President >> Gorum >> here. >> Gasula >> here. >> Peterson >> here. >> Ericson >> here. >> All right. Pledge of allegiance to the flag
of America to the stands nationy andice for all. All right. Well, this is exciting. We have a uh oath of office to administer here for uh Mr. Kramer. >> Sounds good. We'll have Mr. Kramer stand and raise your right hand and repeat
after me. I, James Kramer, >> I, James Kramer, >> do solemnly swear >> do solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> the Constitution of the State of Minnesota >> constitution of the state of Minnesota >> and that I will faithfully discharge
>> I will fa faithfully discharge >> the duties of the office of planning commission >> duties of the office of planning commission >> of the city of Briner Minnesota >> city of Briner Minnesota >> to the best of my judgment and ability >> to the best of my judgment and ability. So help me God. >> So help me God.
>> Welcome to the planning commission. >> Excellent. We got another one. >> All right. Move on to item five. Looking for approval or uh any amendments to tonight's agenda. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, sir. Mr. >> Um I would uh note that I have a
potential conflict of interest on an agenda item and I am searching bad here. >> Would that be 8 C? >> That would be item 8 C. as chairman of the Brainer H. pretty >> pretty tightly interwoven with that
item. So I will recuse myself and drop to the audience for that item. >> Excellent. >> Mr. Chair, I will recuse myself from the same item as commissioner of the H. >> All right. Anybody else like to recuse themselves? >> Mr. Chair, unfortunately, I may I also
will recuse myself from item 8 C based on a potential conflict of interest. >> All right. Very good. Thank you. All right. Uh, with that, do we have a motion to approve the uh uh agenda with uh recus recusals as noted? >> So moved. >> Second. >> I'm giving that one to uh Justin. And
with that, all in favor say I. >> I. Same sign. All right. We have an agenda. Item six, looking for approval of minutes. Let's let's go out there. I'm I'm looking for somebody to approve both 6A and 6B in one shot. If somebody would be so daring. >> Motion to approve.
>> Motion to approve. >> Second. We got a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. There we go. We are set. Uh, and that leads us all the way up to um a public forum. This is time allocated for citizens to bring matters
not on the agenda to the attention of the commission. Is there anybody here tonight that would like to speak? I'll open the public forum at 603. Do we have anybody in the audience? Do we have anybody online? We do not. We'll pause for a second. We'll close the public
forum S603. That gets us all the way up to 8A. We're going to consider a interimm use permit for a renewal on an STR at 1123 15th Avenue Northeast. James, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, so this is a renewal for a short-term rental at
112315th Avenue Northeast. Since it is a renewal, the renewal period can be for up to two years. The House rules and occupancy have not changed, and the property meets all conditions required of a short-term rental. Uh staff did email a letter uh from a concerned neighbor regarding the
residence. I did follow up after that with the police department to see how many calls they have received regarding uh the residence. Um I did get uh correspondence back from the police department. In the past two years, the police have responded to one call for loud music. Visited the property. They did not find the property in violation
of any code, but did inform the property manager of the complaint. Uh since there's been uh no police action or calls to the community development department, staff did not recommend or does not recommend any additional conditions than what is recommended in the findings. Uh so with that, staff recommends to hold a public hearing and
approval with the following conditions. The interimm use permit terminates 2 years uh after approval. The interimm use permit shall terminate upon sale or transfer of the property. Occupancy of the short-term rental shall not exceed 9. All out outdoor lighting fixtures shall meet the standards of section
515-4-8 outdoor lighting of the zoning code. All watercraft docked in the lake at the property shall be within the boundaries of the property. Overnight guest vehicles and trailers must be parked in the driveway. Two additional vehicles may be parked on the street for daytime guests. Submission of the lodging tax
report on a monthly basis to the finance department. And I can answer any questions. >> Questions for James? >> Seeing none. >> Mike. Um, Mr. Chair, thank you. Um, James, there has been a letter received on this particular property here as
you've mentioned. Um the issues are um issues of signage um lighting s noise um and and there
you know the use of the hot tub and the rowdiness I guess that's associated with that. Um, as I if I'm summarizing your your staff report, our ordinance addresses those issues and our conditions that we have currently
recommended by staff would would encompass um those particular issues that this letter has brought forward. Am I correct in summarizing? >> Yes, those recommendations certainly um if there are any issues should reach out to our community development department on any of those. We have not received
any calls. Um, and then also if it's after hours, um, if there's uncontrolled bonfires or uh, music, certainly the police department would be the one to call on that. U, we could also be made aware of that. If there was actually an incident that happened there where it was potentially cited, um, typically the
police department would forward those to us. Again, I didn't receive any of those. I did follow up with the police department. They had responded to to one call at the property, >> and that's what I have to my knowledge. >> Okay. And follow up, Mr. Chair. Um, and this this property is also managed with
a um a rental license from the city of Brainer. Is that correct? >> That's correct. So, all short-term rentals are required to have a rental license. >> And there is there are regulations on rental properties that address um nuisance properties, if you would call
them, those that are frequently being re um police reports to that property. And that um is another >> that's that's correct. If there's a conduct on premise where there's uh police activity, it could be potentially forwarded for revocation of the rental license. >> Thank you. No further questions.
>> Any other questions for James? >> Seeing none, we'll open a public hearing at uh 607. I'd like to invite the applicant, Mr. Fish, >> appreciate your time, consideration. Um so we have a noise meter >> name.
>> Oh, Mike Fish. Uh 1533 1808 80th Avenue in Pierce. >> Thank you. >> My office is there in Baxter. So we have a we have a noise meter that's a Wi-Fi connected noise meter 5 ft from this hot tub and I should have printed out and brought it. I didn't know that would be brought up. That noise meter never went
off. When I was on the phone with the guest who called me when the police showed up and she said they were sitting in the hot tub talking. I was told by the by the one of the neighbors that they feel they should be able to have their window open and their bedrooms right there and they should not have to
hear anything. So, this certainly wasn't a matter of somebody partying in any way, shape or form. I just want to put it in record. I've done everything I can to work with the neighbors. As I think some of you folks know, I managed over 5,000 bookings, 70 properties over nine
years. I've never had a formal complaint or an issue. And this is a second second or third time out of 5,000 bookings I've seen police called. I was also called by a neighbor one day who informed me that we had no right to have anybody have a boat at the dock. And she said, "I know
you when we gave you that license, you promised you'd never have anybody that would have a boat at this property." And I said, "This is a vacation rental. It's a lake home. There's a dock. Just like the neighbors have a right to have a dock, a boat at the dock. some of our guests will rent or have a boat at the
dock. Um, I was also called with a claim, and I'm not there, so I'm not saying it didn't happen, but a wild claim that I had guests walk into the wrong house. 9 years of doing this, never heard of it. So, they asked me to get a sign. I put up a very clear sign showing that
it's a rental. So, I feel like um there's other things that I won't bring up, but I feel like I've done a a fairly good job at um making sure that as I promised when you gave this to me two years ago, making sure that we're going to run a super tight ship and we wouldn't have issues that were going to
be bothering neighbors. So, >> good. Any questions? >> Questions for Mr. Fish? >> Any questions down there? >> I just have one quick question. Uh you said noise meter went off. Um is it set at a certain level? Noise meters on some properties. I've got noise meters. The
noise meter did not go off. >> And so define go off. >> Um well, you can set it at different dec. >> Okay. So, um the idea is if it's set at a seven, if someone's screaming or playing loud music, they'll get a text. >> That's seven. You mean 70 dB or
>> uh seven dB? I believe the setting. I >> seven dB is I mean, we're talking at about 60 dB. 70. It might it might be 70. Yeah, I'm not sure the setting and and but the owner has has it it does go off every time someone's mowing the lawn. Okay.
