WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=sX3GJVZNHRk

Part: 1

1
00:10:08.959 --> 00:10:24.720
So, in summary, it meets the zoning requirements. Um, the staff received no public comments prior or or after publishing the report directly to us. Um, the applicant prior to submitting did do their own independent neighborhood

2
00:10:24.720 --> 00:10:40.320
meeting. Um we gave we provided them with uh addresses 350 feet from the property boundaries which was the same notification um area that would that we sent our public hearing notices to and we've

3
00:10:40.320 --> 00:10:56.720
received no feedback directly from the from the public after. So our recommendations this evening are for the planning commission to forward the resolutions. I could list them all but they're in general all of them. And um I the

4
00:10:56.720 --> 00:11:11.519
application is the applicant is here too the representative. So um generally he would be speak first in the public hearing to represent his application questions. >> All right let's bring it back to here

5
00:11:11.519 --> 00:11:28.480
and questions. If I could I've got two questions that are kind of related in just a logistics one. I'll do the logistics ones first. I'm assuming you're going to be looking for four motions from us uh down the road separate and I'm also looking to Leslie. So you'll want a separate motion on

6
00:11:28.480 --> 00:11:49.040
preliminary final plot separate motion cate uh Leslie could you walk through just refresh my memory because I get muddied between C1 and C2. What big picture overview? What is a an accepted use of permitted use in a C2?

7
00:11:49.040 --> 00:12:04.480
>> Well, it's actually very vast. So, if you give me a second, I think I can pull that up. The C2 is really what kind of governs a lot of commercial property throughout Fairbolt. So, based on that, if I can,

8
00:12:04.480 --> 00:12:20.639
you can't see it in the table, but um I'm looking at uh general retail sales and service. So, for example, on our list, we could have a banking institution there. We've had the Mayo Clinic, which was a permitted use. Um, it could be a child care center. It could be a funeral home. It could be a

9
00:12:20.639 --> 00:12:36.320
pawn shop. It could be a pet store. It's those are some of the sale just generally some of the retail but it could be an automotive services area a car wash it could be a liquor store it could be a micro brewery distill it

10
00:12:36.320 --> 00:12:53.120
could be a restaurant hotel it could be um sports and health facilities it could be education um furniture moving and I mean there there's just such a wide myriad of things I think that you know if there's

11
00:12:53.120 --> 00:13:08.959
on something specific that anybody wanted to ask me, I'd be happy to answer that. >> Mr. Chair, that that gets where I was going. And then my second question, it was related. You showed the land use map. Was that the comp plan map or the zoning map? >> Oh, I should have said, does it say

12
00:13:08.959 --> 00:13:27.120
>> I can't remember what it said, but zoning. Okay, that was the zoning map. And I'm just clarifying from what I fished out of one of the resolutions that the comp plan says that this is guided for commercial andor residential. is for either or. >> So the existing zoning and the comp plan

13
00:13:27.120 --> 00:13:42.320
already are in alignment. >> They support it. Correct. >> Thank you. >> I have a question. Mina, >> so I noticed in the preliminary plat they did provide a a preliminary grading plan, but in the final plat they did

14
00:13:42.320 --> 00:13:58.200
not. >> So we've been getting we we have they have applied for a grading permit. So, we do have I probably didn't include it in the packet, but we do have the the final grading. It's gener

15
00:13:59.040 --> 00:14:15.199
>> there's just quite a bit of elevation change between the parking lot and the neighbors. So, I just thought it would be nice to see the grading plan. Where's that flowing? Any >> runoff? >> Mr. Chair, I can I can address a little bit of that. So the grading plan is submitted as a part of the preliminary

16
00:14:15.199 --> 00:14:31.920
plat but we don't get another grading plan at final plat. Final plat is just about creating property lines. So the preliminary plat is where we actually do tease out some of those details like a grading plan, a storm water protection plan and if needed like a utilities

17
00:14:31.920 --> 00:14:52.000
plan. >> So are we just to assume that those are going through the grading permit and not under our perview? >> Yes. So to that respect I mean I think and let me go back here but hard to see I understand. So one

18
00:14:52.000 --> 00:15:08.800
thing that I would like to point out is maybe this so this is the this is building one that is the top north and west building which is accomodated by the surface by the surface rating but this is what I'm

19
00:15:08.800 --> 00:15:25.440
assuming is surface is building two. So the approach is still to have a inset into the hillside for those houses or those garages that accommodate it, but still have those floors, the upper floors have exposure to light and

20
00:15:25.440 --> 00:15:45.519
sunline like a like a typical um residential single family here. So if you look at this, I think this generally is a fairly decent highle representation. You do see that they

21
00:15:45.519 --> 00:16:02.720
will need to accommodate this capture of the slope um in the areas to the south of the second building along that hillside on the eastern side of the of the lot. And then in between the two uh the bank of buildings that's in the center and the southern buildings there

22
00:16:02.720 --> 00:16:19.279
is another retaining wall that will accommodate this. The storm water management you know is going to be accommodated through a combination of surface drainage and structures. So which with piping. So, it's kind of

23
00:16:19.279 --> 00:16:35.120
threading the needle between those two approaches to keep this as economical as possible. Um, I made reference in the staff report to the previous application that was for 34 units that was went through all the way

24
00:16:35.120 --> 00:16:50.320
through council approval. If I'm understanding this correctly, and I wasn't here at the time, I believe all of that approach was for underground infrastructure for the entire thing. and you know which is an a very expensive proposition and I can only imagine that

25
00:16:50.320 --> 00:17:08.160
that did not maybe one of the reasons but I don't know for sure so I don't want to say that >> I guess so we have a higher unit count on this this is 37 units correct >> correct >> and I guess my thought would be is are they managing their storm water on site

26
00:17:08.160 --> 00:17:29.600
>> predominantly yes >> and preventing runoff into any of the surrounding neighbors >> that's a requirement of the applications. >> Well, I have a couple. Uh, so what will happen in the future? Let's say that uh these units fail, will the be coming

27
00:17:29.600 --> 00:17:49.200
back to us then? This will be kind of a >> Harry wants to jump in on this one, so I'll let him. >> Well, that's why I'm asking because I'm curious. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair. So um this project is being permitted by conditional use permit as multifamily. It is slightly

28
00:17:49.200 --> 00:18:06.400
changing in the sense that uh the CIC plat does create in effect boundaries between the units so that they could move forward as as attached town home building permits. Um but in reality it's still functioning as a as a multifamily

29
00:18:06.400 --> 00:18:23.440
uh development from from our standpoint. So there would be no future uh going back through the process, going back through the entitlement process uh just to be able to sell these off. That's why the CIC plat is being requested now.

