All right, good evening everybody. We are going to call the St. Joseph Planning Commission meeting for Monday, June 9th to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. All right, we are on to number three. We have public comments. Anything that people wish to talk about not on the agenda tonight? Beautiful. We'll go ahead and close
that. We are number four, agenda review and adoption. I would like to make a motion to change the order of the new business. Uh so A would stay number one, C would become number two, B I'm sorry, D would be
number three, and B would be number four. Awesome. I got a motion to change 7 ACB. Do I have a second? I'll second. All right, we got a second. All in favor? I opposed. All right, we have adopted
the agenda. Approval of the May 12th, 2025 minutes. Motion. Motion. Second and a second. All in favor? I. All opposed. All right. Number six, old business. Nate A. Bayou Flats Alley
PUD amendment. All right. Thank you, chair. All right. So, the Bayou Alley Flats PUD amendment. You recall that this was on for discussion and public hearing at last month's meeting back in May. The commission did discuss and decide to
table action on this item at the last meeting. Most of it was tied to concerns about closing off that middle access point and wanted to further understand the possibility of extending the patio and cooler to the north. Um, in response
to that, the staff did reach out to the applicants team and then did ask uh three main questions. Um, one, what is the feasibility of expanding the patio to the north and include pros and cons and why and why not is that possible? And then two, relocating the trash
receptacles and enclosure. Again, pros and cons and feasibility and why and why not is that or why and why is that not possible? And then the last one was just reconfiguring the cooler. Could that be expanded to the north and aligned there
um and then not have the access point closed? And then why or why not? So, in your packet, responses from the applicant and the architect were provided. Um, just to summarize those, um, relocating the project to the north
driveway presents multiple issues which include poor internal circulation within the property, specifically the pickup, garbage pickup, and um, being able to safely access that current pickup
location. um lack of maneuvering and then lack of another area for moving those trash recepticles and enclosure to. Um right now our code does require that trash recepticles have to be enclosed on all sides. Um so that is
additional space that is needed for those trash recepticles. Um that creates some problems when trying to re relocate that within the current site given the density of the site. Um and then the current east side layout supports the
functional access of the site, enhances safety, um doesn't conflict with the trash receptacle location, and then just the interrogate or um integration of that with the bakery's internal operations. Um that's a big part of why
the cooler is being proposed where it's being proposed. Um, so just some graphics again here that we saw at the last meeting just showing the cooler and then couple pictures from the alleyway itself.
Here's some better images here that show aerial showing the site. Again, those trash receptacles are right over to the north there. Um the first one in the upper left is looking from south to north and then the picture on the right
hand side um from the audience's perspective is looking towards the west along the site. So the action that is requested tonight is a recommendation on the resolution PC2025-01
that would amend the developers agreement and then that recommendation tonight would be forward to the council meeting next Monday. So the applicants are in attendance this evening um and can respond to any questions that the commission has on the project.
Great. Thanks Nate. Um, real quick question before we'll bring the applicants up though. The more I thought about it after the meeting, looking at stuff, is it possible to even close that whole portion of that alleyway off and have an entrance and an exit on both sides? I don't know if
that's, you know what I mean? Like, because I don't think our goal is to limit you guys and your business, but it's just that avenue is really, really tight there, right? And just thinking, is it possible to do that on both sides and just cut the middle completely off or is that something that would have to
go to the council or So, yeah, I want to understand it better. So, are you saying like is it possible to expand at the east but then still have a drive? Yeah, I'm cut the middle completely out like
where they are asking to expand. Still cut that but then all the way across the alley. don't even have that as a point to where they can go through. So, how far how far east is blocking the alley? Just right here. Blocking the alley from there all the way to just right here. So, if people want to get in, they can get in here, right?
They can still get through here. One way going this way, right? But that's what I'm saying. The I think that poses some delivery driver, right? Only trying to put it out there because if you block that whole thing off, right? Could you get in and get out? I know that poses some problems,
but I'm just trying to think outside the box a little bit. Yeah. So, so, um, the western most access to this site, I believe, is the widest access point. Um, and I believe applicants can correct me if I'm wrong on this, but um, I believe when like
garbage comes for collection, I believe they come and then they turn into that first access point and then come through and then pick up the garbages and then go out towards the the other way. They keep going out east on the alley to the no to within the
within the site the so the garbage receptacles within the site itself. So they'll come in at that first access point to the west that we want to stripe. Correct. Yep. And that that would be striped. Um the recommendation from staff is to stripe that no parking in that area so
that area is clear at all times. Mhm. Um and so they would come in and then they pick up the garbages. Um and then they continue to the east and then go out the eastern most access point. Yeah. When they when they do pick up the trash, just to make sure and I want to understand,
they don't go all the way through to the parking garage. They make an immediate right right behind the bakery or do they go correct? No, they do not. If you want to come if you want to come up to you can just say your name who you are. You might as well. We'll get you guys up here. But just state your name for the record and
then Yeah. Um, Aaron Mackey, uh, owner of both crew FL. Thanks, guys. So, it sometimes it just depends on where people are parked in the alley and in the thing, but what normally happens is they come in, take that first left
into like the garages, like going towards the garages, and then when they get the the apartment garbage and um, recycling, that's right in that covered area. But then there's also a a recycling bin tucked into the at the little walkway that's at the end
of the first garages. So sometimes the dump or the uh driver will go all the way into that like loop and then come out all the way through the end of the parking lot to the very last exit. So are you I'm just going to say so we
go in here with the cursor. Yep. So yeah. So they go in there. go they'll usually go that whole horseshoe. The whole horseshoe. Yep. And then come out. And it changes sometimes season season. Now summer they'll pull in they all the garbage on wheels. Y that driver will just stay in the spot.
Wheel the garbage can, pick it up, dump it, wheel it back in, grab whatever the next one is, back in. Recycling guys, same thing. They'll push it in kind of where my truck is parked on the screen. Go in, grab that one out of there, push it up to the front of their thing, dump it. Sometimes they will back themselves
out. into that alley. And normally they'll take that full Do they ever go through the parking lot and then go out the other exit? No, they can't make that. They rarely can make that. No, sometimes they will go through. I know, but when it depends on if there's a car parked in that. Yeah, they'll go through that
straightway and then go exit through the They never go through the second entrance. Is that correct? No, because they can't miss they can't make that turn. Yeah, it's too tight right there. There's usually a car parked at the very end of the um little strip there and that Yeah, their bumper would totally
So they can still go in through the horseshoe, but then can they cut between the building and your and the the Yeah. So, and then they can come back out. So, pretty much kind of doing Yeah, that was going to exit through the parking lot. Yes. Yep.
Okay. Yeah. I was just trying to think outside the box. So, um Okay. Um open uh for discussion or does anybody have questions for You got feel free. So what we did, we actually, you
probably saw us today. We're at Bland Fire Department here. So we actually took one of our trucks, actually two of our trucks today and try to get access to the site in the back there. So with our van, we can get in the front one and then it is tight, you know, all the way around there. But
the we took our our bigger fire truck, our ladder truck, and we came in off of Minnesota and we took the first left. We could barely make it in there because there was vehicles parked there. I know we talked about striping that so people can't park there. I'm curiosity who's going to enforce that and then we could
not make it actually around the horseshoe with a with a single turn with the truck. Um or the first one either. We could not make that turn. Um so I'm looking at access from a safety. So let's say there's fires in that garage there. How are we getting there? We can't really pull in that first exit because we're
not we're too close to the fire. We don't want to park that that close. So now the middle one's blocked off. We got to back in away from the east one because I don't think we can drive in there and get enough access for for fire vehicles in there to be able to do anything. So, that was a concern that we
had tonight. Um, go ahead and expand on that if you want, but just a safety concern. Um, think you guys have a great product. Um, the the interior from what I've seen, um, not the largest and there's typically a line wrapped around
the building. Is that fair to say? I think with a patio and that's just going to increase that problem and with blocking off that middle stall, it's just going to keep pushing traffic through that westward lot where the lines now in theory
getting larger because we have more seating. So, it was just safety concern on my end. I guess my question is where your truck is parked there too. Like how often do you park there? We can never park there. Those are our two garages that we rent. So, we would
control anybody parking there, especially if you had it striped and marked. And if you can, you can kind of see to that far corner where the recycling is, there's a little white area that shows there's no parking signs there. I'm sure we can get more to put across the rest of them. But they're only in that
corner, that far right hand corner of the right hand photo against that garage. And then the one adjacent to it to the right the like straight ahead to the Yeah. Okay. And I'm in the bakery every day, so I
can I think between our social media and me being there physically, we can start telling people not to park there, and I think it will work. It just may take a couple months for it to people to remember that they can't work park there and stuff like that. But I I also think if there's a spot for
people to sit down, a lot of times they'll come with families where it's one, two, three people. there's one person that can order and other people can go sit down, you won't have as much I guess congestion of people standing in that parking lot area also. And I'm sure
if they heard you guys racing down alley, they probably get out of the way, right? Yeah. And you guys, you can't turn into the far one either. Did you try over here at all? Do you know the far the middle one or the far one? Far one. The far one. So that being a that's a way
far east one. That would be not not from coming in the way the alley goes to make that turn. No, you'd either have to pull pass and then back into it. We can't make again just to make sure that I understand from your point of view. If they if they put the p you that that
turn in that that little access point where the patio is going to go, you can't use that anyway. Period. Period. Probably right, but it just makes it all wet more congested in there with people and everything else too. So that's kind of the I guess the point. But but yeah, you're right. We would probably use it anyway now the way it is
because you can't get the truck in there to turn around. There are bigger ones. Correct. Yeah, that is correct. Not. Yeah. What does it look like on the other side, Nate, with the garages? Is it all vegetation on the up here? Yeah. Is that this?
Nope. More right there. Oh, that's all that's a different property on the other side. There's houses over there. One big grass lot with a random garage on it and then houses on. You know, I look at trying to say it's like if you needed to, could you drive on that side? I mean, because again, when there's a
fire, it don't matter. Depends burning though, too. As the garages, you know, we could run through a thousand different scenarios, right? I mean, and you never want to see it, but you know. Yeah. Right here. Okay. Well, yeah. Okay. This is just one property. This is actually the interim use permit that we have on tonight's agenda right over
here. So, Okay. Yeah. Good to know. But, you know, I look directly behind it. You know, at least there's a big open space there. Maybe we'll talk later, but just trying to see. Okay, those are some of the questions I had.
