e e good IA good evening I will now call this meeting to order our first order of business is to adopt the agenda for tonight's meeting Commissioners is there a motion to adopt the final agenda so moved
motion can second I'll get a second that motion is second all those in favor I I oppose thank you the motion carries our next order of business is to adopt the minutes from our February 4th 2024 finding commission
meeting Commissioners is there motion to approve the minutes no moved motion can get a second second motion and second all those in favor hi hi opposed thank you the motion carries
we'll now move on to our discussion items first item tonight is item 3.1 consider a pool variance for 6580 Aster Trail this item does include
a public hearing I will now turn it over to associate planner pravis beerley for a staff presentation and then I will open the public hearing hearing from those in the chamber this evening that wish to speak thank you thank you chair and
Commissioners uh now it's back perfect so tonight is the vars request for a pool at 6580 asra Trail um what the request is is to have the Waters Edge of the pool uh 75 ft from the ordinary High
Watermark which would normally be 100 ft underneath the Shoreland ordinance so this is a request for 25 ft encroachment into that setback in front of you is is a layout of what they're looking to draw from the landscaper uh you'll notice uh where the
back of the house is just beyond that where the Landscaping is the the right side of the pool is about where that 100t setback is so it's mainly just the pool moving over into that area uh we did receive the application and considered it complete on January
24th of this year excuse me I have the wrong year on there uh there is a 60-day rule which is going to end uh March 25th for the city to take an action unless extended uh we did do a public notice that was mailed to Property Owners within 350 ft and we published in the
Winona or excuse me the Waconia Patriot um staff has also discussed this application with uh representatives of the DNR the county as well as the minihaha uh Creek Watershed dist um just to go through what a variance is the main thing we're looking
for tonight is if there's a practical difficulty practical difficulties are listed in statute um and they have to have all the Practical difficulty test completed in order for the city to be able to issue the variants when we look at that this means that there's a
reasonable use and it's a permitted use on the property um there's a plight of the owner due to circumstances unique to the property as well as if the variance is granted it won't change the character of the neighborhood the other thing to consider during this is that an economic
Factor uh alone is not uh a condition for practical difficulties and shouldn't be considered as such when we look at when we look at practical difficulties the applicant had submitted a letter which is in the packet and just to sum that up uh is a reasonable request the first part of it
staff agrees that this is a reasonable request uh a pool is definitely an accessory use to a single family resident and then we get into the uniqueness of the property we're talking about that the uh the applicant talked about the
lot shape the closeness of how uh close the home is to the 100 foot setback the driveway location topography as well as trees and vegetation um I'll go into more detail in a couple slides on all of those we also have to look at the essential character of the property so
if there is a pool does it change how the neighborhood looks feels or operates staff would agree that it does not change CH that characteristic talk about the uniqueness of the property when it comes to the lot shape this lot was designed actually
part of a minor subdivision back in 2014 with the intention to build a single family home the single family home was built close to the lot line but it met all the ordinance at the time as well as the 100 foot was in place at the time of that building another thing that we look at
just to give a better example of what we're talking about as we go through this I wanted just point out that blue line on there is where the 100t setback is where you see the magenta box that's a rough location where the pool would be it's not perfect it's not exact but it's it's a good representation of where it
would go just to show that it goes over the line the red boxes are also two other potential pool locations that will that are going to be discussed as well uh when we look at the other items mentioned by the applicants Topography
of the trees and vegetation we have on the south side of the home which is the bottom of the screen so it' be the bottom Red Box uh the pool could fit but it does have significantly steep slopes and it would be impractical to do the
grading or or anything like that which you're going have retaining walls that are going to be 68 ft in height it just doesn't make sense you have a real steep slope in the pool um on the North side um the applicant decided that it would require tree and vegetation removal um
you can see in the Box there's a tree and then kind of that squirly line you see just above the the top box that's actually part of a tree line so there's various vegetation that's built into that the last thing that we looked at is the proposed location that's flat and
Accord and um the survey doesn't show any trees in that area the biggest thing with that is that it's within the the satb back area so looking looking at that type of information we have to think about there's three potential locations one has been definitely ruled out just
because it's infeasible and these are things just to think about as we go through this process the applicant had also cited uh in their application a variance that was issued in 2023 for 6642 Astro trail that variance was to
was to demolish an existing home and replace it with a new home on generally the same footprint that was there it's also outside of the 100 foot or or setback that's required that's that uh longer dash line that's just left of the home uh working with the DNR the DNR
required a 30ft drainage and utility is been to be placed in this well and there was a lot of work done to figure that type of stuff out the other case that was cited in here Vance that was recently issued was for 7321 tamarak Trail and that was just last year uh
that was a request by that applicant to have greater than the maximum allowable uh perious or impervious surface on the property when that homeowner had purchased the home they had intention of building a pool things got delayed the city changed the code to take a pool and
from an imp from a perious structure to an impervious structure um with that there was significant mitigation in storm water controls uh an investment which had to go on the property to make sure it didn't cause any environmental damages or damages to adjacent
properties so tonight the big thing for us is going to be what our zoning code says our zoning is says that the Planning Commission cannot recommend and the city council cannot approve unless the four criteria listed here are met the first one being strict interpr or enforcement and interpretation that
result in a practical difficulty so if the Planning Commission uh feels that there is a practical difficulty that can be established then that criteria can be met that there's no uh exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to property um
that wouldn't apply to other property so is there anything with this property that other homes in the neighborhood or throughout the city wouldn't face um and granting a variance it doesn't adversely affect the public health welfare safety or be detrimental to the community or
the neighborhood in any way and the last thing is that the variance granting it uh is something that is permitted so a pool is a permitted use so meet that criteria so staff is recommending denial of the VAR for failure to meet the Practical
difficulties test um one of the reasons is pools and other recreational uses are they're not a requirement of a single family home they're a desire they're not a need the other thing we look at is the size of the pool though there are only so many sizes of pools that cannot be a determining Factor if a pool can be
placed when we go back and we look at the map that had the three different pool locations on it those are based on what the applicant was submitting the size of the pool if the pool was smaller it's still a pool it can still fit um there okay uh the other thing to look at
is if regardless of where it is on the property if it has anything to do with vegetation coverage sunlight or wind or things like that those are all personal preferences those aren't necessarily requirements for if a certain use such as a pool can be
constructed uh the other thing is not removing vegetation uh a couple years ago where the pool is being placed there was trees I don't know when those were removed or if they're still there unfortunately I I can't walk on private property um but if trees would need to be removed uh for it the city would be
likely to Grant the permit uh if it can be placed in a in a in a way that we don't have to do a variance for the zoning code um the location of the home being built so close to the 100t setback that is not considered a practical difficulty in staff's opinion because
the home could have been built smaller it could have been built further away in addition this requirement was in place at the time of the application for the single family home as well as the construction of the home itself so that was a known Factor um last thing is
that when we look at wanting to or we were to permit a pool or any type of accessory use to go with inside the setback uh it's considering where that line is the state and the DNR have already looked at and we've agreed that it's 100 foot setback is the line this
is not an essential item so we would be actually shrinking our ordinance which we would need to look at for future variance requests as well so with with all that information being said uh there's a lot of things to think about and different ways to look at different types of information but
the biggest thing would be does the request meet the Practical difficulties test in the in the mind of the Planning Commission things to consider is that acceptional extor circumstances so when what I mean by that is is there a place that you could reasonably put the pool
on the property e if you change the size or just location in general that would function to meet the purpose of having a pool as an accessory um that is a subjective opinion but it is something to consider um at the would the city
