[0:02] foreign [Music] [0:39] Chair Melissa Kenninger: [Music] on the bottom right am I as well I call to order the Rosemont Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday September 26th please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic in which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all are there any additions to tonight's [1:25] agenda uh Madam chair there are no additions to the agenda thank you if there is any input from the audience on agenda come to the party Holdings for the record at this time and we do ask the audience to keep their comments to three minutes if they wish to address the public or the Planning Commission this evening [1:49] Chair Melissa Kenninger: seeing then we will move on to the consent agenda our consent agenda this evening includes the minutes of the August 22nd 2023 regular meeting minutes are there any comments or questions on the consent agenda seeing that I will make a motion to approve the consent agenda second it has been motioned by commissioner kinegar seconded by commissioner Haber all those in favor please say aye aye opposed motion passes I am going to skip over old business as we have no old business this evening okay um and we will move into a public hearing section we have two items that will have public hearings on this evening the first is a request by Maplewood development for approval of the Amber Fields 13th edition [2:34] preliminary Platt and I will turn that over to Julia [2:43] Julia Hogan: all right so this item tonight is a preliminary plan for amberfield's 13th edition so a little bit of a summary for the of the requests so the Planning Commission is being asked to consider requests by Maplewood development for approval of a preliminary plot for amberfields 13 Edition to create 65 single family residential lots so a little bit of the site location so you can see that the site is outlined in red it is located on the Southeastern portion of the overall Amber Fields development located directly west of Akron Avenue and also north of 154th down there all right a little bit of overall site plans so gross area of the site is 14.68 acres and the density is 4.43 units per acre like I had mentioned 65 single [3:29] family lots are requested for this site so you can also see that there are there's two roadways throughout the site the looped Road B that will go off of the proposed Road a that will come off of Akron Avenue from the west and then there also will be a road C that will interconnect the looped Road also proposed for this area is a trail Connection in between lot 20 and Lot 19 in Block one that will connect to that Central Greenway area and that will be part of phase two so heres the phasing plan for the site so the first fade of the subdivision will consist of the 37 of the proposed single family lots part of the Interior roadways of c and b and then also Road a [4:16] off of Akron Avenue that will interconnect throughout the development and then the second phase will consist of the remaining 28 single-family Lots in the remaining interior roadway and Trail extension as well um so some lot standards so that table that's shown right there you can see that what dimensions were approved with the Amber Fields PUD and then also what is being proposed for the 13th edition so the applicant is also requesting a minor Amendment to the Pud to reduce the minimum lot width and reduce the minimum lot area square footage um so the corner Lots within the subdivision do meet those minimum requirements that were approved in the Amber Fields PUD but there are a few interior laws that do not meet that minimum 5445 feet width [5:03] Julia Hogan: so the landscape plan so 88 trees are to be provided throughout this site and then a landscape Surety in the amount of twenty nine thousand forty dollars is required as a condition of approval the landscape plan does meet the requirements and then here is showing the preliminary plot of the site just showing the roadways and also the 65 Lots presented for the site and then a couple elevations that were sent over from the applicant so here are a few that are proposed for the houses throughout the Edition then here are a couple more and then here is um some looking out from the roadway onto the potential homes throughout the subdivision as well [5:49] Julia Hogan: so recommended action so a motion to recommend the city council approve the preliminary plot for Amber Fields 13 Edition conditions uh subject to conditions a through e then I will take any questions from the commission are there any questions at this time for Julia yes commissioner Whitman [6:00] Commissioner Whitman: thank you um yeah a couple questions one this minor amendment that they're asking us to approve so as I understand it the the um some of the Interior Lots don't meet the minimum lot requirement because they're it's a smaller it's a lot less of a lot area and so they're asking for a smaller [6:37] lot area than what is yes correctly required yes um and yes sorry no keep going um and this isn't the first time we've seen this for an addition throughout the Amber Fields development um Amber Fields Edition fifth edition um which was David Weekley Homes we did allow for a minor amendment to allow for decrease in lot area square footage and as well as lot width as well um this is not to that extent that minor amendment was only for that Edition so that's why they have to come forward again for a minor amendment to allow for it for this Edition what's the is there the minor amendments capitalized is that a is that a defined term in our zoning code is end and is there uh some kind of legal framework or [7:22] Commissioner Whitman: parameters that we have to look at in order to approve a minor Amendment yeah so there's minor amendments and major amendments um that is at the discretion of the community development director and how we see the request being either a minor or a major like I had mentioned since we did do that as a minor Amendment for the fifth edition we did see this being relevant to be a minor Amendment for this Edition as well but for