This transcript appears to be a meeting of the **Hastings Planning Commission**. Although the provided list for the Planning Commission members in the context does not match the names in the roll call, the names mentioned (Romans, Hallberg, Messina, Matzke, Best, Siebenhaller, and Chair Johnson) correspond to the officials actively participating. The staff members mentioned (John and Justin) are John Hinzman (Community Development Director) and a staff planner. [0:00] **Chair Johnson:** the second thing is uh minutes from last meeting from the october 12th meeting everybody have those um comments concerns corrections [0:27] **Chair Johnson:** we're all good um i'll entertain a motion for approval [0:37] **Commissioner Hallberg:** don't move mr chair thank you [0:40] **Chair Johnson:** mr hallberg second [0:42] **Commissioner Best:** i'll second thank you emily [0:44] **Chair Johnson:** um you're gonna call roll for us tonight john [0:46] **John Hinzman:** yep i can do that here with the roll call vote commissioner romans aye commissioner hallberg aye commissioner messina aye commissioner matzke aye chair johnson aye commissioner best aye and commissioner siebenhaller aye [1:21] **Chair Johnson:** [Music] all right um we do have a couple of public meetings we'll be taking them uh one at a time i presume um [Music] when we start with the headwaters and mint development we're looking at a preliminary plat site plan and a variance approval tonight for the senior housing city number 2020-41 uh do you have a staff report for us john [1:57] **John Hinzman:** i do mr chairman i'll go through that right now and share some information here on my screen as i go through it all right so what we're looking at is three approvals for headwaters development located on this property here this is 1190 county road 47 it's an 11.3 acre parcel bounded by county road 47 on the south the vermillion river towards the north aglan to the west residential to the east and then riverwood development with apartments and mid-density development to the south as we've looked at this property in the past we've noted that the majority of the property is undevelopable because of floodplain restrictions so the 11.3 acre property that we have we're really looking at development on the southern portion here which is about three acres all together so what we're looking at tonight are three separate actions one is a preliminary plan to create vermilion acres which is a one lot subdivision pretty simple on that end of things second would be a site plan for the construction of a proposed three-story 75 unit senior housing building on the site and the third would be a variance to a city code section that has a requirement of a 15 roof pitch for residential care facilities so looking at some of the background information earlier this year we looked at the comprehensive plan and the rezoning of this property and the planning commission recommended action to change it and the council took action consistent with the planning commission so the property that we're looking at today is now guided for high density development and also zoned for high density development zone r4 during that discussion period earlier this year headwaters development was contemplating a larger development than what we are seeing today at that point we had discussed the potential of up to 120 units a potentially four-story building on the site today we're looking at 75 units the 75 units consists of 15 units of memory care and 60 units of assisted living facilities on the site so that's what we're looking at today um we also had the planning committee of council take a look at this property as well and the potential project for earlier in january uh they they were supportive of the project as well there's been a couple of neighborhood meetings that have been held in the project as well one earlier this year with the comprehensive plan and rezoning request and then one just last thursday on the proposal before us tonight at the neighborhood meeting last thursday on the fifth we did have two people that attended the meeting and uh there was some discussion about uh the traffic that would be generated from this development and how it would coincide with with potential improvements from a dakota county roadway study down the road and just also some concerns that the storm water that may be generated from the site does not have a negative impact throughout the neighborhood so we had a discussion on those items we also did send out a public notification on this as well to people within 350 feet of the property received one uh comment back from that from an individual they wanted to ensure that the trail would remain on the site which it will and they also had some concern about traffic at the intersection of county road 46 and uh village trail which is a little bit west of this development so let's take a look at what we've what we've got here tonight this is the preliminary plan it's kind of shifted north is to the this to the west here uh very simple subdivision one lot subdivision you may be asking why are we doing a one lot subdivision uh reason behind that is right of way we have uh right of way that that is meets and balanced description for this proposal and um needed to ensure that the right-of-way was public was publicly dedicated through a planning process uh through dakota county's uh controls so that is the reason why we're doing this subdivision here this is more of an existing condition scenario showing the house which will be gone some of the existing grading and some of the tree line along the property again the develop developed portion of the property is quite limited down here everything you see on the majority of the property stays the way it is looking at the the preliminary plant we're looking at a couple of different things looking at the grading drainage erosion control plan and setting up different requirements so when the developer goes forward with the final plot look at the plan and the conditions that have been established tonight make sure that those are implemented and so when it's officially split off it's officially uh subdivided it's a fairly easy process with the preliminary plat we set the conditions and really make the plan for subdivision final plot is just executing it so within the staff report i've noted a few items that will need to be completed by final plat with parkland dedication of the property our park and recreation commission has taken action to recommend that cash be paid in lieu of land at this point it would be eighty two thousand five hundred dollars that'd be at the time of final plaque uh of noted sewer interceptor fees and the storm water maintenance and development agreements and final grading drainage and erosion control plans that would need to be completed so really setting the setting the plan for this as far as what we're looking at and reviewing as far as the preliminary plan beyond that there's not a heck of a lot so we are recommending approval approval of this plan uh consistent with the conditions in the report so moving into the site plan here this is what we're looking at for development of the site uh this is not the entire site this is a this is a very smaller portion of the sides here this tree line here is uh below the trail which is off the screen to the north so with the site there's a singular axis at uh at riverwood trail and county road 47 so at that point traffic would come in drop off area to the main building here this would be for visitor parking to the east over here would be more for resident parking turn around area for loading and unloading which is also denoted here this portion of the first floor of the of the building would be at grade parking so this would be you parking areas for residents of the building itself you can also see some of the storm water areas that have been created in rain garden areas on the west and to the north of the subdivision as well so when we look at the actual layout of the site traffic layout we're we're fine with what's being presented here tonight