--------- So, that was another one that I had pointed out >> and um I um I saw some redundancy in here on some of these. So, the shades are the same and >> and and I would recommend we we combine
those in a smart way so that it's less busy when we get down to it. um you know and I I would trust your judgment to take a good stab at how to nest some of these >> u to what is missing. I I would u I
would return to um Commissioner Gorum's point. Under the mobility goal three, um we don't talk at all about bikes and pedestrians in other modes of transportation and it says bicycles and
pedestrians, but all we have is is uh is cars and and buses and shuttles. >> Um we really desperately need that. But if you look at goal goal three priority one it's public transit transit plan and
the second one transit plan the wrership um transit plan. >> So let's let's use this opportunity to really really pull some thoughtful policies in that that help us deal with the the moving people in other modes of
transportation part of that goal. >> Thank you. >> It's very motor centric. Oh yes. >> Well, and it's it's interesting that that you brought this up because one of one of the things that we always realize once we put it into a table like this is
how many things are redundant. You know, when it's in a long list on, you know, 20 pages, it's really hard to see. And then you start putting it into tables and you're like, that's the same that's the same strategy. It's just under a different goal. So that was actually going to be one of our observations and
recommendations to to collapse and maybe yeah collapse and consolidate like items. >> Yeah. Total it does like if you add them all up it's 127 almost 130. It's like between 120 and 130 um goals and strategies. So if you're feeling
overwhelmed and that's why it's a lot. >> Yeah. >> And there's a lot of things to work on, right? So, it makes sense why we have such a good big list and >> what are some of those ways that we can help streamline it and make it clear what the priorities are for everybody
working on things with the city. I think another good example on the very front page with land use, right? We talk about deploying smart growth uh principles. I think a really easy way to make that strategy feel a little less daunting is that in because we're bringing the goals
and policies into the narrative, right? The narrative can be detailed in what what that fully means. And then in our goals and policies, right, we talk about deploying those smart growth principles um to achieve our our aspirations and be
able to um simplify some of that. Um, and then look for those places where we can consolidate. You read my mind. I was going to ask for consensus or or other input on that idea of making some strategic edits uh to the list where we
do find those redundancies and thinking about, you know, sometimes it feels redundant, but there's maybe kind of two different two different angles to that particular goal. You know, downtown is mentioned quite a few times throughout here, right? And there's different components of of policies related to
downtown that I think are important for us to call out. Um, and so it's it's taking that that closer look um at those places where there might be what feels like repeated repeated goals and policies and really thinking about what's the intention and making sure
that we're compre we stay comprehensive in what those goals and policies are but make it feel more user friendly. Those are the big highlights we wanted to talk about. I I thought it was interesting maybe just an observation. I
noticed on the front page that a lot of like a lot of people thought that the land use section a lot of those tasks had already either been implemented or in you know in implementation phase or or completed. We're not going to remove them like they're going to continue to be because I think it's important that you keep working on it. But I just
noticed that some of the other ones that you know had less completed. So I just thought I'd maybe just ask if there's any reflections on that or if there is something that um >> Yeah, I I think part of that is um from
the zoning code update that we've done. Um, I was going to mention this in my staff report, but uh, um, I've seen again this year, um, last year was a little less a year before, a little bit more, but, uh, a lot of people approaching staff about infill duplex development, which our zoning code has
allowed and opened up for that, where these lots have stayed, you know, prior to our zoning code stayed vacant for years upon years. Um, so people are really trying to find these properties in Brainer to to add density, create dup new duplexes, to to add additional housing in some of our areas that we
have infrastructure um already present. So I I think that was the the zoning code update um was a big one. Um we've, you know, really allowed that. Now it's, you know, housing is still one of the most important goals in our city, creating more housing, and that's really kind of throughout greater Minnesota.