us approving it is there I mean is it just our discretion to approve it or not or is it a minor amendment that changes a PUD can only be approved if blah blah blah you know what I'm just I'm just wondering if there's some kind of framework we're supposed to be looking at well a minor amendment is only only goes forward in front of the [8:09] city council so there will be um that in front of for them a major Amendment does go in front of the Planning Commission as well um that's why as a condition within um this approval that a minor Amendment would be have to be approved by the city council so commissioner Whitman um there are some standards that the community development director should consider when determining if a Amendment request is major or minor one example is if it changes the number of stories if it's a commercial or other type of a development or if it increases the number of residential units by greater than five percent that would be a threshold that would lead to a major Amendment but simply changing the the [8:54] Anthony Nemcek: minimum lot area or one of those did not fall to the level or rise to the level so to speak of a major Amendment requiring a public hearing for that specific request okay and then I guess my that thank you both um the so this PUD has been established it has these requirements staff has determined it's a minor that the director has determined it's a minor Amendment does is the director also considering whether I I wasn't here when the Pud was approved so I don't know but are there like environmental concerns and that sort of thing that not concerns but issues that need to be addressed and [9:41] Commissioner Whitman: resolved before approving that level of a zoning approval um does it change does a minor Amendment just by itself not change those you know like having a smaller lot area does that affect any any of the findings that were made when the Pud was approved so like for instance um so for smaller lot wise we do have you know our inter-departmental meetings with everyone so if engineering did have if the engineer nearing Department did have concerns regarding you know runoff from smaller Lots or anything like that they would let us know in their reports [10:28] Julia Hogan: that they do for preliminary preliminary plots um there was no concerns in regards to that from them that was their memo was attached within the um within the attachments um also again with the original PUD everything was looked over engineering had um comments within that I don't know if Anthony wants to add any additional well I think the the biggest thing is that the request for that deviation or change to the deviation standard doesn't really change the development patterns on the site it's simply the the request for that smaller lot when it was approved prior was only limited to that specific preliminary plaid area versus [11:16] Anthony Nemcek: the entire plan unit Development Area I guess okay um and that's fully clear on where you're going with with it well I just I is there ever a reason not to approve a minor Amendment it sounds like just like not even a big deal like why are we even approving it or not well the main thing we look at for these ones is that that minor Amendment resolution is approved so that when building permits do come forward that we can approve what comes in front of us like for instance with the Amber Fields fifth edition we allow for those smaller Lots on that one in regards to that but there's other like amberfield's second edition has larger parameters they fall under the Amber Fields PUD regulation so a lot of it comes forward when the building permits come forward for those houses and it's [12:01] Julia Hogan: what the building department and planning looks at when approving those as well okay Julia I think I don't know if I had my count right but I think it's like seven lots that this applies to yeah it's not many all the corner Lots meet the minimum requirements there's a couple within the interior that don't meet that parameter and are at that 5200 square feet in area size okay I mean to me it would be more concerning if they were asking for a a variance to drop it drastically to fit a lot more Lots in there or something and if every lot was going to you know 5200 or 52.50 and um and such but you know it's less it's about 10 percent of their total fall into it so you know I think it makes sense I just I [12:48] Commissioner Whitman: want to be careful that like this is the second one we've done so you know we don't want to create a I don't know if it's gonna if we're gonna have a lot of these and to what degree as they continue to to build out Amber field um if there's if every development that comes forward is gonna or every Edition is gonna need to go down and how many lots and and such does that make sense yeah so the alternative I guess what I'm looking at is we keep the same amount of lots at the same amount of footage and then just have more Green Space versus having more housing space is that the alternative I mean [13:34] Commissioner Whitman: they'd have to probably come back with a different design or different plan well I'm not proposing and I'm just saying that that yeah typically if you're asking for Less footage for certain Lots then you're getting more houses in a smaller area ultimately um and we saw that same with you know Amber Fields fourth and fifth editions and many other editions within Amber fields we are seeing that smaller footprint but um that is something that the market is seeing those smaller Footprints and that's why these developers are coming forward and asking for these smaller ones um so one one more question turning to the trees the preservation and Landscaping section just for my clarification it looks like [14:21] Commissioner Whitman: there's two paragraphs here the second one deals with a total of 88 trees will be planted and that's what you have on this slide here as well there's a landscaping Surety that's required but that first paragraph is talking about certain amount of caliper inches of trees and it states staff is confident