Based on the context provided for the City of Hastings and the dialogue in the transcript, here is the formatted version with speaker identifications. [0:00] **Commissioner Hallberg**: mr chair i'll make the motion to approve the minutes [0:02] **Chair Gino Messina**: okay motion approved commissioner hallberg second second mr best second [0:06] **John Hinzman**: uh commissioner romans aye commissioner bansky [Matzke] aye commissioner peters aye commissioner tyken aye commissioner best aye commissioner hallberg aye and chairmasita [Messina] aye okay pass to 7-0 [0:24] **Chair Gino Messina**: all right great um there are no public hearings so other actions um we're going to do things just a little differently than what the agenda says in the order we do have a couple people attending tonight for number six on the agenda which is the mason home company variance 2021-12 [0:48] **Chair Gino Messina**: and rather than make him sit through the other three go ahead if there are no objections and move that up to the front of the agenda and take that on first um it's not a public hearing but they are with us tonight so if we have questions for them it gives them an opportunity to answer those questions as a courtesy to them since they're with us if that's okay if there are no objections i'm fine with that chair okay all right sounds good so the first on the agenda is going to be the mason home company variants 2021-12 shoreline lot width and size 914 east 1st street and i believe justin is doing the presentation thank you but [1:41] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: all right so this uh variance is to the shoreline lot size requirements as you can see on this uh lot survey there's uh two lots that were platted um 1800s they're 66 feet wide by 140 feet deep um they're they're well above our minimum lot size standards for the r2 zoning district the uh shoreland ordinance does require a greater size setbacks option in 1994 that ordinance and i can explain in a little bit here why why they these lots aren't grandfathered in um as [2:26] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: as normally they would be when you change an ordinance there's a aerial photograph of the site you can see on one one of the lots there's an existing house their lot is vacant um in aerial photographs over the years um there's been a few different things that have looked like occurred on this lot in the back part of the lot in the 30s and 40s it looked like there was a house and then it looks like there was a large structure towards the southern half of the lot and speaking with some of the area residents it sounded like this may have been an area where they stored ice from lake isabel [3:14] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: photograph looking to the south from first street you see the curb here along first street um the ground this right-of-way um area street and where the lot starts is um kind of a ditch area its uh elevation is as low as 698 feet below sea level and there's a storm drain or catch basin uh right here on the right side from here as you go south to the lot back of the lot it uh elevation goes up quite a bit um where the lot meets the alley it's about [3:59] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: 694 feet which is fairly high that's the minimum finish floor elevation of a structure in this area would have to be at that elevation uh taken from the alley looking to the north of the vacant lot the existing house is just off to the right and you can see first street in the distance there [4:38] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: two lots do meet all the current uh zoning requirements of city zoning code the shoreline management area as i mentioned has some different requirements in its overlay areas and the shoreline ordinance is meant to conserve natural environments while allowing for development in existing urban areas while the overlay boundaries for different waterways are static for all lakes it's a thousand feet distance from those lakes or rivers that's 300 feet from those rivers are the overlay districts where their regulations apply it's the category of those waterways where the regulations differ rural areas [5:25] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: with undeveloped lands are identified typically with natural or recreational lakes and rivers as traditional and those were along those uh requirement for lots that are much larger and um have greater width requirements to keep those areas um looking natural but also to keep uh impact to those resources minimal since they're in undeveloped areas without infrastructure of stormwater systems and septics or sewer systems categories are generally not found in cities that are [6:12] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: developed along those waterways waterways in cities with existing development by definition are meant to be categories as urban or general development staff has found that similar cities use these categories for their stretch of the mississippi river and lakes that are in those cities that are developed around additionally the dnr's draft mississippi river corridor critical area plan his neighborhood as this neighborhood as river towns and cross things district which is characterized by historic downtown areas and residential districts states that the area must be managed in a manner that allows continued growth and redevelopment this also appears in the city's critical [6:58] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: area chapter of the 24 2040 comprehensive plan properties were planted prior to adoption of the shoreline management ordinance they would be grandfathered at the current size but for the provision of the shoreline ordinance that states have two adjacent lots are ever currently owned they would have to be not allowed to be grandfathered there's case law that found that neither greater than 66 percent of the lot requirement nor continued joint ownership may be compelled allowing grandfathered lots as a result of joint ownership that case law the current size of those individual lots nearly meet the minimum of the [7:44] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: enforcement of those lot sizes and lot width without a variance but just not quite this may be granted we're due to special conditions and where literal enforcement of the provisions of the city code would result in practical difficulties staff report explores the conditions and difficulties along with checks of those findings but principally staff believes that the special conditions include improperly classified water bodies requiring rural undeveloped lot standards in the developed urban environment the applicant would encounter practical difficulties in developing the lot without a variance due to the lots being in common ownership and being planted urban lots required to [8:31] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: meet undeveloped land requirements most of the area the subject properties are within the flood fringe district the city's flood plain ordinance and federal regulations allow construction within that designation as long as the floodplain regulations are met most notably the structures must have a minimum finished floor elevation the area would be 690 feet level and they must be on fill at least one foot below that rooms in the area [9:14] **John Hinzman**: yeah froze on us there the time here to yeah it becomes unfrozen again all right if not somebody might have to call him and let him know if he can't hear us yeah yeah libby i will do so [9:52] **John Hinzman**: like uh justin has left us here i think i can summarize a little bit here i mean we've got a variance report before us tonight brings requests from the shoreline ordinance provisions here there's two things that we look at with the variance request we take a look at some of those items that must be necessary for use to grant a variance we take a look at some of the precedent that we've used as well in this situation as justin stated the zoning ordinance meets the requirements it's a situation in which the shoreline ordinance does not and the fact that these lots were combined effects that we had two planted lots there back from 1855 they were joined together at one point so the variance request here is for the [10:37] **John Hinzman**: shoreline award it says as we've shared with you earlier today we've had uh a couple of comments that have come in uh from from residents uh in the adjoining area from uh from ray banard and from uh and from bj carl uh in general i think that their comments relate to stormwater on the site itself and uh concerns that they have related to how stormwater would be affected with the new development as they pointed out and is uh i think justin learned from his visit to the site that it's a it's a lower area and uh we've heard that during uh larger storm periods that that is a natural low spot for drainage of the of the surrounding area and so there is some concern of that take a look at the [11:23] **John Hinzman**: the variance request itself the variance is to the shoreland ordinance as part of our development requirements for any new construction of a home we would have certain requirements for stormwater management that must be met with a building permit primarily with that relate is the relation that storm water that is on the site cannot leave the site and so that is something that they would look at and have to provide some analysis to ensure that we don't have more stormwater leaving the site with the development coming in there so there may be some creativity on that we also shared an email earlier today from the applicant himself uh sharing some of his expertise and some of his background on the [12:08] **John Hinzman**: item itself so i think i'll stand at this point here again as the chair had pointed out this is not officially a public hearing although i do know that there's a couple of people in the audience including i think the the applicant who may wish to address so mr chair if if it's appropriate you you may ask for for any comments that are out there we could take some additional comments if people want to comment at this point and i will turn it back over to you thank you [12:53] **Chair Gino Messina**: okay thanks john and justin wherever you are appreciate that um and looking at uh i just want to pull up the participant list here we got uh it looks like all three of our attendees are accounted for um if you if uh it's edgar [12:56] **Chair Gino Messina**: bj and ray or in there if you want to speak if you could just use the raise hand feature and okay ray ray's got his um hand raised we'll go ahead and bring you into the meeting [13:16] **Ray Banard (Resident)**: okay and ray if you just unmute yourself you should be good to go can you hear me now we can welcome you thanks thank you thank you for a chance to to speak um with all due respect john i think it's a little more complicated than you described and um and i want to start by saying we're totally in favor of developing this area of like we were part of that we did it as well um the the lots i i did send some documents regarding this and the entire block you need to understand drains through this lot so the alleyway is sloped from washington and franklin [14:04] **Ray Banard (Resident)**: towards the center of the block and the houses on 2nd street all drain towards the alleyway except for a little bit on the front of them which drains towards 2nd street but the the roofs and structures there and there's parking lots driveways garages etc uh all drained towards the alley then the alley all drains towards this lot and in a moderate rainstorm there is literally a creek that flows through the lot it's substantial the heavy rainfall it's like a little river and it goes down to the front of the lot uh just uh justin mentioned the ditch at the front and in that is a city storm sewer to collect that [14:51] **Ray Banard (Resident)**: water in a flood period this is a very low storm sewer it's like six feet below first street uh and first street is below the flood plain just to put that in context um the mississippi river begins to flow back up through the storm sewer because this is the shortest route to the river if you will and uh it's right out front that's where that storm