Good evening and welcome to the planning commission's regular meeting for June 23rd 2025. This time we'll move to roll call. Commissioner Fischer. Commissioner Bot here. Commissioner Britain here. Commissioner Fiser here. Commissioner Frasier here. Chair Frasier, I should say. Commissioner Canable here. Uh, Commissioner Seekman here. And Commissioner Woodman here. Thank you. Item three is approval of the agenda. I would look for a motion to approve if there's no additions or modifications. Motion to approve. Motion to approve from Commissioner Canable. Do I have a second? Second. Second from Commissioner Britain. All those in favor say I. I. Post say no. Motion carries 70. Item four is open forum. This is an opportunity for anyone to speak to the commission on an item that is not on the agenda tonight. So at this time, I'll open forum. Seeing none, I will close open forum. Item five is chair's explanation of the hearing process. The planning commission is a volunteer advisory group to the city council. One of the commission's functions is to hold public hearings and make recommendations on land use and zoning matters. The purpose of these public hearings is to provide an opportunity for each applicant and citizens to present information, ask questions, and express opinions. Since these proceedings are televised and recorded for the public record, anyone wishing to speak must step up to the podium and give their name and address before addressing the commission. Staff reports are prepared and provided to the applicant and planning commission in advance of the meeting. The first step in the hearing will be for staff to present a summary of the report. The applicant will then have the opportunity to briefly explain the proposal and provide additional information or comment. Anyone wanting to speak in favor or against the proposal will then be heard. Upon completion of the testimony, the hearing will be closed to public comment. The planning commission will then discuss and act on the matter. Two complete agenda packets are available for view on the back table. Please do not remove those items. The city council will act on the only uh item on the agenda tonight on their meeting on Wednesday, July 16th, 2025, which starts at 700 p.m. With that, we'll move to item six. 6A is the Dresley accessory structure case 2025-015 with Max presenting. Good evening, Mr. Chair, me members of the commission. Uh the application for us is uh the property owner Al Dresley and the applicant has applied for a conditional use permit uh and a variance um to allow for 2340 ft of accessory structure space to construct a proposed accessory shed. The applicant has applied for a variance for an accessory structure to be constructed in the front yard. The applicant has applied for an additional variance to construct the accessory structure with a metal exterior. The site is located at 6255 Hadley Avenue South. The property is 4.3 acres. It is adjacent to the Eastbrook subdivision to the north. The home was constructed in the mid90s along with an existing 980 ft accessory structure which is constructed in the front yard. The site is serviced by a well and septic system. A swimming pool resides in the rear of the principal structure and the site is wooded with a mix of deciduous and coniferous trees. The property is currently zone R2 residential estate district. The R2 residential estate district is intended to represent areas well suited to high value housing uh in very low densities. The intent is to preserve a semi-ural lifestyle um on larger parcels nearby developing areas. The site is guided as low density residential in the 2040 comprehensive plan for potential development in the future. zoning ordinance allows up to two accessory structures over two uh over 200 square feet of up to a maximum square footage of 2,000 square ft in the R2 district. The current accessory structure is 980 ft and the proposed will be 1360 ft which would bring the total to 2340. Uh swimming pools and one structure under 200 square ft does not count towards this total. Exceeding the square footage is conditionally allowed as long as it meets the three additional requirements provided in title 1135F in city code. The first requires that there is an adequate setback screening or topography changes that buffer the proposed structure from adjacent public roadways or adjacent properties. Uh natural screening exists on site uh and minimal removal of vegetation is proposed to the road um between the road and the nearest neighboring property. The proposed building site is roughly 140 ft from the public road rightway with den dense vegetation u established between them. The second requirement uh is that the proposed building height or building square footage uh does not exceed the ordinance criteria for more than 20% as the site is in the Musa. Uh this property is so the propertyy's in the Musa and the percentage threshold for increasing the square footage is 400 square feet. Um this proposal is only going to exceed the standard by 340. The third requirement is the setback distances are increased 5T for every 1 ft of height or 100 square ft in size. The applicant is proposed to build the structure 35 ft from neighboring property line. The setback requirement for accessory structures in the R2 district is 20 ft and an additional 15 ft is required for