[0:00] The Chan Hassen City Council, doing a short training session as well. And I think with that, I will turn it over to Eric Moss, community development director for the rest of the agenda. Joining the Planning Commission this evening, Commissioner Olm said and Commissioner Grover, so this time we'll turn it over to the City of Chan Hassen, Minnesota. To the best of my judgment and ability. To the best of my judgment and ability. So help me, God. So help me, God. Fantastic. Thank you.

[0:29] Welcome typically the first meeting in April held by the Planning Commission is where we get a lot of our administrative

[0:36] It's not affirmed by the City Council. It is a Planning Commission decision

[0:41] Typically it knows the two new ones might I will be out on parental leave for a decent chunk of this summer

[0:49] That would be staff's recommendation for chair

[0:50] We do not have a recommendation for vice chair

[0:52] But we'd offer that to the Planning Commission for position the chair again for this next term to cover the planning and zoning committee means

[0:59] We have to make a motion to elect Steve Job.

[1:04] Is that the correct pronunciation of you?

[1:06] Say aye.

[1:06] Aye, aye.

[1:07] I'm going to stand.

[1:09] I'm staying.

[1:13] Excellent.

[1:13] So in summary, she will edit to the bylaws, the main one

[1:17] being that we wanted to clarify that it could occur in the event

[1:21] that we are absent on unexpected quorum.

[1:24] The other item is clarifying that with the planning commission,

[1:27] but understanding that things happen in life.

[1:30] For instance, I know I will miss.

[1:32] For those of the two recommendations from staff in terms of updates for the bylaws with

[1:36] that, I'll send for questions.

[1:43] And Mr. Chair, if there are versions of the bylaws that's in front of you.

[1:47] Aye.

[1:48] Aye.

[1:49] I appointed advisory body.

[1:51] So you all have been appointed to this body by the city council.

[1:55] You make, that means that zoning variances, so variances to chapter 20 are reviewed by

[2:01] by the planning and deciding vote,

[2:03] whereas in other cases typically you are a recommending body

[2:06] and deundation for the adjustments

[2:07] and giving you that authority.

[2:11] So, this is something you-

[5:00] In terms of deliberation and the running of the meeting. So that would be staff's recommendation for chair. We do not have a recommendation for vice chair, but we'd offer that to the planning commission for discussion. Thank you. With that being said, do I have any motion to position the chair again for this next term to cover the planning and zoning committee meetings? We have to make a motion to elect Steve Job. Is that the correct pronunciation?

[5:30] I'm going to stay in motion.

[5:35] Excellent.

[5:36] So in summary, chairman noise, chair roll, commissioner Job will continue in the vice chair roll.

[5:43] That helps with our minute taking and just to record the meeting.

[5:47] So thanks for that reminder.

[5:49] She will add it to the bylaws.

[5:50] The main one being that we wanted to clarify that ins has been our past practice.

[5:55] Again, absent decorum, no official recommendations or motions can be.

[6:00] could occur in the event that we are absent on unexpected

[6:02] quorum. The other item is clarifying that with the planning

[6:06] commission, but understanding that things happen in life,

[6:10] for instance, I know I will miss for some attendance to be a

[6:13] planning commissioner, but that if an attendance issue becomes

[6:16] a problem, then the city council may relieve that planning

[6:19] commissioner of their duties if it becomes an issue instead of

[6:22] shallow relief. So those are the two recommendations from staff

[6:26] in terms of updates for the bylaws, with that I'll send for

[6:28] questions.

[6:34] And Mr. Chair, there are about a second.

[6:38] All right, all in favor of

[6:40] approving the version of the bylaws that's in front of you. Aye. Aye.

[6:47] Mr. Chair, with the conclusion of the organizational items completed, we're

[6:51] going to move on to planning commissioner training.

[6:56] This will be a refresher for

[6:58] some but a pointed advisory body. So you all have been appointed to this body by

[7:03] by the city council.

[7:04] You make...