flows and it it comes straight up into the lot and begins to fill the lot because uh the house bj carl's house the house that is being remodeled right now the basement of that which includes furnaces and such my garage [15:39] **Ray Banard (Resident)**: are all in that flood plain the city comes and plugs it with a balloon to keep the water from coming back up and filling the lot that lot was filled with water just two years ago and what happens when that occurs then is that it only takes a moderate rain and the lot becomes a flood plain it fills with water quickly as i described there's a whole river flowing here and then the city comes down and pumps the water out of the lot and and over the top and into the river so the city has participated in helping to manage the situation it is a city you could argue city created situation that allowed all of the building uh permits on the houses on second street which are all recent um [16:27] **Ray Banard (Resident)**: here's two more coming now that's going to create more runoff and the lot of the alley is flowing towards the lot not towards the street and the city has acknowledged that there is an issue with significant water flow by putting a storm sewer right in the lot if there is a house added in the center of that lot it's going to create two rivers one on each side of the house uh one will take out my retaining wall which was pictured in one of those pictures i i have the geodesic dome you can see from the ceiling from the satellite imagery or the plane flyovers whatever that is and the other will take out the existing garage because it'll flow straight through that that's a very old garage [17:12] **Ray Banard (Resident)**: i guess it's it's remaining because it's filled with asbestos so it's going to flow straight down on each side of that house and two rivers have as much of a place to go because the ponding base won't be filled and so we're we're concerned about the water management in this and i'm not sure what it means that you can't let your water flow across somebody else's lot it it's kind of irrelevant when you've got all the other lots flowing through this including water off of my house as well it is the the stream the flowish for this whole block any questions on that [18:00] **Chair Gino Messina**: all right commissioners any questions [18:09] **Commissioner Best**: you have one for justin justin you with us yes i am thank you so on the recommendation under the conditions condition number three where it says all provisions of the zoning shoreline management floodplain ordinances must be addressed including but not limited setbacks design drainage and elevation requirements um would that condition be would that condition match their concerns and have would that that address those concerns prior to the final approval [18:48] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: sure i mean they would have to have a grading and drainage control plan that would be engineered and reviewed by our our city engineers staff to make sure that any alteration of the site wouldn't create any additional issues and [18:55] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: hopefully it would reduce some of the existing drainage issues that could better be handled that would have to be in place prior to any kind of building yes that's correct if that condition is made okay i just want to get clarification on that thank you yeah [19:22] **Chair Gino Messina**: any other commissioners have questions comments if not i see that uh bj has the hand raised and bring there we go all right and if you could just go ahead and unmute yourself and you'll be with us there we go [19:42] **BJ Carle (Resident)**: hello thank you appreciate it let's see if i can get my camera on yeah can you do that um can you do me a real quick favor and then just uh give us your address if you would uh it's 102 washington street 102 washington street okay thank you so i'm on the corner um i think ray did a really good job of talking about the concern with the runoff when you're adding more water flow to because of surface area in addition the ponding concern would be that there would be additional runoff and it would fill quicker so i think i appreciate ray you know explaining that and that's just part of my concern i also do have a bit of a concern with the property line as it stands drawn one of the i know for a fact that the agreed-upon [20:28] **BJ Carle (Resident)**: property line ran right directly from the edges of both of the sheds um straight through to that uh on the plan you can see i think uh he even put a retaining wall on there and and that was the agreed upon um property line and has been um probably since the 1930s originally before even bill and lorraine rackey built the house and then moved it back so they're i'm looking into also how to dispute that and i do have gathering information and old photos and different things to show that that property line is over slightly and so i don't know if that's going to make a difference with the variance or not but i just wanted to [21:15] **BJ Carle (Resident)**: bring that up but the biggest concern we have is the fact that you know we give this extra zoning we allow for this um splitting of these two levels and the house gets built and he you know basically this is a builder who flips houses he'll sell it and then the problem lies with the new owners and the concern is we want to make sure that the flood plain and zone gets resolved before there's any approval in building that's what i wanted to say and i appreciate um giving me the time to talk thank you all right thank you thank you very much all right and mark's got his hand raised as well bring mark in [22:01] **Mark Mason (Applicant)**: mark once you unmute yourself you just give us your name and your address can you guys hear me oh there you are perfect uh mark mason here owner of mason home company i own the lot at 914. uh first thank you guys all for hearing this variance request tonight i really appreciate it uh been working with justin on the variance as you guys have kind of heard the um the variance i think is is not the issue here the issue of the neighbors uh is storm