this will be met as development continues are you stating that you're confident that is are these two separate things we're talking about here or are you confident that the 88 trees will be planted no the 88 trees need to be over the caliper inches is more so from what the trees that were had to be taken down with the development that has to be made [15:07] Julia Hogan: up what's the basis for your confidence in that um there's a large green space proposed within this development the central Greenway and it has to be made up that's a requirement of the original Amber Fields PUD that was approved back in 21 that was a requirement that they have to meet those makeup and caliber inches so um the main developer is aware of this and staff's confident that they'd be able to make up those inches throughout the different people with this okay that's provided there you're confident that there's room for those trees to go in it can be met but you're not stating you're confident they're going to do it they're required to do it right yes [15:55] Commissioner Whitman: but here you have a surety for planting 88 trees that builds some confidence to me but to not have any kind of Surety and just state that you're confident it will be mad without it having been met I guess I don't know why why are we why is Staff confident about better commissioner it's more that the the confidence that there's enough room for them to make up for the tree replacement that they're required to plant within that open Green Space at that time when we see what the planting schedule and Landscape plan is for that open Green Space we'll be collecting a surety for those trees in addition to the 88 that are required as part of this which is just the standard you know one per interior lot two per Corner lots and [16:41] Anthony Nemcek: then any additional ones on the boulevard for example on that southernmost Street are in addition to what the code requires so those will count towards The Replacements that are required within the overall Master development plan so when when we give the Landscaping plan for that Central Park and green Air Green Space area that's where we'll calculate The Surety for those trees themselves okay so the confidence is that there's enough space for them to fit all of the replacement trees that are they'll be required to plant but just on a lot by lot basis it's been hard to do because we're only looking at these you know basically blocks of of homes okay okay and so a surety is collected on those [17:27] Commissioner Whitman: once it's deemed where those additional caliber inch right because they're going to be replaced yes and then the landscape Surety is right is taken okay then you're really confident for a year all right that's it thank you very much there are questions from the commission item thank you Julia at this time we will open up the public hearing on this item anyone in the audience that would like to speak on this item may do so at this time coming to the podium stating your name and address for the record [18:08] Chair Melissa Kenninger: seeing that I will make a motion to close the public hearing is there a second okay it has been motioned by commissioner kenniger and seconded by commissioner Haber to close the public hearing all those in favor please say aye aye opposed motion carries the public hearing is now closed and at this time we could entertain a motion on this item before us yeah I'll I'll try to make a motion here I think this is my first emotion I've made since I've been a planning commissioner um I moved to recommend that the city council approve the preliminary plot for Amber Fields 13th edition subject to the conditions as stated in the recommended [18:53] Commissioner Whitman: action a through e second it's been moved by commissioner Whitman and seconded by commissioner Powell all those in favor please say aye aye opposed motion carries that concludes the first item on our public hearing agenda for this evening the next item on our public hearing agenda is a request by al-madina association for a site plan review and I will turn that over to Anthony thank you madam chair this may be a familiar uh site for some of you on the commission the applicant did apply for a conditional use permit for a place of worship on this site which is located uh kind of in the north northern portion of the Eastern portion of the city uh right off Bonaire path so as I said they had [19:39] Anthony Nemcek: received a conditional use permit in 2022 on the site and had initially been planning on converting an existing garage to an assembly space for their worship on the property after some consideration by the applicant and discussions with the city's building official it it was too much or too it was unlikely to work for the applicant to convert a garage into an assembly space due to the requirements of the building code the applicant has come back with a site plan a proposal and is seeking site plan review to construct a new building on this site in with that is about 40 by 85 feet or 300 or 3 400 [20:25] Anthony Nemcek: square feet footprint staff is recommending some conditions uh to that approval uh due to the fact there are some shortfalls in the applicant's plans that could be made up through those conditions recommended namely there's some requirement for some screening or trees planted within a required buffer yard so the Landscaping plan would be required to be updated to include those in order to be in conformance with the city code there is also some parking located within that buffer yard that will have to be shifted or relocated elsewhere to meet that requirement so as I said the site is located along Bonaire path just on the south side of Bon Air path near the intersection with [21:11] Anthony Nemcek: Bacardi Avenue immediately east of the site is Meadows Park and south of the site is a city water tower and fire station 2. West of the site is a large lot that's currently being used as a single family residential parcel and immediately to the north is a non-conforming commercial property just at the intersection with