This transcript is from a **Hastings Planning Commission** meeting. Based on the context provided and the dialogue, here are the identified speakers: * **John Moes:** Acting Chair (addressed as "Mr. Chair" and "Sean/John"). Since the Chair listed (Melanie Peters) is female and the speaker is addressed as "Mr. Chair," Moes is the presiding member. * **Justin Fortney:** City Planner (Staff giving the report). * **Keno Conor Toberman:** Land Use and Planning Director for *Friends of the Mississippi River* (Public speaker). * **Missy McGrath:** Planning Commissioner (Phonetically transcribed as "Commissioner Grant" or "Grass" at the end). * **John Hinzman:** Community Development Director (Staff). * **Commissioner Teiken:** Planning Commissioner (Phonetically transcribed as "Tyken/Tyen/Taken"). *Note: While not on your provided list, he is a known member of this commission often mis-transcribed phonetically.* * **Commissioner Harberg:** Planning Commissioner (Phonetically transcribed as "hbert"). *** [0:00] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** all right um good evening we're going to start the Hastings plan Commission meeting for November 27th call me into order all right first up approval minutes from November 13th meeting any comments [0:10] **Commissioner Teiken:** Mr chair go ahead I voted against the uh number three thanks Sean [0:16] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** okay perfect any other questions all right with the exception of that change we'll go ahead and consider the minutes to be approved all right first order is the public hearing city of Hastings ordinance Amendment 2022 D1 [0:46] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** z-m rcca staff report by Justin Fortney Justin [0:48] **Justin Fortney:** right thank you very much the MCCA is the Mississippi River Corridor critical area I'll likely refer to it as the MCCA from here on it's a 72-mile corridor along the Mississippi River through the Twin Cities it uh including Hastings of course uh it originally was created in 1970s but this is the first time there'll be uniform uh local regulations guiding the the plan Corridor the ordinance itself was developed at the state level for adoption by local cities and townships um for uh uh enforcement and [1:32] um carrying out the the the corridor uh regulations the DNR has approved the draft ordinance um that's that's uh being presented um which is pretty much directly what was the uh the draft or the template ordinance with uh some minor changes um to more close closely relate to the Hastings area um the purpose of the regulation is to maintain natural and Scenic character uh and minimize negative impacts to riparian areas and Bluffs this is accomplished by additional development regulations beyond the [2:18] zoning flood plane and Shoreland management ordinances that are already in effect for much of the same locations um the Planning Commission has asked to hold a public hearing review the proposal and make recommendations to the council for the following items the new ordinance which will be chapter 152a mrca amend the official zoning map chapter with MCCA overlay districts and make amendments to two existing regulations related to weeds and grasses um those fall under the zoning code and Property [3:03] Maintenance um to get into a little bit specifics of some of the aspects of the mrca ordinance um are some of these items listed here and I'll go through some of them with some examples as far as setbacks the existing uh setbacks of items that have requirements would be grandfathered and new ones um going by the districts for uh structures and uh impervious surfaces would from the ordinary high water level would be uh from these different districts which I'll go through in a little bit more specific uh Case by or of the districts in a minute here but um the [3:50] the r District it would be 200 ft from the ordinary high water level the RN 100 ft RTC 75 ft and those would be from the Mississippi River the Ros also has 150 foot setback requirement from the Vermilion River and then from the bluff line setback the Ros has a 100t setback and the others uh 40ft setback if a new structure has a similar scale as adjacent ones it may also conform to those existing setback um of those uh structures on those adjacent Lots um height height limits the r is 35 [4:39] ft RN is 35 ft the SR um just is whatever the underlying zoning is but may also not be visible from the ordinary high water level as viewed from the opposite Shore at the ordinary high water level and the RTC which is the downtown area of Hastings would be 47 ft roughly the height of the finch building and a conditional use permit would allow for up to a 65- ft building um these regulations have some limitations on lot size for the Ros it's 200 ft wide and the minimum lot area would be what's required for development on the lot to [5:26] maintain setbacks without a variance um there's notice requirements of the ordinance to the DNR and the National Park Service and in some instances adjacent local governments were applicable that was would be for um not only changes to the ordinance but for uh applications for variances and conditional use permits and uh development um there's some addition land use regulations related to or Beyond zoning and they would relate to for agricultureal there's some crop buffer uh requirements for perennial uh [6:12] ground cover there's and then there's uh some land use regulations for feed Lots forestry non-metallic mining River dependent uses and communication Towers there's performance standards for some private and public improvements just for some quick examples those would be like roads driveways parking areas and they're required to be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation top topography to reduce visibility from the river U comply with structural structure setback requirements and not be placed within Bluff impact zones or short impact zones unless it's one of the exempt uses at the very end of the ordinance additionally private access access paths must be no more than than [6:59] 8T wide and then in the shore Impact Zone No More Than 4T wide 8T wide or 4T wide within the bluff Impact Zone um there's some other related items for uh