##VIDEO ID:KaklGS5fJk0## [Music] we'll call to order the Planning Commission meeting for Thursday January 16th 2025 please stand and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance remove your hats please I pled to the flag of the United States of America and to the for stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all and Mr platzner will you please come and administer couple alsoo office please absolutely chair thank you Mr chair so I will have one by one the new planning Commissioners if you don't mind coming up and standing by me and I'll administer the oath of office for you starting with commissioner ronak commissioner ronak I'm gonna have you repeat after me I Paul ronak do Paul oh I'm sorry I'll I'll I'll finish the sentence and I'll put the microphone over toward you sorry I Paul Rak do no one second let me try that one more time okay I Paul ronak do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States I Paul RC D swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Minnesota and the constitution of the state of Minnesota and discharge Faithfully the duties of the office of planning commissioner and discharge duty of the officers of the Planning Commission for the city of Rapids for the city of Rapids in the county of Anoka in the county of Anoka and the state of Minnesota and the state of Minnesota to the best of my judgment and ability to my best of my judgment and ability thank you welcome commissioner thanks all right and commissioner treml if you could come up I'll administer the oath to you as well do you want to be Anthony Dremel or Tony Dremel Tony Tony okay I Tony tremel do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States I Tony tremel do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Minnesota and the constitution of the state of Minnesota and discharge Faithfully the duties of the office of planning commissioner and discharge the duties Faithfully of the office of the planning commissioner for the city of  Rapids for the city of Rapids in the county of Anoka in the county of Anoka and the state of Minnesota and the state of Minnesota to the best of my judgment and ability to the best of my judgment and ability welcome commissioner treml thank you thanks thank you now Mr pler we please call the RO commissioner noblock I here commissioner no here commissioner treml here commissioner Casey here commissioner schy here commissioner ranak here chair Schwarz here all right our first order of business for the evening is to adopt our agenda CH schwar commissioner n i motion that we adopt the agenda for the meeting tonight second second motion by NA block second by Casey any additions or Corrections hearing done all in favor I I I opposed and the agenda is adopted and with one up on the agenda for the minutes oh for the minutes sorry yeah thank you I'm moving on now we'll go with the approval of the minutes of our November 21st 2024 meeting Mr chair I move that we accept the uh approval of the minutes of the November meeting I'll second it motion by Casey second by noblock any further discussion or Corrections hearing none all in favor I I opposed and now we'll have the obain obain by commissioner Smoky all right our first order of business this evening is to elect uh Vice chair uh so far we have interest shown by commissioner schoki anyone else interested in serving as the vice chair any nominations for anyone else Mr chair I I would move to nominate Mary schmi for the position of Vice chair second motion by Casey second by note to nominate commissioner schoki any other nominations hearing none all in favor of commissioner schoki as Vice Chair say I I I opposed and commissioner smoki congratulations on Vice chair thank you thank you Mary next we have considered the adoption of Planning Commission policy for 2025 Mr platner thank you chair Schwarz I don't have a presentation for this item the Planning Commission policy for 2025 is identical to the Planning Commission policy for 2024 um so I'm happy to answer any questions if the Planning Commission has any but I don't have any presentation for this all right thank you commission any questions and any motions chair Mo commissioner na I I make the motion that planning commit uh Planning Commission adopt the 2025 Planning Commission policy on rules and orders commissions commission procedures and ethics second motion by n second by schoki any additions or direct discussion hearing none all in favor I I oppos and that carries next we have our first planning case for the year planning case 25-1 design flexibility for Club Car Wash 2550 Rapids Boulevard Mr CL plan commission the first item I have before you tonight is the request for design flexibility for the Club Car Wash is proposed uh or is going forward at 2 request is from contractor Lee and Associates um so the club car wash the location is the former Rapids Express Car Wash at 2550 Rapids Boulevard so that's Rapids Boulevard between xavis and direct River Drive um so this was an existing car wash in the city that um the chain Club Car Wash did buy and they're working on remodeling the building to match the Aesthetics and the design of the Club Car Wash chain um to match the other club car washes uh in the Twin Cities metro area so Club Car Wash did submit building permit applications for the changes to the building and a few small changes to the site a site plan was not required for the updates that they're making um and the reason site plan approval was not required for these updates is because within the River Rapids overlay District site plan approval by the Planning Commission or city council is only required if the updates are to more than 15% of the site or more than 15% of the building and what the applicant is proposing is less than 15% of the building or site with the exception of the um exterior facade of the building which they are planning to update to match the other Club Car Wash locations in the Twin Cities and because this is the continuation of an existing Car Wash use on the site um this is is an an approved use on the site since the existing Car Wash um was not vacant for more than a year thus the approved use did not lapse so all the applicant is requesting as part of this site is design flexibility and what they're proposing to do is to paint the red brick on the building black and white um which does uh not meet the letter of the River Rapids overlay District standards which does require um 30% of the of any facade facing uh Rapids Boulevard to be brick um and staff were considering that because this is an aesthetic requirement in a section of the River Rapids overlay section of the zoning code primarily concerned with aesthetic requirements and because the proposed painting would eliminate the brick aesthetic that is um seen as the intention of that section of the River Rapids overlay um staff considered this to be something that required um flexibility approval and thus um staff recommended that the applicant uh app for flexibility which requires a public hearing recommendation by Planning Commission and then approval by the city council so I have here on the presentation what the um Car Wash building looked like as Rapids Express Car Wash so you can see that much of the building is a red brick facade and this is in keeping with the aesthetic requirements of the River Rapids overlay district and what I have here is a rendering um showing what the proposed Club Car Wash um design would look like so it's the same brick along the building but painted black and then white next to the windows instead of keeping with the red brick uh aesthetic so just a little overview for the new planning Commissioners especially within the River Rapids overlay district there are a lot of um zoning code standards and requirements that are very prescriptive very specific and have to do with Aesthetics um but along with that within the River Rapids overlay applicants can request flexibility from those requirements meaning that the applicant can choose to request uh from the city council um permission to not meet some of the requirements within those districts so design flexibility is one of those types of flexibility in order to be approved for uh design flexibility um the applicant does have to meet four requirements um which I have listed in the staff report and I do have up here um I'm not going to go over all of these requirements in detail but uh I am open for questions if the Planning Commission does have any questions about whether what being proposed meets the requirements but staff do believe