Bacardi Avenue a little bit more site contexts Robert Trail is further west and to the east is Autumn path Bella Vista is northeast of the site with Horseshoe Park in there so the site itself has a very rural feel uh and it is heavily wooded on the southern portion of the site and you can see the existing home here this was the garage [21:57] Anthony Nemcek: that would have been converted had that been possible and then to the east is a park here showing some grass that had been control burned to eliminate non-native invasive species if you were wondering what the black ashy area is there a view of the site from the street shows the existing home the proposed building would be located to the rear of that phase placed in a diagonal orientation the site itself has many trees as well as some existing lilac plants along the western boundary and further back you can see that wooded area on the site so the site plan proposed by the applicant shows the structure here being [22:44] Anthony Nemcek: placed thusly with some parking to the rear of the site and wrapping around to the right as I said there was some parking placed in that 30-foot buffer yard that would have to be shifted or relocated some additional plantings would have to be placed along there although the existing Greenery here does provide some screening further back you can see in this image it is a little bit more open to the adjacent parcel with regards to the site standards related to setbacks and building Heights the front yard setback the minimum is 30 feet the actual new structure will be placed 134 feet back from the Bonaire [23:30] Anthony Nemcek: path the side yard setback is typically 10 feet side yard setback with the required buffer yard of 30 feet the building meets that with the region as shown here this portion of the parking does fall 30 feet from that parcel boundary and the rear yard setback is 10 feet the the new structure would be located 319 feet from the rear property line the maximum Building height for a structure like this in the public institutional District would be 40 feet the applicant structure is 24 and a half feet tall and the city code does allow for some additional structural elements to it that would are allowed to exceed [24:16] Anthony Nemcek: that in this case the minaret would be allowed to be up to 65 feet tall or 25 feet taller than the maximum Building height in this case the top of the minaret is 41 feet 5 inches tall with regards to parking on the site the applicant has provided a plan showing a number of parking stalls as well as a proof of parking the code requires one stall per three seats four assembly uses based on the overall size of the building the building code itself anticipates a maximum capacity of 248 people and that does not take into regard the different spaces within the building if it's seats or kitchen area or meeting rooms or anything like that so just based on the 248 people that [25:02] Anthony Nemcek: could possibly fit in there with a ratio of one per three feet three seats 83 parking stalls would be required on the site the applicant's plan shows 27 stalls which would equate equate to 81 seats within the building uh the proof of parking shows room for an additional 84 stalls which is um I think I don't have it on me at 248 more uh 250 or 248 more people could fit in there with the proof of parking so uh that is to say if someone were to come in and purchase this and use it for something different there is enough room on site to allow for that additional parking if it were needed just based on [25:48] Anthony Nemcek: conversations with the applicant and the information that they provided their actual parking needs are far lower than the 80 some stalls shown in the proof and therefore staff is recommending approval of the site plan with the parking shown here in the hatched area after review with the city's building official the plan shows a widened driveway to 22 feet to allow for emergency apparatus as well as turnaround areas to allow for the maneuvering of those vehicles the applicant does have some Landscaping on site there's a total of 26 trees provided or planted existing 53 are [26:34] Anthony Nemcek: required but the city code only requires two and a half inch wide or caliper inch trees so um just looking at the site itself you can see many of the trees which will be remaining on the site are well beyond that and therefore it is anticipated that the site is well in conformance with that minimum planting requirement additionally Foundation plantings in the number in in the amount of one per 10 feet of building perimeter equate to 25 Foundation plantings the plan shows a total of 41 shrubs on the site additional Landscaping is provided around the parking areas which is consistent with the city code [27:20] Anthony Nemcek: the building elevations provided by the applicant show some vertical elements to break up the the walls along there this being the South elevation kind of the main entrance as people come in and park on the rear of the building if you were looking at it from the from the street you can see those different windows and a dome and other elements there this would be the Eastern elevation so facing the Northeast of the site this is the west facing elevation with some additional vertical elements punctuated by the windows there and then lastly the southern elevation the code does call for the use of brick [28:06] Anthony Nemcek: and natural stone on 50 of the site the applicant's plans do include a stone face block on the foundation areas and the applicant is proposing to use control joists separating a fiber cement paneling material positioned in a way that mimics a stone block exterior while not actually using brick or natural stone with regards to this the intent of the ordinance and the material the the specific language in the code says that the the materials are required in order to prevent Urban blight and ensure quality long lasting construction that does not detract from adjacent properties and is compatible with those throughout the distance or District [28:52] Anthony Nemcek: excuse me it is staffs finding that the materials proposed by the applicant do meet the intent stated before you there and an example of how the the control joints would be used is most clearly depicted kind of in that upper right picture on the left hand side there with the with the control joints creating a brick-like exterior um a couple other notes the site had but has been you uh served by well and septic a requirement of their cup approval and of this uh site plan would be that they tie into the two eight inch water and sewer lines [29:38] Anthony Nemcek: on the Eastern portion of the site which the applicant is aware of and as indicated would be done as part of this project additional conditions staff is recommending with this are to update that landscape plan to include some Evergreens along that Western portion of the site as well as reiterate the fact that the driveway and parking areas shall be paved lastly the city's engineer and building official have reviewed these plans but as this goes through the building permit process a formal approval or stamp so to speak would be given to that and so any requirements of the engineer and building official be incorporated into the plans prior to a building permit being issued [30:25] Anthony Nemcek: and lastly a landscape Surety in the amount of 110 percent of the cost of any trees planted on the site to be returned after one year of survival is a requirement as well so with that I can take any questions the commission might have I do know the applicant is president who may be able to better speak to their plans than I am thank you Anthony are there any questions or comments from the commission at this time [30:55] Commissioner Powell: [Laughter] so nice here um so I was here originally when the original proposal was in place and if you could just remind me Anthony um at one point then they were going to convert the garage dwelling and do you remember or can you tell us how many um how many people that was originally going to hold versus the 248 now with the new proposal I couldn't tell you what that exact number was the building code just kind of has a general maximum capacity and that's what we were going by simply because the use is not doesn't fall within that direct um uh use like the layout and the worship [31:45] Commissioner Powell: will not occur in typical Auditorium style seating that could be used to calculate how about this this the new the new building is proposed to be I think you said 40 by 85. yes 3 400 square feet what about the original garage space maybe that will help me to kind of put it into perspective of the difference in size um well I can tell you on the site plan you can see here the original one was approximately 44 Maybe by 20 44 by 20. [32:16] Commissioner Powell: so much smaller and you can see it on the site plan here this existing garage and one other question then too like obviously this is a residential home that's can that's on the dwelling at this point is the lot itself zoned for residential itself or is there something else that it's zoned for on top of that to be able to build this type of larger structure in the backyard so um house places of worship are allowed within the R1 zoning District as a conditional use so you have to go through the conditional use permit process in order to use that site for that use [33:02] Anthony Nemcek: the applicant did get that approval so it's kind of uh quasi-residential quasi-public institutional the conditional use permit process is to mitigate any impacts that there would be on incompatible or different uses in close proximity so basically in a neighborhood I think my last question the only other concern originally I think was possibly people parking in areas they shouldn't and around the block and things like that but it looks like parking is going to have enough room for 83 required stalls correct correct there's there's significant parking [33:48] Commissioner Powell: space for parking through the proof of parking and also staff would just note that there is no parking allowed on Bonaire path noron Bacardi Avenue in that in proximity of the subject parcel the closest parking that could be done off or on Street would be over 500 feet away to the West but it's just not likely that that would be the case that's all I have thank you commissioner Powell thank you my first question is kind of the mechanics of our approval here so they've got a conditional use permit are we modifying that original condition when you use permit by this action or are we we're [34:35] Commissioner Powell: probably a better way to put it is adding additional conditions that are tied to the construction of this building okay the original conditions in their conditional use permit would still apply okay the plantings and the trees and there's credit essentially given correct for existing trees on site those those can count towards the minimum required we know how many of those are ash trees I do not know off the top of my head how many but if there are there will be likely fewer on there for sure okay um my concern as I asked trees it's Emerald Ash bores all over Yes trees are being taken down all the right and left so uh the the proof of parking [35:22] Commissioner Powell: um what will trigger the applicant to build the proof of parking so typically the proof of parking is uh the trigger is if it's the city's discretion for if that needs to be implemented and so we we would see parking on the street or hear about it more likely um that would be a trigger that the city would then work with the applicant and say you have to start implementing this proof of parking secondly would be if the use were to change into a use that has a higher level of parking requirement the code specifically says that the proof of parking would have to be implemented or parking would have to be provided for that new use whatever it would be [36:10] Anthony Nemcek: yeah um so if they're using all the pave spots and there's significant parking in the gravel area will staff consider that in the future like if they're using the gravel area for