regulating uh water oriented accessory structures dock decks patios in setac areas signs fences and Lighting in some areas um another major component of this ordinance is vegetation management permits are required um except for maintenance and emergency situations public RightWay maintenance Agricultural and Forest reactivities [7:46] selective vegetation removal of dead dying diseased or hazardous uh vegetation um also individual tree and shrub and invasive nonnative species can also be removed without permits land alteration standards and storm monor management um there's a large section on those uh just for some quick examples um permits are required for land alteration uh work below the ordinary high water level is permitted through the DNR and the core as um has always been required the constru uction of rip wrap uh for areas above the ordinary [8:33] high water level requires city permits and must be to correct and established erosion issue maintenance and repair of rip wrap above the ordinary ordinary high water level does not require a permit large subdivisions and development standards um are applicable to large developments of 10 and 20 acres exemptions to certain Heights locations um are listed at the back of the ordinance those include just just a some brief examples uh Bridges silos flag poles access ramps and similar type uses the overlay districts I mentioned [9:19] to a little bit uh earlier uh include the rural and open space the r District it includes un veloped in rural low density development areas they're adjacent and visible from the river as well as large undeveloped tracks of high ecological and Scenic value and include a lot of flood plane they're intended to sustain and restore natural character and protect habitat open space and River Corridor views the river neighborhood RN is primarily residential neighborhoods that are adjacent or visible from the river with limited commercial development they're intended to maintain the character of the river Corridor within the context of existing residential development and um the purpose of those [10:07] districts is to try to minimize erosion and the flow of untreated storm water into the river and enhancing this Shoreline vegetation the river towns and crossings RTC district is primarily the downtown area um there is for historic downtown areas and limited nodes of intense development at specific River Crossings including t building they're managed to allow continued growth and Redevelopment in those limited areas at River Crossings to accommodate compact walkable development patterns and connections to the river the purpose of those districts is to try to restore the natural vegetation in those riparian areas and tree canopies are priorities of that district and lastly in Hastings is the [10:53] separated from River SR District uh this district is in is intended to cover lands that are readily that are not readily visible from the Mississippi River and the purpose of these district is to try to manage and minimize negative impacts to primary conservation areas and minimize erosion and flow to um of untreated storm water into the Mississippi River this is uh the proposed overlays uh the yellow would be the the RN the river neighborhood Brown is the uh River CR RiverTown Crossings the green is the r rural open space and then the the the dark yellow or orange is [11:39] separated from the river districts Additionally the that ordinance requires uh Native and natural vegetation um to be maintained where it exists and also where there's intended land alterations and where uh Ground Covers required those requirements aren't compatible with some existing ordinance Provisions that the city has requiring certain maintenance activities of grasses and weeds um which would be a maximum grass height requirement and not allowing vegetation to go to seed um as a result we are looking to [12:25] remove Provisions in the sign code that happen to mention brushes and high grass and weeds um aren't allowed near signs and that um adding an exemption under Property Maintenance requirements for ground cover vegetation within the Mr CCA overlay District that ordinance currently requires certain maintenance requirements for grass um and those would not be enforced on properties that are within the mrcc overlay District um as far as public input and the open house we held um staff mailed about a 170 informational notices to affected Property Owners explaining the proposal um included uh links to [13:13] information including the maps of the districts and the the resources and provide a notice to attend the open house and the Planning Commission public hearing tonight staff received a few uh inquiries through email and in phone uh regarding the the proposal and about 20 to 25 residents attended the open house on November 13th the draft proposal was presented there were some question and answer uh time as a large group and then afterwards some folks stayed uh for specific in-depth uh review kind of of their individual properties with questions they they had um and then lastly as you see on the [13:59] Diaz I placed a a letter from the friends of the Mississippi River um providing a suggestion that optional language to the variance section uh would require some additional written findings for variance approval staff had chosen uh to propose only the required language in the template ordinance um the written findings are already required including written findings that the variants be consistent with the purpose of the entire Mr ccca ordinance the suggested additional findings are very subjective and not well relatable to uh variances specifically staff had suggested using those written findings for the conditional use permits because they're [14:45] more relatable to uh uses than to variances the letter also recommends that uh we provide uh longer notice than then the template or ordinance requirement of 10 days to agencies um for those required notices when um we're going to be reviewing applications or changes that require notice the letter indicated that a 10-day notice period often means that the agency input is received very close to or even during a Planning Commission meeting um staff provides these notices as soon as the date for a meeting is known