also will note that there's also the possibility to extend a connection to the west upon development of the bower property at some point in the future when you take a look at county road 47 the trail is a collector road it is it is identified to carry the most traffic between riverwood drive and village trail so potentially at some point in the future that has the best chance of having some sort of intersection control located there and this would provide a mechanism to access it at that point some point in the future down the road so we're fine with the vehicular circulation on it we also had a traffic review conducted by a third party srf consulting they had a couple of conclusions that they that they left within the report they concluded that there was no significant transportation impacts expected as a result of the senior facility they did note that they expected about 195 daily trips in and out of the development about 14 of these would be with the term peak hour at the busiest hour in the morning and 19 during peak hour in the afternoon and that the overall trip volume was estimated to be less than that of the vermilion shores apartment building which is across the street which actually has less number of units because of the senior nature of this facility and that county road 47 can accommodate the proposed increase in traffic volume from the development but that we are coming close to that capacity end and that's noted by dakota county and the plans that they have for a roadway study that they're in process on taking a look at the building setbacks they all meet the building setbacks of the r4 district the pedestrian axis is good you can see the trail area here which is a public trail they're also planning some private trail connections here for the residences residents of the of the senior apartment in which there would be some internal routing here internal pathway so providing that amenity to the people on site here standpoint we have minimum parking requirements which they certainly exceed they have a minimum of 35 spaces that they need to provide by our city code what they are providing is 82 altogether of the 82 there's 29 within the parking facility here and 53 on the exterior of the site through here provision within the city code that caps the number of parking spaces to not exceed 20 percent of the minimum requirement in this case that would be they would have a max of 42 spaces that they could provide there is a process that the city council may grant an exception uh provided that an argument is made by the developer and that argument is agreed upon by the by the city council i will note that this exception is not a variance it does not require the same sort of uh knee and have to meet the same requirements as a variance it's noted in the ordinance as an exception and frankly we haven't dealt with this too much within within development but it does come up from time to time so i have included within the staff report an explanation from the developer as to what they feel why they feel the number of parking spaces are necessary uh they've stated that this is the number of spaces that they have typically provided in comparable types of senior housing facilities the developer has some experience in constructing senior housing facilities and he can speak to more of that if you if you would like him to do so we looked at the rationale we developed minimum parking standards to ensure that minimum parking is met uh we also look at those that provide parking and those that have industry experience and lean on them as to what they think is adequate and in this circumstance uh the argument for the additional parking spaces is something that uh that we could agree with and we would support the exception based upon it this is some more areas here of the development here is the floor plan itself so looking at the first floor plan you've got the parking on the first floor you've got memory carry units 15 kitchen dining administrative areas a pub sounds like a nice area going up to the the second and third floor plans those are pretty similar primarily residential units these would all be the assisted living unit areas you'll note salon therapy community room and a patio space on there so there is amenities added within this development for the enjoyment of the residents and then 31 more units on the third floor here you take a look at the building itself and our architectural standards it certainly meets those it's an attractive building it's developed similarly on all four sides of the building itself through a combination of limestone veneer two different colors of fiber cement siding there's variation in the facade depths and windows and and roof lines so it breaks up the large massing of the building itself and meets our requirements for architectural standards look at the landscape pen itself there's a number of different requirements that they they need to meet here from tree and shrub planting itself there would be perimeter tree planting around the development and this is uh in addition to the trees that are there on site presently there's also requirement for parking lot screening towards county road 47 through this area preservation itself there's a couple of trees that they have mature trees they've taken down over here that have been calculated into the number of trees they need to provide and there's also something unusual to hear that we haven't dealt with much and that is a rain garden so they are constructing a rain garden for some infiltration of the storm water needs and by doing that there's also an offset credit on the number of landscaping they need to provide all in all here on the landscaping uh if they're at if they add two more trees they would meet their minimum requirements for for the number of trees that they need to provide and so we've added that as a condition looking at lighting plan that's acceptable as well our city engineers looking at the grading drainage and erosion control plan under their review they'll be providing more detailed comments in the future their general look on it is as this is acceptable from a siding standpoint and they'll take a look at the storm water and other access measures here in due time so we are recommending approval of the site plan as well the variance this is kind of an unusual provision and frankly one that i wasn't really aware of until we did a little more in-depth review of the code is that for residential care facilities there is a requirement to provide a roof that's at least 15 percent so you cannot have a flat roof on a residential senior facility uh why is that i don't know if i can answer that question it's in within the code itself and uh this certainly doesn't mean 15 percent and so a variance is being requested on that and so within the report itself i've listed out the number of requirements that are necessary to meet our variance criteria on this and dealing with with with practical considerations special conditions enforcement physical surroundings those type of issues that would need to be present in order for a variance to be considered on that uh in in general one of the difficulties that they have encountered on this site is mitigation of storm water efficiently and effectively the site itself as you know is encumbered by a number of wetlands in which you cannot directly add flow to those and they're also dealing with areas in which there's shallow bedrock and low-lying topography and so what they plan to do with the rooftop the flat rooftop is to incorporate that it's part of their their drainage control for the site and all four for drainage to be more concentrated through downspouts and into areas for storm water treatment consistent with our storm water requirements here and that would do a better and a more efficient job than a standard slope roof design would have the other the other issue that comes into hand from other than a storm water requirement is more from an aesthetic standpoint as the the planning commissioner may recall during some initial considerations of the owning and