call to order planning commission meeting for city of Brainard Uh first roll call Stephanie Peterson here Norwood here Garcula here Gorum here Higgins here Powell here
Ericson here And the pledge of allegiance of America and to the republic for which it stands One nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all All right Seeking a motion for approval
of the agenda Make a motion Uh real real quick uh I just want to note that I do need to recuse myself for item 7A Okay So did I hear Gorum for and then Ericson for a second
Okay All those in favor I I All those opposed and on to looking for a motion for approval of minutes Move to approve Second And all those in favor i And all those
opposed and eyes have it Uh unfinished business item 6A community development director Thank you Mr Chair So this is holding a public hearing considering data center ordinance included in the packet Uh the
planning commission reviewed the proposed data center ordinance at their March 19th meeting and uh pro the uh ordinance included the recommendations from the public utilities director The planning commission directed staff to again hold the public hearing at the April 16th meeting Uh staff did also
include a bill that is be currently being reviewed by the state Um so certainly could impact some of the language in this ordinance Uh state statute would supersede the zoning code in some of those instances Uh so want just wanted to make planning commission aware of that Certainly there's been a lot of discussion at the state regarding
data centers Uh so with that I can answer any questions after this but uh staff does recommend holding a public hearing and recommend approval of the proposed ordinance Any questions for staff just a quick question sir Um when you
went through the state ordinance was there anything that you looked at that and you said "Man that should have been in the local ordinance." Was there any any insight from that or was it just standard stuff i didn't see any potential issues with it Certainly there was some stuff that talked about water usage and maybe higher standards for
some of that stuff you as of right now you don't know what future technology looks like but a lot of the new um facilities going in don't have the same type of water usage Um certainly some of the older types of data centers do use significant amounts of water but what we
have in our ordinance I don't see any major concerns at this time Thank you Thank you And just for one question that I had is that any state statute would end up over
overseeing any ordinance that we create create So pertain pertaining to state statute if something was passed regarding it um we couldn't be less restrictive than the state statute Um unless there was some other type of provision saying that we
can't be more restrictive Um but that's typically how it would go So I don't think a lot of the state statutes um at least the one that I saw here doesn't detail the sound aspect which is kind of the main part of our ordinance Okay Any other questions for
staff and so then I will open the public hearing for uh our data center ordinance Sorry this is my first time Do um do I need to read off any portion of that
no you do not need to read it Usually just state the time that the public hearing Okay And so we'll open the public hearing for the data data center ordinance at 604 And if anyone would like to come and speak as to the ordinance uh your name and
[Music] address hi Sarah TC uh 11687 Oakidge Road Um looked it over It actually looks great and we just want to say thank you for moving forward with this Don't really have anything to add Um but I appreciate it So thank you
Any others that would like to speak in the audience anyone online that would like to speak and seeing none others uh I'll close the public hearing for data center ordinance at 605
and then bring it back to the board for discussion Any items that anybody would like to discuss as to the ordinance or seeking a motion for the ordinance mr Chair yes I'd like to make a motion in favor of
adopting the ordinance as uh as presented I'll second All right And all those in favor i I opposed Same sign And 6A is done On to new
business Item 7A Sorry You know I'll just clarify kind of next steps for the ordinance So there will be a first reading um for the ordinance at the next city council meeting which will be April 21st So it requires a first reading a second reading Um the public hearing is
done here So um you'd be looking at the second reading occurring May 5th Okay And then on to item 7A This is the part where I'll recuse myself and staff
Yes Thank you Mr Chair Uh so Mike Higgins on behalf of the NPC Center uh 1511 Northern Pacific Road has applied for a conditional use permit for the construction of a church and existing building Uh the tenant space number is 1481 Northern Pacific Center Road Uh the
underlying zoning district governing the standards and uses of the property is the TC Town Center District and Appendix A table of uses allows for places of worship and related buildings as a conditional use in the TC district Uh the proposed use meets all requirements established in this ordinance and there
are no use specific regulations for churches and related buildings The building official and fire marshall have reviewed the site plan and have no issues at this time uh building and fire code review will be conducted before issuance of the building permit Uh the proposed use uh will not significantly
increase vehicle traffic Uh the Northern Pacific Center is an event center that can that can accommodate a significant number of vehicles um traffic and parking Uh so that's kind of typically the the big thing you want to that staff would review with a church or related building Uh so with that staff