>> Um it does go off if if there's a dog barking somewhere. So, I mean it's it's it goes off. It's pretty good. Um and we've uh not had that go off in the last year and we didn't that day. Um certainly I was on the phone with the guests. uh you know, not ideal in any
way, shape, or form, but we've uh it's very very clear in our rental agreement and our marketing that there's no parties at this place and that uh the quiet hours have to be respected. >> It's kind of interesting how the DB I hadn't heard of that being used before. Uh thank you very much. Questions, but I think that'll do it for the moment.
>> Okay. >> Like to open the floor to anybody else who would like to come up, please name and address. >> Cheryl Caitlyn, 120815th Avenue Northeast. I live right next door to 11:23. Thanks for giving us neighbors the
opportunity to share our experiences living next to 1123. My neighbors and I chose to purchase live in a traditional residential neighborhood as ours is zoned. To clarify regarding my email, we
do not want a verbbo Airbnb as our neighbor. The serenity on Rice Lake that the property owners and managers advertise in verbal is not our reality. For those of us who live there, our
peace, safety, security, and comfort are not compromised for just a weekend. It's every weekend. Every week. We have to tolerate partying day and night, loud noises, music, domestic disputes,
trespassing, people trying to enter and break into our homes on a regular basis. They're violating city ordinances. The noise doesn't stop at 10:00. It doesn't. All our neighbors, their homes were all
in close proximity. This house is 7 ft from my property line. One could say we are in the next room or down the hall from the party that never ends. The owners of 1123 on the other hand live
over 180 miles away, more than 3 hours away near Good Hume, Minnesota on a Red Angus ranch in the country. The property manager lives 30 miles 30 minutes away on a deadend road in the country.
neither live in this city or in this county. Neither have to see, hear, live in the next room or down the hall every day, every week, every weekend of the year. Would they want to? Would you want to
live next to a party house? We didn't choose it. We ask you to vote no. Terminate the permit and the turmoil. After this meeting, you don't have to see here and live in the room
next the next room or down the hall. You get to go home to peaceful, quiet, serene neighborhoods. Don't we deserve the same? Thanks for your time. >> Uh any questions for uh Miss Gaitland?
>> Okay, thank you very much. Would anybody else like to speak? Last chance. Anybody online? Nobody online. All right. Um, you're good, Mr. Fish. >> Um, I think >> I'll be good with that. >> All right. Very good. I'll close the
public hearing at 6:13 and uh invite any discussion or questions. >> Mr. Chair, um I'm I'm sympathetic to the points that were raised in the letter. Um, and I'm keenly um interested in ensuring
that that that reasonable um neighborhood feel um is is not lost. Um, and I think having been on the planning commission when um the short-term rental
ordinance was uh was crafted, if you would, I feel like we spent a lot of thoughtful time um trying to address these things and and I feel that staff's report um gives me comfort that we've kind of have a means of addressing any
kinds of uh cross crosswise issues that come up that that there is pathways to address those and and we've not um omitted opportunity here for uh for some additional conditions we might apply to
this permit. So I I I feel pretty um pretty comfortable that um the the license as as proposed here will will address those concerns or it has the means to address those concerns. There may be actions that are necessary by the
property owner or the neighbors. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Any other comments or thoughts? >> Yes, Mr. Ericson. >> Yeah, I have a question for uh James, or maybe it's more of a comment, but the comment was made. I guess the question
for James is um the short-term rentals similar to the long-term rentals in that we require if somebody lives far away, they have a local property manager and I believe is within 30 miles. Is that accurate? And I I guess
>> Yep, that's accurate. And that is why Michael Fish is the Yep. That's why he's the property manager, not the owner. >> Okay. And I guess the claim that was made that the property manager is more than 30 miles away. So just something we can maybe >> double check and verify on.
>> That's not true. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mike. >> Thanks. So, >> I just Yeah, with that claim we made, I just wanted staff to be able to make sure to verify that. >> Makes some sense. Cool. Any other thoughts? Um, my two cents worth here is I wish I lived in a neighborhood that
was quiet and serene all the time, but it's not. Um, my neighbors have parties and you know, usually they end and I have neighbors that have uh their little motocross trucks and stuff and things and I don't know, it's part of living in town. But that's just is my two cents worth. The most important thing is I
think we do have a good process involved. I think we set up a good ordinance. Um I think we're uh uh we're on things. We're listening to things. We're um responding to it. So I generally feel pretty good about this. If there isn't any other discussions, I'm certainly open to a motion.
>> I would move to approve as presented. >> All right, Ericson. And >> I'll second. >> We have a second, Mr. Peterson. Any uh any discussion? Hearing none. Um, all in favor say I. >> I. >> Same sign. There we go. Next step for
the applicant. This go to city council. Is that correct? >> Yes. So, this will go to city council as planning commission's a recommending body. City council meeting will be on Monday, June 1st for final consideration at 7:30 in the council chambers. >> Right. Very good. All right. We are in
AB considering another um IUP for a STR. This time we would be at uh 152614th Avenue Northeast. It's not too far away. And James, could you um introduce us? >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, the applicant has applied for an IEP to operate a new short-term rental at 1526 14th Avenue
Northeast. The house is five bedrooms, and the applicant proposes to occupy with 10, which aligns with city code. The applicant has a pet noise and garbage policy. I did make note in there um that the noise policy needs to be adjusted to meet city code. it didn't quite meet the the weekend morning um
requirements with that. So, I am going to recommend adding a condition. Uh the premise was inspected by the housing inspector and fire marshall on May 7th and the house was issued a rental license. Uh one party has contacted the community development uh department regarding the interimm use permit and was opposed to the short-term rentals as
they did not want this type of use in the neighborhood. Uh so with that, the applicant uh and staff's opinion has met all conditions of the IEP and staff recommends uh approval with the following conditions. Uh the one that staff's recommended adding would be the applicant must update the noise policy in the house rules to align with city
code prior to occupancy. Uh the interimm use permit terminates one year after approval. The interimm use permit shall terminate upon sale or transfer of the property. Occupancy of the short-term rental shall not exceed 10. All outdoor lighting fixture shall meet the standards of section 515-4-8 outdoor lighting of the zoning code. All
watercraft docked in the lake at the property shall be within the boundaries of the property. Overnight guest vehicles and trailers must be parked in the driveway. Two additional vehicles may be parked on the street for daytime guests and then submission of the lodging tax report on a monthly basis to the finance department. And I can answer any questions.
>> All right, questions for James. >> Hearing none. Uh we'll open a public hearing on this at 6:19. And if the applicant is present or online, I certainly wish them to come up and uh talk to us. Yeah, come on up, please. >> There you go.