that all of the requirements are met by the proposal and do Rec commend approval of design flexibility for a painted brick facade uh in this case thank you that's all I have for a presentation thank you commission any questions for Mr platner chair Schwarz commissioner noock uh question for planner uh platner uh how many club uh Car Wash locations are there currently in operation in Minneapolis or in this Twin Cities thank you commissioner noblock I don't know the exact number that's something that the applicant might be able to speak to um once they they have a chance to come up I believe it's probably something around four or five to my knowledge okay thank you Mr platzner the roof of the old car wash was blue I see looks like it might be black now is that going to be painted black or are they changing the material to Black metal roofing or Thank You Cher Schwarz um that's another question that I would direct to the applicant I don't know whether they're painting or replacing the roof I believe the materials are going to stay the same but just the color is going to change all right thank you any other questions for Mr plon Mr chair no just of curiosity with the um the brick exterior that that requirement it looks like buildings on both the East and the west side of the building have been painted gray the brick has been painted gray so is it because of the the scope of what whatever they're doing that they're requiring this flexibility or it seems to me that some people are just painting it I mean is there an enforcement mechanism thank you commissioner no um I'm I'm not familiar with uh the buildings to the to either side of this club car wash having been painted I guess it was my impression that those were gray brick buildings rather than painted red brick buildings so I I I don't know if I can speak directly to um those buildings but generally if someone wanted to update the facade to remove the brick aesthetic from a building that had brick aesthetic we would require a flexibility request um code enforcement is done on a complaint basis so if staff are made aware of something like that we would generally um take code enforcement action um however I admittedly am not aware of of anything that was done on either of those buildings that would require code enforcement action so I I would I would have to look thank you any other questions anything the petitioners would like to add so please come to the microphone give your name for the record hi there everybody uh my name is Michael leig I work with Robert lean Associates for the engineer who um kind of helped facilitate this development we're also the engineer for Club Car watch uh for pretty much all of their Midwest projects um just to I guess add a little bit um the the main reason that they're looking to kind of have this this painted aesthetic is sort of a key point of their business model um kind of like the name implies they're a Club Car Wash so they do part of their business is selling memberships that you can use at any Club Car Wash location so being able to pick out a Club Car Wash to say oh I can use that one even though it's not the one that you would normally go to is sort of a a Big Boon to their business model um just to address a couple of the questions I think were brought up I think it was how many are in the Twin Cities or was it how many operational today in the Twin Cities uh um how many are operational yeah right now I want to say we have two operational in the Twin Cities um we do have plans for excuse me an additional three that are approved um Club Car Wash has started their push into the Midwest they're based out of uh Missouri so they've started a push into the Midwest in the last probably since 2021 starting in Wisconsin branching out out of Minnesota and Illinois that's happened in the last year or so so um a couple in construction the intention is to have these um dotted around probably over the next 10 years an expansion push especially around the around the Twin Cities in the metro area around there so um more to come on that uh and then I think the other question was on the painting of the roof or replacement of the roof to my knowledge the intention is to replace the roof with exact same material or very similar material um I do not believe their intention is to paint the roof black um I could reach out and get an answer from that from the architect um or the Civil site do coordination from that perspective so um if that was something that I would imagine if they were looking to change the roof they would have applied for that as part of the building permit process so um just to add a little context there thank you Mr chair uh commissioner Casey um sir um so it looks to me like metal roof right is that going to M you're going to maintain a metal roof that would be my understanding if it is a metal roof right now they would they would replace it with a metal roof um just black or or yeah that would be that would be what their intention is or they would submit a permanent application to change that sure um and just to be clear the painted facades are are still brick they're just not the red brick anymore correct um going to be colored typically club car wash uses um they don't usually buy uh prior car car washes and convert them they have a very specific kind of like layout that they like to do but when they're in a very useful location and this car wash was in really good shape they essentially they'll strip out the internals and put new uh kind of their corporate standard stuff in there um but they typically would do like white split face Stone like a concrete masonry unit and then a dark black gray kind of like a charcoal split face masonry unit um matching these colors the intention is just cuz it's red to to paint over it just because it's good brick they just don't want to tear the building down thank you but it will still be brick yeah okay Mr chair commissioner smoking so um since this is for aesthetic purposes nothing structurally necessary for the um for you to have this as a car was what would the alternative be if this was um not approved since it's just painting it would it be a cleaning of the brick would it be would would there be an option since there's only two operating car washes in the Twin Cities today it's um not a known um you know um um layout I guess or um you know print colors and so forth right now so what would the alternative be um the alternative would I mean obviously if it was denied there's not a whole lot they can do I think they would probably look at um raising the building and eventually and replacing the building with their preferred split face block I have no idea uh their financials behind that obviously that would be a much more costly very expensive Venture they would not be doing that anytime soon uh they would probably just leave it as is and try to increase marketing around it um I I see your point that you know if there's only a few operating right now the brand recognition isn't there but I would from their perspective it's even more important now to say this is kind of our first impression our first for into this they want to make sure everybody kind of sees them as these red and black colors so that as they continue to grow and populate the area around there it's a recognizable brand you mentioned red and black or is it white and yes so I should it is white and black they their colors are that red black and white so correct though this is this is white and black okay yes yep thank you any other questions for petitioner all right thank you we may have more later thank you yep all right at this time we need a public hearing so I will open a public Hearing in planning case 25-1 design flexibility for Club Car Wash at 2550 Rapids Boulevard anyone wish to speak to this public hearing anyone wish to speak to this public hearing seeing none close a public hearing limit comments to the commission commission Mr chair commissioner Smokey um I'm inclined to approve this for a couple reasons the number one being is that um not only I understand the economics of the painting is definitely less expensive but um you know if the alternative is that they would end up being tearing this down now you're talking about you know polluting landfills all that kind of stuff all that material has to go away and if they're a able to um you know use the structure as is and improve it um you know uh and and get the branding that they need doing painting I don't see this as a major issue Mr chair commissioner Casey um I would agree with that um I