Great. Then we will consider those approved. Um and then I I know that most of you are here tonight regarding the one item that we have on the agenda. Uh we do want to just let you know that there was a public hearing at the last meeting. We are not reopening the public hearing, but we are going to allow for public comment after the staff report. Um, so John, if you want to lead the staff report and then we also want to welcome Natalie Rogus with us tonight. She's the community development intern. Um, and then we'll turn things over to you, John. >> All right. Thank you. Just a couple of things before I start out here. We do have one of our planning commissioners, Commissioner Angela McGomery, who's who's joining us here by a team. So, anything that we do tonight for motion or I may need to bring her into the meeting to speak there. There's somebody else here on the line. We'll have five people present tonight, but any motion or action that the commission does take will need to be by by voice vote here individually. So, thank you. Well, planning commissioners, uh, I think you know what we're here for tonight. We're here to untab the request for the special use permit for indoor cannabis cultivation. A little bit of background on where we're at and uh what has transpired so far in this permit. We did have this before us as the chair noted at our last meeting on May 11th. During that meeting, we provided some background information on the request itself. The applicants were here as well to uh to provide information. What we're looking at here is a special use permit for Travis Davidson to operate an indoor cannabis cultivation facility known as Odin's Garden. This would be located within an existing 22,000 square foot building located at the northeast corner of Enterprise Avenue and 31st Street. So, this would be the proposal that we're acting upon tonight. Planning Commission did meet at and two weeks ago on May 11th. We did hear some information from the applicant clarifying some aspects of the application. We also heard from people of the public as well. Some of the things that we heard for concerns dealt with odor activities that may go beyond cultivation public notification of the meeting. Ultimately, as the chair pointed out, we we heard the public comments, closed them, and then ultimately the planning commissioners had questions and a list of questions was sent to the applicants to provide more information for the meeting tonight. So, that's where we're at tonight. The request that I'm going to be asking the commission to take tonight is that we continue to table this action after tonight. I'm going to provide an update of what the applicants have presented and we're going to have public comment to make sure that we're not missing anything. But ultimately, I'm asking for this to be tabled because the odor aspect of this, although we provide have been provided information by the applicant, we need to be able to have this independently verified. We want to make sure that we're creating a situation that is that we're certain is not going to provide an order impact. I think that's part of what our responsibility is for reviewing any special use permit is that impact that it may have on a on a neighbor or a business. And from the information we have, I just cannot provide uh a recommendation one way or the other without that expertise. So, we'll be that will be the action in which I'm requesting tonight, but I wanted to provide some background and where we're at at this point. So, at the last meeting, we did hear some public comment. We've also had public comment as well that has occurred either emailing me, council members, whatnot, and did include that within your packet here. And also, there was an addendum that I sent out late this afternoon that included, I think, three more comments on that as well as some further information from the applicant. I'll get into that in a little bit, but essentially the comments that we've heard from the public generalized are concern about the proximity to residential area, energy usage, emissions, odor, pollution, wastewater, uh negative impact uh to adjacent businesses, incompatibility with the area, areas near residential, effect on home values, uh water discharge, and vandalism. Uh those are the general things we've heard. What's not in your packet is three other comments I received. One of those comments was in support of the facility itself. This was from a resident in the Hastings Terrace Mobile Home Park who was in in support of it, thinking that it would be uh a job creator and in support because of that. And then two other comments that aren't your packet with similar types of concerns that were shared. As I mentioned, the applicant did put together a response to many of the questions here. I'm going to summarize that in just a moment. When we look at the planning and zoning aspect and what we're charged with here, uses within the zoning code are going to be termed as either permitted uses, which mean you can do them outright with any zone, or they're going to be called with special uses. Now, a special use means that it can be allowed within a zone if certain conditions are placed on it that would ameliate any sort of impact, negative impact on property owners, neighbors, so forth, the environment. So, that's the charge we're looking at tonight. Are there conditions that we can place on this application so that it can operate in such a manner to meet uh the just meet the justifications for granting a special use permit? We're not there tonight, but uh we want to go through an update of what we do know at this point. So, in this property here, it is zoned industrial. It's with the within the Hastings Industrial Park, and it is guided industrial and a comp plan within the zoning code. It does provide for indoor cultivation as a special use permit. So it is allowed within this district provided that certain conditions may be placed on it to make sure that its impacts upon neighboring areas can uh can allow for operation without those impacts. So going to go down a little bit through some of the information summarized from the applicants who are here tonight as well so we can ask them further questions on this if that's necessary. They did provide some further information on the facility. The building itself is 22,000 square ft. They're using uh only a a portion of that facility for the uh for the operation itself. There would be other activities going on and the rest of the building have about 6 to 14 employees altogether working from 8 to 5 Monday through Friday. Generally there would be some other activities that would happen outside that area. They did go through step by step and identifying the different activities that were going through in this property. One would be the mother plants clone propagation growing growing the vegetables, vegetatives, flowers, harvest, drying it, trimming and curing and packaging and then storing and outbound. There also was some more specific information on those steps provided later on that I'll get into in a bit. But those are the different activities. One of the uh discussion points we had last time was we're allowing for cultivation within the facility that's allowed within the industrial park. Do some of these other activities that are being defined here, are those truly cultivation activities or do they fall within other activities themselves? We took a look at the definition that we use for cultivation in our code which is taken directly from state statutes under cannabis. And the cannabis cultivation definition does allow for some of these things that are occurring here. It allows for the harvesting, the flowering, the d the trimming, the curing, and the packaging in there. So the activities that are being described are permitted under the definition of cultivation under our code and under state statute. So in consultation with the city attorney, we find that what they do what they're doing does meet the definition for cultivation. At the end of the day, what's leaving their facility would be packaged dried cannabis flowers, bulk biomass transfer to license manufactured with all products labeled, and they use a a tagging system uh for OCM or office office of cannabis management licensed carriers. There is no retail sale on the site. I'll stress that again. That would not be something that's allowed within the industrial district nor something that we would permit with this. What this facility would be would be a growing facility, harvest facility and then the drying and curing to the final product. That is what the activities would be in here and that's what we would limit within a special use permit for the activities on the site. When we're talking about traffic, they're expecting about three to four trucks per week with different types of inbound and outbound delivery. uh waste product removal I'll get into in a little bit here. Uh one thing to