30
00:18:23.440 --> 00:18:39.360
>> And uh has the fire department looked at these private streets? >> They have. And that's their primary recommendation was, you know, it's navigable, but should there be car parking along the 24 foot width street, that would not be

31
00:18:39.360 --> 00:18:56.240
desired. So that's why there will be a request for posting parking of no of no parking on the private drive. >> And I have asked this question the last two applicants in the spot. So I don't want to leave these folks out. Will there be any handicapped accessessible?

32
00:18:56.240 --> 00:19:14.160
that is you don't see any on this that has been brought to their attention. They have not um that is highly uh part of the scrutiny of the building official and the way that we do our applications here. So they will be required to meet all state and federal EA requirements

33
00:19:14.160 --> 00:19:33.000
of approval. >> So now I'm going to open up public uh input. So, please when you come up, please make sure you speak into the mic. Again, state your name and your address, and we welcome you to come on up.

34
00:19:40.960 --> 00:19:55.600
Evening, commissioners. My name is Dan Gel from Rebound Partners. My address is Sunnybrook Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Um I'm here tonight with members of our project team including April Paxton from

35
00:19:55.600 --> 00:20:12.320
Don Schulty from Jones how Smith. Thank you for the opportunity to present our development. It's a proposed 37 unit market rate rental town community on the at 924 First Street Northeast mentioned.

36
00:20:12.320 --> 00:20:28.960
As many of you know, this property has been vacant or underutilized for several years, has been the subject of multiple redevelopment discussions over time. We believe this proposal represents an opportunity to put this site back into productive use and while providing housing type that is

37
00:20:28.960 --> 00:20:44.960
currently limited within the far market. Throughout the planning process, we have worked to gather input from the community and local stakeholders. As mentioned, we had a neighborhood meeting with nearby residents this year, and we also had a round table before that where

38
00:20:44.960 --> 00:21:01.520
we included city staff, community leaders, and many major employers. In addition, we've reviewed the Maxfield study. Um, we attended the presentation that Maxfield had in the community. Um,

39
00:21:01.520 --> 00:21:16.640
and we've evaluated the project with the framework of the comprehensive plan. Um the project before you tonight reflects many of those conversations and planning efforts. Uh in addition, our design team also worked to take advantage of the

40
00:21:16.640 --> 00:21:31.760
site's unique topography rather than force a one-sizefits-all development on the property. The building layouts and unit design utilize the natural slope of the site, helping to project transition to adjacent

41
00:21:31.760 --> 00:21:47.360
properties while maintaining a residential character consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Um, we'd like to also thank the city staff for the significant amount of work and effort they put into reviewing the project and work through the various

42
00:21:47.360 --> 00:22:04.200
applications and details of the project. Uh the project is well summarized in the planning commission packet and so I would like to keep my comments brief and we'd be have more questions you had.

43
00:22:08.000 --> 00:22:24.240
>> Mr. Chairman, yeah I just wondered um there's quite a bit of difference between having an HOA and uh moving into the CIC. So my question to you would be when are you going to make the decision

44
00:22:24.240 --> 00:22:43.520
to utilize the CIC the community interest common community interest plat and go that direction versus multif family housing. Have you made a determination? >> That determination hasn't been made yet at this time. Um, as you know,

45
00:22:43.520 --> 00:23:09.679
construction costs are extremely high and we need to utilize any way possible of creating cash flow just to come up with a a reasonable return investors. Jane Spooner, I live at 133 Urbing

46
00:23:09.679 --> 00:23:25.200
Avenue. So, this project really affects my corner property there. Um, I'm really concerned about when that grading takes place, what's going to happen um to like especially the corner piece of my property. Um, I used to have a large

47
00:23:25.200 --> 00:23:41.760
pollinator garden in there and we kind of knew eventually that may be taken out because of that and so we actually were proactive and we did take it out. But I'm just wondering is my yard still slopes there? That's my property. and how that's going to affect when you grade that piece of that out of there,

48
00:23:41.760 --> 00:23:57.679
what that's going to look and how you're going to work with me as a homeowner to make sure we have a nice transition into your area so I'm not left having to try and figure out how to rellandscape that and and be expending a lot of money with

49
00:23:57.679 --> 00:24:14.559
a landscaper to help me out with that. And also along that fence line when you're taking out that hill, you know, you're going to have cars going in and out of there. And it's one thing to have a line of houses behind you when they're pulling into their driveways from the other street on the other side, but now

50
00:24:14.559 --> 00:24:30.400
you're going to have cars going in. Are you going to put any kind of fencing along the back side of my property like on the west side of the property and then down the south side of the property with, you know, all the traffic going in just for just for uh not so much safety

51
00:24:30.400 --> 00:24:46.159
sake, but just with lights shining in. Um, we had an incident where people were using the parking lot for a uh bus stop for Kenyon and they would back into the parking stalls along the side there and shine into our kitchen in the morning.