hadn't thought of the demolition of the building but that's a very good point I think the um you can tell that that it is brick maybe not the black part but the white part still maintains that and it's a really nice look it's very sleek and fits their brand um so I'm inclined to approve it also chair SCH commissioner no um I agree with my fellow Commissioners but for a different reason um it is a network it is a branding issue and um I think it it's not a big ask it's quite minor it's utilizing and existing and um the of course the interest the the quality of the facility and that it was purchased uh I think it's a good addition even though there's still brick just to meet in accordance with their branding model of black and white um I I think it it's a it's a very uh low threshold ask um in the port overlay area that I would be I would agree with the planning with the uh to approve it Mr chair commissioner no I would make a motion and plan case 25-1 that we approv the design flexibility for the painted black facade for the club car wash Mr chair second commissioner Smoky we're recommending approval correct we're not actually approving yes it's recommend approval of the design fle got it thanks second motion by NA second excuse me motion by no second by NA block any further discussion hearing none all in favor say I I I opposed and that motion carries this is a recommend ation by the Planning Commission and a decision by the city council at their February 4th meeting thank you and good luck thank you for your time everybody all right our next case is planning case 25-2 and 25-3 of PUD and preliminary plat for  Rapids town homes at 10701 Butternut Street Northwest September Sun architecture LLC Mr plater thank you Mr chair members of the Planning Commission so what I have before you tonight is a request for a plan unit development um so that's a rezoning to a plan unit development overlay for the site and a preliminary plat for a 34 unit town home development at 1071 Butternut Street so the location is a 3.8 acre vacant property that was formerly owned by Peace Lutheran church and was used as a community garden for the church um and this is at the intersection of University Avenue and Butternut Street um with the intersection of Northdale Boulevard and University Avenue being just to the northeast of the site um the site does have Frontage on University Avenue and Frontage on Butternut Street um so there would in theory be access possible on either University or Butternut however the applicant is proposing access only on University Avenue for this site so this is a site that's currently zoned office and the office zoning District does not allow any residential use so a rezoning would be required for res use to be approved on the site and what's being proposed is that the site be rezoned such that a planned unit development overlay be placed over the existing office zoning so the applicant is not requesting that the office zoning be changed but simply that a PUD overlay be placed over it so what a PUD does is it allows the city to approve uh use and standards that are not normally permitted in the underlying zoning District so long as they um abide by the planned or the future land use designated in the 2040 comprehensive plan so because the land use in the 2040 comprehensive plan for the site is commercial mixed use which is a mixed use land use and does allow for residential uses a PUD over the office zoning in the site would match and meet the land use requirements in the 2040 comprehensive plan so what the Pud would do would it would allow a use that isn't otherwise allowed in this uh zoning district and it would also established standards that that use would need to meet because the office zoning District standards are not um written to to uh accommodate a residential use staff are proposing that the MDR or moderate density residential zoning standards um are adopted as part of this PUD for the site so that the site would need to meet the moderate density residential zoning standards I know that's that's a lot of of zoning lingo all in one long paragraph so um when I finish with this presentation if any of the Commissioners have any questions on how a PUD works or how we're applying it or proposing to apply it in this case I'd be happy to answer those questions and this shows the land use for the site which is commercial mixed use so for the Commissioners that were on the commission back in 2014 you'll remember that uh a similar application was brought forward in the spring of 2024 um and uh the proposal was for 34 unit Town Home Development um a couple of the changes were that the the town homes then were U proposed to be aligned to the east of the site uh whereas now they're aligned toward the west of the site the proposal back 2024 had access proposed on Butternut Street to the south of the site whereas the current proposal is um access only on University Avenue and the earlier proposal was to rezone the site from office to moderate density residential whereas now they're proposing a plan unit a planned unit development overlay um back in the summer of 2024 the um Planning Commission did recommend approval of the rezoning of the site from office to MDR however it was denied by the city council uh and the city council does have a lot of discretion over approv approval or denial of rezoning um and the primary concern of the council was that the proposed access off of Butternut Street would put too much traffic on smaller residential streets such as Butternut Street and that a better use for the site would be uh for residential with access only on University Avenue since University Avenue is a County Road whereas Butternut Street is a city street um in order for the applicant to put an access on University Avenue they needed approval from Anoka County um and the applicant was a ble to work with the NOA County to design an access that uh did receive preliminary approval from the NOA County highway department and they did provide a letter um stating as such so the revised application uh moved the town homes to the west side of the site to provide room for Access off of University Avenue and then put a wrin write out only access on University Avenue um as well as changing from a rezoning to from office to MDR to PUD overlay and the reason for the Pud overlay um was that uh at its hearing uh for the original site back in the summer of 2024 for the original site plan or sorry the original rezoning the council was concerned that rezoning to MDR would allow a town home use by right without the discretion of the council to be able to deny the use if they thought that the use would put too much traffic on Butternut Street um and the only way or one of the best ways to make sure that the rezoning was tied to the um site plan and the preliminary plat would be to do so as a plan unit development so with the approval of a planned unit development if this development were not to go forward um a new PUD overlay would need to be approved for any future development whereas had the site been rezone from office to MDR uh a town home development would be allowed by right in the new MDR zoning district and there would be no ability for the city to um have any discretion over where the access for the site were to be located th a future developer would be able to put the access on Butternut Street so the the Pud provides that security to the city um that no future developer would have um blanket ability to to do such a development so staff are proposing that the plan unit development um require the plan unit development overlay require the development to meet all standards for the moderate density residential district with one exception um staff are proposing an exception for the setback for the parking and drive so in this case that's the guest parking on the east side of the site from the street right away so the MDR District requires that be 20 ft what's being proposed is a 15t setback for the um guest parking from the street right away that would make the guest parking um in actuality the setback would be about 30 ft from the curb of University Avenue um but only 15 ft to the RightWay line there would still be landscaping and a sidewalk buffering that guest parking from the curb um the applicant did meet meet all other MDR standards um in the application um with the exception of a couple that are um noted in the conditions and that are addressed in the conditions notably that the um children's play area that's being proposed um have details shown and the applicant