So, you know, if there's any implementation strategies that we've missed um or haven't done that other cities have found success with, I think that's still important. But I I'm guessing, you know, that's why a lot of that stuff was listed as as completed or um maybe not as high a priority is
because we've already done quite a bit um from the planning commission side with that zoning code update. I'm curious what uh everybody's thoughts are. We didn't include it for the survey purposes because we wanted to force you into putting um putting a year bracket
down, but for the sake of the final implementation plan, would it be helpful to add a a status category or a priority category that still maybe talks about it being kind of high, medium, low priority, um but has has an ongoing
element to them where like some of these things are things that you are just continually a part of the work that we do. Um, and you know, sometimes ongoing those ongoing efforts can be Yes, absolutely. Right. That's a top
priority and it's ongoing work versus, you know, it's a it's an ongoing project, but it if I have to pick between this and that, I'm going to pick the high priority thing. Right. From a staff perspective, I think that'd be very helpful um to still list as high, moderate, low priority, so we kind of
know what we're working on, but then adding that status tracker to it as well. And then we kind of talked about, you know, perhaps having a page where we have some of our completed items listed as well, so we know what we've completed and they're not just off the list. >> Yep. Yep. >> Yeah. I think having a priority is is
huge, too, because like like James said, we have mixed land uses, but that's a constant tweaking process. We're always going to be tweaking that as we go forward. >> Absolutely. >> But it's still a high priority to make sure that the uses are mixed. >> Yeah. Well, and I think to that example
especially, right, it's good to identify like what, you know, from a policy perspective, where do we sit on some of these things, right? Because you don't necessarily as the city have full control over what developments are going to to knock on your door, right? Um but
we can indicate through those policies and priorities what type of development development we want to see which can both be a really helpful external indicator as well as a really helpful indicator for you as planning commission when you have projects coming forward to
say is this checking you know is this the type of development we want to see right does that align with you know we're always asking that question does it align with the comprehensive plan right so we still want to know what those what those policies and and those priorities are.
>> Yeah. Just add agreement to that how you with what's been said and how you laid that out both the priority but then the ongoing aspect because you just can't do without that. And I I like I know this was by design to have the years but I found that really challenging. Yeah. >> So I like that. I know, you know, it's a
good exercise, but from a user standpoint, I think the high, medium, low priority would be >> that resonated more with me. >> Yeah, >> I would concur with that. I had a hard time with the challenging. >> Can I I'm just curious. Can would could
you expand like a little on maybe why it was challenging or >> Well, I mean, there's there's some things that are a lower priority that are easier to accomplish. So, we can accomplish them in one to three years. Mhm. >> But they're a lower priority. Whereas
other things are a higher priority, but it's going to take that full three years, maybe three to five years. At least that's what I my thoughts were on it. >> Take a while. >> It's going to take a while. >> I probably put one to three years on
everything. >> I want to do everything. I probably threw off the curve a little bit. >> I think I was right there with you. Yeah. Like, yeah, yeah, yeah. All those things. >> So many of the things are ongoing
>> that, you know, by and large we maybe have accomplished it, but technically it's ongoing. And I was probably just >> yeah, >> battling with that. >> Like create a walkable and bikable neighborhoods. Well, you know, with some of the safe routes to school stuff that's been mentioned, we've done some
sidewalk projects, some trail projects, but certainly it's ongoing. So, how can we say that's not completed? >> But um and certainly not going to be done in a couple years. Just happens. It's an ongoing one. So, it's just that
tension I guess was >> what I was referencing. >> Yeah, absolutely. That what you just said is something is a lot of times kind of our next step is where we go. Okay. Whereas we have like a little matrix that we'll do with low like low and high
priority like on one axis and level of effort on the other axis and we'll try and map them because then like if it's going to be if it's low priority and really hard to do like those are the ones that we might just X out because they're going to you know maybe there's
it's a low priority not going to have a lot of impact but it's going to cost $10 million. So, you know, let's focus on first of all the low like the high the high impact, high priority, low cost, loweffort projects first just to get some momentum
going. And so that's a lot of times our second phase of the priority >> process. So, >> um, >> and one thing that I, um, you kind of talked about land use a little bit, um, that I did bring up in our, in our one
meeting is, uh, picturing kind of the state hospital property. I know when we were doing our zoning code update, um, we picture that potentially as like a TN3 where you'd have, um, kind of not a it's a mix of uses, but they're kind of
separated from each other. You have commercial next to to um, Highway 18 there. have some higher density development and then potentially uh go into lower density development. Still wanting it to be walkable and bikable to, you know, those commercial uses that are next to the highway. You're not
having to take a car at all times. You can still, you know, walk from your house to some of those. It's not a long walk. Um, but right now, our future land use map doesn't really have any type of designation for a TN3 development or a planned unit development that might have a mix of uses in there. Um, so something
to maybe um, consider as well. Right now, our our future land use map talks about mixed use, but it's more of a mixeduse type building like your downtown, which might not be as appropriate for a development on, you know, on the on the state hospital um property. Somebody, you know, it's it's