52
00:24:46.159 --> 00:25:02.480
And so it's just kind of annoying and so I'm just looking at those kinds of things that are going to affect my property. So, and I'm also concerned about the drainage because we do get a little water when we get high um you know high

53
00:25:02.480 --> 00:25:37.039
rain amounts and so just that's my biggest concern right now. Good evening, commissioners. Uh thank you for holding this meeting and thank you for your presentation. Um uh just a couple uh comments that I have

54
00:25:37.039 --> 00:25:53.679
and concerns. Can you hear me? Okay. Or >> sir, could you just state your name? >> Yes, my name is Bill McCoy. William McCoy >> and I live on Urbing Avenue, 305 Urbing Avenue. I live there with my family. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um,

55
00:25:53.679 --> 00:26:08.720
one of the concerns that we had back in at the end of March at the meeting that it was referenced by this gentleman over here, there was a meeting and it was very well attended. Uh, what he didn't mention is in this well attended meeting

56
00:26:08.720 --> 00:26:26.960
uh the overwhelming sense among the residents was opposition to this proposed permitting. And I think that's important because if the people that are going to actually have to live in this community um with 37 new homes and let's

57
00:26:26.960 --> 00:26:43.039
say there's four people, two two kids and and a husband and a wife in each of these town homes, you're looking at a a sizable 150 people suddenly being dropped into your neighborhood. And that really changes the makeup of the m

58
00:26:43.039 --> 00:26:59.039
neighborhood. And it also it's a completely different experience than the one that you expected when you purchased the place and and that you've had. So since we purchased the place in 2012, um it's that you know, of course

59
00:26:59.039 --> 00:27:14.480
neighborhoods change, but those changes are slow. Uh this is a rupture with what our common experience in the neighborhood would be. and and um it's one thing if the people building actually live in the neighborhood and

60
00:27:14.480 --> 00:27:30.640
and okay, they're benefiting from it financially and so forth, but um that's not the case here. They're just simply investing their money and then walking away and and collecting the profits. So, there's that. And then um the other

61
00:27:30.640 --> 00:27:47.600
thing um that suggestion that I had then and I I have tonight. We obviously want more housing. We want more people in a growing and thriving economy. But with these housing permits, it seems to make more sense to do what was done on the south end of town where you put it on

62
00:27:47.600 --> 00:28:05.039
the very edge of town or outside perhaps a half mile outside of town. So you're not disrupting any neighborhoods. Uh the neighborhoods that exist remain intact. the property values remain the same and growing higher and it's not a disruption

63
00:28:05.039 --> 00:28:22.000
in in the the people's experience and in why they move to Farbo or why they move to that particular neighborhood. Uh so I thought I'd share some of those concerns. Um and then lastly just one question. Um it as I understand it is

64
00:28:22.000 --> 00:28:39.360
this the is the committee the permit committee. If you approve this, does this then go to the full council? It or how does this process work? >> It's a great question. So, we are a recommendation board. We do not have any ability to make anything. Uh we just

65
00:28:39.360 --> 00:28:57.120
make recommendations that then go back to the city council. The city council are our elected officials. So, they're the ones that actually have the power to to either um go with what our recommendation is or they may change it or they may not even um they they may go

66
00:28:57.120 --> 00:29:13.760
a completely different way than what we talk about here. We're just here so we can make sure that you have the opportunity as a community to come and talk to us about this so that we can then take those thoughts in with the information that we can go by which we

67
00:29:13.760 --> 00:29:32.320
follow the rules of um of how the community has set up. And so when we look at this project, we look at this project on how does it fit within our rules. and the city uh council actually has a lot more latitude because uh again

68
00:29:32.320 --> 00:30:02.240
they are elected and they have those abilities where recommendation. >> Okay, wonderful. I think that explains it very clearly. Thanks for your time tonight. I'm Frank Pete. I live at 936 North Cedar Avenue or 936 Third Street

69
00:30:02.240 --> 00:30:18.240
Northeast. Um I guess my big question is is um the parking. I know you said there's there's going to be two parking spots for each complex or each uh apartment building.

70
00:30:18.240 --> 00:30:34.559
Is there going to be like overflow parking? I know you said there'd be a little bit of overflow parking. I guess the reason why I'm asking is that cultacack I live on. If they start filling up in there, I noticed over there by Walmart, you took out that big d that big uh supper club and you put

71
00:30:34.559 --> 00:30:51.520
all the apartment buildings in and they're parked it up and down the street every day, every night. I mean, are we going to have to be dealing with that up there in that cult? I guess that's one of my concerns I have is on the parking. And then I noticed that you're going to have a drive going out onto Third Street

72
00:30:51.520 --> 00:31:09.279
Northeast. So you have your the complexes to the north side and the drive will be going out. Is that going to be a oneway out or is that going to be like a two-way where you can go in and out off of Third Street? I guess that's another question I had. You know,

73
00:31:09.279 --> 00:31:26.320
that that was never clarified. And is this going to be like rentals or is it going to are they going to sell them like condos? That's, you know, that's kind of up in the air. You know, they're ask, you know, if they're going to rent for 2,300 like the original meeting said, are they

74
00:31:26.320 --> 00:31:44.360
going to be able to rent them for that or are they going to have to turn them into condos right in the beginning? That's, you know, that's something that I'd like to see clarified a little more so we kind of have an understanding of what's going to happen up there. So, and I guess that's all I got. Thank you.