uh their threshold of going over 2,000 square ft. So this proposal does meet that standard. Uh the applicant is not proposing any new street accesses and will utilize the existing driveway. Uh the applicant has applied for two variance requests. The variance requests require there be a practical difficulty of the proposal which meets the zoning requirements. A practical difficulty is considered something that would be prevent the property owner from following code standards based on site characteristics or conditions that are not created by the property owner. Financial hardships are not an acceptable reason for approval of a variance. Non-conforming uses, land, structures or buildings in the same district or other districts may not be considered grounds for an issuance of a variance. The first variance request proposed uh is to locate the structure in the front of the property. Current code standard requires that all accessory structures are placed behind the principal structure. The site has two unique practical difficulties which would honor the variance request. The septic system located on site prevents access and placement of the accessory structure to the south of the principal structure and the topography and placement of of pool uh provides difficulty to place structure north of the principal structure. The second variance request is for the exterior of the accessory structure to be constructed to be comprised of metal. The current zoning code for accessory structures in residential districts requires that all accessory structures over 200 square ft be construct of split face block vinyl lap or cement board materials complement the color of the principal structure. The current standard has been consistent since it was amended in the previous iteration of the zoning code in 2012. The general purpose for this code change was to preserve the aesthetic and character of developing areas. Uh this request does not present a practical difficulty of site conditions. Uh variance requests cannot be based on non-conforming uses. Land structures or buildings in the same district or other districts. Uh may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance. Um and economic considerations alone do not constitute a practical difficulty. Uh previous variances must not be considered uh to have a set a precedence for granting further variances. Uh with that I leave the recommendation before you. All right. Thank you. Any questions for staff? All right. Thank you. At this time if the applicant would like to add anything additional. Sure. if you could say your name and address for us. Yep. Good evening. Uh my name is Al Dresley. I live at 6255 Hadley Avenue South. Um I'm just uh in far as the variances and some of the things that I've looked at. And I want to thank Eric and and also Samantha for helping me walk through the paperwork on all this. It's it's not an easy task to go through all this paperwork. Um, but one of the things I wanted to point out is is my neighbor to the left of me um also has a metal barn uh that had a a permit that was granted in 1997. That barn is 30x 40 ft. Um, I've got his approval. Got uh two neighbors that on both sides of me to uh have this built. Um, the difference is is I think when we think of metal buildings, we think of just a plain old metal building, but I've got a lot of um um features on this building. Insulation cosmetically outside with eyebrows over the doors, windows. It's not going to be just a plain old shed that's out there. Another thing I wanted to make sure that everybody knows that if you're familiar with this this land or this location, which I'd ask if you ever get a chance to drive by, you won't be able to see this from the road, just as my neighbors won't see this from the road. And then finally, I I think what's important is I've been there since 1994. Um, and next to me, I I recognize Ken and some of some of you, I think, but in '94, um, I moved in and I was under the assumption that, you know, this was land that I could do some things on. That's why you buy these larger lots. Um, in 2017 around me, um, there was a lot of codes changed for a developer to come in. Um they were supposed to be three to five acre lots and now we've got quarter acre lots with 200 houses plus. Um I understand that it's an opportunity for the city to get tax money on those and all I'm asking for is if we if we do that for developers. I've been there since 93. I've paid my taxes. I'm asking just to have something in front of my house. Unfortunately, not to mention um my septic uh that the city wanted to put water in, but they didn't want to run it all the way back. So that's why my septic is back there. But there's also a creek back there that I've asked the DNR if I could reroute to do things and they they absolutely said no, I can't reroute that because it's a natural. Um so with that said, I guess that's what I'm I'm going for. I I watch these planning commissions quite often and I see a lot of codes change and um I'm just asking for something that my neighbor has uh something that I don't going to uh fringe any um on any of my neighbors. It's not going to be an eyesore of any sort. No one's going to actually see it. So that's it. Thank you for your time. All right. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? I have one. Sir, if you could go back real quick. That's all right. You're not done yet. I'm not going to let you off that easy. Mr. Fisher. Okay. So, in the packet there is a photo of a metal barn. Is that your neighbors? No, that's my my neighbors doesn't even have windows. I didn't take a picture of my neighbors. Okay. Where did you get the photo of the one that you included in your I don't know if I gave that or if that I think I just got that off the internet. Okay. But again, mine's even got more cosmetically things than that does. I mean, I'm having a sure door made and all these other things. So, Okay. Thank you. But, yep. Mhm. Any further questions, Mr. Woodman? Yeah. So, one of the concerns that I that I know you brought up was the expense of building another one. I know we're not considering expense in this, but what other alternatives did you look at? Is there like could this structure the same exact structure be just thrown up with vinyl or is it all constructed as one thing? So what's Well, it's not constructed as one thing. Um, one of the other things that I probably didn't mention is, you know, there's a lot of people using steel now instead of wood. Um, first of all, it it's stronger. Um, it lasts longer than the wood. If I was to put up a wood uh shed or uh storage unit, um, I would have to be maintaining that. Um, the wood's going to after so many years, I'm going to have to fix that. Um the difference is it's almost three times as much. I looked at it um because uh one of the things that Eric pointed out right away is that you know look at some of the options that you might have and I did and it's it's at least three times as much as what I can get a a metal building for. And I think that's why you're seeing more and more buildings out there be metal. You're seeing you know roofs all metal. A lot of things are going metal just because of the price. Thank you. Appreciate that. Any further questions? Um, you mentioned that your neighbor has a metal out building and I think you said that was in 97. Yep. I've got the Okay. permit for 97. All right. Um, so I don't know, you know, we there's the zoning. We understood the zoning, but I don't know what the definition was it back then is, you know, because we can't find it. Yep. Eric's, you know, can't find it what it what it stated that it had to be, but it was R2. I thought I was R1 at one time, but it was R2. Okay. Okay. Since 81, but it doesn't state what the definition of R2 is for building. Sure. Okay. Any further questions? All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. At this time, we'll open public hearing on the application. Anyone wishing to speak for or against the application can step to the podium. All right. Seeing none, we will close public hearing. Uh any further comments, discussion from commission? Commissioner Woodman. I did drive by um I'm right in the area today and I I am in agreement that there would be no way that this would be visible from the highway may or from the road there. Maybe just a couple of visible I mean through the trees type of things, but nothing that would be visual. I also think if you look at the if you look at the reason for the setbacks that we have in the first requirement, I think that that's really comes down to the visual appeal to your neighbors. You know, keeping it off of property lines and all of that. And then you look at the reason for the 2012 change is really to prevent brand new developments going in with mainly metal construction. Like we're setting the precedent for the city of what these new builds look like. So, I I do think that there's uh I think there's room to approve both in my opinion because there I I don't think going metal disturbs anything in that area. Having been from there, driving through there, I don't see any way that that would be a disruption. I know that's not what the recommendation was, but that's my viewpoint is that there really wouldn't be any negative to the city. Um specifically calling out the the harmony of the area. I I feel like that area is still, you know, a a fairly rural little strip of land and and we could look at giving in a variance for that. Okay. Any further discussion, Commissioner Britain? Um, can we ask staff a question? Yeah, I was going to do so myself, so go ahead. Okay. So, we we have reference to a a neighboring property with a shed on it. Are there any other properties that you're aware of in the area that have sheds of this type? Uh comprised of commission uh uh Mr. Chair, members of commission. Um there is another shed that is south. Um I'm forgetting the road it's on. It's pretty close. It's in R3. Uh but it was constructed well before. Same thing. um that neighbor shed uh we have the building permit for and it shows metal was approved um but I couldn't couldn't come across any code that kind of spoke to that in 97. And then there's other buildings in the community that are um in the R1 district that prior to the zoning code of 2022 uh amendment um allowed for metal and the current iteration is uh lays it out as all residential uh should be these wooden vinyl labs. Okay. Thank you. So Max, I guess that was going to be my question as well then. So, as far as we know back in 1997, cuz we have the building plans at least that show that in this area metal was allowed, but we know for sure in 2012 the ordinance changed to say in these areas R2, R3 