approve a variance for a pool if it was an indoor pool or different accessory structure it's another thing to consider because we're looking at impervious cover and the placement of that impervious cover uh the other thing that we need to kind of look at is when the this home is recently purchased and there may have
been an understanding at the time that a pool could be placed on the property should that be a factor of consideration though that information didn't necessarily come from the city as far as an understanding and the want and the desire to have the home that the applicants had purchased um if the
variance is approved uh we should we should definitely take a look at the allowable encroachment uh because pools do have coping on it and they do have patio so it's 25 Fe going to be enough if the recommendations do that we should definitely ask the applicant take a look
to make sure that it'll fit the needs that they're looking to do um also if it's approved we want to look at if there's any reasonable conditions we'd want to do uh something that would automatically be in there is we would work with the DNR uh to look at any type of mitigation with the Watershed District the pool is going to be is
proposed to be built above the 100-year flood plane so therefore uh the Watershed doesn't have too many comments but the applicant would need to reach out with a pool application just to get that final signature from The Watershed if we move forward so with that um stand for any
questions or comments thank you um does the applicant wish to speak mate yeah State your state your name and all right bear with me I have a lot to say this project is near and dear to my
heart has moved a lot and we were really hoping to make this when we bought it we um we didn't find out until September that the pool was considered in that 100
setback but this is where we are um so my feel here the point of the 100 foot setback is to protect the shoreline right it's the water quality it's the natural Shoreline characteristics in the wildlife habitat we fullly agree with
that um um as lifelong Lakes Shore owners we would argue that a pool actually AIDS in the goal of um keeping Humanity away from the shoreline without a pool there will be much more emphasis on the
sheline we'll be down there in the pool the kids are I mean down there in the shoreline the kids are going to be running around we probably put a bigger dock probably put more SE we find put in a water with that human activity on the shoreline instead of the pool the bed
away and the wildlife sto coming which we believe a pool is 75 ft from the shoreline is in harmony with protecting the shoreline and the DNR has already looked at this project and given no indication that they disapprove or
expected any additional mitigation efforts above um what we are already planning to do is a 100% home patio uh full rest of the Native V we have um
that goes down into another flat area before it's Lake we plan to restore that all Native vegetation orbs veses will work with the DNR if they want to have input right
now just redo that bank not only a buffer but also just help the shoreline of the shoreline also we will collect all water drainage underground that's already in
the we our landscaper and already that so said this home was built in 2014 we actually built a home 201 on a lake and with we built our actual 75
from the shoreline and the lot where this house is built is atypical by any means and and the 's next door have again a couple acres we are on this lot that has this we don't get so a riparian lot has
a minimum width of 125t get 125 until our front door okay and this this house also needed to have a well so when the people were building this them in order to have a well with
all of its distinct characteristics odd shape so Travis did propose about this about putting the pool on theth side of the house I just want to point out um if you looked at the report I'm not sure did or
not but the red rectang at red R the report also indicates that the Smoke on the side is same as the L side is also not true I went outside today and I took more pictures like this is a
picture of that sides and not only summer it's all andet covers our neighbor's house the oison on this side um they moved in about the same time
that we did and we both move neighbor neighborhood to have more sping between hes to have those Tre have that privacy and to put over there down that privacy and then have a pool right 20 in
my neighbor's house would really hurt the essential character of neighborhood and and city do M protect adj property and limit
vegetation I again toally but above all that but you would have no patio whatsoever around it you could like squeeze in a smaller pool but it just doesn't make logical sense have the front of the
house that picture looking out of side when we have a space that's flat open and 75 ft from still 75 ft of buffer zone with that B that we are
planning to restore vation and I do want to note the two variances that you brought up that were approved both had DNR Feb both of them the DNR had something to say about it right one of way over and it
was also I do want to note as well Victoria um already allows for a deck to encroach into if you need certain criteria you don't even need a VAR
structure existed on thect thorough evaluation theer structure no can then encroach up to 15% no closer than 30 feet to the high water mark and then that
so I just wanted to point those two things out um sorry if I talk too much this is important to me um I hope after considering everything that I mentioned plan commission coun will grant the variance and allow us our
forever home want to stay here forever only ads that I would have is um one you know we agree and agree where we disagree the and my wife talked about irregular lot what she didn't talk about is that
the umre the uh monumented property lines and the so on thatth side there's a 10 so we have to build a pool 10 off the property line 10 away from the house as
well as there's that discrepancy that could move the property line at some point so that was told us don't do anything in that discrepancy area as well because that can move the property line so it really does make putting something on the north side of that house an additional because there could be a
movement in theot at some point because there is a discre that exists that's documented show there's a discrepancy between legal description and the monumented market so [Applause] that oh don't talk from back
there so um so that's that's like I said that's why we really think there is a fight to owner in this one and they said there's not there's other places to build this the north side is and we La out a number of reasons why we think that that is not impractical place to go to pool and if
we had to build a pool there it would be a small pool you can have deep end and there's also other Reas all day long side of the but it just not so that's where we there is a fight to thank you for
consider thank you I will now open open the public hearing is there anyone in the chambers this evening that wish to comment on this item good evening commissioner Commissioners I'm Eric simmer uh 6600 as Trail in the neighbor to the
South um I completely support the applicant's uh application the location approval is proposed I feel it's in certainly keeping with the characteristics of my house which has AOL
uh facing the lake um and is um more AOL is more consistent in keeping with the general future of the homes in
the um I think the other thing that's sort of fascinating about um the ordinances here is if you fill out the pool if you look at the pool application um through the city setback for the rear
yard is 40 ft there's a whole host of other rules that come into effect when you're dealing shorland uh overlay District which does contemplate um you know accessory uses that are water water oriented that in
some cases have set backs of 10t those can be boat houses they can be patios they can be detached decks um so you live in this space where I you just go pick up the application for a permit to put in a pool um
you um pretty rightly believe that the setb back to the rear yard is 40t from the property line um and then when you start looking at Water oriented structures in the Overland District it's as little as 10 ft so I do think it's a great area I'm very sympathetic for
the fight here and I support quite the thank you thank you anyone else in the audience hearing no additional public comment Commissioners may have a motion to close the public hearing make a
motion to close the public hearing motion can I get a second second motion second all those in favor oppos thank you the motion carries I will now open the floor for
the Planning Commission to discuss commission any questions com a couple ahead go ahead um can you can you guys clarify what's the pool Dimensions that you're going for sorry if I I'm probably missed it in
the packet yeah we would like to build a standard pool is 20 by 40 to make it fit within what we talked about we proposing 18 by 36 so a little bit swamp Okay so the pool itself okay I heard 100 feet and that's where I was thrown off the overall with the patio from the house to
where the patio ends is that what you're asking the decking around the decking around the PO oh that's is that the 30 6 F feet No 3 we need 25t total variance basically
from the 100 foot it would go 25t that the 100 foot Mark basically goes along the the shrubs that you see kind of walking in that patio right there yeah so it's just pool that would go over the 100 foot and we are asking
for 25 ft pool's only 18 wide and so including the was 25 does that make sense yeah thank you yeah um and then I guess just from like having done your homework I know you guys talked to Travis about the north side have you guys talk to an
actual pool builder about the north side like the practicality like can it be built um you can't bring in a bunch of dirt and then put a pool in it it has to be in virgin soil they call so in order to do it on that North Side you would have
to like dig down and put up a retain while probably along the property line is debatable right now we got this 10 discrepancy um to make that flat because you can't bring in dirt and then dig
into the dirt does that make sense yeah so can be done but it's but it couldn't be done to that Dimension that's the other key thing it would have to be smaller than that so we couldn't have a deepend you couldn't have a pool you could jump into you could only have like a sporting pool if you put it in that