75
00:31:56.559 --> 00:32:12.399
>> Uh, good evening. My name is Taylor Hatfield. I live at 904 Third Street Northeast. Um, my house is going to be the road that you have proposed going out to Third Street will directly come out into my driveway. Um, I've I've

76
00:32:12.399 --> 00:32:28.240
grown up in that neighborhood for over 30 years now. I'm 38 years old. Uh, my grandparents live there for decades upon decades. My current parents live there. 5 years ago, I purchased property there and I also have my sister who purchased property in the neighborhood. So, we all

77
00:32:28.240 --> 00:32:44.720
have grown up there and it's been the quiet neighborhood. Um, and that's why we chose to live there. This is completely changing the entire neighborhood. Not just for our third street and our culde-sac, but over on Urbling and on First Street. I can't imagine how busy erranging is going to

78
00:32:44.720 --> 00:33:02.399
become if all these get filled up. Um people are going to come from Highway 60 if they're coming from that out of town, but any other side, they're going to cut on or cut off St. Paul Avenue onto Erbang and make their way there. Um Bill was right. Um the last meeting we

79
00:33:02.399 --> 00:33:20.159
had, it was an a resounding negative uh response to this. The neighbors don't want this. We acknowledge that it's uh something needs to be done, but this just seems like let's cram as much as we can in this property and make as much money as we can. And um we don't agree

80
00:33:20.159 --> 00:33:38.399
with it. We acknowledge that it needs a change. Can't just be an open parking lot. We'd love it to be a park of some sort, but we know there's finances involved. Um, just in our little area, there's well over a dozen kids, probably under 16. And in that area,

81
00:33:38.399 --> 00:33:53.360
playing outside is a big thing with all the neighbors. Um, kids roam all over the streets and all over in the playing each other's yards. So, that's a huge concern we have. Um, and then like the last guy, Frank, you know, it's third

82
00:33:53.360 --> 00:34:09.760
street goes up into the culde-sac. And we're we're concerned with people parking along that road. Um, and then like I said, the the road that's being proposed to leave onto Third Street. Go. If you stand in my driveway, you're looking directly at that road. So,

83
00:34:09.760 --> 00:34:25.520
selfishly, I do not want to see that happen because that's going to change the reason why I bought the house. Um, so I ask all you just to please consider that. I think 37 is way too much. I think there's other ways we could go about this where they could go about

84
00:34:25.520 --> 00:34:52.159
this a little bit differently. Um, that's all I have to say. Thank you for your time. Anna Lazerti. I'm the executive director of the assisted living. that's across the street at 828 First Street Northeast. Um, and I'm just mimicking the concern of the parking and the

85
00:34:52.159 --> 00:35:08.640
traffic flow. I think we have to be purposeful. I'm concerned for my residents right across the street, people using our circle coming through to turn around um, and using our already very small parking lot for parking. So, if there's intention with that parking and how traffic flow is going to work, I

86
00:35:08.640 --> 00:35:35.359
think that really should be thought on when we're My name is Lori Patty. I am married to Frank. And I know he had asked some questions that the answers were given to earlier, but I did want to state that it's very hard to hear in here before the mics came on. So, there were a lot

87
00:35:35.359 --> 00:35:51.839
of questions we had towards the back of the room that we could not hear the answers to. Um, one question I have is we were given the information that these units would be rented to begin with, uh, for a number of years and they would

88
00:35:51.839 --> 00:36:09.200
start at approximately 20 or $2,000 and go up to $2,700. My question would be is this is Farbolt. I don't know what the average rental is in Farbolt, but it seems awfully high to

89
00:36:09.200 --> 00:36:25.040
rent a townhouse for an average family for $2,700 or $2,500 even. But what happens if over 50% of those units stay empty because they can't fill the rental

90
00:36:25.040 --> 00:37:01.599
prices? What happens then? Thank you. would anybody else like to come forward? All right, we are officially closing public input and coming back here to the commissioners. Question, >> Mr. Chair. Well, yeah, we're beyond

91
00:37:01.599 --> 00:37:16.160
questions now. Uh, to the discussion part, I'll just take the first swing at it. The reason I was asking the question on what is permitted in C2, I understand why that zone C2 uh the

92
00:37:16.160 --> 00:37:32.320
farbo clinic uh was clearly a commercial uh uh curly place, Minnesota maintenance was m was a commercial facility. So, I get it why that's kind of grandfathered in. And that's why I was asking the question on the zoning map that if if

93
00:37:32.320 --> 00:37:49.760
you look at it, I don't want to call it an island of zoning because it's not really accurate, but it is surrounded on several sides by by residential and then the assisted living, which you know those it's like a church. They can kind of go.

94
00:37:49.760 --> 00:38:06.560
I also understand this is the third or fourth time we've seen a housing developer come in and and try to put something in there. I I totally get it. I I I hear what the neighbors are saying. I understand it. Uh I will say when the southside came up, I live within walking distance of those massive

95
00:38:06.560 --> 00:38:23.920
three apartment buildings. That is not on the outskirts of town. And I can tell you firsthand that has radically impacted my neighborhood. Uh the the traffic patterns are totally different. The use of the park across my street's different. That comes with the territory of growth. And but yes, I know that. I

96
00:38:23.920 --> 00:38:37.839
see that firsthand. And I'm not discounting that. I know what that looks like. If I had a magic scepter to wave, which I don't, and I've asked for one for years. If I could wave a magic scepter, I think

97
00:38:37.839 --> 00:38:55.520
that is probably better used as a lower density residential use. It really could be an R2. That said, I don't have the magic scepter and I got to deal with what's in front of me right now. It is zoned C2. The comp plan calls for it to

98
00:38:55.520 --> 00:39:11.280
be higher density residential or commercial. Given that playing field we have in front of us, it would be difficult to just summarily turn this down. If the city council decides to do

99
00:39:11.280 --> 00:39:27.040
that, I kind of want to plant the seed maybe in our minutes that if the city council does decide that they don't like this for whatever reason and want to blow it up, they've got to come forward with a reasonzoning plan. we just can't keep having the same discussion again. Uh

100
00:39:27.040 --> 00:39:42.720
the conditional use permit and a lot of times in in tricky meetings like this I like to stop and take the step back conditional use. It is a permitted use with reasonable conditions. The path that I'm going down is