hasn't yet shown the detail of the children's play area but that will be required before any building permits can be approved so I did include um The Matrix of all the MDR standards this is also included in the um staff report in the packet I don't want to go over all of these but if there are individual questions on them I'd be happy to answer those and then this slide here I've done my best to um include several layers of the site plan that's being proposed as part of the Pud um and they're a little bit hard to see because they're north south orientation versus the the landscape orientation of the screen it was hard to get a good zoomed in view of the site plan but what they're proposing is um six town home buildings five of which would have six units each and one would have four units um the children's play area would be on the northwest corner of the site along the very Northern edge of the site would be an easement dedicated for the church to continue using as a community garden so the community garden use would not be eliminated entirely um dumpsters are proposed uh in between units two and three and or sorry buildings two and three and buildings four and five and those would be used by all units on site each of the units would have a garage uh with two vehicle spaces for parking and then uh multiple G guest spaces would are also included on the site along the Eastern edge of the site meeting all the parking requirements for the site and then the access to the site would be in the middle um going from north to south and there would be a right in right out only access um onto University Avenue and with the Landscaping plan in the middle you can see that the the proposed Landscaping does include trees and um Shrubbery all around the site and in between the buildings and this does meet the Landscaping requirements required in the MDR District um this is a an elevation showing the building facad so they would all be three story units um with garage doors um leading to two car garages on the back and then man doors on the front um there would be windows on the ends of the units so the um end units would have um windows on on three sides rather than just two sides of the units and then here's a rendering kind of showing a little bit better what the units would look like and last I included this image showing um potential traffic movements going into to and out of the site um so the the red arrows that I showed uh show southbound um university traffic entering and exiting the site so a turn lane would be added on University Avenue allowing vehicles to slow down and turn right to enter the site they would also need to turn right out of the site for any Northbound traffic um Northbound traffic accessing the site on University would need to make a u-turn at University in Northdale and then head Southbound on University to access the site and any any Northbound traffic heading out of the site we need to First first head Southbound on University and then make a u-turn on um the intersection of University and Egret to head Northbound on University um there is still uh a likelihood that some traffic exiting the site would use Butternut Street if one were traveling westbound or attempting to travel westbound on Northdale Boulevard they might turn South out of the site right onto Butternut Street and use Butternut Street to access Northdale Boulevard and then turn left on Northdale um but staff think that most other traffic directions would would make other movements and would likely not use Butternut Street um either accessing the site or leaving the site no public comments were received by staff ahead of the meeting and um with that staff are recommending approval of the proposed plan unit development the conditions listed here are all standard conditions for a multif family residential development there's nothing really unique here and staff are also recommending approval of the proposed preliminary plat so that's all I have for a presentation thank you thank you commissioner any questions for Mr platner Mr chair commissioner smoki Mr patner can you go back to the um the yes right here so what about traffic that is coming to this area from the south so we're approaching the town homes what is the anticipated they're going to be taking a U-turn then at Northdale Boulevard and then coming back down that's a lot of traffic thank you commissioner Smoky the two um possible uh traffic movements coming from the south would be either to make a u-turn at University in Northdale to or to turn left at University in Butternut go up butternut turn right on Northdale to go Eastbound and then right on University to go southbound so the the u-turn at University and Northdale is much more likely um staff have had conversations with the NOA County highway department who do have control over both Northdale Boulevard and University Avenue and the highway department um did approve uh that option as they believe that the traffic impact would be low enough that this would not be a large a large increase in the number of cars heading Northbound on University and making that U-turn thank you commissioner R okay I'd gone to the site and a lot of the things you indicated are correct uh it looks like they may be a left turn off of University possibly you sort of indicate here you have a uh oh I see you that's a right turn line right okay um the biggest impact here is probably going to be the people that live to the west of it and in looking at the site it probably was set up at one time to be a school by the uh Church uh eventually it's going to be something the question is what uh looking at this plan versus a solid building that covered the entire site would probably be less attractive than what there's now where you can see through these buildings the traffic the parking is on the University side you've got garages which means you're not going to have a lot of cars sitting there uh we did talk about Landscaping on the west side I did have a conversation with you and I had thought that a nice privacy hedge of some sort would be uh beneficial to the residents there uh this whole intersection is very involved there's all kinds of type of activities be it apartment buildings a strip mall a church uh the intersection itself is very it's oblique uh it's not a straight uh 90° turn and in looking at the best use of this site this is probably as well as you're going to get to it the city's already gone through it the entrance off of University during construction is going to be very involved cuz you're going to have to put a tracking pad there and bringing in the heav equipment and things uh the state's going to have to probably or the city's going to have to work on or the county rather uh the traffic that's going to be used by when they bring in the big semis they drop off their equipment the biggest impact to the people there on the west will be when they grade it once the grading is done most of the things will be uh less intrusive to them such as the dust and things like that I hope the developer is in good terms with the church because it would be very good of them to be able to use some of the parking to make sure that they take off their employees cars and be able to use the parking lot during the day uh of course this is uh between them and the developer looking at the alternatives to the people that live there and this is probably as good as you're going to get we don't know what else might be proposed but uh based upon what's there and the fact that what might have happened or what might fut happen I think this is as good as you're going to get right now thank you anyone else Mr chair commissioner casy so Mr patner for this um traffic picture that you have up is there is it allowable to take a going northbound on University can you make a left on to Butternut there's no median right at that portion is that right right I can't tell it's a light commissioner Casey yes I believe the median ends just north of butternut and there is the ability to take a last you could take on Butternut from University yes but you can't access the site from there you'd have to go around and come down Northdale and then down University correct okay all right that and I I had one other question they'll the county will do that um oh that right turn lane they they'll account for that on University commissioner Casey the developer would construct the right turn lane to the county standards okay so that's there but but there's room for it correct okay all right well thank you Mr chair commissioner Mr pner have