drainage uh which as ray pointed out he'd like to see the development and is concerned about the drainage all i can offer is um you guys have seen kind of our plans my past experience uh working with i was an engineer was a storm water engineer i've got a [22:48] **Mark Mason (Applicant)**: lot of good friends that will be helping with these plans that is a condition that needs to be set with this variant approval and i think the ending result will be better especially if mr menard would let us fill a little bit onto his lot we could drastically limit the size of the retaining wall that he needs put in better rock swales more of a functional swale instead of a random river or stream running across the lot when we can control the drainage it will function much better than it is currently and if we can't do that then then the building permit wouldn't get approved and we will work collaboratively with the city engineers to make sure all that happens and if you guys have any questions for me on anything i'm happy to answer [23:25] **Chair Gino Messina**: uh commissioners you have any questions for any of our attendees no all right i want to thank mark and bj and ray for being here tonight and um i want to thank ray for his presentation for his documents that really helped put things in perspective as far as his view on it so commissioners i'll open it up for any other questions comments [24:10] **Commissioner Matzke**: mr matzke is this in the his hysterical or historical zone of the city do they have any conditions that they have to meet of the historical zones there's this is not in the historic district or the original hastings design standards area so there's no uh requirements by the city [24:41] **Commissioner Matzke**: and then i guess i'm looking at the aerial photo of this and the drainage of this and it does look like most of the water is running through at least the three quarters that city block is running through there already so it's not like we're doing any we're doing anything or adding any additional drainage um but we will be blocking that area up it looks like by building a home there so if it can be addressed and the designer can come up with some sort of plan that would efficiently move the water through there i don't see this as a plot a problem but it does look like three quarters of that [25:28] **Chair Gino Messina**: block does through that one parcel so okay yeah and i'll just uh chime in here real quick while i have the thought in my head this is really kind of a two-prong deal um you know the variance that we're undertaking is can the lot be split um and that's reference the ordinance itself um the conditions they those they have to meet those certain conditions before there's a final approval right so that's the double check and this is kind of one of those classic situations where uh if you deny the variance we never make it to the next step to see what the solutions could be so we know we don't have a the discussion on [26:14] **Chair Gino Messina**: the solutions and then that so not us but i mean as far as the city and the builder and the neighbors so um in order to get to that next step you know we have to we have to move forward you know at some point so i'm supporting the variance only because i think that some of those drainage issues um and the retaining wall and i think she had mentioned the um survey issues those are things that are outside the purview of what we do of what we can control and can't control we're just undertaking the variance portion of it and the ordinance part of it and so i think that there's ample opportunity for the builder or actually the lot owner as well um and [26:59] **Chair Gino Messina**: the neighbors to work together and coming up with a better drainage solution than we have today and it sounds like he has experience with that so that's my take on it is to recommend approval of the variants to the city council move it forward and let them move forward with putting some of those solutions into place so that's my two cents on that uh commissioner taking good thanks sharon um great comments just a couple uh housekeeping items on one of the drawings that shows a well is that still in place and is that going to get taken care of did see that there's a hand pump well out there i'm not sure if it's anyone or not these are [27:46] **Commissioner Tyken**: things that we do look at um when they when there's development um if it is a functioning one they generally want those capped so there's not a well i guess my question i'll be direct about it then is do we need to put something in there to make sure that gets taken care of or is that just part of the whole process of going through the build that he'll get and take care of [28:09] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: it's up to you i can i can make uh extra sure that we are cognizant of that it's luckily it's on the surveys that we have on the property so it will be reviewed um and then explain to me so the finished floor height has to be would you say 694 feet above [28:35] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: or above yeah the base flood elevation out there is 693 feet in the finished floor elevation be one foot above that and is that the highest clean water in that area or where do we come up with that figure it's it's just the noted elevation on the on the fema flood maps i believe it prob it may relate to a hundred year flood and the houses in that area they're at that similar height or they varying based on when they're built the new ones are probably at that height um i believe uh mr menard told me that he built his [29:20] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: uh two feet higher than he was required to in the early 80s i'm not sure if if that in the early 80s it was a different elevation but okay that's just the minimum today yeah and i agree with the chairmastina i think uh it seems supportable um and the floodwaters are kind of outside of the variant so i'll let the engineers and figure that out to make sure that we don't build a houseboat right locked uh house if it ever floods enough so thank you chair [30:04] **Chair Gino Messina**: all