area it would have to be a smaller size gotcha you couldn't you couldn't have a standard you only one of those kind Lounge Bo thank you Dimension back up is that edge of that I mean there
is the edge of the house is not at 100 foot set back chair chair commission correct the there there so the home doesn't hit the 100 foot Mark so the home is in compliance with the city code and with the Shoreland ordinance the encroachment
that 15% or 30 ft that's if the principal structure is already encroached into that 100 foot mark because the mark did change over the past couple decades so used to be able to build closer so that's where that 15% rule comes into place um so but with it
out being set we would look primarily at if we want to allow the encroachment what do but it's about 3 4T off that 100t Mark just on the sou just on the southern side and then it goes up and
then it cuts over Travis can you give us any examp other examples of uh when we've made exceptions for the Shoreland 100 foot setback variants in my tenure with the city I have not been part of that process where
that 100 foot's been encroached on um I did talk to the D R uh and with our area hydrologist basically it's if it happens if the city would approve it the DNR is going to work with it and if the city denies it then they'll go with that
route as well um but as far as it going in the setback generally that's what variances are used for is for that setback or height requirements I just haven't seen that um and even going back to the 2023 example uh that had nothing to do with
the 100 foot setback 20204 example as well they were well beyond 100 ft wind is at 100 fet get set I mean if the lake goes down waterwise or where where does that get thrown in there
excellent question uh chair uh that is set by the DNR so if you go to the dnr's website you can look at any Lake and you can pull the data on the lake and they have an elevation for it so it's the same way that we would calculate like flood plane elevations same way we collect that that ordinary high water mark is generally where it'd be expected
within certain amount of Seasons with snow and rain and all that to where that would get and that's where that Mark is set so when we look at in here where it gets marked it's it's a specific elevation at 9 129. 3 ft
is what the DNR has that high water mark at so you go from wherever that line is that's down here and you go 100t above it that's how that's created yeah both the variances that we were mentioned in
here the one on Tamra yeah they were over hard cover but they were actually the mediation system they were putting in they were actually reducing their hard cover and the other one was pretty much to the benefit of the
DNR to change those it was variance that needed to change the DNR if I remember but it was still a plus or DNR right but it also cleaned
up um the Waterway uh the drainage system um there was a lot that there was a benefit to it to allow them
to um to do that shorland I mean I was been on the Planning Commission when we went through the shorel ordinance we did a lot of discussion
on shortland setbacks um unfortunately the way this house is just built they either decided they wanted the house size and
they wanted it where it's at I I'm having a hard time with it to be honest seconded my question is the what is that little structure on on the water the boat house and what's the
impervious of that boat house and what's the construction of that is it actually a house is it just a a structure with uh what is it commissioner by definition that falls underneath as a water oriented structure which is a special
classification of accessory uses that was written by the DNR so with boat houses it's considered an accessory use to the lake such as being able to store your boat or store boating equipment or to store other supplies for the enjoyment of the actual the resource
itself got it um in here we do have it listed uh when we go into it uh it's 419 Square ft um is the size of the or's the footprint of the structure as far as the use or more specific use the applicant would be better able to answer that
question you want to know what it's constructed out of sure I mean cement it's yeah concrete Bo floor yep got it I my only my only message I guess is that um
you know we like to let homeowners do what they want to do with the property and um that's kind of conflicting with with having to abide by our Shoreland rules and our um you know the other
regulations you have to stay in compliance with I mean we we like to find way creative ways if we can to make to make things work for the homeowner but we can't on the other hand if we start making exceptions for certain things we'll we'll end up with the
argument is that we'll end up with a line of of people asking for variances for the same purpose where then we're in a pickle so typically I would say and you guys can comment but I like to withhold those kind of exceptions so we don't get into the slippery slope and we
maintain our level of control over what happens on the property um but if there's a way that we can figure out where uh without making a clear exception we can find a way to to help you out and get your pool where you want to put your pool I think where everybody's amenable to that but the
problem is a setback agreed I think the um and looking at the at the entire package before um the option is the uh the north
side but then you've ruled out the north side for all of the the logical reasons um and in in terms of of the um the the rules that we have to that that
restrict what we can do at the same time is you know is uh precisely what was stated so um if the if the north side doesn't work um then we we don't
essentially have an option and and and I agree you know we're we're here to we're here to work with you as absolutely best as as we can without breaking the laws and so I think that
that's essentially where we're at on yeah I I think the question earlier that you asked do we have other examples of encroachment within the Watershed we have lots of lakes in this community and
if there aren't any it starts to get to confined space that we're are we creating that exception that creates a rule that's going to be down the line that's what I think I'm asking
myself right now can I speak sure yeah please uh you know we did find some examples where it looked like the AER measurement there were pools at 152t off that's on 1200 Highway uh there's one across the lake
from us that appears to be less than 100 ft now if we don't know if they were grandfathered in or what their rules were why they did that but um there are others that appear to be based on aerial Lins within 100t so yeah I I can't speak to that um first of all thank you for the presentation
it's clear that you put a lot of time and effort into this and this is really a a passion project for you and I certainly appreciate that and I'd Echo what others have said that you know we very much want to see if we can make these happen um with variances the challenge is that by definition a
variance is an exception to an ordinance and we try to try to keep these ordinances consistent and it is uh it is precedential when you grant a variance um I remember vividly the discussion about tamarak and that was an
exceptional circumstance because the homeowners there purchased a property in Reliance on some bad guidance uh from a former city official and they went through incredible
Loops to try to make it work including considering buying adjacent property to meet the impervious the property when built didn't meet the impervious standards it was it was a bucket of worms quite honestly um and there through some abatement in cooperation
with the DNR I think we were able to find a solution that worked uh in this case though I just don't see meeting the legal standard for the variance um the exceptional or extraordinary circumstan is I haven't heard anything that causes
me to say that there would be tremendous economic loss if this weren't um if if this experience were not granted and so um I feel constrained and by the way this is only an advisory body the city council makes the decisions our role is
to represent the voice of the community in in evaluating requests and then passing along our recommendation but as somebody who've seen now a few of these um my view is that we don't really have a choice to deny the very answer question that that's my
view discussion Eric again is a patio um when you read the definitions of pool um setbacks you're supposed to VI it and the light of accessory building that's
point is a patio accessory building chair chair commission it it is not a patio is not patio is considered a type of landscaping but if you were to do a patio out into the setback we'd have to take a look at that to get you a better more clear definition because the
water oriented um structures talk about um the setback for patio saas and it strikes me as odd that a pool which is more akin to a patio in terms of its um visual impact on the
surroundings um is viewed as a building when so and I understand the nuances around the variances and why why you can't but this might be more of a code issue and looking at a pool in the
context of accessory structure versus in context with a patio seems to me to make a lot more sense in terms of visual impact um as it relates to you know impervious calculations Etc um so depending on how the rest of this
process works out you maybe that's something that um everybody could consider very no more discussion I will ask for a motion um I would like to make a motion to uh recommend denial to the city
council for a variance request to zoning ordinance section 22-6 d uh to permit a pool to encroach 25 ft into the Shoreland setback for the property at 60 580 Aster
Trail motion a second second a motion a second all those in favor I oppos thank you the motion carries our second item tonight is item 3.2 continue the public hearing for the
West Creek Village Residential development to March 4th planing commission meeting the applicant for the West Creek Village is still preparing additional information for the commission to review at their next meeting so we will
continue this to our meeting on March 4th 2025 Commissioners can I have a motion to continue the public hearing so moved second motion second all those in favor I close thank you we will continue this
item to our meeting on March 4th with the presentation prepared by staff I have a quick question on that yes chair how many times can we continue a public hearing we can continue a public hearing uh as many times we like