parking on a routine basis maybe they should construct that proof of parking right right yes because that is the requirement in in properties that are served by Municipal sewer and water that parking areas are paved with bituminous or concrete okay and finally uh it's to be paved with an approved surface I assume we're talking between us are kind of great exactly thank you Mr mortman yes thank you um just one question on the fiber cement [36:55] Commissioner Whitman: siding that's being used and I understand staff 's conclusion is that that meets the intent of the ordinance as I understand the ordinance says something like you have to have rock or stone face but this looks like rock or stone face I think is what I'm hearing and so aesthetically it meets the intent the only thing I heard and the reason I'm asking the question is when you read that off it says long lasting construction and I'm just asking if does that change having five or cement siding versus like a full stone or Rock does that change the long lastingness of the construction I think I would defer to the applicants [37:42] Anthony Nemcek: architect on that about the specifics of the material it's something that we've been seeing somewhat regularly requests by developers to use materials that aren't explicitly allowed but because our code was written when it was written you know you can't use metal paneling well the metal paneling nowadays is not corrugated you know or galvanized steel or something like that so it's more um just allowing it to be a little bit more um reflective of modern construction techniques um and if one of the one of the um intents or goals is for it to be compatible with other properties throughout the area allowing this [38:29] Anthony Nemcek: material which is used on homes and things like that would be a little bit more complementary to those but yes I see where you're coming from and I would defer to the architect on the specific materials long lasting or durable yeah on elements okay thank you any other questions or comments yes I have thank you I just have questions on what is the color being proposed or the product um I the code doesn't really regulate the colors so I would defer to the applicant on what they were thinking for it okay are the existing structures the the home and the garage staying where they are [39:15] Commissioner Haber: are they being demolished yeah it's Steph's understanding that they would be remaining on site and then any comments from their residential property that uh is adjacent to this site staff didn't receive any comments or calls regarding this request thank you Anthony can you I just wanted to clarify on the trees the the credit that's given for them is a tree for tree or is it because some of those trees are more established that there that they would get more credit for them generally it would be how we've with the tree inventory and the true preservation portion of the city code it's all calculated on Caliper inches okay so staff would interpret it [40:02] Chair Melissa Kenninger: as caliper inches okay we certainly wouldn't want them to remove a large established tree and then replace it with a two and a half inch tree right right yeah have it still right okay so so they may not need to plant any trees once you go through the inventory is what could be the outcome except for the trees that are required to be put in for shielding of the parking right which are are different than just kind of the general you need this many trees based on the size okay okay with with commissioner Paul's comment about the ash trees certainly not counting um one other thought when when there was the conversation about parking that I that I had on some other properties we have done conditions where there can't be off-street parking so I'm thinking I feel like like Community like [40:50] Chair Melissa Kenninger: The Community of Hope Athletic Center or hope field house and then like the North 20 Brewery we had conditions in there that and I get the ostrich Market as far away but that we had conditions where there couldn't be off street parking done and if that would trigger the additional parking is that something that we should consider here I think that I mean certainly you can condition it how you see fit from an enforcement standpoint it's very difficult um right I think if it's a repeated ongoing issue it could be a little bit easier to suss out with you know where the parking problems are are coming from um but being that there is it's clearly [41:38] Anthony Nemcek: no parking on the street and no parking on Bacardi the two closest areas um it just doesn't seem likely that that's a long way to walk it is it's a long way to walk I I would agree and and I would note if it helps the city in their if they have to enforce it if it's a condition that was put in or not as or where I'm going yeah you know we do add a lot of conditions to things that you know don't always it's more of a memorialization of that understanding or expectation um you know I would defer to the applicant and see what how it doesn't feel like this use may not may not cause that but if the use should change in the future right that's where so it's like I'm not necessarily feeling that that this use [42:25] Anthony Nemcek: may but 10 15 20 years down the road if either it grows to such need or that you should change that then certainly certainly and I think the applicant would probably without speaking for them be happy to have a reason to expand their parking right of course commissioner Whitman yeah I was just going to say Madam chair I I like that comment a lot and um I think it's important to be consistent if we have imposed conditions on other uses especially other assembly uses if that's if that's if that's what we've done then we should be consistent across the board so it sounds like it's not a big deal like the app it sounds to me like the applicant is going to be complying with it parkings would be a long way away anyway [43:13] Commissioner Whitman: Perhaps it is difficult to enforce but if we even pose those conditions it seems like we