very less likely that somebody's going to do a mixeduse building in that area. So, potentially having another type or editing some type of future land use map designation to to to give that type of option. Yeah, I think we've talked about also
considering the option where we add that type of use into the the future uses and then a question of, you know, do you formally add it on the map or do we wait to do that, right? We can we'll navigate some of that together. And I think that future land use area will be really
critical, especially when we're talking about the alignment with um the the environmental components, environmental review components of this update. Um because we want to both say here here's our existing picture, right? Both from a land use and a and an infrastructure
perspective. And then as we think about those future land use areas, right? That's where we can then identify what the what the opportunities are or where the barriers are from an infrastructure perspective to make those things possible. So that's a that's an
important component that that those EAW requirements want to see met in the plan. It's good. >> I'm Do you have another >> No, go ahead. Um I haven't here like as you as you were talking you know there's
been a lot of conversation about pedestrian and bikes and more from a mobility perspective and transportation perspective. A lot of times with the chapter park and recreation, a lot of times trails are included in there, but based on kind of
what I'm hearing from you, it's it's that it's less about recre it has an recreation component, but it sounds like it's more important for transportation. >> Yes. >> And I'm wondering instead of doing, and I was just scanning it really quick to see how much really is about trails in
here. The the park and wreck doesn't really have a lot about trails. And it's more about like more about open space maybe park and open space or
because it talks about public spaces. I mean it does I guess there is one reference under goal one3 there is the talk about multi-use trails but like some trails is one of those trails is one of those
topics that could go either in transportation or in parks and recreation and I'm almost thinking that it might be something that we should add to the transportation or mobility chapter. >> Yeah, I know. I'd like to see it in transportation. I mean, my future vision
is definitely that human scale development where you can walk and bike to things. >> I'm with you. >> You're here. >> And I'm seeing so I don't wonder if we're looking at the same sheet here because mobility goal one item three >> continue to maintain and celebrate
Brainard's expansive trail network >> and consider opportunities to expand it. >> I was looking Oh, go. I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Oh, I'm on the wrong item. I was on No, I'm glad you point Glad you mentioned that because I was looking at the parks and recreation. That's the only place
that it mentions trails in the parks and recreation, but you're right. It mentions It does mention >> Yeah, it's covered a lot mobility piece, but >> yeah. >> And then um I did have a you asked about anything missing and I'm sorry I didn't bring it up before, but and it's really
not missing, but it's really not I don't not emphasized to the degree that I think it should be is under facilities and infrastructure. >> I to me the so goal one under that section is improve the overall image of
the city that doesn't necessarily fit as well there. >> Goal two is preserve history and the small town feel and then goal three to me gets to that facilities and infrastructure water power wastewater system. And so I that's the that's such
a large part of city you know governance is and it's the you know so I think that might be something we should maybe elevate. >> Yeah. >> So that to answer your question from earlier that would be one that I would add about a piece that's not missing but
should maybe be elevated. >> Yeah. >> What would we think about? So there's also a community character chapter. To me, >> the history, small town feel, overall image of the city that fits a community
character conversation versus facilities and infrastructure, I agree, should should be more focused on what are those public infrastructures and facilities that you're maintaining as a city. >> Yeah. And I'm not trying to diminish those goal one and two by any means, but I just I agree with what you said. I
think they just fit better. somewhere else. >> Yeah, I agree. I think that makes sense. >> Want to look at what's in the >> Yeah, it's the the word image is interesting when because I don't normally think of image and infrastructure together. I think that's
more >> Yeah, I think this will be a place where we look at, you know, if we were to move those to community character, do we, you know, what's the redundancy there? because I'm seeing some things in the community character chapter which is immediately after land use um where
we're talking about preserving and repurposing historic assets, enhancing the city's unique identity um and again that blend of historic and modern. So, I could see us I could see us making
some strategic edits >> to consolidate that um and then expand and I think the expansion of those goals related to infrastructure again is going to reiterate the importance of that
>> EAW alignment as well >> because then we can point to >> you know either specific areas or maybe there's particular themes We're finding as we're thinking about that future development like we really need to you know enhance one particular system or
one particular area um that can fit in that infrastructure goals and policies chapter. I mean goal one now that I'm thinking instead of like the word image what I'm thinking is like um
like creating or and im the overall I'm getting stuck on the word image but making making sure that the city is reflected as a modern city that has the technology and you know to support >> to support
current 21st century techn um jobs and living and >> because that's It's talking about broadband and infrastructure. when you get to um the evaluation piece, you know, you you
highlighted page 81 that the sort of the way you're thinking about breaking out the >> implementation strategy. >> Yeah. >> Um there there's a section I think we'll want to have in there that simply is about administering the plan so that we
can measure our effectiveness in administering the plan. So part of that you have in the narrative above about you know annually review and I think we should have something purposeful in there that we evaluate that on an annual basis.