recommends approval of the conditional use permit as presented And then director do I need to have a public hearing for this this is just opening for Yeah So public hearing is required Um so if there's any questions of staff I can
answer that first and then it would go on to the public hearing Amen Any questions for staff yes Um James why is this even a cup why isn't it just granted so again um we are going through the allowed use section So in districts that
are maybe larger um is something that we'd probably look at potentially being permitted uses Again kind of that that last line that I talked about Um parking uh certainly can be issues in in neighborhoods and making sure that you're accommodating uh or having a plan for that is is probably one of the big
big things that you're looking at because churches do um occur in TN1 CN1 CN2 and those things have to be accommodated for So so I'll follow up with that So if if we were to change some of that that's if we looked at like
parking and some of those things that could arise for that then it could be just a staff directed Is that you know if we do make change i'm not saying we will but yeah potentially Um you know again for larger properties like this one or districts that have um large
properties in them say general commercial maybe industrial um you know staff would probably recommend you we are going through the loud use table but you know possibly just be having it as a permitted use It's difficult to sometimes account for everything um when
you're looking at uh um our our neighborhoods And really we don't have any off- streetet parking standards right now Um that's something that I think has been um pretty supported by city council So because there's no off street parking standards you know in a in a you know in Gregory Park area which
is TN1 you probably still want to leave it as a conditional use permit So you're reviewing how the how it may impact the neighborhood Okay Thank you Any other questions for staff all right And I'll open the public
hearing for the conditional use permit for 1511 Northern Pacific Center Road at 609 And first if we could have an applicant uh briefly give a synopsis
Hi Mike Higgins Uh 1511 on Pacific Center Road Um not too much to talk about It's a 8,000 square foot space that was previously uh occupied by Smoke Stack Barbecue Um they uh got out of their lease early and we offered it up
to the church We knew they've been in the basement of the arboritum for the last couple years and knew they were coming up against a deadline on their lease over there and they've been growing and I attend that church so we offered it to them and got a deal done and that's why we're here
Any questions for the applicant Mr Chair yes What's the name of the church risen Cool That's all I had All right No other questions thank you Thank you Any other individuals that would
like to speak on the conditional use permit all right Anyone online and seeing none online I'll close the public hearing for the conditional use permit at 611
and bring it Chair Yes And make a motion to approve this as stated as staff has stated Second Okay No additional conditions Okay
Uh all those any discussion before I move on all right Mr Chair I just want to say I think this is a great idea I think it follows with the comp plan It follows with the idea of infill and developing um sites that already built out as opposed to you know building new ground
So I'm in favor of it I think this is a great idea All right Any other items for discussion all right All those in favor i All those opposed and that motion carries and I'll go back
to staff for next steps Yeah So this will be at the next city council meeting on April 21st for consideration by city council All right And then moving on to item 7B uh conditional use permit for expansion of
adult daycare services at 1919 South 6th Thank you Mr Chair Uh so Productive Alternatives has submitted an application for an interior remodel and conditional use permit to allow for the expansion of adult daycare services Uh the property is located in the general commercial district and table of uses
permits daycare facilities as a conditional use in the GEC district Uh the proposed project meets all requirements of the zoning code and staff have no concerns regarding drop off or parking Again a pretty significant uh parking lot as shown in the findings of fact Uh the building
official and fire marshall have reviewed the site plan and have no issues at this time A full building and fire code review will be conducted again before issuance of the building permit Uh staff did put a couple options in there Um option one would just be to approve it
as um as stated in the findings uh and as as the request of the applicant Option two um as the Minnesota Department of Human Services regulates the operation of daycare facilities and productive alternatives meets all the other requirements the city ordinance staff recommends approval of the CUP
amendment without any future occupancy limits to the existing building related to the CUP So allow it we've done this for a few other um childcare facilities um that have kind of large areas large parking areas Um so they wouldn't be able to add on to the building but could add occupancy to the building without
coming back for a conditional use permit Any items for staff from the commission yes I've got a question Uh James they got like a considerable fleet um at that location Can you tell me the like is how many vehicles they're
allowed to have in that sp that under that zoning and in that location and with this expansion I guess you anticipate that being an so I I don't have a fleet number Um yeah I have not heard of any concerns about you know