Just to add to um just a point of clarification, too. I know we we just mentioned some of this and talked about it last time. If the commission were inclined to put a condition for like no parking along this stretch, you can that is the right of the commission to put
that on there and that would be enforced as part of private property parking. Yeah, cuz that's on their that's on their lot. Is it something to where we could stripe that too? I mean, obviously then loading vehicles could still pull in and load, but just no parking
because it's a loading zone, call it. Yeah, I mean, you could do it, you could tackle it a variety of different ways. You can just do straight no parking from, you know, whatever time to whatever time along this stretch. You can do the first couple spaces right here, no parking. It's really what the
commission feels is best and what would help the situation, I guess. Or like I wouldn't be opposed to striping it if you're already going to stripe the first one. The first one. Is that going to mess with deliveries, though? Well, no, because you could still have the delivery people pull up into it because there, you know, for the loading
purposes, if that's the only thing that's going to pull there, it actually would be better, right? I mean, because then now you don't have cars that are parked there during delivery time, right? I mean, obviously, yes, we have to enforce it and you guys can get hopefully out in social media, but if you're going to stripe it, you might as
well do that, too, as far as no parking slash loading zone right there. Yep. And you just do the whole thing up to it, I guess. Or like to your point, Nate, even if it's the first two or three spots, because then you could still keep a couple spots there.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I would say just cuz the overall site is dense in terms of like limited parking that maybe you know from a perspective maybe have some but right half of it I mean because then you could probably fit two cars still there
on the end. So okay. Is that all one property or is there another property line that goes north south there? I'll go back to this. So this is all one property right here. So this is
this entire site is part of the overall planned unit development. Um and the parking stalls are adequate to meet the needs of correct of the Yep. Correct. Because they have the garage parking and such. Um so yeah, that was part of the overall PUD that
went through and was approved back in 2014. Do they have extra spaces? Um I do not believe so. Um I just utilize the lot that's alongside the other building that Peters owns the
and and these ones right here I do not believe were were part of the quantity of the spaces that were approved as part of this original PUD. Um, and since 2014 when it was originally approved, there's only been one other amendment and that
was in 2017. And that was when there is three units on the lower floor, call it the north uh west corner over here, that were changed from commercial to residential units. The original intent of the PUD was to have the whole lower
level be commercial. Um, so that was the only change that ensued since the original that didn't bring up anything to add parking with those three developments. Correct. So they had ample parking per our orders. I I do not believe so. Yeah, because it was the site was existing as it was.
Okay. Yeah. There was no other modification. The only reason I asked that because it's like, well, can you eliminate some of those spots so that there's more area to move? But again, just trying to think outside the box, right? But
Um Keith and Andy, just a quick question. Your concerns for safety for the people um that are in in the patio area. Is it from traffic from the alley or is it from traffic going around the horseshoe and around through the parking lot?
Let's see. Probably yes, in my mind both. Probably. Right. I mean, it's a get pretty congested area in there. I understand the alley can get really congested, but I didn't know how congested the horseshoe gets when people want to go because that's just for the residents primarily, right? But now I think it's a oneway.
Yeah. So, we're going to force we're going to funnel cars in through that first if anyone needs to get there. They're going to have to drive by twice. Right. But but it's it's already a oneway going into the horseshoe into their parking areas. They're already doing that. Well, and I know if if you
close off that middle one because there's been times too, it's like I don't know if I'm supposed to take a left in the first or left in the second. So, you do have people have sometimes that go the opposite way. So, again, eliminating it will force them to do that, right? I guess your biggest concern though is getting that big truck
there if needed to be safety. Right. And that's why I said well, you know, on the back of it if needed. I mean, heaven forbid there's a fire, we don't ever want that, but And if I may interrupt the there is a lot of people that go the
wrong way daily. Probably at least every other driver is going the wrong way to get out. Um and they are exiting the proposed space for the patio and it's a pretty tough blind corner because the bakery does stick out further. So
people are exiting there too. cutting that off to people will what I think will make it a little safer because it's a lack of um or less chance of a T-bone happening right there. Um especially people walking around and whatnot. Um
and honestly, if I can just speak, I don't mind it not having a patio. That's not my concern. My concern is we need cooler space and we've outgrown both crew and flower and flowers. So, however it will work, I'll be back next
time if it doesn't get approved to get a cooler space in the parking lot because that's that's the biggest concern here. So, I just wanted to put that top of mind that the patio is a bonus, but the cooler is what's necessary. To refresh just to refresh my memory,
the cooler goes just to the east of of the actual shop, right? Yeah. because and that's kind of why why we want to close it off because that's where it's going to extend into. Yep. We would like to maximize the space
and that's the only really space that will work inside of the bakery to access it from inside of the bakery. Yeah. Kind of go back to that. Remember that arrow kind of in the middle point there's a gas meter there. Those things would probably have to be relocated to get us out to go to the trash.
I wouldn't even entertain putting a cooler there because it would interrupt the retail space and then it would also be in the way of the garbage truck. So, it's kind of for me the way that I envision my space is that that's kind of where it would need to go. Whether it's going that way or whether it goes alongside the sidewalk that's in the
back and just forfeit. It's either get a patio or forfeit my patio. And either way, I just need a cooler. So, however it works. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Any other questions, concerns?
Okay. Well, at this time, I'm I'm going to make a motion to approve resolution PC 2025, but with stipulations to stripe those first couple parking spots of the loading zone and to add no parking there. Um, and that's that's what I'm
going to do. Do I have a second at all? I'll second. Yep, there's sec. So, I got a motion and a second. Any more discussion? I'm I'm still pretty concerned about what you guys brought up about the fire truck, but I'm not as much concerned
about the patio and about the cooler as much as I am about even right now. It's you can't get a truck in there now. Um, and that bothers me that that that we don't have the ability to get safety equipment. Can I ask one question? Absolutely. I
know we were parked there waiting to come to there. So, that maroon band was ours. Should that had that maroon band not been there? Had you been a would you been able to take a little wider turn to not have to do that little te back up to get kind of in that circle? I don't know. The first turn, yes, would
the first left would have been easier because it was pretty tight there. But actually getting around the other one, I don't think we would have made it either way. But that's with a ladder truck. You got smaller trucks that can We have our vans or smaller stuff, but all of our trucks that was actually the smallest of our three big trucks. Is that like your pumper tankers like to
get the water in? Those are ladder. So we use our ladder for that. Yeah. Our is the pumper tanker smaller. Is your ladder your biggest truck? The ladder is the smallest of the three big ones. Okay. We have We have three large trucks. We do have smaller vehicles. We have a grass rig. We have, you know, a few other smaller the rescue vehicles
smaller. Where's fire hydrants compared to that back there? Are there some back there? I think there's a water hookup. Is there a water hookup on the building? That's for us to put water in the Yeah, we still need water to the truck.
Um, our concern, I think we talked about it a little bit. If let's say for sake of example, your two garage dolls are on fire. Yeah. Us parking our truck there would be we can't do that. from the truck to some. So would you then you'd probably park in
the alley closer to La Pette at that point. Right. Right. Or back in if it's on the second story in that L. It'd be not a good day no matter which way you cut it, which we never obviously want that to happen, right? But I feel like at that point it's the
bakery is the one that's in the way, not necessarily the cooler or the patio. Right. Essentially, right? It's it's it's a problem. Even with even with it, it's it's a problem. So even if we approve it, you're still adding stuff, but really it's the bake
the initial building that was already grandfathered in there because ultimately it would have been great if you could have just back and and I'm sure some of this was flushed out why it was going through the original PUD, but I'm not sure to what extent it was um and what those
conversations look like or that pre I think all of our times, but Okay. Yeah. along with along with the safety concerns. You brought up some of the striping and some of the and I I really do think that you know if we approved this before with the stipulations for
more traffic control, more SC I hate to use more science. They just they don't I think we proved last time it's not it's not effective, but you still you still put it in there. It's got to be effective if you enforce it. It's got to be enforced that people know it's a one way and you can't come back
any other way. And I still think the striping, you know, to the to the west and then if you stripe where that is, it's it's bright, it's vibrant, it's at least going to say something. But again, I don't think anything's going to happen until you call and you get someone towed or you get someone out of there to where they're like, I can just park wherever I
want. So, you know, if if it gets approved, it's putting it on you guys as well as the owners that are there to try and enforce it a little bit more to make people aware like, oh crap. when people have been getting more uh bold with their parking lately, too. And I've asked people to move recently. So, I'm
not I have no opposition to We've even asked Granite City, who uh real estate who manages the buildings there, to do a better job, but they haven't followed through on that themselves. So, it's put it in our hands. So yeah,
I mean I don't mind getting nosy with people and pushing them out of the way because with you know with your two garages that you have there how often are you parking there to load to unload because that's too often right. So I mean it's more of a convenience. Yeah. And that's that's a big thing is
if this gets approved like do you have an idea of We easily could unload and drive away in five or 10 minutes. Okay. So not parking there for hours at a time, right? Because obviously that's there's a greater payoff to not there. Yep. Exactly. Because again, then if you're closing that middle part,
you know, and then you're there, well, now you're blocking the only way in, you know what I mean? So, and and one thing to keep in mind, too, is right now, um, within that western most access point, um, this PUB, one of the our conditions or our
recommendations from staff is to have that no parking right there, you know, at all times and such. So that could maybe help improve that access flow there and hopefully discourage people. But again, signage is only as effective as So, all right. Well,
yes. You mentioned earlier, does that fall on the property owners or is that something that does the St. Joe police got? Does Yep. So any of this no parking that we're talking about, whether it's the westernmost access point or it's the parking that is next to the alleyway
would fall on the owner, which would be um John Peters and and his team. Um and we I think flushed that out or talked about that at the last meeting and I know Peters was supportive of that. So So that'd be getting back to him too, right? All right. Um any other
discussion? I' I'd kind of like to also add that we should be able to come back and visit this three months later, six months later. Sure. To look at the safety concerns and see if the traffic flow has improved, to see if we've got adequate safety measures in place to protect residents, visitors to
the store, you know, just to make sure that things are working and and if something comes up that we need to add to it that we have to go. Yeah. Because the proposed patio isn't meant to be a permanent structure. It's meant to be three seasons and we can take it down for winter. So if we do
find that it does cause more havoc than anything cooler would still extend into there are options to get a cooler that can be removable but obviously that'd be a pain in the butt but we could in your response I see you wrote something that that takes up the sidewalk and the mulch. Would that be a
like a fix for you? Would that be that would be but that would eliminate what did you say? That'd be second best case scenario. Yeah, that would eliminate all of my patio that I have right now on that side. But it that would work. I think it'd be a little tighter though for
cars. I mean, it would butt up right to the road and eat up the patio or the sidewalk. But yeah, I I mean, personally, I would I I don't hate getting rid of that middle part. Like, because even trying to turn in their left or turn out their right, like
it just shouldn't be there. Erin, do you It adds more confusion. Yeah. I was going to ask um Erin, do you recall, I don't have in front of me, how wide that patio or that cooler is? We proposed 18 feet and I think that
goes from the wall to the um curb of the start of that sidewalk or like a little bit before it. So if we go from the wall and we go out east 18 feet. Yeah. That'll pretty Yep. Yep. So you'll still have a walkway there.
Yeah. Yeah, about four feet. How long would that proposed cooler be then if we were to rotate it? Um, if we were to rotate it, it'd only go up to 8 ft. So, it's 18 18 by 8. Oh. Um,
are you at like Wait, I'm sorry. If you put it to rotate it to And that was my original kind of question there. Thank you. Yeah, I think that one would have been 6 by8 if it were to go alongside the building taking up the sidewalk. Oh, so you exchange size of if you would
other way. Correct. We would it basically cut it in half and the cooler, you know, if we were to able to do the 18 foot, we would do half freezer, half cooler, which is what our like issue is right now is we don't have any freezer space. Um, we would be able
to still do that, but it'd be a lot smaller. But then now you have that cooler that's budding up. And if you don't vacate that, well, now it's even tighter there for cars and less visibility on the out, you know. Okay. You might get cars trying to sneak
through there. Yep. Yeah. You're going to make the west one a two-way then, right? That's the plan show, right? So that'll be in out the west entrance then. This west entrance. Is that correct? That's the plan shows. I I did see a picture of that. I'm not
sure. It's on the plans that you have in the packet here. So there both ways I mean that would be smart because then it would eliminate parking and less one way. Is there space to make that two-way?