as long as we're within the time frames um I would ask that uh the motion is amended uh to include the time of the start of the next Planning Commission meeting um just so we have a clear date and time and location yeah but we could push it off
to the uh the 18th realistically um and then I would have to check to see if we've already I believe we've already done an extension of 60 days one so we would get capped at 120 days from the time of the application to the time the city council
has to take an action or the application has to be officially withdrawn I I just yeah so if we could amend the motion to reflect a 6 PM start then then we can do that and if we need and if it gets push back another meeting uh staff would come forward and ask for
the same thing we just don't have all the materials yet from the applicant that we've been requesting I'm just wondering I mean how long do they have to give us that information um they need
it staff staff generally wants to get a week to take a look at something before we bring it to the Planning Commission because we need to make sure we're looking at at the potential questions being asked and we're looking at all the issues that could come up and try to find
resolutions um but it would be more apt that Brian gives a specific date on it but generally at least a week because it's just not planning staff that looks at it we also have all our Public Works we have engineering law enforcement fire
all that good stuff so how long before that they have to basically start over or can we continue and continue we can continue and then what would happen is when we hit that the legal end date of the 120 days staff will ask the applicant to voluntarily withdraw their
application or what we would do is we would go and to the Planning Commission the city council and we would request that it's denied uh for not being fully complete and then the applicant would need to reapply and restart that process so what I'm hearing in essence
is 7 Days 10 days back from whatever 120 days is if they have't of that information they've kind of de facto defaulted into a denial uh you know with a vote we and correct u under under the way that the laws are written if the city doesn't take an action within those
time periods whatever they requested they get basically without exception so that's why we would push for denying it at that point and make sure that there's a clear understanding of what that that end dat rule looks like we still got plenty of time we're still we we still
we still have time um and I know that uh that um Brian or excuse me city planner mccan has been working with the applicant to get the information that they need it's just it didn't work out to do the public hearing tonight okay all right thank
you our third and final item tonight is item 3.3 discuss article two of the zoning code revision I will now turn it over to associate planner Travis yearly for staff presentation
uh chair Commissioners we are on our second step of a few more months of going through this I promis this is it it gets more fun from here um but just a reminder uh while we go through we're updating the zoning code uh we're looking to be transparent we want to
make sure we're available for questions we want flexibility in the process so we're not rushing anything um and what we bring the municipal zoning code back together for recodification and 2026 uh just quick background uh for
those coming or residents that this may be the first time they're seeing it um we identified over 500 items in our zoning code to take a look at for review that's anything from making sure we're into the correct legal site to everything from grammar to Clarity um
Clarity of uh what the ordinance is intended to mean um we've already addressed several things in 2024 some of our larger items especially uh cp's I sign ordinances fence ordinance and getting our business district back into place with that C1 and C2 um I said the
process uh we're just going to take a look at everything and we're staff's going to come forward with a proposed language for the zoning code as well as a new layout for it we'll be moving some stuff out of it and stuff into it and we got to go through everything
we'll be tracking the changes being tracked as a reminder are that'll be presented the redline version which we need to present before we'd be able to adopt an ordinance change it's going to be the redline version coming out of what's presented at the Planning Commission as the basis of that underneath the new structure um we do
have notes for anybody who's interested in seeing where it is and as of November 2024 to um how we got to where we are today but it is quite a bit uh this is our second article of the of the list
that we've got to go so still starting on it but it's good stuff um article two is all about Administration and enforcement uh there's some general language you need to do there's the board and appeals um that uh we're going to go through there's some changes to that there's also non-conformity as
we're going to take a look at that and there's some policy changes that I want to introduce in that section as well as well as land use permits and variances there's also some policy changes there um I will make sure to highlight those policy changes and the new Concepts as we go through this to make sure that
we're all aware of what's being asked for uh division one of article two covers the zoning administrator the zoning map amendments public hearings and enforcement a little bit more administrative stuff we already talked about some of it in article one It just fits better in this section here uh the
zoning ad administrator section has been amended um it lays out a lot of the duties of the zoning administrator as long as responsibilities this is this is common in code generally city managers City Clerks Finance officers police Chiefs that type of stuff will have areas within the code where their job
duties are signed and laid out uh we're looking at the official zoning map in the current code we have a physical copy of of our official zoning map it's out of date so every time we would make a change to the zoning map we would need to do public hearing and go
through that process we already do that but it's it's easier administratively to keep a copy at City Hall under the control of the zoning administrator that has the official so it's it's one thing that can get missed as we go through and do updates um in 5 years 10 years from
now uh we're looking at uh how to amend the city code or the the zoning code anything from how it applies to uh the property owners and their agents which is basically anybody who wants to bring forward a text Amendment to the city code what that process would look like
as far as what staff has to do the roles and responsibilities of the Planning Commission as well as the city council um um there's also uh going through the approval and denial for it um with zoning text amendments we're not required to approve just because we're asked as excuse me the Planning
Commission city council just because there's a request for it um this also goes back into when we talked about substantially similar uses and going through a staff process to see if something will fit compared to bringing it forward to this process this is the
formal process of the substantial or similar sub anary uses public hearings nothing's really changed with that um we do U 10 to 30day notices what it has to be published in the paper as well as the residents uh
that are within 350 ft have to be provided with a notice uh for all zoning ordinances and all zoning applications uh there are some exceptions if it's a Citywide thing or it be unreasonable to have uh city planner McAn and myself sit
down an entire day and stuff envelope something like that come up we do have a rule um and that specifically is if it's going to cover a space of more than five acres uh it provides an exception it provides an option it doesn't mean that uh that option is always taken there
would be specific examples that would come up we would want more notification and we' want that higher level of community engagement this does not take away from that ability um there other things question for you yes commissioner so um we had a recent
um question on the 350 ft on variances what is what is standard I feel like 350 fet is pretty darn close to something with a variance so if you're within the um where does the 350 okay the 350 or uh
chair commissioner the 350 comes specifically out of out of state statute 462 and 350 ft is the minimum distance that's required um and it goes through the rules on how that works when we do a melee notice it's 350 ft from property
line to property line so so that's the minimum required we could for example make it 1,000 ft in our city toal notice for residents absolutely that's 100% something that could be done it's uh it's a way to get it out more um
but I I would I would caution on the distance a little bit um but yes it is an option when I was in Newport it was 500 ft for everything because they wanted to have it expanded a little bit so so it's a an administrative cost for the community in some regard it's
administrative in time but that gets balanced out with expanding uh direct notification um one one last question oh when I just use a quick trip down on County Road 10 you mail
that to within a 350t radius no one who's there who's there yeah exactly yeah you know and and then when you get into even you know
that's that and I don't know when you get in those areas where even it's newly developed I mean yeah there's properties there but how many houses are whatever so chair commission just kind
of lay out the public hearing notice process that the city uses uh we do put it on our social media accounts as well as on the city's website and on the monitor at City Hall and this information is also put out to the public uh in a newsletter that gets re released periodically by
Administration if there is a case that comes up in the future where the Planning Commission or the city council feel that that there should be more notice or more direct notice uh that's something that can be discussed um and can be taken into advisement by the from the Planning Commission and ordered by
the city council the reason that I'm kind of vague with it is there's uh sometimes budgetary or or political purposes to different things and I don't want to step on toes of others especially those that out rank me through the city but those are always comes up so