101
00:39:42.720 --> 00:39:58.000
it is zone C2. This is an appropriate use in C2. The conditions are appropriate. Uh, I know that Culdeac neighborhood well. A very dear longtime friend of mine, uh, Roy Anderson and his family lived at the top of that

102
00:39:58.000 --> 00:40:13.520
culde-sac. I'm sorry, what? >> I love that house. I've been in that house dozens of times. But I know that neighborhood that's been a culde-sac my entire life. Pouring a fair amount of traffic out in that culde-sac is um,

103
00:40:13.520 --> 00:40:29.680
that's asking a lot of that neighborhood. So, I'm not in any position to even suggest start making any motions, but that would be one thing if this does move forward to maybe talk about that. I'm not sure you could not have that

104
00:40:29.680 --> 00:40:46.240
entrance there because you have an a an awfully long dead end street and then the whole thing starts to unravel. But I am mentioning it that I think that that that entrance exit onto Third Street is a problem. So that's where I'm at right

105
00:40:46.240 --> 00:41:01.760
now and I'm >> Mr. Chair, do do we know do is there like any traffic studies planned? Has that been talked about at all? Because I hear like traffic is a huge issue. And I know that street fire trucks would

106
00:41:01.760 --> 00:41:17.520
probably have a really hard time if you would take off that connection. You wouldn't be able to service probably any of that stuff if I guess you just watch a burn. Can't get the fire truck in there. So do they have a traffic study planned? So a traffic study was not required of the application. This has

107
00:41:17.520 --> 00:41:37.920
been reviewed by the city engineer and then the fire department. So um so that is not a requirement of the scope and scale of the ST want me to address any of the public

108
00:41:37.920 --> 00:41:53.760
comments on the factual nature of the things that I Okay. So it was asked how wide the road is and as if it's two-way traffic. It is intended to be two-way traffic. It is

109
00:41:53.760 --> 00:42:10.800
intended not to be signed, as I said, on either side so that you may enter or exit onto Third Avenue or from Third Avenue. You would enter it from Earl Blang Avenue or exit from Earl

110
00:42:10.800 --> 00:42:27.359
Blang. for the units that are fronting on First Street, they will have direct access, driveway access to the public road system on First Street. Um, I have to say I'm not entirely

111
00:42:27.359 --> 00:42:43.040
sure that I know if there is parking on Earl Blang Avenue. Now, if that is signed for parking, I am not clear. We can look at Google Maps and figure that out quite quickly. Um but just to know that the right of those streets are designed with

112
00:42:43.040 --> 00:43:03.760
public rideway to accommodate traffic and to acar and sometimes they are designed for on street parking and I do not but I can in regard to grading and um those

113
00:43:03.760 --> 00:43:20.560
activities um the applicant has been advised that they should be working with the adjoining property owners to the site. Great activities must stop at the property line and go no further unless

114
00:43:20.560 --> 00:43:35.440
they are granted an easement by permission of the joining property owner. They are in no obligation to do so. There is I understand and I truly believe that there is willingness for the applicant to work with the joining

115
00:43:35.440 --> 00:43:53.599
property owners to mitigate any of the necessities of grading and um screening and so forth. Um you want to reopen the the public hearing and address have them address that themselves. That's entirely up to you. Um, and I can't remember any

116
00:43:53.599 --> 00:44:09.520
other specific questions if maybe >> one was about whether or not there would be some type of buffer like a a fence. >> Um, so in our at the site planning stage, the landscape plan is required.

117
00:44:09.520 --> 00:44:25.200
This cate this is categorized as residential which means that there is a requirement not only to provide um the highest level of landscape material but also to address what we would call transition transitional areas would be between low

118
00:44:25.200 --> 00:44:41.119
density and highdensity residential. So the applicant will need to satisfy the conditions of the appropriate treatment between properties and whether that is a um if there is a difference in grade that requires a

119
00:44:41.119 --> 00:44:56.800
retaining wall. Would that be a fence and some screening alongside of it? Is there only room for a privacy fence? You know, that that is something that's looked at at the administrative level when the site plan is submitted. >> Mr. Chairman, I have some comments.

120
00:44:56.800 --> 00:45:13.760
>> Yes. Go ahead. Um, Commissioner Aman, I appreciate your questioning the density um, from the C2 to an R2, but I think that we need to take it a

121
00:45:13.760 --> 00:45:31.280
step further. Yes, you could allow a higher density, but I'm not sure that the 37 units may be too high. When you look at uh traditional APA planning, statistics say that one

122
00:45:31.280 --> 00:45:47.839
housing unit is equal to 10 trips a day. So if you have 37 housing units, that means you have 370 trips a day on the roads as as Mr. Aman said, it made a drastic impact in his

123
00:45:47.839 --> 00:46:05.359
neighborhood. Um, I don't think there's been enough uh consideration to overflow parking. Um, we all know everybody goes to visit people. If you have anybody who has a teenage driver, both parents, there's there's just extra cars.

124
00:46:05.359 --> 00:46:21.119
Um, and I've said this before, this isn't new. I don't agree with the staff's position on the criteria that's been presented in the findings, fact findings. in fact, and we don't ever review those

125
00:46:21.119 --> 00:46:37.400
individually. And so, because I don't agree with staff's position on the criteria and the way they've presented it, I'm I will be voting no because I don't agree with the I'm sorry, I don't agree with the criteria findings.

126
00:46:37.920 --> 00:47:01.920
And state statute does say that we can't give a recommendation unless we consider the criteria. So, that's why I'm saying no. Other discussion, >> Leslie. Um, as part of our recommendation, we could

127
00:47:01.920 --> 00:47:24.319
ask for signage with no park. >> Hold a sec. >> That is beyond the boundaries of this. Um the residents I believe would have to petition the department for that restriction on that

128
00:47:24.319 --> 00:47:44.319
road. I'm not that would be beyond the the request of this application. >> Any other discussion >> here? Let me just kind of take another swing as as we're continuing to work through it. Excuse me. Um, the other

129
00:47:44.319 --> 00:47:59.200
thing I forgot to mention the first time through, I'm just generically I'm not in favor of private streets. I've never really But in developments like this, it kind of has to be that way. And they have worked. But I'm not going to ever be the champion waving a flag that says

130
00:47:59.200 --> 00:48:15.040
private streets. Just another kind of yellow flag that's jumped up there. But as as the discussion was going on, I was going through and looking at the preliminary plat and CUP and the variance.