Well, that's and then to the point of the blind spot, I guess I see the same issue then because the the building there sticks out as far as Flower and Flower does as far as creating a blind spot there. But I I don't know if that was the intent or not. I just saw the double arrows and I Was that supposed to be in the drawings,
Nate? Well, I I think really the only ones that would use this, right, coming out this way are going to be the folks that are coming out from the garage areas and then swooping down this way. Um, you know, because this is still going to be that would still be a oneway going that way, right? So, you're not going to have
any cars, at least in theory, won't put it against anyone, but you know, these cars shouldn't be traveling back this way and then back down that way. They should all be exiting over there. is meant for, you know, folks to come in through this way, you know, park over here and then exit out that way or for
the folks in the garage to come out and then come out this way. Um, there's a little bit more visibility coming out here where you don't have the building and other obstructions that are blocking views as you're coming out this way. And I think you kind of make it a oneway still. And
you know what I mean? You still make it a oneway. And because you're still going to have confusion, I think it like to your point, Erin, it's only going to it's going to take a couple months, but after a couple months, they should it should subside a little bit, but you know, again, concerns are there. So, I
guess you don't know until it's done, right? But, you know, to Mark's point, I think there's a bigger factor than just this. If anything, it exacerbated the already safety calls that we have going on even prior to it. So, and to Mark's point, you can come back and revisit it
and talk in six months is how's it going? Is it not going? Do you need the patio there? Or, you know, because then if you vacate the patio, well, now you have a little bit more space to be able to for cars to do the wrong thing. But,
so any other thoughts, concerns, comments? Okay. If not, we do have a motion and a second. the motion for to approve PC 2025-10 with um stipulations of striping the first call it 50% of where the
loading is and there um I have a first and second all in favor I are you talking the 50% here yep I think you're going to have to do the whole thing to get an 18-wheeler in there like all yep all four spots there is that four
yeah if you try hard enough well I mean I I don't care I'm down with the uh give me a I'm going try to go back here and um because I'm not sure how many are exactly. Usually it's a 9 by8. Um so it's about 78 ft there.
I'm good with all of it. 80 foot 18 legal combination. I did with the striping. So yep. Yep. That and that that can only be used for
loading and unloading. loading and unloading. Hey, maybe you could park there for certain hours of the day. Um, does anyone get a truck after 5? No, not you still don't want people I still wouldn't park there. No. And we as like bellow cacina law
play as restaurant owners, we can tell our drivers that they should veer off into the stripe zone to unload and unload, keep the alleyway open. We are okay able to do that. Will they listen all the time? Maybe not. But the more we push our reps to tell the drivers to do
it, we'll do it. Most of them we try to do a key drop. So at least two of them come before 6 a.m. Oh, that's good, too. I still say you you stripe it and it's just no parking period. So the motion is to approve um
resolution PC 2025 with the additional striping where those four spots are. Um all in favor, please signify by I. I. All opposed. Well, you got more. No, you just left off. I mean, when we talked about the be to come back six
months later. Oh, you know, any additional signage that we need. I just want to make sure that So, do you want that in the motion as well? Okay. Well, let's let's retry this again. Yeah. I say let's let's do a new I'm going to make a motion to approve resolution PC 2025 with uh-10 with the
stipulations to stripe those four spots and come back in what do you want? Three months or six months? Six months to talk about adding more signage there through the city. Safety and security. So to add more signage in six months,
but not add the signage. I would say just review the secure review the safety issues to make sure we're doing everything we can. Okay. With the added signage in place. Yeah. I would say put the added signage in place right away. Right away. Right. Right. Okay.
Okay. So, that's the motion. Second. I got a second. Any more discussion? All in favor signify by I. I Anybody opposed? All right. Well, it's 22. So,
unfortunately, the motion does not pass. Um, that's what I've got. Okay. So, it'd be a failed motion. So then it would um be forward that recommendation be forwarded on to the council for their meeting next Monday. So a failed motion does not pass.
Yep. Yep. So Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. We are going to move on to seven. Now we got a little bit of change. So we're going to start with 7A.
Awesome. Thank you, chair. So we have an interim use permit being proposed. This is a renewal. So, it is for a residential rental within a B1 downtown commercial district. So, this interimm
use permit is up for renewal. It was approved back in 2020 and was approved with a 5-year maximum term for the interimm use. So, I included a couple graphics. I know some of this is kind of
hard to read on the screen up here. Um but just to show the surrounding area. So that subject property and call it the neon green right there in the lefth hand picture. Um that's the property that we are referencing just north of the property we were just talking about with
the last council or the last agenda item. The properties across to the north are either um residential in use or also residential rental. However, in that picture to the right, you can see that
blue color. All the properties to the north, west, and um northwest would be in our zoned B1 downtown commercial. So, the action for this evening is to open and close that public hearing. And
then the second step would be a recommendation on the resolution 20 PC 2025-012 which would approve the finding of fact and issue a renewal for the interimmuse permit. Um one item that do request for
discussion is the appropriate duration. Uh we've talked about the duration in the past with other interimm use permits. We have in the language right now drafted a five-year um max on there. We did include graphics from the
applicant though who does intend to convert the property to a commercial use um in the in the future. So um and is thinking about those things already. So with that, I'd be happy to answer questions. Otherwise, we'd be looking
for that public hearing and then that action on that resolution. Any comments from the commission? Right. If not, I will go ahead and open the public hearing. Um, does anybody wish to come up and speak?
Don't all jump at once. All right, I will go ahead and close the public hearing. So, now we are looking for a motion to approve resolution 2025-12, the adopting a finding effect. Do I have a motion? I make a motion. I have a motion.
A second. And a second. Any more discussion? All in favor? And just real quick, chair, so that motion, so the so the drafted the drafted resolution had the fiveyear term. So I just want to make sure that the commission's okay.
Okay. I don't think we had any change with it. Three to five years. They might they might be developing within three years and that's all good on our side. Yep. Okay. Y So it's with with the the finding of facts with five years as drafted. Okay. Are we we good? Yep. Thank you.
All approved. I Anybody opposed? All right, that one passes. Now we're moving on to what would be C. And keep me honest here. I'll go back to my pages. So the next one would be
um All right. The reszone request. Yep. Clippers reszone for lots one through three block two K&L properties. Yeah, thank you chair. So uh yes. So this is one project proposal but with this one project proposal there is a
multitude of different steps involved um in sequential order. There's the reszone and then there's the future land use amendment and then the preliminary PUD plan. So um the reason is to align the proposed use with the proper zoning um
and then the amendment to the future land use is to then amend the future land use with that zoning. And then the PUD preliminary plan is to allow the increased density and storm water pond dedication which we'll talk about um shortly. And then future steps if all
these items were recommended for approval and then approved by the council would be to come back with a final PUD plan and execute the PUD agreement and then vacate interior easements between the lots and then do a pre and final plat.
So reszone proposal. So the three subject lots that we are talking about are um the total acreage is about just above 3 acres or so and they are located what we call south of Quick Trip East. So we have 20th Avenue on the eastern
side and Minnesota Street on the northern side. Uh these three lots are currently zoned B2 which is highway business. So then that map to the right hand side on your screen, all the red
area is B2 highway business. To the south of the site, that beige color is R3 multifamily. And then to the southwest is a PUB with
a R1 zoning designation. Um, and then further over to the west again is B2 in that red color. Um, so the applicants do currently own the parcel directly to the south, which is the other apartment complex to the
south. Uh, this is just the zoning map um showing the overall city here. And then I included a table. This is also in your packets just again alluding to how the zoning is for the surrounding area and then how the future guidance is for that
surrounding area. Um so the future guidance matches the um current zoning around the adjacent parcels. Purpose for the reszone is the applicant is wishing to construct a 42 unit multifamily apartment building with a
PUD overlay district. Uh just some more background within the city, the number of lots that we have that are B2 highway commercial, we have about half a dozen or so that are shovel ready right now. And those shovel ready ones are mostly
in the proximity of the current area just to the west of the um subject parcels. And then we have three other apartment lots that are available throughout the entire city with one of those being
shovel ready. Um they would just have to get a permit to construct and then the other two need to be final platted. Um so we don't have a lot of other apartment areas that are riped for zoning now or guided for multifamily in
the future. um the areas that we do have um there's not in existing infrastructure that can service those areas. So, this is a future land use. Again, some of these colors might be a little bit um hard to
differentiate um on the screen, but high density residential is a darker brown on this. Um so, you can kind of see as we go like on 75 west of town, there's some pockets over there. as we go on County Road 133 out towards like Sartell,
there's a little pocket over there. Those are all future high density areas. Now, those could change if someone were to request that changing. Um, and all those areas that you can kind of see there are um not connected and not next
to a lot of the existing infrastructure. R3 zoning. So, of course, multifamily apartments are allowed. I just wanted to highlight some other things that are allowed within this district. Um, for permitted uses, we include other things like churches, libraries, town houses,
um, inhome daycarees, residential facilities for group homes, and there's some other conditional uses as well, including public buildings, manufactured home parks, and then uses that the planning commission deems similar to these listed uses.
Within the current zoning of B2, we do allow any use that's permitted in our downtown district. We also allow other things like automobile repair, convenience stores, funeral homes, grocery stores, hotel, motel,
um places of worship, retail stores. And then for conditional uses, things like um pet boarding, um things like dealerships, new or used dealerships and lumber yards. Uh so I just wanted to point those out so the
commission fully understands kind of what is allowed right now and what you know could be allowed with with the reszone as well. So again, the reasons being sought, the PUD specifically is being sought due to
the proposed density of the 42 units. Um during discussions with the applicant, um we determined that the R3 zoning alone wouldn't be enough because there's density limits for R3 zoning. So it
depends on the exact number of onebedroom, twobedroom, threebedroom and what that make uh makeup is on how many would be allowed but um a safe estimate is around 36 to 38 units for R3. Um so
they're proposing slightly more um and then with that they can go that route with a PUB and have increased density. Um part of the discussions has also included that the city needs storm water ponding during that along that corridor.