>> I think because we're using this to um increase our authority um to um make development decisions without um needing to go to an EA. Mhm. >> We should probably have something in there from an administrative standpoint
that that our staff kind of huddle on a regular basis to to to um look at roles and responsibilities that each fragment of city government has um to bring the whole together to make sure we don't
miss anything. That's our lesson from from a recent development project is we just missed something and and at the same time we might come across new tools to help us with that or new information we want to make sure we bring into that evaluation process.
And so I and and so I think that um you know having a specific section that relates to administering this plan >> and key pieces like that that we want to make sure we're checking boxes on a periodic basis whatever the frequency
should be. That's it doesn't require its own goal. doesn't require its own policy, but it's going to be important to implementation, >> like a stewardship or something to that effect where we can connect these parts, >> right? So, when we go through an evaluation of our progress on this plan,
um, number one thing we're going to see under administration is review it annually, >> right? >> You know, um, so, okay, and that's part of administering this plan and implementing this plan. I like it. Okay, let's see. What did we have for
>> when you do some um and just another comment when you're doing sort of the informed or um um uh intelligent kinds of adjusting to the policies and things that's where the that's where the narrative is going to be guiding as
well. I think when we look at >> image and we look at broadband in the same category, what exactly did did our community tell us? Mhm. >> so many years ago, five years ago or what have you or six years ago. >> So, use those tools in there as best you
can to sort back because I don't know that there's many of us that remember that well what we were thinking. >> Yeah, >> lots happened since then. >> Great. Trying to think if there's anything else. Um,
>> we've covered what I expected. Yeah. Is there anything I guess um we have a few we we can talk a little bit about next steps but was there anything else that like folks wanted to share before like just that we didn't cover that you want
to make sure that we know as we go back to our computers and >> I think I've got one um >> so I know we've we've got our zoning maps um those community gathering spaces that we devel that we talked about earlier
I would definitely like to see those upzone to allow more density closer to those areas. People want to live by schools. They want to live by parks. >> Okay. >> Okay. I think you have a pretty satisfied group here so far.
>> Great. Awesome. >> Got a few more minutes if you wanted anything else to touch. >> Yeah, I think the last thing we wanted to touch on was just kind of what to expect over the next few months. Um, so we are working on one of the one of the few engagement activities we do have
built into the scope are just some some press releases, some articles that can be used in lots of different ways. whether that's talking points for you guys to uh share as you're chatting with your colleagues and neighbors um or you know more formally sent to the newspaper
and and otherwise. So we will be drafting that to kind of inform the public about this effort that's underway. Um we will get that done yet this month and then we'll really like Robin had mentioned earlier we'll really get underway with the updating of the the content of the chapters uh in May
and June. So, we'll be looking at land use and transportation, mobility, infrastructure implementation, all of these things that we've been talking about this evening. Um, and that will get us to July 15th, which I believe is also your regular count uh regular
planning commission meeting date. We are going to notify city council of that workshop um and and notice it properly so that if city council, additional city council members decide to show up, they can. Um but but we'll be working towards
seeing you again uh July 15th to go over some of these edits we've been making um and and where things are starting to shake out. And question quick question then I know um it's more of a streamlined update of the comp plan but
in the public engagement will the public have an opportunity to weigh in um you know I guess the open house and public hearing of course but more >> yeah perhaps that press release could mention something you know about that we
um our city administrator also does um you know kind of monthly uh radio um segments as well so we'll mention that as well. But yeah, I'll talk with Bolton and Mink to see, you know, how, you know, if the public is interested in weighing in on it. Um, and perhaps at
that July 15th meeting we open to public for for public comment if they have anything that might be a good idea. So, >> I I think it's it's good the way we're doing it. So, I'm not questioning that. But I just want to make sure that, you know, the public doesn't feel like it's
a prescribed process where we've got, you know, I want them to have that opportunity and feel like they've been heard and and understand that this is more of an update of the previous one. >> We could treat >> Yeah, that's good. I got a quick question for James. >> Who's doing the social media for the uh for the city of Brinard at this point?