[10:00] That means that zoning variances, so variances to chapter 20, are reviewed by the planning and deciding vote. Whereas in other cases, typically you are a recommending body and

[10:10] demondation for the adjustments and giving you that authority.

[10:16] So this is something new to names so that you have some familiarity with folks as they come up. So Eric Moss and the community development director, Samantha DiMaggio, she is the city's economic development manager. She actually isn't a room right over. They're having the economic development commission meeting right now as well.

[10:31] So you may see her for projects related to tax increment financing pack on who's your tonight

[10:36] She is our associate planner as well as Rachel Jessica our planner

[10:39] Miss Jessica's on vacation. So miss Jessica have been with the city about a year and a half now

[10:45] Very lucky to have them both resources specialist. So she handles everything from forestry questions to

[10:53] Composting to you name it she is our environmental resource. You'll see him really a fair amount

[10:57] He comes to quite a few meetings to talk through things like wetland

[10:59] and wetland impacts stormwater-mitting

[11:02] are a consultant forester.

[11:04] He's actually been helping the city off and on

[11:05] for about the last three years.

[11:07] He is currently soft right now.

[11:09] So, Manuel is helping two backfill

[11:12] basically Jamie's busy season.

[11:17] Now getting more than nothing bolts

[11:18] to the comprehensive plan over what can go where?

[11:21] Is the easiest way I can distill that in terms of example,

[11:27] large lot residential, we allow zoning districts

[11:30] which permit between one unit and ten, excuse me, one housing unit per ten acres down to the downtown where we don't have a max density, but we anticipate it rocks me 32 units per acre.

[11:48] This is updated every ten years with the city's update along with the Metropolitan Council.

[11:53] So the relationship that between zoning and land use is, once a property is guided by its

[12:01] land use designation, is established by that land use designation.

[12:04] So for instance, residential large lot, that I mentioned earlier, our A2, our agricultural

[12:10] state district, or our rural residential district.

[12:14] So you'll see in staff reports from us that what is the land use designation for the property?

[12:19] What is the zoning designation for the property?

[12:23] Any time there's a subdivision, the subdivision needs, but once, for instance, an example of sewer capacity or sewer is brought to the site, they're not eligible.

[15:00] They're not required to up zone unless they're seeking subdivision. At the time of subdivision, one they need to be compliant with the city's comprehensive plan.

[15:11] Tro, it's meant to foster change and really provide a framework for how and where change it. We then move up into the zoning map and zoning code. This meant it should be analyzed regularly to make sure that it's both consistent with their comprehensive plan as well as consistent with market forces related to development.

[15:36] And those are the primary three, but there are a couple additional ones related to mostly

[15:41] open space.

[15:43] But that's where we create ordinances, and we've got the most discretion.

[15:52] Moving to READY is acting as legislative or policymaking capacity and any rezoning or PUD moving

[16:05] up into the zoning code.

[16:06] That's what we use as really a nexus to analyze purple that or a site plan would be another one

[16:15] Generally speaking if it meets the standards that are within the city code the city shall approve

[16:21] This considered a quasi-judicial additional use permit

[16:25] Well, it's stated as a conditional use permit. I like to refrain it as a permitted use

[16:30] Then the city shall approve the the purposes of a conditional use permit it

[16:35] But use may have increased impacts on surrounding properties and therefore require additional scrutiny through conditions.

[16:42] That could be things like hours of operation, distance, buffering, screening, parking.

[16:51] Specific performance standards outlined by the ordinance that the city can sum.

[16:54] We have a relatively high level discretion because an applicant is seeking a deviation from the city's, it's as requested,

[17:00] said, walking through whether or not it's staff's opinion that those necessary findings

[17:05] have been achieved.

[17:06] Again, this is a quasi-judicial decision.

[17:11] And this or a building permit for a new home, it's really at that point where we're taking

[17:15] what's already been reviewed or approved or height limitations, et cetera, and we're just applying

[17:21] It adds it exists and it's at least a moment of...