Thank you. >> Well, to the uh the commission, thanks for allowing me the chance to speak. My name is Hunter Pinky uh here 152614th. Uh and I'm just here to tell you a little bit about our history um with the
short-term rentals as well as some of the improvements that we've made to the to the home. Um as you guys can see, I use a wheelchair full-time. Uh and accessible lodging is is a passion of mine. I was injured in 2019 uh spinal cord injury. Uh since then I went to the
University of Arizona, received my degree in real estate development with a focus on accessibility housing. Uh our family owns a construction company. We own a material supply company as well as uh we build movable homes. Uh my grandpa started building homes in the 1970s. And
uh he used three-foot doors back in the day. Little did he know that his grandson someday was going to need three-foot doors. Uh, but accessible housing is is a passion of mine and uh I was actually just at a wedding last last winter in in Brainer. Um, making hotel
reservations. Uh, there was no accessible rooms left in the the entire city of Brainard. Um, and you look online at an Airbnb, is there something that, you know, has at least 32 ft openings, stepf free access? There was none as well. Um, so, um, I couldn't fit
in the bathroom of my hotel room and, uh, hence why I I feel pretty passionate about allowing spaces to be accessible, uh, for people. So, we've made a lot of improvements on this property. Uh, one of them being an additional bedroom um, and bathroom on the main level um, so
that there is complete accessibility for a wheelchair user like me. Much like the gentleman that spoke previously, we have a lot of the same um, rules. Um, we will change that that morning. I believe ours is 7 a.m. We'll change that to to meet the the city ordinance, but we also have
a noise meter as well. I believe ours is sit at at 8 8.5 85, which is typical yelling. Um, but just wanted to to make note that uh we're uh we're excited to to offer this to to people that are visiting the Briner Lakes area.
>> Great. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you. If we have any other questions, we'll let you know. >> Would anybody else like to speak on this matter? >> I'll say >> Mike, if you'd like to speak, come on up.
>> I would just like to say welcome. >> Um because he knows probably less than 1% of the um short-term rentals in this area handicapped accessible. So, that's something I'm always pushing too. So, that's a great thing. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mike.
All right. Anybody else? Not hearing or seeing anybody else. I'll close the public hearing at 6:22 and open the floor to any discussion. >> Mr. Chair, just a question or >> Yes, please. >> James, can you tell me why this is a one-year approval and the previous one
was a two. So, um, within our code, uh, for short-term rentals, new ones are only one year just to, um, see if there's been any issues, allow property owners to come back after one year and state if there's any concerns with it. Um, renewals, uh, are allowed for two.
Uh, obviously, if there is an issue um, that's maybe minor or something that we want to review, um, it's optional. I think we did it for one short-term rental where it was a renewal that only renewed for one year. Um but if there's no issues then um staff recommends two.
>> All right. Any other questions or discussion? >> Not hearing any. I'm open for a motion. >> I'll make the motion. >> Mr. Mr. Peterson. >> Second. >> Second to Justin. Very good. Any discussion? All right. All in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. Same sign. >> There we go. Next up for the applicant. >> Yep. So, this will be heard at the next city council meeting on June 1st at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers for a final decision. >> All right. Very good. We move up to uh
8C. This is when we get to have a few people. Uh uh we're going to walk. >> Going to walk. Yeah, you've had enough. Don't blame you. All right, we are on to uh we're item 8 C. We're going to consider a reasonzoning uh and there's three things. So, resoning, a conditional use
permit, and resoning request for a 50 unit multif family apartment on Wright Street. I think the last thing is supposed to be a variance, isn't it, James? >> It is. >> Okay. So, it should actually be a variance that we're looking for. Can you set us up? >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, the applicant is proposing a 50unit multif
family apartment on P41310501 tract A on the attached survey. Property is currently zoned general commercial. The applicant proposes to change to contemporary two neighborhood district with a future land use map changed to medium to high density. The property is currently surrounded by the general
industrial zoning district and primarily vacant city-owned uh property. There is an adjacent data center that does generate substantial noise. Uh the project is in conformance of the comprehensive plan. Housing goal one provide a diverse mix of housing choices for all stages of life, income ranges
and ownership/ rental preferences to expand home ownership and rental opportunities through rehabilitation and new construction. Uh so with that, the developer must ensure that a sound study uh with a sound study that the development will be within MPCA noise requirements due to the adjacent data
center. So essentially the onus is on the developer not the adjacent properties. Uh multif family apartments are a conditional use in the CN2 district. The applicant has also requested cups to exceed the lot size maximum and lot width maximum. Again, we have that variation in there in the
event of multifamily housing to provide for more room. Um, we don't have uh uh we do we do want a maximum in there typically because we don't want single um family homes to consolidate lots and have too large of lots. Uh the building uh does meet the design standards of the
zoning code. Again, a goal of the Brainard Economic Development Authority is to evaluate the city's vacant industrial property for compatible non-industrial uses that would address current and future needs of the community. Um, certainly housing has been a focus of the EDA as well as
some of the other um commissions and and committees in the city. Um, the applicant has also requested a variance from the Austri parking requirements. Uh the Brainer EDA uh requests the developer maximize their property design to allow for additional development of the property which reduces the ability
to expand off- streetet parking. Uh the applicant does believe that the parking plan will satisfy the needs of the apartment complex due to uh the building having substantially more three and four bedroomedroom uh apartment units than typical multif family developments. Uh so it can support families with uh young
children that do not possess driver's licenses. Uh staff does have no concerns regarding the proposed parking plan. A letter was sent to the planning commission members opposing the land use request. Um so you should have all received that in email. Uh so with that, staff recommends to hold the public
hearing and then separate motions for the following. Recommend approval of the resoning to CN2 and the future land use map amendment to medium high density residential for track A in the attached survey. Staff recommend approval of the conditional use permits for the construction of multifamily uh five plus unit apartment to exceed the lot size
maximum and exceed exceed the lot width in the CN2 district tracked A in the attached survey with the following conditions. Conveyance of the property from the city to the applicant developer must be completed. The applicant shall have four years from the date of approval to initiate the project and
utilize conditional use permits. And then just a slight adjustment from what I had um in number three. Uh prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall submit a sound study provided by a thirdparty acoustic engineer to the city per uh proving the development will be within MPCA noise requirements due to the adjacent data
center. And then the final motion uh staff recommend approval of the variance request from the off street parking requirements in the CN2 district to allow for 102 total spaces for track A in the attached survey with the following conditions. The applicant shall have four years from the date of approval to initiate the project and
utilize the variance. And with that, I can answer any questions. >> Questions for James, Mr. Chair? >> Yes, >> I have a few for you, James. So, this is a zoning change and we have general all the way around it. Isn't that the definition of spot zoning if we would do
this? >> So, yeah. So, um you could certainly look at it as a potential spot zone. Um the obviously the EDA which is um a separate entity from the city but related does want to potentially see some of this vacant uh industrial land
that hasn't been developed for a number of years or shovel ready sites um potentially be developed into residential. Um you know certainly the entire area could be reszoned to residential. Um but it is vacant property. So, when you are looking at uh potentially a spot zoning, certainly
there's more concern when you have a whole bunch of uses that are existing in there and you're changing, you know, say you're surrounded by residential houses and then all of a sudden in the middle of residential houses, you spot zone to industrial. Um so certainly something to consider from the planning commission.
