah, not a problem. Good evening, everyone. The only item for discussion tonight is the conditional use permit for Bethel Rock Church. Previously, we had amended city code to allow religious institutions to operate in the B2 Zone via a conditional use permit, but currently, there are no conditions attached to the CUP. So, in my memo, I gave you guys a list of conditions you might want to consider just to get you guys talking and for something to look at. But honestly, we have a clean slate right now, so you might like some, you might not be a fan of any, and perhaps there's some that you have that you think are pertinent. So, I'll make note of the conditions you guys think should be attached and then draft a final resolution. [9:11] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): And so we're just looking for a conditional use permit so that we can utilize the facility on 32057 64th Avenue in Canon Falls. We are going to be utilizing the upstairs portion. There's going to be spaces—I actually brought, in case you want to see it, just an idea of the drawing of what the upstairs would look like. We have spaces for lots of kids' classrooms, space for a sanctuary to seat 250, and then just all sorts of area for different youth outreach, community events. And we just aim to be a light in the community and to just really assist the community in any way we can outside of just what we do on a Sunday and a Wednesday night. So with that, thank you so much for your time and God bless. [10:00] Brian Douglas (Chair): Thank you. Anybody else wishing to address the public hearing? Did you wave? No, not at all. We waved at each other. I waved. We're farming, that's enough. Second call, anybody wishing to address the public hearing? Third and final call, anybody wishing to address the public hearing? With that, I'm going to close the public hearing. Commission thoughts? [10:46] Diane Johnson: Okay, and I first I have to say, I always appreciate that Zach goes over and above the call of duty to find out anything and everything we could possibly want to know or not know about a given issue. Probably there's a lot there, yes. And it was—I thought when we actually did the text amendment that we said we wanted the same two or three conditions to go along with it as we had in the R1, R2, and RB zones that we allow churches, which would be then the first two that are on our bullet points, of which I have absolutely no problem with those. Zach pointed out that because it's a pre-existing building, the other condition was the side yards be double that required in the district, and with the pre-existing building, that's not possible. So if we take that out and instead put "must adhere to building and setback requirements of the B2 District," I assume that would accomplish pretty much the same thing? [11:58] Zach (City Staff): Yeah, right. In the CUP, it's like—number four. Number four as written, correct. [12:10] Diane Johnson: Right, yeah. [12:13] Zach (City Staff): I would probably recommend the first two because those are the ones that are already—the one you're talking about is number four on the list. That's right. Yep. Where did you find that? I put it in there, there you go. [12:28] Diane Johnson: Okay. Yeah, so one's good, two's good, number four, and quite frankly I don't like any of the others on either of the lists we have. And the only other thing that I would say, and it should be done in all places we allow religious institutions, is to note that they should also conform—which I think is a given, but we should state it—with the noise control in 152.191 and the lighting control in 152.187. [12:59] Brian Douglas (Chair): We can make that happen. Yeah, I think those both make sense to me as well. So I'd add a note and then I would scratch everything else. Since this is in a business district and this is taken from residential text, it looks like you want the landscaping to happen for abutting residential uses. I mean, is that still worth putting in there, or is that something we should just strike? [13:30] Zach (City Staff): I kind of thought the same too. I mean, there's some B2 lots that abut up the—some residential like the northern part of the B2, it does touch some residential. So if you guys want a little bit extra buffer, it wouldn't be for Bethel Rock specifically, but this is obviously for any church. [14:00] Diane Johnson: Then let's leave it in there then. [14:01] Brian Douglas (Chair): Okay. Is there anything on here that they're not currently meeting other than—I mean, we talked about that footnote on number four? [14:15] Zach (City Staff): Yeah, I mean, if we don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot here, I guess is what I'm saying. Right. The three conditions that already exist for a religious institution in the other residential zones—there's three of them. Like Diane had already said, the first two they meet. They have a lot of parking, like more than 120 something spaces, so that shouldn't be a problem. In the RB or other residential zones, it says side yards shall be doubled that required for the district. So if we doubled it for them, their building wouldn't make sense in this case and I don't really think it's necessary. So that one's gone. But yeah, anything else here, they should conform to everything. [15:10] Brian Douglas (Chair): Do we, when we have churches in town and residential areas and they're throwing festivals and stuff like that, do they have to apply for a permit for stuff like that or is that part of their conditional use permit? [15:18] Zach (City Staff): I think, yeah, it's—ours, the code as written, doesn't go that deep. So I mean, I know a lot like farmers' markets, that's—I mean, a lot of churches have farmers' markets, but to answer your question, no, they don't have to apply for anything in particular. That's why one of the things I put on here was just, you know, if they plan on having outdoor events or something, that the time, volumes, and duration could be disclosed with the Planning Commission, but I