we also taken into consider uh into consideration um foot traffic that might be going from one side of University to the other um with this development to go to the shopping centers there and so forth are we comfortable with the intersection supporting that foot traffic again because of the unique shape of that intersection everything I just want to be clear commissioner schoki thank you yes um staff are comfortable with uh the uh foot traffic uh at that intersection it is it can be a difficult intersection already staff do not believe that the increase in traffic that would be making u-turns on either either the Egret or the Northdale uh intersections would be enough to cause significant uh increased danger to any foot traffic using those intersections um yes that's generally my response thank you Mr chair I want to clarify one thing on the on the traffic flow situation um that there there is a median at Butternut Street so it's not possible to turn a left from University location we really have to go to the signal on thank you all right thank you commission any other questions for Mr platner at this time all right anything the petitioners would like to add please come to the microphone give your name and address for the record good evening my name is Michael coun I live in Minneapolis uh 731 East 51st Street in Minneapolis um I am the architect uh for this project but I want to be clear that we are applying on behalf of a gentleman named Dan Carlson who is the developer and current owner of the uh the pro the property um we do have updated renderings I think the renderings that were submitted were um uh maybe not up to the standard we'd like to present so so if it's okay I can distribute those or I know Max I sent you an email um is there a way we can get those up on the screen I do that okay speak up speak up yes okay yeah so this is our second time um applying for you know these Town Homes uh the first time of course we had access that was going south onto Butternut uh apparently traffic in this area in the neighborhood is is a problem already and um the neighbers are very concerned that the traffic was only going to increase with this development um we have done a parking traffic study and it found that there was going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 250 trips per day that were going to be generated from this development so that's not a ton um in fact if it was an office or a medical facility the trips were likely going to be much higher than that um so you know obviously we were denied by Council the first time and so we've done the work you know met with the county along with help of City staff here and I think we've got a good proposal I think we've eliminated most of the traffic concerns from the community and um you know we're looking for you know to do a really a nice development really a First Rate development um all the materials that we have we've got some samples of the materials are are nice materials materials that are going to have a 20 or 30-year warranty we're not putting vinyl siding up on this building it's going to have brick metal panel uh fiber cement you know siding things like that um and so I think I'm very happy with the design and I think it's going to be a a nice project any questions commission any questions from practitioner Mr chair Mr n a question question on the children's play area looks like there's three of them that are showing up in my Legend here are there two other ones that aren't in the north there's only one area um it's up the northwest side you know adjacent to the church um yeah so there'll be one children's play area there's just two others that show up in this that and on the fourth town home down this the bottom one that shows the play area and the items that I got so just one to clarify yep just one on the northwest side um just a point of clarification that children's play area doesn't extend into the Church's Garden area it sits right on the on the edge of let me clarify y home home when the parcel changed hands one of the um conditions of sale was that a certain percentage of the the old parcel would go to back to the church as an easement so they could have a little community garden uh I don't know what the dimension was that it's 80 ft or something like that North the South Dimension and correct the play area would go just to the South of that easement or the property that's being given back to the church or the church is using correct yeah and then west of the four unit building correct and how big is that play area maybe you said that 80 you said something about 80 but it be roughly 40 by 40 ft something like that okay it looks longer than it is wide but um just curious how big it is is 54 ft probably north south Dimension and 40 ft wide okay all right is that pretty standard for a child's play area or is there a standard maybe about the size of this room maybe a little less but I think you know a pretty generous children's play area though you know there'll be some equipment there um and you know I think a nice area in the city has standards for that am I right Mr patner correct for the play area okay thank you Sher Schwarz commission I have a question for the applicant in the along University on the northeast uh Corner uh the common open space that is adjacent to the Garden can you give us some general Dimensions just a gener a generalization of the of the size it looks it looks very long but I want I'm curious more on the width it's right beside the where the community garden and then to the left is the four town homes that's the children's play area no that the play area is on the northwest side talking the areawest to the east of the four Town Homes yes to the east along the University Avenue yeah um well just curious of the dimensions it looks to be 70 feet wide okay and then the town homes are 40 ft deep so it'd be 40t plus probably 10 ft on either side of that so I would say 70 ft by 70 ft okay and just uh to follow up to that what is the intention essentially for that open space just to be open or I don't think there's a program for that open space it'll just be open space for open space yeah open space thank you commissioner R uh in you brought up the plate area is that going to be restricted to the owners or are you're going to allow neighbors to get in there I don't know how you're going to control it but uh that is a possibility ility that you could run into some friction there yeah I don't think it's going to be just for the residents I think it's going to be open for the church and probably people in the neighborhood as well that would be my assumption again it's not my development so I don't know what kind of controls are going to be but uh um I know the developer and he's he's a community guy and he I think would welcome that yeah it's better to make friends right exactly commission any other questions for petitioner all right we may have more later okay thank you all right we do need a public hearing on this and Mr B cor I can have one public hearing for both yes thank you this time I will open a public hearing for both planning cases 25-2 and 25-3 the Pud and preliminary plat for rord Town Homes 10710 Butternut Street Northwest September Sun architecture LLC anyone wish to speak to this public hearing if so please come to the microphone give your name and address for the record and limit your comments to 3 minutes good evening my name is Alan Prater I reside at 1081 Z Cottonwood Street Northwest approximately two blocks west of the proposed development the major safety and other related concerns for the nearby residential area some of whom have children in the local schools the daycare on the South Side uh Kinder Care the daycare operated by the church on the North side deals with the high density and with high density we have a higher number of cars it's an area with cuis saxs easy access to ER Boulevard on the South fley Boulevard on the West ndale Boulevard on the North and the same reasons people would have turned directly onto Butternut Street turning right out of the proposed uh entrance last year uh would not be removed by an inout entrance on the east side of the property onto a university in other words if somebody was going to be turning right out of the property last year directly on the butternut all they're going to do now is turn right on the University go a few feet and then turn right on to Butternut and then conduct their business for all the reasons shown above uh test or uh Brian Armstrong our Ward five uh council member parked his car