note is that everything is radio tagged. They they're subdivide things into what is cannabis, what isn't cannabis, making sure that things leave the facility in proper methods. We had some discussion last time on fencing. They did provide some information pertaining to different types of fences that uh that could be installed within here. We'll get into that a little bit when we when we talk about the uh the special use permit upon this being untabd. But they do have some suggestions here for fencing on it. The one thing to note is that the fencing itself, there would be a perimeter fence on there of 6 to 7 ft tall with barb wire that is allowed within the industrial park. What they're looking to put on the outside of that is something that would look less uh like an industrial fence, something that would uh soften those edges a little bit more on there. But for security purposes, because of their operation, they would have a barb wire fence within the property. And then for odor control plans, there's a I I just included verbatim the information that they submitted to us. And generally speaking here, and we may get into this a little bit more, all the cultivation product storage room within the building are done in such a way so they have a negative pressure to capture any air within there so it doesn't leave the facility. That's the what the design of the facility would be. What we're wanting to verify is based upon that design, would that work? Are there going to be chances for odor to escape? But that would be the plan that they would be doing. Uh building will be fully sealed. No operable windows within there. Held under negative pressure. Air can only move into the building controlled through filtered intakes. And they would be in the loading and product transfer areas. They would be enclosed. They would all be within an enclosed building as well. So there wouldn't be anything in the yard, waste product or anything else that create no create odor. With that, they would have what they term an activated carbon filtration system that would scrub the air as well on that one. And they put some methodology in there of how the maintenance would work with that. Uh there's also a supplementary a supplementary vapor phase neutralization. Not exactly quite sure what that is, but they state that it's not a substitute for this other system, but more of a a backup on that that u that would help to make sure that there would neutralize any orders that would come forward on that. So, that's generally what the order plan is. We heard a lot of that information at the last meeting. There seems to be thought that's put into that. I appreciate that from the applicants. I just want to verify that this is something that would would work. And so looking for that third-party analysis to when you look at the systems, look at the building, look at the plan, what might we expect on that one. They also put some monitoring in there too, which is something they would be doing. And they also had a section on unloading and unloading uh supplies there uh to be able to to limit the amount of time that the doors are open. That air could potentially escape and orders could potentially escape in there. So that information is in there. When we take a look at the site plan, that was another thing that the planning commission was looking for a little more detail on. What's changed on this one? The building itself, same location. The fence itself at one time was was located more down towards the road. This one is not as far down. It's about 26 ft off, so it's less of a fenced area. And then the parking lot here, I don't know if that's going to be expanded or not at this point, but this this site plan's not showing that. But the one thing I think that's that has changed in this one is the fenced area for this loading area has decreased in there, which is a good thing. And then the entrance to 31st Street shown here would be closed. They would just have the singular entrance going on on the site here. Another bits of information the planning commission requested was some previous experience among those in the cannabis cultivation facility. So I did provide uh information for Mr. Henderson and and Travis Davis. Travis uh is the uh is the applicant. Uh he would serve as the director of cultivation and managing manager. He's a senior cannabis cultivation executive with four years experience uh in Colorado and Michigan. And then Mr. Henderson was director of cultivation. He spoke at the last meeting at at a facility in Fortsmith, Arkansas, and has overseen operations at production scale for over six years. He also requested information on that facility in Arkansas, which has been identified as River Valley relief. Uh they they state this is a 12,000 square foot facility. So the building is about half the size, albeit I think the cannabis production within this building is going to be pretty comparable in that. uh they stated that uh the businesses in the surrounding industrial corridor have not been negatively impacted by documented odor complaints. However, they did note at the last meeting that when they first operated, some of the interior tenants did have some uh some odor issues within there. Uh as far as pesticide runoff, uh they the pesticide runoff they state is not possible because they're they're limiting it to natural insects, predators. They're not using chemicals to treat the plants, but really using insects uh to do that facility use on that one. They're going to be doubling the amount of use of the existing building itself. When I I spoke with the building official to get an idea of what that means for other buildings in the park. It's going to be towards the higher use, but certainly not the highest use of energy that we have within the industrial park. We've we've uh looked at the industrial park for high energy uses for manufacturing operations. So, it is consistent with uh with our expectations within the park itself. Our city attorney did provide some comment on a couple of items within the report as well. I I already went through some of the definitions of cultivation in there. There's also a a question brought up by an attorney representing one of uh one of the neighboring property owners related to conditional use permits uh which he had reviewed and uh does not concur with his uh conclusions on on special use conditional use permits itself. Also included within your packet is the odor ordinance itself. So Hastings does have an odor ordinance. The odor ordinance itself was was taken from uh city of South St. Paul who as we all know has a history of of odors going in there and they took uh some time a few years ago to create an ordinance that could be used to uh regulate odors. Odor is a difficult thing. Some things these can be subject subjective. They created an ordinance here that uses uh data and something called a nasal ranger which would go out there and provide a a measurement of odors within there. And so we have would have a documented way to to uh regulate nuisances that might come up. We c certainly don't want to be at that point and we want to be able to be at a point if we do approve this that we have a good amount of knowledge that this wouldn't occur. But if it does occur, we do have that odor ordinance that's within our regulations that we can fall back on. Under special use permits, there's different things that we do review in this one in particular to c cult cannabis cultivation facilities. uh put in there some of the performance standards that we have and again looking for that thirdparty verification and order control. Uh we can regulate the proposed hours. The employment appears reasonable on this. The windows are limited so the lighting any other lighting on there. We do have a phototric ordinance that has a foot candle illumination and where lighting is set. So any exterior flood lighting or whatnot that will be installed would be subject to that. and it meets the the minimum distance requirements from excuse me that cannabis facilities have from other types of uses in there. There is a a security plan that is reviewed by our police department. A preliminary security plan has been submitted and has been reviewed by our police department as well. We also look at various things about site operation, how to get in and out the parking refu area screening and buffering on that as well. And I think on most of these things, uh, we could add conditions to to make this, uh, something that would work within it. As far as other information that was submitted since the report went out, I did make some mention of some of the comments that were received. Also, the applicant did provide a little more information on the drying, curing, and and product storage. Uh, stating that on the drying aspect of it, it's controlled in a controlled environmental space. uh typically takes about 2 weeks and the dry room is central filtered in the exhaust system