right thanks commissioner tykan yeah i guess uh for commissioner best integrity kind of when i do variances i look at three things i'm pretty consistent on that i look at three [30:07] **Chair Gino Messina**: the variance review in three ways does it fit a makes sense um and it does the variance review spells that out in each in very good form by the way nice step good staff report justin thank you um the second thing i look at is does it create a hardship either for the applicant or anybody else it actually this may be an opportunity to take away hardship which seems to be uh the drainage in that area and i think that um qualified to work with the neighbors on that and then the third thing is precedence there's a set of precedents uh going forward that you know puts either the city or other residents precarious position and this one actually doesn't it actually fixes [30:53] **Chair Gino Messina**: something so it's actually a positive precedence on that but i really uh i really implore the the neighbors the resident the builder the you know everybody to work together and coming up with the solutions since the since the common problem is the drainage i think it's a great opportunity for people to work together and come up with the solution and i think the only way that we can let that go let that process continue is by moving the variants up to city council for approval the recommendation for approval commissioners any other questions mr albert you're on thank mute mr uh mr menard had his hand raised again i didn't know if we wanted to bring him back in [31:44] **Chair Gino Messina**: you're on mute now let's go ahead and bring them back in john [31:54] **Ray Banard (Resident)**: all right mr bernard you're in just need to unmute and then we can hear you hear me now i can go ahead just very briefly i'm looking forward to working with mr mason to see what can be done [Music] not a problem there i just want to note that in uh justin's presentation uh the document that said if there was a dispute over property lines you couldn't allow a variance and that was in essence what bj was saying so i don't i don't know if that applies or not but i just wanted to mention it that's all john justin can you respond to that yeah well i can i can say that i don't [32:40] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: recall saying if there's a dispute on property lines variance can't be approved uh does property line disputes are civil matters between property owners um the city doesn't have any ability to grant any type of uh a finding on who owns what property um i might have stated something that was um it sounded similar to that but i can't it's in 9b is where it says that [33:23] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: again not trying to throw a wrench in the gears here did you say nine b nine b or d i'm sorry yeah i missed that too b as in boy he's a boy okay well cited for me what you're looking at nine b states that uh the practical difficulty is caused by provisions of this chapter and not been created by any persons presented or formally having interest in the parcel of the land oh okay the practical difficulty was [34:09] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: created by the miscategorization of water bodies in the shoreland ordinance it wasn't the current property owner that did something to the property to have it be substandard an ordinance okay that clarification and thank you appreciate that [34:39] **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator)**: oh dan yep go ahead you're on mute justin i guess maybe not quite the same question i i understand 9b is is different than what mr menard asked but even though it might be a civil matter between those those parties this question of a lot line or potentially adverse possession there um does the the potential of changing the dimensions of the ladder to be created lot impact on setbacks does any of that affect the potential for a variance [35:10] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: uh well the lot affected by that is the lot with the existing house on it which she shares a border with the survey shows that her shed is over the property line maybe a half a foot or so and i think she's contending that uh she owns that property um so if she were able to uh win some um litigation in in word granted a sliver of that property uh it would make that lot smaller but uh that would be occurring in the future after this determination um so the lot would be grandfathered in because that happened uh after the fact possibly um all we're doing is making a variance for the properties as they are now [36:15] **Dan Wietecha (City Administrator)**: so there's nothing on file right now there's not a dispute or anything on file currently correct and it and that is for the property that's already developed so it wouldn't affect um any of the constructing a house on this lot to the west okay and ideally that would be the homeowners that would want to work that out or excuse me the landowners a lot owners that would want to work that out in the future dan go ahead can you humor me justin could you share screen and throw up uh ariel or a map or something just so i can understand which lot is which and where there's a property line and a garage and if i can zoom in here [37:15] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: all right so the the property line under uh dispute from bj would be this eastern orange line um that survey that is owns this lot one and this survey is showing that her shed is slightly over the property line and she's contending that uh there was a an agreement that the property line ran you know to the west a little bit of the official platted property line for for whatever reason thank you that was very helpful [37:55] **Chair Gino Messina**: okay yeah that clarifies it so it's actually on the existing property not on the new lot yeah okay thanks thanks justin yeah i couldn't hear anything there for a second i'm sorry no thanks justin i just that was a good point he made just to clarify which side of this uh lot was in dispute so even if she goes ahead and disputes that and a civil litigation it's