there last year if you remember his uh description of his experience he said the traffic was so heavy he was forced to move it his car off of Butternut Street on the south end of the proposed development and seek safe parking in the uh parking lot of the dentist uh Summit Dental located there so again a lot of our concerns are driven by the high number of uh units the large number of people with cars and the resulting uh amount of traffic one proposal or one consideration put forward during discussions last year was maintain the character of the surrounding residential area low low density residential and perhaps consider that uh for the architecture as well as the owner of the land I'm aware of uh uh lower profile single family homes and another area of development in Kun Rapids between Egret Boulevard and aasay on the south side of uh Kun Rapids Boulevard across from liliput and perhaps that is something that could be done to maintain the benefits of single family homes but reduce the overall density thank you thank you anyone else wish to speak public Ken D Hudson 10763 and 69 um Butternut um the new plans you backed up the the uh properties do you guys plan on putting a a fence aloner on the back side of it just for safety reasons I I'm just curious did they is that in in the in the description I know they said some about privacy plants but I just wanted to know if you guys were going to be putting a gate along that whole that whole back side where you guys push the units back further towards the residential area and then the Pud can you explain that more what is that what is that uh involve and what is the standards for the Pud commissioner uh chair Schwarz if I may um we do my best to respond to any questions that come up in the public hearing after the public hearing is over thank you thank you anyone else for public hearing Deborah n 10772 Butternut Street Northwest well they always say you can't fight City Hall last year we all felt kind of hopeful that you leaders were going to be for us and now it comes up again but now it comes up 34 units everything was ignored about the safety in that area of residents a lot of them that go up and down Butternut walking across acoss the street those that cannot drive children walking across the street to go shopping and that was ignored there um and like I mentioned before I'm an RN I know these buildings you do not have multiple visitor spots you have very few and you have multiple people that move into these rental apartments because that's probably what they will be you can't guarantee us they're not and it's against fire ordinance but it happens and it's ignored you're only supposed to have so many people living in so many bedroom units never works out that way so if you think people are going to sit in their parking lot in a line waiting to get out on University to come and go that's crazy because they will come out Butternut they'll be going both ways and I take it as an insult to say you're only going to have 250 trips out of there and that's not very much when the person does not live where I live to say that's not very much traffic going in and out of there and was said the church has more no they don't the church church is quite Dead coming in and out of Northdale most days and to say we can't get better than that we sure can because you can do a little strip mall if you want to do an exit out of University do it for little businesses that benefit neighborhoods with jobs and stuff and you're not going to have the traffic coming and going you're not going to have a 100 people going to that strip mall at any given time you might have one two 3 four coming in and out and visit whether it's a nail Shalon Salon a therapy shop whatever and they're going to be closed by 5 6 or 7 at night you're not going to be having people coming and going 24 hours a day down Butternut trying to get out and if this does go through I don't care about a rich developer like I said before I care about the Equity of my home the reason why we bought in Rapids and if you if you go through this the developer can pay for any improvements it will not go on my taxes thank you anyone else wish to speak to the public hearing my name is laurianne fomer I live at 10810 Cottonwood Street Northwest in  Rapids my main concern is the traffic and the safety issue uh there's no sidewalks in this area there will be all this traffic that uh 60 some cars is going to be a lot of traffic and it's not going to just be on University there will be a lot of traffic on Butternut Street these are a lot of families that we have no sidewalks these Ames walk on these streets um we have at least three buses if you were in our area between 7:30 and 8:00 at night or 7:30 and 8 about 7:30 and 8:00 in the morning there's at least three buses that go through there picking up kids for different schools there's no sidewalk so the kids are standing on the street and you're adding 60 cars in this area with no guarantee that they're not going to have heavy traffic on um Butternut Street the other it all the kids that go to Eisenhower and Northdale um which are the nearby schools uh it's a they're Walkers so having extra cars possibly 60 extra cars and kids in a school area is not a safe thing and as far as the two intersections doing a U-turn down at Walgreens um on the one side of it or doing a U-turn Down On The Other Side by speedway in Northdale it's dangerous uh you're going to add all these u-turns on there and then you're going to have kids c those are the intersections that people are walking in and I can tell you down at Walgreens it's already extremely confusing because the way they have it set up is the Middle Lane is supposed to go through and uh you're not supposed to be or when you're coming back from over by Oak Park Plaza cars are always in the wrong lane when they're supposed to be turning right they end up going through so adding any kind of uh traffic adding any kind of kids walking through there it's just a really huge safety issue and we can do better we don't need a 34 unit uh facility there that's why you're having to ask for all these exceptions no one is saying don't put housing in there if if that's what they have to do but that's way that's crazy that's why you're having to be so close to the street and that's why the neighbors are concerned it's a safe safety issue thank you anyone else wish to speak public hearing my name is Dale renelt I live at 10772 Butternut Street Northwest I'm less than a half a block from where they're proposing this one of my questions I have this these units are looking to be sold is that correct or is this a rental property okay so that makes it even worse for us being a rental property chances are it's going to if they can't rent all of these units they're going to go to Section 8 on this and it's going to bring in probably bad people into our area that's going to being even being a rental property like they're talking that's going to that's going to lower the our property values and that's what we don't need in our area not only for all the traffic but with the traffic also one being a rental unit like it's going to be I'm sure some of it's going to be Section 8 if not a good majority which is going to lower our property values number two the traffic coming out of here anybody coming out of here that wants to go north they're not going to drive all the way down to Egret Street then drive all the way up they're going to cut through our neighborhood to get back to Northdale Boulevard to head north chances are it's easier to cut through there than wait at the light and do a U-turn to go back North again like she was like this last lady was talking about think at this point I would ask the the council to keep this uh commercial and we would we would much rather see a strip mall in there something that closes at you know 5 6 at night or or doctor's office which would close 5: at 6:00 at night we don't have all the traffic coming through through there uh most people be in the doctor's office like I said we're not going to have it lower our our property values I think that's pretty much all I have to say thank you anyone else wish to speak public hearing anyone else wish to speak last call all right seeing none I'll close a public hearing and limit comments to the commission Mr platzner you were going to uh give a better explanation or bit of an explanation on a PUD Thank You Cher Schwartz yes I just wanted to clarify the purpose of the Pud in this case um the Pud application was uh related to a request from the