on street parking Um I included the number of parking stalls uh in the findings of fact I believe it was somewhere between 80 and 100 Um certainly just viewing the property on a day-to-day basis driving that area it doesn't seem like the the parking or any of that's ever an issue for it Um so
again uh we've done this for other ones where we've allowed additional occupancy without having to come back for a cup Um except for if they were actually going going to be adding onto the building That would be considered an additional expansion and would have to come back But they be they're allowed to have I
don't know seven or eight or nine of their fleet vehicles parked on their parking lot in that space there Yep Under that zoning Okay Thank you Any other questions for
staff all right seeing none I'll open the public hearing for the conditional use permit for 1919 So cell 6th at 6:15 and if the applicant is here and
would like to come forward All right [Music] and anyone from the general public that would like to speak on the matter and anyone online All right And one last time for a
call for anybody that would like to speak on the matter of the public hearing for 1919 South 6th All right And we'll close the public hearing at six Wait for
it 16 and bring it back to the commission for discussion or seeking a motion I have a question Yes This question was actually aimed at the applicant but
James I'm going to put you on the spot here Who are the clients i'm just kind of curious just curiosity who are the clients that they have there so it's adults with um potentially like mental challenges um something like that that I believe some of them are at the facility
all day Some of them do go out to to different work sites and that type of thing I don't have you know exact detail on it but that's kind of a general idea of what it is Um and I included in the findings of fact it's uh um it does fall under um the the daycare facility
portion as well as as defined by the the zoning code So whether it's adult daycare or child daycare kind of falls under that that same category Good That's all I had All right Any other questions for any other discussion
items seeking a motion for the conditional use permit Yes Move to approve uh as recommended with as presented as option one or option two Option one Okay Second
All right All those in favor i I and oppose same sign and motion carries and back to staff for next steps Yep So next steps this will be heard at the next city council meeting on April
21st All right And then on to item 7C conditional use permit for short-term rental at 714 7th Street South Thank you Mr Chair So Mighty Homes LLC applied for the renewal
of a short-term rental at 714th Street South Brainard Uh the rental has been operating for one year and there have been no concerns or issues at the property Staff has not received any phone calls Uh the short-term rental expired April 1st of 2025 The applicant stated that he misunderstood the renewal
date uh but did state the property is currently leased out to a long-term tenant in the health field until August Uh the house rules are consistent with the city code and staff now have no issues with the renewal of the interimm use permit Uh there are currently eight VDUs in Brainer Uh the property is in
the TN1 district which allows for 10 total Um right now in the uh TN1 district we have five VDUs including this one And then kind of additionally there are no other VDUs on this platted block So with that staff recommends approval of the interimm use permit with the following conditions Uh continuing
submitting the lodging tax of finance department on a monthly basis and the interimm use permit shall expire 2 years after issuance And I can answer any questions Any questions for staff and I I might have one for James At what point so we've extended this or
proposing to extend it to two years At what point do you just have it as a staff situation where okay they've been doing great for 5 years now You Currently right now the code says you do have to come back every two years So you'd have to actually change the the
code to alter that timeline Okay Any other questions for staff yes A question on square footage I see you've listed out the rooms here Um is there a minimum square footage that this would need to meet and does
that um can you talk to talk about that yeah so minimum square footage um I'd have to go back to the rental code I don't have that number off hand but there are there are minimums Um I believe 75 or 50 square feet for a
single bedroom And then I do know at at 100 square feet you're allowed to have two So and then for every 50 after that you're allowed to have that that additional Okay Thank you Any other questions for
staff all right And we'll open the public hearing for the interimm use permit for 714 7th Street South at 620 If that applicant is present and would like to come forward
and anyone else from the public audience like to come forward on this matter and anyone online All right And one last call for anyone that would like to come forward to speak to the public sorry the public hearing for
interimm use permit for the short-term rental at 714 7th Street South And we'll close the public hearing for the interimm use permit at 621 and bring it back to the commission
Any questions or discussion items from commission board i just have one comment Yeah Um I I think it's kind of refreshing to have one where it's a renewal and it's done in an orderly process and it's not our usual we caught you doing this kind of thing So this is good This is the system working And I