131
00:48:15.040 --> 00:48:30.880
Like I said, in a perfect world, I wish that was R2. It is not. It is C2. And in looking at our criteria, and I'll separate from Tina for a second, I I'm fine with the presentation. I'm fine with how the criteria that the staff has looked at it, but the plat is very

132
00:48:30.880 --> 00:48:46.960
reasonable. The grading plan, there's some questions here and there, but there's not anything unusual. you do this long enough and you see a conditional use list, sometimes the conditions can be really kind of unique and bonkers and you're going through that. It's like really that condition,

133
00:48:46.960 --> 00:49:02.480
oh this it can only be done on Tuesday at 2:00 and I mean there, trust me, I've seen some odd conditions. This is a very standard conditional use from it. It's very standard language on the conditions. The variance, yeah, there's a there's a couple of setback things

134
00:49:02.480 --> 00:49:19.880
here and there, but it's not anything unusual. I'm not seeing a, you know, where where a 25 ft setback is required and they're asking for a 5 foot. And correct me if I'm wrong on the variances. I just want to make sure that they were relatively minor variances. If I could just ask that question.

135
00:49:19.920 --> 00:49:36.000
>> Yeah, there that's what I'm saying. But it didn't go from 25 to five. They're asking for a five foot variance, not a five foot setback. So yeah, that's where I'm going. That if you just take the parts and look at it, it's what we do. It is

136
00:49:36.000 --> 00:49:51.440
permittable. Am I enthusiastic about my potential vote in favor of this? No. But it is permittable. It's our job to look at what's in front of us on the land use. That's why I know there were questions

137
00:49:51.440 --> 00:50:06.079
on on price structure. Uh there's a couple other things. Just bear with me for a second. You know, the definition of market rate housing and so that's not our purview. We just don't We look at land use, we look at zoning, we look at setbacks, we look at grain, you know,

138
00:50:06.079 --> 00:50:23.119
the the grading, we look at the plat. Do I think 37 is too dense? Probably. Would I be more happy with 30? Probably. But I don't get to decide that it's within the rules that they can ask for 37, which again, I go back to the

139
00:50:23.119 --> 00:50:40.559
variance. said they were asking for some sort of variance of that our zoning only allowed 25 and they're asking for 42. Yeah, I'd have a problem with that. But they're not. Everything here is within acceptable range for us.

140
00:50:40.559 --> 00:50:55.920
Whether that's right or wrong, you know, there can be a discussion. But I I'm feeling kind of danced into a corner where I would likely be voting in favor the vast majority of this because it is

141
00:50:55.920 --> 00:51:16.400
within our rules unless the city council tells us otherwise. And that's why I made the point if the city council comes in and rejects this, I would hope they kick it back to us with a recommendation to reszone this discussions.

142
00:51:16.400 --> 00:51:37.040
>> Nope, I've already said my words. So I was looking I was looking at the existing grading because my background is storm water engineering for six years. It will reduce the amount of runoff coming off parking lot. Right now, all that just

143
00:51:37.040 --> 00:51:54.000
runs straight to Urbing and right off the edge. So, most of it, if you draw a line through all the buildings, most of it is being captured and pulled into their storm system. So, that would be a benefit. And it is a big hill. So that's really hard

144
00:51:54.000 --> 00:52:10.400
to deal with on any of this gradient houses and streets. It's all really difficult. So I mean that would be a benefit is that it would take just straight up sheet flow off of a paved area to no longer run across

145
00:52:10.400 --> 00:52:26.800
some of your properties. And yeah, we are kind of backed into a corner as far as this is permitted whether and we know it impacts your communities. >> Thank you. And I'm just going to add

146
00:52:26.800 --> 00:52:43.680
just so it's on record, we do look at safety. We do look at the situations where a neighborhood changes because of certain and that's why we have all these stop guards in place and it's why we have

147
00:52:43.680 --> 00:52:59.520
wonderful staff that is able to look at these and make sure while we can't address whether or not a a a neighborhood is going to get louder or obviously more people are out there in the streets. It's again something

148
00:52:59.520 --> 00:53:28.599
that public safety takes care of and that goes um but I just want to make sure everybody knew that you care. It's just we have to stay. Mr. Chair, when in doubt, do it one at a time.

149
00:53:29.920 --> 00:53:45.280
what I'm going to do and again for the benefit of those here what we're going to do at least what I'm going to try to do start there's going to be a series of motions they're not going to be unanimous one way or another but to go back to what the chair was saying our recommendation then goes to the city council along with the minutes along

150
00:53:45.280 --> 00:54:00.400
with the tone of this discussion I am confident and when I was ch I always use the line that we're going to talk about some things and somebody's going to make an emotion and we're going to vote on stuff and eventually a majority will agree on something and then that goes to the city council. So that's what's going

151
00:54:00.400 --> 00:54:17.200
to happen and I'm quite confident that there well there's five of us so it's something you know there'll be a majority there's not six of us tonight. Uh but then that goes to the city council as a recommendation and then they said I'll start with kind of the easy

152
00:54:17.200 --> 00:54:32.720
one and I think Emily hit right on it on the plat that all seems to make sense the preliminary and final plat. I would move that we approve that resolution >> as presented. >> So your your motion is for A1. >> Yes. >> Second.