probably should impose those here too yeah so with the North 20 I think um you know when they came back here the the it's a public at the end of the day public streets that have allowed parking are public streets that allow parking and It's tricky to say this this property can't use the public Street or public parking so with North 20 I think that we ended up on that eventually it would be signed no parking so nobody could park on it or it was parking on one side so that some neighbors could park on it but um it it goes we see it in other [44:01] Anthony Nemcek: neighborhoods down by the Clover and a neighbor saying well I see employees parking on my street it's a public Street you don't own it I think when it when it becomes an issue is excessive and repeated use and a lot of times those issues can be resolved through a meaningful conversation with the cause of those issues so that's kind of where I would like to leave it as staff just because it's difficult for us to enforce but again you know the applicant is here they they can hear your concerns and certainly could speak to them better than I could [44:50] Chair Melissa Kenninger: it's for staff at this time okay sitting down we will open up this item for public hearing this evening anyone that would like to speak to this item may do so at this time coming to the podium stating your name and address for the record and we would invite forward the applicant if they would like to speak I know there are a couple questions for the architect on the color and longevity of the building materials and also on the plan for the existing home and existing buildings on the site [45:25] Al-Madina Representative: foreign [45:38] taking this this evening architect is here uh but addressing the earlier question on the parking I know the parking has been issued in some of the church worship kind of users in the other cities with such a small community here I moved to Rosemont 2012 with 25 some members 12 years later we're still under 40. so with such a large four acre lot and plenty of opportunity to expand as a staff recommends us we really don't see a problem if a condition has to be added I mean really we do not have a concern on that because there is no possible way to park half a mile away and walk anyway here but at the end of the day I don't think that's concern for us the on the [46:25] Al-Madina Representative: colors part yes it's a modern materials I think it's as durable if if not more than the existing one but that was our reason to go it of course it's a lot more cost effective for such a small community and the main thing was that it's it's really a nice looking after the lack of battery term I can definitely address if there's any other questions but I think there was a question on the color of that you're planning for the building we didn't see any elevations that had the colors on it sure we have not selected the colors we're still working with the contractors on the materials and then the but we we are definitely open shared with the city staff and if there's any concern we'll certainly I mean be open to change but I understand the uh ordinance required the [47:12] Al-Madina Representative: Earth stone kind of colors marked some flashy red or something that of course will will definitely don't want anything like that so we'll we'll definitely keep them to our Throne then if then they won't even be acceptable we'll be willing to to switch so color it doesn't matter be the lighter Earth stone kind of colors but again haven't picked up one yet okay thank you and then there was a question on the existing buildings or existing home on the site is that going to stay there at this time correct that's the at this time we're not planning to remove any structures but down the road we really do not know but at this time with this building when we construct hopefully starting soon so with that we are not removing any of the existing structure I know there was a small [47:57] Al-Madina Representative: not a garage but it's a chicken coop kind of that's very small smallest of a small structure and probably will remove that one but all the other structures at this time gonna stay as is okay thank you and if you could just hang out are there any other questions from the commission for the applicant yes commissioner Whitman thank you madam chair it and I I didn't just to clarify because I asked that question about the fiber cement siding I understand it looks good you know I I believe you um was there any concern at all or is anyone aware of any concern that fiber cement siding somehow has like a lesser lifespan or something than actual rock and stone well that aspect hasn't been discussed [48:43] Al-Madina Representative: at least so I'll be very open but definitely Our intention working with our architect and the potential contractors were on the two fronts once it looks nice one is it's durable and it's a cost effective as compared to real rocks okay any other questions any other questions for the applicant thank you thank you there is anyone else in the audience who would like to come to the podium at this time and address this item you may do so [49:18] Chair Melissa Kenninger: seeing then I will make a motion to close the public hearing is there a second okay it has been motioned by commissioner Haber seconded by commissioner Paul to close the public hearing all those in [49:29] favor please say aye aye opposed motion carries the public hearing is now closed are there any other comments or questions from the commission before we move forward no uh Madam chair I I appreciate the comments about the consistency with the the parking um but I also appreciate that public roads are public roads and unless it's posted no perky and people are allowed to park there I think practicality will take take over here and and they've got plenty of proof of parking so I'm not recommending an alteration to the conditions that are presented in the staff report I would make a motion to approve the site plan of the proposed place of worship for al-madina Association subject to these six [50:15] Commissioner