[20:00] Discretion, after those plan reviews. And then finally, building permit, as discussed. So I wanted to just provide kind of how we work up and just where our levels of discretion are and how each of the elements that the city has put forward the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, locations are building permits.

[20:22] So meeting flow, the energy guide to rovers rules of order. So this is what the city uses for its comments. There are no additional comments.

[20:32] then the chair will call for a vote on that motion.

[20:35] In the end to amend that original motion,

[20:38] then the commissioner that originally made the motion,

[20:43] this is why staff is here.

[20:44] We will help you through that if it has not come up in my time with the city,

[20:47] but every now and again, it does.

[20:49] It's just so it's very clear what is on the table for voting.

[20:51] We will make sure that that's clear and understood before any vote takes place.

[20:57] In ministering of public hearings, you have won the comments.

[21:00] questions of staff or comments to be discussed amongst the Planning Commission.

[21:04] Once the Planning Commission has reached a point where at least their introductory questions

[21:10] or comments are satisfied and minutes to address the Planning Commission provide their

[21:14] feedback.

[21:16] Deering individuals early in terms of the public hearing and making sure everybody gets

[21:20] a chance to share their opinion before we get into it.

[21:26] Commissioner.

[21:26] Mr. Commissioner, this is a point of clarification on this because we often have a different

[21:30] way.

[21:30] Mr. Commissioner, so the applicant can do that during the public hearing but probably

[21:36] the cleaner way would be to invite the applicant up if they're in attendance to provide any

[21:41] feedback.

[21:45] I'll go as they will come up during the public hearing but the goal is to generally have

[21:50] them before that, usually right after the staff has made their presentation.

[21:56] So it does make the flow much easier if you do it that way.

[22:02] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[22:03] And then with that, if there are any ever questions from the public, right,

[22:10] that ultimately, as commissioners, you're discussing amongst users,

[22:17] that makes it difficult to capture the meeting minutes for it.

[22:20] But it also just, it degrades high-level Roberts rules

[22:25] again, staff is here to help make sure that we're filing our decorum and proceeding accordingly.

[22:34] Something new from this past year,

[22:39] public hearings are new for a lot of people. This is

[25:00] That is sometimes not the most, not the easiest place to stand up and say what you think. That's put out for public hearings, is to try and give those that are in attendance, if they've never been here before, a good understand, kind of their portion of the meeting to participate in. And then when they leave, what are additional ways to get additional information, get in touch with staff, and know what? So that way, if we don't have English speakers here, they've got a guide that can help them

[25:29] So with that we've got two brand new planning commissioners here this evening so I would encourage you to ask any questions of staff that you might have again we want this to be we really appreciate your stepping up to serve the community in this way and so we want this to be a positive experience for you so if you have questions please ask them of staff in that same goes for the rest of the planning commission so with that I'll pause.

[25:50] So

[25:54] Eric, when in your process, the triangle that you showed, does staff come to the commission?

[26:01] When do we see that after you've already reviewed things?

[26:04] Yeah, Mr. Chair, commission following the city receiving an application, staff deeming

[26:10] that application complete.

[26:11] So everything in our ordinances, it says they need to provide it, which that means we can

[26:16] now do our review for review and recommendation.

[26:20] Okay.

[26:20] Thank you.

[26:24] Any other questions or comments about what Eric presented?

[26:29] By this handout in additional languages, what we also provide transliter services if someone does present with non-speaking English patterns or language skills.

[26:40] Mr. Chair, commissioner, I will need to look into what options you have for a transfer at.

[26:45] Specifically at a meeting, is that the question?

[26:47] Yeah, because.

[26:50] Well, I think with that we can move on to our one public hearing item.

[26:53] Sorry, Mr. Chair, one additional item.

[26:56] The League of Minnesota City also offers a pretty cheap.

[27:00] Great, thank you.

[27:05] All right, and then we'll propose ordinance amending chapters one in chapters 20 of the city

[27:10] code chapters live.

[27:12] Ultimately only the city council needs to approve a change to chapter one.