and held at negative pressure. They did state that the drying aspect those two weeks is the highest odor stage of the process and the room carries the heaviest engineered odor mitigation. So we'll pay close attention to that portion of it. But according to the applicants that would be one of the most odorous aspects of it. There's a bucking and waist separation where the flowers removed from the stems on that wood and waste material is separated. A curing where the the flowers cure in line totes for approximately 10 days and uh are kept in a room to do that trimming and processing for the manufacturing. There's some laboratory testing and packaging and final storage. And so there is an on-site vault, hardened alarm, camera covered exterior sto secure storage to ensure that there is uh therea safety and security for the cannabis product within there. Also there was some questions related to office of cannabis management waste rules compliance. So what what are their obligations to do there? So they did include some of the information that is required under state law about cannabis waste. The waste holding area is within the building envelope itself. There'll be nothing on the outside. So even even if there's waste product on there, everything's within the building itself. Uh it's camera controlled under negative pressure so that the odor would not be able to escape from the facility itself and goes through different materials that would be required for defined as waste and things that aren't defined as waste. So we do have some information pertaining to that in there. So ultimately uh planning commissioners I am recommending that we table this application. What I'm asking is to table this and direct the applicant to provide third-party verification from either a professional engineer or qualified industrial hygienist that the facility would provide appropriate odor control systems so as not to produce any noxious or dangerous gases or odors or create dangers to any person or entity in or near the cannabis manufacturing facility. Essentially, what I'm looking for is verification from a third party that the that what they would be instituting in this property would work from an odor control standpoint. Uh that's what I'm asking for in a nutshell. So, that is the action that I have as a recommendation before you tonight. Uh commissioners, you're free to take any any public comment uh at this time. I do want to note that we do have the applicants and some representatives from the applicants here tonight as well in person and on teams. if you have any questions for them. Thank you. >> Thank you, John. I have one quick question before we move on to public comment. When we discuss the special use permit tonight, do we need to officially untable what we tabled or can we just do we have to make a motion to do anything with that? >> Probably be a good idea. Let's untab that for discussion. >> Okay. >> And then continue from there. Thank you. >> Okay. We'll do the public comment first. Um, so thank you for for the report and thank you everyone for being here tonight. Um, we do welcome you to come up and make any comments that you would choose to. Please keep them brief considering the number of people in the room tonight. Um, when you uh when you come up to the microphone, please state your name, your address, and then provide your comment. Um, and again, we appreciate that you're here. Please keep it brief and then we'll follow up with our discussion. So, thank you. Go ahead. You can just come on up. Form a line. >> Hi, my name is Mike Wyel. I live at 2235 Glacier Way. Um, just a couple things that I thought of. John covered just about everything. I had a question on. I was wondering about the exhaust out of the building. That's going to be through some kind of a charcoal filter, some other method. But I was wondering what the air flow was and if there was going to be a stack and if there was a noise ordinance around that or kind of what the decibel level might be out of that. And then the other thing I was thinking of is just a general thing about utilities that are used, water, electric, wastewater, if that's going to affect any of the rateayers in the city. Um, I know that usually commercial gets a better rate on electric. I don't know what the water rates and the sewer rates are, but if it's not if it's not a uh a good deal for Hastings residents, that's that's kind of a no no for me. So, thank you. Uh, my name is Charles Shelene. and I live on 2381 Glacier Way. U first I was a little confused on your overview. You did say I thought northeast corner and this to me looks like it's the southeast corner. >> Northeast corner. >> It is >> first enterprise. Correct. >> Can you put that graphic up again? That satellite shot. >> Sure. >> Hold on. >> I just want to make sure I'm looking at the right >> at the right place. Of course. Excuse me. There. I'll put this thing. back to >> there we go. Is it the highlighted yellow? It is. Is that it? >> It is. >> Okay. So, that's currently a big brick multi-use facility. >> Okay. Correct. Thank you for that. >> Um, so your last message about looking for verification, asking them to find somebody to give a third party verification. Wouldn't it make more sense for you guys to ask for that verification rather than the people who obviously are biased in favor of this project? I mean that that seems like a conflict of interest big time to me. Okay. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Mark Sandstead. Um I also live on Glacier Way or downwind third of a mile. So interested in the facility. Appreciate John's comment about having further plan. I think an engineer stamped plan uh makes perfect sense. We have some verification of that. Um going forward just want to make sure that there'll be independent uh measuring of odor in the future. Independent party will do that say perhaps quarterly. And we mentioned John the uh uh odor nuisance variance or ordinance. I just want to make sure that there's a specific uh measurement in place that it's not vague in terms of what that measurement is. So the third party could verify that. And then finally um going forward, will the odor compliance to those standards have an impact on um permit renewals for this facility in the future? I don't know if it's an annual basis or how often the city renews uh the use but hoping those things would be in place as well. Thank you. My name is Beth Salvig and I live on 32 or 2232 Glacier Way. I want to thank John for your due diligence. You answered a lot of questions that I have, but I did have something prepared, so I don't know if I'm going to edit it. I'll just go ahead and answer or ask my questions as I have them listed, but your thoroughess, I really respect that and looking at the whole picture. Um my first question is really why the cannabis facility facility or cannabis farm is even being considered in the city limits of Hastings. Um, I looked on the website and I saw on their community vision for the planning committee is ensuring thoughtful consideration of long-term community changes while balancing re resident input and regional policies. This is resident input. We canvased quite a bit of our neighborhood, made some contact with people that lived on Glacier or Glacier, not Glacier Way, but Spiral Boulevard, too. Um, just through some groups that we were in. We just ended up meeting some other people. One guy's his wife is the president of the HOA there, and another friend is on the board. And you know, I know that it was with 350 feet that by law they had to notify, but we got no notification. And it's kind of kittywampus from where where we live. And the I don't know is it 300 or 75 ft or 400 ft from somebody who used to be work for the sheriff's department. He's the first home down there. He had lots of concerns and lots to share about this. Um, also my concern and questions about the facility are, uh, cannabis cultivation produces odors. You're trying to address that, John. I appreciate that. Um, my concern, will we be having the odors that the facility on 316 has where residents can smell it, the smell of a skunk up to four miles. One of the girls that lives in our HOA, she knows people that live right out there and they're battling that. I know there's different regulations because of the res, you know, the the Indians owning that. So, that's a little bit different concerns. We have more regulations that they're you're obviously trying to input. Um, will the cannabis farm be viewed as a public nuisance um with the six-foot fence and bar barb wire and potential smell during the drying process? Um, and if it's viewed as a public nuisance, will that bring our property values down? Uh, what about Well, I was concerned about the nitrates, but you addressed that, too, that they're not using nitrates, they're using insects, because I didn't want with the PASS that we already have and the nitrates we already have that we're