and of course no less than 10 days [15:32] and we provide those electronically uh lengthening the notice period for all instances would delay applications uh when there are large and complicated projects or if staff or agencies require additional information we do hold those applications back from bringing them to Planning Commission or if something comes up at the last at the last moment um they can and usually are are tabled for for further information information um if we lengthen the time of the the the notice requirement you know that would delay a lot of the applications but it would still require us to hold hold continue to hold back the more complicated ones because generally that [16:19] even if we um chose 15 days or you know 20 days that often times is not enough for a a large project that has a lot of back and forth or additional information needed um staff believes that more would be lost than gained by changing that notification period which is a a typical notification period that we do have for other um uh notices required for other ordinances for agencies um with that I can uh stand for any questions um and there is a public hearing requirement and I do believe the a representative from the friends of the Mississippi uh River was going to come tonight and and offer any [17:06] comments [17:07] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** all right thanks Justin yep we'll go ahead and open the public hearing all right if anybody wishes to speak if you could just come up to the podium state your name and either your address if you're local or your organization that you're [17:26] with [17:27] **Keno Conor Toberman:** good evening commissioner I'm Keno Conor Toberman With Friends of the Mississippi River I'm the land use and planning director there um thank you Justin for your summary of FM's comments and your response to them um it's great to hear the city has a practice of giving agencies as much as much notice as possible even if it's not possible to cautify a longer notification period in your ordinance um because you know we we share your experience in observing how other cities have implemented this that when you get the DNR in particular involved you can get into a lot of really Technical and legal stuff that um take some time to work work through before it shows up at a public hearing and makes the hearing confusing um I I will note that our other recommendation to add some more language to your variance uh findings um is something that several other cities have done many [18:11] cities have adopted the same required language um for both variants and cup findings and in our experience adding that specificity um has been helpful in the decision- making process it gives you know both property owners and developers as well as neighbors a clearer idea of how a process uh how how a proposal is going to be assessed what criteria are expected to be met you know these um a lot of places along the river are places that people feel really string about and hold very dear and so the more you can kind of set a process that it's clear to everyone about what criteria will be used I think the easier it is to consider new projects along the river um so all I wanted to share tonight thank you so much for taking up this ordinance and you if if it's appropriate if there are any questions I'm happy to respond to them thank [18:57] you [18:58] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** okay okay thank you very much we'll hold on to the questions for for a moment here and see if there's anybody else that wish to speak anyone on Zoom no nope nobody else okay we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and then we'll go ahead and open it up to Commissioners for questions and [19:26] comments oh commissioner McGrath go ahead [19:28] **Missy McGrath:** hi good evening um in doing some reading of the letter that was left today there is a reference to Minnesota State Statute 30.02 and I fully acknowledge I'm not a legal expert but I am not able to pull that website up on the um on the State legislator's website it looks like it was repealed and I was just wondering if that if there's a current um statutory reference we could take a look at [20:03] **Keno Conor Toberman:** commissioner McGrath I believe please correct me if I'm Ron that that reference uh which is at the top of the second page in italics um was something I copied out of the city's draft ordinance is that correct [20:17] **Justin Fortney:** that's a local uh Hastings ordinance that um deals with commission responsibilities okay and variances [20:36] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** okay good catch I would have missed that myself Commissioners any other questions go ahead commissioner Teiken [20:41] **Commissioner Teiken:** thank you Mr chair uh I got a few the we notify people as soon as we can right it's not we don't wait till 10 days we just whenever we're ready in that process [21:10] **Justin Fortney:** yeah I mean we would notify somebody as soon as we knew which meeting it was going to be going towards yeah [21:16] **Commissioner Teiken:** um and then the weed ordinance so the the stuff in yellow is the stuff that contradicts with the what the DNR wants is that what [21:23] **Justin Fortney:** generally yes [21:24] **Commissioner Teiken:** and then um all we're really doing is loow them to have higher grass and weeds and let that go to seed [21:30] **Justin Fortney:** Y correct [21:31] **Commissioner Teiken:** okay and then the cup process is uh you [21:24] know was brought up in this letter about adding some more language the language that's in here here is that the same that we use for any other uh process regardless of the zoning District [21:49] **Justin Fortney:** uh which which language are you specifically in the friends of the Mississippi they have the um variance application the cup uh process and they want us to change the language from what you have in here to what they have and I'm what I'm asking is what we have in here the same language we have for the rest of the properties in the city well up at the top of that page AG that 30.02 is outlines our variance process okay so that has all those findings that you normally see with a variance uh [22:10] staff report