Um but there is essentially vacant uh um readily available uh development property around it. Okay. Followup if I may. So let's say that's granted and we have two or three different manufacturing companies come in and want
to buy the lots around that. What sort of things do they have to jump through or can or can't do then if this housing development is there? >> So if uh industrial property would be developed in that area then they would be held to essentially um being adjacent
to a residential property. So the existing use um is uh would not have to do any sound mitigation me method or me measures but a future um property owner may have to depending on the type of industrial use. Um certainly we do have a lot of um vacant available industrial
land also in our TC Drive industrial park um which kind of seems to be the one that developers are are tending to go towards right now. Um not to say that that's what we're looking at in the future. So, it almost if if you're going to zone this, wouldn't you zone other
properties adjacent to this at the same time so that that wouldn't happen? >> So, you could potentially do that. Um, planning commission could make that recommendation to city council. >> I'm not saying we do that by any stretch, but yeah, I'm I'm going to I'm
going to wait for other questions till later, I believe. Very good. >> At this point, >> you have any quick questions there, Mr. Ericen? Well, just maybe almost a followup. Um, if if we move forward with this and as Mr. Peterson pointed out, if a manufacturing or data center wanted to
come in in the surrounding or adjacent properties, they would be subject to the noise study. Um, as you mentioned, now the noise study that kind of came about when we were, you know, fielding proposals from data centers in the industrial park. Is that something
that we would have the discretion as a planning commission or council to you know potentially wave that if it's like a local or a regional manufacturer versus a you know one of these large scale data centers or is this something you know >> so we would not have
>> well just sorry as I recall the noise study was more for that purpose you know than you know inhibiting a a lo you know local manufacturer sorry go ahead >> yes so um we would not have the ability to you know, wave a sound study if we
had concerns. So, so right now within our conditional use um requirements for like a data center, um we have a required sound study in there. Um certainly if there was some other type of industrial use that were to be next to this one, it's something that city staff could require if we have concerns
about uh noise generation next to a residential um area, but it's not something that that we could wave. So, um any use that goes in there would have to adhere to the MPCA requirements. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Good. Any other questions? >> I may have one for James. I And you
probably can't answer that, but I mean since there's other general zoning around this, why didn't the applicants look at something that was on the outer fringe rather than surrounded by vacant general lots?
>> So, um, property that's owned by the city that could potentially be sold at a dollar a dollar an acre. Really, we only own um general industrial property. The applicant may be able to speak to this. Um, they've worked in other kind of difficult locations similar to this. Um, so they believe that this could be a a
potentially good fit for what they're looking to do. >> No, I I mean in this area like over 500 ft to get on the outer edge of the general. I mean, because there's other lots for sale in here, right? >> So, there are other lots for sale in
this area. Um, the applicant could maybe speak to why they chose that particular piece of property. >> Sure. the the one to the south um would have been problematic uh because it is in a shoreland district. So, you do have um some additional requirements with that. There's I think it's Little Buffalo Creek that runs along there.
>> Um but the applicant could could maybe speak of why they they chose that site. >> Um just a couple questions. I think you answered one. I was going to say what was the cost of the lot? The cost of the lot would be $1, correct? Okay. Um how close to the east? I when I was uh did
the site visit um there's a farmer's field. How so how close is it to Oaklan Township? Basically quarter mile less than a quarter mile to Oakan. >> So yeah so just beyond the city property um across from be Kittyhawk Court um there's other city property and that
then that's next to Oaklan Township. >> Okay. >> So I I do believe one of the the ideas was that there'd be potential uh ability to expand residential um in the other direction as well in the future. But >> what do you mean by the other direction? >> Um to the to the east. So I believe
that's why they I believe that's why they chose this one. And then there's more city property >> um that would be across the street from Kittyhawk that could be potentially utilized by the developer in the future. >> It's all city property in the city. >> It's all city property. >> Nothing in Oaklan. >> Um yeah, none of this is in Oaklan. This
lot isn't adjacent to Oaklan. Uh the the larger parcel is >> the larger parcel. And that would be Do we have a map, too? We can take a look at that larger parcel. on the spot here, but that would be >> that doesn't get to the full >> a little bit more, but
>> so right the survey even shows it right there. >> So you see the culde-sac that's uh to the east there where right street terminates. >> And so >> that line right there essentially >> line is that the city or >> that's the city boundary. >> Let's just hold it right there. And so so the the line on the right of the
screen, that's the city property. That's the city line. >> Yeah. So the far the the line that's on the far right there that you have the culde-sac, you have a little bit of property right there, and then you have the city boundary line. >> Okay. All right. So the it's the the line farthest to the right is the city boundary line. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Uh very good. Um any other questions before we get it to a hearing? Yeah. Go ahead, please. >> Sorry. >> No, go ahead. >> Why $1? Can I buy it for a dollar? >> So that's something that um still would have to be determined by city council or the EDA or the HA. So, it's it's not a given that it's going to be sold for
that. Still has to be determined with the sale price with that. Um, but the the EDA has marketed um some of this property um either for residential or commercial. Um if you're bringing in, you know, certain number of employees, um adding tax value, adding some, you
know, some type of incentive to the Briner, meeting some type of need for the city of Brainard, um they are interested in potentially selling at a dollar an acre. So, I could possibly buy the lot next to it for a dollar >> if you were Yeah. If you were to propose
a use um that the EDA deems acceptable to sell for a dollar an acre, it couldn't, you know, typically like just a storage and warehousing building wouldn't be something that um you're going to sell for a dollar an acre, but something that would add either taxable value, jobs to the city, um residential
units to the city. Um that's something the EDA is interested in exploring. But historically the whole idea with having um inexpensive property in industrial park is to create jobs. Correct. >> Correct. That was that's my understanding. It says it to jobs. All right. Any other questions? You want go
ahead for >> if I may. I mean um I guess I'm looking forward to hearing from the applicant and and from others. I guess I just wanted to maybe mention or say that you know usually I'm pretty flexible when it
comes to zoning changes. Um, I'm I'm looking forward to hearing the applicant. Um, because I'm a little hesitant, you know, I'm just looking at Google Maps here. I mean, of course, I know the fair is only once a year necessarily, but you know, there's the the shooting range down there. So, I
mean, we are if there is a situation where spot zoning creates conflicts, this is pretty much one of them because we're, you know, there's a gun range down there, there's the fair surrounded by general commercial. Um, so I guess I
I'm hesitant, but I'm that's why I'm looking forward to hearing from the applicant and and from others. So >> Ed, where's the uh the gun range uh in in comparison to like the fair? Is it >> just trying to south? I I guess I'm not entirely from the south >> south side of the fairgrounds. >> East side maybe
>> right be to the east of the parking lot. >> Okay. Yeah, >> directly south. So anyway, so I there's a lot of conflicting uses. >> All right. >> And yeah, sorry. Very good. Um, you all ready for a public hearing? >> I absolutely
only three of us. I get to talk because you talk, man. >> We're going to have dead air otherwise. All right. I'm going to open a public hearing at 6:37. I'd like to invite the applicant to come up and uh talk about the project. >> Thank you, commissioners. Uh, my name is Jason Krebs. I am the community
development director at Central Minnesota Housing Partnership. Uh my home address is 3709 Dearwood Court, St. Cloud. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Um so where um how we've gotten to this point, uh so CHP, we are an affordable housing developer. Uh our
office is in St. Augusta, Minnesota, but we have a 16count service area in central and east central Minnesota. Uh a little bit of background about us. Um we own uh 38 properties in central Minnesota. Um some very similar to what we're proposing here. Uh we property
manage 29 of those uh properties. In fact, we have four properties in Baxter and one in Brainard um that we currently own and manage. Um we've done a variety of projects uh senior projects, supportive housing projects, family projects like this one. Um over the last
