Excuse me. March 18th meeting of the Briner uh planning commission to order. And uh roll call, please. >> Juval, >> present. >> Gorum, >> here. >> Grisula >> here. >> Peterson, >> yes. >> Powell. >> Ericson, >> here. >> All right. Pledge of
>> allegiance. United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right, that leads us up to uh looking for a motion to approve
tonight's agenda. >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> And a second. All right. All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> I. >> Very good. We have an agenda. Looking for a motion to uh approve the minutes from uh uh the draft minutes from February 18th. So move the ball second.
>> All right. Any discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. Excellent. That gets us all the way up to public forum. This is time allocated for matters that are not on tonight's agenda. And uh anybody like to come up to speak? I'm
going to open the public forum at 601. If you're online, you're welcome to speak as well. Be on. Anybody clamoring to speak online, Max? >> How do we How do they do that? >> Oh, I Well, I think I can look at this little thing here. I think they do. Uh
they they raise their number five raises their hand, right? Yeah. And six unmutes you, but if we have nobody there, I'm pretty confident to close the public hearing at 601. And that will lead us to number seven, unfinished business. James, can you talk
a little bit about uh the shoreland ordinance update, please? Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. chair. Uh, so the planning commission directed staff to work with the Minnesota DNR to investigate if lot lists as well as sizes are negotiable for non- riparian sewer lots in the traditional neighborhood and contemporary
neighborhood zoning districts. Uh, the Minnesota DNR recommended the staff perform a survey of properties located in the Shorland district prior to making a request. Uh, in addition, staff also requested an impervious surface increase from 25% to 40% in this area as well. Uh
the full request letter is attached as well as the DNR request for additional regulations as part of that negotiation. Uh the DNR is requesting that in order to approve the um concessions for non-reparing lots, riparian lots um that would potentially alter or increase their impervious surface on their
property would be subject to a storm water plan for properties uh over 15% impervious surface and then a buffer for properties over 20% impervious surface. And then for rip wrap um also a required buff buffer and then rip wrap can only be installed when vegetative methods are
not possible. Uh staff have been working uh with Jake from the DNR and he is here to present tonight about natural buffers and their impact to overall water quality. And I'd like to thank him for coming tonight. Uh staff is looking for the commission to consider the DNR request and direct staff to include the
requirements um of the DNR or reddraft the ordinance to meet the state minimum requirements. And with that, I will turn it over to Jake. >> I think I go to this mic, right? This is the one. This is my first time uh at the at the planning commission for Briner.
So, it's good to see you all, Mr. Chair and members of the commission. I am Jake Free. I am the area hydraologist for the Minnesota DNR. My office is here in Briner and my work area is in Crowing and Aken County. So, I I work and live in this community. I'm not I'm not
driving up from St. Paul. So, um I'm I'm I'm happy to be here today. Um let me start by saying as well on a on a funnier note, this the this is the first time I've ever had background music before the start of a meeting. I used to work for Crowing County as the planning
and zoning administrator. I wish we would have done that. That probably would have calmed things down a bit. But with that, we'll get going. Um I just I think we have Yep, there's the PowerPoint up front there. I just want to talk a little bit about the implementation flexibility
that um is being requested uh by the city of Brainard. In general, all of the I'll call them four major requests that the city has um seem seem pretty good. I laid that out in my letter that they seem practical. They seem reasonable. You guys did a great survey, a good good
study to see how this makes sense. So, we really appreciate that. also appreciate the um the work being done to say, hey, here's here's some of the flexibilities and the higher standards we're thinking about to kind of offset
those lesser standards over here. And my talk today is just a little bit about why I had a little bit of a response letter to let's see if we can move the needle towards those riperian properties and why that's why is that a thing with
the state of Minnesota. So that's kind of what I wanted to frame out today. So just to start, we've lost about 40 to 50% of our natural shorelines in the state of Minnesota since since uh we've started recording that. So we know that by remote sensing
and by surveying the lakes themselves in the shorelines. So we have some good technology to kind of survey how that looks. Um so we've already we're already kind of 40% loss. If we don't protect those natural shorelines, we might lose
water quality in the near future. Next slide. Um, is there a tipping point? Um so bunch of studies have shown that once we get a watershed that's more than 25%
developed meaning losing their natural conditions we ste we see a significant um increase in phosphorus and a significant trend towards potential water quality decline. You can kind of see that up on the slide. Once you hit
that red 25 you start to see an increase. So that's that's an issue. Next slide. What happens when we remove shoreline vegetation? Because that's a critical component that surface water quality. When we have shorelines that are
primarily lawns or armored, for example, what happens is soil washes in all of the uh nutrients like phosphorus bind to the soil and it brings it out into the lake. It causes nutrification. Elgo blooms and there's a spiraling sort of
food chain effect. I'm not going to go into that too much today, but just note that when we have our nearshore environments, those riparian environments are critical towards protecting the water quality of our of our lakes. So, let's go to the next slide.
Water quality reduce. No one wants the water to look like this. Next slide. I'm going to rifle through these fairly quickly for time sake. study that was done in Wisconsin showed that when you have very small runoff, very small phosphorus input and sediment inputs
from those natural shorelines, you didn't have hardly any moving the needle on water quality. Very high. As soon as we moved from to a lawn environment or sort of that half-developed environment, there was four times amount of sediment inputs. And by the time we got to a fully
developed shoreline with a lot of armoring, we had 18 times the amount of sediments, 7 to nine times phosphorus, and so forth and so forth. Next slide. All right. So, one pound of phosphorus produces 500 lb of algae. If we take a
look at a a large plot or a large development area, if you have a 100 lots, 0.2 pounds per lot, five tons of algae. And that's just coming from developed situations. Next slide. This is this is what we would love to have
some of our shorelines look like, these natural shorelines. We know that that's not going to happen quite that deep or to the extent of all of our lots, but if we can move the needle towards these kinds of conditions, we can increase our habitat. We can provide some good storm
water benefits, reduce our nutrient loading, and still have it look aesthetically good as well. Next slide. So the problem we have, it's not a city of like it's not a this is the problem in Brainer but sort of statewide. The problem we have is we have a lot of
lawns to the lake, a lot of hard armoring of our shorelines. And while that does tend to prevent erosion in some areas, it's being used in a manner a lot that is creating these unintended consequences. lack of fish habitat,
um a lack of habitat, uh and some other issues. Next slide. Uh it also can affect loons as well. Lons are more likely to nest away from shoreline development. Um and so this conversation about um water quality
relates to loons as well. Next slide. Fish habitat is destroyed when we have a lot of rip wrap. It's unfavorable for small fish and things like that. they prefer natural cobbles and things like that. So that's that cascading effect. Next slide.
Uh often we'll see uh a presumably stable shoreline at times even though it is a lawn. Um what we've seen next slide is a conversion from this to typically a rip wrapped situation. A lot of hard armoring when there are other choices to
be made for natural vegetation, bioengineering, things like that. Um so next slide. Um so we have for example uh Gilbert Lake which part of that is in the city of Brainard's jurisdiction for planning
and zoning. Uh the Mississippi River Brainer one watershed one plan comprehensive wershed plan. Um there's actually a Gilbert Lake implementation plan and this was a plan that was vetted by uh uh many counties many cities a lot
of partners involved with the creation of that plan. Next slide. And right in that plan uh specifically for Gilbert Lake is shoreline restoration uh to try and get those natural buffers to reduce phosphorus loading and get storm water
management plans uh for those impervious surfaces that are more than 15%. So it's kind of dovetailing our overall goal there. Next slide. So what what's the point of my brief 4-minute introduction to what's really driving the water
quality issues in this state? It's nearshore environmental issues. Yes, there are some agricultural issues as well, but particularly in the city of Briner where you have um you know your lakes and rivers. The offsets we would love to look for is offsetting those
riparian properties particularly on promoting natural shorelines and reducing storm water runoff from entering our lakes and rivers on those lots. So next slide before I wrap up some of the things I talked about in my letter and I'm I don't know if you guys have read it or
not but uh basically talked about um those performance-based triggers. So, if you pull a permit and you breach an imperous threshold, um you would you would be required to have some sort of buffer at some at a certain depth or
have a storm water management plan that doesn't need to be designed by an engineer, but sort of that idea um that it would you have an intentional plan on your on your on your permit plan for whatever you're pulling to sort of retain that water before it gets to the lake. So, um, really appreciate all the
work that, um, I' I've had with the early coordination with James on talking through these issues. I'm happy to take any questions. I know I I went fairly quick. I wanted to be cognizant of everyone's time here. If there are any questions about anything I said, I can I can tank them or otherwise, Mr. Chair, I
can go back and sit and and listen. It's whatever you'd like. >> Mr. Free, that was great. And I think you can stay right there. I suspect we have a few questions from the uh from the group. Anybody have any questions for Mr. free. >> Mr. Chair, I have one. >> Please. >> When when a permit is pulled in the city of Brainer, do you also look at that
then if it's on the shorelines? >> Um I I do not as part of a standard practice. Now variances, right? I get published for the variances and I will look at those. Um but it's not been a standard practice that I do that. There are actually some smaller cities that do send them to me because they only have
like two a year. So they >> they'll slide them to me just to see, but not not the city of Brainer. Other questions? Mike, please. >> Yeah, thank you. And Jake, thanks for being here tonight to kind of address the questions. Um, you know, one one big
question is uh are are the your recommendations um firm or are we do we have an opportunity to continue negotiating on these? >> We're here to be a partner. We're here to help, not be a bureaucratic
obstructionist organization. So, um, we're always talking. So, that's just ideas I'm throwing at you to get the ball rolling about things that have worked in other communities. I did not just, uh, kind of like go in my basement and say, "This would be interesting." You know, I we looked at other
communities, what's worked there, what's practical, looked at my own experience, but certainly there's still still part of the conversation um for moving the needle. For sure. I think, you know, I when I look, I see four key recommendations that you're saying and
and I think it makes sense to if you're going to concede um your standards for something a little more lenient that the city's looking for and understanding that, you know, we're dealing with a landscape that's been
platted since as early 1887 in that northeast Brainer from Washington Street up to end and uh to the east in the 20s and the 30s. Further north up on Rice Lake, it's it's 1950s. So, we've had all
of this platting and development prior to the shoreline standards ever coming into play here. And I understand you grandfather those in if you would that they're conforming or legal nonconformities or whatever you have. Um,
so but it's fair to trade off to say if you're going to the state is going to make concessions, the the city has to show how you're providing better protection in in a different way that's maybe more aggressive than the state standards. And and I think you're
providing us four examples here. One of those is to um use some of the suggested off offsetting higher standards um that director Krombick has has proposed to all of the riparian parcels not just
certain certain ones. um you've talked are suggesting that any rip wrap applications above the ordinary high water mark in other words outside of the state jurisdiction.