153
00:54:32.720 --> 00:54:50.640
>> All right. We have a first and a second. Any discussion? >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All oppose. Same sign. >> Nay. >> And I'm going to object to criteria three and four. So for the record to show if you're

154
00:54:50.640 --> 00:55:12.040
objecting if you're not agreeing you have to say why or what way the statute reads very much motion carries A2 Mr. Mr. Chair, I'm just looking at the conditions here now

155
00:55:12.480 --> 00:55:30.000
making that a motion, but I am curious and looking for direction from staff and the rest of the group. Is there a way at all to, and I hear Leslie, we can't get in and say, you know, put no parking signs somewhere, but is there a way to word it to add an

156
00:55:30.000 --> 00:55:47.559
additional condition to trigger staff to look at on street parking signage, parking usage? Would that be an appropriate condition to add to the motion?

157
00:55:48.559 --> 00:56:04.640
>> Mr. Chair. Um, I think the way that I would answer that is that you could recommend that city council place a condition on this project that there be sort of staff reviewing the, you know,

158
00:56:04.640 --> 00:56:21.960
the nearby streets in order to think about uh controlling on street parking. That that's maybe how I would recommend that. >> I see where you're going with it. It's not a conditional resolution, but it would be a I'll mention it in the motion in a way that it triggers where you want to go.

159
00:56:26.400 --> 00:56:43.119
Looks like I had to load that one, too. Uh, Mr. Chair, I would move we approve the conditional use permit as presented and request that the city council direct city staff to look at the on street parking needs and issues in the

160
00:56:43.119 --> 00:57:06.240
neighborhood motion. Do we have a second? >> First and a second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> All oppose. Same sign. >> Nay. And I object to staff's criteria findings on 2, three, five, and eight.

161
00:57:06.240 --> 00:57:24.880
Let the record. >> Mr. Chair, just a question. I'm just curious. I'm not hearing your vote. Is it is it 32 or 41? Okay. Thank you. Sorry, I should speak up.

162
00:57:24.880 --> 00:57:46.319
All right. A3 resolution to approve variance for Farbo Town Homes. >> I'll make this motion. >> Yeah, you can't. >> I can't. I know. >> Mr. Chair, of all the four that's in front of in front of us, again, if you

163
00:57:46.319 --> 00:58:03.280
take them in their pieces, the variances of the least concern five, you know, instead of 25 foot, it's 20 foot at a couple of spots. and it seems certainly appropriate and it to my mind it met all the criteria and the variances. I'm fine with that variance. So that

164
00:58:03.280 --> 00:58:18.640
said, I apologize for the rambling, but I move that we approve the variance resolution as presented. >> Have a motion. Do we have a second? >> A second. >> That's a second. Any further discussion?

165
00:58:18.640 --> 00:58:40.079
>> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose, same sign. >> Nay. And my objection is that if if I'm not in favor of the cup, there is no need for a variance. >> And uh A4 resolution approved the CIC

166
00:58:40.079 --> 00:58:56.000
plat for uh number 104 for Fairbell Town Homes. Mr. Chair, humor me for a second. I'll look back at Leslie. I just don't have the experience with CIC's. This is a relatively new phenomena. Give me the 302.

167
00:58:56.000 --> 00:59:13.119
What is this again and why is it part of this package? >> So, the common interest community plat allows there to be a designation of smaller units of dwelling within a single platted area.

168
00:59:13.119 --> 00:59:29.520
Recently approved the CIC plat for the Eastman building. Same thing stacked. >> Excuse me, Leslie. A little closer. >> Seems to be cutting out. It's cutting out. It's not you. It's >> apologies. I'll try to speak up. Um, you recently some illustrations that you might be familiar with from your tenure

169
00:59:29.520 --> 00:59:45.839
is the CIC plat that you approved for the Eastman building, which is a different arrangement. It's a multi-levelled single roofed structure, but it allows those individual units to be I will just say condominiumized or

170
00:59:45.839 --> 01:00:02.880
subdivided in the in the in the construct of the larger structure for that building. So in a subdivision it is that in at that theory as well where the properties are uniquely identified they

171
01:00:02.880 --> 01:00:17.680
can they remain under the common roof line here but the the because it's this is part of a larger community setting a neighborhood setting there needs to be other bylaws and declarations and

172
01:00:17.680 --> 01:00:34.480
associated contracts that anybody who is going to have an ownership share in future should that occur would also be party to the larger parcel itself. >> Thank you. That's really helpful. So this is in front of us because of the common roofs.

173
01:00:34.480 --> 01:00:48.640
>> Correct. >> If it wasn't a common roof, this wouldn't be in front of us. Thank you. >> And honestly for the flexibility, could they have delayed this decision in the future when that they had a to be in the

174
01:00:48.640 --> 01:01:04.160
future considered? Yes. Is it to provide flexibility for the management style and and to you know it could be it's it's like I said when we talked about this in the work session it's a bit of choose your own adventure. Could one entire

175
01:01:04.160 --> 01:01:22.079
building sell to another property owner in total? Yes. Could individual units sell in future? Yes. Could this thing could the entire property and every single unit within it remain under one ownership? Yes. And so because just a

176
01:01:22.079 --> 01:01:38.000
reminder and this is not to sway you but this is the fact the Mayo Clinic Alina building has been vacant since 2017. So obviously there is some desire for some flexibility to be also encompassed in this proposal. I don't think I'm

177
01:01:38.000 --> 01:01:54.000
overstating that. >> And I know planning world has kind of started to shy away from this term but 20 years ago this could have been a plan unit development instead of a CIC. >> Correct. That would have been that would have been a different approach. >> Yeah. But it it it's it's in it's in the neighborhood of a of a of planned unit

178
01:01:54.000 --> 01:02:09.040
development. >> Yep. And if and the difference just for the commission members so we don't get confused, if this were proposed as a plan unit development, a great deal of other design thresholds could have been proposed. And so it does meet the