city council that um any proposal that comes forward on this site um the rezoning be tied to the development itself so if a PUD were not part of this development and uh rezoning were approved then if the development were not to go through then any residential development that meets the standards of the MDR zoning District would be able to um get approvals by right that use would now be approved in that District meaning that if they wanted to put an access on Butternut Street there would be no ability for the city to tell them no um whereas in this case with the Pud the site plan itself is tied to the rezoning so there'd be no way for the property to be rezoned um without being without this development going through so any future development would need approval from the um city council uh and there would be no ability to do a residential use by right meaning that the council is able to control that the site plan going forward only has access on University rather than also having access on Butternut so that's that's the best I can explain the ing for the Pud uh proposal here thank you thank you commission thoughts concerns Mr chair commiss Smoky so my concern along with a lot of the feedback that we're hearing is is on the traffic and the increase the amount the amount of cars the amount of or the risk to pedestrians Etc and I have just a couple thoughts but um I know the 250 was a number that that came up in terms of increased traffic if I'm not um mistaken and I guess um you know numbers are numbers can be very subjective right so how do we know that 250 is U reasonable or not reasonable for this space um to me it's like anytime we're putting extra traffic at intersections to make u-turns um especially because you anticipate that more at the the peak times when um people are either going to work coming home from work right um what does 250 mean to the safety of um other drivers and pedestrians in that area so how do we come to that is kind of one of my questions um I I don't disagree I think I'm hearing from you know others that um we're not opposed to a a development that um adds new housing in there I think that that's exciting for the area um but again what's the right number I I don't have anything that says that 34 units is too many nor do I have anything that tells me that 34 units is actually very reasonable or light um and that's where I'm struggling in order to try and and help make a decision here as to whether or not this should be approved I know on my own um I'm looking at um it was mentioned the um development on Rapids Boulevard which is really awesome all the new homes that are being built there um after the number of years that that has been in place I know that we're now putting a pedestrian walkway that actually crosses Rapids Boulevard and um wondering um because I think foot track foot traffic to me is very important considering what's on the other side of University Avenue um possibly jobs for some of these individuals Etc um is there anything additional that we can do um AKA a uh an elevated crosswalk that would help take some of that traffic off the the foot traffic off of the University I think I'm hearing Butternut I mean again they're saying that they don't anticipate much traffic if any to be diverted on the butternut um you know for the the um new homes going in there so I think that that's been addressed again I don't know um what um you know what will be allowed if that is going to be increase um you know challenges for the um the neighborhood to the west or not but those are the things that I don't feel like I have enough information in order to be able to make a reasonable decision yet chair Schwarz commissioner NAA um the issue of traffic in a community in a neighborhood like Butternut um exactly what SM uh commissioner Schley has brought up um but in regards to I believe there should be a a review or an looking into greater track traffic mitigation on that on that street if it if it means putting in speed bumps physical ones or you know those temporary ones um or um speed uh uh tracking indicators that the police put up to show you your speed all those tools are available that I think should be under consideration but also um I have a uh secondary question and that's for planner patner um are you familiar because just on the east side of university is bla correct just north of the Northdale and University intersection uh right across from the power generating subunit whatever that little one there's a whole bunch of town homes are you familiar with those I'm not familiar with a lot of the details on the town homes commissioner noblock but I'm familiar with them okay um the reason I bring those up is because this plan looks a 100 times better than what Blaine's doing on the other side of the street in my opinion from the design the layout and I've just I was just curious what that development in that area is experiencing because I I never see anybody I never see any actions or anything going on there and I I don't know if they're unve non if they're not if they're vacated or if people actually live there and I drive by there all the time so that is the reasoning for my question on that but I I also think that um and I brought this up the last time this came before uh the Planning Commission um and I I truly think a community a safety issue and I think the last time I was the one of the Commissioners that didn't vote for it um but also I really think the issue is still not going away and that further efforts need to be put to address the safety issue if and if this is just an example if and I think it's been brought up that if a commercial if a different type of commercial entity were put in there that and with wider hours the potential is there would be even greater traffic and a greater risk to butternet uh traffic and safety so I really think an underlying issue needs to be there needs to be something done for safety for uh pedestrians on Butternut if that means potentially sidewalks or speed bumps the issue needs to be looked at a little bit deeper because this is not going to go away regardless of what gets decided so that's it thank you commissioner Rak now granted we are going to have traffic here we're talking 34 units uh most of the the traffic it'll probably be in the morning and the evening when people are going to work um how many cars maximum you'd have 70 cars there with the twocc car parking lot chances are you're probably going to have about 40 to 50 cars into this unit here uh they all have to turn right they're not all going to want to go over to ndale so that means you have a percentage of those cars going south you can also go down univers uh University and make a left or U-turn down the road and come back to go north on University there's other ways to go so your percentages that are going to go down butter and I'm not defending them but the idea that they're throwing it going to have a huge amount of traffic there I don't think it's going to play out you're going to have traffic yes but you got to look at the numbers here you're talking 34 units you're talking maybe 40 cars a day moving in and out uh there might be leaving in the morning they'll come back in the afternoon during the day most of the people are going to be at work so you're going to end up with less traffic during the day granted you're going to have more at night in that but the idea that everybody's going to go down Butternut is unrealistic there is going to be traffic there's no doubt about that but I don't think it's going to be that great that it's going to propose the things that these people are talking about I I agree with there there is going to be traffic yes and then as far as who lives in these things I don't know what the rents are going to be uh but it's going to be somewhat expensive I would imagine by standards uh they've got to make a profit whatever they're going to rent so I don't think this would ever qualify for a sex uh I don't think the government would be putting this money in there besides that he'd have to apply for it um so granted we're they're throwing out big numbers here but I think the percentages that are going to turn on to Northdale first of all you're going to have to figure out how to get through there uh and the only place you're going to go is I mean better not the only place you're going to go is North there and uh so I I I see problems but I don't see their drastic problems that's it okay J Schwarz commissioner no um just say it's an improvement upon what I saw last year the in it on and