seven year or excuse me, over the last eight years more recently, we've developed seven new construction projects. Again, some in very difficult and maybe not the most convenient housing locations. um soil corrections, wetlands that we've had to deal with and
and noise. Um I can say we haven't built uh adjacent to a data center as of yet. Um but we have dealt with noise, railroad tracks, uh uh very busy uh roads, highways. So we've gone through noise studies. Um we have some familiarity with that. Um this project
uh again where where we're at now um we've been working with the Briner H the EDA to determine how we can provide a more affordable housing in Brainer. Um there's a documented need for affordable housing in this community. Um we ourselves I mentioned the five
properties that we own in the area. Uh we currently have a a weight list of 72 uh the uh of all those properties 72 households that would in fact be eligible to live at this uh live at this uh building. Uh I know that the HR they
they also uh have documented needs and data that show there is a real need for this project. Um more specifically I I did really want to touch on the noise mitigation efforts that we will be incorporating into this project. Um, as James mentioned, we will be uh doing a
full uh noise study. We're already doing a little research into companies who would provide quotes for that. Um, but specifically to this project, um, we're doing everything in our power uh to make sure that that noise is mitigated. Um, the size of the lot. Um, there were some
questions about why this lot. uh the need for housing and the number of units that we have to produce not only to meet that need, but also uh financially to make a property like this uh function. Uh it wasn't really uh able to be done
on that lot east of Kittyhawk there. Uh and as James mentioned, the southern lot across from or the south side of Wright Street uh really had some some issues with the uh the wetlands. Um the building is pushed as far east as we can
uh based off the setbacks. Um we have uh on-site garages, detached garages. There are two uh garage banks on the west edge of the property. Um and even west of those garages, we will be planting a line of coniferous trees uh as a as a
natural sound barrier. Um this building is uh will be a fus model energy modeling. Uh so those uh that FIA modeling has very strict um and enhanced insulation standards. Um we will be
using triple pane windows. It's 2x6 wall uh wall uh construction with insulation plus our zip sheathing has an additional 2 in of foam on it which adds an additional R9.6 uh to those exterior walls. So
obviously this lot as far as housing, it might not look like the best place, but what we are experiencing over the last several years is there aren't a lot of lots that are perfect for this type of housing. um in working again with the local EDA and HR, this is this is a site
that we came up with and with the FIA modeling, the other things we're trying to incorporate, um we feel like this will not uh there won't be a noise issue for this building or our tenants. >> All right, questions for the applicant? I think we may have questions later, but
that'll be good for now. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Would >> anybody else like to come up and u speak to the group? Come on up. name and address. And >> hello, my name is Brett Matias. I'm a director of technology at Just for Crypto at 1640 Kittyhawk Court. Um,
we have a sound meter and we did go to the property line, the western property line yesterday and we measure at 69 dB and we went to Kittyhawk Court and measure it at 65 dB. I don't know how they're going to be able to mitigate
that amount of sound to be compatible with the use you're they're um asking to reszone it to. Um yeah, I guess and if you guys have any questions for me, I guess we just recommend uh denying the reszoning
request. >> I do m what is or maybe it's James too is what is the decibb that are required? You said >> uh MPCA for residential requires 50% of the time during the day to be 60 dB or less. >> Okay.
>> At night it requires 50 dB or less. >> And yours is 50%. We're confident. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Other questions for the applicant? >> I think that'll be it for now, but thank you. Thank you, sir. >> All right. Floor is open for anybody else who would like to come up and
speak. Name and address, sir? >> Gary TC, 12437 Oakidge Road. As you see up there on that sign, I I don't see the best, but I own all them fields to the east of this property
you're talking about. I've been on that farm um for close to 70 years from a kid on up. I am really disappointed to hear that they want to bring people into that facility when it's
zoned industrial. Um my family uh own the trailer park. I own the trailer park to the north of me and uh anyway um I have constant
problems with people coming onto my property. Um, I try and be a good neighbor and uh there's noise problems and I'm just really not in favor of having any
facility like this come into next to me. Um, it's just it's just a struggle. Keep people don't respect my property. And uh, like you say, you got the fairgrounds there, you got the gun range on the south side of the trailer park,
you got the Bitcoin. Um, it's all industrial, it's all businesses. I have no problem with a business coming in for that v into that area there. Um, so I just wanted to just say I hope you stay and keep it commercial. Okay. Thanks.
>> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Anybody else like to participate? Come on up. Oh, >> sorry. You and you. There you go. >> Hi, I'm Luke Shipman. uh 4191 County Road 45. Uh my business is right in that
area. The swamp he was talking about partn theft problem on our property if they move in. >> Huge wet problem. I missed it. >> What's that? >> A huge wet problem. >> Uh theft. Oh, >> okay. Thank you. >> Yep. Um I guess I'm same with him. We've
been there for 90 years. I'd like to stay that way. That's it. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> All right. Come on up, sir. >> Yes. Thank you, Commissioners. Eric Sharpenter here, executive director for the Briner HR, Housing Redevelopment
Authority, 324 East River Road. Uh, just wanted to to speak directly to Commissioner Ericson's question of, you know, why housing when everything, you know, is very close around it, not housing. I would also, you know, offer that there is housing, naturally
occurring, affordable housing to the norththeast of that property that uh uh the previous uh speaker that owns uh the adjacent property to the south had mentioned. There is a a mobile home park there. There is a mobile home park to the west side of 13th Avenue just to the
northwest of this property. So, there is naturally affordable or naturally occurring affordable housing in this general uh neighborhood. And just wanted to make that a note to the commission as you had directly kind of asked what else is around here. We certainly see that
there is um you know general industrial commercial properties uh in the general vicinity. There is also some housing there as well. Certainly we understand that the uh the fairgrounds is there as well. Um and then to the sound mitigation again that is something that
we've known from day one. It's why we walked the property early in this process. The developer CHP has been very well aware of this uh as a potential issue and we've known that there has been a a need for that sound study uh has not been ordered yet because we wanted to see if this is going to be
something that can be supported by the planning commission can be supported by the city council before we get too deep into those costs and that is kind of where we are at with where we're at. So just wanted to to to answer some of those direct questions. Thank you. >> Thank you sir.
Would anybody else like to come up and speak? >> Hello, my name is Samantha. Uh, my physical home address is 14872 Hall Road in Brainard. Um, I own Brian's Welding, which is tucked kind of back behind Shipment Auto Parts, where Luke is at.
Um, our address there is 10131 Industrial Road. Um, I just have a couple things to bring up and a couple questions. Um, our when you were talking about property lines, um, our our property is Oakan
Township. Um, just for Crypto is right behind us. That's where it switches to the city. Okay. >> Their property is city, our property is Oakan, so it's it's pretty dang close. >> Um, as far as the noise study goes, um, is that something I have a question on that. Is that something that's done like
is over a period of time or to James on that one. How do how does the noise study work? >> Yeah, so staff would expect a noise study um I haven't gone through one of them before, but certainly um over you know several weeks and then taken both daytime and night time. So um to get
various readings. >> Yeah, I was just curious because like I know like I said our business is right in front of just for crypto and in the summer for example their fans are a lot louder. We got we can hear ear noise from our property. Um, so and then obviously with the fair going on, I
don't know how that affects um their sound study. Um, as far as theft goes, um, we are right next to their lot. Um, so I myself had have had to call them multiple times saying, "Hey, we see people back in your
lot that aren't supposed to be here. We have people come back in our lot sometimes to get to their property. um they have fencing across the front of their property, but they weren't able to put fencing up next to their back lot. Um so I know I know personally that I've
had to call them um for theft already that they experience um being in that location. Um I totally understand that we need housing in our community. I just don't think this is the area to do that. >> All right. Thank you very much.