don't know how—it might be a little hard to configure that. [15:50] Brian Douglas (Chair): So just, yeah, that's why I put it because I thought of that too, but yeah. I don't know. I mean, I think it just goes towards like being a good neighbor. I don't think churches generally—there shouldn't be an issue like that, but you know, and out there I don't foresee it being a problem. But potentially if you're in a residential area and they're doing something that might be bothering folks outside of normal hours, that could be an issue. But I don't really know how to put that into text. [16:08] Zach (City Staff): Yeah, I think if anything it should be added to the residential religious institutions, but you know, out in the B2 it might not be appropriate. So, I guess I did have one question—well, two questions. One is, because it's been a while, does any of this or is anything that we've approved affected the O2 Event Center down below? Are they still able to operate as is regardless of what we do here? [16:40] Zach (City Staff): Yeah, for alcohol sales at least and anything that I can think of, they should still be—I mean, it's a building that has two uses but both are now allowed. So, I mean the only thing I could really think of is traffic. I mean, maybe Pastor Brandon, if you—I don't know if you have like times and service times you might have services. I don't know if that's something that you guys know. I'm sure it's just the typical Sunday, maybe Wednesday. And they, like I said, they have plenty of parking so that shouldn't be an issue. I think the third bullet point is "vehicular access points shall create a minimum conflict with traffic movement." That's just, you know, if another church comes in and like, hey, this is going to mess up the flow of everything in the B2, then it kind of gives you room to deny them, but in this case, I don't think it would have an effect on the Grand O2 or the rest of that area. [17:34] Diane Johnson: Again, good job Zach. [17:34] Steve Nordin: And then just to point out, it would be real difficult to ask any religious organization to provide their service times in that, being those are subject to change. Pastor Brandon, I want you to approach the mic because I want to ask you a couple direct questions. Yes, sir. What are your long-term goals as far as education within Bethel Rock? [18:19] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): Yes, long-term goals is education? I mean it would just be Sunday service and Wednesday nights. That's our long-term goals. [18:25] Steve Nordin: Is there any truth to the rumor that you were going to start a regular school there? [18:30] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): No, we have no interest in a regular school. We had thought about allowing a homeschool co-op to meet at our location, but that's not necessarily a school, more of a co-op that would meet once a week during the day on a Friday. But it's not necessarily an education center. I'm not sure if you're familiar with what homeschool co-ops do and where they meet; they usually meet in community centers. I just thought about opening up for—I know there's a few homeschooled co-ops around. That doesn't mean that it's not in our plan, but it's an opportunity that we would look into for sure, just another opportunity for the community as far as the homeschool co-op allowing for them to... Yeah, we're not interested in opening a school. [19:15] Steve Nordin: Is there any reason that we should put that in the conditional use permit? [19:20] Steve Nordin: Um, I don't believe so because I don't—we don't have any like need to do that. I mean, that's not in our plan. It hasn't been discussed. It has been thrown around with our current facility when talking to the board at the church that we're currently in and they were talking about, well, what would we do with this building because they're shrinking, because they had tossed around the idea of us merging together which they chose against. But if they did, what would it... I'm like, well you got classrooms here, you could open up a homeschool co-op. So I'm not sure if that's maybe where that came from. But I know there's people within our congregation that definitely do homeschooling—my oldest son is homeschooled—so I think that those are definitely beneficial, but not necessarily in our direct plan to do. [20:25] Steve Nordin: And is that something that would need to be applied for? I just—it's been looked at unfavorably, I don't know how, by who, how to put it nicely. I'm going to give you my names. Okay, yeah, you know as far as starting another... [20:39] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): Yeah, and we're not trying to start a school. But I mean, like if a homeschool co-op that already meets is looking for a location, that's how I had brought it up and that's how it had came to be because I know there's a few around. [20:53] Diane Johnson: If it's a real concern, you could put that language in there because it sounds like they're not going to do it anyway. Well, then again, when we look at religious organizations, if your church wanted to start a private school or a religious school, there is absolutely nothing in the zoning code to say you could not. So I'm not sure why we would put that limitation on them if we're not going to in turn put it on every other religious organization in town. [21:31] Fox (Commission Member): I mean, I see where Steve's coming from, but I think what Diane's saying—I'm not trying to put words in your mouth—but I think that makes sense to me. Whatever we currently impose on other churches in town is probably what we should do here. It's kind of where I'm at. I don't mean to leave you standing there. [21:55] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): No problem. Yeah, no problem. [21:58] Brian Douglas (Chair): Do you have more questions for him? [22:00] Fox (Commission Member): No, I was just—that was my concern and I was asked by a few people to directly question it. I thought that was a good question