Um you you couple that permit approval with some sort of a shorland buffer. Um you know I'm I'm all over those. I think those are I think fair requests of the city where I what I'm getting a little bit struggling here is um you know
starting to to require certain actions you know for for the one for storm water management plans triggering at 15% impervious cover that's that's 40% lower than the state standard of 25% right
that imperviousness the state standard is 25 isn't it? >> Yep. you know, so we're making a pretty big leap down. Um um and and then for the over the 20% um um you know, putting in a normal buffer
and I appreciate the presentation that you made here and and it's it's not lost on me that water quality gains come with wellstabilized and vegetated shorelines. Um, if we look at the city parcels on
Gilbert Lake, I think we have like a couple dozen parcels that actually front the lake. Um, and if you look at those on the aerial photography, um, the shoreline for most all of those is wooded. The trees are there. I don't
know the the depth of the vegetation, but it it has those attributes that I think you're looking for. Um I'm not sure how many of those are um exceed the 15 or the 20% imperousness. That's something that director Krombic might
know. Um there are some that are pretty well denuted. >> Yeah. >> You know, deep lots with with basically, you know, a fairway down to the and and there's room for improvement there. And and what I'd like to propose um to you
is that you know for for Gilbert Lake I don't know that the 24 lots on Gilbert are really driving water quality trend there. There's a trend and I think that's alarming. We should be concerned about that. We should also recognize that you know there's a lot you know
another twothirds or threequarters of the lake is developed in another jurisdiction. you have um probably some internal loading from shallow water boating going on outside of you know the city of Brainer's jurisdiction. You've
got um transportation infrastructure with county and state highways there that catches storm water directing it to to Gilbert Lake, you know, and outside of City of Briner jurisdiction. So I'm I'm thinking that if you were to apply
these standards even at the levels you are, I don't think you affect anything um for the city of of Brainard parcels there. What Brainer does bring um is is municipal sewer capturing treatment. And
with these super sandy soils, these um even though a septic system may be performing and pumped on a regular basis, the cumulative, you know, per drainage and and and travel of phosphorus down through the
soil in these sandy soils is going to end up towards the lake. And I think that's a strength that we bring um to the Gilbert is that phosphorus capture stuff. We're handling a big chunk of that through the lots that we have there that are connected to city sewer. If I
were to look over at Rice Lake, that's the other body of water. That one doesn't seem to be trending from what I see in the wraps reports. And I've not been able I didn't look at the implementation strategies for that lake. It's a little bit lower a priority, but
it's got 4 and a.5 million acres of contributing watershed to 418 acres of water surface. So 10,000 acres of waterhed per acre of of of water. That's a lot. And and so, you know,
putting these buffers in um is probably not impacting the nutrient the phosphorus loading to to Rice Lake. And and so I would challenge challenge you to think about the outcome not being to put storm water buffers or
or water filtration buffers, but the focus that you you highlight in that vanishing shorelines uh issue paper. That's a solid document and it really portrays the importance of of what's happening to our 40 to 50% of our shorelines across the state. And I
think the piece that that catches my eye there is the loss of the habitat. And I think in that document it talks about, you know, the the upland habitat for some of the amphibians and such and then that transition into the water, things like trees and woody habitat falling
into the water provides that benefit. And and I would say that really if we're to look at buffers, we should look at them as a habitat feature and not really for Brainer as a water quality piece. And I think that that would really be something we would do outside of the
shoreland ordinance. You know, we could do that as a design standard like we do for parking lots. You might say that we need a particular level of screening. For example, you can put trees and and shrubs and things in. and our staff are clever enough I think to be able to come
up with a way to maybe implement that that gets us the shoreline um stabilizing in that way. Um but you also at the Department of Natural Resources have authority for stuff that goes in the water. So that's, you know, the rip
wrap permits on the water side are the lakewood of that ordinary high water mark. And you've got um aquatic vegetation permits where you're authorizing a level of removal of um vegetation and things and then sand blankets and things.
So, if we're going to try and make an attempt to to address some of these, um, I'm not sure that we want to tackle that in the shoreline ordinance piece for the city. I think I think it's a multi-jurisdictional thing. It's it's
the city, it's the uh, Department of Natural Resources, it's probably boarding water and soil resources, the local SWCDs, the conservation community. There were a lot of partners listed in the Vanishing Shorelines brochure and I think the city could use their resources
um in in creative and constructive ways to be able to do education on the value of returning shorland buffers and habitat to our nearshore areas. And we could target and develop probably a multi-jurisdictional plan for Rice Lake
if there's not one developed right now that gets at that that we work on outside of the context of the shoreline ordinance and that we leave uh leave the the impervious thresholds and things are really about water quality and and and if we were to point to some of the
examples where other communities are doing this well it's you know again we've we've got sewer and sewer and storm water uh sanitary sewer and storm water infrastructure in place which is different from the city of 50 lakes different from the city in this
different from our neighboring counties. So I I I think the intent is good but I would change the focus from water quality because I don't know that we would be able to show the public that for the effort that we're putting into
putting buffers here that you're going to move the needle on phosphorus. And do you have thoughts on that or or or is that a a line of reasoning that you'd be open to exploring with with our staff? >> I'm always happy to continue to chat
with with the staff about it and I appreciate your thoughts on that. Um I don't have any like rebuttals right now that I I wrote down a few things. No. Um it it's a it's a I think there's just multiple benefits to um storm water and
and buffers as you illustrated besides water quality. Um and so um I do know that the city has a a you know that storm water management plan. Um typically on the lake side on riparian lots though things are either going to
run towards the street or run towards the lake. Um so they'll either hit a storm water plan or a buffer. So that's the idea on that um a little bit but uh yeah absolutely I really appreciate the feedback and your thoughts on this um uh
where we were coming from was an emphasis on what really moves the needle on water quality is when you get closer to the shore putting standard higher standards in place there rather than further away from the shore which also mean there's a little bit more of a
pinch point for for folks about I got to do something a little bit different So it's it was more about being the most effective the closer we get to the lake because that is where as you know most of the critical habitat interface happens is
right there. It's not 500 ft away. I mean I'm not saying 500 feet doesn't mean anything but it just really ramps up. So I just wanted to let everyone know that's where we're coming from is trying to emphasize that's where you get the most protection. So, I appreciate your thoughts though
>> and thank you and I and I and I agree um that I do not want to discount the importance of the storm warn and that's where I think your your first recommendation of of those offsetting standards requiring you know um storm water plans and and it's very you know
helpful clarification from you that it doesn't have to be a highly engineered storm water plan but >> you know so that's helpful um as well to say what is the what is the degree of rigor we want on these, but we want to have people thinking about how water flows off of their roof, how it flows
off of their driveway, how it flows off of their accessory structures, and how do you manage that before or if it hits the lake? And and I'm solidly on board with that. So, I'm not saying we dismiss that, but I think as we think about vegetation buffers and things, I would
like to empower our staff to say, "Let's find a way to fit that in a different part of our ordinance than the shoreline that gets at a a design standard and an aesthetic that we feel we apply to Brainard, you know, and and we can describe, I think, about planting trees
and and and whatever to get those same sorts of benefits, but more focusing on getting the habitat piece in place. So, so thank you Jake. I appreciate your listening, Mr. Chair. Thank you. >> Excellent. Yes, Chad, please.
>> Thank you, Jake. Um question on you just kind of brought up the 15% um impervious triggering the storm water management plan. Kind of to that point of you mentioning that doesn't have to have a lot of engineering rigor. Can you just describe what level you would be looking
for? as council and planning commission member will get that question this is gonna you know cause me this much cost and y >> can you kind of just paint that picture of what what you would be looking for or what what that might >> yeah so to help out with that and I'll
go there with the buffer so to both of those the storm water management plan is not an engineered engineered u quality plan it literally can be a property owner with the help of staff cuz there are guides out there on how to
do it very simply, circles and arrows of where are you intentionally shedding your water and they can just draw it out and then staff would review it to make sure that makes sense. Um because sometimes that causes people to go, I've
never really thought about that. Why? And then the answer is well if you just put the gutters on and direct it not over there but over there they most of the time my experience has been when when we did the similar thing with Crowing County is that was that was the switch. That was it. It wasn't hiring an
engineer or spending a lot of time on that. And a lot of times those storm water features are already on the property. So it's not like they have to go excavate or create these crazy designs. It's taking already existing features on the shoreline or on the hill
or a dip and just making sure you're using the already natural features there and intentionally putting things in those places rather than building infrastructure and you know all these other things that are more mind related if you will. Same thing with the buffers. We would not be
saying you need to get in there and do a native planting of $10,000 worth of X Y and Z. It's simply provide at least eight inches. Stop mowing on a percentage of the shoreline. It wouldn't be the whole shoreline. And let it grow
a little bit further to capture that storm water, provide a little bit more habitat, a little bit more shading. That's kind of the angle is not it's just move that needle a little bit. Is that helpful? Yep. >> Okay. >> I think that does help. >> You couldn't help yourself. You had to
take a jab at MDOT. >> No, I I'm sure MDOT, you know, they've they've got great storm water ponds. Wonderful storm water thoughts. Yes. >> Justin, any thoughts? >> I don't have any questions for Jake. >> All right. Very good. >> Um, just a couple things. One of my pet
peeves are words that we use and we I think when we're when we're in a certain culture, in a certain workplace, we throw out these words and other people are going, "What define repairarian?" >> Uh, a lot that's a uh literally on the lake. We'll call it >> lake or river.
>> Lake or river. Excuse me. A water body. Yep. >> Okay. No difference there. Yep. Good. Um, that helps because in in my I think I always thought repairarian just referred to river. Yeah. >> And it refers to all of it. Um, I think one of the things that we have to look for is allowances for unique terrain. Do
you have any thoughts about the riverbank and brainer? There are points in the riverbank and brainer that are incredibly steep. >> Yeah. >> And that it's hard to understand how we could do prevent erosion without rip wrap or things like this. Specifically over in West Brainer, there was the wash out. Are you familiar with the wash out that happened? Yeah,
>> absolutely. And uh what are your thoughts with that in terms of the response and what can we learn from what can we learn to prevent this from happening again because these things tend to happen over and over again in this in certain areas in our town. >> RIP is a is a tool that has its place.
That was one of them and there are many tools. By the way, I have I have not been the you go to Jake and he says no to rip every time. Sometimes you get that label, but it is we have allowed rip rev in many places where there is a demonstrated need. Too often we've seen
it just on a a fear that there's that there's erosion, but there's objectively not and there could have been a cheaper, simpler, >> better habitat choice for that. So, >> uh, if implemented, this wouldn't be a
no to all rip wrap. It's going to it's going to be that demonstrated need where you where you see that erosion where the wind fetch is big or like you said steep slopes where there's there's no practical and feasible way you could do any bioengineering that's just going to fail. >> The river's moving. >> Absolutely. So, um the other thing with
buffers, same thing. There's going to be a lot of people that don't need a buffer because they already have it. So, you just walk away. So, it's it's more fixing those areas that are that are hanging out there that that may need it rather than everybody gets it. So, >> got it. I don't want to put you on the
spot too much, but we make reference to uh in our packet, we have a lot of information about Crowing County and their approach. Do you have any thoughts on the approach that Crowing County has been using? >> Uh, well, I've, as you probably know, I've worked uh for Crowing for many,
many, many years. Um, and it seemed to work great because they have, >> I'd say, a thousand permits a year. So there's no time to go through a storm water management plan for 17 hours. You need to review them quickly, make sure
they make sense, and get them out. If there's going to be a buffer, you need to look at it very quickly and get out. So from an implementation and a customer satisfaction standpoint, I can speak from professional experience that we did not have a lot of we do not like this,
get this out of the ordinance. Again, that's not the city of Brainard, and I don't want to I hate comparing, you know, it's a it's a unique place, but from an implementation and a practicality standpoint, we seem to have good buy in when I was there. Um, that's
as best as I can tell you. So, it'd be safe to assume that if we turn to Crowing um as a model for some of the solutions here, we probably would be turning to a good place. If we turn to Crowing County and kind of look at their at some of the programs they have in place, the rapid response program and some of those things.