examp we quick trip I think it was like seven or nine notices that we sent it wasn't very much but if we wanted to expand to say hey that neighborhood to the north we want to get to the hunters Brook and the Creekside and all that that's something that could have been directed to say hey can you guys do a mailing to that as well as staff and
that's something that definitely could have well in you got to what I was going to ask a moment ago is it related to city council approval because there's a budgetary component associated with no
uh as as far as that would go the reason I bring up the budgetary part is if it was every time we did a public notice the direction was to send it to everybody in the city direct mailer there is a significant cost to that especially for the number of requests that we get so with that that would be
within staff's perview uh because it's a budgetary item so therefore staff has depending on which staff it is so such as uh the community development director the city manager they have different levels to what they can approve for spending within the budget so that's
that's part it's we don't have to ask specific permission for everything every time but so we could highlight we could technically possibly change we just can't go below 350 we got 400 500 correct could we we add other
stipulations to it like my other question is I know it's been in there publish notice in the official newspaper nobody in the city gets wone patri
no well some of us might get some of you might get it do you get it I looked it up because I was like I want to see these notices um no I mean the actual physical Pap oh the physical one um and my question is I know it's
probably a State statue that you got to put it in a newspaper but as far as newspapers are going away so to to that point uh chair um underneath State Statute the first speed of the year the city council has to have
an official publication newspaper and and there's certain rules that come with that newspapers are getting phased out but it's still a statutory requirement that we really can't get around um so until the statute
changes it's kind of what it is state statute correct I think I think I I don't know I can speak for everyone else but I think for myself I would challenge the city to be a leader here and figure out what is the next iteration to get these notices out to the public so that people are
aware of it I don't want to speak what everyone else is trying to get at but that's what I think I would encourage the city to do is like how can we be leaders in our community to show how we engage better with community members not just rely on minimum feat and papers
that that may or may not be mailed in our in our neighborhoods like what can we do that's better and how can we put that into our code so that we hold ourselves to a higher standard to make sure people are getting the notices I think that's what I would encourage the city staff to really think about it's
posted on the website social media it is and those are great things but like I we we got one person here tonight like I mean let's like how can we reach a broader audience you know we need to do
so chair commission when we would do a public hearing the other thing that the other tool that we have and it's a great tool through website and through MailChimp everybody gets the email from MailChimp or from the website and it says Hey the packet has been published and then there's a link directly to it
so I would highly encourage residents that are curious or just want to stay at to date whether they read it or not but at least the option is available that they can go I believe we mail out to about 220 people or email addresses right now for the commission packet um in my mind
of community size that's not a lot um but if there did become a time where we want to have uh a larger scope of a public notice or more Direction on it that'd be a conversation that I believe would be appropriate at the time of not
or coming to the Planning Commission saying hey we're looking to schedule public hearing for something U Biz there's a difference between uh something small and that's more routine and and a larger project or what that impact would be yeah I think that goes back to the point I was saying earlier
of like it could it could be a sliding scale right like maybe there's a a level to that but I think like even another simple solution I would suggest is to look at if you know that a neighboring Community has an HOA like why would we not reach out to the HOA and be like hey
just so you know like this is happening like there's pros and cons to everything but ultimately if our goal is to be transp parent to the community and leaders like we should make sure people are informed and they have an option to provide feedback and know what's going
on um yeah one one of the uh one of the things that came to mind as I was again reading through this um is uh Applewood neighbor seems to be uh pretty well circulated in this area and literally
covers um a bulk I think of of Victoria and the surrounding areas is everyone familiar with oops maybe it's not that apple wood neighbor and and it's a you know it's uh there's a lot of
there's a lot of nonsense we talking about next door next door Y how about next doorwood no just next door next door is the app yes I am definitely app neighborhood
every yes every Association you sign up and yeah you get all kinds of garbage so what so what do we do can we uh revisit this when we decide on or do we need to make some recommendations right now to you Travis commissioner either way if there's recommendations or
thought shift now I I'm taking notes on everything um uh if something that that uh individual Commissioners want to think about they can definitely send Brian and myself an email so that we can we can get that noted in so we could provide a red line coming back and we'll
have a back back or we'll have a history to why that change was made uh and represented um and th those cple changes aren't going to be in common um there is an ordinance change that will be bring it in it's going to affect ordinances we've already looked at stuff so that's
going to happen through this process if the commission has something directly in mind that they they want to do absolutely would love to hear it if it's at another meeting and it's like hey the public hearing thing because public hearings are going to come up a few more times throughout this code if there are
things that we want to do there's nothing wrong with going back and revisiting anything that we've talked about um and mainly that's because we haven't done a public hearing for anything all this is basically it's a formal informal
conversation about proposed changes so maybe I suggest that um staff consider what might be a good standard for us and re make a recommendation well or
like you could talk to staff and see you know if we change it to 500 feet what does that do um and and just kind of check with staff
and say well the staff recommends yes or no or this is why we we and chair we can definitely do that um that you know we'd like to get
some feedback on increasing it to 500 ft and if we can take a look at the 500 absolutely and we can take some examples from notices that we've done uh within the past year and I I can bring that information back at the next plan commission meeting if you'd like just to
see the the breath of how many notices go out at 350 compared to 500 um and I can bring more detailed notes of how we do public or how we get information out to the community I want to talk to the communication staff with the city to make sure that I'm not misdating
anything and I'm not missing anything kind of like public hearing tonight I mean you got the lake there so how much lake is in that 350 foot you know that you aren't getting
the neighbors across the lake or well in one that's been brought up as HOAs I mean there could be a you know everyone touching that one that probably represents a broader but it's only getting a hold of three or four
maybe five different organizations another source that are representing many people without you know outside that parameter was saying it at work Elmo enough let's move on should we use
that yeah I know po Trav we beating them up over this public here I would much to be honest I'd much rather have it done here today in a public hearing when we've got more eyeballs on us it's all good it's good discussion any other questions about
public hearings or anything else that uh the Planning Commission would like uh staff to bring back at the next meeting to kind of go over how those work okay um one key thing to note is that failure to post a notice or failure for a resident to get the notices does
not invalidate the public hearing and does not invalidate the action by the city if something was to happen the city could be held legally liable for it it be up to the courts to figure out how that works um but if we put things in the
mail and the mail loses it or the post office loses it we don't get held at fault as long as we're not doing anything that's malicious and intent and we're taking that good effort to do things uh proper um and be transparent honest and for and upfront with
it um we talk about enforcement this is an addition to the zoning code uh it's more of a blanket statement uh which basic says if you violate the um anything in the within the zoning code any ordinance any section that it's a
mem meter um and that's unless there's a rule in State Statute which says that it's different this is an option in the tool blocks so this would be part of a code enforcement policy which means that there's still discretion
um so if somebody is in viol if a property would be in violation we're going to try to work with them to to correct the violation but this is just another option to get compliance and enforcement is all this is
absolutely um in the mailed notices should there be like 10 days or yep it's it's a minimum of 10 days it has to be postmarked we don't I mean should it say that in the I mean it says a 10 to 30 day
published in the official newspaper that that's all in the statute the 10 to 30 days published I just didn't want to repeat it oh okay but it under under statute 10 to 30 days is the legal window that we have to get information out it's enough time to be able to react to it and not so much time that it gets
forgotten about okay back enforcement sorry yeah go ahead my kind of question about this was you know the failure to remove Shelby guilty of a misdemeanor how are we adjudicating a
