##VIDEO ID:e-9vyr9w3ak## e e e e e is there a second for that second okay second for Chris so we do have uh two candidates for chair uh any other nominations any other nominations any other nominations nominations cease um all those uh in favor of Diane Johnson for chair say I I I there's two okay all those in favor for Chris say I hi hi all right uh I had one for sure Elin elstein okay well I don't think it's fair Diane you have uh been elected as chair for the Planning Commission and you can take over the meeting from this point to elect your Vice chair nominations for position of Vice chair I nominate Chris noach CHR not second I second it further nominations further nomin ations further nominations hearing none all in favor of electing Chris as our vice Chair say I I oose nay stain so moved any additions to the agenda if not is there a motion to approve the agenda move to approve the agenda second second um motion by Fox second by Douglas all in favor I I oos Nate so moved minutes from December 9th and especially our new people I want you to make sure you uh any questions on the minutes from December 9th if not is there a motion to approve approve motion to approve the minutes second second motion by dougas second by Fox all in favor I oppose nay moved is there anyone here for public input we have to read it public input is intended to afford the public and opportunity to address concerns of the Planning Commission public input will be no longer than 30 minutes in length and each speaker will have no more than 3 minutes to speak speakers May address topics relevant to the governance of the city speakers must sign up in advance and must provide their name address and topic they intend to address comments must be on topic respectful pertinent to City business and adhere to the applicable data privacy rules any speaker that violates these rules will be asked to sit down and if the speaker refuses to comply they may be removed from the hearing speaker shall not address top topics that are subject of a public hearing all such comments shall be made at the public hearing Planning Commission will not generally act on issues raised by the public input but may choose to schedule consideration of the item on a future agenda we have Ken Roar is are you for public input or yeah or the for the um conditional use on Timber Ridge yeah so that's that would be under the public hearing yeah oh never mind so we really don't have public input then no okay moving on to public hearings conditional use permit Midwest Building and Equipment outdoor sales lot Zach good evening guys um Ed Rymer the owner of the Canon Falls Mall is applying for a conditional use permit on behalf of Midwest Building and equipment for an outdoor sales lot located at the Canon Falls Mall um Midwest Building and Equipment sells highquality custombuilt sheds um since the applicant is going to be located in the B2 Zone they are required to obtain a conditional use permit under Section 152648 section I um I was told that the sheds would be stored in the southwest corner of the mall property set back off the Rancho local property line um I know Midwest Building has or they're currently operating in Hampton but they've been in Canon falls in the past so questions discussion I just was driving by and I saw there's already sheds there is that correct I was around 52 and saw some sheds in that particular area I'm just asking is it already taken care of or is that something that well that's they have to get approval tonight so suppose if they didn't get it they would have to take them remove them yeah I went just it was just the other day I went by and I'm like oh they're already there so what are we talking about I um I had a question too um about this um are are they actually planning on uh set up shop and selling them there or are they just storing them I mean you know what I mean right they'll put up a sign and all that that's what kind of but it's they don't actually have any like they won't they won't isn't going to be an office at the mall or anything but it's they store there but it's for for profit so I got you um they have a agreement with the with the mall property own owner he wants them to to be there so I think they're going to they signed a lease I think for a or they were going to sign a lease for I think it's a year or two so so that lease for a year or two it's intended to not just store them but essentially utilize it as promotional to where if somebody wanted to physically view one they go out there view it would that sale then occur via the mall location or Hampton it would occur via the mall location um so yeah there's sto they're not it's not it's it's not like they're stored there but it isn't like storage for it's a sales lot is what it falls under under our code so um they would be I guess to my knowledge you you go there you see something you like you give them a call and then they meet you down there and that's kind of how it works and reading through the minutes it seemed as though the the owner of Canon Falls mall would be responsible for maintaining and taking care of he he had to sign off on the on the development application because he is the owner so I guess yeah everything would fall back on onto him yeah so now I do look here at like it says outdoor sales lots it says number I4 is the entire sales lot in all street parking area is paved now when you look at the picture and driving by there it looks to me like it's a grass lot and that's where those were set up and I'm sitting here wondering if that's a viable situation because they're going to have this around year round there's going to be mud there's going to be everything else people are going to be treding through mud to look at the sheds is that something that we really want to have people do I mean I mean I know it's his lot but I mean is that something we want potential customers to do is have to walk through mud I guess there is an option to if like hey this is all fine but you know you have to you know you could approve it with the you know contingency that it has to be you know you have to move everything onto the actual pavement is an option but okay and this is a one to two year that's what you're saying but I've been told yes okay but and and something i' asked Zack earlier it would not really result in the additional