>> Um Tony does. So we can certainly put release some stuff on there as well. these guys with materials, things like this that that that can be shared with on social media. That's that's an avenue. >> It's free. >> Y, >> you know, one thing we could do is treat the July workshop kind of like the
kickoff of a draft because we'll have quite a bit done um after we have our conversation and and certainly, you know, public meetings open to the public for them to join in. And if you want to have, you know, comment time or anything like that during that workshop or otherwise, we can we can certainly
design around that. Um, but one helpful thing like before we get to the September joint formal planning commission, city council meeting, um, as we kind of work towards adoption, we could have, you know, we could easily have some things posted online. we could
create a really simple like online survey that people could just provide comments on um before we get to that adoption phase so that there is that opportunity for for input that isn't going to you know isn't going to take a lot of time to uh implement into the
process. >> Thank you. >> Good. Excellent. >> We can talk with James about some ideas we have. So, >> all right. I think this has been productive. Um uh unless Bale says any other thing, I would say let's have a motion to adjurnn. So moved. >> All right. Second. All in favor say I.
>> I. >> I say >> thank you, Robin and Sarah. >> Yeah, good job. Part: 2
Duval >> present. >> Gorum >> here. >> Grasula >> here. >> Peterson >> here. >> Ericson >> here. >> All right, let's do the pledge of allegiance again >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic
for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Better this time. I remember the words >> sometime. I'm just going to freeze. >> Yeah, the dumbest stuff like that. We can freeze that. All right. Looking for
an approval of tonight's agenda. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. I'll take that. Uh all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. We. We. We. We. We. We. We. We. We. We. We have an agenda. Looking to uh um uh for approval of the draft minutes for March 18th. Looking for a motion. So
moved. Second. Have a second. I'm going with with uh Justin. And with that, all in favor say I. I. >> I. Post. Same sign. There we go. With that, we are all the way up to six new business. And uh James, want to tell us about uh what we have?
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so Emily Fairbanks has submitted a request for a variance to expand the parking lot entrance at 411 Laurel Street with a 40ft distance to the intersection to allow for incoming and outgoing traffic. Uh the zoning code requires that driveway entrances be placed 60 ft from
intersections. Uh so a few notes from the findings. Uh this area of the city has been developed for multiple years. The block does not have an alley to provide for rear parking lot access. Uh the change in width of the entrance will not alter uh the appearance of the property. Uh the majority of off-
streetet parking lots in the town center district are wide enough to provide for vehicles entering and exit exiting the property. And uh city engineer um certainly did review this to see if he had any concerns with it and he does not have any concerns regarding this request. Uh so with the staff recommends
approval of the variance request as presented. Uh the applicant is also here if uh you have any questions. >> Very good. Any questions for James? >> I have a couple please. >> Um so James, looking at our off streetet parking 515-4-12
section G, the parking surface design standards. Um so looking at this, it looks like they're going to repave the whole area that's already paved. Um, per our design standards, they should have an 18 foot
stall length and a 24 foot wide aisle. Um, do we have to adhere to that or because it's existing, we don't have to. >> Because it's existing, they're able to replace what's existing. >> Thank you. Uh, my other question is, and I got to ask because we're looking at Fourth Street right there. Do you know if we're going to do a road diet anytime
soon on that? >> Uh, do what? a road diet and narrow the street there because that's >> um I am not sure >> and that's probably more a question for Jesse. So >> good. Other questions? I'd have one
question. Do we uh in the town center? Do we have any um landscaping requirements or anything like that for a parking lot in town center? >> There would be if it was a new parking lot. So pretty much all parking lots need that uh kind of a 3-foot landscape buffer around it. Um, city hall has that
right now, but uh, being that it's ex an existing parking lot, um, it doesn't need that requirement. >> Okay. Any other questions? If not, let's uh, let's do a public hearing at 604. I'd like to invite the applicant to come on
up, tell us name, address, and tell us about the project. >> My name's Emily Fairbanks. Do you want my home address? >> Any address. >> Okay. 710 North Thirdrd Street in Brainer. Um, so my husband and I bought this building um under HIT LLC. We own
Strength Studio LLC. So basically we're going to be leasing to ourselves. So it's a personal training studio. Um, right now we've been growing a lot. So we have about 60 to 70 people in and out in a day. And I would say in the morning