Powell: conditions noted in the staff report second is bamboo by commissioner Powell and seconded by commissioner Haber all those in favor please say aye aye opposed motion carries that concludes our public hearing section of this evening's meeting and we will move forward to new business [50:40] Anthony Nemcek: there is no new business Madam chair perfect section of this evening yes uh staff would just like to remind the commission that there will be a joint work session with the city council on October 3rd from five to seven hopefully from five to six thirty because the council has to kind of turn over the room for their council meeting at seven o'clock to discuss the zoning code update and kind of the progress that we've made and elicit feedback from the commission so that's just a reminder there um and if we could just yeah I know commissioner Reed and commissioner Rivera are not able to make it that evening is there anyone else that is not able to make it on October 3rd [51:28] Chair Melissa Kenninger: can you repeat the times uh five o'clock until six technically seven but probably 6 30. and if anyone else is where something comes up and you cannot make it please let Alicia know [51:46] Anthony Nemcek: staff would also just like to welcome Alicia I know you had some of you had a chance to um uh say hello to her ahead of the meeting we're very excited to have her on she's been getting her feet underneath her and getting getting going and up to speed on all the great things we have Happening Here in Rosemount so we're very excited welcome welcome Alicia um I will just do a quick review of our next meetings so our next meeting is [52:15] Chair Melissa Kenninger: October our next regular meeting in um outside of the joint meeting that Anthony just spoke to is October 24th then November 28th and then December 18th and I put an asterisk next to that one because it is a Monday yep and it is not um not our normal Tuesday fourth of Tuesday the month meeting and also the city website calendar I know was it actually has it on both the 18th and the 26th oh I didn't so I think whoever put it on the 18th uh forgot to delete it from the lady from the 26th do not come on the 26th we will meet on the 18th um and if you are unable to attend any of those upcoming meetings please let Alicia know right away and I know some of you may have already told her I think [53:00] Chair Melissa Kenninger: commissioner Paul you can't come on the 18th typically I believe that's correct I think that's a meeting conflict okay so can I just ask that you send Alicia an email so she doesn't have to remember I may also ask to see if that other meeting might move before okay reach out okay be sure to let you know perfect sounds good I know we've got a lot of a lot of stuff coming up in the next few months and so we want to make sure we we certainly have a quorum um for meetings and then I did want to just mention um this did come up in my conversation with Anthony ahead of this so I don't want to have it reflect on any of our great conversation we had here tonight um but you know if we have questions on on the topics especially in the next couple months when we have a lot coming through that if you've got specific questions it's very helpful to staff to send those in ahead of time [53:47] Chair Melissa Kenninger: um even if you don't read the packet until Monday night and you're sending it in Monday night and they get a Tuesday morning obviously the earlier they get the question the better but that way if it requires research or it requires some for them to look something specific up they have some time it does not mean we can't ask questions that come up during the meeting because during we're going to have questions that as we're talking about it we think of so that it does not mean to to dissuade us from doing that it just means that if you have questions while you're reading the packet to send them in allowing them to get us research and info ahead of the meeting so that they can have answers for us also if you've got concerns about an item feel free to share that with them as well and what your concerns are so that they might be able to help address those as well at the time that we get to the [54:34] Chair Melissa Kenninger: meeting so that they we can continue to move things forward and not have to continue I know in past we've had items where we didn't have information so we had to continue it to Future meetings um and such so so just a a small reminder and request of that Anthony anything you'd add who should we include on those emails just uh typically if it's a specific item whatever staff person wrote the report um that's always helpful um because we would be the ones presenting that item um that yeah we it's not a requirement it's just always easier we really want to be able to give you guys as good of information as we can and and give you guys uh enough information that you can make good informed decisions is [55:21] Anthony Nemcek: we're trying to do and I I think Julia and Anthony encourt Smith I'm wrong on this but I think I think is new wrote the report but you could also copy Adam and the other the other individual in case one of you should be out sick or something and some things we don't always know who's if something changes so yeah I think makes sense but but you should send your questions to just them and not the rest of the commission so just a reminder we don't want to start having any open meeting laws right we don't have any violations of discussing items against open meeting laws so please direct any questions or comments to them and you can also you know call them and talk through it as well yes and I think it should be acknowledged but tell me if I'm wrong with this understanding but when we [56:07] Chair Melissa Kenninger: email you that's a public record subject to being produced in a oh yeah certainly certainly any of the emails you know keep that in mind any other just discussion item I have nothing else okay with that I will adjourn the meeting meeting adjourned [Music] thank you [56:55] [Music] [57:17] foreign [Music]