I'm calling the meeting to order. A motion to adopt the agenda. >> So moved. >> Second. >> I'll second that. >> All right. Any discussion? Not. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. And opposed. That motion passes.
Next item on the agenda is the council leazison update. Welcome commission members. It's good to be back here on uh our second day of what's now fall. Uh
here is my update. Uh council set the two 2026 preliminary budget and levies. Overall, there will be a 3.7% increase from 2025's budget. The major factors behind the increases come from employee
union contracts, a 7% increase in the sheriff's contract, and several other smaller increases in different areas. And if you'd like, I can go over those, but uh just let me know. Uh at this point,
the budget cannot be increased as we approve the preliminary uh only decreased. The final budget will be voted on in December. At the September 8th meeting, staff had on the agenda the successful completion
of probationary period for the city planner. This is normally a sixmonth period and staff felt that the city planner was doing a great job and fulfilled this requirement. Three council members voted on a motion to
extend the probation probationary period for three additional months. I felt this was wrong and voted against it. Uh to my knowledge, there has never been an extension of a probationary period for a new employee.
Uh the fire department will be hosting an open house at fire station 1 on that's on Viking Boulevard. Uh this will be on Monday, October 6th from 5 to 7:30. It's a kid-friendly event. The
East Bethl Lions usually provide chili hot dogs with all the fixings. Uh in the past they have uh the what's a helicopter life >> lifeink >> life >> li life link. >> Uh helicopters come and land and if you
never been around a helicopter when they've landed or taken off it's it's pretty great experience. Uh if you like to be sand blasted. Uh but they have other vendors there and
uh other things for kids to do and to generally clam around on the fire trucks and learn about and meet our firefighters. It's a good excuse to get out and participate in our city. Uh then we again have the fall town hall meeting
that'll be on Thursday, November 13th starting at 6 pm in the senior center. You have any questions or comments? the um Troy Slater's um that I can't remember was IUP or CUP was was
approved, correct? By the council >> the the which one? >> Troy Slater, the the beekeeper. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. And then we had another one with multi well multiple things. >> Yeah. The uh the for the building.
>> Yeah. That was approved as well. >> So everything's been approved. Great. >> Doing a good job proving things for recommendation. >> Thank you. >> All right. Well, nothing else. Again, as always, thank you for your service to
our city. It is greatly appreciated. >> Thank you, Brian. >> Thank you, >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next item on the agenda is the approval of minutes from our last meeting. Does anyone have any comments or
um corrections? >> I do. On line 24, I would like you to read after the word explanation. Terry stated the explanation then adding
provided in our packet does not justify the reasons etc. >> So just adding provided in our packet. >> I am not seeing where is it? number line 64 24. >> Oh, sorry. >> Okay.
>> So, again, what was the correction? >> Adding after the word explanation um provided in our packet. >> Okay. Yes, >> that's all I have. And I just want to make a comment that the um whoever did
the minutes, they did a really good job of of summarizing that last one because that was a really long and complicated one. >> Good job. Okay. Any other corrections? >> Okay. Is there a motion to approve the minutes with the correction?