179
01:02:09.040 --> 01:02:25.520
current parking standard. I can didn't can say that from our tabulation, but they also could as part of a PUD could have asked forgiveness for certain standards in the encompassing approval of a PUD. But I don't want to get you off track. So what is before you as a

180
01:02:25.520 --> 01:02:40.319
CIC >> and go ahead. >> I have a question when you're done. >> Uh just to let the public know as well whether this has been vacant since yesterday or 2017, it has no

181
01:02:40.319 --> 01:02:58.559
at all. So, um, we're not considering any how long it's >> just as an FYI, >> well, I guess maybe I'm a little confused, Leslie. If you sold one building, it would require a separate

182
01:02:58.559 --> 01:03:16.000
tax ID number. Would it be required you'd have to split the lots back up again? The >> attorney's opinion that I'm understanding. I just feel like it's I'll be quiet. I I just feel like you in

183
01:03:16.000 --> 01:03:32.559
development you I understand the flexibilities that they're looking for. They don't want to come back in front of us again. They want to get it all done at one time. And I get that. But I think you need to make a decision. Are you going to do are you

184
01:03:32.559 --> 01:03:47.359
going to sell units? Are you going to rent units? Are you going to know upfront I'm going to sell some? I'm going to rent some. I I just think you need to know that before you start. So maybe there's no reason to It could be 10 years down the road before they sell

185
01:03:47.359 --> 01:04:02.880
a unit or a a building, but I just feel like it's premature until they know whether they're going to sell it or rent it. I I just feel like it's premature to do that. But I'm not in support anyway. That's just the CIC thing. I mean,

186
01:04:02.880 --> 01:04:31.839
there's just it's very different. >> Harry, do you wanted to add something? >> I'll I'll hold for now. >> Mr. Chair, my enthusiasm is far from high on this. It's a very messy >> I

187
01:04:31.839 --> 01:04:46.720
I'll I'll just say I again I I'll I'll say it for the record. I wish this was not zone C2. If I had my way and this was not zone C2 and was zone something else. I'd be having a very different

188
01:04:46.720 --> 01:05:04.079
series of conversations here today. But I mean it's the old saying when all else fails is put your head down and do your job. our jobs in front of us and I certainly respect the the folks that are voting against it and I certainly respect the neighborhood. If I were you, I would be there agreeing with you, but

189
01:05:04.079 --> 01:05:21.359
this is what we signed up for. This is what we do. And that's why I wanted to be very clear what a CIC is. Uh before I make the motion, I'll also add I was at a housing conference last week. This is not unique to Farbo. It is next to impossible to build single family houses right now. Uh no developers doing it.

190
01:05:21.359 --> 01:05:37.359
It's just not happening. So this isn't a unique farbo problem. Every community throughout southern Minnesota and Minnesota and probably this part of the country dealing with the same thing. So that all said, Mr. Chair, I move that we approve CIC common interest community

191
01:05:37.359 --> 01:05:57.280
plat number 104 as presented tonight. >> I'll second. >> Have a first and a second. Any discussion? And just from my field, I am an insurance agent and having these CIC's

192
01:05:57.280 --> 01:06:22.319
cause complications while I see where they come in. While I wish there was something more perfect. All in favor say I. >> All oppose same sign. >> Nay. Right.

193
01:06:22.319 --> 01:06:40.559
The resolution is approved. >> Item number five, request to be heard. Mr. Chair, before we move on, uh the city council next Tuesday night, so next Tuesday, 8 days from now, city council, it's in front of them.

194
01:06:40.559 --> 01:06:57.400
>> The CIC is not until the 23rd or it's a later date. CIC plat's on a different date, but the ution says city council holds a public hearing on

195
01:07:01.520 --> 01:07:19.119
yeah public meeting June 23rd what it says in the CIC plat. >> Mr. Chair, I apologize that was a that was an error. We will we will get that fixed.

196
01:07:19.119 --> 01:07:45.440
And actually the 23rd is next Tuesday. >> But just to clarify for the group >> and not in next week yet. Sorry. >> All right. Request to be heard. >> Uh Mr. Chair, at this time we don't have any requests to be heard.

197
01:07:45.440 --> 01:08:02.720
>> Item number six, items for discussion. Uh currently, Mr. Chair, we don't have any items for >> number seven, routine business. >> Mr. Chair, we don't have anything for routine business. >> Number eight, updates and reports.

198
01:08:02.720 --> 01:08:19.040
>> Yes, Mr. Chair. So, I guess um just a short update to um what we're doing regarding potential development standards for data centers. Um with the recent ruling from

199
01:08:19.040 --> 01:08:34.799
uh the courts, uh city council would like to kind of discuss their options with the city attorney before moving forward and figuring out exactly what what the game plan is going forward. So that is why we

200
01:08:34.799 --> 01:08:52.799
we don't have a work session uh while why we are not talking about potential data center development standards. So is that anything that's that comes currently on

201
01:08:52.799 --> 01:09:10.080
nothing that's been talked about? >> Mr. Chair, can you clarify that just a little? >> Um just just curious since we're on uh is this just not a moratorum, but is this just a

202
01:09:10.080 --> 01:09:28.239
discussion for any new applicants? >> Mr. shared there. There are no discussions to my knowledge about a moratorum or not talking about certain things like potential new applicants or anything like that. Um it's it's just a

203
01:09:28.239 --> 01:09:46.279
request from city administration to hey let's put things on hold while we figure out what the plan is going forward. >> I'm sorry I thought you said city council. >> Well, my apologies. >> Yes, both really. Right

204
01:09:46.719 --> 01:10:03.679
adjournment. Do we have a motion? >> I so move. >> All right, we have a first and a second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. All oppose. Same sign. We are adjourned. And thank you so much for the community

205
01:10:03.679 --> 01:10:07.159
coming out tonight.