the comprehensive plan there was concern from the neighbors on the height of this development that it may be seen further away and so a flat roof helps to minimize the height of the structure itself and so those are the general rationale that we that we have that have been created here to support the variance itself certainly the report has more detail on that but we are we are supporting the variance to the 15 percent result provision here so that is what i've had for a presentation here i we also have the developers i believe you have mike hogberg and rob barce on the line as well if you have any questions for them again this is a public hearing and you may open it at this time as well thank you [18:14] **Chair Johnson:** all right thanks for the report mr hensman um at this point we'll open the public hearing i i maybe preface that we have uh some people from the public or just the developers or [18:29] **John Hinzman:** mr chairman it looks like we do have some people from the public here so if anyone from the public that's listening to the meeting would use the raised hand function when the public hearing is called then we will know that you wish to address the planning commission and we can call you calling you accordingly [18:49] **Chair Johnson:** okay so we'll open the public hearing at this point and request any comments or concerns from the audience and we may have to consult with the developers here too at some point so [19:03] **John Hinzman:** mr chairman i i note that there's a gary mcdougall in the audience here i'm not sure if he wishes to address this item i know he is uh he's associated with the other item on on the agenda but uh i can bring him into the meeting if he has questions i will do that at this time let's see i'm waiting for [19:30] **Gary McDougall:** can you hear me yeah i'm waiting for the other meeting sorry [19:35] **John Hinzman:** okay okay hang on um [Music] i don't see anyone else from the audience looking to to address this item [19:54] **Chair Johnson:** yeah at this point not not quite this is there is there anybody that called in or no [20:01] **John Hinzman:** oh as far as called in no i i did receive one comment via email on someone that had concerns that the trail would remain in place which it will and uh general traffic concerns at conor at 47 and village that that's the extent of the comments i've heard and then we had two people at the uh the neighborhood meeting the other night [20:23] **Chair Johnson:** oh i'm sorry what i was referring to did anybody call in for tonight's meeting that can't raise their hand [20:30] **John Hinzman:** oh i get it i get it now okay i don't know [20:33] **Gary McDougall:** because they would look just like i did before you un until you put me in a different status [20:38] **John Hinzman:** okay yeah at this point mr chair i don't see anyone that would wish to address the the commission there's no raised hands that i see on using the zoom app here [20:53] **Chair Johnson:** right right it's just not the same as being there is it no um all right well at this point then we'll we'll close the public hearing and um we'll open it up to the commissioners i i would just uh like to reiterate we have three pieces of this puzzle um the preliminary plat and the site plan and the variants um we'll we'll do these things one at a time i think and john i might have a question for you um does it make sense to do the variance first is it kind of a chicken and egg thing here you know what i mean or do we approve the site plan because site plan one of the one of the contingencies is is a variance correct [21:56] **John Hinzman:** yeah i can i can uh in any order that the commission chooses [22:00] **Chair Johnson:** yeah it might make sense to just make sure we're okay with variance before we big apple uh not not that it it's too significant but anyway let's take a look at the preliminary plot um for vermilion acres and commissioners do you have any questions or concerns we we do have the developers here um you want to direct questions to them then do so [22:30] **Commissioner Matzke:** mr chairman yes sir uh i just got one quick question for john um you know it's pretty close to the road there is there a little with the uh easement that's in there in there the right-of-way that's in there is there enough play if they ended up doing anything that highway 47 did any realignments or anything like that that um that would be fine with the offsets yet [23:01] **John Hinzman:** uh yeah commissioner we we've had the dakota county platte commission which is the engineers and surveyors review the access to the site and also right-of-way needs here and they're confident that the boundary that is shown on the plat itself in the right of way that would be dedicated would constitute their needs for any future expansion [23:25] **Commissioner Matzke:** all right well it's great to hear thanks that's all i had [23:31] **Chair Johnson:** so i know that the traffic uh was an issue at the neighborhood meetings um might be one of the first and foremost concerns of people and i think in the report it mentioned something about the road might be marking its maximum capacity for a two-lane road do we does the county have any kind of idea of what they might do or uh when they might do it um i'm just throwing that out there i know that that is one of the concerns of the public okay [24:11] **John Hinzman:** and mr chair the the county is is going through a process right now to answer those questions as we speak they are doing a roadway study on county road 47 to to see what sort of improvements might be necessary down the road so that that's something that they are working on now and so we'd have more answers in the future on that [24:36] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** john i've got a question on that same note um can i go ahead [24:43] **Chair Johnson:** go ahead um [24:45] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** the what is what is the process um that coordinates the traffic review that's been done by the independent agency and the county study [25:00] **John Hinzman:** commissioner the the county study is going to be more inclusive than just the intersection of riverwood and county road 47. uh when the county goes to their study i i can't recall what the ex extent of it is but i believe it may go as far east as 61 and and west into the uh to the limits of hastings here but they're going to be looking at the potential volume growth of that roadway from potential new development and take a look at each individual and access point and roadway in there to see if it if it would meet it would meet the capacity and meet uh turning movement thresholds so they'll be looking at at something more comprehensive than than this property but sort of similar [25:50] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** yeah i guess my question is you know what is the process that needs to happen here to coordinate the the the county study and the independent study you had mentioned something in your and now you know in your summary that the two would work together at some point or that the county's study would um what could affect the the this property um am i getting that am i did you say something like that [26:18] **John Hinzman:** well with the the county's study is going to provide recommendations for improvements in various areas those areas may include this access point to the property itself uh so that would be the study end of it and then from the study there would need to be an implementation aspect to it in which that would happen generally uh that would be upon when development would occur or through some sort of capital improvement plannings that the county may go forward with so there's the identification of needs which would come from the roadway study and then there would be a mechanism for how it would be implemented which may come later on [27:07] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** okay thank you um i got i got one of those letters i about the study from the county because i live i