not really gonna affect the other lot itself that's more that's in the other the other lot so okay that makes sense [38:28] **Commissioner Romans**: mr chair commissioner romance uh just a quick uh quick thing i'd like to just reiterate what what kind of you said there i think it's a um you know the stormwater seems like it could be an issue but this that's outside of our uh purview here but don't want to get uh too far away from that um the variance makes sense to me uh it follows all the outlines here um so i'm generally supportive of going forward with that variance um and i would like to um add on to commissioner tykan's point on the well there um i'd be supportive of adding a condition in there that that that well gets a sealed to mdh standards [39:15] **Commissioner Romans**: just uh just to throw it in there to make sure moving forward that's probably a good practice to have so other than that supportive of the variants and i think it's a great opportunity to work together as a community in there for them to solve some of those problems of the uh stormwater moving forward so um i think that's all i had thanks thanks mr chairman [39:46] **Chair Gino Messina**: thanks commissioner romans anyone else questions comments christian albert mr chair i'll make the motion to approve the mason home company variance number uh 2021-12 shoreline lot size and with uh with the conditions and the added condition of the closure and capping of the well [40:03] **Chair Gino Messina**: we have a motion on the floor to approve by commissioner hallberg and that's modifying the conditions to add the uh capping and ceiling of the well commissioners do i have a second i'll second second bite commissioner romans any further discussion john [40:24] **John Hinzman**: commissioner hallberg hi commissioner best mr tykan chairmasina i commissioner peters commissioner matzke i and commissioner romans and i will note that that passes 7-0 the recommendation for approval with the added condition [40:49] **John Hinzman**: that will be forwarded to the city council for final action on april 5th [40:58] **Chair Gino Messina**: john okay next on the agenda is tc land llc final plat or correction let's go back one more time here simic property group final plat 20 21-10 um villas at pleasant 32 villa homes north ridge and pleasant take it away thank you [41:35] **John Hinzman**: thank you mr chair i'm going to share my screen here and show the property that we're looking at tonight you you all see that the map okay thumbs up summit property group you've looked at this before last fall when we had the free zoning and the preliminary plant and final plaid application for this development [41:44] **John Hinzman**: time the development looks like it does today which is a 32 lot subdivision of villa homes which are detached single-family homes within an association so the layout you're looking at today has unchanged from last fall the approval what has changed is how the project is going to be constructed when the project was originally brought forward to you it was a preliminary plot for the entire subdivision and then a phase of two which the first phase would take place down here second phase at a later time so we the final plot approval at that time was only granted for half of the development since that time civic property group has decided to do everything at once that has necessitated a new final plot application [42:30] **John Hinzman**: which would encompass the entire subdivision so what we're looking at here is consistency from the preliminary plan to what's being shown on the final flag when we take a look at whoops two together preliminary plaid is here final plaid is here we've gone through a review to ensure that that is consistent and it is the only change really is this outlet b which was part of the preliminary flat had a extension of 15 foot wide extension behind these lots uh difference now is these lots go all the way to northridge drive makes these lots a little bit larger and this the strip back here really served no purpose we're certainly supportive of that we [43:17] **John Hinzman**: also have in here your standard requirements that we have in the final plant including the payment of park dedication fees sewer interceptor fees as well as signature of agreements for the development of the property and so we have those conditions added in so taking a look again on a preliminary plant what we're looking at is the how the property is going to develop we do really the heavy lifting at the time of preliminary plat we look at the grading review where streets are going grading storm water utilities all that portion so we do the heavy lifting during the preliminary plant when the final plaque comes along what we're looking for is this consistent and it is consistent with the final plant and we are recommending approval of it and so i i can stand for any questions [44:04] **John Hinzman**: that you may have on this thank you thanks john appreciate it [44:06] **Chair Gino Messina**: commissioners uh once i get the full screen back up here okay commissioners any uh comments and just some background for commissioner best and commissioner tyken we we took this up in the fall of last year so we've already done all of the plat work and the review and all of that so this is basically uh basically um allowing them to build the whole thing now at once versus in two phases i'm assuming because demand is there so that's where we are on that you're taking go ahead [44:50] **Commissioner Tyken**: my only question is all the outlets who do they who who owns those um [44:58] **John Hinzman**: when this is done after the outlaws would be owned by a homeowners association so the development agreement would would uh have that as a requirement and then we would have a requirement that homeowners association documents be drafted to maintain the ownership of that all the taxes and uh whatnot will be paid by the hoa correct okay that's really the only question i had thank you chair [45:25] **Chair Gino Messina**: thanks for taking appreciate it commissioners any other if there are no other uh discussion i'll go ahead and take a motion [45:39] **Commissioner