conclu like are they going to be charged is this is a wording thing to me um shall is a a must and guilty is a presumption correct so we would deem that they would be guilty of a misor meaning that we
would that the city would issue a ticket but we have the discretion on it and generally what happens with these is it goes to court and the judge is going to take a look at it and there's basically a last chance to it um so if if you want to see what some of that paperwork looks
like I have some at my desk from a case a couple years ago so I've challenged this before whether we want to invoke a criminal penalty or whether there should be a civil penalty associated with zoning Cod violations
and the response I received earlier was that we like to have this hammer in the bag in case we M it um we all know that judges never impose the sentences for a misdemeanor that are allowed you could impose theoretically 30 days in jail and
$1,000 for every day that somebody is in violation of um I don't think we want to send people to jail for zoning but I do support a civil penalty so for what it's worth as a policy matter I would much rather see
a civil penalty Associated rather than the threat of jail time or somebody unless it's malicious commissioner I haven't seen that with zon cot I've seen it with like nuisance codes and Property Maintenance codes um when we look at the municipal side that's something that we're going to revisit
um as well know it's something that we can reach out to the City attorney and ask some questions to see how we could potentially put that in the zoning code if that's uh some information that we wanted or direction that the Planning Commission would like to see I think I share the same concern um from a
different lens of it's fast forward 10 years and we get some turnover in staff 25 years put whatever years you want on it if the next staff comes in interprets this as any person who fails to remove violation shall and it's that's Hammer
that's definite I guess I'm concerned with that sh as well being so definitive i' be more supportive of either maybe guilty or I maybe charge just leave it a little bit more loose if you guys don't really truly intend on it being every
time like choose a better phrasing of it and again thinking future future State someone else is in that seat and they read shall they're going to be like well this is what they decided 20 years ago so shall it be and then we're stuck in a tough spot of someone's holding someone accountable because they didn't take a
sign down or whatever we can we can definitely take a look at that commissioner um and whether it's a civil or misdemeanor I'm a little indifferent on that but I'm I'm concerned about the Sha and again I try to think long term that we're making changes and I hope we don't have to do this again in the next
10 15 years so and and I guess going back to it how how I see what the intent is is yeah you know if they've failed to correct take corrective action you know they've met the
definition for us to take punitive action whether it be a misor or a civil offense you know and but it's to me it's like if you do if the individual does not correct these things then by definition they're meeting the intent of
what would be a Mis but there's still like you said some discretion as to how the city is going to respond in that circumstance right it also puts the city in a tough spot when their neighbor is coming to you and saying no your code says they shall be
found guilty and so then it puts us the city in a weird spot to be like well yeah but we decided not to do that and then it's like wait a minute you know like so I I just feel like phrasing that should be done really carefully like want to consult with legal and make sure he guys phrase it in the right way we'll D I'll double check on the word uh for
sha and administration um and then just for some some background on uh the code enforcement policy is generally directed by the city council and it' be set by the city manager the policy or what we would do in the zoning code would be the
same as handling a nuisance violation um so I guess it all depends on there so right now it is one policy it could be changed in the future depending on who's on Council who's in city manager and that type of stuff so um just kind of just a little bit of background it's got to mirror him up and that's why some of
the language is the way that it is um but we'll definitely look into that get some answers and bring it back to the next Planning Commission meeting I would just say just don't forget that uh they're in violation of the of the chapter that's been committed or existence shall be served with an order and writing to remove the
violation yeah exactly so if they've been told remove the bags of garbage 10 times and they're not removing them well what's the hammer eventually we need a hammer either we we
pay to have it done and charge him for it or a civil penalty or what I mean I don't it does they've been told it's almost like to me the word guilty it's like that's the legal that's a legal definition after a jury decides yeah I
think that's the word that I'm hung up on more than shall I agree with you you've been written notice you haven't done it times you have met the definition of you're willfully violating the code at that point right yeah fair point it's
probably the word guilty is the the adjudication of the process the result of what is outside instead of Shelby guilty would Shelby charged of a misdemeanor make more sense yeah because charged is the
action that leads to others resulting in a guilty it's not so cut and dry that way well actually I think it's more direct just just say you know this is this should be charged I think what we're trying to do is is State the consequence for a violation of
the zoning code right right and violation of it right right this is willful yeah and so and that's the way statutes are written you know violation of the section shall be a gross mystery is that so as an attorney that's
how I should be reading this that answers it for me I just needed that context okay but I think I think the point is well taken we shouldn't hamstring the city council that they
have to be finding somebody guilty of a Mis in fact it's not it's not the city council's role the prosecutor would charge it out and then judge would ultimately decide whether somebody's guilty
not legal advice just leave to the attorney and we've only asked we asked the City attorney during this process to do a high level overview before we present it uh and things like that so more specific things we're going back to them with um so it's
definitely something we'll bring back I'll make sure to bring up the different concerns about the language as well um and we'll have a report hopefully at the next council meeting to say or excuse me next Planning Commission meeting to say here's what was discussed here's the result of it here's the options and then
we can go from there so we get we going to talk about this a few times so um any other questions or comments for me on the enforcement section
okay uh so the next thing we look at is the board of adjustment and appeals uh we just went through one of these processes um this is also in statute as well and I made sure to bring it with me just in case there's any real
specific questions but basically uh the Planning Commission shall act as the board of adjustments and appeals um what the duties and powers are is to receive and recommend so it's uh the Planning Commission is an advisory commission um
but we do handle public hearings and that type of stuff um we're going to be looking at with inside here we talk about the procedures of the board uh which include um different fees uh finding or filing of appeals uh getting
the city council approval and there's also some language in there about a city council override um which basically says that the Planning Commission wasn't to act the city council can take it there's some advice from the attorney to make some changes on that um and not
to put something in the code that keeps the council from being able to act with inside their full power so that that language was like to going to be stricken from when we uh bring it back as a Redline version I do want to point that out TR I know that um staff will do a
close proof reading of the language there I noticed that there were several points where we call um the board of adjustments and appeals the board of appeals and adjustments we will we will fix that so yeah so flag that so section division one section 7 for example is one um
there's another one no I can I'm G I'm G to type it into a find on word okay yeah and that way there you go we grab them all um I don't forget things right um so there's another thing
that's in here um that we added uh which is the appeal of administrative decision this goes back to uh the hearing that we had regarding the the uh property on Smithtown as an appeal of administrative decision so if and we didn't have a
process laid out on our Coast so this is an addition but more or less what this says is the staff issues a permit or something like that and somebody doesn't believe that we should have they'd be provided 20 days um to or 20 calendar days so one day shy of 3 weeks from the
date of that approval or issuance to say hey we need to take a better look at that um and what'll happen is that we come back to the Planning Commission acting as the board of appeals and adjustments to um figure out did staff act correctly or not and during that
time period we would actually notify and and halt the permit that way you don't get somebody starting construction just to find out three weeks later that they got to take it all down we don't want to cause that type of hardship to anybody uh the next thing that we're
looking at is non-conformities uh under division three uh non-conformities uh we we did a little bit of change to it the planning commission's looked at these in the past um but we just want to kind of take a look at modernizing it we have just the in general which is just amended
language from what we already had it doesn't change the intent of the policy of the code or anything like that um basically we want to permit structures that were legally built to continue to exist uses that were legally permitted to continue to exist after the city
makes a a zoning action which makes those not legal anymore so they become what's called a legal non-conforming use legal non-conforming structure um with that being said non-conforming uses uh the planning commission's recently looked at uh we
