This transcript appears to be from a **Planning Commission** meeting, as they are discussing zoning amendments, bulk standards, and referring items to the City Council. Based on the context provided, here is the formatted transcript with speaker names assigned. [0:01] **Chair Melanie Peters**: First item up, approval of the minutes from September 13, 2021. Take a motion—oh, and we're also approving the minutes from the October 21, 2021 workshop as well. Motion to approve? Comments? Questions? [0:25] **Commissioner Rachel Swedin**: Second. [0:25] **Chair Melanie Peters**: Second. And all in favor say—any further discussion? First of all, no? All in favor say aye. **Commissioners**: Aye. Aye. [0:25] **Chair Melanie Peters**: Motion carries. All right. Next item on the agenda is a public hearing. It's for the City of Hastings city code amendment, bulk standards, downtown core zoning district, and we have John Hinzman here for a report. [1:00] **John Hinzman**: Put together a map here that I have for the property. So, for you tonight is a code amendment to consider changes to the downtown core zoning district. I'll go through the specifics of what the amendment would be, a little bit of history on the downtown core district and its implications. So, the downtown core district is a district that is primarily geared towards areas in and around the downtown area. The downtown core district was established as part of our Heart of Hastings Master Plan, which was done almost 20 years ago now, but really has relevance and really led to the development of many other projects within the downtown area. After that project was approved, the plan there was a recommendation to establish this downtown core zoning district. This district established uses and densities and heights that were more in line with only downtown uses as opposed to general uses throughout the city. There are infinite commercial districts, some that are within the downtown; the uses and the densities are similar to downtown as they would be to any place else in the city. This was really meant to establish something in particular for the downtown area. So looking at the map here, everything here that we have in purple comes under that downtown core district. So we have the confluence area here west of the bridge. We have what's commonly known at City Hall as Block 2, which to normal people is the area between Tyler Street and Ramsey Street where Hastings Family Service is, and then there's vacant property behind it. Block 1 over here where Artspace is and vacant property behind that. Looking south of 2nd Street, the parking lot, the Red Rock commuter parking lot—which if it was developed at some point could be that zoning—as well as the recently rezoned property located at the northwest corner of 3rd and Tyler for the Luke Seaworth apartment project, a 32-unit project. When we take a look at areas north of 3rd Street and south of 3rd Street, there's a little bit of a difference here. When we look at areas north of 3rd Street, we're looking at the core of our downtown area. We're looking at the two and three-story buildings along 2nd Street along the riverfront that have a particular mass and a particular feel. And the thought behind the downtown core district was: we don't want to put anything within this area that would detract or be out of place from a scale or height or width standpoint than what is established within the downtown. We do have a project coming up here in the future on this property down here which is currently zoned industrial, and that would be for a four-story over ground-floor parking apartment building at the former UBC site. This would be about 85 units altogether. The heights of this project, as well as the stories, would not be in line with the downtown core district. And so we're asking for a consideration to amend that district to really establish two areas: one north of 3rd Street in which the regulations would stay as is—47 feet and four stories. You may say, why 47 feet? Top of the Finch building; we did not want to have any buildings go any taller than that. When you look south of 3rd Street, that maximum height limit would be raised about a story from 47 feet to 57 feet. When we're looking at the project coming down the road here, I'm anticipating that that project is probably going to top off someplace south of 55 feet, but we put that 57 feet as a buffer within there. So that is the proposal that we're bringing forward to you tonight and for your consideration. This is a public hearing, so you can open it up at this time or I can stand for any questions. Thank you. [5:30] **Chair Melanie Peters**: Okay, thanks John. Yeah, we'll go ahead and open up the public hearing. We have nobody here present with us in chambers, and just double-check to see if we have anyone on Zoom. Okay, nobody on Zoom. Therefore, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and, Commissioners, open it up to any questions or comments for John. [5:36] **Commissioner John Moes**: Mr. [Hinzman], so what is—so we're just south of 3rd Street is what we're proposing. Is there a limit to where this zoning ordinance would cut off at beyond 3rd Street? 