>> Yep. I would I would think you'd have a known um implementation system that's already worked out any bugs that they've been doing it since 2011. Um, and there's other cities that have done it as well, but um, certainly um,
uniformly uh, in some areas on shorelines is a good thing between cities and counties because then when you look at a lake, we don't look at it chopped up. The lake is just the lake, right? >> Like Gilbert Lake that we're talking about. >> Yeah. We we want a little bit more uniformity on how how habitat can be
expected and and not change just because you cross the city line, right? So that's that wershed management. >> Um lastly, u generically, how what would you say what is the water quality of the of the Mississippi? Do you think it's heading in a positive direction or uh
going the other direction? Just what's a generic thought on that? >> Well, there are goals to uh reduce phosphorus loading on the Mississippi in general and there are goals to get that down. The issue is there's so many entities, so many agencies, and so many cities. they all have to play together
to to get that done. Um, so what's my answer? Generally speaking, in the uh in the first 500 miles of the Mississippi River, the water quality is good. Not shockingly, as you collect more information and move south, the water
quality tends to decline. So, we are very fortunate up here to have um good water quality, but we want that trend not to decline. We want it to stable or go up. And that's really what I'm talking about here is not we have some bad water quality. We have great water
quality, but how can we keep that from declining? That's really the the risk. >> Very good. Uh >> I apologize. I do have one other question for Jake. >> Uh Jake, you mentioned the Brainer, Mississippi one watershed one plan. My
understanding is that there's additional funding that comes either to jurisdictions who participate in that plan and or property owners. Would there be opportunities for property owners to apply for funds through that plan or the
city to offset some costs that may result from if we go down this path? >> All right. So, uh there are funds that are allocated on a bianual basis. Um there is uh a soil and water conservation district that's kind of the
fiscal agent for that and the monies that come from watershed planning get into the millions of dollars. Now that's for the whole wershed not for the city of Brainard but um are there uh if someone is doing an activity that fits
within the priorities of that watershed and that lake then there's the possibility. The only thing that I would say is sometimes if it's a regulatory item and you're required to do it, sometimes they look at that as a as a required item rather than a a volunteer
um activity. Um but uh there there may be some opportunities. Although I will say I don't see a lot of serious infrastructure or like I said, you don't have to plant native plants um to to implement this. That's my opinion.
>> Thank you. Any other questions for Jake? >> All right, I'm going to thank you for now. We may have another question or two, but uh uh thank you for the presentation. That was very help. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair and Planning Commission. >> Very good. At this point, um we need to point our staff in a direction. We have
I think it's kind of spelled out we have a couple different directions we could go and uh James. >> Yeah. So, I'll just kind of re reiterate those directions again. Um either number one would be to kind of accept the the requests of the DNR, implement those and
we could bring it to a public hearing at the next meeting. Um another option would be to to not accept those and just meet the minimum requirements for those non-rarian lot sizes. Those are and the impervious surface. Those are some of the big concessions we're looking at. Um or third option could be perhaps um
direct staff to work with the DNR for another month and and kind of review things as well. All right, sounds like we have three options uh uh sitting out there in Yes, Mike. >> Finish your thought or >> No, no, I'm ready. >> Um question for staff here. Do we have a
a timeline we need to get this done after which bad things happen? >> So, so obviously we did receive a letter um saying that we need to update it and probably be more of a question for Jake if it would be okay to continue to
negotiate for for one more month. Do you want me? >> Yes, Jake. Come on up. Thank you. >> Well, the city of Briner has been working in good faith and a joy to work with. So, I don't go there when we're making excellent progress. It's uh it's only when we're
having really big issues that we go, well, we got to get this done. So, you guys have been great. I don't have any problem with continuing to work on this and making everybody happy. So, >> good. >> That works. >> Excellent. >> Yep. >> Very good. satisfies your question. >> Other thoughts?
>> Question for James. >> Uh James, would we've got significant shoreline of our own as a city there? Would Lump Park on Rice Lakes be subject to the same requirements? And are there things that the city could do to perhaps offset that would be beneficial for the
residents? >> You know, certainly park planning could um institute buffers. I've seen that in other cities where they've done rain gardens or buffers and put signage out there to promote um those type of things. So, that's something that the the parks department could consider. You
I would think um the size of Lump Park and the amount of green space in there probably isn't even even approaching 15% impervious would be would be my guess. So, they would be subject to those same standards, but you know, impervious surface wise, it probably isn't approaching for a requirement.
>> Thank you. Good question. Other questions or thoughts? >> Otherwise, I'll be looking for Yes, please. >> I just have a thought on the buffer. I know we've got an ordinance on the books for mowing your lawn. Um, so James, do you have any idea how that would interface with that ordinance or if that
ordinance would potentially have to be changed to allow for the buffer? And I mean, I guess how much of a buffer could be subjective up to the property owner and how would we account for that? So, those are things that I could continue to work with Jake on. You know,
maybe refining that. Maybe it's not exactly what Crowing County uses. Um, you could look I could look into potentially is there another spot in the code and the design standards. Um, my one concern on on that is I do know the legislature right now in Minnesota is
looking to get rid of a lot of the design standards that the city can put in place. Um, I'm guessing, you know, if that would pass, that's something that would just be removed out of there. So, um, again, that would be my my one concern about putting it somewhere else other than the shoreline code.
>> Thank you. Interesting point. Yeah. Other thoughts otherwise um looking I I think we should make a motion tonight and uh Mike, do you have anything or because I think we have a few different directions to go. My personal thought on it is I I like uh what Crowing County
has done. I think uh uh moving towards adopting some of their ideas would be beneficial. I think um it's such a privilege for us to to have so much water in this area to have to have so much um um access to it and then with that of course comes a great
responsibility to take care of it and so I would encourage my myself I would be in favor of either the second or the the first or the third option. The second option is the minimal. I wouldn't be in favor of that. I like the first and third option. One being what? You would just accept the DNR standards and three
being you negotiate further with the DNR. Correct. Am I understanding this correctly? >> That's correct. >> Okay. So, I see three um three paths out there and I'm certainly looking for motions or uh discussion if we're not ready for motion yet.
>> Mr. Chair. >> Yes, Mike. I would I would make the motion for the option three to continue negotiations with the Minnesota DNR with specific outcomes. Um perhaps looking at um um the thresholds for for uh
requirements of um of of some of those certain actions I itemized here and and empower our staff to to to navigate with general guidance and let them find a path that works for us. >> All right, we have a motion. Do we have a second? >> I'll second it.
>> We have a second. James, do you think you you have enough to work with there? >> Yep, I should have enough to work with. Very good. All right. Um, any other discussion on this? If not, all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All >> oppose. Same sign. We have a motion.
Thank you, Mr. Free. I appreciate your time tonight. >> All right. That moves us on. We are up to uh we are on 8A. condition consider a conditional use permit amendment for the dermatology uh clinic that we talked about last month at 1410 and 1424 TC Drive. James,
>> thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so, River Birch Investments has requested a an amendment to the original CUP that was heard um last month for additional off- streetet parking spaces. Uh there was a miscommunication that the approved CUP would allow the applicant to exceed the maximum number of off- streetet parking spaces without restrictions.
um the the plan that was provided would essentially kind of lock them in. So, the applicant has um pretty much finalized the civil plans and is requesting 90 total spaces and has attached a letter to provide reasoning as well as a new site plan. Uh the footprint main entrance, which is the
upper level, the the one that I used last um time was the lower level, but really the upper level is the main entrance um would allow for 52 spaces without a cup. Um, and again, a CUP may be granted to exceed the allowable amount for multi-level buildings. I do
want to note the total surface area for the building, um, counting the first and second floor is 12,750 ft, which would equate to, uh, 86 spaces if we were to use the total square footage. Um, also want to note that parking lots of this size are consistent with surrounding
properties. Um, FedEx is essentially across the street, which has a lot large parking lot as well. Um, also do want to note that this property is not in a walkable, bikable area of the city and and TC Drive isn't really designed for off- streetet parking. It's designed for a semi-use. There's no sidewalks. Um, so
off streetet parking is certainly important in this area. Um, so the applicant is here. Um, so staff does recommend to first hold a public hearing and then recommend approval of the conditional use permit amendment that allows for 90 off street parking spaces. And I can answer any questions.
>> Questions for James? I have one for for you, James, >> please. >> Why don't we have a a set maximum for parking spots? Because we have impervious soils in there, you know, like I Yeah, let's just leave it at that
for the question. >> So, yeah. So when we did take a look at this um about a year year and a half ago when we were going through um parking lot sizes um some of our major concerns uh were our downtown area where we have abundant off streetet parking and and
really not wanting to see an expansion of parking lots in in areas that that we want to see density and buildings in. Um I would say the the industrial area was a little bit of a a less concern. It wasn't really talked about as much. Um, again, we have the TN2 district, our downtown districts, commercial corridor
districts where we're wanting to see that density and that that's really where the discussion came about, >> but we have minimums also. Correct. >> We got rid of most of our minimums. Um, our downtown does have some very low threshold minimums. So, for instance,
um, multi-level buildings, um, commercial tenants have to have one parking space if they were to to do a new building. Um, apartment units have to have one parking space. So, it's less than what would be required in in um some of our other areas. So, we do have parking minimums for our our residential
uses, but not really much for our commercial uses. >> Good. Thank you. >> All right. Other questions for uh for James or staff? Hearing? None. I will open a public hearing at 6:44 and would welcome the applicant to come on up and talk about
the plan. Not required, but could be helpful. Hi, my name is Christina Britain. Um, we were up here last month and kind of talked about the need for parking and I know one of the questions um that was asked was how do we do the calculation
um as far as parking spaces and um we had kind of explained for every one provider we need four or five um different parking spots and once again it was a miscommunication as far as how many that we needed for the initial site plan. So after we sat down and kind of
made our final calculations, we realized that we needed more than we we had originally asked for. Um and I think the other uh thing that we wanted to point out was that on the initial application, the amount of square footage was quite, you know, was small. That was just the
basement um excuse me, square footage. So now the the new application reflects the total square footage of both the top and the bottom. um which I think would help support the reason why we would need more uh parking um for the for the uh building.
>> Thank you. Um just a quick question, refresh my memory. How many parking places did were requested uh last month? >> I think it was 60. >> 60 believe it was 60 or 65 somewhere. >> Yeah, 60 or 65. Yep. >> Other questions for our applicant while she's up.