tax revenue for the city okay I guess the thought process potentially being that those sheds would bring more traffic potentially to the mall and then thereby yeah it seemed like the the mall owner and who he talked to he said it seemed like yeah he was in favor for it so um that's probably the that's probably his end goal to get more people in that area and I guess I have no with um I guess I don't know anything about the comprehensive plan of Canon Falls in that area so I'd have to review that but I guess right now if it's a one to two year I guess I would approve it you know just because even though it doesn't bring anything in reality to the city one to two years isn't going to change too much for the future of the city and and maybe it would bring some additional traffic into town and maybe maybe they'd stop and eat yeah y um do we want to make a condition that they Park them on asphalt or they pave that area where they want to park them or just let it go and chair um like referencing the the ordinance I believe in number Zach correct me if I'm wrong but in I4 that it should be the entire sales lot and off street parking area is paav I think I think you guys should go ahead and make sure that it's it's paved because it is one of the conditions that falls under so I mean he could move them maybe off the grass or I think there's room back there when I was talking to Ed it sounded like you could maybe fit everything in a stack there so I think they'd still be able they should be should be kept onto a pave surface right meet the conditions so does he own I'm looking at the map does he own that is that the south side of the yeah so if nothing else he could put them on the South Side wouldn't you think would that be paved I don't know if that would be because there used to be what storage sheds there and I don't know if they're still there I'm not sure the main like route to get into Rancho Loco how people that's right that's the only way that's right do we have to then modify the conditional use permit to include they must be parked on pave surface right yeah you could do that and then for city council I could you know make it redo the resolution right so do we want to go ahead to approve or recommend to the city council to approve this with the caveat that they can only be parked on a pave surface I agree and you've got two resolutions in your packet Zach is very good to us he he includes one packet to recommend favor and one to deny so okay um so when you have this if you approve do you put the conditions somewhere or does he he will do it for the city council yeah okay I guess I would I would approve if the resolution of having it paved is followed so are you moving that we adopt parenting commission resolution 2025-the all in favor say I I I oos nay nay motion is car do you want to speak to that or no okay yeah okay I'm fine if I'm fine if they're on the grass that's all oh okay okay so uh second uh public hearing and I forgot to call for public input I was say we should oop did anybody have any public input on the okay well on on the the wall one I'm sorry that's okay kick me it's just generally a question the stor or the storage sheds that are already on the grassy area back behind the bank is this the same outfit or I mean I don't I those why are those that was my question why are those sheds there behind the bank I mean I don't know if that's the same outfit or not those have been there for a while but you're talking to ones along 52 yeah yeah that's the on that's not by the mall right it is same outfit or yeah okay I just was curious because those are on the grass yes that's a very good point um and sometimes I found that if something was existing before we passed an ordinance I don't think they have to bring it up to code until they do something so that yeah that would be um legal non-conforming is the is the word you know the description of that so it it wasn't it was legal before you changed the law therefore it's allowed to be maintained in a non-conforming state legally up until the point where something is changed um in this I I guess in Clarity just to help me understand too because I'm kind of new were you referring to the to the on the map the storage units on the south side of the mall are those those appear to me like as just storage units that people would rent and store their stuff in and what these are what we're talking about and allowing for is the sale of a storage building that somebody then could put onto their property distortion stuff in so I don't I don't know if the ones that those white ones on the south side of that property I have driven through there before I think they they appear to me like they're just to store stuff so yeah different I think just for me and Clarity I think that's a different topic I don't think that would apply to what we're discussing tonight about selling something in an outdoor lot okay um because those are you know probably least spaces for people to store their stuff in okay were were you referring to the ones that are out by the the bank and not these so she's not talking about the storage units that are on the property already if you go a little further south of town There's a bank okay and and it's by the Snap Fitness oh and currently currently there's a couple of storage sheds there that look like they are for sale for sale yes wow and I don't know if they're the same company is has them there as well or ever permitted to be there right I think that was what she was referring to okay I think that's something that we can look into for sure the storage unit there there that are outside there is also on inside of the same thing so I I'm I'm sure the storage units are all connected to the mall there they're they're inside the mall as well them stor but I think we're going even further are you looking down by Community Resource Bank yeah yes way way down south y so there's even more down there yeah wow but is that a separ that's a separate agenda to what we're talking about now okay I'm just wondering if it was the same outfit and those buildings are on grass yeah yeah and you know now now that you say that I applying yeah that rule to this one that's that's all good point I would just say it it's up to the mall owner because he's got the car but when they're bringing in them sheds they're going to