Um so a PUD is part of the PUD requires the applicant to provide public benefit from the project. Um so we actually suggested that the ponding could serve as that public benefit. Um right now the
site the preliminary plans that you have seen in your packets the storm water ponding area is about five and a half times larger than what it would be if it was just the apartments ponding needs being serviced. Um so that increase
essentially accounts for those three subject lots. One of those three subject lots being a storm water ponding area. Yep. Yep. So, um, one one conflict that we did, um, cover is that within a PUD,
storm water ponding areas are supposed to be subtracted from the total lot area, which would have impacted the density that would be allowed. Um, however, in this instance, the city is requesting that again, additional storm
watering area within the site. So, um, that could be resolved through a PUD agreement if these were to move forward and be approved. Okay. Um, and I just want to touch here on the future land use amendment. This is required if the reszone is approved and
then is just to update the future land use map um, in that kind of bluish color. Again, that's the highway district that is those are the properties are guided for highway commercial. So requested actions for the reszone is
one open and close that public hearing two provide a recommendation on resolution PC2025-013 which is the finding of fact for the reszone and then three a recommendation on resolution PC2025-014
which establishes the reszone. Um these would be forwarded to the council and then I also include those actions for the future land use amendment. Um and then after these two um we would then request action on the PUD which I can get into greater detail um after. So
questions. Does this have any implications to the beltway? Are we good on that front? The beltway? No. Okay. Nope. Nope. There's still pieces that the St. cloud area planning organization has to kind of sift through um as part
of that beltway planning, but um no, because the beltway as it is now is essentially 20th um Avenue. Yep. Yep. Thank you. Anything else? All right. If I don't have anything
else, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing for reasonzoning proposal. I have a question. Yep. If you can if you go that far step up and then say your name and and where you live and then
Mary Filson 210 18th Avenue Southeast St. Joe. Okay. And my question is how will building apartment buildings affect the property val my property value because we already have apartment buildings to I don't know the directions
but there's two of them down there and one right in my backyard and I'm like yeah I don't really want anymore. I don't want to be surrounded by apartment buildings. Seriously do not want to be surrounded by them. And that's what it's going to be. He's going to build here and then
he's going to build over there because there's two two lots that I mean two farm acreage right now and he's going to sell that other side too and that's then we're going to be surrounded by apartment buildings. I don't want that.
And how will it affect my property value that I do not have the answer to? Randy on that one. Yeah. Yeah. So I I don't think any of us would be able to answer that question. That would come down to a assessor question and how they would determine those those values and such.
Yeah. Okay. Yep. Just again come up say your name where you live. Amy Baful. I live on the 18th Street Southeast as well. And uh one of the things when they did put those
apartments in and technically there are three that kind of surround us currently um they widen 20th but only up to the stop sign and not there's a block between a stop sign on 20th and the
light on 75. Currently it is just two ways no shoulders. the big trucks that are coming into Quick Trip to fuel, they can barely make that right turn from 75 without going across the line now. And you're talking
of adding 38 to 42 more units. You're talking about adding potentially 42 to 84 more vehicles on that block that cannot currently handle the big trucks and the property
owners or apartment rentals. Now, because that part of the street was never widened. I'm not exactly sure this new complex that is being proposed where the entrance and exit will be. Will it be on Baker Street? Will it be on 20th? Will
it be on Minnesota Street? Because currently with the Quick Trip, you have a lot of traffic coming in and out of that Quick Trip as well as well as the big trucks. And that's a lot of traffic to add to an area that already has three three
apartment complexes and then all of the property owners that are there. And that's why all of us are here tonight is because we all live on 18th Avenue. Okay. And have that concern. My name is Tom. I'm just gonna piggyback
on this part. Tom, where where do you live? Uh at 2131 18th Avenue Southeast. So again, with that, if you're trying to make that turn on 75 with all that extra traffic, you can't turn east on 75 right
now with people also going straight. So you're going to end up with even more backed up traffic. No shoulder. So stall, you can't get the stall off. You would have all your traffic backed up because there's no way to get around. So you're talking about the section of road from Minnesota Street up to 75
because that's the two lane and down in front of the complex. It's four lane. Yep. And so you're also going to add more walking traffic in there. There's not a designed area for people to be walking there. And again, that's where that guy was killed
right at that intersection right there. So the trucks coming into Quick Trip, coming off of 75 and then having to immediately turn right into the Quick Trip, they don't come all the way down to Minnesota Street and they don't use that exit entrance on the south. The entrance is actually right there off 75
for the truck entrance. Yep. Well, they have to turn at the light at 75 and then quick trip has an entrance there where the trucks can come in, but it's making that right turn from 75 on to 20th. They have to come back up, come back around, if they're going straight across
over to Manions. Then you also anyone else going back to the east to St. Cloud, which was the majority of the traffic goes, they're sitting there waiting and that backs up further. So, and there's really no way to widen that unless you move the traffic light.
There's electrical, you know, Sterns electric has boxes there. Uh restaurant neighbor 75 is there. So, it would take quite a lot to be able to widen that section of the road as well. And that's that's just for
driving traffic driving the people that walk through. Yeah. Because there's no sidewalks. There's no sidewalk. There's none. There's none on 18th Avenue South either. And there's plenty of people that walk down that from those apartments already.
And so then you're adding in more in front of that as well. So it just becomes an even busier intersection right quick. And there's the adding Nate, if I'm if I'm correct looking at this map, the entrance and exit to the apartment complex parking goes in on
20th and 18th both. So, it's it goes all the way across. Correct. So, so part of the discussions that we've had with the applicant up to this point was um one limiting the number of access points leaving the site. um there's a lot of uh traffic um analysis
that goes into it to try to make that um as kosher as possible. Um so that's why on this plan that I pull up here, so this is the um plan showing the overall project and then the access points. So there's an access point coming out to
18th Avenue at that intersection right there. and then um also a access point from the site going to the south to the other existing apartment complex which would then funnel out to a already existing access onto 20th. Um I think in
some of the initial concepts there was another access point directly to 20th. Um we wanted to limit that though. Um, and then given that the property owners also own that property to the south, um, having that connection to the south and then using an existing access point to
get on to 20th was better from a traffic management and safety perspective. Um, so that would go over the current walking paths. Yep. So it cross over those current walking paths. Um, so there'd be improvements made to that. Um, and then
also part of the overall concept plan, too. Um and this is part of the PUB discussion um that we would have as part of that um agenda item um is uh feedback in regards to sidewalks on 18th Avenue
leaving from the site going towards Quick Trip. Um Quick Trip when Quick Trip was built there was not sidewalks placed on the south side of that lot because of the future reconstruction of Minnesota Street. um that street will
turn from a call it a rural street to a urban street. Um and that means that we would have curb and gutter and sidewalk trail um when that street transitions to that urban standard. So that sidewalk was um put in the developers agreement
to be installed once that section of Minnesota street changes over to a urban section. Um, and that would be the same kind of train of thought with this project would be if there was a sidewalk on Minnesota Street for that to be
deated until that street is reconstructed. So that sidewalk wouldn't have to be reconstructed as well. Um, so those are just part of the kind of site elements. I hope that answers some of the access point questions and such. It answers the access point, but then that creates another issue because the
they have the garages for that complex backing up to the current field. And if they're going to join them, that's going to mean that all of the children that are currently, you know, on the walking paths and people walking their dogs and
everything else are going to have to be cutting through traffic basically because you're going to have all of those both apartment complexes back and forth between the two. And currently that is also where the because they currently have a drainage
ditch that runs all the way up to where the walking paths are because they connected a walking path behind their garages to the walking path that the city had has there. And part of uh the commission's ask also
for that agenda item 7D that preliminary PUB conceptual plan that we see on the screen is for um feedback in regards to the placement of some of the site specific things like garages and landscaping and parking and things of
that nature as well. So, but the other thing is is it's the same builder as the one that currently built the other ones a year or two ago. And again, There's additional land out there owned by the same individual. And that would be the another concern is if this
one gets built, then there's going to be another one. And that's going to be even more of a density issue because you've got five sets of apartments surrounding a residential area. I don't think any of you would want to live surrounded by a
Okay. Just Yeah, we're going to have the people at the stand talk. That's fine. All right. Anything else, Amy or Tom? I just want to just and it's not for really a discussion thing, but I just wanted noted that I'd like to find the reasoning why they're trying to bring in
more of these apartment buildings in our area when St. Joseph is not like making a high school. So, you want to bring in more multifamily units, but you're not accommodating things for them to do. There's already houses that burn and
turn because you can only so long or if you want to stay here, you bust your kids over to Apollo and why would you not have that here? But yet you want to bring in more apartment buildings. That's just a point that I'm making there on that. And then the other point that
I'm making is that these uh the public did vote against these last apartment buildings and the commission just put them in anyway. So, okay. Thank you, Tom. Kelly Beign, 11817th Avenue Southeast. Um,
good points. My point is is that I received this in the mail just last Thursday. And my it's very important to me as a council member that the information gets out there. And I I I understood thinking
that all the information was getting to the right people. Now, these ladies and gentlemen's received and I'm taking it. They're on 18th Avenue, so there are 350 as it says right here. However, none of my
neighbors received this except for me. And so I'm a little concerned about that because I had to apologize to them because I didn't open up my mail until this weekend because I was working through. So I was in my garden and I had
a couple of very upset neighbors going, "What's going on? Should we show up tonight? What do we need to do?" I'm telling you, gentlemen, I'm very confused in the sense of I told them not to because you're only going to have
more upset people because they didn't receive this in the mail. So, we really shouldn't even be having this hearing until the appropriate people get their information. Do you know how that we we send that out 10 days ahead of time? So, we did send that out.
This was noted Thursday. When I opened it, I had to go into the house and go, "Are they sure? where are they? You know, and I didn't mean to act like that, but I had to double check. And so, here I go. Oh, goodness. And I'm feeling like a a big So, yeah, I totally understand the
frustration and apologies for that, but we did send that out in 10 days ahead of time. So, we do have affidavits that have shown that we did send that out 10 days ahead of time. Now, sometimes the mail does arrive um you know after that and there is delay for that um but we
did send that off in the required notice amounts of 10 days ahead of time and to all folks that are within 350 ft. So we do have affidavit 350 ft. Yep. We do have affidavits that um do display that. So if I received it, they should be receiving it. They actually heard from
somebody else that they were talking about. They're like what? They were in quick trip. So, councelor Beignck, if you want to see the list of addresses that are within those 350 ft, I can definitely share that with you. Um, because what we do is we um highlight
all three of these subject properties and then we do a 350 foot radius around that and then we grab all that parcel information from the county record. So, whatever the county has within their records for property addresses and listed owners, then we send off those
notifications and we include the time and the place of that hearing. And on the flip side, we include the depiction of Yep. And that's the thing is these have been neighbors of mine for almost 30, you know, I'm not these aren't just moved in people. So, I'm trying to be as
levelheaded as I possibly can because this was my mistake and not checking my mail because I'm having a busy life, right? And I understand that this is going to come in front of the council, too. However, when they're not getting the information, that's when I I tend to be a little bit upset. We've had this situation before and I want to make sure
we're clearing this up as much as we possibly can. Please. I'm okay. Um, and so that's probably my most important is making sure that the people and I and I do believe my neighbors um because they wanted to make
sure um Jeremy has lived in that house and has been brought up in that house next to me for a very long time. Um the neighbors uh across from me also did not receive it and again what that 350 is I have to question that also in the sense
that they're just right across the street. So I I would like to address that and make sure that that gets appropriated and I would like to see the list if that would be okay. Now tonight, what I was going to say, yeah, definitely can share that list with you.
Appreciate that. Now, as I'm sitting here and I was reading through um and again, I just feel like I didn't do my due diligence of homework is that I didn't realize um that it was already set forth as an apartment building. I
mean, I realized there was conversation around being able to switch that and change that, but I look at St. Joe as a council member and if you drive around St. Joe, we have a mixed and mixture. You know, we have the, you know, patio homes, we have the um when we're going
down um is it able that there's the condos. You know, I like the mix and mixture of of it. And as it had been shared tonight, and this is, you know, we're building apartment buildings right around our in it and I moved into this
space where I was literally in a dead lot. There was no drive-thru. So those roads actually came through and this and all these lovely people weren't even there when I bought that and I wasn't even city at the time. So yes, it has grown and I accept it and I receive it.