and down, we had to have wood. R1 was still allowed to have metal, but now um it was the intent of the uh council to say that in every residential district they had to be um a wooden structure with this split brick, vinyl, concrete um walls. Am I am I following kind of the the legislative history here? Yep. Mr. Mr. Chair, members of the commission, um the so when 20 prior to we have the what it changed from in 2012 and that goes back to 2000 which was after 97 but before the change in 2012 the language read um that it must complement the materials and the color palette of the house and now it's it reads as they made it more specific. Um but essentially what yeah what you've repeated is correct. Okay. So, at some in the the council then in 2012 said, you know, we really want to have these wooden um secondary structures in most of these residential areas except for the R1's which are going to be like the over five acres I think is an R1 over three acres. Um and then when we did the rewrite in 2022, council said actually all residential areas we want these same types of structures. Mr. Chair, I was sufficient. That's correct. All right. Thank you. Any further comment, question, Commissioner Bren? You know, I agree that, you know, fundamentally I don't see any harm being caused by this, but unfortunately the the rules that we're currently bound by from the zoning ordinance is prohibited. So, while fundamentally I don't have an issue with it, I don't see um findings of fact to the level that would constitute granting a variance for the materials. All right. Thank you. Any further comment discussion? I have a question. How big is this plot that your home is on? Sorry. Or Max. Max, you got it. Uh, Mr. Chair, Cushion, Commissioner Fischer. Um, it is 4.7 acres. 4.7. Yep. Commissioner M, I have one quick question. So the requirement for the building material is for aesthetics or what is the reason behind Mr. Mr. Chair Kish, uh, Kisherbot, the requirement is to maintain consistency with residential districts. Um, and Emily, maybe you can tap in, but it um it's to to maintain a certain aesthetic and character of the community. Mr. Mr. Chair, members of the commission, that was the intent in 2012 is to ensure that those materials were consistent with those materials that are permitted for uh with uh on um uh residential homes, right? Um we have standards for the architectural materials there and we wanted that to be consistent and to Mr. Ericson's point um to be consistent within those residential areas. Thank you. Any further questions, comment, discussion? Commissioner Fischer. Oh, I just I'm just having a hard time with this one because I I mean, this is a 4.7 acre lot. Like, I understand that I could not put up a little metal shed in on my third of an acre lot. Um, you know, but this is a very large lot in a very densely wooded area. Um, so it makes sense to me, like Commissioner Woodman said, like it doesn't cause any harm. However, our variance, the you know, the check boxes we use to grant a variance are not being checked. So, I have a hard time with this one because it's in it's definitely in a gray area. That's my thought on it. Um, the public comment is closed unfortunately. So, um, any further comment, discussion? I guess I'll add my two cents. I I agree with Commissioner Fischer and and Commission and Commissioner Britain. Um, you know, in in the grand scheme of things, does it seem like that big of a deal to allow this on this specific instance where it seems like it's going to be screened from view? The current neighbors don't care. You know, it is going to create um an economic hardship, which again is not sufficient to grant a variance. Um, but it can be part of it is my understanding. Um, no, it doesn't make a ton of sense to me to deny it. However, um, we are required to follow the rules that the city council has laid out. Um, and I think what speaks to me most clearly is that we still had this exception in the R1 district where you could have an over 3 acre parcel and still have these kind of structures that the that the applicant is asking for today. And just three years ago, city council said actually we don't want that in our community. We want these type of structures that are already in R2, R3, R4. And so to me that is a clear indication from city council that that is their intent of what they want in the community. Um and so I don't see that there is a variance basis to go from that. Obviously city council can tell me I'm wrong and decide differently. um that is their prerogative. But based on the history as I know it um here today, it is my belief that city council has given us an instruction of here is what the accessory structure should look like in our community and these are what what should be approved? With that being said, any further comment discussion? Otherwise, at this point, I would look for a motion. A motion to approve the conditional use permit and the variance for the accessory structure based on the findings of fact and subject to conditions stipulated in the staff report and deny the variance to the required materials based on the findings of fact listed in the staff report. All right. So, I have a motion to approve the conditional use permit and approve the variance as to the location on the property and uh a motion to deny the variance based on the architectural materials subject to stipulations in the staff report. Do I have a second for that motion? Second. Have a second from Commissioner Stickman. Stickman. Um any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none. All those in favor of the motion say I. I. I. Pro oppose say no. Motion carries. 