live right on you know i was i got the letters so anyways um something that i was wondering about that study and john i don't know you may not be privy to this information but i thought you might be um do you when do you know the dates of that traffic review has that completed already or is that in the process [27:44] **John Hinzman:** you're talking about the the county's traffic review commissioner [27:48] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** yeah yeah [27:49] **John Hinzman:** you know i'm not certain where that's at at this point i my belief is the study is just beginning right now and so i'm not sure when the traffic elements and estimations counts would take place or if they have taken place at this point [28:03] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** yeah and i if i recall correctly and i don't have the letter in front of me i apologize i wish i did um but um i guess one of my biggest concerns there is that i mean and i'm sure these guys are professionals they know what they're doing but yet at the same time i just want reassurance that um you know what factors they're taking into consideration being were during a pandemic in the traffic on highway 47 is nothing like it ever normally is and so my concern is that they do the test now and then on down the road when people start to get back to some normalcy um that the traffic flow is significantly different and i can't image i don't know how they would ever be able to estimate the the effect of the pandemic [28:56] **John Hinzman:** yep that's uh that's a good question there i know in looking at these studies in the past they look at a couple of different aspects one are traffic counts and as you mentioned the traffic counts may not be fully ex fully include all traffic because of the situation we're in but they're also taking a look at at the land use and what they generate for flow because they're really looking at future volumes to make their to make estimations for improvements and so forth i think there's likely going to be more more weight placed upon the the average chip generation from different land uses existing in future and how that affects the corridor than the existing crop existing counts [29:41] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** okay do you anticipate that they would use like our comprehensive plan to for that projection [29:48] **John Hinzman:** yes yeah especially for the future of the media aspect [Music] [30:04] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** okay okay thank you [30:08] **Chair Johnson:** okay um anybody else commissioners [30:13] **Commissioner Matzke:** mr chair i'd like to make a motion to approve the preliminary plat review [30:18] **Chair Johnson:** perfect motion's on the floor second [30:23] **Commissioner Hallberg:** i'll second that motion [30:25] **Chair Johnson:** all right any further discussion or questions okay hearing none why don't we call roll [30:37] **John Hinzman:** okay i will uh commissioner messina [30:42] **Commissioner Messina:** aye [30:43] **John Hinzman:** commissioner siebenhaller [30:45] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** can i ask a question [30:48] **John Hinzman:** sure go ahead um [30:51] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** help me understand a little bit better the process of approving of the city council working on the proposed number of parking spaces and the max that's currently allowed [31:02] **John Hinzman:** commissioner right now we're looking at the at the preliminary plant approval i think that might be best associated with the site plan which which is not okay [31:13] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** thank you so commissioner uh my vote is yay [31:18] **John Hinzman:** okay yay uh let's see yeah i'm out here commissioner best [31:26] **Commissioner Best:** hi [31:27] **John Hinzman:** mr johnson [31:28] **Chair Johnson:** hi [31:29] **John Hinzman:** commissioner matzke [31:31] **Commissioner Matzke:** aye [31:32] **John Hinzman:** mr romans [31:33] **Commissioner Romans:** hi [31:34] **John Hinzman:** and i think commissioner rome uh holberg [31:38] **Commissioner Hallberg:** aye [31:40] **John Hinzman:** okay i will note that seven eyes and no nays that passes [31:48] **Chair Johnson:** excellent all right let's talk about the site plan um three-story 75 unit senior housing building uh john has given us a pretty good report do we have any questions concerns ladies and gentlemen [32:10] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** john did you want can you can you tell me again a little bit about the summary of how the 42 spaces is going to be dealt with as as with the developer wanting over 80. [32:23] **John Hinzman:** sure you know and with that specifically i i may call on the developer he may be able to best address those issues mike holberg i see him in the audience i'm going to pull him into the meeting mike has has some experience in dealing with uh with other senior housing developments and and may be able to best answer that question so i've pulled mike into the meeting here you're on mute right now mike uh if you can help us out with those questions [32:53] **Mike Hogberg:** hi this is mike kochberg with headwaters development can you guys hear me okay [32:57] **Chair Johnson:** we can yes [32:59] **Mike Hogberg:** all right perfect um yeah so this site's a little unique in the sense that most of our developments we try to maximize parking under the building we like the heated and environmental controlled parking aspects of this primarily for our residents and safety through the winter and cold seasons this site it was challenging for many different aspects but one of them was underground parking was simply not an option and so we we tried to maximize the amount of environment controlled parking for our residents we we believe that that's still a little light based on you think there'll be somewhere between 30 and 35 residents that will have cars that are excuse me still utilizing cars and so with that number of residents that are utilizing those cars plus uh our staff which fluctuates based on different shifts throughout the day but with our staffs that we will need somewhere between 70 and 80 spots in total to be comfortable to handle those flux in different staffing ratios um and then that's that's also not taking into consideration guests that will be there for the residents and sometimes through different services or in events that we have in the building that are inviting some of these outside guests and so uh we felt that we could be operational and comfort with those i think 82 total sites our total uh parking spots um and what we tried to do is to minimize the outdoor parking spaces to try to fit within uh the required amount at that 20 margin so we ended up just north of the 42 external spots um if this is something of great concern we do have a little bit of flexibility but once we start reducing those spots it gets pretty tight to be able to manage all of those different stakeholders that i just mentioned so that's how we ultimately came up with that and then as well taking into consideration all of the water capture infiltration and everything on the site that we had to accommodate for this was really the best design we could come up with did that answer your question [35:15] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** yes it does and i also wanted to add that i just wanted to thank you guys for um paying attention to the to the rain runoff and the the the idea and the concept of using the the rain drainage system um is greatly appreciated thank you [35:46] **Mike Hogberg:** yeah [35:53] **Chair Johnson:** anything more on parking or any other questions for mr hallberg any general questions for anything or for john [36:20] **Commissioner Matzke:** mr chair absent of any further discussion i'll make a motion to approve uh site plan for 2020-41 senior housing 1190 county road 47. [36:34] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** um i actually do have a question [36:38] **Chair