yeah so those are required findings that have to be made um based on on on that local ordinance of ours for variances so we'll have to make those and they suggesting that um we make those specific additional ones a b and see okay in in addition to uh written findings that the variance request meets the intent of the ordinance itself which is how it's how we have it worded now is that findings uh required for uh that it's consistent with the intent of the ordinance they're suggesting that we also do these these [22:56] three um compound compound items as a as additional written findings [22:58] **Commissioner Teiken:** okay thank you cuz I mean just it's very complicated matter right especially around variances um and there's L legalities I just want to make sure that we're treating this the the way we treat the rest of the if we approve it as presented to us it's treating that the same way we treat the rest of the city correct Okay [23:36] **John Hinzman:** add one thing further to that too and when we take a look at conditional use permits the purpose of a conditional use permit is to set specific additions for parameters of operation so the more specificity that we can present is good for being able to provide for how one can operate and uh it being most consistent with the ordinance at hand when we're dealing [23:83] with a variance we're dealing with a legal issue and it's been a court challenged issue that uh has had due stipulations in the last few years in which there are specific items that are laid out and one must what one must meet to have a variance be granted and those things as as you all Recall come forward to you with variance applications I do have some concern about adding other items to that that we don't have for other variances because we're putting ourselves at somewhat of a legal Jeopardy of of being more selective on granting a variance than we do in other land use regulations so I do have some pait hesit hesitancy in that I understand what the what the friends of the Mississippi River is is is doing in that one and I understand the need to be [24:29] specific in that but when I get to be get to be specific regulations within the code and the sensitivity and the uh legal challenges that can come with a variance I I do pause with some hesitancy in that [24:41] **Commissioner Teiken:** and and that was my point thanks for pointing that out I want to make sure we're treating everybody the same regardless of what district they're in within the city um so yeah I don't think I'd support making a special case for one District over another and um variances are very very very limited and when we when we can approve them so um I think that was all the questions I had right now thank you Mr chair [25:14] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** all right Commissioners um Justin how many [25:14] properties are affected by this in Hastings how many Riverfront properties do we have [25:18] **Justin Fortney:** well it's not just River properties or just in this total I mean they're affected more than others but uh I mailed out about 170 [25:31] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** 170 okay [25:34] **John Hinzman:** I think it's important to note here too that the the Mississippi River critical Corridor ordinance here is in addition to the flood plane ordance and the Shoreland ordance that we presently have in place those those don't go away those still stay in place but there is additional regulations that would be present for the property shown on the map here Mo those properties now for the [26:00] most part are affected either by flood plan Andor Shoreland for the for the most part in there so there's already specific regulations pertaining to land use and proximity to River and and clearing there's more specificity certainly in the MCCA but uh we're not establishing anything that's dramatically new I don't think within this [26:24] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** okay thanks John commissioner Harberg [26:31] **Commissioner Harberg:** thank you Mr CH John real quick with having the shoreline and the flood plane and this there's no chance of anything you know being convoluted superceding causing confusion moving forward they all flow pretty well together pardon the pun you have any comments on [26:45] **John Hinzman:** well it'd [26:47] be better if they were all one thing but but but they're not and they for the most part can't be um one thing that'll help you know is having a overlay District map um you know with everything shown on there to make sure that anytime there's a request in a on a property that it's plain to see all the different Hoops they have to jump through and everything that has to be reviewed and um just go uh you know one ordinance at a time [27:18] **Commissioner Harberg:** okay all right thank you [27:20] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** all right Commissioners any other questions comments [27:21] **Commissioner Teiken:** mine were answered by the two questions that you asked so take good take care of that um I I'll make a a motion but I'm [27:34] just make a comment before that I have property on a on a lake and I know there's a ton of regulations and stuff that what you can do and what you can control so I totally uh I get this in I'm support of it um my daughter actually took a class in 19 30 20s they did a fish survey and they found three fish from St Paul the Hastings in the Mississippi River cuz is so polluted um and thank God we're not in that situation anymore so people are dumping all their sewage and everything else right into the river so um I'm in support of it I also understand uh property owner rights um but I think you know reading through this that we're not really impacting uh too much of what people have already today so I'm in support of this and I'll make a motion that we uh recommend approval of ordinance [28:20] Amendment 20 22-10 Mr rcca [28:34] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** now do you want to include one through four in that or you don't take them individually [28:38] **Commissioner Teiken:** we have four uh all four all four of us okay so thanks [28:44] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** the motion is to approve the