[27:17] That means, so tonight the discussion is regarding detached townhomes.

[27:22] Staff has proposed this definition based on consult with the city attorney so we would

[27:28] have dwelling town has been separated into single dwelling units at the common side wall

[27:34] typically with structured dimension of the side walls.

[27:40] So an example of where the city

[27:42] The Aviendas is within a planned unit development or a PUD master planned development.

[30:00] Change for public benefit. So the reason why we have detached town homes already in the community even though we don't are obvious. But they are being used in this case as an example of what that looks like.

[30:14] So city staff has received interest in detached town homes in the possibilities that come with a traditional detached single family home. One such project currently under review, Pioneer Ridge. So we've made everybody aware that this is something that with that project came through.

[30:30] They have pivoted and offered to swap the northern portion of you and feedback coming out of that city council.

[30:40] You should pursue this amendment to make it at least an option that could be considered for this project.

[30:46] That being said, it is not good policy for a city to enact new city code for any one particular development.

[30:54] However, it is not staff's opinion that that is the case here.

[30:58] And that is because we have seen this product in the community of four.

[31:01] We have seen interest in this product before, and we are now reacting to a broad evening.

[31:06] So here's an example from Avienda showing the front at the top here, the detatch, same

[31:13] as in the home, but with all the common area maintenance that you would typically see with

[31:17] a town-home product.

[31:18] I'm going to switch to my laser pointer here.

[31:20] And again, this is all based on the addition of tuner-d to just clarify in some places that multiple family

[31:26] in other cases, multi-family, we want consistency, so we're having consistency based on the definition of multi-family.

[31:33] So each of those three types, an average of 5,445 square feet per dwelling unit, with respect to minimum lot frontage,

[31:42] adding detached townhouses to the same section that currently applies to townhouses and multi-family,

[31:49] With minimum lot depth, again adding detached townhouse to the second-day family dwelling and providing additional clarity language that that lot cover is specific to the total big building as a multi-family and then there's a broader lot.

[32:02] You've got smaller lots that are specifically to 50% maximum lot cover building

[32:11] setbacks in looking at this and other past ordinances increased to 30 feet.

[32:19] And then for side yards of townhouses for multifamily dwellings, 10 feet, again, we're

[32:23] no common walls located, and then for side yards of detached town homes, five feet on

[32:29] the garage side and 10 feet on the house side with a minimum separation between structures

[32:34] being 15 feet and that for detached housing product.

[32:39] No proposed changes for maximum height 15 feet.

[32:42] Eric I do have a question on for the front yard setback it's moving from 25 to 20 in the rear yard

[32:52] is going from 25 to 30.

[35:00] 30. So there's still 50 feet in total. What is kind of the logic is a relay property lane? We want to make sure there's acceptable distance for vehicles wanting to park in the driveway that don't hang out over a sidewalk if one exists or venturing to a street. Over and above that 20 foot setback for a building.

[35:22] Staff's opinion is that it reduced setback in the front to 20 feet still allows for ample space for a vehicle to be parked. In front of instance, between the

[35:31] the rear building setback of one lot to a rear building

[35:33] setback of another, but still mean.

[35:36] That go out to, I mean, I mean,

[35:39] how does a, there's a sidewalk in play?

[35:41] How does that come into the measurement?

[35:44] And the reason why I asked is, I mean, I look at 20 feet,

[35:47] and I drive a very large vehicle.

[35:49] I'm like, I don't even know that my truck would fit in 20 feet.

[35:52] It's be close that lays out in the various scenarios

[35:56] that could be associated with some of these projects.

[35:59] Yeah, certainly the edge of the yard is 20 feet.

[36:02] Now this is a site plan taken directly from the Ivy line is actually right there.

[36:07] They've got about 10 feet technically, I think it's seven and a half feet.

[36:12] From their building set back to their property line, but then additional space out to what

[36:17] is the edge of the out lot that is maintained by the H away.

[36:21] And then we get into either public or private right of way.