know it's a little bit and I I can appreciate what you're saying Dave It's a little bit you know of of a burden to have people come back again But if there was trouble this is such a great way to to catch the trouble So it I know it's kind of extra red tape but it does give
it does give a chance for us to review it as we go Otherwise I'm in favor of this is sounds good It's been a good rental Any other discussion items or seeking a motion for the intermittent mr Chair yes I'd like to make a motion
in favor with the conditions of paying tax on a regular basis right and um that they come back in two years So those two conditions with those two conditions Okay Second All right All those in favor i I oppose Same
sign And motion passes Next steps for staff So this will be again reviewed at the next city council meeting on April 21st and be voted for approval or denial All
right And then on to item 7 D 7D Yes thank you Mr Chair So this has come up with a few properties um specifically in the general industrial area Um doesn't have a lot of view from traffic is obviously heavy heavily industrialized uh with equipment and and
other such um items There already is uh a lot of um I guess nonpatuminous or concrete parking in our general industrial zoning district So what happens or tends to be a problem at times if somebody wants to add on to say
an existing class 5 parking area they would actually have to meet code then at that point for that additional area not for the whole thing So you'd have a class 5 area and then you'd have to add on to it say in the rear of the building um as a batuminous or or concrete So I
do see challenges with that and and we did do a a tour from the EDA where again one of the businesses wanted to potentially do a turnaround area behind it and and this ordinance would potentially impact something like that from a industrial business being able to do a turnaround area behind their
building So staff is bringing this um you know kind of from the EDA perspective and some of the things that have been hearing um from some business owners in the general industrial district area again kind of more out of the out of the way properties that uh aren't seen on a consistent basis um in
the rest of our city Uh so with that uh staff did um if you want to go to the ordinance Sean kind of go through this one by one again the first part I do potentially recommend removing from multifamily non-residential parking services the options for pavers Um I
guess what staff has seen is that pavers and brick um can have issues at times Uh what we see is pavers are kind of haphazardly put in Um you know it's not like an actual paver driveway that we see So limiting potentially to concrete and patuminous and then uh all areas
intended to be utilized for parking space and driveways in multiple family and non uh residential zoning district shall be surfaced with concrete patuminis the general industrial district and park district are exempt from this requirement Uh so again a lot of our parks have class 5 in as well and
that's a a new zoning district that was added to our zoning code So I think that was probably uh something that wasn't caught um with the new zoning code The next part is all areas intended to be utilized for parking space and driveways in the front yard and sideyard in the general industrial district shall be surfaced with concrete or puminous Class
5 crushed concrete and crushed patuminis are permitted surfaces in the rear yard So really just that rear yard only Uh parking space and driveways in the rear rear yard abuing a public street or alley shall be surfaced with concrete or patuminous within the rear yard setback and right ofway So typically that's
going to be your first 40 or 50 ft still requiring paving Um one of the things we'd want to minimize in that area is potential dust um entering the the storm sewer system So still requiring some sub some pavement in that area In the next part all areas intended to be utilized
for parking space and driveways in the park district shall be surfaced with concrete puminous pvious or impervious pavers pvious or impervious brick class 5 crushed concrete and crushed patuminous And with that I can answer any questions
Any questions for staff yes just a general question Um is there any downside to striking pavers i I it kind of makes some sense to strike the pavers Are we is there anybody going to go "Oh but I wanted to have pavers." They can potentially then come for a variance You know if it's done right it
can be done nicely But again what we've typically seen is it not being done right in the city and kind of a a way to subvert the the code to have that parking area look nice Then I I would just say I'm probably comfortable with taking the papers out That'd be my view
whatever there's like say any other discussion or question for staff or any seeking any motion as for this item Mr here Yes I I will make a motion um just basically directing staff that um I
think it looks good what we're doing here I would say let's let's bring it back without the papavers and see how it goes So that'd be my my uh my motion I'll make that as my motion and take it from there And and then are you guys good bringing it to the next meeting for
a public hearing mhm Okay I'll second Okay Any other discussion items as to the motion um before I move to the vote I just want to say that there are certain things that I had questioned and
discussed with staff as to um rear of yard is a definitive defined term within our code Um and so it meets all the criteria as to make it legally binding for the specific things but also freeing
up significantly uh the ability for businesses to uh do more with their property Any other discussion on the motion seeing none all those in favor i