But I do have I'd like to mix and mingle that. I would love to see condos down there. I would love to see lo family lodging down there. um I didn't realize that it was already established that this was going to be apartment buildings. And so that that was another
thing that I'm, you know, realizing tonight um that I didn't know. And so obviously I have to do my a better homework in this and watching this coming down the pike. And so I apologize, but my first um concern would be making sure that everybody got the
mailing because like I said, I did tell my two neighbors next to me not to come tonight because I just thought I didn't know what how and how they were going to be received and maybe that was wrong, but I thought I would come and and share our concerns.
Thank you. And councelor, if I can just add to that, we did receive two notices that got sent back to us, but those were for the interimm use permit notices that we had sent out. Okay. Um, all the other public hearing we did not receive back. So, as far as we know, they were received within that radius of
350 ft. Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Nate. Thanks, Kelly. And my question is, which you know me already, Mary? Yes. So, um, what where does the 350 ft come from? Yeah. Yep.
That seems like a very small amount of area. Yeah. Yeah. So, and and agree that whole and it includes our whole neighborhood is going to be affected by this. Yep. Yep. So, and agree and I understand your frustration in regards to that. So, that 350 foot radius is set by a couple
factors. Um, one, it's set by state statutory requirements. So, statutory requirements require a specific distance for mailing notices um based on the land use application. And then um the second factor is uh ordinances. So the p the
city council could um amend the ordinance to require a greater distance for those those mailings. Um but when we receive applications in um we go off what is our ordinance and what is the statutory requirements. So that 350 ft
that we've been referencing is how do I get a change to that? How do I make how do I who do I talk to in order to to complain a lot and that needs to be. Yep. And and I totally understand your frustrations. Um the tough part is about
that is um you know, if the council were to change and this is a council decision, but if council changes it to 500 ft, there's going to be someone that's at 502 that is left out of it. This is the number they chose and that's it's just arbitrary. Yeah. So it's what the state statutory
requirements are for minimum distance for mailings and it's what's in our ordinance. So like staff, we go off of what's in the rules and then we send off accordance to that. I do understand that. But it really is going to affect our entire neighborhood
because we will be surrounded on all sides because there's a there's nothing, you know, there's a trees back there. So I mean it's Yeah, it's pretty much we're going to be surrounded. I don't I don't want that. Understood. Thank you, Mayor. Yep.
Just say your name and address. I'm Victoria Umerki. I live at 204 18th Avenue Southeast. So, going back to the map that had been up, you guys are wanting to put a road up against like
where that current walkway is or take place of that. Is that what you mean? The one that connects the two parking lots. Yes. The one that goes over the Yeah. So that's part of their conceptual plans is to include that connection and mostly so there's the purpose behind
that was so that the site had a second access in and out of the site. Um so instead of directly connecting to 20th on the west um having them come down to the south and use the existing access was what was designed. Yeah.
Okay. So, will there be like any walkway back there or will it only be road? Because I'm home most weekends and in the evenings and they are constantly used except for if it's raining. Yeah. So, are you uh asking if would there be like a sidewalk connection from
like uh the side of the garage and parking lot to that trail? Yeah. Yeah. So that's that that's part of um the discussion that's part of the conceptual plans and part of the PUD proposal is sidewalk connections in and out the site and then sidewalk
connections around the site. So um the commission could uh ask or recommend that a connection be made from that parking lot to directly those pathways. Okay. Will that pathway stay in at all like alongside my house or will that be straight road?
No. Nope. So, um, this graphic kind of shows, but that pathway is in that, uh, call it the concrete color. Um, that white. Yep. Where it kind of curves. Yep. Yep. So, that's all that existing. Yeah. So, that would all stay. Um, and I think part of the applicant
um, and the applicant is in attendance this evening, too. But part of also the reasoning behind also some of the placement of those garages, specifically the garages to the west of that access point going to the south is to aid in a
buffer for um the single family on that side and to the southwest there. Um, so but what about like vandalism being behind sorry and in that area because I mean there are quite a few teenagers and kids
granted I'm not much older than them. So right now most of this is just a conceptual use right now. So it doesn't mean what you see is what you're going to get. Right. Right. But that would be another worry because I think I think I have seen some vandalism on the garages that are with
the current apartment buildings. I haven't seen any being done, but I believe I've seen it in passing. So, and like that's right outside my window and I can see that. So, y Okay. All right. Thank you. I appreciate you orientating me. Thank you.
Yeah. No, thank you. Sorry. Nope. You're good, Kelly. Go ahead. Well, now that we're bringing that up and and I'm glad you're going to come up and and approach that, but if this does pass and if this is I would really really strongly suggest on having them
enter in from the road between neighbor and quick trip that what is that road? Are we talking about 20th? 20th. Yeah. Because right now I run and to run from my house to get onto that
path is already a little trepidacious. But now if I'm running I'm going to cross over, get on that path and then cross over two more times in worrying about cars. And so I would rather have
if this were to pass to have that on 20th and not on 18th coming because already cars aren't stopping at that stop sign. I'm just telling you, you know, they don't. And I'm right. I'm there all the time and I don't know how many times I've had to say stop because people aren't watching the cars and
they're supposed to be stopping at that stop sign and they get to drive all the way through why the stop sign they stop. They don't stop. And I'm just saying that's that and that's early in the morning when I'm running. So and so and
so the that that's my concern because we're already having a situation with that corner. Okay. So I would rather have cars and not have another crossing over that crossing path. That's all. Okay. Thank you. So I'll just add to that. Um so again
some of the reasoning behind why you see that access point coming to the south is um traffic management. So specifically like when our engineer was reviewing the project and in terms of like inter intersection spacing and that um the
less access points that we can have directly onto 20th Avenue which is a arterial street and arterial road um the better in in their traffic management lens. Um and we do have that existing trail that comes up here that could
create a conflict there. I know it under it creates a conflict to the south as well. Um, so either way, it's going to create that that conflict. So, how do we lessen that? Um, but I can't speak exactly for Randy, but you know, um, who
was our our city engineer, Randy Sabart. Um, but that's part of the comments that, um, he had provided, um, from his team to lessen the access points on to 20th and then go to the south. So, state your name.
You ready? Steve Keepers, Keepers Construction, 17018 Commercial Park Road, Brainer, Minnesota. Um, hear you guys's concerns, comments. Um, we approached staff couple years ago about the initial idea
of doing a third building. So, we did those two buildings, the Oxon 20th, um, before 20th actually got rebuilt. U, that was the site of the former Delwin. Um, a previous owner gotten it reszoned
multif family and they had proposed a a PUD project that ultimately was determined for a variety of reasons. He didn't move forward on it. We bought it, put the two apartment buildings on it. Um aligned and perpendicular to 20th, aligned them perpendicular to the houses in the back. We did tie into the trail
at the request of the city at the time. Um projects actually been a it opened up during CO um which was a challenge. Uh project's basically been full ever since. It's a marker project. We never asked anything from the city. Um it's
been 95 plus% occupied. It's actually been a really nice project. Why does people want to live in St. Joe in a multif family project? Same reason why I want to live in a house. St. Joe's a nice community. We've enjoyed being a part of it. The third building idea came
along. Um the owners, the current owners, um they dropped the price on it here a while ago. They're not getting any interest in it as a commercial site. Right now, that's three commercial lots. So, you guys already saw the uses on it. It's a down zone to go from the
commercial to the multif family. So, we were attracted to it because we actually felt it was a less intensive use than say if a hotel went on it or a implement dealership or whatever all the different uses are. Um We approached city staff, city engineer loved it because instead
of three access points, we were literally getting down to one access point onto public roads. The topography of that site lends itself in such a way where there's a need for regional retention pond and that's why that's down on the corner of down toward 20th
going to the east. Um, thus then it put the access point out on the 18th. We really wanted a second one just from a safety standpoint. So, we it to the rear parking lot of the existing project. Yes, it does go across that trail. Um,
ironically enough, I remember when we put that trail in, nobody was ever going to use it. Now, everybody tells me that they use it, which is fine. We'll put a crosswalk on it, so there's going to be some control. Um, we added a pickle ball court to the project. We originally wanted to add a swimming pool. It just
didn't work for size. Um, and then you did hear that the request for the PD is largely driven by the regional retention pond. As far as the traffic goes and the concerns of the neighborhood, we're really relying on the city engineer. Um, and you know, when you guys rebuilt 20th
and you laid that project out the way it was, we're working with the parameters that are there and the infrastructure that's there. Really don't have anything else to add to it. Ultimately, it's your guys' decision. I mean, it's right now it is own commercial and it is lots. We're
taking it down to one lot. We're dedicating that pond to the city for the future use and we're going to the basically the multif family use. Any questions for me that you guys have? Uh, no, not during not during the public hearing right now.
Thank you. And we do have someone on Zoom as well, chair. All right. Um, uh, very faintly, uh, can we can you state your name? Yep. Tyler Johnson. I live on 220th 17th
Avenue Southeast. All right, Tyler, go ahead. Yeah, actually, uh, my comment changed a little bit. Did I hear that there was a pickle ball court as a part of this? Yes, you did. Yes, you did. Okay. So, I I actually have a coworker who's going through a very similar
battle um in different city with a pickle ball court and some of the concerns that causes with things like noise. Um, I just wanted to originally rise to say I support everybody else and actually offer a little feedback on the survey from somebody doing the Zoom or not survey, excuse me, the notice uh
that was sent out. Um, if it would be possible to put like better Zoom directions, I look for about 15 minutes saying thank god my wife is smarter than I um and found the link. Um, because I was really struggling. I don't know why that's not included so that people who can't make these meetings can find it a
bit easier because I was very close to giving up. Um, but yeah, those are just my thoughts. I'll keep it short. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Tyler. Anybody else? All right. If no one else would like to come up, I'm going to go ahead and close
the public hearing. Um, so then we are on to the motion for resolution PC 2025-13, unless there's other more discussion. If there's no discussion, we're looking for a motion and a second.
I'm trying to figure out. So, we're right here on page I don't even know what page it is. My pages are off. You got I'd have to look. Yeah, we're right here. It should be right here.
So, we're just following the requested actions up there. So we're under the reszone number two recommendation on the resolution which is the finding of fact and then that second resolution is establishing the reszone. Yeah. So this first one is just again
the finding of fact. So, and I'm just going to ask a real quick question to Kelly's point since there are a lot of people that maybe weren't aware of the public hearing. Didn't get the message in time. Would it be appropriate to resend that out and
tabled this until the next till next month? So, we sent off all the notices with the required. Yep. They've sent the required and nothing came back except from the pod. Yeah. So, we did everything that we are legally bound to do. We've done everything. Correct.
I mean, you know, and to Mary's point, it's it's something to look at. If you want to expand that to get more people, then you'd have to look into the ordinances itself. Yep. Which could be something that we could do. Then I'll go ahead and make All right. I have a motion uh just for the finding of fact of resolution PC
2025-13. Do I have a second? I will second. Just to be clear, this is just changing it from R3 to R1. Yep. This well this is just a R3 or B2 B2 to R3 to R3 residential three.