did some clerical changes to it but overall we didn't change a lot um the biggest thing on here uh that we'd want to take a look at is intensification which basically if a business um starts needing more uh floor
SP or they increase traffic because they're just becoming wildly over successful which is great we want that to happen but there's a reason that we made that use specifically not permitted within that area that would be an intensification the city would have an ability uh to help regulate that and as
staff we would work to try to keep that that business uh as best that we could um the other thing is of Abandonment um so if it's abandoned or discontinued for a period of one year what would happen is that the city would have the option to revoke that legal non-conforming
status um that involves some public hearings and some other things but it's a good option to have because the goal of his Zing code is to say this is how we want the future of the community to be not this is how we wanted the we wish the past was different uh so with non-conforming
structures there's or excuse non-conforming structures uh there's a continuance piece which is that legal non-conforming alteration uh which allows you to make changes as well as if if a building was to get damaged um if you have a building that doesn't meet setbacks because we
change the setbacks it's got legal non-conforming standing and it starts on fire well depend on the level of Destruction statute as well as our code mimics it to say if it can be replaced if it can't be replaced if it's going to
have a change to it what does that change look like um and uh if you want to expand it you can't expand it in a way that um puts it excuse me um creates a greater
non-conformity um so but when a non-conformity structure is damaged by fire other perel to the to the extent that more than 50% of its estimated market value um is there they'll have 180 days to submit a permit to rebuild the exact footprint that they had and
dimensions and things like that um with that being said we'll use the counter assessor's office to when they say this is the value of that structure that's what we're going to use for the dective point versus the building perent valuation so it's two things that the
city doesn't have a direct influence on and so it's third party telling us what that where that Mark is and if it gets hit uh probably the biggest thing in here is going to be uh uh the expansion has a 20% rule this is a it's it's not
necessarily a new idea but it's not overly common but if you have a non-conforming structure say the setback we changed it from 6 feet to 10 feet and now they're encroached into the new setback we would allow that building to be expanded administratively up to 20 %
as long as the expansion doesn't expand the non-conformity so if they're two feet encroached they can stay two feet encroached but the footprint of the structure can't go greater than 20% of the existing um that's an administrative process that we would handle um and then
noted in their property uh there any questions on this piece because I know it's new and there's and this this is a policy item uh we have non-conforming lots this is amended mainly it's amended um for a
clerical reason uh we did remove uh a rule that it was if you have a non-conforming lot uh there's two things that you need in there second one didn't line up with the state statute so we pulled it out um but
the biggest thing is if you have a lot that's undersized or doesn't meet width Dimensions or depth dimensions anything like that we can still consider it a buildable parcel uh the pro or and let's say it's for a single family home you still have to meet all the single family home
setbacks so you probably just have a smaller home is generally what happens we don't have many Lots within the community right now that are like that however they do exist and there's potential that they could exist in a greater fashion in the future 20 years
from now 50 years from now that could happen this is just a a tool it's also required by Statute to allow to be in place uh discontinuance that just a clerical change um this is just a fa
phase uh phase uses and structures out when we when the Planning Commission the city council uh look at our use tables and we don't want or it's determine that we want to make something uh non-permitted use eventually the goal is that that use goes away it's nothing
against the person it's nothing against building it's just growth and advancement of a community um were there any questions on non-conformities right away okay uh the last part is division four land use permits and
variances uh when looking at the varying section we got the authorization the power and duties um specifically practical difficulties are listed out in here uh it's the same same items that were shown tonight for the variance uh request that we had uh we uh as staff we felt that it would
be important to uh take a goal and turn it into a policy and specifically state that variances wouldn't be granted for pools height restrictions or impervious cover um those are some of the things that we get and those are more um I want it but it gets in a gray area with the
city being able to approve it or or not it's easier to defend us denying a variance than it is for us to defend granting one as a community um curious there so why did we hear the variant request tonight for the pool this is a
proposed draft so that is new language anybody's allowed to submit um a land use application regardless of what it's for regardless whatever if they want to submit an application and get all the information that we asked for they pay the fee and pay the escrow we're going to we're going to go through that um
tonight's example was uh months of going back and forth with the property owner uh as well as some of their contractors discussing different options and looking at things a different way knowing that sta as staff there's no way we could approve what they were asking and trying to resolve it before it
came they submitted for a variance because that was the only tool that they had to be able to put their pool they wanted to staff can't make that determination so with that if we want to get to a point where we say hey a pool
it's an amenity and we're not going to Grant any more variances for setbacks or impervious surface or anything like that regarding a pool that's what this would say if we say hey we're not going to allow buildings to go over the height uh levels and and Grant a variance for it
this says that a right away staff has something excuse me staff has something in black and white that says that we aren't going to do that same thing with impervious cover um I would say in the N9 months that I've been here that those seem to be three of the things that we
get requests for to encroach or go above or placement of those items I I don't I don't know that I would be supportive of pulling strictly saying no variances for pools um the reason I say that is because there's
other there's other reasons to to put in a variance for a pool um like I think about that impervious one that we did have earlier guess last year now like I feel like that was a very good back and forth and use of that variance that was put in whatever we
approve um I kind of struggle with the pool one especially like given what we talked about earlier like we'd rather homeowners be able to do what they can do with their homes and if they want to put a pool in like we would love to make it work for them so I that's my opinion
other people can disagree but I I I have a hard time with the pool one saying absolutely no variances for pools well I think I think on the the couple this evening um they I suspect that they came in with with the
reasonable level of knowledge that it was going to be denied uh just based on the statutes and and and the previous previous conversation um that said I think we do also have an
obligation like like like you said too uh an obligation to hear them hear them out and you know it's a um I I think that's how city government
quite frankly should work in my view as you know I I am not a fan of variances I think um they should be truly rare and the standard should be high U but I also believe that you should never say never uh and to create
a blanket rule that you would never Grant a variance for pools impervious or height I think goes too far um because as sure as you do this you would have for example tied your hands to issue the variants for the tamarak situation in
which an owner spent a big chunk of money in Reliance upon being able to build a pool in an area and went through Extreme Measures to make sure that the uh DNR requirements were satisfied so I
would I would urge City staff to go back and look at the requirements for a variance and raising them rather than establishing a blanket rule against certain things not being eligible for variances my twoo sense right and that
impious like Tam one um because they wanted the pool but they actually with the mediation system you know let's say they weren't putting in a pool but we're putting in a bigger patio
and they needed a variance just to get because the house was built over impervious surface but we're going to do this and we're going to do that we're actually going to do a negative impervious surface or you know
increase um and I know we talked about doing after that meeting changing to allow that if a homeowner is going to decreases impervious Surface by putting
this in that they shouldn't be required to come in with an variance but I don't know if that's in this anywhere yet or not and chair that is not in the proposed draft after that meeting staff had uh reached out to neighboring communities to find out who did it or
who had regulations like that we also reached out to the uh to the county as well as the DNR um the that would be a variance that the city would need itself for our code that we wouldn't have been that died right
there but again I mean if a homeowner wanted to do it and get a variance where here we would say no you do do we have any other forget my ignorance any other blanket you can't
put a variance in for this today or would these be the only three that we saying you can't put a variance in for this Comm the these are the only three uh this mainly got put in to highlight it uh that this is what we're getting requests for and just kind of help get
better clarification on it um there's outside of the Planning Commission there's been other Communications regarding the variances that the city's done reasons behind it understanding of uh what the law says what the code says that type of stuff so um this is uh