unload them with a forklift there's going to be semi loads of them coming in there is the tar in shape to handle that but that would be up to the mall owner right damage is done so okay all right then you need to close the public hearing this topic anymore for public hearing on the storage said um outdoor sales L any additional public hearing input any additional move to close public hearing or do we need a motion on that no you close it at a certain time okay we need to redo our vote uh you probably should for context to make sure that you've Incorporated any public inputs okay so any other I mean Jesse do you want to say anything more about no I think Jesse I'm just asking why would you think grass is okay for them to be on um uh because it's the um because it's the owner of the mall and it's um I I I get that there's a uh written in the code that it has to be paved um but it doesn't this is a weird one in that it I don't believe they're actually going to be out there selling them to people um right it's it's it's it's just different because it's it's more of an advertisement right um you drive you drive by you see it you're like oh and then you see the phone number and you call and you get a price and and then then then maybe you go you maybe go there to look at one or you go up to Hampton to look at one that's why I don't really have a real issue with it being um I don't I don't think people are going to be driving out there um but I'm still and I'm still fine with the ordinance um the way that we've written it um to require them to do it to pave it um it'll probably it might change whether or not they do it um but also um I just wanted to go on record that I didn't care about it as grass right thank you yep so any further discussion before we do the official vote NOP okay somebody like to uh recommend we adopt Planning Commission resolution 2025-the pavement I agree second so move by Douglas I can by not all in favor I I iOS a so moved now I'll do it correct this next time public hearing on variance endress Canon Falls LLC driveway to service Timber Ridge Estate Lots public hearing is now open now you get talk yeah have discussion first yeah that you you can you can open the hearing you can discuss it as a board and then you can take public input if that's how you choose want to do usually just have the public but if you want to take the public input first you can do that as well so either one well that's how we've done it in the past mate we sometimes have conversations so all you have to do is introduce yourself and address then we're good to go Ken Roar 31029 County 25 Boulevard so my property is Right alongside the development um I've read about the variance in the paper talk to Zach just a little bit so I don't know a lot about it I'm concerned about the runoff especially the two lots on the downhill side from the Connector Road there uh there's been no catch basins you have a long run there it's going to be water runoff there's going to be wash and if it was tired and done properly there'd be catch basins and run off directed in a certain way but that water all comes down it's going to run down onto my property okay so you're south of there no cuz I know I went out there and looked at it when and the road comes down and you're and then goes off to this this way are you back here you back down where the water would be running off to well my house is up on 25 oh okay but my lot runs a long ways back into there okay my lot on the west side there goes back into the uh land that's being developed around it my property all right so I already have wash off run a runoff that has washed a lot of sentiment into my pasture from from the west side of the development that was happening before the development hasn't done anything to correct any of that and now they're starting on the east side with another place that's just going to wash down on um some of these variances that I hear have went in out there on that development I question why all the variances if it it should have been planned out better if it was going to be done especially them two lots or four Lots now and then where the future development will go from there we're talking about just four Lots but the development's going to go on from there so uh is this the time to start with it right or I don't want to see the same thing that's went on up at the high school there or by the high school with that development which I read about in the paper you know and stuff and people bought something and got a big Bill out of it later and stuff so let me if we require Paving of the driveway I know that right now they've got they're going to have to have private well private uh septic so there really won't be any will there be some kind of storm mitigation Incorporated in that I didn't think there I didn't think there would be no I think there potten potential for for gravel run off off those driveways if it was approved so I don't think I don't think there's anything in place at least at the moment so okay after so even if they pave it we might not get any storm mitigation in terms of keeping it off your property well if it's just paved yeah if it's not yeah the storm should it be a street that has curb and gutter and and proper containment of the water uh you look at that driveway coming down in there there's a on a heavy rain there's going to be a lot of rain come down there now you put a house in a garage and your apron out in front and where's all the water going to go on them lots and stuff so and it runs off onto somebody else's property not it don't stay there so and I agree with you because I out there looking that is a steep little slope to get down to those homes I was like wow yeah so you're basically surrounded by both developments that's what you're saying your property is I can say I got City on all four sides of me so okay all right thank you thank you thank you um my name is Don Lanning my address is 32443 64th Avenue way um and I do have some paperwork that I'd like to like share yeah give it to Zach you can hand it up we can just pass it down okay these ones all right all right so first off um I just want to state that I really have no other interest in this subject Beyond fair and reput Equitable application of local ordinances I honestly felt very sympathetic to the homeowners on 72nd Street when