So I've got a a motion and a second. Any more discussion? Yeah, I'm fundamentally I'm I'm opposed to spot reszoning like this. It just bothers me. We've already got a zoning map in place. We know what we want to do
and I understand the need for additional housing. um you know and this actually could be a pretty good um use of land because you don't know what could happen in a commercial site. Well, right. Any number of things that might be more detrimental to the neighborhood than an
apartment complex. Could could be a hotel, could be could be a number of things, a car dealership, but yeah, it is you are asking for spot reszoning. That's always been something that's a concern to me. You know, it's it's spot reszoning for
three parcels that butt up to rural residential. Is that correct? Am I right there? No. No. So I just a a point of clarification. So um spot zoning is typically where like you have zoning where the surrounding area is different
than what the proposed reszone is. So this reszone is wouldn't classify as spot zoning. Um it does but up against R3 to the south. You recall the existing apartment complex to the south. Um, and
then the roadway, Minnesota Street, and then 18th Avenue on the west would then be, if this were to be approved, would be the boundary of the residential to the commercial areas. So, this right here. Yep. So, I know this is a little bit
hard to see, but some of this was in the in the packet. This would turn to this right here, and then this all would stay right there as the commercial. So, all right. Any other discussion? I have a motion and a second. All of
those in favor for the finding of fact say I. I. I. Any opposed? All right. That passes 3 to one. All right. Then the next one, Nate, would be the motion of the resolution. If you want to go back to the other one.
Yeah, give me a second. Sorry. Out of slides here. There you go. All right. So, this is the recommendation of the resolution PC 202514. This is establishing the reszone. Yep. Correct. Yep. Okay. Um, so do I have a motion for the
recommendation of the of establishing the reszone? I'll make a motion for PC 202514 establishing the reszone. Do I have a second? Second. Okay, we have a second. Any discussion?
What's this one saying now? So, this is just establishing the reszone itself. So, what was the last one? So, the last one was finding a fact, changing it from business to R3. Yep. And then this is just
establishing the reszone now. Oh, yinging it. Yep. So it's it's it's essentially it's similar because so the finding of fact is finding the conditions to you know approve the the reszone itself and then
the establishment of the zoning is essentially the same thing but officially changing the the zoning designation and public publication of that zoning change. Yep. So any other questions on that? So it
updates our zoning map. Yeah. So the first one finds the findings to change the reszone and then the second one establishes that with the zoning map itself. Yep. All right. So I have a fir or a motion and a second. Any other discussion? All
in favor of establishing the reszone PC 202514 say I. I. Anybody opposed? That one passes three to one. All right, Nate. Now we're on to Number three, this is the
Yep. This is the PUD. So, this is the PUD cons uh concept plan. So, again, the PUD is sought because of the density and then the public storm water ponding along the corridor. So, again, in um some of these discussions when the applicant had
approached the city about the reszone, um there is a need for storm water ponding along Minnesota Street. Um, we'll go back to the example of Minnesota Street being a rural section right now and eventually that rural section is going to change into a urban
section with curb and gutter. And when that transitions there's a need for storm water ponding along this corridor. What triggers that change from the rules of the uh so that would be a change that would
be part of enhancing that street to meet city standards. So right now it's old like rural standards uh township and that with ditches. So when it changes to a urban standard now you have the storm water collection system, you have the
storm water pipes that get put in and then you have trails and sidewalks and things of that nature. I think more to Keith maybe what he's asking or more what I'm curious about is when when's that sand the line in the sand come up? Is that just when Randy
says it's time for a new batuminous overlay or something? And that's it. So, it would be part of our capital improvement plan for the city. Right now, there is no timeline for this section of road to transition. So, it' be up to the council um direction to
decide when that transition occurs. Um however prior to that um and part of this project provided a opportunity to capture the ponding needs. Right now the city does not have any other land along this corridor to capture those needs. Um
so the city would have to negotiate with individual property owners for acquisition of land or easements um to accommodate the capacity of ponding that's needed which would be pretty significant for the road um
reconstruction. So um and these subject properties right now again are three individual properties. So those would have been developed individually with their own storm water system and collection system on site. Um right now
how the applicants have designed it is they've designed it to accommodate uh five and a half times the ponding than what they would have normally needed. So we had showed this earlier. Um this is the conceptual plan for how the
applicants are proposing to develop the site. You can kind of see um to the right of the pickle ball court that lighter green area. The lights are kind of hard to um see that corner. Apologize for that. Um but that's part of the storm water ponding area. So
essentially, if you think of this as three lots, that easternmost lot is essentially ponding area. Um, so it takes up a pretty good size of the site. Again, 42 apartment units. Internal circulation and connection to the
property to the south minimizes those driveway connections to public roads. Um, and there's transition that is provided with separation of roadways and the uses um and compatibility with the development to the south in terms of the
multifamily that's proposed. Um part of the PUD requirements are providing public benefit. Um so some of the public benefit is that storm water ponding and then um additional housing. PUD requirements. PUDs show demonstrate a public benefit that addresses housing
needs at varied income levels, offers diverse housing types and designs, preserves open space, provides recreational opportunities, and supports mixeduse development. Um, so a couple of those uh the project staff views, you know, do they do hit on and again part
of this was the city asking for that storm water pond if this project were to proceed forward. Um staff would want that ponding um incorporated to accommodate that growth of Minnesota Street.
Also within the PUD requirements, some findings that are required are that the proposed plan is not detrimental to surrounding land uses, is compatible with future development, has adequate streets and sidewalks, provides required
utilities, required parking, aligns with our comprehensive plan, and then conforms with subdivision standards. Um again we talk about stormwater ponding um here and planning commission uh she'll provide input on the overall
concept plan the compatibility public benefit and the zoning elements that we had talked about. So some site specifics um that we uh want to get direction from the commission on are sidewalk connections within the site. Some of
that was brought up earlier as part of the reszone um public hearing, but we would like to see at minimum there's a sidewalk on the south side of the apartment complex that connects to the trail out on 20th Avenue. We'd like to
see that sidewalk also extend out to 18th and that intersection near their access point. Um we've talked a little bit about future sidewalk along Minnesota Street. So the northern part of the site again when that Minnesota
street develops from a rural to a urban roadway we feel that capturing that future sidewalk as part of a future improvement within the site is appropriate. Quick trip again across the way to the north. They don't have a
sidewalk but they're required to put one in once that roadway transitions to a urban standard. Uh we talked a little bit about providing a connection along 18th Avenue. We recognize that there's a lot of bikers and pedestrians that not only would be created as part of this
project, but also um that exist in the surrounding area. So providing that connection along 18th Avenue to get up to Minnesota Street and then that future sidewalk on Minnesota to get out to 20th Avenue would be appropriate. Um but we're looking for feedback from the
commission on that. And then also we talked about that um connection to the south and some of the reasoning on why it's reflected in these plans, but getting some input from the commission on that as well.
Requested actions. Again, we're doing a public hearing with this. And then there's different options for the commission including approving with conditions, tableabling, um with specific comments and and denial. So,
those are the actions that's being requested. And any questions for staff prior to opening up the public hearing? Nope. Uh, so with that, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing for Keer's
PUD lots 1 through 3, block two, and KO properties. Kelly, Kelly, 11817th Avenue Southeast. And of course, I'm coming as a resident. Um, looking at those I'm sorry. We've put more than enough um ponds in that area.
I Why would we need to put another pond? I really need to talk to Randy about that. Um there's just way there. We got a large pond between which is kind of nice between the resident and the apartments, but then there's a whole
another there's like two other ones and that's one thing I don't understand if that's an ordinance or like you said from the city. Um That's something that we need to look at because there's quite a few when I run back through there. Um, you know, if this does come uh to
fruition, I don't see why they would need to build another pond. Nate, do you have a um comment? Yeah. So, Kelly, that comes down to the standards by the MPCA. I get that, but we need to approach that then because there's really I mean, there's enough ponds
we we don't have control over that. So, when we go We as a city don't. No. So when we go and reconstruct a roadway and we create in additional imperous surfaces and we have ponding that is required that this has been recent. Well, the
permits the the requirements have changed and MPCA does change their standards and they've changed it a lot, but um we need a place for that storm water to go and that storm water if you look within that zone within those three apartments, they've got more
than enough ponding to hold a hurricane. Really? I mean, there's they're not being filled with the with the downpours that we're having right now. they're not getting filled between the three of them that we have. So to put another one if they are to build,
I'm just saying it would be more parking space for them, you know, not like I'm saying that I'm I'm approving this, but now we're looking at and I don't know this is between trying to decide with this, but I'm just
saying there's enough ponding there, but like you're saying, if we don't have a say in that, then I guess I can understand that. I think my biggest is being able to um I hope hearing the voices of us that are living in the area and I have no problems talking that if
it does happen to be able to reconstruct that so we're all safe, the children and the people who are running and being able to maybe have um trees, you know, instead of the the ravine. I don't think we need the ravine. Like I said, we have
more than enough ponds. I would love to see trees then. paint. What are all those circle things around the area? That's the sidewalks. That's the sidewalks right here. So, no underneath. So, the I circled in red the areas where you could have those additional sidewalk
connections. Yep. Underneath those. Are those all trees? Those are trees, correct? That would be fabulous. I would love to see trees themselves. So, there's Yep. So, there's trees around the entire site in accordance to our landscape requirements. And the only thing that I request is uh the road
Yep. them entering into 20 instead of 18. Um, just because that is already congested the way it is. And to be able to have Say that again, Kelly, which on 20th have them have the driveway into 20th. Do not have that um second entry over
the the pathway and then cuz right there, I mean, they're literally not even I don't know how many feet. It's to the corner of 18 where that stop sign is where nobody's stopping like I'm talking about. The less entries to things there would
be so much better. I would then put trees like they if if it's the way it looks right there. I I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with too much going on. There's too many kids walking there. I'd
rather have that driveway entry. Get rid of the dang pond. Give them more parking. on that side. That's my position in that so that we're safer on the other side. Move the building down towards the 20th and um you know have
that parking in the in the trees there and less entry into so that we can be safer as a community neighborhood there if that makes sense hopefully. Thank you. Thanks Kelly. Anybody else?
Anybody online? Nope. Okay. Thank you. Uh if there's no one else that would like to do that, I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing um for the PUB in that purple bit. If you could back it up one, Nate. Yeah. Can we put a a stipulation where if
there we talked to Randy and figure out what the needs are if it does have to cook up to 18 there, can we put a a stipulation that there needs to be speed bumps there for that trail? to go across it instead. I don't foresee that being a heavy
traffic area, but I I just also see that there could be a conflict of interest there. Yeah. So, speed bumps on the south access point across the trail leaving the site, right? Or just where the path is crossing on that. Yep. Yep. Yep. Definitely.
Yeah. And again, just to clarify, you know, the ponding and those things really are and had been pushed from staff in regards to that overall capacity knowing that we need ponding along that corridor. Um, and this
presented an opportunity to acquire it in one swoop, which is much less costly and much less um demanding than individual negotiations. Um, end of the site then. So that makes the most sense to put the bond on that end versus the other side.