[36:24] and that's simply again where you've got about 14 feet from the edge of the

[36:29] property line to the back of curb. And so while this doesn't have a sidewalk, if

[36:34] there was a sidewalk, in this case, at least from townhomes from the building to

[36:39] the back of curb was 36 feet. And so for those reason staff is comfortable in

[36:44] proposing a 20-foot setback to the prop ending if it's a private road or a city

[36:49] road. And so there's always additional room within that right of way that is

[36:54] is used by driveway and would be available for parking if needed.

[37:00] Do we need to be more prescriptive?

[37:03] It says for front yard's 20 feet, but it doesn't say what you just said.

[37:07] It doesn't say it's 20 feet to the property line.

[37:11] We had the same element of wanting to make sure it was very clear in that.

[37:14] So under E, you should read the setbacks RS file.

[37:18] Thank you.

[37:20] Mr. Chair, I have a question as well.

[37:22] Well, if we're doing only in the back, set back, but why not on the two family dwellings as well?

[37:29] Yeah, Mr. Chair, Commissioner, staff is open to that.

[37:33] That being said, we saw those two family dwellings operating more so, it's a duplex.

[37:38] And in trying to establish between a two family and a single, true single family in terms

[37:43] of what that set back could look like.

[37:45] And as we move down the list, you're from single family dwelling to two family dwelling to

[37:49] detached town home town home and multi-family we're getting more dense and

[37:53] sometimes it's getting greater right

[37:59] continuing on this conversation just

[38:03] single-family dwelling in the rear

[40:00] Mr. Commissioners, so within this district, and based on feedback, they were received on past projects. It's typically the feedback we get is the rear setback is in theaters, not a great distance, but over potentially larger platter area. It's the impact six months from now. What plan is going to come before us, where somebody is impacted by this. I mean, so if somebody is now trying to

[40:29] to further back and gets into this, which is now 30 feet instead of in the past, they could have had an extra five feet on that deck.

[40:39] I mean, they're going to be precluded from that project now, right?

[40:42] And they'll probably think, well, maybe I'll apply for a variance, but probably there's not going to be a whole lot who's got a structure already.

[40:50] So, Mr. Chair, Commissioner, so this ordinance proposed

[40:54] those specific for the residential, low, medium, or RLM zoning district.

[40:58] So, it would not impact that being said, we don't have any vacant lots currently zoned

[41:05] RLM that are awaiting to be built, and this only applies to the principal structure.

[41:10] If somebody wanted to make improvements because of that additional principal structure set

[41:15] back if there is an existing why that being said in staff's review of this

[41:20] typically the rear it's up back well exceeds 25 years ago in RLM or in general

[41:26] with single single family dwellings. Mr. Commissioner specific okay is the

[41:34] detached townhome category is that something that other cities have defined as

[41:39] well and did you look at communities requirements for detached homes.

[41:51] I just have something quick, get these go through a round of proofreading before they

[41:56] get finalized, or it means that's something we should point out in the future, or worry

[42:00] about.

[42:01] Mr. Commissioner, yes, staff reviews it along with our city clerk before it gets formally

[42:05] published.

[42:09] Mr. Chair.

[45:00] Attached structure. Are any of the other dwelling types defined specifically to this degree in section one of the city code? Or is this one going to be the only one kind of defined? I guess that's my dwelling is defined currently today. Yeah, and shame on me for not reading those definitions, but I looked at this though, right? I was just wondering if this significant sufficiently

[45:29] the RLM but that's specifically a frame that the attorney would have looked at this through right that this definition also is said that they're comfortable with this that makes sense to me then but just just something I wanted to.

[45:46] Any other things that you need to present?

[45:49] Mr. Chair, I know that concludes that presentation.

[45:53] Any other comments or questions from planning commission?

[46:00] I did just have a question.

[46:03] Was there, historically, was there a reason why we didn't have a car bought for this?

[46:10] Was it just something that hadn't been brought to us the reason why the city didn't want

[46:14] to have, or support the data found out?