Johnson:** go ahead mr commissioner stephen allen um [36:42] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** okay so i'm i'm just wanting to make sure that i've got my head wrapped around the traffic review stuff that okay so the traffic review that was done by the independent contractor when was that when were those traffic review dates john do you happen to have that information [37:03] **John Hinzman:** a commissioner i've got that here uh the date of the report was september 30th i'm looking through here to see uh when some of the work happened as far as any estimates on here and i don't know if i can immediately find that i so looking at the traffic yeah yes [37:25] **Mike Hogberg:** that the original and i apologize i don't have it in front of me but the original study was done early 2020 as we were getting prepared for some of the neighborhood meetings on the first rezoning process and the the file that you have that was dated september simply adjusted the trip generation counts to reflect the building downsizing and not including the child daycare that we had once contemplated and so the study was done prior to what i'd call the pandemic phase which was in march um and then this just reflects those and the other thing too is when they when srf does they've done a few studies for us in conjunction with other municipalities is they they go back and look they have historic counts in all the different metropolitan areas just on a lot of the jobs that they're that they do around town and as well they were able to to look at the other communities across the street and they had real-time data from those studies as well to incorporate into this and so um the the comment that was brought up about pre and post pandemic traffic this really does account for uh some of that and as it relates to the pandemic it doesn't really affect our trip generation from from this building i think the biggest conclusion to take away from this is is we are a very light user of roadways during rush hour times this the type of resident that is living here is not going your normal nine to five job in fact all of them are retired um and the staff the way it turns over is not during that those rush hour periods and we intentionally kind of staff and have staff turnover on those off-peak hours so it's a really limited impact to the overall roadways and traffic [39:20] **Commissioner Matzke:** i guess i'd like to kind of piggyback on what mike just said um being the housing manager of a senior facility that's how our traffic pattern goes as well my residents they're not leaving at 7 30 to 8 30 they're leaving to go at 9 30 10 o'clock staff is in before mooring traffic they're in before afternoon traffic um for a lot of the same reasons for traffic so for me looking at the the traffic account it seems well or very fairly accurate to all practical purposes [40:06] **Mike Hogberg:** and and i guess to echo on that if the concern which which is a real concern that frankly we've spent a lot of time on is this corridor is getting more and more crowded uh we understand that that at some point it's going to be need it's going to have to be dealt with and if you consider really any type of multi-family use or higher density use on this site there really is no better option than senior because it just of all the options that could go on there this is the least impact by far um and so not that that's how you should make a decision but it's just a fact on multi-family is that just really don't have that high of an impact on roadways [40:48] **Chair Johnson:** thank you for those comments commissioner yeah just a point of order i put a motion out on the table so generally speaking we usually go for a second and then we go any further discussion we take a roll call so and my motion's still out there to approve it [41:04] **Chair Johnson:** motion is still out there we do not have a second [41:09] **Commissioner Hallberg:** i second [41:10] **Chair Johnson:** seconded by hallberg this would be an appropriate time for further discussion [41:17] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** i have a question go ahead commissioner stephen thanks um john um you know that you know that um that uh i don't i don't know exactly the wording for it but it's that is it an ordinance or it's it's a it's a shoreline protection program so um do you know what i'm talking about like the newest apartment building across the street had to kind of shuffle past it because it was created after they had had their site approved [41:48] **John Hinzman:** yes yes commissioner there there's a shoreline management ordinance that we regulate locally here and the location of this development here is far enough away from the vermilion river to be outside of its jurisdiction so you may ask the question well the uh the development that uh seaward did is much further away from the vermilion river so how come that was came into place that was actually to another waterway there is uh i'm not sure if it has a name to it but there's a great big drainage area that was that is behind uh 31st street near the the seward development that is subject to the shoreland management ordinance so uh short answer it's uh not applicable it's outside the bounds of the shoreline management [42:37] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** okay thank you [42:50] **Chair Johnson:** all right in further discussion hearing none should we call roll [42:56] **John Hinzman:** i can do that mr chair uh commissioner best [43:01] **Commissioner Best:** aye [43:02] **John Hinzman:** commissioner romans [43:04] **Commissioner Romans:** hi [43:05] **John Hinzman:** commissioner matzke [43:06] **Commissioner Matzke:** i [43:07] **John Hinzman:** johnson [43:08] **Chair Johnson:** aye [43:09] **John Hinzman:** commissioner hallberg [43:10] **Commissioner Hallberg:** hi [43:11] **John Hinzman:** and commissioner siebenhaller [43:13] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** aye [43:15] **John Hinzman:** i will note seven eyes on the site plan thank you [43:21] **Chair Johnson:** excellent let's get on to the variance this is for a flat roof versus a 15 requirement standard requirement any questions or comments or should we get a motion on the floor [43:38] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** i have a question or a comment i i would like to add go ahead commissioner steven allen um when i'm looking at the request for variance i feel a great need to understand the the current city code and why it's in place in the first place and sounds like john wasn't real sure but i'm wondering if city staff could research that enough to help us there had to be a reason it was put into place um and there has been many establishments that have had to abide by that and so i feel like we owe it to the process to know more about that particular city code and why it was created in the first place i mean i i can't imagine that it was for for no reason [44:31] **John Hinzman:** and commissioner i can give you the rundown of what i know on the code right now the code itself is applicable only to senior senior assistant facilities i believe is the way it's termed and the number of senior assistant facilities that we've had come in place over the years has been very few like for example the the senior residential facility we had over at schoolhouse square would not have been applicable to this because it's not assisted it's independent living so really we've there's been two that have come under this one would be mississippi terrace and three mississippi terrace downtown the other cda housing over on over on over by by the old target building on south frontage road and then the augustana homes project those all have gabled roofs on those ones as far as the rationale behind those you know from looking back i think a lot of it had to do with there was a time at that time having a gabled roof made something look more residential the homes were mostly in residential areas i'll be at the the one downtown is was in a transition zone and to better to best match