>> All right. Anybody else like to come up and speak? Do we have anybody online waiting to speak? All right, last chance. And last chance, come on up again, sir. Give you a short uh short spot here. Go
ahead, >> Gary TC again. >> Yes. >> Um I used to farm that property where all that is when Brand had it. I had a 10acre field right where they want to build >> and right where they want to build. I'm surprised that you're able to do that cuz that was all a swamp hole. M there
was a swamp hole right I believe just east of your facility there and I I'm surprised that you can build in that because I could never get through it with a tractor and it was water there all the time. There is a low water table
in that area. So I just I just wanted to bring that out. I'm kind of wondering how that works out with that wetland there. >> All right. Very good. Thanks, sir. >> All right. Last chance before we close the public hearing. All right, I'm gonna close the public hearing at 6:50 and
I'll open the floor to discussion. Gentlemen, >> I don't know where to start. Um I I it my mind has probably not been changed. I I this is not the place for it in my mind. Not at all. I I just
can't see it. I mean, we we're zoned we would just take away the future limit what can go in there. In my mind, we've zoned it for that to bring in businesses, to bring in jobs. Yep. It's It's not much has been happening, but we don't know if that's not going to take
off quick or not. If this goes in, that really limits his businesses that can go in there. I just think it just then you got storage shed units or something like that, that's just not going to cause any any noise and not be an issue later. You
know, can we bring in a pig farm next to it then? You know, those kinds of things. I I just I can't get behind this and I don't even know if I can even I don't know if there's a need for me to bring up other things. I I already know where I'm at. >> All right. Thank you, Tad. >> Yeah, a couple of comments and then
another question for James. And actually, if um Mr. Chair, if I could >> Yeah, please go ahead if you have another question. >> Max, is there any chance you could bring up like Google Google Earth or Google Maps and just show this? I don't mean to put you on the spot, but I'll ask I'll I'll ask my question maybe if you're able to do that. Um while you're doing
that um so it was brought up about this of course a lot of discussion about the sound study. So if we were to move forward with this um these adjacent property owners more of an industrial use they would that that would then trigger their um
adherence to that sound study. Is that correct or >> so we couldn't Yeah. So we could not permit this project without the sound study showing that they would be in compliance. So they would the the the property owner. So we couldn't even allow this building if the sound study
comes back that it's not going to meet those sound requirements. Certainly the applicant could propose some type of sound mitigation um that would be approved by the acoustic engineer that would reduce those levels and show on a study that it would be in compliance, but the current um property owners would
not have to do any sound mitigation methods if it showed that it was in compliance. >> Okay. it it could, you know, certainly potent uh potentially affect future usage and you know, if it was going to increase in sound, um, you know, there could be some some restrictions there.
>> Okay. So, that Yeah, that's Thank you. That's a So, it would potentially or likely impact future use of surrounding properties, but also I'm glad you mentioned that any expansion of existing
adjacent property owners. Um my what I wanted to point out and thanks Max for putting this up on the map. Um so Jeff, you can scroll north just a little bit. Two folks brought up the manufactured home park to the north and to the east.
Um you can scroll just the other way. That's the one on the west, but then there's one on the northeast there. >> That's quite a ways away. >> And I I was thinking about that too as I was kind of rolling this around in my mind. um if if we had a different scenario and and I'm not suggesting this
but I mean you know if that um field there was in city limits and there was residential growth coming from the north coming down I could see this being a and then it terminating at this property with residential. I think I could see that
being a a possibility with with kind of, you know, that residential area to the north if that were to come down. But that's that's a that's just merely speculation at this point. Obviously, that's not the proposal at hand. But as I was thinking like, well, what circumstances would I, you know, you
know, be in favor of this, but so I guess those are my thoughts and thanks for answering the questions and thanks for putting the map on the screen there. Um I I I I guess I see a lot of a lot of the same conflicts that I kind of was
seeing initially. Um and I think we're kind of we would be creating a a lot of uh zoning and use conflicts by by moving forward with this um at this location. So I guess I'm
those are my thoughts. >> Very good. Thank you. Um I have some thoughts on this too of course. Um this is spot zoning. This is exactly what spot zoning is. This is saying um this is the old model of saying ah we want to change what this block is and we'll just kind of change this block and and and we
can do it. Um it's a property that it doesn't fit into CN2. The only way it could be CN2 is with major changes. Um the land is industrial. That's what it is meant for. I see this project as being driven by cheap cheap land. Uh, I
think that's the big motivation. Um, if you look at the qualities of CN2, just talk a little bit about the atmosphere. Um, that, you know, just to get to the property, you drive by a lot of barbed wire, and you drive by it for a reason. It's an industrial zone. They're trying to keep people out of junkyards and, uh,
and whatnot. It's there's nothing uh nothing particularly charming there. I don't think it fits into uh, again, going on with uh, Mr. to Erikson's point, if there was um CN2 or other residential coming down from the other direction, I could be open to going,
okay, I I I can see where we're moving a little bit that direction. Um I think this kind of uh sort of makes a mockery of the of the future land use map that we're talking about. And um because I mean there's a reason you have uh the zoning and you have these maps is to
avoid the kind of conflicts that I think we're we're absolutely setting up here. I think we're setting up uh uh uh conflicts. Um and then, you know, I think one point that I want to make too is that I think adults can put up with a lot of things. I think adults can live in a lot of different environments.
They're going to do all right. They're going to be fine. They're going to live in some lousy apartment for a while or some undesirable area, but they're going to move along. I think about kids. Kids need neighborhoods. Um they need places to go. They need be able to walk to a park. They need to be able to walk to school, to get out to cha, you know, uh,
uh, catch frogs, do the kind of things kids do, right? To get out there. There's there's there's really nowhere for a kid to go up there that you're not going to get in trouble. You're not going to get into, uh, either be trespassing or getting into a farmer's field or um, you know, just being in an
an industrial environment that just doesn't seem like any place for a kid to uh, to be to be raised. Um, and I appreciate um the developers ideas about sound um protection and making the apartments as quiet as you can, but what about being outside? What about going
for a walk? Um, that sound is omnipresent. I made two visits out there. The the first visit, I guess, I went out there and I kind of took it and the second visit I realized I needed to get out of my car and just listen. And it's non-stop. It's it's just there. It's that 69 dB constantly. It's that
kind of sound that sort of wears on people after a while. But again, that use is there for a reason because it's an industrial um is it's zoned um industrial. In terms of the question of uh what are we going to do about all this unsold property, I think our group
has shown itself to be open to um non-traditional uses. Uh there's a dermatology clinic that we've recently approved that that's going to fit right in. That'll be just fine. It's, you know, it's daytime use. nobody's living there. That's a creative use of that property. I think um our town has many
um there are properties that u would be so much better to be developed. Um over my neighborhood in southwest there's been a um I think three or four different properties that have come on the line uh come on the market now in the last uh year that are exactly where you want to have infill development.