>> Justin, please. So, I went through and calculated some of the other medical uses um in the surrounding area um based on public records and then physically counting parking spots. Um at
that 90, it seems like you're you're very high on parking. Um I guess my main question is how often do you expect your parking lot to be 100% full? That's hard to predict because a lot of
times it depends on how how the flow is going. So I would say, you know, as a provider, if if I'm having a good day and I can get in and get out of a patient room, I could probably have two patients there, you know, so then you're going to have two parking spots. If I'm
having a bad day and I'm running 45 minutes behind or gosh forbid an hour behind, I could potentially have seven patients, you know, three in rooms and then two or three of them waiting out in the lobby. So, there's no way to really kind of predict, you know, how that
goes. I would say majority of the time I run on schedule, but there's no way that I can predict that. The other thing that's an unknown for us is that we do have patients that instead of calling to schedule appointments, fill out paperwork and things like that, they decide to swing by the clinic to fill
out paperwork. We also sell product out of our office as well, um prescription medications, things like that. So, we have an unknown number of patients that will just swing by without an appointment and pick up prescriptions or pick up samples or pick up other things
like that. So, it's hard to gauge, you know, depending on how many um how many people are going to be there on an average day. >> Okay. >> It also depends on how many providers are working that day. You know, not all providers work 4 days a week, you know, and then we were also looking at
expansion as well. You know, part of the reason why we built the building was because we want to be able to expand our surfaces, our services. So, I would say we've got room to add another two or three providers, whether they're cosmetic or medical providers. And when we add more providers, then we're going
to need more space. You know, my biggest fear is we've grown so quickly in the first four years of business. What happens in two more years? I add two or three more providers, we have more park or we have we have enough room in our building and all of a sudden I don't
have enough parking for my patients to show up. Um, one of the things that we potentially are going to add is what's called a MO provider. And so that is a special dermatologist that does most procedures. When you come in for your most procedure, you're there the entire
day. It's not a regular patient appointment where you come in, you are there for a half an hour, 45 minutes, you're seen, and then you're left. You actually come in, you have um your skin cancer removed, they put a dressing on, you wait in the waiting room, they process process the tissue, which can
take two hours. If they clear the margins, great. They bring you into the room, they numb you up, and they repair it. If they don't clear the margins, then they actually take another layer. They numb it up, take another layer of tissue, out to the um waiting room, you go for another two hours. So, some
patients having a most procedure could be there for seven or eight hours. So, then that takes up whole, you know, parking spot for the entire day, not ones that are coming and going. So, if we were to add that, you know, service to the um facilities, then you're looking at more staff there, plus
potentially 15 patients that would be there for a whole 6, eight hours. >> Okay, other questions for the applicants. >> All right, thank you. >> Questions? Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. We may have other questions, but thank you for now. Would
anybody else like to speak on this matter? Max, anybody online? No, got nobody online looking to talk, looking to press number five, raise their hand. All right, very good. Well, um I'm going to close the public hearing
then at 650 and alternative to discussion andor questions for staff. I would just like to say historically we're a little wary of big parking lots. There was a uh a Thrifty Drug, which has kind of been on my mind lately because Thrifty Drug is closing their location on Washington Street. And that was one
of the first uh um cases that we dealt with. And boy, everything was so well intended, but we ended up with a parking lot that is just gigantic. And uh so I think just to kind of explain a little bit, that's where we're I think some of us are kind of coming from uh because once you build a parking lot, it's it's
always going to be a parking lot. But um that's just a thought. But anyhow, any other questions, thoughts? I'd just like to echo that comment that once it's a parking lot, it's always going to be a parking lot. And it's easier to show need to convert green space to parking lot than to get it the
other way around where we converting a parking lot back to green space. >> We did that at Mississippi Landing at the park on Mississippi Landing that was actually converted a parking lot was converted back, but that that's it. All right. Any other questions or thoughts? Otherwise, I'd be looking for a motion
um uh on the cup. I'll make a motion to approve the um to the 91 spots. >> All right, we have a motion on the on the floor. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> And we have a second by Ericson. Uh any discussion?
>> I just I'll just point out to I think the context your point is very well taken about the Thrifty White parking lot or that the one in that neighborhood >> infamous. um and very unfortunately so, but um I just would say I think the context of that being in a you know a
neighborhood versus in this location I think kind of is the difference maker for me. So I plan to support it. >> All right. Very good. Any other discussion on the uh the motion that's on the floor. All right. Um hearing uh no other discussion then we are going to All in
favor. Should we do let's do a roll call on this one just for the heck of it. Stephanie, can we do a roll call? >> Duval, >> I. >> Gorum, >> I. >> Gasula, >> no. >> Peterson, >> I. >> And Ericson, >> yes. >> All right. Very good. It has passed. Um,
next steps for the applicant, James. >> Yep. So, this is a recommending body. This will be forward to the next city council meeting for a final decision uh on April 6th at 7:30 p.m. >> Very good. Thank you. And thank you for coming tonight. I appreciate it. Um, we're up to item 7B. We're going to
consider an interimm use permit for the operation of a year-round warming shelter at uh 1926 South 7th Street. James, could you help us on that one? >> Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so, Jana Shogin has submitted a request on behalf of Bridges of Hope for an interim use
permit amendment uh to operate a yearround warming shelter for the homeless in Brainer Lakes area at 1926 South 7th Street. Uh the applicant does meet all conditions in the allowed use section, which was in the findings of fact. Uh the applicant has made changes to mitigate concerns regarding
year-round operations. A few of those items include uh the shelter has updated his public safety plan and consent form to address uh potential police investigations. Uh the shelter has also updated its guest agreement to require individuals within 3 to 5 days of their
first night to actively participate in my pathways plan. If no progress is made within 30 days, services may be denied. I do want to note a letter from the public was submitted to the to the department in opposition of the year- round use and it was sent to the commission members uh yesterday. Uh so
with that uh staff does recommend approval of the interimm use permit contingent upon the conditions listed in the findings of fact. Um those conditions are interterm use permit shall expire on April 30th, 2027. Number two, if the Brainer Police Department determines that the facility has been
used in a disorderly manner and upon recommendation of the police chief, the interimm use permit shall be brought before the city council for review and consideration for suspending or revoking the permit at the next available city council meeting. Number three, staff uh the shelter staff shall provide a report
to city council each year prior to September 1st. With that, I can answer any questions. Um there are some applicants present. There may be one online as well and I'll turn it over back over to the commission. >> Excellent questions for James. >> James, another point. >> Wanted to note one other thing. Um,
police chief Davis is here to answer any questions as well. >> Excellent. Very good. All right. Um, any other questions? And if we don't have any other questions, I'm going to open a public hearing at >> anything else. >> Mr. Chair, >> I might have one for James. >> Yeah. What is I mean this is kind of an
outlier. This building where would be the perfect place to have this? That's that's pretty subjective. Um so typically um you know this isn't a commercial area. Um you know per perhaps
you know not in the middle of a a neighborhood. So you know where where services aren't near it. So, um, certainly there's a bike trail next to this, um, which does help provide for transportation. Um, but yeah, very pretty subjective. >> All right. I just wondering if there was
a spot. So, >> that magic. Yeah. Well, >> yeah, that magic. >> I get it. I get it. Other questions? >> I've got maybe a question for the applicant, but I'll hold off until after the public hearing. >> That sounds good. Well, then with that, I'll open a public hearing at 6:55. I'd like to welcome uh either of our
applicants or both come on up and uh present the idea. >> All right, thank you for having us. Um so I'm here Samantha Baron, the program director of Bridges of Hope. I'm speaking on behalf of the shelter. I also invited Bill. Um he's our shelter
manager and Janice Shogram is um here online as well to help answer questions. Um, so I'm just going to do kind of a brief update and share kind of some of the progress we've made for um, Bridges of Hope. Um, had a warming shelter. Sorry, I'm come overcoming a cold.
So, just some context. So far this season, we've served 155 unique individuals and provided over 4,200 nights of sleep. That's demonstrating the continuous need for a shelter in our community and the impact it's having. And we're continuing to focus our
efforts on how to better evolve to better serve our guests. And a big part of that evolution is what we're calling our pathways project. And that's what I'm going to kind of focus my talk on. So our shelter manager has kind of shifted his schedule to focus half his time in the daytime hours. So he can now
work directly with shelter guests. And this includes one-on-one meetings to assess their situations, helping them set goals and supporting them as they kind of take steps towards stability and ideally moving on to a better pathway. Um we're also working and strengthening our collaboration with our community
partners. So that is including weekly meetings with staff on Lighthouse Day Center, um Crowing County, and those have been especially impactful. And I'm going to actually let Bill focus more on kind of the content of those meetings because he's at those meetings. Um in addition to path those weekly
meetings, we also do those monthly collaborative meetings with all participating organizations. That's uh Bridges of Hope, Krillin County, Sharing Bread Soup Kitchen, Lighthouse Beginnings are the big partners in this
collaborative and we've come to because we often serve the same individuals. So, these meetings are allowing us to kind of align our efforts, make sure we're sharing updates, we have a shared code of conduct and kind of that unified front as we're interacting with these clients or guests, however you want to
put it, on a daily basis. Um, to help reduce barriers for our participants, we've also partnered with Lighthouse to offer a free shuttle service. And this is helping our participants access these essential services and resources to help them on their pathway. We've also introduced a
greeter position at the sharing bread soup kitchen. This is helping to create a welcoming position and welcoming and positive experience for them and again another touch point along this pathways project. Um as far as you know outside this project we're working and on
strengthening our communication with Blender Brainer Police Department to ensure safety not only to our staff guests but the community as a whole. We're incredibly and I just want to kind of end it with, you know, we're really grateful for the support we've received.
It's really allowed us to continue and enhance the work we're doing to help grow our programs like this new pathways project and we're really excited on the impact it's having. And again, Bill's going to touch more on those numbers. So, I just kind of want to wrap up by
saying I appreciate your time and opportunity to speak here today. And do you have any questions before I turn it over to Bill? Any questions for our applicant? >> I'll have the same question for uh Bill that I'll have for you. How do you feel
what's going to be different in your approach to the city council? I a lot of us were disappointed last year with how things went. Um do you really feel do you feel like you've made progress in answering their concerns and questions? >> So I just started in November, so I'm not comfortable addressing that question
just because I wasn't here so I can't give proper context to it. Um, this that might be a better question for Janna to answer. I know changes have been made, but I can't speak appropriately to it. Sorry. >> Thank you very much. I I think that's all for the moment. We may have uh uh later questions, but >> No problem.
>> Good. >> Bill, do you want to come up next >> and name and address if you could be so? >> Uh, good evening. My name is Bill Weir. uh representing uh the bridge on 7th warming shelter address 1926 South 7th Streets.