[46:16] I'm sure commissioners are looking for housing that may not have the same maintenance responsibilities

[46:22] that more traditional housing may, or would require.

[46:30] Before I open the public hearing portion of this item, just a reminder if you do want to come forward, come to the mic and please state your name and address for the record and with that, I will open.

[46:42] areas. And I think it absolutely makes sense for a new development, the 30-foot setback.

[46:51] It makes sense when it's a development that's in a different zone, zoning of low-density

[46:57] housing, that there should be, according to your comprehensive plan, increase setback

[47:03] for two different zones that butt up next to each other. So I understand that this variance

[47:10] makes sense for within an RLM, but when an RLM connects with a low density house,

[47:17] if it's behind my house where Pioneer Ridge is going in, if there's a third-

[50:10] So there needs to be some consideration, I think, for when two zones are put together, that this is not just a cut and dry variance. There needs to be consideration.

[50:28] Mr. Chair, if I could. Just for a minor focus sense, let me make sure it's clear.

[50:31] So the discussion tonight in the public hearing tonight is specifically

[50:35] considering adopting lot requirements and standards for detached

[50:39] townhomes within the residential low-medium zoning district.

[50:43] We've provided an update to the Pioneer Ridge project that depends

[50:47] on homes as an allowed dwelling type and a lot requirements for those.

[50:52] There is the potential commission this evening and I also recognize that this is

[50:57] is a complicated and into a complicated one,

[51:01] but if anybody has any specific questions,

[51:02] I'm more than happy to discuss with planning commissioners

[51:05] looking for the planning question.

[51:07] Thank you.

[51:08] Thanks.

[51:11] To Laredo Drive and Chan Hasen.

[51:14] I think I misread the agenda.

[51:18] I thought this was just a discussion,

[51:21] and there weren't going to be any ordinance changes.

[51:24] So proposed tonight, perhaps I'm really off base.

[51:30] because of particular developments.

[51:33] And I think that the amount of the space to date,

[51:36] and I hate seeing changes come through

[51:40] because of proposed developments

[51:42] that they should stand on their loan

[51:44] with the way the code was,

[51:46] or apply for a reasonable, reasonable things like,

[51:51] it does not impact my neighbor.

[51:53] Our code is served as well.

[51:56] You've all applied variances,

[55:00] I understand why you have to ask, but I'm not going to risk it. You never want to go through it. It continues forever. Back to my points. A lot of us have moved here from different places, which are issue an ordinance change. It has a domino effect on people who have houses near, but I want to share with you one thought. And I shared it with the city council. It really good. So I'm just asking you to consider that when you look at all these different changes that are being brought forth

[55:30] to you and because if there's a city that does it next door, I don't know if we want to be Eden

[55:35] Prairie West.

[55:36] You are making will impact what that future will be and there'll be people who have said

[55:41] not.

[55:44] Thank you.

[55:45] Thank you.

[55:48] Comments?

[55:49] Questions?

[55:53] This is within the scope of what we're discussing tonight but I am curious since the comprehensive

[56:00] plan does prescribe smooth, I don't know what the right language is but it essentially

[56:06] probably prescribes smooth transitions between different sorts of zones of density.

[56:12] I don't know that that is actually applied in code, question is if we want to start thinking

[56:20] about should that be applied in code and how would it be of don't think it probably belongs

[56:25] in what we're talking about tonight, the sections we're looking at, but I'm asking for your

[56:29] opinion and advice from staff on that.

[56:32] Mr. Commissioners, the city code currently does have, and so that is in effect today.

[56:37] It's required of projects when we've got it's a chart and it has the hard types based

[56:43] on its adjacency, the least similar the two adjacencies up similar or like land use designations

[56:51] next to one another.

[56:53] So the example we try to avoid that for many reasons, but if it were to exist, we've got

[57:01] is a little bit of a unicorn. We allow for residential low medium and land guided for low density

[57:07] residential. We also allow residential low medium and land guided for medium density. It did

[57:12] be very similar a little bit more. And so there is still that requirement. So it's even...