I oppose Same sign And the motion passes Next steps for director Yep And this will just be brought back to the next meeting as directed by the planning commission for a public hearing All right And then moving on to item 7E
uh removing screening requirements for outdoor sales Yes Thank you Mr Chair Uh so this was a direction from city council to work on this item Um there's two sections that kind of pertain to that those outdoor sales One of them is is auto dealerships Uh second is outdoor service sales and
rentals Uh so staff is recommending um removing the requirements for screening Um certainly with outdoor sales uh screening uh can be an issue for selling products and such Uh if it is listed as conditional use permits where we're um
we are going through the allowed use section of the zoning code screening could potentially still be added to um a particular use if it's a conditional use permit But this takes out that that particular requirement Uh but staff uh does recommend that still potentially if
it's abudding a residential district um or use that there would be a fence requirement uh 6T high fence or landscape screen providing 80% year-round opacity Um you'll notice at the end of the ordinance um staff did recommend doing a slight adjustment to
the definition of a butt which is in our uh definition section of the zoning code Uh right now we have it street Um staff is recommending that it's changed to alley Uh this was something that was kind of nuanced and changed as we were doing the zoning code Um there are other ramifications where um having the word
abut go across the street does have um could have a major issue with with some type of project Um one of them is with with fencing So it would allow potentially with the word of butt to somebody for somebody to install a very large fence in their front yard So with
that um that was just one of the instances and I think there are were some others if I if I do recall But with that I'll take any questions from the planning commission Any questions for staff yes Uh for James James what is a landscaped
screen trees so landscape screen would be um yeah evergreens It could be arbor vites that type of thing Um I think Taco John's and Starbucks put in kind of a roll of arbor vites in that area near their drive-thru So it' have to be something that would be kind of have that year- round opa opacity So more
than likely to achieve that 80% opacity it would have to be evergreen spaced pretty close Follow-up question is that do we have a definition of that or is that we do have some guidelines in our in our landscape ordinance on what spacing might look like i didn't add it to this
but it could potentially be added to it you know as prescribed by section such and such in our landscape screening requirements I I wouldn't be in favor of adding to it I just was curious if that referred to a definition elsewhere Thank you Y
any other questions for staff yes sure Um so number six on here required parking shall be segregated from the sales display and the area used for sales shall not take up any required parking space Um when I read our off- streetet parking section I am reading
that in Town Center and Main Street there is a required parking space one required parking space and parking maximums in those other zoning districts Um I guess my question for us is does it make sense to regulate a parking
stall here when it's potentially one parking stall i mean obviously any business owner is going to have more than that but to me it seems our zoning code allows just one Do we need to regulate that and I I agree with with Justin I
pretty minimal with our offer parking requirements now So probably not a a huge issue to remove that question for Justin He's just saying it's redundant of us to essentially regulate here since it's dealt with I would agree Yeah it's dealt with elsewhere and it's like I said
potentially one spot If one spot is comingled with their sales area it's not going to be a huge issue I don't think probably going to do it anyway right could be their loss Good catch Any other discussion items otherwise
looking for a motion or direction Yes I'd like to make a a motion to um I I guess we're moving forward to move forward with this that staff continue to I don't think we've made one the one change we uh on parking and that we bring it back for a public hearing um at
the next meeting I guess I have another item I'd like to address to um the principal use if we're going through the whole ordinance Just for a point of order there there was a motion Okay And just seeking a second or uh we
can pull it back and do it again as to or the motioner can amend without understanding completely what the or if it doesn't get Mr Chair if it doesn't get a second it dies So we can just come back
Okay Looking for a second Don't do it All right And we'll let the motion die for a fail of a second And I guess looking at section three um outdoor sales services sales and
equipment rental connected with principal use limited to 50% And then down below in Town Center and Main Street limiting it to 15% to me that seems quite low especially if service is not attached if it's just sales
Um sales could occur with a 8 by8 shed Um so I'd just like to raise that point that maybe that needs to be adjusted Um because it does seem like we're we're severely limiting the amount
of sales space Any other comments on that specific i I generally agree Whatever motion we make is that clear for clear direction for James on that does the planning commission have a percentage in mind that they'd be
comfortable with mr Chair may I ask a question oh where did the 15% come from that's just been in the code That was in the previous code as well Okay All right Nothing magical about that number All right I do have a question then