hours we do have probably um about seven clients that are coming in on a rotation every half hour. So that's where the double width of the driveway would be really huge for us. Otherwise, I think it's going to be very congestion um in
that passing. What else do you want to know? >> Well, I I I have a question. Are these uh classes that you're doing now, are they at this building or they at another site? >> So, right now, so we do all personal training sessions and right now we are at 510 Washington, so in the um Midtown
Center strip mall. Very good. >> Um, long as I've got some questions, uh, the other one would be, um, and you have purchased the building, I I presume at this point. Yep. >> U, what are the plans for, uh, remodeling and rehabbing the building? >> Yeah, so we're doing a complete renovation. So, right now, uh, my
husband and I, we gutted the entire building and, um, at this point in time, the framing is done, but we're just waiting on some funding, but then it's going to be a complete, um, redo on the inside and the exterior as well. the exteriors on my on my mind. I walk by
that property quite often and the stuckle is really all kind of fallen apart and so that would be great to see that. >> Um other questions for the applicant. >> I have one just clarification. Um so the plan shows 29 ft of um curb and gutter
removal and replacement. The actual entrance is only going to be 20 ft though, correct? >> I believe so. >> Okay. >> Yep. We had Anderson Brothers draw this up. So, uh, truthfully, I just told them to do what they do. So, I don't know all
the exact measurements off the top of my head, but that sounds correct. >> Is the studio going to be the only um uh tenant or are you going to have other tenants? >> Just that. Just us. >> Just us. And then there is the most curious little structure in the in the in the parking lot in the northeast
corner there. I think there was a radio tower on that. >> I think so. Yeah, we're planning to remove that. You gonna remove >> for Yeah, we're planning ideally to remove that so we can have another parking spot there. >> I was wondering about that because that looks like it's be one heck of a Yeah. >> job to get that out. >> All right.
>> A ballard. >> Oh, it it's Yes, it is. It is protecting that corner. Nothing's going to harm that corner. Um, good. Well, excellent. Um, I I think you've answered the questions for now. If we have any other questions, we'll let you know. But thank you. Appreciate
it. Do we have anybody else who would like to join the public hearing? Do we have anybody? Well, I should say, are we online? >> We are live. Do we have anybody online? >> Nobody online. All right. Well, very good. Then, um, as long as there aren't
any other uh immediate questions for the applicant, I will close the public uh form at 607 or public hearing at 607. >> So, >> I have a question for James. if I if I may. So, um, James, looks like we'd lose
a couple on street parking stalls. One or two? >> To me, I believe it just be the one. Um, and that's part of the variance request. Um, going south, uh, city engineer kind of realized that if you do push it further north, you potentially lose that on street parking spa space um to that
business that's there. So pushing it further south um kind of removes that parking space that's in front of um the proposed business. >> Okay. Yeah, I I have no issue with that. I mean it is a heavy corridor there with a lot of parking with obviously county there, but I think we can I guess I'd be
comfortable with actions already been taken to minimize that loss of parking. So >> other discussion? >> I just have a comment. Um, you know, it it sounds definitely reasonable what you're asking for. Um, I would hope that
you would look at our design standards and maybe conform to that voluntarily, add back in, you'd get 10 ft of green space in front and that'd give you some place to store snow in the winter. Um, but that's my only comment and it's purely a comment. I will echo that. I I
think um just any type of landscaping to improve that area will take the edge off it and will make your business look more inviting. And there there is a problem with uh with the where the snow gets piled up and where it melts and where it runs all over the place like that. And so uh that that might help to have a little bit of green space. So I would I
would echo that. >> Well, looking for Tad. >> Well, I'm sorry. Another comment too. I think actually as I'm kind of mulling this over in my mind a little bit further. I think actually with removing that one parking space, it'll actually maybe improve the sight lines. I think
we saw a presentation on that a couple months ago. Um, so I think it actually maybe even be a safety improvement. So, >> very good. Anybody prepared to make a motion unless you have any other questions or discussion? >> I'll make a motion to approve.
>> Second. >> Peterson and Dval is a second. Any discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor say I. I. >> I. Same sign. Next steps for our applicant, James. >> Yes. So, this will be heard at the next
city council meeting. Let me get the date here for you. Be April 20th here in the city council chambers at 7:30 for final approval. >> And should I? >> I can talk with you tomorrow. >> Yep. >> Very good. Thank you. And good luck with your project.