Uh so we're here once again asking uh to be uh open all year round to help better serve uh the individuals that are in our area that need uh the the help that we are providing. Uh I do feel that we have uh addressed some of the concerns uh
over the last year with some of the city council and some of uh the people in the community. Uh we have worked very hard to uh figure out what the issues were and try to address them as much as we possibly can. Uh my higherups Jan and Samantha have been doing an excellent
job working with Chief Davis here to come up with a public safety plan. Uh, I have been working one-on-one with Lighthouse uh, beginnings as well as our partners in Crowing County to be in better communication, not just of what's going on with the agencies, but what's
going on with the people that we serve as well. Uh, it's very important for all of us to be informed on what's going on so we can all provide a uh, a better way of helping them because if we all know what's going on, we can all work towards that same goal. But if all
of us are working towards different things, nothing is going to get done. Uh since we have started the pathways project at February 1st of this year, our communication has been excellent. I'm communicating with Lighthouse Beginnings nearly every single day. Uh
as well as the soup kitchen. When things happen at the soup kitchen, I'm informed. Lighthouse is formed. It's all just one big communication going on. Uh it's also been uh very uh good for our intentional helping to where is we're actually able to sit down and talk with
our guests onetoone give them the attention that they deserve figure out what is going on what they need and what we can better do to help them. Uh and since doing that uh as of February 1st uh five people have gotten jobs and I
should mention that two of out of those five have two jobs as of this morning. uh 10 people have got into some sort of housing and six people have gotten to some type of treatment and that's just from February 1st of this year. Uh so
that's a huge huge bound to make in just a month and a half of helping that many people. Now just imagine what we could do if we were open 12 months out of the year. Uh I don't want to see people stay at my shelter forever. That's not my goal. I want to help them move on and
build their life. The shelter is not an end place, it's a beginning place. Thank you. >> Any questions for Bill? >> I got a question for you, Bill. >> Sure. >> I work at the uh the bridge on Seventh. I work at the Bridge of Harmony on Seventh. >> Yeah. >> Did you get those uh the big bag of uh
of gloves and hats the other day? >> Yes, I did. >> Good. Just checking on that. Sometimes people mix up the two bridges and just want to make sure we were on the same path. That's all I have for right now. We may have another question for you. >> Um Miss Shogun, would you like to uh uh add anything? Yeah. Good evening everyone. Can you
hear me? Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. Wonderful. Um, I just want to reiterate uh what Samantha and Bill have said that we're very proud of the work we're doing. We're very grateful for the collaboration uh recently with Chief Davis and throughout the the opening of the shelter with the Brainer Police
Department. I would echo what Bill said that I do think we have made significant progress um in identifying some of the concerns that the council had this time last year um in terms of trying to increase our expectations of people. Um
not that we ever didn't expect anything, but I think we've done a better job of tightening up our collaborations with local partners and probably doing a better job of communicating that back out. You know what what we are doing to help people. You know, Bill gave you some good statistics on um some of the
outcomes we've been tracking since February 1st. I just wanted to make one clarifying point on that that um we've been working with Lighthouse Beginnings Sharing Bread Soup Kitchen in Crowing County really since the inception of the shelter. So over four years now, we've
um once we heard the concerns from the council last year, we um I would say formalized that collaboration more and we started meeting right away last May after the shelter had to close on May 1st and those partners were concerned
about the guests that were serving in common. So, we've been I just want to make sure everyone realizes we were we've been in touch on at least a monthly basis, sometimes multiple times a month with our partners since last May. And we've really finally just solidified
um kind of what this looks like and we're starting to track some outcomes because we know that's important to be able to share back with you um in the community some of the positives that we are seeing. Um, you know, there are some concerns about the shelter being open year round and might that draw more
people to our area. Um, might that um not give people a motivation, so to speak, to um, you know, figure something else out for the summer if we're closing. And I guess what I would just say to that is um, we in terms of
closing for the summer um, we see people scatter. That's what happened. And Lighthouse Beginnings would attest to that as well. You know, I I liken it to, you know, our some of our teacher friends, you know, kids have the summer off from school and and they come back and they call it the summer slide,
right? So, there's there's some sliding and behaviors and maybe reading, you know, proficiencies and that sort of thing. And we see that with our guests when they don't have the bridge on 7th to stay at on a nightly basis and then um have the Lighthouse Beginnings Day Center to go to people scatter to try to
figure out where they're going to be and then we lose all touch with them and any sort of progress that we've maybe helped them make in terms of job searching um treating mental illness, attending to addiction, searching for housing, whatever that might be, you know, we just see a big backslide on that. We
have to start all over again in the fall. Um, and then you know some people longer term homelessness is an issue and that's something that we work on. But the the thing that really worries me the most of about closing during the summer
is um, you know, let's say somebody for whatever reason becomes unhoused on April 1st or April 15th, let's say, through a job loss, a relationship change, whatever that might be. you know, that person only has a couple of weeks, so to speak, before the impending
deadline of closing the shelter on April 30th, for example. So, while I can understand some of the concerns about chronic homelessness, which we need to address in a different manner, I hate to think that some people who may find themselves in the unfortunate circumstance of not having a place to sleep at night in March or April, have a
very limited time to work with us and our partners before we have to close on April 30th each year. So really appreciate you guys hearing us out tonight and um we just want to serve well. We want to continue partnering with the city and our partners and and
we want to do the right thing to to help people and be good neighbors. >> Very good. Thank you. Questions for Janna? >> I think that'll be good for now, but we we may come back. So, thank you sir uh so much for your uh for your help. Thank you. All right. Would anybody else like
to speak on the matter? Chief Davis, got any thoughts, please? >> I could spend an hour speaking on the subject of homelessness. So, I would uh definitely entertain any specific questions if you had any. Um to summarize, I won't go into great detail,
but I will I will echo um some of the comments that some of the others made is over the last year there has been increased communication with our department. we um shared um some of our concerns, some of them that I illustrated about this time last year to the council, at least my concern,
speaking for the police department. And um I I'm I'm I'm pleased with uh the communication and the plan they have moving forward to address some of those issues. Now, time will tell if um a little bit of our creativity and our
forethought to address some of those things actually works or not. Um but uh yeah, I I'm hopeful and I'm I appreciate uh where we've come in the last year. >> Very good. Questions for the chief? All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Um anybody else? There's
anybody else online or anybody else who would like to speak on the matter. Not seeing or hearing anybody. I will close the public hearing then at 7:08 and we'll open the floor to discussions and or questions. >> Mr. Ericson, >> I've got a few of both.
>> Let's go. >> Um, so first of all, I wanted to thank Jana, Bill, Samantha, and the team, and Chief Davis for the the steps you've taken uh to address some of the concerns that the city has had on the past year.
I think um first and foremost is I think acknowledging that the legitimate concerns that the city had. Uh for me, that was important to see. Um, I wanted to just I would try to be quick here, but I wanted to back up a little bit from, you know, I remember when this
first came before the planning commission four years ago. Um, and it was it was for uh the warming shelter to operate seasonally during the cold winter months and it was both presented that way um as a warming shelter
specifically named a warming shelter for that reason. Um it gained support from the planning commission. It gained support from council um to operate as such seasonally. And then um after operating for for it
was I think it was a three-year um interim use permit um so after two and a half years when they came back for um to renew the permit is when the request to go year round came and that's really when I think a lot of the concerns for
both from myself and from um I think other council members um about you know will going year round promote a a permanent culture of dependency.
um will going year round um act as a draw from other communities and when I you know just speaking from personal experience on that when those I feel legitimate concerns were brought up
the response was you know quite passionate and as it should be but you know it was a pretty rocky road for for both um bridges and for the city I think going through that
um and so that's why I led with you know thanking them for first acknowledging those concerns and then I think taking the steps to um address and and mitigate those concerns. So um those were kind of those were my
concerns kind of throughout and then now again coming back with the same request for going year round I still have those concerns. Um, but I think with seeing this application, um, the work that's been done with the safety plan,
um, you know, on on two positive notes I wanted to say is kind of the approach that I try to bring to the planning commission is, you know, I don't want to see the city stand in the way of a nonprofit doing good nonprofit work. um regardless of
what you know the nonprofit is and I don't want to see the city stand in the way of a business wanting to do what a business wants to do with their with their property. And so I've kind of grappled with this and found kind of those principles at odds with wanting to uh with the concerns that I had about
some of the operations. So um with that said, I I I like um the work that's been done. I think the the work with Lighthouse and um development of the safety plan um development of the the
guest agreement um I think goes a long ways towards securing commitments from both the guests and from Bridges um and the other organizations and the increased uh communication between um Bridges and the the police department of
the city uh I think goes a long way. Um, I did want to and I'm wrapping this up. I apologize, but um I did have and Chief Davis, I don't know if you had a chance. I spoke with Jana today and you had talked about and I
think it's a really good idea about there's a section my computer went to sleep here in the the guest agreement um the the statement about the disclosure about I will agree within 3 to 5 days of my first night to actively
participate in the pathways plan I think is a really good clause or statement in the guest agreement. However, I'd like to see that added to the safety plan so that both the guest and um bridge on 7th
are mutual partners in ensuring and being accountable for seeing that through to fruition. Uh so I don't know if that's a a condition we could add or ask the applicant to include. I think that would further strengthen the bond
between um like I said ensuring that that followth through is happening and partially why I think that's an important step is I think that will help mitigate any actual or perceived draw from other communities. Um so I I think
that's an important piece. So um I'm looking at my list here. I think that might be all I wanted to say on it. Um, oh, I'm sorry. I did have one other question. Could I ask the applicant a question still? >> They may. Absolutely.
>> Uh, so one, would that be a possibility for you to include that language in your safety plan? And then secondly, there was other language I think that talked about um approval for other, you know,
when they when they when they leave, they're going to lighthouse or if they're going to work. And then there was a clause about other approved activities. And I just wanted to get further clarification on what that meant. Does that um does that mean I'm going to go to the park or I'm going to
you know what what sort of criteria would you be looking at for that other category? >> Sure. So I can Bill I can speak to that really quick and then if I don't if I don't hit it the right way you can um speak up. Um so for us the first of all
the other activities would be um employment, going to treatment, medical appointments, that sort of thing. You know, significant um reasonable, you know, things that take up positive um activities for your day, not just I
feel like going on a walk instead of going to the day center. Absolutely. So does that answer your question? >> Yeah. So and those things are other listed kind of in already. So it's >> more maybe as other things >> arise but
>> Sure. And I mean I think that's where um I appreciate your point about you know >> I think trusting us as businesses and nonprofits to do what we do best. So yeah we would make that judgment call in alignment with those types of activities is is what we would want to do. I I just
want to make sure that we leave some room for some >> reasonable activity that somebody might be partaking. Maybe they have a funeral for the day or something like that. You know, I don't want to have to make it be an exhaustive list, but but we absolutely want to be a good partner and have expectations of our folks that they
are utilizing the day center or they're spending their day in a a way that makes sense otherwise. >> Thank you. And then the one about um the language from the guest amendment to the safety plan. >> Yep. So, yeah, that's a great that's a
good question. So, Chief Davis and I actually spoke about that um yesterday, too. So, I said I would take a look at the public safety plan. At first, I didn't quite see how that expectation would maybe align with the public safety plan exactly, but then when we spoke um you know, we talked about the section 4
that is about intake and conduct controls. So I if it would be um agreeable to this group and the council, I would maybe propose that we would add a line in there, you know, a 4 something that would um talk about our staff
working to the best of our ability with G guests or the expectation be that guests uphold and follow through with that guest agreement that they sign. I don't know if I want to hold up. I I understand your your concern about the the pathways plan. I just wouldn't want
to single out one piece of that guest agreement to make it seem to our guests that they should follow just one piece of that guest agreement over something else. So maybe would it be reasonable or would it help what you're if we would just make sure that it's reflective in
this plan that there is a guest agreement and there are expectations that guests will be expected to adhere to. Um if I may may >> so section four you know when we spoke I recommended maybe section four and
looking further maybe section seven as well neighborhood impact mitigation it talks specifically about the guests acknowledge and agree um so that might be an appropriate location for it as well. Um
I guess the more specific the better in my opinion. So I don't know about it. >> Sure. So let's see. Um maybe we could add I'm just give me just Okay. So it says in 7.3 guests
acknowledge and agree that and then if you go to point three it said guests are expected to engage in constructive daytime activities including participation in recovery oriented programming mental health. I won't read it at nauseium for you, but maybe what we need to do is just add, you know, attending programming or working on a
pathways plan at the day center in that list. That might be the best spot. Yeah. >> Yeah. Some Yeah. Something some language that kind of ties it to the So, >> yep, >> Mr. Chair, chief has a hand up as well. I'm ready. >> Yeah. Yeah. It says guests agree to comply with structured daytime
transition procedures. I think that's where we're trying to address it. I also I want to be careful that I'm not so specific in a plan that if we change the name of the pathways project, for example, or if if lighthouse beginning ceases to exist, not that I expect that,
you know, I so I I don't know. To me, I think that's what we were trying to address when it says that guests agree to comply with structured daytime transition procedures. But I I'm open to what's agreeable as long as I just am not I don't want I I'm cons if we if
that becomes a condition of the permit being approved and then the name of a program or something changes. I just want to make sure we don't create a bunch of bureaucracy for any of us that I have to bring this agreement back to you and get it approved if the name of a program changes or something.