those areas uh if based upon the research that i've done that would that would be my conclusion [46:04] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** okay thanks i appreciate that i i kind of like that um you know as low as you can get it it would be helpful for the surrounding residents and residents period thank you [46:24] **Chair Johnson:** does anybody have any concerns with the with the variants should we get a motion on the floor there [46:34] **Commissioner Matzke:** i'll make a motion to approve variance 2020-41 senior housing [46:38] **Commissioner Hallberg:** second [46:40] **Chair Johnson:** excellent and should we take roll [46:44] **John Hinzman:** i'll take roll uh mr siebenhaller [Music] uh yes commissioner romans [46:53] **Commissioner Romans:** hi [46:54] **John Hinzman:** commissioner best [46:55] **Commissioner Best:** aye [46:56] **John Hinzman:** mr hallberg [46:57] **Commissioner Hallberg:** aye [46:58] **John Hinzman:** chair johnson [46:59] **Chair Johnson:** aye [47:00] **John Hinzman:** commissioner messina [47:01] **Commissioner Messina:** aye [47:02] **John Hinzman:** and commissioner matsky [47:03] **Commissioner Matzke:** hi [47:04] **John Hinzman:** i will note seven eyes on that [47:11] **John Hinzman:** all right now note mr chairman i think that concludes the three actions that we have related to vermillion acres uh so these recommendations will move forward to the city council for final action at the november 16th meeting [47:33] **Chair Johnson:** very good and so st phillips church let's move on to the next item on the agenda um st phillips church special use permit 2020-49 columbarium uh justin muted [47:58] **Justin (City Staff):** thank you the planning commission is asked to hold a public hearing uh to consider a special use permit for the columbarium at the subject property shown on the map at the bottom of the map outlined in orange the proposed column barium okay i gotta scroll is uh an outdoor masonry wall store for storing urns they've been uh gaining popularity recently along with uh the popularity of cremation over burials columbariums and cemeteries are allowed in the subject r1 low density residential district with approval of a special use permit the purpose of reviewing a special use permit again is to determine if any special conditions are necessary to assure that the proposal fits in with the character of the area athletic standpoint the proposed impact of the site negligible the improvements are similar to a video or a small parklet type use the intensity of the site generally won't change um there would likely be some more additional activity in the specific location of the columbarium during a funeral but generally the site is not going to have more people attending funerals they would just be having the entire funeral at the site rather than um at the site and then possibly leaving for um cemetery the usage of a columbarium is generally expected to last for a very long time uh possibly forever reason uh staff is proposing a condition on approval for a signature of an agreement identifying the perpetual maintenance care and funding of the facility along with the process for possible removal and restoration if that use ever to terminate columbarium is a masonry wall is shown on the photograph which should be about 16 feet long it's two feet deep and six feet high it's proposed to have 80 double urn niche compartments benches paved area and walkway and landscaping sent to property owners within 350 feet and published in the newspaper uh we recently received a phone call from uh resident diane rahway at 1359 6th street west who commented that she didn't believe this is an appropriate use for the site being it's in a residential setting and is a more appropriate to being located in a cemetery she said it's highly visible from her property and didn't want to have to look at it all the time she said also a lot of people walk on the sidewalk along pleasant in that area and didn't think it was appropriate for them to have to walking past it she did ask if there was going to be any lighting planned for this improvement she said currently there's a a cross lit on the building and a street light and both of those um into her home and um it's impossible to to darken rooms in the house because of those lights and she doesn't want any additional light added to it um lighting wasn't mentioned on the plans and i'm um there's uh some proponents of the application here that maybe can answer that question staff has recommended approval of the proposal subject to the conditions of the staff report quick location of the improvement is shown on the here it's between the church's sanctuary east wall and pleasant and um this is a drawing showing the location uh in the setbacks of 73 feet from the curve unpleasant and 190 feet from 15th street to the north to the existing on site sidewalk system is there a couple of photographs showing the location from uh pleasant street from the north the top and uh from the south the bottom flies location based on the site when they provided um i can stand for any questions and this is uh also just remind you it's a public hearing thank you [53:07] **Chair Johnson:** thank you justin um i think we'll go ahead and open public hearing i know there's at least one person out there um [Music] open the public hearing for the saint phillips church columbarium do we have any comments or concerns from the public [53:35] **John Hinzman:** chairman i'm looking at the audience right now i see a few members there no hands up at this point a reminder to audience members that if you wish to to participate and comment during the public hearing please use the raised hand feature within the zoom application i do have one hand up uh greg guyer i will bring him in to the meeting let's see hold on a second that's not it well i see uh whoops oh he's in there he is greg with uh can you hear me now greg go ahead um [54:19] **Pastor Greg Geyer:** i am blessed to service pastor at st phillips lutheran church and um first of all very grateful for all the service that you provide for our city and communities to each of you um with regards to the one issue of additional lighting i can say that that has not been part at all of the the plans thus far and running that out there it would it is primarily designed uh came up by a number of members specifically that this is their church home and with the growing uh popularity of columbariums and cremation as opposed to full caskets it was thought to be much much like a prayer garden and as you can see we believe aesthetically it is not displeasing to the eye for or for anybody who walks around i probably walk around as much or more than any other human being on these streets and think that it would be a a good thing for our community of faith as well as the community at large and so i thank you for your consideration on this matter [55:24] **Chair Johnson:** thanks greg in fact i might i have a quite quick question for you too i it i've seen these quite appropriately used in many many places um do you have any plans or thoughts about future expansion uh you know what if kind of scenario you got you got 80 80 times two is that what i heard just a just in question i don't know if you've thought about it but [55:49] **Pastor Greg Geyer:** we have thought about it um it will probably be long long long after i'm retired just because we don't have that many funerals we probably are in maybe eight to twelve total funerals and not everybody uh that would have a funeral here would necessarily utilize it because many cases folks have already prepaid and they have arrangements made um for them but in theory uh at some future point in the granted it would have to come before this committee and probably i'm guessing none of you would be making that decision but to have another um sort of half circle to do the next set of 80 units you know kind of opposite where the other one is or adjacent i mean the plans certainly could be there but it's this we were thinking that this would last for i'm guessing