>> Make a motion to approve the minutes with the correction. A second. >> Okay. Any discussion? If not, all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> And opposed? None. All right. So, that passes. And the next thing we're going to do is have a public hearing. And
Grace is going to introduce this. >> Yes. This is a public hearing for a site plan and conditional use permit for Atlas Villa's Memory Care. Stone Construction has applied for a site plan review and conditional use permit to allow the construction and operation of a memory care facility
known as Atlasville's memory care along Ulysi Street east of 185th Avenue Northeast. Uh currently these are two properties and they will be combined um at the county prior to the approval of building permits on this site. Uh once combined, these properties will be 4.36
acres. The property is zoned B3 highway commercial and guided commercial. The properties to the north are zoned and guided the same. The properties to the west are zoned and guided light industrial. Property to the south is zoned B3 and guided mixed use. And
highway 65 is to the east of this property. There's currently a drainage and utility easement which runs between the two lots. Uh this is not up for review tonight but will be reviewed by the city council at the October 13th meeting. And the approval of the site plan and conditional use permit is
dependent on the approval of this easement vacation. There are two applications. The first is for a conditional use permit to allow the operation of a residential care facility serving seven or more persons on a parcel that is zoned B3. The second is for a site plan review to allow the
construction of a 17,236qt facility. uh containing 26 rooms, two of those being for hospice, uh for memory care. This facility will include dining and kitchen space, activity and enrichment spaces, and a secure yard for outdoor recreation. When reviewing a
site plan and conditional use permit, the city's discretion is limited to whether the proposed site plan and CUP meet the standards outlined in the city's code. If they meet these standards, the city must approve these requests. There are two requests, and they should be reviewed individually. The first request is for that
conditional use permit. The definition for residential care facility is listed on the screen. Um, this is a facility that is required to be licensed by a governmental agency and provides care to people for 24 hours a day that cannot be provided in a home. Um, the standards
for review are included in your packet. There are 10 of them. Staff has provided an in-depth analysis of these standards. Uh, the applicant has also provided a narrative describing this project and the day-to-day operation of the facility, which is also then included in your packet. We're just going to give a brief overview of some of the things we
touch on in the packet. Um, those standards are summarized on on the screen. Um, something to consider with memory care facilities would be health, safety, and welfare. So, this is looking at the impact on emergency services. I've had a conversation with our sher sheriff's department liaison and he expressed no concerns about the impact
of this facility on the city's emergency services. Licensing is another thing to consider. Um this has been added as a condition of approval that the facility will obtain all required licenses. Uh the property owners, Atlas Ventures, they do operate an existing facility in Centerville that has been licensed since
2013 or yeah 2023 and they are aware of these uh licensing requirements. Traffic and parking is another consideration. Staff believes the traffic generated by this facility would be typical for this use and for this area. Additionally, the submitted parking plan shows that the site will exceed the city's parking
requirement. This facility will be connected to the city's sewer and water infrastructure. Um the city engineer has provided comments on the sewer and water connection that will be addressed um as conditions of approval. Uh another thing to consider is property values and the
impact on natural resources. Uh staff believes this will have a limited impact on both of those things. Um the facility will meet the city's architectural and landscape standards. It appears to look architecturally pretty nice. Um so that is a benefit for property values. Um and
then compliance with the code and comprehensive plan. No variances are being requested here. This is a commercial use in a commercial district. Um and we have no concerns about compliance there. Moving on to the site plan review. Um, staff has provided an in-depth analysis
of the standards for site plan review in your packet along with the applicant's site, civil, parking, lighting, landscape, and building plans. The city engineer has provided feedback on these plans and compliance with his comments have been included as conditions of approval. Again, another overview of the
things that we look at here. Those are listed on the screen. Um, again, compliance with the comp plan and the code. No variances are being requested here. Uh this site plan shows that the facility will meet the city's setback and lot coverage standards within the zoning district. Uh it does meet the
landscaping requirements. Uh it does also meet the architectural requirements. Uh the siding on this building or siding on this facility it would be stone um Hardy board siding and then glass for the windows. Hardy board is not specifically allowed within our
code but it is something staff considers to be a superior material. Um and city council or the code does say that the city council can approve superior materials to what is allowed um in section 28 of the code. Um so this will be something that is mentioned to them but staff has no concerns regarding
those materials. Um storm water will be managed on site through the ponding. Uh our city engineer has reviewed that. Um and this is seen to have a pretty limited impact on neighboring properties. To summarize, the ordinance includes standards for review of site plans and
CUPs. Staff finds the general standards have been met without the need for variances. The city engineer, city attorney, and city staff have reviewed and provided comments on these plans which have been added as conditions of approval. The applicant will need to update the plans to address these
comments prior to submitting permits. Uh updated plans were submitted yesterday by the applicant and the development team. staff has not yet had a chance to review these in depth, but will do so before the council meeting. There are likely other things that will need to be addressed, but they are all relatively
minor. Um, and again, this will depend on the u vacation of that drainage and utility easement, uh, which will be up for consideration on October 13th at the city council meeting. Staff directs the planning commission to open the public hearing and make a recommendation to the city council. Based on the applicant's
submission, the contents of the staff report, public testimony and other evidence available, planning commission may recommend approval of the site plan and CUP or denial of the site plan and CUP. A draft resolution with findings of fact for approval has been included in your packet with conditions to address comments by staff. The draft resolution
may be modified as the planning commission sees fit. If denial is recommended, which staff does not recommend, a draft resolution of denial can be prepared with findings of facts supplied by the planning commission. happy to answer any questions and I believe members of the development team are here to also answer questions.