recommendation and number one two three and four y thank you Mr chair you're welcome second [28:47] **Commissioner Harberg:** I'll second commissioner Harberg [28:50] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** any new discussion okay no new discussion all in favor say I [28:57] **Commissioners:** I I I I [28:59] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** opposed okay that motion carries okay [29:05] **John Hinzman:** and Mr chair the first reading of that will go before the planning the city council on December 4th that'll be a consent agenda item and [29:05] then the second reading final adoption would be before the city council on December 18th [29:14] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** December 18th M okay all right thank you um and thank you for coming thank you um under other actions uh we're continuing the city of Hastings ordinance Amendment 20 23-45 cannabis and help [29:26] **John Hinzman:** we are as uh planning Commissioners recall from the last meeting there was a public hearing held to amend the zoning code to have changes in our performance standards for cannabis businesses at that time there was uh some discussion pertaining to differences between different zoning districts that was confusing and I spoke to the City attorney about that and we simplified that right now uh the only [29:53] section of the code that would be changing would be to remove the Restriction of intoxicating cannabis products being sold at exclusive liquor stores and on sale liquor establishments so right now if you're own a liquor store or a bar you can't sell cannabis products uh with this change you would be able to do so there wouldn't be a a Prohibition on that that would be the only change there wouldn't be anything in there pertaining to differences in zoning districts that we discussed at the last meeting so can stand fory questions [30:35] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** thanks John commissioner Teiken go ahead [30:37] **Commissioner Teiken:** uh thanks John for kind of clearing that up um in this I I was reading about this after our last meeting this is in line with what the state kind of approved [30:44] **John Hinzman:** it is it is and we're we're taking a little [30:39] more precautionary approach to it by having stuff within the zoning code as well as our licensing [31:02] **Commissioner Teiken:** okay thank you thank you Mr chair [31:04] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** you're welcome Commissioners any other questions or comments all right all right if none I'll take them motion to approve or otherwise [31:11] **Commissioner Teiken:** Mr chair I'll make a motion to approve ordinance Amendment 20 23-45 cannabis and hemp [31:13] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** all right commissioner Teiken motion to approve second [31:16] **Missy McGrath:** ah commissioner Grant all right second second [31:22] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** all right any further discussion if not all in favor say I [31:25] **Commissioners:** I I [31:26] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** po motion carries [31:30] **John Hinzman:** okay thank you Mr chair same schedule on that one as well December 4th uh first reading before city council consent agenda item and uh second reading and adoption coming up on the 18th of December so that's have there [31:48] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** Perfect all right and looks like we have other business [31:51] **John Hinzman:** other business here we uh had a council meeting last week they did approve the comprehensive plan Amendment for the uh South Oaks fourth edition so that's going through the pro procedures right now becoming finalized looking at our schedule coming up the rest of the year we don't have anything scheduled for our next meeting on December 11th uh and the December 26th meeting that we [32:12] would have scheduled on Tuesday I've historically not held so I'm not planning for to hold a meeting uh at at late and late December here so if we don't have a meeting on the 11th the next meeting we would have would be in January uh items that are out there right now uh coming up to council there is an environmental assessment worksheet pertaining to what's called waled and Hastings that the annexation area off of Highway 316 what an an eaw does it goes through some environmental impacts of the proposed development so that's been prepared and the the action by the council will be to release it for distribution not to make any assessments on it we'll have other public entities they'll comment on it bring those comments back at the beginning of the year and move forward from that uh along [32:59] with that they there's plans from the development firm there to have land use applications pertaining to development of the subdivision upon completion of the eaw those may come over the winter from talking to the entity there on um on when they're bringing things forward and then as far as the Planning Commission goes and terms uh there's four of you that have said yes the four the four that are actually the four Commissioners that are up for reappointment have all agreed to be reappointed which I thank you for we will have that happen at Council on December 18th as well consent agenda item uh no need to to be present for that we I don't think we've ever been in a position of not reappointing anyone who wants to be reappointed and then we still have a vacancy on Planning Commission it's been difficult to find [33:47] people but for some reason today we've three people came forward so hopefully we'll be able to uh find someone and have someone appointed here at the beginning of January so that's uh all I have [34:10] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** okay thanks Commissioners any other business nope I if not I'll take a motion to adjourn [34:14] **Commissioner Teiken:** right so mod commissioner Tyen motion to adjourn [34:16] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** second [34:19] **Missy McGrath:** second commissioner grass [34:21] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** all in favor say I [34:23] **Commissioners:** I I I [34:25] **John Moes (Acting Chair):** oppose