regarding so um within the small little coffee shops that you have sometimes that pop up out of a fish house kind of a thing Not so much in Brainer but um and a um food truck despite the fact that we do have food truck situation and
code already included within code How does that end up impacting with outside sales so food trucks and coffee shops um t they might have an eating area outside or anything like that that wouldn't be considered outside sales That's in a
separate section of code related to outdoor dining Um so it wouldn't really affect that part It's more of a business selling products So yeah potentially um most commercial properties you have to at least a,000 square feet without a conditional use permit Um and but for
clarification what I'm more or less saying is that sometimes you'll see those little popup barista situations that it's it's a very very small like I say it's a shack that is in somebody's parking lot that they pop up and do
sales their retail coffee sales out of like Earorn or whatever in the summer And sometimes yeah the little um vegetable shop that's in the parking lot kind of a situation Yeah
Yeah I'll kind of add here Um so the town center in Main Street District um typically the purpose and intent of it is to have pretty dense areas shopping um you know living So having kind of real large expansive um sales lots are are may not be
consistent kind of with that zoning district but yeah perhaps 15% may be too low Okay And did you have a recommendation for that percentage i was thinking on it Um so I guess for Town Center and Main Street I believe a parking spot is about
100 square feet Um so if the minimum required building size is 1,000 square feet that would be if we did 25% two parking spots that seems reasonable to me Um in other zones I I don't know that we should necessarily limit it in other
zones Um just because like I said you could have an 8 by8 building doing trailer sales or rentals equipment rentals which we don't have much of in town Um and they would be perfectly fine with that building size but they need a lot
of area for their sales for their trailers or whatever equipment that they're selling or renting Any other discussion items all right And looking for a motion for direction for staff I will I will move to
um direct staff to adjust based on my comments Is that clear enough James yep that's clear So what I took from that was 25% in Main Street and Town Center and no requirements in the other zoning districts Yes
And then the other part of it was removing the parking space park in the parking space That's your motion I'll second that Yes Okay Any discussion on the motion seeing no discussion all those in favor
i oppose Same sign And the motion passes All right And staff yep So staff will bring this to the next planning commission meeting for a public hearing All right So to clarify we'll have a public
hearing at our next commission meeting That's correct Okay Moving on to item F 7F review of the commission itinerary Yes Thank you Mr Chair So staff put
together a memo here um showing what our completed ordinances are the ones that we've been working on and then also the ones that are still up for review Um you see some of them have direction um tonight and one of them is going to city council the cryp cryptomining data centers and AI centers Um staff uh
brought the other two um for review tonight industrial ostri parking requirements and outdoor screening requirements And then currently staff is working on shorland management regulations So this is a large one I think it's a 40 plus page code that we have right now in our city code Um we
haven't reviewed it for 20 years So staff is um hasn't put a lot of work into this one yet We've been focused on the allowed use table kind of first Um the allowed use table will be at the next planning commission meeting for kind of an initial review and then staff
um after that uh allowed use table will probably begin working on that shoreland management regulations um as required by the the Minnesota DNR Uh a couple other ones were added to this one as recommendations from um the EDA So just want to get kind of approval from planning commission to add this to the
itinerary Um so one of them is signed standards Uh at our EDA workshop on April 3rd uh the EDA board recommended working on this Um right now our sign standards uh have kind of uh where they can be located what size they can be but
really don't uh regulate what they can be made out of Um so what we're seeing kind of around downtown and some of our other commercial areas is we're getting kind of vinyl banners that are put up on buildings and really not kind of enhancing um you know that that shopping area So the EA is recommending to work
on that Um and then also uh design standards Uh we did go through design standards um quite thoroughly for residential properties uh but really didn't take an in-depth look at some of our um commercial districts Uh this is something else that the EDA is recommending that the planning
commission focus on this year Um really some of our major corridors and enhancing those and enhancing some of the requirements And then again um the city council did approve um a budgetary item for the comprehensive plan Um obviously that's kind of been getting
bumped down on our itinerary list um based on some of the direction from planning commission city council and the EDA So staff certainly has that and something that that you know we should work on this year as it is a budgeted line item Um but uh staff is recommending the other priorities first
So with that I can answer any questions Any questions for staff go ahead Um what are so with the with the money for the comp plan is there a danger that we're going to hit the end of the budget and not spend our money and not and kind of missed our opportunity where are we at with that