They're exactly where you want to put multifamily housing. They're in walking distance to schools and parks. um they're they're exactly where you would want to raise a kid. I just don't see this as uh fitting that definition. So, um I just personally can't get beh get
get behind it. So, that's my two cents worth. With that being said, uh any mo I'd like to make a motion. >> I'll make a motion to deny. >> All right. >> Second. >> We have a second. Any discussion?
>> Hearing none. All in favor say I. >> Right. >> Oh, are we there? So clarification, we have multiple requests. >> We're doing one of them. Can we do all three at one or do we have to go one by one? >> You could motion to deny all three at once, but we should state what what we're denying.
>> Okay. So, let's back up. So, um Dave, what we have to do is we have to either um go step by step or or try to make a motion to cover all three. Can we make a motion to cover all three? >> Yep. So, you could deny the resoning request, the future land use map amendment, um the cup request, and the
variance request. I will do that. I'll make that motion. >> Okay. We have a we have a stated >> he's amended his own motion. >> Second. >> And we have a second on it. >> Are we good to vote? >> Good to vote. I do believe that you guys have produced enough findings um that we
could bring back to um city council for their consideration. >> Okay. Okay. All right. With that being said, um all in favor say I. >> I. >> All fost. And there we go. and uh next steps. >> Yep. So, as this is a recommending body,
this will be at the next city council meeting for their consideration on June 1st, 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers. >> Very good. Thank you. >> All right, exiles. You may you may return. >> You may return. >> Thank you.
All right, you all settled in. Okay, we are moving on to item nine. We're going to have a public hearing on the shoreland ordinance. James, >> um I believe that is the next one. The flood plane ordinance. >> Oh, is flood plane next? Oh, yeah. Flood I'm sorry. We're still in 8. 8D. We're
going to review the flood plane overlay district. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so this ordinance regulates development in the flood hazard areas of Brainard. These flood hazard areas are subject to periodic inundation which may result in loss of life, property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce
and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief and impairment of the tax base. Uh so the city of Briner, I do want to note we do not really have much development in our flood plane areas. um really the the high school football field is probably the one area that's
developed in our um uh it be the flood fringe, not the flood way. Um so with that, staff has been working with the DNR to reinccorporate our regulations into our zoning code. It was inadvertently removed um with the zoning code update. Um so staff's been um working very well with the DNR and and
we're kind of on the same page with that. Um the regulations uh are not subject to negotiation um like we did with the Shorland ordinance. It's really we have to to put these in there. U with the exception of the higher standards um/exlanations that are in blue. Uh they are recommended by the DNR. Uh staff did
not see any immediate concerns, but we'll have our public utilities director review prior to bring it back to the planning commission. Um some of those uh are higher standards. Some of them are better explanations. Some actually I think do allow for a little bit more. So it's it's kind of a combination of all things. Uh so with that staff recommend
the commission review the proposed regulations and direct staff to hold a public hearing at the June 17th planning commission meeting. >> Questions for James? >> I got one uh start things off. Um do we have a map that shows a design where the designated flood plane uh what are we
calling this here? The flood plane overlay. Do we have a map that could show it? So, I typically use um the Crowing County GIS map um and there I turn on essentially the the flood district and then you can turn on the floodway and flood fringe and that's how I identify if properties are in that um
in that area. >> Okay. Okay. >> So, yeah, really the the major development that we have there is in the flood fringe area which you're allowed to do a little bit more. Um and that's kind of the high school football uh field area, baseball field, um softball fields >> because it was built in a swamp,
>> right? >> Yeah. Got it. >> At times >> sank into >> Do you have anything? >> Sank into the swamp. Right. >> Yeah. Spark. >> Um I do. Um James. Um some of the suggested more uh
restrictive language. Um let's see. Uh extending the flood fringe area from 1% to the 2% annual chance. So this is uh item B1N
on the third page of the um the U draft that you have before us. Um we have it als permits are required
um C3B. Um, where is that? Was it just defining the district? Um, and then there's reference to the federal insurance rate maps. Um and and what I'm trying to think in my head is
by expanding this fringe area, do we affect um property insurance rates um or uh or is that basically just determined by the federal government's
maps and >> and done? You know what I mean? So, when I go um and the federal government makes a change to their maps and suddenly part of my property shows up on the revised map, um I've got insurance implications
for that. Does this advance have any impact on that or is it just our local controls um that we're working on here? Can you help me understand? So, >> I think that's a good question. um that inclusion of that 2% um I do not know
enough about that really to discuss at tonight's meeting, but that is the one thing I was going to bring up to our public utilities director who was a former city engineer um and and possibly remove that section. Um so certainly I can get some more information on that um at the next meeting or work with our city engineer. That was that was the
part that I was probably most concerned about. Um is, you know, what does that do for, you know, do we want to expand that, >> right? And and I would be in favor of of more restrictive standards, but I'm I'm nervous if the the result of that is
that we're going to we're going to change people's liability for a bump in insurance without having a pretty rigorous discussion about that. >> I can probably answer that for you, >> Mr. Peterson. Yeah, the answer is no. That's a federal. They're the ones that do it because I've got some properties
in it. Jim probably knows too. >> Yeah. Basically, you know, the standards we're setting here basically from a ordinance enforcement >> Yeah. >> action. You know, FEMA basically, you can talk about flood fringe or the 2% which is the 50-year base flood
elevation, but basically the government has set up that if you have any mortgages that are backed by Freddy Mack or any federally funded mortgages, which most mortgages get packaged into a finance package, if they show up in a flood plane, basically by law, you have
to have flood insurance. And that basically kickstarts a program where you can get a letter of map amendment or look at the elevations around the foundation of the structure and it can be removed. That structure can be removed from the flood plane. What we're dealing with here is what we would allow
to happen in a flood fringe and how it triggers and how it's approved. And I don't think their restrictive language is terrible by any means. Uh it's basically a control apparatus to make sure that uh we're doing it right. And this these are the things that you have to have this to stay within the federal
insurance program. So, you know, I've seen FEMA before where counties aren't enforcing flood plane restrictions and FEMA will come back and say, "Guess what? We're not going to offer insurance in your area anymore." So, overall, this is a good
thing. Other discussions or >> I guess I'd just like to add to that as a lender. Um it's not just Fanny May and Freddy Mack. It's all all loans secured by real estate. Um you know I I don't
think anything we're doing would change the insurance requirements. Um >> Okay. Very good. >> So So Mr. chair and I I appreciate the the technical expertise we have at the table here and and so I I I'm I'm
hearing that there's probably not an effect. If we could if we could get staff verification of that um just to just to be clear um you know um for the city's city's perspective I think that would be valuable and thank you all for your your important perspectives and
learned learned experiences. >> Very good. James, have we covered kind of enough here or do you have any other you feel like uh you have enough now to come? >> Yep. And and I, you know, do hope the you know, planning commission allows kind of the latitude. We I do recommend bring it back for a public hearing. Um
DNR wants to to to work through this as fast as possible and and then um I'll work with our public utilities director to review this and and may bring back um some slight changes to to those um blue portions to it and and then we'd hold the public hearing. >> Would you like a resolution or anything
tonight, a vote or anything? or you feel good about uh >> if it seems like there's a consensus that we're good to go ahead and hold the public hearing next meeting. >> All right. Very good. >> Mr. Chair, if I could just I'll bring one up >> and one one point they have any facility used by employees or the general public must be designed with a flood warning
system. That mean if you issue a land use permit to somebody, let's call it the district 181, do they have to have a flood warning system? And can you tell me what a flood warning system is? Uh do you remember what page that is on? I thought that maybe
>> standards for permitted use is in a floodway. >> Was it in a flood way? >> Yes. >> Okay. So yeah. So um to my knowledge the um school district is in a flood fringe. So this would be a flood actual flood
way. Um and I don't believe in my opinion you can really not build too much in the flood way. there's not a whole lot you can put in there. Um, so I I don't believe it would would affect the ISD 181 property. So I I did review that as well and had a little bit of concerns with that, but since it said
flood way rather than flood fringe, um, it didn't immediately call out any major concerns. >> Okay. >> All right. Are we good on the uh, excuse me, item 8? We're good on that. Um, let's move on to item nine. Uh, unfinished business. We're looking for a
public hearing tonight on the Shortland ordinance that we've been working on. Uh James, >> thank you Mr. Chair. Uh so planning commission has been working on the shoreline code update for a number of months. Attached are the proposed deviations as well as the higher standards negotiated with the DNR along with their conditional approval letter.