Uh that I would defer to the applicant um in terms of that. Yeah. Yep. Goes down. Okay. You want to go to what we need to do next here? Just more Yep. I mean you can keep talking discussion about the about the plan. Yeah. Yeah.
Go for it. I'm looking at and um Victoria This might be your property. Are you on the corner right behind where the where the 204 where those four circles are? Yep. Yep. Those are
those are the those are the existing trees are there. You've got a lot of nice big trees right to the north of your property. So those and those I'm assuming that's why I want to ask the applicant if those are going to stay or if they're coming down and being replanted. These guys right here. Sorry Mark. Let
me flip. Yeah, that's even better. Sorry. As we're jumping around, you're good. We're in steel toe. I'm gonna I'm gonna flip to a better map that can provide a better visual. That would be great. Nate, just give me a second here. Sorry, I have like three, four maps pulled up.
So, I got steel tokens. All right. 204. Yep. Okay. Um, so I'm assuming we're talking about these over here. All of these right here. Um, yeah. Right up to your left. Keep going up to your There you go. Right in
there. Right all through there. Those are all nice big trees back in there. And I'm I want to check to make sure they're going to stay or if they're coming down and being replanted. Yeah, it'd be nice to have those stay. Okay, give me one second. I'm refreshing
property boundaries. Sorry. Crazy map. All right. And I'm just pulling this up just to try and see because I I'm not 100% if all those trees or some of those trees are
within what area? But so they'd probably be property. Yeah. They're within the property that they want to build. Yep. Yep. Okay. Okay. Whoever wants to speak, can you go up to
the mic here? They want the online folk. Yeah. I mean, actually, right now the public hearing is closed. So, she wants something that she can't hear. Yep. I know. But so yeah, we've just gotta kind of control where we're at. So um you know, it's us to discuss kind of
where we want and where we're at. Um so with more than likely they might have to come down, but they would replant. And it looks like they would replant down over here too. And that's kind of what I would like to see would be a lot of vegetation trees to block the view of the back side of those of
those garages. Yep. all the way along, you know, the path back here. You've got a nice a nice vegetative if that's blocking. Yeah. Block. Okay. And and and again down the path that
they've already there going down to the Looks like they've already got that slated for everything around it. Andy, I like your idea of the speed bumps. Yep. Go across. If unless we can unless we can access 20th Street and eliminate that crossing across eliminate that
access to another parking lot, which you could you could you could you could add that into the PUD to approve it to say to Kelly's point where if she wants it off of 20th and not 18th, so you completely cut it off there. And if that gets too busy, we can always
put a roundabout in there, right? Yeah. I mean, I can't I can't speak for Randy and the traffic folks. I can only relay that this is part of why you see what you see on here. Um, but that's something that we can follow up with for sure. Yeah,
I would be interested to know what the traffic flow would be like if the access goes on to 20th Street instead of 18th because 18th being a residential road and there will be a fair amount of traffic coming in and out, especially in the morning and the afternoon. And I don't disagree with all the residents there and the traffic that's
there. There's a lot that goes there. Yeah, a lot. There is a lot. So to cut off the access point to to Kelly's point to bring it on a 20th makes more sense to me than there because now you're limiting that 18th to the residents that are in there and you're limiting the 20th to the the
residents that are there. So you're kind of separating all the other buildings go out 20th and street just two lanes. Yep, it is. So, for those listening, Yep. That is still two lanes going past
and in between neighbors and um Quickrip Quick Trip. Um unfortunately, that's not on the plan here tonight. It would have to be another thing that the city would need to look at in their comprehensive plan if they need to traffic flow. So,
that's something we could you could bring to the council or something to us later on. Yeah. Yeah, I mean the county is going to control the access point onto there. Um, we don't have control over that. Um, but past that like 20th itself, we have the
jurisdiction with the sidewalks that would be going around the entire property and connecting to, you know, future sidewalk going down 18th potentially and sidewalks on Minnesota and all that. Those wouldn't go in now, but they would
be slated to go in at the time of improvements or can they go in now? So, well, so it's up to the commission on a recommendation. From a staff perspective, uh, we felt that the timing for Minnesota Street would be delayed
until that roadway is improved. That would follow the same recommendation and requirement for Quicktrip and what they had on their site. So, it' be consistent with the surrounding properties and how we um, handled that. The timing of 18th, I think, um, could deserve some more
discussion on when that is appropriate to occur. Um, I'd like feedback from the commission on that. And at minimum, what's that? I'd say you do it right away on 18th. What I I'm sorry. I'd say do it right away on 18th. Okay.
There is no sidewalk there on 18th Street. Is there sidewalk? No. Right. There's no sidewalk. Right there. Right away. Yep. And then you you increase Minnesota and where Quick Trip is when they have to update Minnesota Street.
But I Yeah, I would say right away you do that. So and and along 20th Street. Mhm. Y and we we also Yeah. Right here. So you see how it would it could go right here. Yep. You know, and then you connect it right there. Yep. Connects to the trail.
Yep. All that left side. So the big the big left circle and where you're going to go. But Yep. So, one thing we called out too was yeah, the direct connection from the internal sidewalk going to the west to the 18th intersection.
Um, and then what I'm hearing now is also to have that sidewalk connection travel along 18th to Minnesota Street at the time of development. Okay. And then obviously, well, again, if you want to make the entrance on 20th, then
I would say you connect that sidewalk. If you cut off the entrance of 18th, you connect it all the way. Does that make sense, Nate? I'm sorry. So, you connect the sidewalk where 18th is. And if we decide to move forward with the PUD with the amendment of
closing off the access to 18th and switching it to 20th, now you have the sidewalk where the entrances continue it all the way to the walking path. Am I Am I making sense? Just have it continue from Minnesota down to the walking path. Yes. Yeah.
the sidewalk. So have the sidewalk on Minnesota Street. No, no, no. From Minnesota Street down 18th all the way down to the We decided to cut this off. Yep. Got it. Um Okay.
Lighting. Somebody had mentioned something about vandalism and different things like that that might be going on. That's probably pretty dark back there. If you if you take a look at the at the parking lot buildings, the other two apartment buildings, this new apartment building,
and you got a parking lot, and then you've got those garages. There's nothing back there. It's probably going to be pretty dark at night, especially if I put in I put in if I request vegetation to go in. Yeah. Um, what about lighting to give it
and I don't know if it would blind people at night or if if lighting would be appropriate to give it a little more security type lights. So the you know landscaping lighting just to give it more visibility.
Visibility. Thank you. That's something else. Yeah. So I mean placement of lights um the commission could recommend certain areas for that. But um keep in mind that any lighting within the site is going to have to meet our lighting standards anyhow which is full cutoff style lights and
then there is a uh maximum on the amount of lumens that can reach other adjacent properties. You might have a conflict with that if they're placed on the south side of the garage and then there's the residential to the south. You don't want to make those too bright um because then we wouldn't
allow those. Um so um just want to point that out. But yeah, I still think you'd be a good especially with more people. Cool. Yep. I like the idea of going 20th if we can make it happen. That's, you know, you're keeping all the traffic on that the east side of the
site. I think that's preferable for sure. I get where the basin's at. It makes sense. Low part of the the site, you know, that makes sense to me. Like the size of it, you know, it's helping the city out. So,
So Nate, do you wanna So I want to just recap what I've heard so far and I want to make sure that this is consensus because then I'll take a crack at um the motion with with stipulations in it. Yep. So um I have add trees on the south
side of the call it the westernmost garage. Mhm. I have add speed bumps by that connection. Um if that connection does stay right there we go. that made that connection. Um, explore more of the connection to
20th Avenue and um, close off 18 and close off that. Yep. Yep. and add a sidewalk onto 18th at the time of construction and include that that sidewalk connection also obviously
connect to the internal path but then also be extended to that called the southern westmost corner um of the site. Um yeah, I think that's I think you got it all. The sidewalk 20th Street.
Yeah, the sidewalk right here. Is that the sidewalk on 20th Street, too? the existing one. Yeah, it's already there. It's already there. Correct. So, you're good. And then just to clarify, the timing of the sidewalk on Minnesota Street delay
until that roadway is improved to urban. Okay. Okay. One question here. How many people or residents are in the other apartment buildings there? Are they same size, smaller, bigger? Units. How many units are in the other the oaks? How many units in the current ones that are there now? 36 units in
each building. 36 each. 36 units in each building, just for those listening. So about the same that would be here. This will be a little bit bigger. A little bit bigger. Only one one to twobedroom apartments is what it's stated. So correct.
One person to call it two people. Okay. Okay. So I'm gonna I'm gonna make a motion for here. We add add that to for the
Kapper's PUD for approval um of recommending the approval of preliminary PUD plan with the changes of adding the sidewalk on 18th, closing the exit on 18th or the entrance and exit on 18th and moving it to 20th. And then also
adding a speed bump and if necessary if necessary to the path and along also adding trees on is it the south side? Southwest corner southwest corner southwest side.
Did I get it all? Yes. That is the motion. Second. I have a second. Any more discussion? Okay. All those in favor, please say I. I. All opposed.
Okay, it passes four to zero. Thank you. On to old business. Chickens. Yeah, talking about chickens. All right, give me a second. Just page
here. Yeah. All right. You get to hear it again one day. Yeah. Okay. Huh? All right. Nate, what do we got? Yep. I am getting there. So, sorry.
Okay. All right. So, per some discussion that we had at the last meeting, we talked a little bit about just what uh ordinance could entail for chickens in urban
areas. We also went through some examples and included a plethora of different cities that had examples for chicken ordinances um and included that also in this packet as well. also outlined some of our surrounding cities and their
requirements. So, where we're at now is looking at how could a ordinance look. Um, and these are very rough and these can be picked apart and thrown away, whatever the commission feels is necessary, but wanted to provide kind of
three pathways for our ordinance. Um and those three pathways follow the first option being call it the most restrictive option and the second one being less restrictive and then the
third one being um least restrictive. So starting with the first one we put in here um the first section we talk about size of lot we took the approach with this draft to have a minimum acreage
size. So we just had minimum of one acre. We put in a maximum of the number of chickens or hens you can have on the site. And then also standards tied to the chicken coupe, including the coupe
location, including setbacks, and we're a lot more detailed and strict in how we drafted this first option. Um the second option that we have in here, we also have a
size restriction, but instead of an acre, we put half a acre and also allowances for more chickens than that first option. And the coupe itself lessening some of the standards like
setbacks and such. being a little bit more flexible or a little bit less strict on what those setbacks would be. Um, and then the third, that last option that's least restrictive, we kind of took the approach that we did with like
honeybees where we broke it up into different size lots and then put a max number on the chickens based on those, but did not have a minimum size lot that folks needed to have in
order to have chickens. Um, we also were less restrictive on the coupe itself and the location. Um, in this one we're speaking to 15 feet off adjacent property lines where in the other more restrictive ones we were referencing
30-foot setbacks or setbacks to adjacent dwellings. Um and then also less restrictive on um some of the other requirements like eggs being sold from the property itself. The other two options would
prohibit that. Um this one would allow it to a certain extent. So doors kind of wide open. Um, but these are kind of just three potential pathways that a ordinance could take and
shape out to be. We can change a lot of the details and a lot of the pieces. Um, what I'm really trying to get out of tonight's meeting is do we want to go the more restrictive path or do we want to go less restrictive path? I want to
go restrictive in the sense of number two kind of a cross between that's me personally. Um I would like to see the slaughtering also added to it. I don't want to see any slaughtering on site.