dealing with in our water system, you know, that that is not wise. It's irresponsible to add to that problem. So, I'm concerned about them being a good neighbor and for the common good. Is this our best choice as a community? Thank you for your time. My name is John Sebasti. I live at 2247 Glacier Way now. Historic Hastings beautiful and we do have a lot of historic values a person that live in this community. But what is that going to do to this town in public when they say, "Oh, yeah, you guys got that pot thing going on, don't you?" Well, ain't that nice? And that's going to go all over the state of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, whatever. Then you say, "I'm from Hastings." And they're going to say, "Oh, yeah, the pot place." Yeah, that's really good. What's going to happen to the value of my home when people come and they smell something or they find out you're right next to a place that produces sells pot or marijuana? What the heck? you know, so I don't think it's good for our community, for this town, city to go ahead and permit this to happen. When you look around, you look out, there's plenty of open space, beautiful places that you could put this thing and it wouldn't affect hardly nobody. But you want to go ahead and put this in that place. And I was just wondering if you allowed that to happen, can I open up a gentleman's club right next to it? You know, I can get high and entertain at the same time. So, I'm totally against it. I'm sure these people are, too. You know, it's it's it's a bad thing. It's a bad place and it's not good for our community. Thank you. Well, hello everyone. I'm Dana Picachic and I am at 1407 Jefferson Street, but I'm actually here cuz I am the owner of Solid Staging, which is Kitty Corner from the proposed site. Me and John had a lovely meeting last week. So, thank you for our talk. It was very valuable. But I just wanted to point out a couple of things. I've been doing some research. I have two friends personally on planning committee. So, I just want to share their zoning for their cities. Granite. It's a different city, not Hastings, but the city of Columbus has in their ordinance that any cannabis related to whatever cultivating sales, anything has to be 5 miles away from any schools, churches, or children. So, I just want to point out CrossFit actually has a kids playroom in it. And CrossFit's like kitty corner from this. So, just be mindful that there are children around and it's a great community with that. And the second thing I want to bring to your attention. Um, there is the grow house down in Cannon Falls that is basically the same thing as the indoor grow cultivation, but where theirs is strategically placed is in the industrial park, but it's right next to the turkey manufacturing. So like the turkeys itself produces a huge odor. So the city it was that's a perfect spot for something like this because it already smells with the odors of the turkey and stuff. So I that's all I want. I wanted to bring that to your attention and thank you again John for a great chat last week. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wanted to come up and make a comment? >> Hi, my name is Mike Morhauser. I happily owner of Anki and Morhaler. That's right. next to the potential um cannabis cultivation facility. I would be sitting right there looking out that window within 10 ft from that building or actually that's I don't know if it's 10 ft but it seems closed. Um so I have serious concerns and here are a couple of my questions. I personally don't know who is ownership in the company that's going to be operating the grow facility. And so I don't know if that is the only name I saw was Travis and then he mentioned another name. So I don't I'm not sure who that is. I'd just be kind of curious of who my potential neighbor could be. Um, I feel that it'd be nice if we could I know you're going to close public uh comments, but when we find out more and more information as you guys ask your questions and we can hear what they have to say. We haven't heard anything from them. And so I I kind of think that um I I wish that the public comments could maybe be be afterwards um to just give us a chance to follow up on anything they may or may not say. Uh obviously I'm very nervous about the order being so close. I happen to live out on 316 and drive by that, smell it at my house, and the thought of working next to it and sleeping next to it 24 hours of my life is depressing. And I don't know how anyone could do that. I'm I'm nervous about how far your cultivation goes, whether it's just flour going out, whether you're doing vapes, all the other stuff that goes along with that or not. Um, don't know. curious the the sight of a 7 foot fence bob wire on the top looking at me sometimes 18 hours a day when I'm working taxis and I know to myself well I'm sure the pot's fine in there right I mean safe can grow another one but here I am sitting next to it bob wire fence Should we have one around our facility? You obviously anticipate them coming onto our land. So, you put a fence there. So, I'm just wondering, do we need that for our protection? And what does that mean to our customers that come in for their protection? the H um VAC systems are loud, so I worry about that noise. >> So, those are my questions, concerns. Thank you very much for sharing. >> Sir, can you say your name and address again? We didn't quite catch it. >> Um, my name is Mike Mhauser, 18205 218th Street. Thank you. >> Thank you. Right. Is there anyone else who wanted to come up and make comment? >> Works answered again. 2403 Glacier Way. Couple things I forgot to ask. Will there be a transpar trans transparent complaint um protocol in terms of how things will be handled uh in the future? And will the city maintain inspection rights in the future if there are some issues where the city could go on site and look at some of the odor mitigation things if that's part of the process. >> Can you say that again? What rights I missed that part. >> Uh city inspection rights can the city >> missed that one. Thank you. >> Yes. Can the city go on the property if you know there say we have some complaint protocols and then we're wondering if it's meeting the standards. Does the city have the ability to even step in and take a look or Yeah. Thank you. >> All right. Anyone else want to make comment? I should have talked longer, but all these people here don't want that in our neighborhood. All these people and there's other people that couldn't make it. I was late and I'm glad I made it so I can speak. But these people have big concerns of their community. We don't want it. That's all there's to it. Every one of these people are sitting out here, the ones that are scared to talk. I wish you would stand up. There's a lady right there. But anyway, >> say hi. >> Hi. We we're inviting everyone to come up and speak individually for public comment. Um and and you're more than welcome to um but to maintain order, please come up to the podium if you'd like to speak. And we do welcome everyone to do that if you choose to. Thank you. >> Thank you. But anyway, we don't want it. Everybody here doesn't want it. And I'm sure there's people that don't live in our community out there. If they knew about this, they wouldn't want it either. Pot was it's that's a bad thing. It's not heroin. It's this there. It's a pleasure to smoke it. Whatever. I might have smoked it once, but that was a different situation. I was in a car drunk and the other guys were drinking and they're smoking pot that look like Chich and Chong. >> We sir see out the window. So I guess I did. >> We appreciate the story but please stay to the topic. Thank you. But but we don't want it. And if we could keep from getting it in our neighborhood and be good citizens that we are, it would help us out. And I I'm sorry I was late. I wish I could say more, but you people, if you got something, please come up and say something. You know, don't sit on your hands and think about this and then go home and say, "Oh, I wish I would have done that." Oh, you know, my friend Mary, we go way back to when I was down at the VFW and we had a reunion. I'm sure that that uh you people will go home and think about that. And when you're thinking about that, think about us. think about Hastings, Minnesota because we're proud to be from Hastings, Minnesota. Thank you. >> I've got something to say. I live at 23 uh 63 Glacier Way. Um I used to live Sorry, ma'am. What is your name? >> 316. >> What And what is your name? >> The reason I'm saying that, >> ma'am, is Can you also state your name, please? Oh, Susan Zinshaw. Um, we lived there for 40 years and our neighbor raised corn and when he didn't have enough silage to go out on the thing, he got human excrement that he put on the field. Now, that was supposedly okay. It was not pleasant. It was smelled for weeks on end on the and it always blew across on everything. So, I don't want to live in that sort of thing again. Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Adam Bert. I live off of 160th Street, uh, which is about 2 miles east. More importantly, I'm one of the 160 gym members at that place. So you can see it at the CrossFit gym there, which is I don't know few hundred feet from this this facility. And I've got concerns on the odor as as we all do. Um our run route and we work out uh outside quite a bit almost daily in the summer is in front of this building and there's a trail system that you know is a couple miles to uh 61 there and I don't want to smell that. Um I bring my kids there once in a while. they run with me. Uh, I just don't want to expose them to that. And the best filtration systems in the world, uh, commonly in use, I'm sure, at other grow facilities. Every amount of online research that I've done suggests that it's still going to smell. You just can't eliminate that smell. It smells like a a cattle feed yard from what I've read. So, I don't want to be working out outside and and smelling that. Thanks, All right. Anyone else want to make a public comment? Otherwise, we'll move forward with the discussion. Oh, >> can I double it? >> Please come up to the front and state your name and address. And I know you were here the last time, but please >> I just wanted to confirm that I could make a second public comment. So, um, Michael, um, I live at 5318 Cove in Egan, but I own 2950 Lightburn Court. Um, I just wanted to thank you. I think last time when I met you all, I was very clear that I thought that public notice um wasn't given. And I think very clearly um the city report has cleaned up a little bit. It's a little tighter than it was and includes more information. Um I'm still kind of disappointed though. Um I'd like to point out that in the assessment on the city packet for tonight, it states quality one or custom one right here. >> Quality one to the left. >> Quality one. Yeah, quality one. Um, it seems to be further away than the houses here still. And it seems to be further away than my building, which still isn't listed under the use assessment. And I I maybe I'm just being, you know, a little pandemic, but I feel still not listened to because I'm not listed as part of that assessment. And just like Adam said, we have hundreds of members that run on this trail. Outside of this map, you can follow this pathway down and it meets up, goes down the hill. our hill run or you can take it back up to vets park and there's hundreds of people that take their dogs out on that field. So when I look at that assessment I say well to the south there's vacant land. I don't see vacant land. I see a park. And when I look to the the lower left here I see houses. Look to the right I see houses. I look to the northwest I see houses. Right? Like when you're doing the assessment we're looking around. But the other thing that I was reading up on because I don't think tonight's going to be the end of it because even if it gets tabled and you guys do a good third party assessment because Canon Falls is great. I'm telling you right now, Zachar putting up four buildings down there to grow weed. Nobody cares cuz it's by a turkey farm. Hastings, you're going to be surrounded by people that are upset because my next step is to go into this neighborhood and see if anybody there has had an issue with drug addiction or problems. And if they get a whiff of your facility and they're a vulnerable adult, what's that going to my casings look like? our kids in a room considered a vulnerable population by the state. They get a whiff. How is that going to make case look? Because I've already started contacting the next level because talking with my city council members, they're concerned about Office of Cannabis Management and they're concerned about state law and that's my next fight also. So, if this goes through and you pass this and I think I've given you some reasonable recommendations through my council, this is not going away and I think this is a bad decision. and I've listed why. Thank you. Thanks everyone for coming. My name is Greg Laauo. I own LA's Auto and Truck Repair right right adjacent to the building. Um uh again the whole the the odor uh my doors are open. I don't think any amount of odor is acceptable. uh they can tell you what they're going to what what what they want to tell you, but once they're in there, it's uh it's too late. Um I'm completely against against the whole operation there. Thank you. >> Hi there. Thank you. Uh my name is Brian Radkkey. I live at 1409 Jefferson Street, but I'm partners with Mike right next door. So, my office window actually looks out at that building as well. I guess I've got one major concern that I I just don't know how it's addressed down the road with regard to the odor. So, if they have non-compliance with the odor nuisance, what are the ramifications? Are they just financial penalties? Are they forced to shut down? what happens if they continuously, you know, fail these tests. Um, the second thing is, of course, you know, again, 10 ft outside of our window looking at a a fence to keep people out of their building, which keeps them closer to our building. So, those are two of my comments. Thank you. Anyone Anyone else that would like to make a comment? My foot's just asleep, that's all. Okay. My name is Al Klein. I live at 2711 Rushmore Road. That's the other property way up there, top right. Anyway, I don't know how I feel about this whole issue yet, but I do have two concerns. The first one is um John Hatton mentioned the word I was expecting to hear it called extraction. If these guys were going to have the possibility of also doing extraction for a THC concentrate, which I guess uh in the process of doing that, they can create an explosive environment in the building, but I would presume they're probably not going for that. The other question I just had was raised by the other fellow, which is if this business does prove to be a problem and you decide not to reissue their license, how do we make sure they clean up what they leave behind if there's not a bond or something like that required before they start the business? >> It's all I got. Good evening. My name is Nancy Bert. I live at 2737 Rushmore Road. And um I think we need to I think you're much more concerned about the business than the homeowners that live in that area. And I'm very resentful of that. I think the best filtration system is not going to do the job. And you all can say we're going to do the best we can. But I think we all know that that's there are flaws in that system when they open the doors and they unload and reload and there's going to be some problems and then the then the cat is out of the garage and I think then then it's going to be much harder to deal with it and um mitigate the the odor and I think you need to look at this much seriously right now before it even gets um the building gets bought and sold or whatever is going on. So thank you very much. All right. Anyone else to make a public comment >> bar 2361 Glacier Way. I live in the area. But the one thing I've only heard it mentioned once is just one block beyond is Veterans Park. Have you ever been to Veterans Park in the summer? There are thousands upon thousands of kids there playing soccer, baseball, softball. Think about them. And if there's this pollution, what they think of what they and their parents will think of Hastings. It's something to think about. Not only the residents and the businesses, but Veterans Park is very, very close. And that's not just Hastings people. That's people from all the surrounding areas who have a negative opinion of Hastings. So, just think about that. >> Hello, my name is Nelson and I live at 2213 Glacier Way and I would just like to make a comment that um my husband is a disabled veteran and he has a lung and heart issues and it's difficult for him to be outside if there's any kind of air pollution. And I also ride bike along that building and the bike path and it goes around in the surrounding neighborhood. And I would be concerned about any of the air pollution and the fumes um when I'm out trying to ride bike and be out um for healthy reasons. And I'm just very concerned about that location. I think there is many other locations that could be looked at. Um there's a lot of farming communities out here and I actually have been to um a cultivation site in Wisconsin and you can smell that skunk smell for a long ways away and it is not a pleasant smell and I just would like to say that I really wish they could look at a alternative site for this. Thank you. Okay. Well, seeing that there's no one else making their way up for comment. >> Madam Chair, >> yes, >> we got one we got two attendees online, too. So, if I can ask uh >> any of the attendees that are on the teams meeting online, if they would like to speak uh to please raise their hand, use the raise hand tool in teams and we can invite you in to speak if you choose to do so. And I'm not seeing any response there. So, I'll leave it to your discretion. >> Okay. Then um we'll move on to the discussion portion. We do need someone to make a motion to reopen the discussion on the special use permit. So do we have a motion to reopen the discussion? >> I'll move to reopen the discussion on the Travis Davis special use permit 20616. >> Is there a second? I can second. Okay. So, we have a motion and a second to reopen the discussion on special on the special use permit. Um, because we have to do a roll call or a voice vote. Just ask everyone in favor yay or nay. Opening the discussion. >> And I think we excuse me. >> Oh, just a point of clarification. We have to go individually on on that one. So, I I I can go through the role on >> Oh, perfect. Okay. Can you >> Perfect. Commissioner De Palma >> I. >> Chair Peters. >> I Commissioner McGrath. >> Hi. >> And we have Commissioner Mose. >> Hi. >> And uh Commissioner McGomery. And I will make sure her microphone's on. >> All right. >> Commissioner McGomery. I I got it. Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Um >> Thank you. >> Before we get started with the discussion, I just want to verify a couple of things. one um with if and when this moves forward to the city council, there's always an option for public comment at city council meetings. Correct. >> Right. There there is a a chance for that too. And and commissioners, madam chair, if you there was a lot of notes that we took down from from comments out here too. And if you'd like me to to try to answer some of those at this point or if you have other questions, whatever you would like would be comfortable, I could do. >> I I would like to verify a couple of things, but then if you do have answers to some of the, you know, very objective questions that would be helpful. Um I just want to verify though that when we do act on this special use permit, whether it's tonight or a different night, um it will move forward to the city council either with or without our approval. So the city council will also act on it. Is that correct? >> Yes. The the purpose of the planning commission is to make a recommendation to the city council regarding this application. What I'm recommending as action tonight is that this be put back on the table that a decision not be made by the commission tonight, but that the information requested is provided that that is uh considered and then a recommendation made at a later date. That would just be a recommendation from this commission, that recommendation would go to the city council. The city council would ultimately provide a final decision. >> Yes. Um and then second, just cuz this this came up a lot in the comments, with a special use permit, once it's approved, it's in place until there's a change of use, right? It's not something that's routinely revisited. >> Correct. A special use permit does not have a time frame established on it. as long as the conditions established within the permit are adhered to, then it could continue indefinitely. >> Okay. And then just to also go back to what the lawyer um the city attorney had in the uh materials for tonight, my understanding based on that is that if the conditions for the special use permit are are met um that we that we set out or the city sets out or that set out in the ordinances um then we are obligated to approve. Is that correct? >> With any special use permit, we are look the ordinance establishes cannabis cultivation as needing a special use permit within this district. What that means is that we find that a cannabis cultivation facility could be allowed within the industrial park zoning district which this is in. if we establish conditions or if conditions can be established that we can ensure that uh impacts from this facility will not be negative to the surrounding area. So that really we're obligated to approve a special use permit if conditions are established in which those assurances can be made. If a if a situation comes up where we cannot that that's a different question. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. Um, and then yes, I think before we engage in discussion, it would be great if you could answer some of the questions that came up in the public comment. I appreciate you tracking that. >> Sure. I I'll do my best here. I took down some notes uh from people were talking here. We had some questions related to the uh the sound level within the facility itself. Applicant might be able to address that more in detail, but we do have regulations in our nuisance ordinance that relate to certain decibel levels at property line. So we want to be able to assure from him that those will not be not be uh be be ex exceeded within the application itself but we certainly have that mechanism in place. Uh looking at uh order control we certainly want to make sure that we have some independent indiv individual looking at that one. I I hear the concerns that were brought about well if the applicant is is hiring the person is he truly independent? It's a fair fair point. We'll have to work on how that's how that would work because we want to and truly make that that person is independent. Uh back in on permit renewals, there wouldn't be a permit renewal in this one. Why in the city limits? Our zoning code has an allowance for cannabis cultivation within in the city limits itself. And and I believe that we're we're obligated to provide for cannabis uh facilities within the city limits. whether we we like it or not. I think it's part of the state statute obligations that we we have within there. Uh looking at the orders, we want to make sure that the the orders are going to be are not going to be a problem on that one. When we look at the facility on 316, I I'm not sure what what's going on as far as regulations there. I believe that that is on tribal land. I'm not sure what the regulations are. I do know of a couple of existing facilities. One in Cottage Grove that that has gone through some odor issues. some of it's been mitigated. Uh I've heard various reports of what how effective that has been. So certainly watching that one. Uh other quash they came up with being a a public nuisance. There's certain obligations we have there if this is going to be a nuisance or not, but we need to get information back uh from the order to make that determination itself. There are some questions related to why here. Well, we we'll move it to a different location. Certainly understand that point from our standpoint. It's not within our purview. We've established an ordinance. We've established regulations with the within the ordinance. If an entity wants to come forward and bring in a facility that complies with our ordinance, we're obligated to do it. Even though if we believe it it may be better suited or we may want something else, that that's not part of the decision that the that the planning commission has before them. U proximity to to children itself. There's obligations that we have under our our cannabis ordinance that uh there's certain setback requirements on there with this one here. I think if there's a thousand foot setback is the only thing that comes forward in a cannabis cultivation facility. We do have certain setbacks from children's facilities for retail for example but not for manufacturing. Uh far as barbwire fence and and and other things within the industrial park, this is an industrial park. Uh we're going to have businesses in there that manufacture. We're going to have businesses in there with outside storage with uh barbwire fences. We we limit those areas intentionally to an industrial park area so that those are not in other areas of town. That doesn't preclude anyone in those areas for not following the rules. But there is an understanding that an industrial park is going to have activities that are going to be, you know, more manufacturing industrial in nature within it. Uh if I've got anything oh one question on extraction of concentrate here that came up as well. Their their manufacturing would would be we would prohibit that extraction activity from occurring that goes beyond the definitions that we have for mana for cultivation. That's more of a manufacturing. It's a it's a specific definition within the state statutes in there. And I think that's most of what I I had here. >> Uh I also had on my notes I heard um not necessarily questions but comments about um sales and there's no sale or consumption at allowed at this facility. just want there's no retail sale allowed in this facility and we would one thing I will point out too is if we get to a point of recommending approval of the special use permit there will be a number of conditions of operation that would be established on it and if they're in if they're in violation of those certainly the odor in particular a question did come up about okay if they have odor complaints and