decades before that we would have the demand or the need for any expansion [57:00] **Chair Johnson:** right and am i correct in in the placement here this the half circle right now if you're looking at it you're looking at the building as well correct [57:11] **Pastor Greg Geyer:** well this is kind of on the opposite side yes sir [57:15] **Chair Johnson:** all right anybody else have any anything for uh greg are we still we're still doing the public hearing correct [57:26] **John Hinzman:** we are in a public hearing so we're do we have anybody else that's um raise their hand john mr chair we have no other raised hands at this time in the audience again if you wish to address the commission please use the raised hand feature in zoom [58:05] **Chair Johnson:** all right well do not see anything else at this time mr chair all right so we'll go ahead and and greg if you want to hang on we might have questions i'm not sure but we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and turn this over to the commissioners [Music] anything people [58:35] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** i've got a question commissioner siebenhall go ahead um i'm wondering who okay i see that the owner of the property is saint phillips lutheran church is that a is is that part of a larger entity or is it a a single situation [58:56] **Pastor Greg Geyer:** um it is an independent congregation it is part of the evangelical lutheran church in america but there is no fiduciary responsibility or oversight other than if i misbehave technically there's a bishop that can come and remove me but uh from a it is it's a private entity and i have no intentions of misbehaving for the record [59:20] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** so i guess what i'm getting at with asking that question is if for instance um the larger entity that owns the property decides [59:32] **Pastor Greg Geyer:** no no no st phillips owns all of property the evangelic lutheran church in america does not own any of the property it is unlike um in some other church bodies it is completely autonomous um [59:52] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** justin i've got a little a couple just a wanting a little help with understanding number two um does the signed agreement will do you anticipate the signed agreement to include some kind of escrow to ensure that if they ever decide to relocate or if they go out of business that that there is money there to be able to move it [1:00:23] **Justin (City Staff):** um well it hasn't been determined yet but i don't think we'd be looking to have any type of uh position in any type of funding situation we would just want to make sure that they do have a a source that is funded that could be earmarked specifically for this for that purpose [1:00:46] **Commissioner Matzke:** justin i have a question um is this site will this site be reviewed by uh the city engineering and for grading or just not go before the city city engineering department for grading because i've looked at the overall city of st phillips uh plan on an unrelated the stormwater pond that's just to the north of there eve there's a this is going to be filling in a depression that acts as kind of as an emergency overflow for that it's meant to hold water as part of their stormwater drainage plan not sure if that's been reviewed or not or if that's going to be reviewed is that something that they've looked at in when they when they put this together uh pastor guyer did your team [1:01:46] **Pastor Greg Geyer:** yes that's when we yes and actually it will not go the there is a there's the larger drainage pond which we are trying to get back to and we've had and i don't remember the name of the gentleman from the city that has come and because we did consult that um and the amount it is actually higher up much closer to the sanctuary itself before it slopes down there is another it's not a it's it's a lower drainage area but it does not collect water the same way that the one right closer to the corner does [1:02:22] **Commissioner Matzke:** right it's it's an emergency overflow for the storm water pond that was put in and my understanding is in looking at the overall drainage plan when the church did the expansion that was designed for the drainage plan for the site not sure if that's been reviewed or not or if the city had any review in that when they looked at the site if it's going to be affect that or does that not come into effect here or what's how does how does that work i might probably defer to uh gary mcdougall who i believe is also on he he has been sort of spearheading uh on behalf of the congregation some of these things i thought it was my understanding that we had had the been in conversation with the city before selecting that location to make sure that it was tees would be crossed and eyes would be dotted but i wouldn't by the same token i was not privy to any of those specific conversations [1:03:39] **Chair Johnson:** is that a justin question was for justin if that was something that the city city took into you know when before they brought it before us if they had looked at this and the drainage plan and felt it was appropriate it was okay to put it there [1:03:55] **Justin (City Staff):** this isn't uh part of a site plan review that goes through all the departments um we're looking at it from a youth standpoint right now it's kind of a improvement that doesn't require a building permit so it's not something that would even have come to the city if it were not for the the use being a columbarium related to uh you know a cemetery type use um so again you can't get in though gary are you there [1:04:36] **Gary McDougall:** yes i am i can't get back in here now i'm sorry i don't have my grandkids here to help me out [1:04:42] **Chair Johnson:** we can hear you gary [1:04:44] **Gary McDougall:** yeah we can hear you i think you're good okay a question do you do you know anything about the storm water management plan there and does this call them very affected in any way we we looked at that and we we looked at the size of the patio that's going in uh it's going to be a pavers it's about 400 square feet is all and around that there's going to be a lot of landscaping so it'll be pretty water absorbent from that so i don't think the runoff would we didn't look at that as being a problem [1:05:22] **Chair Johnson:** well um what i might suggest that this point that mr commissioner matzky's brought up maybe it's a contingency that we attach to any kind of approval um i don't exactly understand how the stormwater is managed here and we've not been giving given any grading uh information we just might want to make sure that that gets looked at um i mean we could make an approval contingent on some civil review [1:05:54] **Gary McDougall:** okay there will be no grading at all required other than a removal of about six inches for a base for the patio [1:06:05] **Chair Johnson:** so you're not you're not feeling anything you're you're adding a little bit of impervious uh you maybe not would maybe the the structure would not impede any kind of emergency if if there is an emergency overflow let's say in in this position we just want to make sure that the structure doesn't impede that [1:06:27] **Gary McDougall:** sure chair go ahead um [1:06:33] **Commissioner Hallberg:** i think if i was hearing justin correctly the only reason why this is coming in front of us is because of the use they could literally just build this wall without our without without us saying a thing so i mean i i think the only reason why it's coming in front of us is because of that variance am i correct justin because because of the special use permit right so if they just wanted to build a 16-foot rounded wall with just their with just something on it was it like a monument they could do that without even our approval at this point is that correct okay thank you [1:07:11] **Chair Johnson:** well i don't believe we want to prove something that's going to cause any runoff problems um justin can i ask can i ask you why