>> Thank you. Okay, we're opening the public hearing and if anyone from Atlas would like to come up, please. And if you could please state your name and your address and then
um try to speak into the microphone, please. Brian, can you Excuse me. Stone 629 road. >> Okay. Go ahead, Paul. >> Hi. You have questions or comment towards me
for me. I guess the only comment I'd like I'd like to make and uh the owners here also uh regarding uh item number 18 on engineer
uh M council truck sanitary sewer line we have submitted plans to them although there's not they do not have an ement on this property over their contact with them
through all the title work attorneys from council that council we've been in contact with them for the last three four months and they don't seem to be coming up with
anything. So I guess my point is is uh without property the owners you know really need a letter from them. You know, we've had this conversation
with Craig also record what we have on there is the drainage drainage area which they have in an email. I acknowledge that it would not be an impact to do with their
trucks because it is 353 but of course it's hard to get that comment that without any pretty much to
what they want. >> So Paul, what's your role in this? >> I am uh helping with with the owners of it and I'm also the develop. >> Okay. >> Okay.
Do you guys have any questions? Looks like Brian you don't. Okay. So, um >> we have been in contacts. [Music] >> Okay. And I will apologize. I mean, I'm not totally understanding the subject. Um, but how are you feeling comfortable
that this is going to be okay? Um, is there more that staff needs to do? will send another >> So, you're not building anything over it >> because it's in the ditch, right? It's the big >> trunk line.
>> Yeah. So see where that is in it right there. The truck line is about >> 30 ft in from the property line which is kind of down the center of that what they call ponding but in reality it's only about
2 and 3 ft deep. the truck line 33 to 36. Like I said, I got an email from my council and he's had discussions
with our civil engineer both cases. The Met Council engineer stated that. >> Yes. All right. Timothy discussed proposed work
discuss what work would be occurring in this area. My understanding was that Storm sewer improvements including basin would be construction
in this area assets in the area that proposed work but not adversely. >> Okay. Do you have any other concerns? >> No. Okay. Great. Well, I thank you very much. And do you guys have any questions
for Paul or the owners, too? >> I don't think so. >> No. >> No. >> Pretty easy. >> All right. Okay. >> Um, does anyone else want to come up and speak to this subject?
If not, the public hearing part is closed and then we'll have our discussion. And Grace, I would just like to ask you if what's your thoughts on what Paul was talking about? >> Yeah, that is a engineering matter. So,
um I'm not entirely caught up on that. Craig does his review separate from staff. Um but I'll connect with Craig on that and make sure that there's no issues there. that could probably easily be addressed by just saying um on that because
generally our we'll say we approve this subject to the staff recommendations which would include the engineering but just add to that on point 18 instead of asking for a letter of
approval from the Met Council to say um if there are no object ctions from the Met Council. >> So, you're going to make that in the motion >> if need be. Yeah. >> And so, we're going to have two motions on this one, right?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Do you guys have any more discussion? >> It seems to be pretty easy, huh? >> Yeah. So, the owner agrees to all the engineer things. >> Yeah, it looks like they are agreeing to everything and are working through all of those. So, what is the expected
completion date? Like that's when are you looking to break ground and >> ground as soon as we possibly can? >> Okay. When when you >> next got you were going to say something.
>> Oh, no. was agreeing with. >> Okay, Christina. Okay. >> Yeah, I mean it seems to be ready to go. I mean, with all the with the conditions of the city engineer being met, I I see this as a
as a good venture to move forward with. >> I guess I was going to say it's talks here about a 4 inch water man, but that's not big enough for fire protection. So, it's in there with the engineer notes. So it'll be changed to a six.