they continue to have odor complaints well what happens at that point at that point If the odor complaints continue and we have that within the special use permit, we could revoke the special use permit and validate it. They couldn't operate anymore. So that that piece of paper entitles them to operate under certain conditions. If those conditions are not adhered to, then they're not they don't have that ability to operate. So we will carefully put that together if we get to the point of establishing uh an approval recommendation on here. All right, then. Um, commissioners questions. Commissioner Mo. >> Um, I heard the the, uh, about who would be monitoring it and, um, whether it would be a third party, would that be city staff? Um, do we have the, um, means or the staff that have the capability of monitoring odor issues? >> Good question. With odor issues, it's very specialized. There is in our ordinance there it has reference to this this nasal ranger device which provides a uh a measurable way a measurable way a way that you can measure odor. It comes down to uh has a it has a termin seven seven odor units above or below uh the different ambient I'm not explaining this correctly. we have that more in within the code itself. The question you're asking is do we have that technology to do that? We don't we we would need to have that device. I talked to South St. Paul. They do have that device. They do have someone trained to use that device. So, we would have to find a way to have that provided. That might be something that we establish within a permit by the applicant that if there's complaints that the applicant would would need to provide someone trained and to uh that could provide those measurements independently. So there's a couple of different ways that we can do that, but yes, we would we have a way. We don't have the technology or the equipment to measure that at this point. >> Commissioner McGrath, >> uh just a couple actually. One's a comment and then one's a question for John. Um appreciate the applicants coming back with a lot of additional information. Thank you. That was a short turnaround, so thank you for doing that. Um, John, appreciate the fact that you reached out to the Arkansas facility and sought more information. I think that was really valuable and I think due diligence is very important. Um, we have heard both at the last meeting and at this meeting a lot of people receive did not receive the public notice and we I think made a commitment at our last meeting to talk about that and look into why that maybe did or did not happen. Um, and I'm just wondering I see certainly there is uh greater awareness and engagement here tonight. Thank you all for coming. Did we find an answer as to why many folks feel as though they weren't notified or or or didn't know about the situation? I think there's a a greater turnout which shows me that it feel people feel more informed and more empowered to to participate in conversation. >> Under our ordinance, we're obligated to to notify property owners within 350 ft of a site. 350 ft from this uh this site is not very far. I think on the list there may have been it was less than 15 people probably 10 to 15 entities that were notified. So that included the people up and down Lightboard Court people the vacant property owner to the south the owner of uh the Hastings Terrace mobile home park. It did not include any of the residential areas to the east over in Glendale Heights. any of the people that spoke tonight that was outside of that distance area question. >> We're going to get to her first. >> Oh, a followup. All right. >> Commissioner McGrath, go ahead with the followup. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, thank you for that, John. I think um you know as we think about this in the future that's it's important to think about I mean 350 is such an arbitrary number and I'd like us to think better about how to better inform and engage the residents that live in that could be impacted by something like this. >> Commissioner Dealma. >> Yes. I think this would be for John. Um a couple questions please John. Um the first is um there was a note about um a security plan and that it had been uh offered to our police chief. I believe I wasn't quite sure if that security plan had been approved by the police department or where does that stand? >> Sure, Commissioner. The security plan has been reviewed by the police department. He's given preliminary approval to it subject to construction the facilities and verification. So he believes that what is included within the security plan is what he needs is workable but will reserve final approval until things are constructed. >> I see. So kind of reserving approval at this point. >> Correct. >> Okay. And then the second question um I am not a lawyer so this is a non-awyer question. um that we have um a letter here from uh Lark and Hoffman representing a business and a person I assume. Um and then also um information from our city attorney. And I forgive me if this is a silly question, but when you have a lawyer um stating issues and then the city lawyer having say opposing issues, um how how does that play out eventually? >> Well, good question, Commissioner. We trust within our city attorney to provide a sound legal advice. Obviously, attorneys may disagree on what is sound legal advice. We would move forward with the recommendations our city attorney has. If uh another attorney takes issue with that, there's other methods that that could be challenged, but uh we trust our city attorney to provide us adequate counsel on those types of issues. >> Did Commissioner Montre have any questions? >> Well, let's see. Hopefully hopefully if she does, I can turn her up. Yeah. Yeah. Commissioner McGomery, I'm I'm seeking if if you have any anything to to add and uh if if you do, if you could say I'm just trying to do a mic check here if if that's the case. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, I think I I can. If you can speak up, please. >> Yeah. So, I guess my question is for you. So if we move to table this tonight, can we um explicitly structure the motion um and direct like the third party professional um you know just specifically can we put some criteria around what they must evaluate with the shared property lines? um verifying the dry room, air exchange, um you know, all of those calculations and then also confirm that public works is satisfied like with the internal drainage being isolated from external storm sewer. >> Okay. Yeah. Commissioners, uh within the recommendation I have right now, and certainly subject to change, I I'm looking particularly at at odors that has been the the issue that has come up here. If this is not expand the third party review is not extending beyond further should be be looked at uh that can be considered but it's not within my recommendation at this time. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And I have a a couple of questions and then we'll we'll get to yours. Um and it it is about the qualified third party um to review the the odor piece. Is that something that the city would be able to say, "Yeah, we agree that's a qualified third party and then is that third party review of the odor mitigation, would that be at the expense of the applicant or the expense of the city?" >> Sure, I'll answer that. With the selection of the third party, we would need to approve that. We want to make sure that that's truly independent. Uh the difficulty that comes in here is we are going to be asking the applicant to pay for that. So we want to make sure that that entity is truly in independent when they're going through this and it's not uh because of who is paying for the bill. >> And then I have one more question and this is getting to the um the wastewater. What do we I mean obviously there will be some waste water coming out of the facility. What chemicals and this might be a question for the applicant. Um what chemicals could we anticipate might be released in that wastewater? Um and then the question follow-up question for you John, how is wastewater in the city regulated? And um if there were to be chemicals that come out in the in the wastewater, can we set conditions on that to comply with any wastewater regulations that the city might have? So I guess the first question might be for the applicants, what can we anticipate in terms of chemicals? And then the second part, um John, if you could address what are the wastewater regulations and what kinds of conditions can we place on that? >> Sure. So >> if the applicants, you're invited to come up to answer if if you'd like. if you can please state your name again. >> Yes, my name >> we met you last time. >> Yes, my name is Lonnie Henderson. Um so any type of uh runoff water that would be leaving the facility um is uh consistent with most uh farming uh agricultural use. Um the products that we uh produce are very regul rigorously