70. All right. We'll move on to item seven which is approval of the minutes. There's no additions or modifications. I'd look for a motion to approve. Motion to approve. Motion to approve from Commissioner Fischer. Do I have a second? I second. Second from Commissioner Bot. All those in favor say I. I. I. Post say no. Motion carries. 70 8 is reports. 8A is recap of June 4th and June 18th, 2025 city council meetings with Emily presenting. Mr. Chair, members of the commission, going all the way back to the June 4th council meeting. Uh couple uh uh items that work through on that agenda that I would note. Uh Roars uh company, if you're famili uh that project um at the end of um East Point Douglas East Point Douglas Road and the culde-sac there. Um uh council did approve an extension to their purchase agreement. Um they are still working to move forward but need a little bit of time um uh and a couple of the outlots if you recall are city-owned as a part of that project. So that purchase agreement does need to happen before that project can move forward. And then secondly on that agenda, um uh the uh school district's transition building over there um on Jamaica and 70th um was approved by the council for their uh improvements in addition to that existing building which was former uh lighthouse church. And then moving to the June 18th uh meeting where council um uh did approve you saw Mississippi Landing first edition edition. And I just wanted to mention to you um it was an easement that was over uh an outlot um that was planned for uh future lots. So we needed to vacate that easement so that the second addition could be platted um on that outlot. And then the last item that I wanted to note or there's two um you'll see some activity on East Point Douglas uh uh happening. They're working through a sewer lining project, a sewer that runs under Highway 61. I thought it was important for you all to know um that that activity will be happening there. Very unique situation. Um I am of course no engineer. Um but I do have wonderful engineers uh in this community that can give you the details of what that entails. But it's been a project that's long time coming. Um it takes a lot of coordinated effort. So if you see some unique things happening there, that's what's happening. And then finally, real estate equities uh was approved by the council um at that meeting. That's the project down at uh 100th and Hadley um an apartment project and now they are submitting their offer their bond requests to the state. Um so hopefully that project can secure uh those extra dollars to continue moving forward. And with that, Mr. Justin Olsson is here with us to add anything uh and is typically available for questions. Good evening, Mr. Chair and members of the commission. Uh great to be here with you today. I know you went through some training earlier today with our esteemed city attorney, Corey Land. I hope you all got a lot out of that. Uh Corey likes to do that training annually. And uh I think tonight's excuse me, tonight's accessory structure conversation probably lent itself to some of the things that she discussed with you in that training, uh which is why she does it. So um again, I'm glad you had the opportunity to take some time with her. Um, one of the things I wanted to mention is as you look around tonight, you probably notice a new face on the commission, uh, the, uh, gentleman sitting here to my left, to your right, is um, John Steckman. John's been a member of the community for quite some time. Um, you know, he, uh, was one of two candidates that I interviewed for the open position, and both interviews were absolutely out of the park. Just wonderful. Uh either either choice would have been a great choice. Um but I did end up uh selecting John because the other candidate I think has some additional skills as it relates to maybe our EDA that I'd like to take advantage of. So please welcome John as a new member of the commission. I think you'll find he'll do a terrific job. I've known John for a little while and uh he's one of those guys who does his homework. I'm willing to bet he's driven past this accessory structure seven or eight times already uh preparing for tonight's meeting. So, welcome. Uh I also wanted to mention a couple of other things. You heard mention that the chair said uh anything decided upon this evening will go to the July 16th city council meeting. That's quite a ways from here. Um we never have a meeting the week of the 4th, so that's why there's that delay. Uh but then after that we start our every week budget meetings until we figure it out. So um there's going to be a lot of heavy lifting ahead uh with this budget year. It seems like that happens every year. But if you have any recommendations with respect to, you know, budget focuses for the city council, things you might like uh to see us do more of, less of, etc. in the community, now would be a great time to reach out to um a city council member or two and and sit down and have a cup of coffee and talk about some of