something that as staff we're as staff we're we're not tied to anything that's in the code our our role is to present things so and to look at information and feedback that that we've gotten and present it this is one of those items where kind of s like oh it'd be nice but
if it happens it happens if it doesn't it doesn't um but the general consensus that I'm getting from the Planning Commission is that the recommendation would be to strike this out that' be my recommendation mine too okay so we would
just strike the entire thing um and look at maybe the criteria for variances you know if if there are specific things that require a higher level of um necessity for example
variances as as you pointed out commissioner are supposed to be they should be truly exceptional truly exceptional yeah it shouldn't be something we see on a regular basis coming through but as a resident you have every right to apply for land use permits y any other question on just on
this on on this portion on VAR lapse of variance what was it three and four look quite similar in the um if you go through uh what what page commission SE
page 40 uh underlap of laps of variance if you read three and four it seems like four is redundant it's restating three uh page 40 H laps a
variance 11 I'm sorry yeah I wasn't going up far enough there's an inadvertent repeat I think you meant to strike the last sentence of section three and make it a new section
four yeah just uh yeah we we'll clean that up actually there are a couple as long as we're in that section under laps of variants in the first paragraph uh it says or does not have a void building permit I think that's meant to be valid building
permit okay and then in paragraph two there's in the second to the bottom sent a line it says zoning board of appeals I think that's the board of adjustments and Y and we'll we'll fix that yeah that one wouldn't get caught by ear no no and and I and we do
appreciate yep going through as many times we read this I know I know okay uh the next thing that we look at is condition use permits this is abended most of the language in here is the same as what the Planning Commission City
council's already taking a look at and what we recently adopted and approved some of the things that we did do I want to make sure I'm in the right part uh we took a look at um [Applause]
sorry my notes disappeared on here so this going to be just half a second uh we went through and looked at the specific standards for different conditional use permits uh probably one of them is the auds or adus excuse me a adus um between residential and
Commercial so with inside a residential property wanting to get additional dwelling unit that would still be a conditional use which is the same we currently have in the code however for uh business property we would suggest making that an interim use and that way
there's specific purpose for it and we can make sure we have it if if it's a if it's an auto body shop that has a bunk in the back because they've got some type of model where it would work I guess it's a bad example then we could do an inter room
use permit they need three months of having someone on site for whatever perfect but it wouldn't be an everyday thing or an all year thing year after year after year and you can always reapply for iups um so that's probably one of the that's one of the things that
we went through and we took a look at um the other thing that we took a look at in here is um it's a burden on the applicant is probably going to be one of the things it's up to the applicant to show that they need a conditional use
permit they can meet the reasonable conditions applied um we also took a look at the recording process once an application has been approved um it needs to be recorded within 180 days if it's not the permit becomes
invalidated um and the applicant wouldn't be able to use the condition use permit until there's appr Pro of recording provided to staff the main reason for that is there's 120 days that you get for the process to get the approval in 180 days on top of that the
time it would take for the city to issue a check um it it helps with the audit between short long-term uh uh ability is there as far as our liabilities go so that's a small portion of it the other portion is making sure that these documents get recorded with the county
um if there's a land use right that's given and there's no recording of it 10 years 20 years 30 years down the road staff isn't going to know necessarily and the owner of the property might not know the document exists or how it's applied or anything like that so this is
just a way to have that that extra control put into place uh amendments and rev uh amendments and revocation uh that goes back to the two years if you haven't used your permit within two years of it being issued then
it comes back for for revocation um you can also do amendments the permit would only be valid for the first year to get substantial completion and then you would come back to the and ask for an extension of one year if you can't get the project done um
so uh the other thing we looked at is the interim uses like I said that was just uh amending in there U for the most part the language is the same uh we took a look at uh the specific conditions of uses one is the adus which I already described the other is the outdoor
dining areas um with inside the code underneath the conditional use standards we're looking at getting rid of sidewalk cafes striking that from the code the main reason for that is we have a program that came out in 2020 in response to the covid-19 pandemic uh
called E Street there was a met counil initiative to allow restaurants and um to expand their service out on to an outdoor area um and with that it's a non-traditional patio I guess is the the best way to describe it or temporary so
we'll be bringing that back to the Planning Commission to take a look at um but we're looking at trying to figure out a way to make it fair and applicable between the different types of businesses we have in town uh to provide an example you have Noble Lon they have a couple couple tables and chairs in the
alley and it's only for temporary purpose and it's on private property what should that process look like should there be a process um compared to uh you have a a vix that uses the public sidewalk and parking spaces what would that process look like and how much
regulation we want there you have Floyd's which has an established patio how do we make sure that we're not causing anything detrimental to their operation or having them jump through hoops that wouldn't necessary for good regulation in the city so that's something that I'll be coming back as
staff we're still taking a look at it um if anybody would like more detail on where we're at as a commissioner i' I'd welcome you to to reach out um outside of a meeting I'd be more than happy to discuss it um cover that so for discussion tonight
the big things that staff we want to look at was the regulating of legal non-conforming uses and noncon uh forming structures separately um it I I believe it's a good practice is one we're looking at the actual use of the
site and the other one we're looking at the structures of the site the building itself um but were there any comments or questions on that from what was described I think we've tackled them perfect the 20% we are we already we
already touched on um the variant es for prohibiting pools height restrictions we'll strike that uh the special regulations for the adus we touched that and then the 180 day requirement we touched that I know this is a lot of information
being thrown out I know that there these are longer meetings uh the next meeting is going to be probably our longest that we're going to have on this just kind of a heads up um so I think I'm sick that day I encourage everybody to attend it is the meat and potatoes we're going to
get into performance standards over the next three meetings um and that and if instead of doing three meetings that turns into five meetings or eight meetings or whatever hey I'd ra I I think we could all agree we'd rather take the time to do it right than just
do it to get it done for sure and that's where that flexibility comes in as far as anything presented tonight on the ordinances are there any questions or other items which we'd want to discuss or talk about or more information that you'd like staff to bring back to the
next uh Planning Commission meeting feel like we did it as we went I feel good good okay so as of right now at the next meeting I will bring back uh stuff about the public hearing notices um as
well as looking that uh enforcement paragraph and the language that's in it um and get some more detail with that I don't have anything else for that subject uh this item does not require a formal
motion so we'll move on to our miscellaneous section of our agenda anything from staff miscellaneous anything else West Creek Village is going to come back um I I was able to confirm with uh
the city planner that it's March 18th is their last chance to do a public hearing before we would ask them to withdraw it or we would do the public hearing and staff recommendation would be for the Planning Commission to recommend an so he's working on that uh like I
said we'll be bringing back the um the outdoor dining in the next couple weeks and then uh we're also we had talked about accessary structures and doing a potential public hearing on that we're uh it's been recommended to hold off on that until we go through it
with the code so we can get a a broader look at what everything is so that'll be looked at um over the next couple meetings just to see how that type of language fits in else yeah for just believe that was it but I'm going
to I'm missing something I don't know what it is so that is all we have oh uh uh in the next couple meetings the staff's going to bring uh discussion for the work plan for the Planning Commission okay so that's scheduled to come back on
uh March 18th all right Commissioners any miscellaneous items anything I got um we are we have people that have applied for new Planning Commission
positions that will be at the May 10th Workshop of the city council workshop on May 10th uh I unfortunately I don't know the specifics on that but I can I can talk
to uh no I just uh we can get them um I I talked that's ask Brian I think there's seven people that have applied for Wow finding commission positions
so maybe listen those more well I didn't quite get the question commission but I know you asked inters all right thanks Alissa