tested against pesticides or heavy metals or um general contaminants. Um we have a uh uh filed uh with the state um and they have uh ruled that there's no uh special permit used for our uh required for our use. Um they've dealt with uh you know hundreds of these already and have already looked into this. um we would still have to uh register locally. Um but the MCEES has uh deemed that we don't need a special use um because of the type of runoff that uh would leave the facility. >> So are there when you say like there would be no pesticides and no heavy metals then as part of that runoff? >> Correct. >> Okay. Uh now if there were what are the city regulations around wastewater and how can that be managed? >> Sure. Regulations the regulations in place I think are mostly beyond the city. There's a couple of entities that would be involved. One would be Metropolitan Council. They're the they're the entity that manages and owns the the treatment plant in town. So they have certain parameters for having connection to their system and the type of outfall that goes in there. The example that I think we all remember here is the crearyy. There was an issue there with the crearyy with uh chemicals that came in there that disrupted the the ability to treat water and and they shut them off the system because of that. Uh so that's one part. The other part is uh from an environmental standpoint that's really going to come more from state agencies probably from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Health. there's certain uh uh attributes of what is going to be discharged that are limited on to the number and to the environment. I think under the office of cannabis management their regulations pertaining to cultivation facilities they make mention of those rules. So there's other state agencies that would regulate what sort of chemicals and limit the the the amount of chemicals that may be dangerous that would be emitted from the facility. >> Okay. So, we could then add a condition that says they must comply with all um wastewater regulations from Met Council or other relevant state agencies. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Commissioner Mo. >> Um yeah, I I did I had somebody else made a comment about who who does have ownership of your company and how does that work? Are you one of the owners or >> uh so the cultivation license is held by Travis Davidson. Um there is another entity um that would own the the building um that it would happen in and lease to uh Travis Davidson. Uh of that there is currently myself uh and my another uh partner Michael Beal um and he's out of California. >> Thank you. Commissioners, any other questions or discussion? Does Commissioner Montgomery have any additional questions? >> No further question. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, you know, I John, I think it I think it's a great idea to bring in the third party odor mitigation. I think it's really unfortunate in our community that there's such a negative example um with the operation on 316 in terms of odor. Um I believe that's also it's indoor and outdoor cultivation. Is that correct? Does it do you know? >> Commissioner, I'm uncertain of that. >> Okay. Um regardless, the odor is definitely an issue and and I think it's a valid concern um with residents. So, um, yeah, I I think that's a great idea to continue to table. Um, we would need a motion and a vote or if there's further discussion, Commissioner McGrath. >> Thank you. Uh, I would make a motion to table the special use permit and direct the applicant to provide the third party verification. However, uh the city and and the applicant work that out or agree to that third party verification professional engineer or qualified industrial hygienist. Um and that I trust that we would report back or hear a report back within a defined amount of time. >> Yeah. And that Oh, I'm sorry. >> Before any discussion, we'll need a second on that. So, why stop? >> Is there a second? >> I will second that. >> Commissioner Deal has a second. All right. Then we can discuss. Thank you. Yeah, back to the the question of time frame on this. I'm uncertain how long that would take. So my suggestion would be that we do we do not table this until the next meeting because we very we it's a very good chance we might not have anything tangible by the next meeting that we would table this until it is ready to come back and at that time we would we would provide renotification and for those that were not notified which is a lot of people I understand we have an a mechanism in which you can be notified of planning commission actions. You can uh you you can register for our list served that will bring that will send you the planning commission agendas every two weeks. So you can look to see hey is this on the planning commission or not. And if anyone has any questions on that contact me let me know. It's a pretty easy thing to do. But signing up for that will mean every two weeks prior to a planning commission meeting you'll know whether this is on or off. >> Right. Thank you for that clarification. Um so there is a motion on the table to table um any action on this until the third party qualified odor mitigation review can take place and we did not put a time I there wasn't a time limit on the motion. So it would just be until the applicant and the city brings that back to the commission. So just for clarification. All right. So we have a motion a second. Any further discussion? All right, then John, if you want to call us out. >> I will do the voice vote here again. Uh, Chair Peters, >> I I >> Commissioner McGrath >> I, >> Commissioner Moses, >> I, >> Commissioner Dealma, >> I, >> and Commissioner McGomery, >> I. >> I will note that the eyes are five and no nays. So, this will be tabled. And for clarification on this, there is not a date certain as to when this will come back to the planning commission. We will when this does come back, we will put that on the agenda and anyone that signed up for the the list serve that I mentioned will be notified and then we'll we'll send out notification to the handful of people that we did the last time. So that that is where we are at. >> Wonderful. Thank you. Um other other business tonight. >> Other business. Well, I I appreciate the introductions we have with with Natalie here. This is typically what a planning commission meeting looks like. We usually have a handful of handful of people here from the public that are very interested in planning commission. I do. So, uh this is a good example for for her to come tonight. And anything you want to share about your education or what you're doing, Natalie? >> Sure. >> Maybe >> the buttons are really hard. They >> Exactly. There you go. >> Yeah. Uh, my name is Natalie. I'm going to the University of Minnesota. I'm just completed my first year of a master's program in urban planning. Um, and I'm excited to be working with the city of Hastings. Uh, this is a great meeting to observe. I appreciate everyone coming out. >> Thank you. Yeah. So, Natalie will be working on various things, economic development, planning. So, we may see her at a another planning commissioner too throughout her tenure throughout the summer. and then she'll be helping out a lot with uh with the makers makers and music market downtown on Thursday night. So, you'll see her out there. Other business not related to that, uh we will be having a planning commission meeting in two weeks on June 8th. We've got a special use permit for for an auto facility, which is more of a housekeeping issue. the the Chevrolet dealership now known as as Tri Rivers on 316 and Spiral has been in operation for as long as I can remember. Uh but it never had a special use permit for some reason and through property transfer the uh one of the lenders is requiring it to have it. So we're going through the mechanism of giving them a special use permit and considering that. So that we'll have on the next uh agenda for June 8th. I'm not aware of anything else at this point, but we will have a meeting there. And I think that's about all all I had. >> Thank you. Um, thank you again to our applicants for uh sending back a more detailed plan and thank you everyone for attending and sharing your public comment. We invite you to continue to be engaged on this topic and and any others. Please follow our planning commission um agendas and meetings. If there's no further business, is there a motion to adjurnn? >> Commissioner Mos. >> I'll move to adjurnn. >> So we have a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll second that. >> Commissioner de Palma. Second. John, one more time. >> One more time down the road here. Commissioner Peters >> I. >> Commissioner McGrath >> I. >> Commissioner Mo. >> I. >> Commissioner De Palma. >> I. >> And Commissioner McGomery. >> I All right. Eyes have it. Meeting has adjourned. Thank you. >> All right. Thanks everyone. Thanks, Angela.