>> Thank you. >> All right. And that leads us up to uh up to new uh new new business, unfinished business. We have public form in the wrong place today. I just noticed that we have public form. It's not uh isn't public form usually right up front. We'll let
that slide. It's actually where it's supposed to be. Um so number seven, we're looking at to review the shoreline ordinance. James. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so from the last meeting, uh, Jake from the DNR presented, uh, planning commission reviewed some of the, um, I guess
requests from the DNR and asked staff to continue negotiating with them. Uh, so just kind of wanted to highlight some of the changes. Obviously, they were, uh, redlined in the document for your review. Um, so a few of the changes include allowing for a 35 ft primary structure in residential districts. Uh,
previous was 25. Allow for a guest cottage on a single family lot that meets lot size requirements. So, a little bit easier for properties to potentially do an accessory unit on those properties. Allow for 35% open space for plan unit developments uh
instead of 50%. Uh riparian properties may exceed 20% impervious surface with a no maintenance shore line buffer. So, that's what was proposed. Um staff did work with the DNR to kind of put a caveat to that. Um, so essentially impervious surface additions of 160 ft
or less per year are exempt um from that. So one of my concerns with that is somebody wants to put in an 8x10 garden shed, a very small project, something very reasonable, they're not then going to be required to um install a installer having no maintenance buffer. So people are able to do some kind of common sense
improvements to their properties, but if they're looking to do a large project to the property, that's where it would trigger um potentially that Nommo buffer. Um and then reconstruction projects um where uh demolishing a primary structure, accessory structure um over 400 ft or more per year on
repairing lots would also um require that shoreline buffer as well. Um and then all guest cottages um or guest quarters require that no maintenance buffer as well. Um so I did work with Jake. Um we had some good conversations and I kind of preliminarily um reviewed
it and kind of agreed on some of these things. Certainly, we want to hear planning commission's feedback um tonight to see uh what your guys's thoughts are on that. Uh so with that, uh I don't know if you have anything else that you'd like to add, Jake, or if you're just here for questions.
>> Me go get over here. >> I just want to say it's been a pleasure working with um Mr. Cranic on on the process. It's been a iterative process. It hasn't been a one-way street. And um
I think we've had some really good discussions and I was able to listen a lot to the planning commission's concerns and to James' feedback. So um you probably saw there's a few more gems in there that you uh didn't see before about adding some additional capacity
for we'll call it housing uh that wouldn't have existed. Um and we're we're pleased with what we've got. The DNR is pleased with what we've got on the screen so far, but I'm of course happy to answer any questions you you
may have about anything. I'll go back and sit. That's it. >> All righty. Very good. Any questions for staff or discussions? Yes, Mike. >> Mr. Chair, thank you. Um, Dire Crombick, um, let me find my my notes here. Um,
couple of comments on the appendix A on page 11. Um so you mentioned um the allowance for that 160 square feet exemption. Um, is that
do you get a do you get a cumulative buy before you got to say you've you've imper in other words I I put my 8 by10 shed in you know I wanted to have a 12x 12 patio I want to put an outdoor kitchen you know but I do one each year
is is do we at some point you know so we have the flexibility to be able to allow people to do reasonable things but if I were to to sequence things out I could hit a lot more imperviousness without actually then being required to to take take buffer standard.
>> Yes. Um thank you Commissioner Dval. So our thought process behind this we originally started with potentially a larger number with some type of cumulative effect. We thought for tracking purposes it would probably be easier easier over a one-year period and then just lowering the threshold to 160.
So could potentially somebody you know delay projects? Yes, they're probably not going to delay a large landscape project where they're adding patios and stuff like that. Um so I think that's how we kind of arrived at that 160 a little bit smaller number but then tracking wouldn't have to be done over 5 years or 3 years. Um so that was the
thought process behind it. >> Okay. So and I see a hand up >> real sorry real quick and just to be clear the tracking does not exempt you from blowing over the impervious. You still have to meet your impervious 25
you know whatever the percent is. It just would exempt from the trigger of the buffer. I I didn't know if you were wondering about, hey, do you get to go to 40% if you slow roll every year? Is that helpful? I don't know if that was your question. >> So, if you're at 20% and you want to put
a eight 8 by10 shed in, you get 80 square ft without a buffer >> and then the next year you could put in 100 square ft of a sidewalk. But if you're doing a larger patio or an accessory structure, it's going to
trigger it um in in that one year. >> Okay. All right. I think I'm comfortable with that. And Mr. Chair, another another follow-up question. Um same page. Uh what is it? G8A. Um we just have a a carryover reference
to a board of adjustments. We don't have one, right? So we'll want to probably housekeep those out. That's probably Crowing County language. So maybe a find and replace on those things and >> Yep. I can delete that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Very good. Thank you.
>> Well, are we I think we're I think we're getting there. James, would you like a resolution at all or you just good with the consensus or what would you like? >> Yeah, I think just a motion to um direct staff to uh go ahead and hold the public hearing at the next meeting. >> Yes.