too because I was wondering the same thing, especially because you did mention classrooms when you pulled up your little plan. [22:17] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): Yeah, and that's more in terms for our—because we have zero through one, which is the nursery, and then we have a two and three, we call it a classroom where two and three-year-olds go to learn about Jesus in their specific context. Then we have a four and five room, and then we have 6 through 11, and so on and so forth. So when I mean classrooms, that's specifically what I'm talking about, not necessarily education classrooms. [22:45] Brian Douglas (Chair): That answers the question. What a lot of us would call Sunday school. [22:48] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): Yes, absolutely. [22:50] Brian Douglas (Chair): Well, that's how things get misconstrued sometimes. [22:53] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): Yeah, for sure. Okay, thank you. Absolutely, thank you. [22:58] Diane Johnson: Yeah, I guess where I sit is, like I said, however we're imposing our current rules to other religious organizations within other residential zones or whatever, I feel like it should be a copy-paste here unless there's something specifically that sticks out. You're in a business zone, this could be an issue. I don't foresee any of that right now with this location because I mean, they're also allowed in residential business zones too already. [23:30] Brian Douglas (Chair): Yeah, I can see going with the setbacks for that district. I mean, we don't want to put in a requirement for a setback that the building can't meet and we'd have to chop the building off. That's why that one was—yeah, but I would be willing to go along with the conditional uses being one, two, and just remember the other direct question. [23:55] Steve Nordin: Remember what? [23:56] Brian Douglas (Chair): As far as you know, the O2 is going to stay operating? [24:00] Pastor Brandon (Applicant): Yes, they're in our purchase agreement that we've already agreed upon. That goes through December 31st. There's a three-year lease that they already agreed to. Okay, so yeah, they are there for at least the next three years and we have no plans on pushing them out at all. No, I didn't mean that part, yeah, me pushing them out. Yeah, well yeah, we plan on having them stay. I think it's a win-win for both, you know, to be a benefit to the community would be leaving an event center that is an asset to the community. So that's our intent. Thank you. [24:50] Brian Douglas (Chair): Oh, one more thing. No, just kidding. Commission, Jesse? [25:00] Jesse Guesmi: Just for my clarification, when this—if another organization comes to the town and wants to put a church in a B2 and they have to build, they would be required to follow all of the B2 requirements, correct? So like some of these recommendations in here talk about adhering to building and setback requirements in the B2 District—that's going to happen regardless, correct? [25:35] Zach (City Staff): Right. I mean, it's kind of—it's already in the B2, there's already a list of things. I mean, you have to follow the setbacks. So yeah, I was just making sure that because it was a religious thing, they didn't have to follow all the... I mean, I guess it's given, it didn't really even have to be put in here, but just to keep talking. Yep. [26:03] Diane Johnson: One question for you is, I know I'd said about both following the noise ordinance and the lighting ordinance. Everybody has to do that anyway, whether or not it's included specifically. It's just if you want to be more strict than what it already is. And honestly, the noise—I mean, I don't foresee any problems anyway, but anybody anywhere has to follow those, correct? [26:35] Zach (City Staff): Right. It's only so that we don't have to put them in. Exactly, right. Okay. It's just if you wanted to make it for some reason more strict. Oh, we're worried about other businesses, but that's—yeah. [26:45] Brian Douglas (Chair): So if we made a motion for a resolution to just use the same conditions put on the other churches... [26:55] Diane Johnson: No. Yes, it's one, two, and four here. We can't do the other one for the other churches which was a 30-foot or double the side yard setback. They can't do that in a B2 because we don't have the side yards there; the building wouldn't conform. So that would be number four, correct? [27:25] Zach (City Staff): Correct. Or no, yes, number four. This is what it says in the other ones. Okay, so that would—side yard shall be double that required for district but no greater than 30 feet. That's one that this particular building could not conform to. So Zach suggested we go "must adhere to building and setback requirements in the B2," which they have to anyway, but just to make sure they know. Does that make sense? So one, two, four, that's it. [28:19] Brian Douglas (Chair): Are we ready for a motion? Steve, I guess if you make a motion—I have it written down—one, two, and four. Is there any that work for everybody? But that's considering the conditions for the other... that's except for four, right? Right, otherwise they're the same. Correct, exactly right. I have it right here if you want to see it. [29:00] Brian Douglas (Chair): That motion? Can I make the motion? You do whatever you want. Okay. [29:06] Diane Johnson: I move that we recommend to the City Council to approve Resolution 2024-6 and include on the conditional uses numbers one, two, and four. [29:22] Fox (Commission Member): Second. [29:23] Brian Douglas (Chair): Motion by Johnson, seconded by Fox to approve Resolution 2024-6 using one, two, and four. Correct? Any further discussion? All in favor? [Chorus: Aye]. Opposed? Motion carries. Good job. Anything else to come before the Commission tonight? [29:50] Chris Nobach: Motion to adjourn. [29:55] Jesse Guesmi: Second. [30:09] Brian Douglas (Chair): Motion by Nobach, second by Guesmi to adjourn. All those in favor? [Chorus: Aye]. Opposed? Motion carried.