At the April 15th planning commission meeting, the commission reviewed the proposed deviations and higher standards and motion to hold a public hearing for the proposed Shorland ordinance at the May 20th meeting. So with that, staff recommends to hold the public hearing and recommend adoption of the attached
ordinance. Um, and I can answer any questions. >> All right. Questions for James. >> Mr. Chair, um, Director Grovic, uh, unnamed water body 18537. Where are we at on that? >> I did speak with, uh, Jake Free
regarding that water body and on the DNR mapping system that I don't have um, ability to review. Um, he said that is is definitely a listed water body and cannot be removed. um on DNR's protected waters list for
crowing counter this document uh 19th circuit 1985 um on page 23 of that it lists this as a listed protected um public water wetland
and not a general development lake and that's and that's the nuance I'm trying to get at because there's different setbacks required there, you know, and I if if it's moot, um we can have it as a general development lake, but it's a wetland, but um I think the setbacks are
greater for a general development lake than they are for a wetland. And again, I did push back on that and indicated that. And the email that he had indicated, I don't know if it was because we're a municipality and because of the designation that it was, it was
going to have to be listed as general development. Um, that's what I was told and and was told we can cannot take it out. >> Okay. >> I have to ask the question, where is AT&T? >> Um, it's believe along right along uh Beaver Dam Road.
>> Dam and south of Delmare. >> Okay. Okay. Is it that is that the one that's to if you're going down Beaver Dam leaving town is that the one that'd be on your left hand side? >> It's on the right hand side. >> Right hand side. >> It's isolated from the wetland that's it's isolated from the wetland that's
further east that has direct connection. Okay. Hydraulic connection to to Gilbert. >> Gilbert. All right. >> So, this one's its own isolated water body. >> All right. So, you know, if if all of the properties meet the setbacks on Delmare, there's one at that culde-sac
that I didn't measure it on the on the online mapping tool, but it looks it looks close. But if if it meets setbacks, it's a moot point, you know, but but if I would just hate that we're creating a nonconforming lot of record if if it's, you know, over something
that's not a, you know, a general development lake. So, And again, I, you know, kind of reiterated that to Jake Free and he said, "I can't take it out." >> Yeah. They they hold the they hold the
record, you know. So, yeah, I'm I'm fine if if they're not if they're aware of the issue and they're saying that this is a general development lake. I that it's a general development lake in our shoreland ordinance. So, I'm done. >> All right. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, please. >> Uh, question. James, did you and Jake
have any discussion with regard to top and toe of bluff definition? >> He did review our definitions on that. Um, >> has the city ever considered changing them? The >> city has not considered that at this time. Um, I do know that they're probably looking
at at trying to get our We've been working on this for probably a year, so it's probably something that we'd want to maybe look at, you know, down the road if that's something that we can potentially negotiate. Um, but at this time with the conditional approval letter, I'd probably recommend moving forward and then and then maybe looking
at that at an additional um additional meeting. >> Sure. >> All right. Without any other questions for James, before we hold our public hearing. All right. I'm going to open a public hearing at 7:14. Do we have anybody online, Max? Yeah.
Nobody online. >> I don't see anybody around. Looking real close. All right. All right, I'm going to close the public hearing at 7:14 and open the floor to discussion andor motions. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, please. Mike,
>> I would uh I would move to um um approve the u shorland ordinance and proceed to public hearing. Where am I? There it is. And re recommend adoption of the um ordinance after public hearing. >> All right.
>> Second. And we have a second. Any discussion? I just want to say thanks to everyone in this group for being very patient. This is a this is an issue that's quite a lot of patience and understanding for me to understand all the little all the moving parts there. And I appreciate that we
did negotiation with the DNR and seems like we came out to a good place in the end. So I feel good about the work we've done on this. >> And just to clarify, I might have missed it. We did open the public hearing, right, and close it. Just went fast. >> At 7:14, I closed at 74. Perfect. Public
hearing is done. All right. With that, all in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. There we go. That gets us up to uh item 10. That would be staff reports.
>> Yep. Just have one um update for the commission. So, we're continuing to meet with our consultants monthly. Um me and Mike met a couple weeks ago with our um consultants for the comprehensive plan update. Uh they're continuing to work through it. They have some more documents for us to review and excited
to believe July we'll be presenting kind of a draft for the planning commission to review as we move forward with the comprehensive plan update. >> Very good. Um member reports. Let's start with Mike. Mike, >> I have nothing.
>> Nothing? >> Yes. Do we have anything new? >> Barely. I just got here. I just like to say I appreciate the opportunity. Uh I hope to help. A little background for some of you that don't know me. I I lived my whole life in Brainer. I've owned a business in Brainer for 25
years. >> What business? >> Uh actually own a surveying and engineering and architecture firm. >> Oh, excellent. Very good. >> But uh I'm hoping I can help. Uh James and I talk quite often. >> So I'm just happy to be here. >> Oh, we're happy to have you. I like it.
>> Mr. Peterson, >> I have nothing. Thank you. >> All right, Mr. Ericson. Well, just really briefly, I'll mention too, uh, I was asked to participate as we're reconstructing Oak Street. We've got, uh, kind of a planning team, a couple council members and staff and, uh,
engineers working on that. As part of that, you know, you'll recall that that's, uh, um, got more of a corridor study uh, element uh, to it. So, I just wanted to provide a little bit of an update on that. and um we met I don't remember exact date but last week uh with them and they provided some
alternative potential alternatives as far as handling the inter intersections along Oak um more of the higher volume ones Beach Walnut 28th um and um you know considering some of the potential future pedestrian facilities
particularly to the north. >> Any thoughts about 13th and Oak? Um, lots of thoughts except the limits of the project don't go that far. So, 17th, >> it's 17th not. Okay. That's that's an intersection that begs help eventually.
Yeah. All right. Very good. Justin, >> I have nothing. >> Nothing. I got nothing. With that, I'm looking for a motion to adjourn. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. There we are. Thanks.