>> One more one more question of staff. Um um director, I think we talked about the um public water wetland off of um Beaver Dam as a general development lake. C can you update me on what did we find out
about that? It's right there next to >> Let's make note of that, Jake. I didn't have a chance to reach out to Jake about that. Um so Mike Duval is referencing uh kind of that connected piece to um Gilbert Lake. It's listed as a general development, but it's a wetland when you
drive off of Beaver Dam Road. So, just want to make sure that it's appropriately listed. So, we'll do that before the next meeting. Okay. Thank you. >> That leads me to my question. I saw a reference to Whitney's Creek, but I didn't see a a reference to Whiskey Creek. The one that's done by Beaver Dam is commonly called Whiskey Creek.
>> White leaves up by the airport. >> Yeah. >> Uh, all right. That is a great question. Uh long time ago I real I I actually thought that was a public water. I was working with the crowing soil and water conservation district. It was referred to a lot as uh it's like whiskey creek
and I kept trying to find it in the public water inventory and I couldn't find it. I'm like what am I missing here? It turns out it is not officially a public water course meaning regulated by the DNR. It's actually I don't want to say just a flowage because it's an important conveyance for storm water and
it's been the crux of a lot of things, but it isn't a something where if you build near it, you you have structural setbacks and there's shoreline rules. It's it's just it's actually a flowage. It's just a a wetland flowage that conveys water, but it is not an official
designated public water course, but it is one of the few flowages that has a cool name. I'll give you that. Very cool name. There's a story there still >> and it's still important but it's just not designated. So there you go. >> So it flows like a creek. It looks like a creek but it's not a creek.
>> I mean honestly I I suppose if the city of Briner wanted to they could attempt to designate that as such locally and put restrictions on it. I I am certainly not proposing that but that is an option. Yeah. >> Thanks for the clarification. >> Yeah. >> All right.
>> Yes. I would Mr. Ericson >> move this item for public hearing at the C next council meeting. We >> have a motion and do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Do we have any discussion? >> I would like to just uh uh thank Jake for working further with the city on
this. I I agree. I think you have a really good product. So, thanks for for helping us through this and catching up our Shorland ordinance to to where our city is today. So, appreciate your time and effort on that. I'll echo that. Uh if we do this, this
has been a good process, a very a collaborative process. So with that being said, all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Same sign opposed. All right. There we go. We have a resolution. >> We'll talk soon.
>> All right. Now it leads us to our public forum. This is a time allocated for citizens to bring matters not on the agenda to the attention of the commission. Time limits may be imposed. Hall looks pretty empty. Anybody on the internet? Internet looks pretty empty. Uh I think I better open the public
hearing at 620 and then I better close the public format at 620. So there we go. >> 620.5. >> Yeah. Thanks, Mike. We called it. Yeah. Great. All right. Staff reports. >> James. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, just have a few items here. Um wanted to let the
commission know that the building permit for keepers um has been released. So they'll be starting that project soon. Um certainly road restrictions may play um a part in that, but uh building permit has been released for that one. So excited for that project. Um also the 210 reconstruction project um should be
beginning soon um midappril to sometime uh early May. Again, kind of uh based on road uh restrictions as well. Um so the first part of that the road closure and a lot of the work is going to happen right around Mil Avenue there and the kind of divert just around that area to
to start the summer. Um and then probably around the beginning of August will be kind of the larger section or the the main closure where um some of the local traffic will be diverted to Oak Street. Um so a little bit of disruption um at the beginning of the year and then kind of the bigger closure
um kind of happening later in the summer. Um, so that is everything staff has. >> Very good. Commission member reports. Dad, got anything? >> Um, not tonight. >> There we go. Justin, got anything? >> Yeah, I'm going to comment on 210 as
well. Um, ex It's exciting to see it start. Um, you know, we've had some closures over there a couple of days. I guess I'm not sure exactly if that's just pre-work. I have my fingers crossed that they are plowing in fiber, but maybe I'm wrong. Um, but it's exciting
to see that start and get the project underway. >> All right, Dave. >> Nothing, >> Mr. Deval. >> Nothing. >> Nothing. >> Yeah, >> dramatic nothing. That was good. Yeah. >> And I've got nothing. But I am looking for a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved.
>> Second. >> I'll second. >> We have a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> There we go. 22 minutes. Is that a record? >> It started at 601, I think. So I don't I think it's 21 minutes should be in the