butternut I know coming if you're coming home at night the way it was propos last year You' be hanging left on egret and coming through the neighborhood is the way I saw things happening I think the ability to get this through the the county has been a a vast Improvement I do agree that there's going to be traffic no matter what you put there if you're only having a few visitors a day that business isn't going to last you're going to have to have a business that has customers you're going to have a strip mall there as opposed to this um not withstanding some of the concerns commissioner Smokey brought up and commissioner noblock there's certainly some safety concerns that that should be address and talk through but it's my recommendation in planning case 25-2 um i' recommend approval for the plan unit development subject to the 13 conditions is listed is that a motion yep I'll second it Mr chair Mr B commiss may commissioner no you mentioned one of the planning cases did you intend to make a motion on both cases I was going to do one at a time okay sounds good just clarify now you're just doing the Pud yep all right in planning case 25-2 we have a motion by Noah a second by Casey any further discussion on the Pud case what was the motion to recommend approval okay for 252 um Mr chair I I will kind of reiterate too it is a vast improvement from what we saw last summer um always there will always be safety concerns when University Avenue comes into play um I do a a bit of driving for Meals on Wheels and just in the area and the the u-turns are are really um the u-turns combined with the right right turn on red are a problem if for drivers we encounter them all the time it's it just means more awareness um but it it's doable on these streets and I think the fact that the county kind of greenlighted that right in right out is the only reason we're seeing this back here and and I too don't see a lot of traffic going back to Northdale when you come South on University and take that right onto butternet I don't I see more going down to the um the Northtown area the transit Hub even to Minneapolis where people may work um so I'm I'm just glad that the Improvement was made from what we saw last summer any other discussion for PUD case Mr chair commissioner smoki I I um respect and appreciate all the comments on the other commissioners is made I think I'm still just stuck on probably my biggest stick is the u-turn at um at Northdale I I just am really concerned about the increase there and I do feel like that's a um we've just kind of shifted some of the safety issues to that intersection um so that's my that's my number one hang up really is that I also am concerned about foot traffic um increased at that intersection um and maybe you know safety concerns about um elevated sidewalks things like that that could be considered at a later date um but with what we have in front of us um I'm I'm just not excited about the U-turn situation any other discussion hearing none all in favor of the Pud case say I I I opposed opposed that case passes 6 to1 with commissioner schoki opposed that's a recommendation by the Planning Commission and will be a decision by the city council at their February 4th meeting next we have planning case 25-3 the preliminary plat Mr chair commission n in planning case 25-3 I'd recommend approval of the proposed preliminary plat second all right we have a motion on 25-3 by no and second by Casey any further discussion hearing none all in favor I I opposed and that motion carries that's a decision or recommendation by the Planning Commission and a decision by the city council at the February 4 meeting thank you and good [Applause] luck all right uh we have no old business moving on to other business Mr Black now that you've all made your decision I hope someday they build a a rental property right right next to your house a half a block from your house you're out of order sirer please please leave even anyways yeah that's you're for the people I don't think so other business I'm just going to talk about a little bit of the development that's currently happening in the city I also want to um say you know congratulations on your first Planning Commission meeting of 2025 for most of you and your first Planning Commission meeting for the two new planning Commissioners um there have not been any applications for the February Planning Commission meeting so far so um seeing as nothing has been tabled or postponed until the February meeting I think it's reasonable to say that we are probably not going to have a meeting in February so the next Planning Commission meeting will likely be the upcoming March 20th Planning Commission meeting um I will confirm that um probably early next week and send out an email confirming that there will not be a February Planning Commission meeting um I proposing to or planning to have a brief Planning Commission 101 presentation just to go over and refresh folks on um some of the basics of the the planning commission's role um and processes U and that's something that I'm also planning to bring forward at the March meeting but for now since we have no business we will likely not have a February meeting um just com going over some of the new uh development going on in the city a lot of 2024 um both the Planning Commission and city council were working with the applicant uh for the IDC automatic Edition uh 360 Rapids Boulevard they have submitted building permits and um had building permits approved for the addition to their um building there so that project will be going forward probably this spring um with the beginning of construction um the Robinson Town Homes which were approved back in um 2021 I believe they've completed the first or generally completed the first um five unit uh building for that town home development and have received building permit approval I believe for the second six unit building so um the second building will be going forward soon for that um so just a little bit of progress ress on those two um applications that have gone through the the process in the last couple years um the old Dairy Queen at 3064 rids Boulevard um is in the process of being remodeled and um the plan is for them to open up as time and place tropical wine bar so that will be a restaurant there um at that old Dairy Queen location um the uh former USF Holland uh freight shipping building at 11220 Zeon Street that's now being occupied by Estus Express lines so that will no longer be vacant uh moving forward oops I included a extra bullet point there that I didn't mean to uh nothing about this is purely aesthetic they will be moving in there um and then Hyderabad Indian Grill will be moving into uh the former New Mandarin restaurant at 2711 rabids Boulevard so that building won't be vacant for uh terribly long so that's all I have in terms of other updates um so thank you Commissioners thank you thank you thank you commission any want have anything for other business uh yeah I just uh Cher Schwarz I have a question in regards for planner uh Pat before you get gets away um any developments on the um Development Across on Kun Rapids Boulevard which is right beside this the Indian Grill that the hyper dad you said is moving in the development that was the gas station on the corner is there any further movement or progress or status with regards to that development commissioner noblock I'm told that they're going to submit building permit applications uh in early spring of this year so that's that's the best I have but I that's the plan for now all right thank you that's it and Mr Casey um thank you just for clarification you said no February meeting but the March meeting would be whatever cases we have to consider and then you'd incorporate U planning 101 for us yep that's that okay like in the meeting room afterwards like a work session or something or or you just do it commer Casey I'm I'm still thinking about it I think it probably would be best to do it in the meeting room but U I know that they have the I believe it's the historical commission that meets there most nights so um we'd have to time that around that it might be easiest to do after the meeting quickly in the council chamber since we already have this room um but I'll I'll look into the logistics of it and and make it a termination okay thank you thank you anyone have anything else just Welcome to our new um Commissioners it's nice to meet you all and we'll move forward together Jour I would move to a joury I'll second motion by Casey second by now BL all in favor J you