>> So if they agree to all that should be fine. >> Have you heard anything from the neighbors? >> I have not regarding this project, not from neighboring property owners. Um a public hearing notice was sent to them
um alerting them of this hearing. Um so they have been noticed of the development. >> Okay, great. because sometimes we hear opposition or support but nothing at all. >> And then um just going back to conditions, there are a number of conditions on the draft resolution. One
of those being the engineers comments and a few other things that will need to be addressed. So those are those are already in there. Um but certainly we can make that change to the to the language in there for the letter of approval as Mr. secretary suggested >> and that would be in the site plan, not
the CU, right? >> It's uh just one resolution here. We can file them together. Um assuming both are approved. Um it would just be one resolution, one motion on that. >> Oh, we don't need to do two separate. Okay. >> Oh, it doesn't. It's okay.
>> Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve the conditional use permit and the site plan review with the um staff and engineering comments being part of that with the exception of engineering comment number 18
which I would like to recommend um instead of requiring met council approval saying um as long as there is no objection by Met Council regarding the um
the location and depth of the pond. >> Is there a second? >> I second. >> Great. Any more discussion? If not, all in favor say I. >> I opposed. Being none, that motion passes.
And now this so this is a recommendation to the city council uh for approval. So that will be at the next city council meeting which is when >> October 13th. >> So that's kind of when the final approval or disapproval is done is at
the city council. All righty. Thank you. And the next item is we're going to do another public hearing and Grace is going to be introducing this one. This is a reszoning of four properties along
Johnson Street south of 241st Avenue. At the request of the city council, city staff has initiated a zoning map amendment for four properties on the east side of Johnson Street south of 241st Avenue Northeast. The city was made aware of the need for this resoning
when a property owner applied for a building permit for a pole barn. Staff discovered that the property was zoned light industrial. Um and then further discovered that the zoning and land use map in this area do not match up. This was brought before the council uh on the
October 25th work meeting agenda. The council directed staff to init in initiate the process of reszoning to correct the incompatibility between the zoning and the land use map. These properties are currently guided low density residential and zoned light industrial within the zone the shoreland
overlay district. The proposed zoning is R2 single family and town home residential. These properties are within the 2040 MUSA. Properties to the west across the street are zoned R2 and guided lowdensity residential. The properties to the south are zoned and
guided light industrial. And the properties to the north and northeast are zoned and guided mixed use. These parcels currently contain single family homes. They are legal non-conforming uses at the moment because they are zoned industrial but they are used for
residential purposes again with those single family homes on those industrial parcels. The request is to reszone these four properties from light industrial to single family and town home residential. As you can see on the screen, there is an incompatibility between our current zoning map and our current land use map.
This incompatibility is the reason why this resoning is being initiated. These parcels are guided lowdensity residential by the land use map within the 2040 comprehensive plan, but they are zoned light industrial. The zoning map and ordinance are tools for enforcing the goals established within the comprehensive plan. Parcels are
required to be zoned in a manner that is compatible with their underlying zoning district. The comp plan actually gives a list of primary and secondary zoning districts associated with each zone or land use designation. For lowdensity residential, the associated land use designation or zoning designations
should be R1 single family and R2 single family and town home residential. Light industrial, not surprisingly, is not a zoning district that is compatible with the lowdensity residential land use. This incompatibility is why this resoning has been initiated.