and so typically how that works is it's budgeted Certainly council would want an update or you know why uh we would didn't get to the comprehensive plan if it was in the budget Um you know certainly some of the direction for these codes have come from EDA which consists of council members and from
city council themselves Um so probably be an understanding of why we're working on some of these Obviously the shorland management came from the DNR That's a requirement that we have to do this year um or we could face again some repercussions from from the DNR on that one Uh so in most instances like this in
the capital budget they get rolled over to the next year So um I think what I would like to see is is creating an RFP probably sometime late summer with the comprehensive plan to at least get the get things rolling with this and and select a potential consultant to work on
that update Got a question Yes James Um are you able to scroll back up to the EDA signage um can you elaborate a little bit on the concerns that um coming out of that workshop like so the I think I understand what you're saying about the
vinyl signs Um they're worried about the condition of those or just the presence of those signs Yeah I'd say probably just more the presence instead of having kind of a real nice three-dimensional sign put on the building something that looks more permanent Um certainly vinyl signs are going to show wear and tear a
lot faster as well So I think what came out of the conversations from the EDA is maybe there's some temporary you know somebody moves into a building they're allowed to put up that temporarily but then you know you have a certain number of months before you'd have to put some type of sign with with
more aesthetics in that area So that's kind of the the thought process behind it I think the EDA um in some of these corridors will probably probably be rolling out some type of uh facade improvement grant or signage grants is something that was discussed That
probably wouldn't be until uh most likely 2026 Um they're hoping to get maybe some enhanced standards before the roll out of some type of incentive program to help businesses replace signage Okay Thank you I guess just a comment then I guess I look forward to
talking with that or talking about that bringing it Um I guess my concern is you know for a startup business we want to encourage startup businesses along our corridors You got a $350 cost to get a a nice looking vinyl sign versus you know
5 to 10,000 and up for a um you know structured sign like that And so I guess we'll talk about it more at the next meeting but that's my kind of initial thought and concern Commissioner Peterson Well I yeah if we're talking about it later because
same thing I mean how it's going to be a regulation nightmare I would think I mean you think about the liquor stores and different things that you know put up Bush Light or whatever for sale this week Is it going to include those kinds of things or the car dealership that's
you know got a special on Mazdas tomorrow you know they're everywhere So typically um the ones that are put up for a week or on a temporary basis those aren't issues It's ones that are kind of left up there permanently Um certainly an example is liquor stores that put a
lot of signs there It's it's hard to know when they put the signs up Are they grandfathered in but that many signs on a building is prohibited by code and it always has been as to creating the priorities within our situation
Um am I hearing it correctly that shoreland management should be the highest priority yeah Again the the allowed use section and and shoreland is the ones that that count that staff is currently working on and and staff believes that definitely should be the highest priorities Okay
Anybody on the commission that disagrees with that assessment okay and then moving into the comprehensive plan might be the next major priority of staff Am I hearing
that so yeah certainly um want to look at doing that this year Um this the sign standards I think that'll could be a pretty fast ordinance like these last two Um the the planning commission did do a pretty thorough review of our signed ordinance a couple
years ago um came up during kind of the political season So it's really adding more of an aesthetic requirement in this in the sign standards I don't think that one's going to take a considerable amount of time and I could see that one being brought within the next couple of months just as we're working through
some of these other larger ones Design standards that one you know certainly could take a little bit more time So whether design standards is before or after the comprehensive plan you kind of that's up for for further review Okay And then if I'm hearing it correctly the
solar arrays and the manufactured home overlay and sound requirements would be towards the bottom of the current list Again if somebody were to propose a solar array in Brainard right now we don't have code for it So it would be a little bit of a
longer process Um I went through that process with with Brainer Public Utilities over in Baxter Again it was just brought forward with the project So you know if if somebody were to propose something we just look at creating standards at that time Is there currently code within our
neighboring communities that does reference solar arrays that you know of so Baxter does have um code for it Okay Um do you believe that it would be fairly simple and easy in as far as
crafting and working through that specific item i think that one could be a little bit more timeconuming based on screening requirements It' be there was a lot of discussion on that Uh over in the neighboring city Okay