Romans**: i'll make a dimension i'll make the motion to prove the final plan [45:45] **Chair Gino Messina**: okay we have a motion to approve do i have a second second second commissioner hauberg any other further discussion john if you can call the roll will do [45:55] **John Hinzman**: commissioner romans commissioner peters aye commissioner hallberg aye commissioner tyken aye commissioner matzke aye commissioner best aye and chairmasina i i will note that that passes on a 7-0 vote for recommendation of approval and that will be forwarded to the city council on april 5th for final action [46:27] **Chair Gino Messina**: thank you john all right next on the agenda tc land llc this is the final plat for 2021-04 heritage ridge second edition 31 lots at general sieben drive in fallbrook thank you [46:42] **John Hinzman**: thank you mr chair i've spent my screen back on here a similar type of uh action tonight as we had for the last one this is for the 40-acre development that's located off general sieben drive and fallbrook drive this is the the total attempt the total extent of what would be the second edition you could see the first edition fallbrook drive of nine lots extended over here total development is 116 lots half of them being villa home lots half of those being traditional single family lots [47:14] **John Hinzman**: when you take a look at the preliminary plot which is shown here showing the entire 116 the area in red shows what's being constructed as part of the second edition and that's shown here in the final flat so we will have some street extensions fallbrook drive will be extended further to the west with the temporary cul-de-sac at this location and high point drive will be extended north with a temporary cul-de-sac here actually which point sorry got my streets and ridge point court will be constructed off to the east here there will be a stub street for west what's termed westview drive here albeit uh as we know in town we already have one of those so that would be west point drive we have that as a condition as part of the approval on it [48:00] **John Hinzman**: so that's what would be constructed as part of this phase another important part of this is outlat c which is the main stormwater basin for the development that would also be done as part of this phase of development we've had our our city engineers working with the developers engineers to look at stormwater patterns with the preliminary plant there is a method in which all of the stormwater can be held on site and we're so we're reviewing that and one of the things the developer is seeking which is well outside of the the bounds of the final plot discussion for planning commission but more it's kind of a tidbit is there might be some potential drainage worked out with saint elizabeth and seton church to the north assuming they come to agreement on an [48:47] **John Hinzman**: easement but there is methodology for them to have their stormwater on the site and meet our requirements so we're working through that again with the pro with the final plant we're looking for consistency with the preliminary plaque what we show here is consistency uh we would have cash and lou for park dedication we'd have the requirement that uh the development agreement and homeowners association documents be recorded also have a provision that lots that are built within the subdivision are notified of the potential uh negative attributes of the mining operation to the south so all those are included within the the conditions for approval i believe the developer is also the audience tonight if you have any questions for him and i can stand for any questions at this [49:33] **John Hinzman**: time as well thank you all right thank you john [49:35] **Chair Gino Messina**: commissioners any comments questions if you're thinking of some uh i'll just start out by saying i want to you know thank the simok property group and uh heritage ridge second edition developer it's nice to see development and see the demand and i mean they look really nice if you haven't had a chance to visit the area i highly recommend it so thank you for uh you know coming to hastings so it's nice to see your questions comments nothing's changed so take a motion if not [50:23] **Commissioner Hallberg**: commissioner hopper i made the motion to approve heritage ridge second edition final plat 2021-4 tc land all right commissioner hamburg motion to approve [50:35] **Chair Gino Messina**: do i have a second fisher taken on a second any further discussion ah john go ahead and call the roll all right uh [50:47] **John Hinzman**: chairmasina commissioner best aye commissioner matsky well commissioner mattsky you're on mute hi commissioner tyken commissioner hallberg hi commissioner peters hi and commissioner romans i will note that that recommendation for approval passes on a 7-0 vote [51:10] **John Hinzman**: and that will be forwarded to the city council on april 5th for final action thanks all right thanks john [51:18] **Chair Gino Messina**: and next on the agenda custom sawdust llc site plan 2021-11 construction of a new building at 5 25 east 31st street and you are back on go ahead thank you very much [51:40] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: i apologize for uh losing internet connectivity earlier hopefully i'll be uh fine for the rest of the meeting um this is uh the property that's proposed or purchased from the city of hastings by the applicant to construct a building [51:55] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: on it's just east of the hastings bus garage photograph taken from you can see it's it's a pretty level site totally vacant uh the city had formerly had uh agricultural lease on these properties but is um put it to uh natural plantings in the last few years the site plan for the proposal you can see it's got a nearly a 5 000 square foot metal building which is mostly a shop for semi storage a small office the site also includes a large [52:41] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: maneuvering area for semis to pull in and uh presumably back up into the building uh and two entrances onto the street uh elevations of the