not only were they forced to pave the road in front of their house but also to have to pay for that project so that another developer could have benefit from the project without sharing the cost they were put into that situation by the lack of city ordinance enforcement developer requirements when that development was done several years back the requested variance for the Timber Ridge Development will basically do the very same thing with no protection for future land owners and unless otherwise presented tonight does not meet the requirements for granting a variance included below so when you look through your ordinances um first off there are some requirements for granting a variance the criter IIA for granting the variance a variance states that there has to be a particular hardship um to the owner if the variance isn't granted oh not mine I had to check I have that ring too um so first off there has to be some sort of hardship um that this variance will fix right and then the other thing is that there has to be something unique to the parcel of land and there also H that hardship any hardship that's presented cannot be based on finances it cannot be because he wants to reduce the cost of developing those lots um so my questions here just base on the basis of even granting a variance is how has the criteria for this requested variance been met what hardship will be avoided by granting this variance was this hardship created by the developer own actions like I.E lack of planning so you know he's in the middle of the winter and he wants to sell these lots and now he can't pave it because it's the middle of winter well that's a lack of planning that is the developer's fault for not getting things all of his ducks in a row kind of thing is this request based on finances or the desire to save money on the cost of developing these lots and that's a better financial gain so that is just the requirement for the variance now when you look at some of the ordinances related to subdivision developments um it says that um that let's see basically it says that there has to be a land dedication for any development I'm wondering has this developer meant any dedication requirements for this development um if so was it a land dedication did the developer donate some land for development of a green space for this development a cash deduction or a combination of both if it was a land dedication was it included in the final plat approval if it was a cash donation how much was the cash donation did it meet the requirements in this section that are outlined on the SI based on the size of the development which is like based on acreage has that cash donation been added to the Park's budget for the city of Canon Falls as its own fund not put into the general fund but into the parks fund there is no discretion or exception included in this Clause of your ordinances so that is a requirement and there is no discretion in whether that can be there or not just you know they have dedicated two Park areas okay within the development yes okay if you look at the map I can show them to you um that works one is actually like a playground park area and the other one is actually right uh west of these little Lots there and that's going to be hiking trails through the woods okay that covers that one thank you um then the next section is to the Crux of your variants as far as Paving the the streets um and basically it says all streets shall be improved with a concrete or binous surface streets to be sha paved shall be surfaced for a 7 ton axle weight capacity um blah blah blah blah the wear course of the binus shall be placed following the construction season um it can be finished up to two years from the date of the final plat approval um exceptions to this provision may be granted granted okay so yes the city council can grant exceptions but those exceptions really are subject to the criteria for a variance which again unless I unless there's something else that that's been presented as a hardship Beyond finances the criteria for granting a variance hasn't been met um Landscaping I don't know um so there is also a requirement for a landscape plan um for a development of three or more Lots um so again I have a question as to whether there's a landscape plan that's been submitted by this developer does it meet the requirements of this section with regard to tree species to be included has it been approved by a Forester which is one of the requirements in the ordinance was it included in the development package prior to final plat approval and this Prof this provision is also another one that says shell and there is no language to any exceptions so any idea on of pass minutes okay so um so again the last item here spefic this is another section so not only is the requirements for this variance included in one section it's included in two sections it's a very important idea that there are criteria for granting variances so to break that out exceptional and undue hardship what is the hardship that's going to be solved here um and if granting the variance it does say you can prescribe conditions to be met so my suggestion would be if this ordinance is going to be granted then the exception for the then the exception to Paving drives should be included on the deed to every one of those plots the variant should be granted in perpetuity to protect future land owners from having to pay for something that should have been done by the developer and should the city council change their mind on the need to pave these drives if city council changes this decision in the future it should be the responsibility their responsibility to pay for the needed Improvement so when you look at approval of variance it says specifically each and every one of the following apply Topography is there any physical reason just but it okay I think uni I'm almost done okay unique what exactly is so unique to these lots that was not applicable to the Lots on 72nd Street those homeowners were totally ignored in their pleas um to what the city was doing to them finances again what is the hardship Beyond saving costs and self-created hardship thank you thank you is there any other public input I just ask one more question sure y we just want to get home for the kickoff no what's that the Viking game so so what happens are these Lots up