So adding J to the most restrictive down to the restrictive option. F F4 under restrictive is slaughter of chickens on. Oh, is it okay? Sweet. Thank you. I just I didn't read all that, but I was like I definitely don't want that. Okay. Um, I think that's kind of a happy
medium. I am of the thought process of less restrictive. Okay. Um, solely on the fact that I don't know what the percentage is. I'm just throwing a dart at the wall. Probably 90% of lots inside St. Joe is less than half an
acre. Yeah. Um, so if we're going to open it up, I think we open it up. So, I I I personally still like the halfacre because no offense, I'm not getting chickens anytime soon. And from where I live, I
really don't really want chickens by me, but I also am okay if some of those people want it. So, to me personally, I mean, half an acre that gives at least range for where the chickens can be. It doesn't reduce it to the eight oneacre
lots that we have, you know, and thinking about it, I just it's, you know, can you drop down to 04? Sure. But that's why I kind of asked earlier is what is the average size of where it's at? You know what I mean? Where it's it's so hard to to answer that question because the city and the makeup
of the city just can vary so much. Yeah. Um, you know, we even have um you know, I'll give an example. one of the folks that has been speaking about um the chickens to staff in terms of support of the of ordinance change has a lot that's larger than what you would typically
find in the surrounding lots around them. Um so it just varies so much. So um and I would say there's a science in the the minimum size of a lot. It's just more or less kind of what other cities have enacted, right?
Um and there's some consistency on some of that. Yep. If that's the pathway that that we take and and again, you know, you know, Andrew, that's you know, you're good to have that. I'm good just with that's what I think. I mean, what do you two
think? We can agree to disagree. Absolutely. And my was only my only thought there was a I I'm willing to wheel and deal on everything else. Yeah. Yeah. I was thinking that if you've got a halfacre lot and you put a house on
it, that doesn't give you a lot of extra room for anything else. And I, you know, I mean, if if it's my lot and I want chickens on it, I'm okay to give up my my lawn. I'm okay to give up my space. But how close am I to my neighbors? And do my neighbors want that? We've got
to have the setbacks if we're going to have a halfacre lot and you're going to allow a chicken coupe with a chicken run, you know, a fenced in chicken run. That's I I And I don't have a feel for a halfacre lot. So I don't know just how small it's going to be. And when you put
all that on with a house and set back from the road, it's going to be like right by your house. You're going to have that's going to be pretty tight, I think. Yeah. And I think that the neighbors, you know, might Would it make a difference if I'm on a halfacre lot with a 30-foot setback or
an eighth acre lot with a 30- foot setback? No. As long as the setback is there, you know, there closer to your house. Yeah. As long as it's not intruding the smell, the noise doesn't does not intrude on the
neighbor. And what the less restrictive one has, you're just talking lot size for this first one. A correct. Is that what you're saying? Correct. To move it to there because again, if you have a half acre lot or smaller, you can't have more than four chickens anyway. Correct.
Which I'm in agreeance with. you know, then if you you bump it up. Sure. Right. Because now if you've got an acre, it's a little bit different. So, I guess I'm in agreeance with that. Keith, yeah, I guess I'm mean I
your chicken just uh just kidding. Are we are we defining chicken or going ducks or geese? I mean, there's part of this though, too. Is this just don't bock at the chance to talk. I mean, I'm just I guess my point just for chickens. We're going to
clearly define and again this does not include roosters. It does not include crowing hens. It is just female chickens of I forget the exact science terminology, but we will clearly define it.
Okay. Yeah. I feel that should be probably defined. Yes, absolutely. As far as you know, agreed. Are we talking fowl or are we talking just chickens or you know that type of thing? So gosh, please tell me as far as Kelly make those jokes at your
meeting, please. All right. As far as sizes, I'm not real partially. No. And like I said, I don't mind if you move that piece to the less restrictive to the minimum and keep the other ones. It might if we Yeah. Yeah. I think we're good. How's that sound to you?
Um Okay. So less restrictive option and then look at just uh some language specifically language on setbacks things like that. So maybe come back with like a couple more options and so we like the restrictive option but adding morelex
the less restrictive for the number of chickens and lot size. So you're a and less restrictive bump that up into A for restrictive. Does that make sense? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Do we remove B then? Yeah. Or is it still?
Yep. Well, then you'd move it because then it has the number of chickens per lot size. So you you'd remove A and B and just put A in there. Yep. And then as far as the C the restrictive stuff. Yep. Then you have your setbacks fully enclosed. Yep. The only other
thing that I was thinking about was the chicken run. You've got a a fenced area for the chicken run. Yep. And I mentioned this the last time. I I think that if if here's your house, here's your coupe, and here's your neighbor, I want the run to be towards your house.
I want it facing away from the neighbor so that when you look out the window, you see it, not your neighbor. Yeah, that's exactly right. Yep. I like that. And that run also needs to be 30 feet from any part of that fence. Yeah. Yeah. Which I think they Well, they have an adjacent hole, they have 30
feet from Y. Okay. Just ring notes here. Okay. That give you enough to go off of. Um, what about eggs being sold from the site? What are your thoughts on that? I'm okay without Yeah, I'd say no. I mean, and let's
let's be real. They might get some and go somewhere and say, "Here you go." They might have they might have, you know, a sibling or a friend come over, but I wouldn't sell from the home. It's not a business. It's not a business. Okay. A home even a home. Yep.
Okay. Um, okay. I think that's enough. Uh, and the rest of our ordinances cover noise, smell, things like that. Yeah. Yeah. So, you don't have to make any N. And the good thing in here, you know, it
shows where food storage, you know, watertight, all that stuff. Um, what about permit requirements? Um, we have in here a onetime permit being required. Are we good with Okay, I'm good with that. And then you know if you have the onetime permit and then you've got
inspect it the first time and then and then if you've got like problems or complaints obviously complaints come up then right? Yep. Then we would address it. Got 10 chickens in there. Does he? We can revoke Dwight. We'll send the we'll send the chicken
police to go out there and count the chickens. We deputy chief Matt Johnson. Counting chickens is better than counting honeybees. That's true too. little easier. Okay, good with that. Okay, number nine, other business
general updates. Okay, so I will go through a couple here. Um, there's a couple open spaces in our downtown. Um, WR Home, who owned WR Littles, that space is open now. Um, so
that is the old Lo home that is right next to White Pion and the old Fireh Hall Village Hall that we had on the corner. Yep. Um, so that space is open and then also Pine and Fiber which was located right next to the Minnesota
Street Market connected in that space. Um, that space is open as well. Um, so we've been um trying to direct folks over to those spaces. It's not very common that we have open space like that. Um, and then also next week the
council will be looking at a plethora of different things, but one of them is the retail cannabis ordinance is scheduled for consideration. And how that was drafted was a limitation on the number of retail cannabis operations in the city. So that
would be limited to if the city gets approved for municipal one, no more than one other retail. When do you find out if you get approved? Anyone's guess, right? Yeah. Anyone's guess. Yeah. So, um, some of the private entities
have been notified like cultivators and things of that nature. Um, but as far as I know, no municipality has been notified yet. um other than we need more additional information on AB and C kind of thing. Um but there hasn't been
license approvals. Um also, uh we've had some conceptual plans for industrial park phase 2. There's just a lot to figure out with that, including lift station needs and infrastructure needs, where the best spot to situate a lift station is to
capture the most area. Um, and then also the complicated factor of costs in what we would have to do to make that a reality, whether it's grants, more bonding requests, things of that nature. Um, the council uh did have a bonding
resolution for next year's legislation cycle to target the a industrial park phase 2 for a potential bonding request. Um, so probably take a couple different sources to to make something like that work because there's the lift station
cost and then there's the utilities to extend from the lift station to whatever that service area would be. Um, um, some housing, just continue to try to work on some housing stuff. Um, read a really interesting fact from the well,
it's not fact, it's from the National Association of Realators, a survey that they put out. The average age of a firsttime home buyer is 38 years old in accordance to that. Last year it was 35. So that number continues to increase.
Um which is it's pretty eye opening. Um and there's a lot of factors that go into it. Um and housing just continues to be a it's a very complicated uh topic. There's also a record number of single households. there's 30%ish of all
households are single households now just so that's different um than traditionally in the past. Um so those housing challenges will will continue and housing will continue to change and and morph um from what we've seen in the
past I think. Okay. And then um some more industrial park building will be going on um we call the Tyler Bragman project. That's the one where um they constructed a couple buildings. They'll be doing three more of those buildings
um coming up here. And then there's a chance I may not be at the July meeting and I more than definitely will probably not be at the August meeting um because I'll be on paternity leave again. Congrats, man.
Yeah. So, you know, we're trying for a whole starting lineup plus a six person off the bench. Congrats. Future Minnesota links of 2040. Is it another girl? Do you know yet? It's another girl. Another girl.
Um, so if that's the case, then who takes over for you during these? Yeah. So, um, I anticipate 3, four weeks or so that I'll probably be out. Um, so we will have se filling in during that time and I have a call with them on the 18th, but we'll probably have a very familiar
face for some of you. Um Theres Hafner may be the one that fills in. Okay. So cool. It'll be absolutely seamless. Awesome. Um because she's very familiar with the community. Great. So um yeah, and I'll continue to keep the commission updated prior to that um
on things that are coming up in the agenda. One thing we will have is Mark Martini owns the lot that's just north of the house food and tap that is currently zoned R3 multifamily. that will go to a proposed B1 downtown
commercial. Um, and that's part of some of the enforcement that we've had to do with some activities on that site. Um, and that was one of the options that we provided to them to pursue. Um, so it matches our guidance for our comprehensive plan and such and gets
that site from a legal non-conforming use to a le legal conforming use. Okay. Anything on uh laser dentistry, please? other than it was sold and I heard it's um is it insurance agents?
Yeah. Yep. Okay. Um Casey's uh other than just other than just discussions that the council has had. Okay. Um Yep. Um and we had two grand openings. Yep. Saw that. That's Blush Salon and Well and Company.
Awesome. Yep. So great. Yeah. A lot of things going on out there. So the old elevator, the old Oh, yeah. Not really. Um, where we were at with that project was
financing and looking at analyzing if like tiff tax increment financing or tax abatement would be worth it for them to pursue. There's a large cost investment and upfront cost with that. You have to
get an inspection. inspection has to be this AB and C report that costs a significant amount of money and then there's the application process um that could be upwards of $50,000 just to go through that. Um, so if the property value now is, let's say, 100,000 and it
is increased to 200,000, but 50,000 goes towards just establishing that, is is the juice worth the squeeze essentially? Like, is it worth them to maybe go through that and then only capture, you know, 20,000 or $10,000 in potential tax
recoup. So, we're we've been trying to go through that um and understand that. And then they also continue to go through some schematics and then work with their lenders on um other potential options to move the project forward at least the first phase of that project.
Cool. If nothing else, I'm going to go to number 10. I move to adjurnn. I move motion to second. All in favor? I. No one's opposed. Thank you everybody. Little insane in the membrane, right?
But you know,