5th, 6th? Where's the boundary that this ordinance would affect in its entirety? [6:00] **John Hinzman**: At present, it wouldn't affect anything because we don't have any property zoned downtown core south of 3rd Street. But looking at the potential in the future, when you take a look at this area that's generally in red, which may go down all the way to just south of 5th Street here, this area is generally guided mixed-use. And the mixed-use district is where we can consider a downtown core zoning district. So we're not going any further than really 4th or 5th Street further south than this. It's really—the effect of this is going to be pretty narrow. [6:45] **Commissioner John Moes**: But it could go as far as 10th or as far—we're not cutting it off anywhere? I mean, that whole area could be rezoned eventually? [6:52] **John Hinzman**: Correct. In order to be rezoned to a downtown core district, I believe it would need to be guided under a Comprehensive Plan as mixed-use. And under the Comprehensive Plan, that mixed-use guidance really doesn't go any further south than 5th Street. And so you wouldn't see that come up unless for some reason we were guided property further south to do that. [7:24] **Commissioner John Moes**: So I'm assuming it would take a change in the Comprehensive Plan to make those changes happen, is what you're telling us? [7:31] **John Hinzman**: It would. Yeah, right now as the map stands, there is no property south of 3rd Street that is zoned downtown core. We anticipate with this UBC redevelopment project located about here that would come in as a rezoning to downtown core, and that would come in probably by the end of this year or early next year. [8:24] **Commissioner John Moes**: Everything south of 3rd Street, that's what we're talking about today? Everything south of 3rd Street that's zoned downtown core? And then the project coming up would have to get rezoned at a later date? [8:38] **John Hinzman**: It would be, yes, because it's industrial right now. That would need to be rezoned. So we're asking the Commission, and ultimately the Council, whether having additional height within that area would be something that we would look at as an amendment. If so, that project as it sits now, we would go forward under those parameters. [9:06] **Commissioner John Moes**: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hinzman. [9:11] **John Hinzman**: It would be about 10 feet. 47 feet north of 3rd Street and up to 57 feet south of 3rd Street—south of 3rd Street zoned downtown core. Because what we're looking at specifically here is within the zoning code; we have the different zoning districts and limitations within each. So when I say 57 feet, that would only apply to this downtown core district; it wouldn't apply to any other district within the city. [9:46] **Commissioner John Moes**: John, two quick questions. One, just for reference, how tall is the dome on this building? I was— [9:55] **John Hinzman**: You know, Commissioner, I was thinking about measuring that because I was curious myself. Taller than 47 feet. Taller than 57 feet. [10:02] **Commissioner John Moes**: Okay, yes. I just wanted to have a picture of what that would be around. Obviously, you wouldn't want to—from the riverside, you wouldn't be covering that up at all, right? All right. No, I just wanted to ask on that, and I had one more other thing but nothing major on it. So, I just kind of wanted to have that reference of scale. Otherwise, no, it sounds good. [10:36] **Commissioner John Moes**: Mr. Chair, I'll make the motion to approve the city code amendment, bulk standards downtown core zoning district. [10:50] **Commissioner Nicole DePalma**: I'll second. [10:52] **Chair Melanie Peters**: All right. All right, any further discussion? Okay. All in favor? **Commissioners**: Aye. Aye. [11:00] **Chair Melanie Peters**: Okay. Well, Commissioners, we'll take this proposal to the City Council on November 1st to order a public hearing and first reading at that time, with actions scheduled on November 15th. Thank you. Other business? [11:23] **John Hinzman**: Well, Commissioners, thanks for your attendance at the workshop last Thursday. I hope you found that valuable. I have got the slides back, so I will be sending that out to you guys so you can have that. We will have a meeting coming up on November 8th; that's our next schedule. We've got two public hearings for that night. One dealing with an ordinance amendment pertaining to the definition of family in our residential use districts. So it really deals not with what constitutes a family, but more the number of people within a household. So we will bring that forward for your consideration on the 8th. We will also have a Comprehensive Plan amendment coming forward for the property that we were tangentially talking about tonight; that is the UBC property that the Stencil Group—the 85-unit building—having that reguided from mid-density to mixed-use on that one. So we'll have both those actions coming forward for you on the 8th. There might be some other ones as well, but we will for sure have a meeting on that night. And I think that that's all I had at this time. [12:45] **Chair Melanie Peters**: Motion to adjourn? [12:48] **Commissioner John Moes**: Motion. [12:50] **Commissioner Rachel Swedin**: Second. [12:51] **Chair Melanie Peters**: All in favor say aye. **Commissioners**: Aye.