>> Yeah. Are you good with your satisfied with the question? The answers? >> I am. I have one other question, but I can wait. >> All right. Chief Davis question. >> Yeah. I I just wanted to speak. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Speak to I guess my observation to concern a little bit of the conversation that I had. So you know
in the guest agreement it is is illustrated um what the expectation is and it's just as it's titled a guest agreement within the public safety plan which um as I read a significant part of it gives direction to staff how to
proceed in certain occasions under 7.3 that was um just recently mentioned uh it seems to um once again kind of revert back to a guest acknowledgement in a guest agreement. And what I was ideally
looking for is um guest agreements are nice and hopefully they, you know, follow the agreement that they made, but looking for something when they don't agree something within, you know, the safety plan or some sort
of policy that directs staff when they do not follow through with one of these agreements. Staff, this is how you will proceed. this is the direction you're be being given. >> You're looking for consequences if if one doesn't follow.
>> Yeah. And I Yeah. It just it a defined I guess process as best as you can defined it for a staff member. You know, they're not following through with this agreement. This is our policy directing our staff as policies do. How to address
them no longer agreeing to this portion. >> Okay. Very good. Miss Shogun, any response to that? Sorry about that. I was just toggling between the guest agreement and and the other forms to to respond. Um yeah, I I mean we we're here, you know, as has
been demonstrated, to to be good partners and get to a place that >> um Chief Davis and and planning commission and council can feel good about. Um, I don't have any issues with I guess I I I might just need a little
direction on anything specific language that would be agreeable. You know, from where I sit, I see that we are we're saying this is an expectation. We're asking you as an adult participating in our programming to comply. And then it
does refer to um you know that if you don't we you know if you refuse um it could result in progressive discipline consistent with facility policy. So I don't I'm I'm just looking for some guidance here on what would
help. I don't know if you want us to you to see us a specific policy for how our staff are responding to this specifically. >> Let let me put it this way. Do you have a feeling that if uh the chief and Jana if you guys before this comes to the
city council could meet again and agree on some language? Does that seem like a reasonable assumption? >> Yeah, that's fine by me. Yep. >> Okay, good. Good. Um, excellent. Um, I'm going to next question. Well, just whether we would
tie in direct in that to to ensure that the product is >> Yeah, >> I think you get a sense of of what the ask is here, right, James? And >> I do. Yeah. So, um you know, either a motion to recommend that Bridges works
with Chief Davis prior to the council meeting to include additional language in the safety plan. You could certainly motion or just kind of give that direction um to them to do that. you know, to to Jan's point, probably wouldn't recommend actually putting it into a condition because that could have issues with the interim use permit.
>> So So not including it in the IUP formally. >> Not including it in a condition of the IUP formally. >> Okay. Okay. Um would that be uh something would you want like a side vote on this before? >> You could do a second motion to recommend >> a second motion. Okay. So, what we're
going to do when we get to that point, we'll have the first motion on the IUP and then we'll look at a second motion to um get the language consistent and the thoughts consistent between the police department's concerns and and bridges. Does that sound like a like a plan?
>> I think we should flip-flop those. >> Flip-flop them and go. Okay, I'm fine with that. I'm fine with that. So, when we get to the motions, we'll start with that motion uh first. Um finishing up the questions. Tad, did you still have another question? >> Yeah. uh more of a comment. Um I should
have led with this because it's a bit of a negative one, but uh Janice, since the time you and I spoke and now I spoke with a resident who lives on South 7th, um and brought up a concern. So, and I mentioned that I would mention it here. So, and it is I think a it is quite
concerning. Um, I'm going to support the motion, but or I plan to support the the motion, but um, a resident mentioned that they live in the apartments just south of the bridge on 7th. And he says that a lot of times, um,
uh, homeless will come to the apartments and be buzzing the door and they'll buzz and buzz and buzz and buzz and buzz and they'll go down the line until someone gets frustrated enough to let them in. and then he's seen him in the hallway and under the steps and things and so I
I said that I would mention it. That is quite concerning and I see it as an opportunity for I think it's um FHA to maybe coordinate with you and maybe get in and law enforcement to get that resolved and get um something in place to ensure that that's not happening. So,
and I I couldn't quantify, but he said that happens a lot. Um, he also did reference that there was some vehicle breakins, but that has not happened for a while is what he said. So, I I did ask how do you know that it's those coming
from to or from the shelter? Um, and he was confident that it was, but um that was my conversation. I said I'd share it, so I wanted to bring that up. >> Thank you. Um, I don't think you have to answer that now. U >> Yeah, no question. Just
>> No question. Perfect. Excellent. Um then uh um any other questions or concerns on the board before we get to uh motions? I'm just going to say I I I think um I will support um both um the IUP tonight. I think a lot of progress has been made
in the last year on this. It's good to see. I think we um I think we uh um yeah, the process has really matured. I I I I think this is a lot of uh we're moving closer here on this. So, um, with
that being said, I will, um, open the floor to motions. And the first motion is going to be I'm just going to call it agreement of the language in the plans. I'm just going to call that is that good enough if I just call it agreement of language in the what are we calling this? The the safety
plan. Trying to >> get my language correct here. I >> I'd take a stab at it to be more specific if if you don't mind. So direct um uh director of bridges uh to work with the police chief and director Kanbeck to
>> um come to agreement on the language within the safety plan. >> Excellent at the next council. >> That's a great motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> And we have a second. Any discussion? >> Uh all in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Same sign. >> All right. Now we are looking for a
motion on the IUP and uh any discussion and or a motion. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes, please. >> I'd make a motion to approve the uh interim use permit uh that shall expire on April 30th, 2027. >> I'll second. And we have a second. Any
discussion? >> Comment from Director Cranic >> and uh Mr. Graham. Yes. >> And is that a recommendation for the the other two conditions as well? So there was three conditions. I'm going to go back to the >> I beg you pardon. It was inclusive. Thank you. >> It was inclusive. So, it does cover those.
>> All right. >> And then we did get a second from Mr. Peterson. And uh any other uh uh discussion before we vote? >> And on this one, I I think I'd like to see have a roll call. Stephanie, could we do a roll call on this one, please? >> Duval, >> I. >> Gorum,
>> I. >> Grasula, >> I. >> Peterson, >> I. >> Ericson, >> I. >> Very good. Next up for the applicants, James. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, this will be heard at the next city council meeting, which is April 6th at 7:30 p.m.
in the council chambers. >> All right. Very good. Thank you for uh uh thank you to um all of you and Jenna and everybody for uh for your time and thank you, Chief, for your input tonight. I do appreciate it. Um >> thank you. >> Yep. And at that point, um, is number
nine, is that going to be the comprehensive plan or is that the itinerary on that one? I don't have my my number straight. >> Yeah. So, next one is consider conditional use permit to exceed lot size maximums on 107. That's where we are. Very good. All right. If you could help us on 8C.
>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so the applicant is proposing the consolidation of three lots into one parcel on Bluff Avenue. Uh the application for a cup is to exceed the maximum lot size allowed in the TN1 zoning district. Uh standards for the TN11 zoning district states the
maximum lot dimensions is 11,250 ft without a conditional use permit. Uh the applicant has proposed to consolidate three lots into one lot which will equate to 11,88 square ft. Um really this was due to a vacated rightaway which is the reason this proposed lot
exceeds that lot size maximum in the TN1 zoning districts. I want I do want to note that the three lots proposed for consolidation uh would have a 75 ft width. So 25 and 25 um foot lots lot lines could not be adjusted to create
two lots um that would conform to our standards as the lot size minimum for the TN1 district is 50 ft wide. Um the applicant is proposing uh the construction of a single family home. With that, staff recommends to hold a public hearing and recommend approval of the conditional use permit as presented.
The applicant is here as well. >> Very good. Questions for James. >> I have a question. >> Start with Mr. Ericson. >> Um which bullet it is here? It mentions in here or you mention in here that um this is as a result of an easement.
Whereabouts is that? Or can you just describe what is it? A platted alley or? >> Yep. So, Bluff Avenue um was originally platted to be a pretty large right ofway and an easement um was vacated number of years ago. I know the surveyor had to go
back into some some old documents to find that. Uh so staff wasn't uh sure how much of that that easement was vacated. Originally thought that this might be an administrative um subdivision consolidation. Um, so when we did get that survey back, um, and
this is pretty consistent with all of Bluff Avenue, um, the the vacated portion that goes to this property ended up exceeding those numbers. So, it was it was part of Bluff Avenue. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Other questions for James?
>> I have a quick question. I didn't have a chance to do a site visit on this one. Is this when they are we starting to go down the hill or is this before the hill? >> So, yeah, this one this one's kind of odd. It's um again, Bluff Avenue. There's Terrace and Bluff Avenue.
>> Yep. And I don't believe the applicant could speak to this. Um if there's a >> I'm not sure how much it drops off at the end of it. Obviously, there is some some dropped in this area. >> Yeah. But but is and does Bluff veer to the to if you're heading east, does
Bluff veer off to to the to the left or does Terrace veer veer off to the left? So, Bluff, I believe, kind of turns into terrace. >> Turns into terrace. Okay, that's what it's doing. And then the remainder becomes Evergreen. Okay. I was just trying to get a sense of the geography
there. Um, any other questions for James. Otherwise, I say we open a public hearing at 7:31 and we're looking for a uh CUP for um exceeding the maximum laps
a lot on lot size on 1017 Bluff Avenue. And if the applicant is here, I would love to come up and speak. Your name and address, please, when you're ready. >> Good evening. I'm Bernie Machi and I purchased the lot in July and then I
went to Jim Kramer and it thanks to James and the engineer, it took him about six months to do the survey. The survey was just completed now about a month ago or so. And then uh I also got
the uh the street because the street it goes back to the late 1800s is why it took so long for Jim Kramer to do the surveying. He worked with James in the in the city engineer quite a bit. And I want to thank James and for all
his help in in getting this done. And yes, I want to build a a single family home. There is my and the lot does kind of go down. So, it looks like I can do a like a walk out basement very easily. So, do you have any other questions?