The city has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a resoning. The proposed zoning for a property must be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. If the proposed zoning is not consistent with the comp plan, the city must deny the resoning. Obviously, this request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Staff has provided an analysis of each standard for reviewing a zoning map amendment within your packet. Standards for review are compliance with the comp plan and the code, the availability of infrastructure to serve the area, compatibility with surrounding zoning districts, uh ability to support
building development, the impact on property values, and the impact on health, safety, and welfare. A quick overview of some of those things. Um first, I just want to clarify that no new building development or redevelopment is associated with this reszoning. Uh this is purely just changing the zoning of the land. uh the
existing homes which are legal non-conforming uses again uh this resoning would actually change them to being conforming uses. Uh this would probably have a positive impact on property values if anything uh because these property owners are limited in their ability to use their property
because they are currently legal non-conforming uses. State statute says that you cannot expand a legal non-conforming use. So, if a property owner wanted to add a pull barn to their property, add a deck onto their home, add an addition onto their home, we would not be allowed to approve that as
the city. Um, so changing this to being conforming gives those property owners greater flexibility. Additionally, I was I received a comment from a member of the public who was concerned about this resoning because they were concerned about their ability to build a pole barn and have a business out of that. I do
want to clarify that reszoning this to R2 does not in any way limit anyone's ability to apply for an IUP for a home occupation in a pole building. This actually gives them that ability to because we would re be reszoning this property. Um, this is compatible with the zoning districts on the western side
of the street. The properties across the street are also zoned R2. Um, sewer and water infrastructure does not currently serve this area, but if it were developed in the future, uh, sewer and water infrastructure would be expanded down to there. staff does not have any concern regarding that. Um, and if this
were redeveloped, the redevelopment would be residential in nature. It would not be industrial. It would be an intensification of the current residential use. Uh, city staff directs the planning commission to open the public hearing and recommend approval of the um of the
resoning of these properties based on the contents of the staff report, public testimony, and other evidence available to the planning commission. Uh staff recommends approval and has provided an ordinance or draft ordinance for this resoning. Um if the planning commission finds that the standards for this
resoning have not been met, uh they can recommend denial, though this is not recommended by staff. Happy to answer any questions. >> Okay, no questions right now. I'm going to open the public hearing for this and
go ahead Mr. Mundo. Um, Grace, can you go back to the map that shows the four lots? Um, >> are we missing a house because there is one more h residence to the south
that is zoned industrial? >> Yes. So, we excluded that one from this resoning because the land use map for that property uh designates that it is industrial. So, that one will remain as a legal non-conforming use. Um, the property owner for that house did
actually call me and express no concerns regarding not being reszoned. Um, the logic behind keeping the legal non-conforming use there is that first of all, it complies with our our land use map. Second of all, um, some properties are um, legal non-conforming
uses because the purpose is to phase out um, their use and eventually bring in the new use. So, that one will remain. I just wanted to make sure that uh we were missing one that >> Oh, just in case. >> Yes. >> So, thank you.
>> All right. Does anyone else want to come up and um state your opinion, ask any questions on this? Okay. If none the public hearing is closed and then we
can have some discussion. >> I had a question for you Grace about you said if sewer and water were to go into that area um if it did would that be a option for
them to either accept or reject or would they be required to tie into that? That is something that our public works department handles. Um I know there have been other areas of the city. I would have to double check on that. Um if this
area were redeveloped, the new properties would be required to connect because again it's within our 2040 Musa. I would have to check on the existing properties. >> Right. you I think when we were sold this whole concept of sewer and water that it was for new properties only and
especially residents wouldn't existing would not be required but I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't I mean that would be not a great thing I think for some residents to be forced to but whether
they chose to or not it would be another matter >> would it make any difference whether it was zone residential or zone light industrial on that? >> I don't think that would I just that introducing that topic made me wonder about that.
>> Okay. Um Grace, so what what other com what comments have you received then? >> It was just the phone call today from the property owner who was concerned about being able to build a pole barn and operate a business out of that if he wanted to in the future. And then a few days ago from the property owner to the
south who expressed that she was fine with being excluded from the resoning. >> Okay. >> Anyone else? Christina, any questions? >> No. >> This wing? >> I got nothing. >> No, no, no questions.
>> Okay. All righty. Well, I have none either. Um, does anyone want to make a motion on this? I I'd like to make a motion um based on the contents of this report that planning commission recommends approval
of the request to reszone the properties located in this report uh from light industrial to R2 single family and town home residential. >> What a perfectly worded motion. Is there a second? >> I second.
>> Okay, any more discussion? If not, all in favor say I. >> I. >> And opposed. Being none, that motion passes. Okay. And then we have a staff update. >> Yeah. A few quick updates. Um the application deadline for projects for
the October 27th planning commission meeting is September 29th. We currently don't have any applications for projects for that meeting. Uh but they do like to roll in at the end of the month. So not yet canceled that meeting obviously. Um, I will alert you if it does get cancelled, but currently, please plan to
be there on October 27th. Then I'll be out of office for the rest of the week. I'll be attending the Minnesota chapter of the American Planning Association's annual conference in Wilmer. So, I'll be learning from some experienced city planners and I'm excited to bring some of that knowledge back here. That's all I've got.
>> Well, I would just like to comment to how um appreciative I am of the service you've done. You've done a great job. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. Okay. >> Okay. If nothing else, I'll take a motion to adjurnn.
>> Make a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll second the motion. >> Great. All right. All in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? We are ajourned.