why this wouldn't be a building permit [1:07:27] **Justin (City Staff):** because it's not a structure um it's just a a monument type of thing that's not gonna doesn't need to be inspected to make sure it's gonna collapse on people or doesn't have electricity no plumbing kind of like a landscape feature [1:08:00] **Chair Johnson:** okay any further comments what uh could i speak please yeah go ahead please gary [1:08:12] **Gary McDougall:** yeah what would you suggest uh we need to to do now then the structure itself is only it'd be like taking a piece of plywood cutting and happening and laying at the end and that's the size of it it's going to be up fairly close to church but the landscaping and so forth that we're looking at is going to be a patio of about 400 square feet and we've we've contacted a design architect to do that so it would be done professionally and we want to want it to be as buffered as it can be for us and the community so that's what we're looking at when we when we set this up just we'd like to just get started if you could tell us what we need to do [1:08:58] **Chair Johnson:** well i don't know if does the city staff have any concerns about drainage there [1:09:07] **John Hinzman:** it's it's not changing grade no right i mean we're here to approve a variance and um mr matzke brought something up that may be of concern is as long as long as they're not filling in the depression there i don't see as though i would have an objection of this but i guess [1:09:30] **Gary McDougall:** if they say it's going to be close to the church there will be no filling in of that depression because there is a separate drain there for the secondary one and that would not be touched at all [1:09:42] **Chair Johnson:** okay and commissioners [1:09:47] **John Hinzman:** yeah i'd follow up with that too that uh i know this is something that uh would not trigger a building permit review uh i don't know if the the amount of impervious surface added even if this development would trigger anything i don't see that it would but uh we certainly can just do a check prior to the council with uh with our engineering staff that'd be fair and uh mr chair i do see an additional hand in the audience i know that the public hearing has been closed but if you want to entertain another another person from the audience i'll leave that up to your description [1:10:37] **Chair Johnson:** absolutely bring them on [1:10:41] **John Hinzman:** all right i'll call dana elling schultz into the meeting welcome dan i think you're muted right now uh unmute and you are set to go muted yourself again oh there we go here we go [1:11:03] **Dana Elling Schultz:** good evening um planning commission members um i think i i am why is this muting can you hear me it keeps saying i'm muted um i i wanted to mention that i think that maybe commissioner matt matzke um i let me go back justin um to um say that you don't um you you're you're not doing your job correctly but i think maybe where the indication on some of the plans that you showed uh showed the columbarium site a little bit too close to the sidewalk and the street and it is actually closer to the physical building um that is correct um and that i don't believe and i've walked past there oh a million and a half times and i it is not set to be built in the depression and i totally understand the concern because um that's where part of the aquifer um runs and there's a lot of runoff in that area but that's why that big um the big ponding basin is there um after we did the addition so i i don't see that that would be something that would be a real great concern especially considering it's a very small surface that would be constructed yes thank you oh thank you [1:12:45] **Chair Johnson:** all right having personally speaking having heard um what we've heard i i i don't think there's any drainage issues with this structure um but i've not studied it the point has come up um have some city staff look at it and i realize it's kind of a little bit out of the bounds of what we're trying to do here what we're authorized to do here but do we have any other concerns should we get a motion on the floor [1:13:14] **Commissioner Matzke:** mr chair go ahead i'd make a motion to uh approve the special use permit 2024-9 columbarium at st phillips lutheran church as written [1:13:28] **Chair Johnson:** motion on the floor second [1:13:30] **Commissioner Hallberg:** out second [1:13:31] **Chair Johnson:** excellent and should we take roll job [1:13:34] **John Hinzman:** all right i could take the roll on this commissioner matsky [1:13:38] **Commissioner Matzke:** i [1:13:39] **John Hinzman:** chair johnson [1:13:40] **Chair Johnson:** hi [1:13:41] **John Hinzman:** your best [1:13:42] **Commissioner Best:** i'm going to abstain since i'm a member of that church [1:13:46] **John Hinzman:** okay commissioner messina [1:13:48] **Commissioner Messina:** hi [1:13:49] **John Hinzman:** romans [1:13:50] **Commissioner Romans:** hi [1:13:51] **John Hinzman:** auburn [1:13:52] **Commissioner Hallberg:** aye [1:13:53] **John Hinzman:** mr siebenhaller [1:13:54] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** hi [1:13:55] **John Hinzman:** i will note that the recommend recommendation passes uh 6-0 with one abstention and that recommendation will be placed before the city council on their november 16th meeting [1:14:14] **Chair Johnson:** thank you very much yes thank you thanks for your people from the public very much pastor great all right um other business business mr chair [1:14:26] **John Hinzman:** well taking a look at activities uh that have been occurring the city council did approve the special use permit and variance for 321 east 6th street that's the conversion of the former harbor shelter building into historical apartments so that will commence which is great on the development side of things projects continue on the residential side if you've gone down general sieben drive you've noticed that a tremendous amount of grading is occurring related to what's now known as heritage ridge which i think when you reviewed it was sieben ridge same development same plans moving forward on that uh villas unpleasant are planning a spring start uh as well as uh the project that uh that we just discussed here assuming that the city council uh takes final action on it and approves it uh one other thing that might be coming forward to us in the near future as well is hedre is looking at a potential industrial park sale for another mini storage facility at their meeting on thursday uh provided that they're in agreement with the sale and city council is there would be a site plan and special use permit that will be coming forward to you folks uh maybe towards the end of the year here uh one one business note for everybody here a reminder that well we will have at least one vacancy on the planning commission this year and that we are accepting applications for planning commission and all other commissions up until november 20th so if you know of somebody who's interested in serving on the commission uh we our website has a quick application they can fill out and send in and they can be open for consideration so that's all that i have for you [1:16:30] **Chair Johnson:** thank you mr hensman um i'd just like to comment it's really good to see you here dan [Wietecha] uh it's you know shows uh it's good it's good to have you um are we uh done here should we get a motion to adjourn [1:16:47] **John Hinzman:** i i have nothing further mr chair [1:16:51] **Commissioner Siebenhaller:** all right i'll motion to adjourn [1:16:54] **Commissioner Matzke:** second i'll second that [1:16:56] **Chair Johnson:** okay and i will go through i'll go through the row one more time here commission i i think you just called me i okay yes uh chair johnson [1:17:15] **Chair Johnson:** hi [1:17:16] **John Hinzman:** mr best [1:17:17] **Commissioner Best:** aye [1:17:18] **John Hinzman:** mr messina [1:17:19] **Commissioner Messina:** aye [1:17:21] **John Hinzman:** mr romans [1:17:22] **Commissioner Romans:** aye