>> Any other questions for our applicant? >> Um, I have one question. Are you building this house for yourself or is this going to be a commercial property? >> Uh, no. This would be for myself. >> Mhm. >> I live about 8 miles down here. Okay. south of the city and I'm real familiar
with I live on lower south long lake and so was very interesting alless the Jacob we've had a lake association been on the lake since 1973 and I think our we started a lake association about 1978 if I remember right
>> but a lake association does a lot of what the things he does what Jacob was talking about so we're all trying to get our banks and all that. And like you said, some people planted flowers and all that. And we limit the amount of our
yard space going down to the lake is what what he's talking about. And I got trees and stuff between my house and the lake. >> Very good. >> Right. And so like they try and limit it. I got about I got 125 ft lot and I
have about 15 or 20 feet of a path down to the lake for the dock. Very good. >> So that might help explain part what he's doing. >> Excellent. I I appreciate your comments. Okay. >> Thank you very much. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Would anybody else like to speak on this matter? We have a public hearing open.
Do we have anybody online who may want to speak? Nobody online? >> Nobody else. I'm going to close our public hearing then at 7:34 and I'll open the floor to any discussion and or a motion. >> Yes, Mr. Dval. >> Just a curiosity question to Director Grovvic.
the the the county website shows that as one parcel and not three, but it's actually three parcels that need to be replatted. Huh. >> Right. They're going to be it's going to be one one lot when it's all done. Is
that right, J? >> And I can clarify that. Um we did have a meeting this year. The county um brought in a lot of municipalities. Um county is currently consolidating on GIS properties for tax purposes, but they're not a legal consolidation. Um so it's a
little bit more administrative work for us to take a look at it. Currently working with the county um on supposedly there's going to be another layer where it can go back to kind of historic plast to see if it's actually been legally consolidate consolidated or not. Um but that's the reason that it's shown as one property, but it's technically not
legally consolidated just just for tax purposes right now. So it's not a lot of record >> correct >> at at the dimensions that that our applicant wants and that's why we're doing a cup. >> That's correct. >> Got it. Thank you.
>> Excellent. >> Add something. I've been working with with Peterson and we had I had to have some of the neighbors signing. >> Very good. Thank you, sir. >> And thank you. That's very helpful.
Thank you. Um All right. Uh Mr. Ericson, >> I would, unless there's other discussion, I would move approval of the conditional use permit as presented that allows for the consolidation of three lots with a total area of 11,88 square feet or yeah, square feet.
>> Second. >> And we have a second. Do we have any discussion? >> I just want to say it's great to see somebody building a single family house in Briner. That's terrific. Often we have a lot of duplexes and whatnot, so it's great to see a single family house. I think that's terrific. With all that being said, um, uh, all in favor say I.
>> I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. Next step for our applicant. >> Yep. So, this will be heard at the next city council meeting for final approval April 6, 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers here. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Excellent. >> Thank you, Stephanie. >> Thank you, M.
>> All righty. Um, we are ready to uh discuss our planning commission itinerary. Did I miss anything on that one? >> One more item. >> Which one are we? >> One more. >> I didn't get the back p. What's that last one? I I don't have the last page. >> Variance. >> Thank you. Hey, there it is. I got the last page going. Oh gosh, we have a variance on an existing garage. I forgot
the garage in 1513 uh uh Pennsylvania Avenue. James, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so Raymond T. Kucowski has submitted a variance request to construct a 14x 26 ft accessory structure to replace an
existing 10T x20 accessory structure. Uh the applicant is requesting to maintain the existing twoft sideyard setback. Variance is required because you're expanding um the structure that's already there. Uh the proposed accessory structure will meet all other dimensional requirements of the CN2
district. Uh the proposed accessory structure is essentially located where the existing garage is currently placed and will not alter the um character of the property or the neighborhood. Uh the practical difficulty is due to an existing driveway configuration and a sewer line that runs from the alley to the house. Uh while not prohibited,
placement of a structure over a or near a sewer line is not ideal in the event of a collapse. Uh no party has contacted the community development department regarding the variance request. And with that, staff recommend to hold a public hearing and recommend approval of this variance request for the construction of
a 14x 26 ft accessory structure at 1513 Pennsylvania Avenue in the location uh presented by the applicant. With that, I can answer any questions. The applicant is also here. >> Questions for James? No questions for James. We'll open the public hearing then at 7:38 and I'd
invite the applicant to come up speaker uh state your address and tell us a little bit about the project please. I'm very hard of hearing and I'm very you know so I'm Ray Kakowski. Thank you gentlemen. Uh the reason I'm doing this
is I'm just trying to upgrade my garage. I've owned the house for few years. My disabled son lives there. I do not live there. I bought it to plan on to live there once I uh moved out of my existing
home, but I bought a different one. Anyway, make a long story short. Um I talked to the neighbor to keep the twoft set back and and to make a a larger garage. I need to do some landscaping.
Uh the driveway close to the house, so I got to tear all that out. I want to do it all at one time. Um, so that means the whole driveway work in a new garage. The garage is a
new model T garage. You can't park it in anyway. You know, you can't get out of it if you get in a car. But, um, that's basically what I'm, you know, asking for. >> Very good. Any questions for our
applicant? >> Yes, Justin, please. So, with tearing out the existing driveway, would there be any practical difficulty to making this rear loaded? I believe that's what the code says if I'm correct, James, or is that not correct in this zone?
>> I We're going to have This one's going to be for James. >> I can look that up in our code here. >> We're asking We're talking about the garage, which which direction the garage, whether it's front loaded or rear loaded. >> Could be front loaded garage. Okay. And
James, any uh any thoughts on that? >> So, let me pull up the dimensional standards for CN2. >> Yep. So, the TN districts have alley requirements, but the CN districts do not. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Okay. And this is a TN, correct?
>> This is a CN. >> We're in a CN. So, okay. So, all right. Very good. So I I think uh so basically the garage is good facing the direction it is. We were wondering about the garage. It's good facing the direction it is. We're we're still working on it, but that question's been cleared up. I I think if nobody else has any other
questions, you can take a seat and we may have another question, but I think we're good for now. Would anybody else uh while the public hearing is open, do we have anybody else would like to comment on this? Anybody online? Nobody online. All right, we'll close the public hearing at 7:41. Yes.
>> I guess I have another question. >> I had a question for Mr. Kowski. I I apologize for letting you sit down. We moved a little bit too fast. >> Could you come up to Ray? One more question here from Mr. Dval. >> So, um there is an alley behind your
house and across that alley, um Max, could you show the drawing that's on on the findings of fact? It's a There is a garage back. The alley basically stops right there,
but it doesn't show that there's some nice big white pines that are planted back there that >> there's an What is there? >> The white pines trees. >> Yeah. So, in your on your line >> that they don't show up on the on the print, but they plow the snow up to that
alley. And the sewer line is actually 20 ft from the lot line, the south lot line. So you would be building over the sewer and the gas line runs here. That's 20 ft off the lot
line. So I didn't, you know, you can't build a garage over a sewer or a gas line without moving everything. >> So there's a there's a gas line there as well. I see that. >> Yeah. Um, >> and the and the sewer line runs there. I
talked to the city. He said it's 158 ft from the manhole to the Y. And so I measured that out and it's 20 ft from the corner of my lot on the south end in the Y would be the sewer from the
house to the the sewers in the alley >> in your Thank you. And in in your drawing, you're showing a a 9 ft wall. Is it four? >> 9 foot. I want to go 9 foot high.
>> So that's your that's your foundation and you fill level. Is that what you're doing? >> Well, that that whole area is going to have to be built up a little bit because it's all slopes down toward the house now about 10 inches.
So there would be, you know, more fill that would have to be hauled in and get the water to flow back toward the alley and back. I know it >> and your um Max, I think, um the findings of fact
memo has sort of the There you go. Um and and if Yeah. So that that draw um the aerial document there directly across >> is a garage that loads on the alley. >> Yeah.
>> And who who maintains the and plows the alley? Does the city do that? >> I don't I think the city does. >> Okay. >> I'm not sure. It's never, you know, is not never that good of a job because they push the snow
up just far enough so that the gentleman across the street can get back out again. >> Yeah, it looks like you in in in my field visit, it looks like that push wall is is past or about ends where your white pines that you're referencing also
end down there at the bottom of the hill. Right. in the alley. You've got some >> That's a dead end. It dead ends right there. >> Yeah. So, >> it goes down two more lots, but it actually the alley
>> the maintenance part is what ends where is where the city >> hole in there on on the end of that alley. So on that northeast corner of your lot u against the the alley, it's not
possible for you to put a a garage in there that that accesses you access from the from the alley. Yeah, it it's possible, but you know, it's further away from the house and I figured if I wanted to move
into there or my disabled son, that's more snow to shovel, more area to clean up. But I thought this would be just a little bit cleaner than putting a big structure on there to probably, you know, I would never use that big of a
one, but you know, just enough for one car and and a lawnmower and stuff like that. Get rid of the shed debts there cuz it's all old and decrepit anyway. So, >> okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. >> I've got one more question for you, Ray.
the existing garage, the Model T garage as you referred to it, is it serviced from the street? So, right now there's a curb cut and it goes to the service. Yeah, there's curb cut in there. >> Okay. >> So, that you know that would be all rebuilt, you
know, that would be all new from the curb to the garage. >> The curb in Yeah. But the the curb cut would remain the same. >> Pardon? >> The curb cut will remain the same. It'll be the same. >> The curb height would remain the same. >> Okay. But everything from the curb back
to the garage now is the garage is 10 inches lower. So right now you go there and you're in need of water almost, >> you know. I mean I get water in the basement. I got a pump that I pump it back in the yard and >> all right.
>> To keep that dry, you know, >> right? Thank you, Ray. I think that's all we have for you right now. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> All right. I don't think I have to do I have to reclose the public hearing. I'll reclose the public hearing. Good. Thank you. 7:47. Didn't mean to cut you out there.
Those are good questions. Um discussion. >> Question for James. >> Yes, please. >> The sewer line and the gas line in the rear of the property. Does that sufficiently pose a practical difficulty so we could move? that does sufficiently
um create a practical difficulty >> and I in addition to that you know I know there is the one rear loaded property there but just and I don't know if this is a legitimate factor but to me I look at the surrounding neighborhood you know all of these homes have
virtually the exact same setup looking at these other garages they they all look a little bit bigger um so I guess I have no problem with I think It's very reasonable and it's an improvement in many ways.
>> Very good. Other uh questions, comments, and or a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve it as staff recommendations. >> Second. >> I'm going to give the second to Justin. There we go. Any discussion on the motion? Yes, Mike.
>> Um Mr. Chair, I think, um you know, if we're going to approve um this motion, we have a majority that supports it. I would recommend that we include a condition on that um that the applicant
um capture rainwater with guttering or something and directs that out and away from the adjoining property um where you're taking that larger roof surface and you're shedding half of that over to that property line and possibly causing
problems on the neighbor's yard. So if we can condition that um guttering is is installed and maintained and directed away from the adjacent property of the south. >> That's a question for Mr. Peterson. You're friendly to the amendment the friendly amendment >> that good.