for sale already these four lots that yes what happens if somebody buys a house and their building building permit still goes through the city council then don't it or not no all right so somebody could build a house down there and we still don't know what we're even going to do at the driveways no well that's we decide tonight or we don't decide we recommend the city council um because if they if somebody tries to pull a building permit it doesn't comply with the regulations that would get flagged by goodu county or Zach all right thank you any other public input other public input other public input public input is closed we'll move on to the discussion on whether or not to Grant a variance to allow access via gravel driveways we can either approve it or recommend deny and send it off to city council I have to say I drove around I looked at this and then I looked at the maps and the biggest problem I see is on County Road 24 as you go south that is not city property so if any new unless City unless map that I saw didn't show the City prop property properly everything there is whatever that might be County whatever it might be along 24 and so the people there unless they change everything the people there would be able to put in a gravel road and that would stay with the whole Contour of 24 but what you're saying I agree with so that's what my concern when I first saw that I'm like how can this can be this little thing could be City but then everything South future buildout could be anything they wanted to and so I understand where he's coming from and that's something that I don't I can't I can't agree to this variance at this point just because I feel that there's a lot of things I look at that just doesn't make sense to me after looking at it and everything yeah I tend to agree I mean I read it over and to your point I think this is on the developer right I mean they knew they were going to put estate Lots in there they knew what that you know property looked like and I think you know they've run up to a point to where perhaps they're looking at margin and it's not looking as you know advantageous as they thought it would because they have to add in you know pave driveways but I I think that's that's not something the city can put on future residents right that that needs to go on the developer itself right and to suggest that the future residents that'll be their responsibility now you're run into the issue of number one if it's doable right financially from the residents and secondly you're going to have what essentially four different residents potentially hiring four different contractors to potentially put in four different drives I just it's it's the developer responsibility you know according to city code as it is right now so to Grant the variance just based on the fact that the developers saying it's a it's a financial strain well that's that's unfortunate for them but that's the reality of it right so you know building to the cost of you know the the future sale price of the home not put the burden on the future homeowner Jesse comments yeah I I understand um I think um if this gets uh turned down by the city council that um all that's going to happen is that these four lots are going to be sold um more expensively right um so it's going to it's going to make the developer um it's going to be slightly more difficult um for them to sell these Lots um because instead of being a whatever price it's going to add another 40 50 100,000 to the sales price right because they're because they're just going to cover their costs by what they can sell it for it's just going to make their um margins tighter um right um I don't have um I don't I wasn't in when I think when this when when this was sold um I know that the developer got uh quite a deal um I think for for at least the one area I don't know about this estate spot if if that was also part of that deal or not um but yeah I'm fine with um having the developer and the potential new homeowner you know as as long as as long as everybody knows up front right and if you're going to develop it and you're going to sell the lot and here's the house and here you know you know what the price is going to be um when you have to retroactively do stuff that becomes painful because now you're forcing um homeowners later potentially to Fork over you even more money to put in a an approved you know surface so thank you yep and and going back a few years uh when there was another request to uh get a variance for another property that wanted to have gravel driveways the both the Planning Commission and the city council uh denied that application so our policy has been to say if this is the city code ordinance and we follow it and at some point you know all of that area around there will probably be Ann nexted into the city which case everybody will have to have PID drival that's what I was wondering but that's way in the distance so any further discussion it sounds like everybody's kind of leaning towards denying the application would somebody so that would be Planning Commission resolution 20 25-4 recommend that the conditionally or the U variance for gravel driveways be denied somebody like to move that I'll move it second second motion by dougle is second by act to deny the application all in favor I I I oose nay staying so moved we will send that on to the city council uh discussion change of Planning Commission time so Zach do you want to yeah I think I can so it sounds like there's might be a conflict with people coming from the library board to Planning Commission so it sounded like um might be in the best interest of the commission to move the time back from 6:30 to 6:45 um and I'm not entirely sure Library board's going to change their Monday meeting date oh really yes okay their meeting I guess we can that provides more input than we got so yeah they they are they are uh because of the conflict with both finance committee and Planning Commission you know 5 5:30 6:30 uh they are going to move their meeting to first third or fourth Monday or at least they're considering that so okay I would think we could wait on them at this point sure then we then I think no further action on that at this time but thank you for considering them any other things anybody wants to bring up motion to adjourn second all in favor I I iour