those things. We work very hard to maintain a high level of service in the community and there's always that um delicate balance between uh value and cost. A lot of people know the cost of things. Very few people know the value of things and so we have to try very hard to communicate value. One of those uh communication points is we are the second lowest per capita tax community in Washington County. We uh only fall short of St. Paul Park and they get uh over a million dollars a year in local government aid that we don't get. Uh if if we had an even playing field, we would be the lowest. Uh we also are AAA bond rated community and for a community of our size, that is not an easy thing to accomplish. But uh because we are very careful with taxpayer dollars, our fee structures, so on and so forth, um our amazing staff and our council uh work really hard to maintain financial integrity and we have a 10-year financial plan that we follow very closely and that has lent itself to the bond houses looking favorably upon our paper which saves us a whole lot of money and interest anytime we do go to bond and we want to continue that path. So, uh, those will kind of be our northstar as we work through the budget process this year, but your recommendations would be very welcome. And then the last thing I wanted to mention, and I'll open it up to you for questions, is we did have a promotion in our public safety department uh, at our meeting last week, uh, Officer Matt Sorgard. Some of you may know, uh, Officer Sorggard by his partner Odin. Uh, officer Sorggard is a K-9 police officer. He and Odin uh, are a tremendous team. In fact, um they went to national competitions last year and finished second to uh the Washington County deputy that actually trained them both. So, uh he might have taught them everything they know, but not everything he knows. Either way, um really a great team and uh we were grateful that Matt put in for the open sergeants position here in the city of Cottage Grove and he was ultimately selected. So, he was sworn in last week, had his badge pinned, and has already started working uh on those uh sergeant shifts, which uh tend to run nighttime. So, um Odin will still be his partner, but uh they'll just have a little bit of extra work to do each shift. So, if you get a chance to see Matt around in the community, make sure you say hello and congratulate him. With that, I'll turn it back to you, Mr. Chair. If anybody has any questions, I'm available. All right. Thank you. Any questions for Council Member Olen? I don't see any. Thank you for being here. Thank you. B was response to planning commission inquiries. And looking at the minutes from last meeting, there were two inquiries. One uh was from Commissioner Bot about um the information we about that we send to the Met Council about affordable housing and the plan for that. And I think staff was going to provide us with part of the comprehensive plan which we have printed off on the DIS for us. So that's completed. I think the other one was also from Commissioner Bot about kind of like a cheat sheet on setbacks for areas and I don't know where staff is on that. Emily, Mr. Chair, members of the commission, uh we really focus in our staff reports to make sure that we're outlining the code standard and then what the applicant is is proposing, right? So we'll continue uh kind of providing that clearly in there, but if we need to think about maybe a handout that's helpful, we can certainly do so. All right. Thank you. C is planning commission request. Is there any requests for staff from this meeting? Commissioner B Britain in the land use plan here lists that we have an airport of 6 acres in Cottage Grove. Where is that? We have an old airport that is that is I was just curious that is Jansen's farm. Uh actually has an air strip from World War II on it. Oh, yep. Okay. It's a dark blue color. Looks like it's way up there. That's kind of hard to see. Okay. Well, I learned something, so that's a good day. Who knew? All right. Any other requests for staff? Mr. Woodman. Uh update on the uh we had the agenda item last week or last meeting that was pushed out. Do we have an update on where that's at and if it's coming back anytime soon? Yeah, Mr. Chair, members of the commission, Commissioner Woodman, uh that developer continues to work on their plans, um making some adjustments and tweaks to ensure that they're able to meet our minimum standards. Obviously, before we present that item to you, we want to make sure that we've crossed all our tees and dotted all of our eyes. So, that project is complete. At this time, I don't have a timeline for you when they would be back. They have extended their 60-day timeline to be um extended indefinitely. Therefore, we have time to work through that. Um, and so waiting on that developer to make sure that they've got all of their ducks in a row, per se, before neighbors come and ask, understandably, which they will do. They will do. Absolutely. Any further requests for staff? All right, then we will move on to item nine, which is adjournment. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? Motion to adjurnn. I have a motion to adjurnn from Commissioner Fischer. Do I have a second? Second. Second from Commissioner Canal. All those in favor say I. I. I. Post say no. Motion carries 70. We are adjourned.