Yes I think a good list Um I like the priority as you have them laid out I don't know action on this if some of these shift in order I have no problem with that I think it's fine as is I don't think there chair doesn't believe that there
needs to be an action as there is enough consensus within the commission to create the hierarchy within the priorities circumstances it would be Mr Sure It would be great Some of these have been kicked for a couple years now It'd be great to get to
a couple if we can The manufactured home overlay district We've kicked that one down the line And uh that would be a good one to get around to but um I I I think you have a good set of I have no argument with the priorities I think they're as as laid out they make a lot of sense That's all All right Any other
questions comments all right Moving on to item eight public forum Uh this item is usually there's like a whole little thing that I can read off that specifies exactly what it is but it's an
opportunity for the public to speak about anything that is not on the agenda Uh if anybody would like to come forward to speak for the public forum just simply need your name and
address and make a second call for anybody that would like to speak at public forum and a third call for anybody to speak at public forum All right I don't have to open or close it or anything like that it Am I supposed
to it's kind of fun Oh I started talking about it at approximately 6:48 and now it's 6:49 And so moving on from public forum into staff reports
Yes I'll just give an update on the country manor project to the planning commission So getting very close um Mandoli did their um final review for the structural mechanical and and other types of reviews and have released that I think there's one item left on the
plumbing review Um so the state review can take a significant amount of time So that was um something that uh staff was looking at and and certainly wanting to ensure that uh that was getting done in a timely fashion before construction here They are anticipating hopefully to
break ground sometime late May early June Uh right now they're drafting a lot of the closing documents for the conduit debt um through the city of Brainard and and bonding for that as well So project is is moving forward and and uh hoping for beginning construction kind of late
May early June Any questions for staff all right And then moving on to item 10 commissioner member reports I'll start down to the left
Nothing to report All right Okay Ditto Nothing All right I do have one item um within our regular order of business Um I would like to suggest that we
uh amend our bylaws for our order of business within article 4 section 5 item C as to change for the public forum to be moved up uh
to just after approval of minutes in the future Um the the reason why that I am suggesting that change within our bylaws to that specific article is that uh it
will end up adopting something closer to what city council has been doing Um and so the meeting will have a little bit more uniformity to it Does that need a motion i see a lot of head nodding
Yes As directed by the chair I can bring that um to the next meeting and and planning commission can have a vote at that time Okay Any other discussion within what I'm proposing James Just the counterargument is that somebody sits
here at a meeting and hears us talking about something and starts to steam inside and say you know they're forgetting something and or maybe another matter or something I don't know I kind of like it where it is but I don't know I'm not averse to change Um I thought our we were already kind of synced up with city council in terms of
our our things That was a general idea um is that is to kind of sync with the the city council but in order to do that we wouldn't need to change our bylaws So this was a very recent change So it was before we went through our bylaw process at the in I guess at the very beginning
of the year And some of the reason why I suggest it and other than just uh syncing up with how city council has been doing it is that given an item that is not on the agenda I I I do wholeheartedly agree the fact that you
know sometimes you have to stew and sit and listen to how things are going in order to come up with something But um giving the public the opportunity to bring their matter in a a timely and efficient manner I don't necessarily know if the public needs to sit through
the entire meeting and public forum is for items that are not on the agenda Sometimes they're confusion ends up coming as they bring up items that are later on the agenda that they want to speak to and it's you know that's already happened The public forum or the public hearing
for the item is already open and closed and so they're just trying to rehash already discussed items But chair yes I I agree with with um considering moving it at least um just out of courtesy to the public if they've
got something they're coming here to share with us They can't you know necessarily talk about things on the agenda and so forcing them to sit through the entire meeting when they're here to talk to us about something that's not on the agenda I' I'd be open to moving it So um I'd just make a
motion to direct staff to come back with recommendations regarding the placement of public forum on our agenda That way there's no questions on direction and looking for a second that second Okay Any discussion and all those in
favor i I and opposed by same sign All right And motion passes And then item 11 Do we have to have a motion for item 11 yes They can make a motion to adjurnn All right Second All right All those in
favor i