>> We do we do friendly amendments. I'm not sure if you can >> I think that's what you do in small towns. >> I think we just did a friendly amendment. And so any questions about the our now friendlier um uh motion? >> Not a question. I just I think it's a good point. Those clubs are very close proximity. So
>> yeah, water is important to move which way we move it. Very good. All right. Um I'm going to uh we'll call a vote. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Same sign. All right. The next step for our applicant. >> Yep. So this will be heard at the April
6 council meeting. Planning commission is a recommending body. City council has final approval. So again, April 6, 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers here. >> All right. Thank you, Ray. Good luck. >> Thank you. >> All right, we are moving on to um now
we're moving on to item E, the planning commission itinerary. James, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so again, the itinerary we check from time to time with planning commission. It's meant to provide an organization of topics and ordinance for the planning commission uh and the community development department to
review in the next year in order of importance. Uh staff proposed that the next item should be the comprehensive plan which was approved by city council. Then while working on the comp comp plan update, staff proposed also to work on the Mississippi headarters regulations as well as the flood plane district. Um
these are things that need to get updated. Um couple things that haven't been updated for probably 20 years. Um these do need to be completed due to uh state statutory requirements and do want to note that work on these three planned items will most likely take up uh most
of 2026. Obviously if um state statutes change for something, we have to change an ordinance. We'll have to fit those in. Um, but that is what staff is recommending for the itinerary. >> All right. Comments, uh, questions from the group. >> Looks like a lot of water work.
>> Looks like a lot that there's a theme there. There is a theme. All right. Put your waiters on. Excellent. All right. Um, very good, James. I I I think we I don't think we need any motion. I think uh we're going in a good direction there. So, that's good. Um, that's going
to lead us up to uh F. and uh kind of talk about the comprehensive plan update and uh perhaps uh in appointing a commission member. James, you want to kind of set up the situation a little bit? >> Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so, city council selected Bolton and Mink to update the comprehensive plan uh due to
their experience working with the city of Brainard. Uh uh staff has has already met with them and uh definitely confident that they'll do a great job. Uh so I did meet with them on March 12th to begin the process of updating our comprehensive plan uh with the goal of completing the plan uh update updated
plan by the end of 2026. Uh throughout the process staff will virtually meet monthly with Bolton and mink in addition to some of the planning commission meetings. Uh so staff is recommending that a liaison liaison from the planning commission should also attend these meetings to help ensure the objectives of the planning commission are being
met. Uh so staff is recommending a motion to approve a liaison if anyone is interested. Uh staff would also like the planning commission to decide at the April 15th kickoff meeting. Um Bolton Mink would like to come and have kind of initial kickoff meeting. Uh should this occur during the regular meeting or
would the commission be interested in a workshop prior to it starting at 5:00 p.m. And that is everything. I certainly answer any questions. >> All right. So we have two steps here. Um, I would say we look at the first step first, which is to appoint a member to uh to sit on the um on the committee
here and to represent us. I think somebody who's retired and who has a lot of experience in these things might be might be a good person, but I'm looking um the floor is open for NEO for nominations. >> Well, I would say um that I'd welcome the opportunity um if it's helpful to
the commission. I would welcome the opportunity to do that job. I'm not going to self-nominate, but >> I would nominate Mr. Duval. >> We have a nom nomination. Second that. >> We have a second there. Do we have any discussion? No, I think it's a good idea. All in favor say I. And I There we
go. >> Mike, you got another job. >> Oh, there you go. >> And uh then um any thoughts on the proposal that we have a five o'clock workshop? >> Yes. >> U Mr. Chair, an unfair question of staff. Do you have a crystal ball to say what
does April look like? we're ramping up and you know the things are awakening. Are we gonna have a busy do what do you feel April's going to look like knowing what you've seen so far? >> So as of right now I know of one application for a variance request for
um essentially there's a a standard with how far a curb cut has to be away from um an intersection. That's one that I'm aware of. there might be um a plan unit development application but uh at this time have not been working with anybody else for for any other items
and then we may be obviously looking at the Shorland ordinance again. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes. >> How long a meeting is this supposedly with them? >> I would say probably minutes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Probably 30 minutes to an hour.
>> Can I make a statement? I'd say we do it before. You don't want if there's other stuff going on. We don't want to have people sit through that. I've been out there before. >> Okay. Very good. So, I I think uh do we have a consensus that we should look at a five o'clock uh meeting with uh I think we have a consensus on that one.
>> Then you can bring pizza if we end there. >> You read my mind. I was going to say we have conditioned that they that Bolton and Bank provides some pizza. >> Oh, better. Yes. >> Some beverages. And and we'll be quite willing to listen and all that. So, I'll let you handle the details on that, but uh I I think we have a consensus on
that. That's very good. All right, we are up to nine. We're up to staff reports. >> Yeah. So, I'll just uh update the commission on a few things we that we've been working on in the EDA. Um, so the EDA did approve a shared services agreement uh with the chamber for a
Washington Street mitigation plan. It was in the paper. Uh the Washington Street reconstruction process or project will be kicking off here pretty soon. at the end of March are going to be holding a kickoff meeting at the uh um land services building and then construction and and some of the closures will start
occurring in mid to late April. Uh so the EDA did um kind of earmark $20,000 to help businesses um kind of through this process and and and create some marketing strategies with the chamber. We've met as kind of a large group. So
um that'll be um that'll be a good thing for some of these Washington Street businesses. Obviously, there's been some concerns. Uh and then secondly, uh a signed grant agreement was approved with Bladec. Uh so the EDA is going to be offering up $25,000 in facade grants. It's a $5,000
grant per business, 50% matching grant uh for businesses that are adjacent to Washington Street. So kind of through that whole corridor. And then also um a $15,000 sign grant permit. So that's going to be a $1,000 grant, 50% matching. um that'll be throughout the
entire city. Um it's meant for commercial signage. Um really trying to target wall signage um to as we updated the the sign standards the planning commission to have some threedimensional elements. Um so that is something uh that that the city is and the EDA is
looking to do as well. So those are my updates. >> Good. Any questions for James? James, is anybody going to have to dress up as the ox, the construction ox and the whole thing? And >> I think they're taking applications. Yeah, it's a now we know where the the construction guy from. >> Then you can have another job.
>> Then I got another one twirling twirling the arrow over there at all. Now the uh the construction guy from Village People. We know what that that's his new job there. >> There are there are specific I think height and build criteria to fit the suit and I don't meet those.
>> You might I think it's sure I don't. >> I'm sure of it. >> All right. Very good. Thank you, James. All right. looking for commissioner member reports and we're going to start with we'll start with Mike since we're picking on Mike. You know, you already mentioned uh one of my comments was noting in the dispatch the Thrifty White
drug is closing up shop there, moving into further down the east side of town. You know, and I'm hoping that that unused that parking lot that is largely set unused on the corner of North North
Second and Kingwood that that it gets put to a more beneficial and compatible TN2 use by the new owners, the future owner or lease or whatever, you know, that that make better use of that >> market. How about a driving school? You know,
the test motorcycles for the driver. >> Exactly. Or or housing. um or >> or another another neighborhood appropriate TN2 business operation just not an empty field of pavement. I mean um I think Hardies is another example
that there's some real good space there that could be put to a better use than just >> an Hardies >> a parking a parking lot with with grass coming up >> housing in the back. >> Exactly. Exactly. >> All right. Um, but other than that, um, I do want to say that you all missed a
really good, nerdy webinar on data centers last month. So, I I I shame, you know, shame on you for not being there. Director Crownic did an excellent job, I think, of presenting the the city's ordinance and how this
body and staff and council created a a a guiding ordinance for us. and and it it kicked off just about if not all of the elements that some of the technical speakers were saying would be, you know,
a a ideal to have in a community's ordinance. We're we're right out there on the bloody front end of this stuff as as an ordinance in the city. Um city ordinances dealing with large data centers. And so, you know, my hat tip to to James for the great job that he did
and um not only at that presentation, but shephering this through a process and through approval at city council to give us something that really is a good good product that others were very impressed with. So, with that, >> indeed, I'd second that. Dave, you got
anything? >> Yeah, I do. I never do, but this time I do. I know >> it happened. Um, my wife and I were going down to see my new granddaughter and drove by one of my rental properties. >> Trees were gone. >> Wow.
>> Brainer Public Utilities. Cut them down. But now you were pro you were probably on the board 20 25 years ago. Made me plant them there. >> Not that long ago. I haven't been on this board that long. >> But it was a couple there that they're planted on our property and stuff. But that's another story. But it got me to
thinking of we always call them the uh grass police and you know I've got some different properties town in in town that are vacant. >> I've owned one probably at least 15 years. >> How many letters? >> You know from the city about mowing?
>> Oh yeah. No, just one was about seven or eight years ago. >> Okay. >> You know, just random. Seven years later, you know, I got an acorage and I'm supposed to mow. Talk about being angry. And then it was again, I think it was a couple years ago. We had a tree down in the middle of the the forest.
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> James waved that one. It was before your time in the other one. And then this summer, my son got a couple of on another vacant lot fully wooded demo. I say we need to at least address that as a complaint driven. There's there's no
reason to that an intern or hopefully it's not a full-time staff going and and calling those in because there are vacant lots. And the first one I went through, I drove around all the parks and every city park has long grass in
places period. So I I think it's it's necessary to keep up lawns and stuff. That's why when you brought up the one on the shoreline, it's like, God, I was going to talk about that tonight. You know, I don't think it's an issue only if it's an issue to your neighbors or
someone that has an issue with it. >> So, it has to be you'd rather see it complaint driven. >> I'd rather see it complaint driven. >> James, is it complaint driven? Now, >> we are um primarily complaint driven. Uh if somebody else called in a grass complaint, you know, in and near that
area, um we do capture other ones or if we're driving, you know, to a location for a building permit inspection, you know, it may be caught at that. We're not driving up and down the street anymore, though. >> Okay. >> I just wanted to bring it up. >> Um, but I don't know what to do about
the trees. They're gone. So, >> all right. All right. There we go. Sad. >> So, yeah. What are you going to do? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> All right. >> I'm going to get a part-time job measuring grass. >> Yeah. >> Wearing an ox wearing the ox suit. >> Exactly. Tad.
>> Um, data centers. I was going to touch on that as on the council leazison to the region 5 development commission. And at the last meeting, data centers came up as a topic that region 5 is considering having their staff look into to see how and when these data centers
are moving into communities, how the community can benefit, you know, increase jobs, increase, you know, bring keep some of that wealth into the community to the degree possible. uh when that came up, I referenced our ordinance and the the presentation that
you mentioned James had been given and I think they sat in on it because they all seem to know about it already. So I echo your comments congratulating James on the job well done and and and this group as well for the ordinance that was put together. So >> very good. >> It's being referenced and utilized.
>> Excellent. Justin, >> I'm gonna be the odd one out and not have anything tonight. >> Not have anything tonight. There we go. Um, I just look at the uh completed ordinance and I see the cannabis one there. James, do we I know we have two licenses out. Any progress on the two licences. Are they moving closer to
anything happening? >> Uh, still working through the process. >> Still working. And the process being with the state. Is that >> with the state? Correct. >> Still working through the state. All right. Very good. >> I've got nothing else. And with that, I'm looking for a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second.
>> Second. All in favor say I. >> I. Excellent 45minute meetings.