proposed building the requirements uh would normally require uh at least 25 percent class one material in the front um the applicants are proposing to have a stone veneer on the lower half of the building as shown on the elevation which would wrap around to the sides [53:32] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: obviously class two in the front of the building and areas not highly visible from adjacent streets would it be allowed to have a class proposing to have the balance of the building besides the stone to be a class 2 material it's going to be a steel board and batten material with non-visible retainers similar to past couple projects in the industrial park simply storage and what the other one was um that they had mentioned the lumber i believe building the proposal meets the zoning requirements the use of the site is consistent with the i zoning and the [54:34] **Justin Fortney (City Planner)**: comprehensive plan guiding the property as industrial and they meet the parking requirements based on the size of the structure and the use of the building as industrial that i can stand for any questions the applicant is also in attendance if there's any questions for him thank you justin thank you appreciate that all right [55:16] **Chair Gino Messina**: commissioners any questions i do see john has joined us he's in the audience so if we have any questions for jerry i'm sorry while you're thinking of those just pretty straightforward it fits you know simply put it fits you know it's exactly what we're looking for for that area so my only question is is there any additional thoughts on that site that they would be looking at they've got quite a bit of front area there that they're using is there any additional that they're looking at in the for the future plans for this lot i mean it fits it works and it has proposed and it's great i want to see it but they're just what are their thoughts for the future besides this yeah i believe uh jerry grochon was in [56:02] **Jerry Grochon (Applicant)**: attendance would be best to answer that question and it looks like he is in with us now gary go ahead yup you can hear me okay i guess at this point i would uh be interested in the joining this um to the east for future reference and or the one to the north but at right now it's just uh kind of a bit more for me to chew at to bite off at this time so i'd probably just hold it here for now that be for the same story are you talking about same business um just expansion yeah [56:56] **Chair Gino Messina**: yeah okay thank you sure commissioners any other questions for jerry or applicant if none i'll go ahead and accept a motion [57:19] **Chair Gino Messina**: i'll go ahead and kick this one off then i'll make a motion to approve site plan building for custom sawdust 2021-11 at 525 31st street east second commissioner roman second okay and any further discussion it's a common i i love the fact that all these buildings are you know a lot same designs and there's gonna be a lot of uniformity out there but like good looking builds that all like you said mr chair all blend into the area i think it's a great addition very similar to the storage ones yep that are going up so yeah very nice [58:07] **Chair Gino Messina**: any other further discussion go ahead and call the roll will do [58:15] **John Hinzman**: commissioner hallberg all right chairmasina hi commissioner best aye [58:31] **John Hinzman**: i will note that the recommendation for approval passes on a 7-0 vote and that'll be heard at the april 5th council meeting for final action all right thanks john and i just want to say thank you to all of our attendees tonight sometimes i forget to do that on the previous one so i just want to thank all our attendees for being here tonight they're all logged out already but if they ever watch this back we want to know thank you for taking your time out for being here with us tonight so other business john [59:02] **John Hinzman**: other business well updated on a few items that passed through planning commission at the last meeting two items we reviewed one of them was heard by the city council and approved at the last meeting and that was the final plaque for vermilion acres senior housing development and the item missing that we reviewed at the last meeting pertained to south oaks 4th edition the applicant requested a continuance of that item it is anticipated that that will be heard by the council at their april 19th meeting so not the upcoming meeting but the one after that i don't have much more to report on that other than we're looking at engineering issues trying to get a better handle so we can be better prepared for the council meeting coming up on the 19th at this point as far as our actions go i already have one item in the queue for our next meeting which would be april 12th we've got three weeks between our meeting with the fifth monday this month so i do have a final plan application in for wallen 19th edition and i believe that is the last edition for wallet we've been working on that development [1:00:02] **John Hinzman**: now for 20 years and we're finally down to the last few lots so uh we'll be bringing that forward to you and whatever else might be coming in i think i've shared with a few of you here it's been a busy spring as far as new developments that we've reviewed and also with discussions that we've had with other folks that are looking at that development residential development industrial development etc so i hope to have more to come on that one and appreciate your time again and in your efforts in reviewing things tonight that's all i had all right thanks john anyone got any other business otherwise they'll take a motion to adjourn move that we adjourn mr maskey taken yeah oh i'm sorry commissioner tyken sorry [1:00:47] **Chair Gino Messina**: you guys have same voices literally identical so raise your hand then i'll be able to see it do i have a second i'll second all right commissioner best all right john i'll go go through the charts uh commissioner romans hi commissioner peters hi commissioner hallberg aye mr tykon commissioner manske aye commissioner best aye and chairmasina aye