[1:00:00] Is different than that buffering requirement applies?

[1:00:14] You know, one of the comment I would make. We're not changing the long-term plan here tonight. We're not going, hey, we're increasing densities. And all we're doing is really looking at another option as far as a type of housing that could happen within this particular is been put together.

[1:00:38] and making drastic changes to it.

[1:00:41] That's not what this is doing tonight.

[1:00:43] I think this is really just providing another option

[1:00:47] and that options be people that are trying

[1:00:49] to maintain lifestyle in the community.

[1:00:54] It's a personal example.

[1:00:55] My brother lives in Olderwood in the city of Chaska.

[1:00:59] And that's a Dell web detached single town homes on a pad.

[1:01:04] And the nut and what we're reviewing

[1:01:07] going to recommend to the city.

[1:01:09] I also read property at a tattoo.

[1:01:13] And those spaces in between those houses are like 10 feet.

[1:01:17] So it's not only a Minnesota area, but also in California.

[1:01:21] So I like the idea.

[1:01:23] I'm an older man myself.

[1:01:25] I have downsized with my wife into a town home.

[1:01:28] And I don't have to do a lot of maintenance.

[1:01:31] I really like that.

[1:01:32] And that freed up selling a house that a young like

[1:01:36] Make the clarifications and some of the small minor changes we've done to the city code.

[1:01:43] Thank you.

[1:01:51] With that, anybody want to put forth a motion?

[1:01:56] I can make a motion.

[1:01:57] A motion to recommend approval of the ordinance in amending chapter 20.

[1:02:02] Amending lot requirements and setbacks for the residential low and medium density district.

[1:02:08] We have a valid motion, do I have a second?

[1:02:12] A second.

[1:02:14] We have a second.

[1:02:15] All in favor of the motion?

[1:02:17] Say it.

[1:02:26] With that, I think the next agenda item is the meeting minutes or edits to those meeting minutes.

[1:02:33] If not, can I get a 2025?

[1:02:37] We have a valid motion.

[1:02:38] We have a second.

[1:02:39] Second.

[1:02:40] Second.

[1:02:41] All in.

[1:05:00] Chair, if I could offer, so commissioners, Grover and Olmsted, we're not here with us, and then that commission is Olmsted and Grover abstain from this vote. Thank you for the clarification.

[1:05:11] I'll second. March 18, 2025, Chanasson Planning Commission meeting minutes, say aye, aye, the motion passes 5-0.

[1:05:25] Community development director Moss, do you have any other administrative or other updates for the planning commission?

[1:05:31] Yeah, commission. So the city received application on Friday for the Santa

[1:05:38] Vera apartment project phase two. So that'll come before the

[1:05:41] plan side. There's currently an existing 18 unit apartment building at the

[1:05:46] corner of Santa Vera and the radio. So that'll come before you. We also received

[1:05:50] application for the apartment project at Avienda. That's still under staff review

[1:05:55] for completeness. So that may come before the planning commission in May. However,

[1:05:58] we're still working through that middle. The West Building, which was referred

[1:06:01] to as the Bennett. We're still working through that, they're working, I've got a couple.

[1:06:06] Okay,

[1:06:09] one question. On the Santa Vera project, this is do it like here or if there's a way to inform

[1:06:14] the commission. Certainly two of our commissioners weren't here then it may have been more depending

[1:06:19] on when that happened. I just can't recall now what the date was when we last looked at that project,

[1:06:25] but there is a lot of input, a lot of public activity. I'm just wondering if there's any way to kind

[1:06:30] We're going to get a refresher on what we already did versus what's still ahead may site that came through for staff review ultimately that project never went forward it was a mixture of now being proposed is just the apartment building.

[1:06:45] So the current beauty that's in place allows for an apartment building by right that's permitted use it explicitly does not allow for the amendment.

[1:06:54] And as I mentioned with our pyramid of discretion, the city would have a lot of discretion already

[1:06:59] by a prior staff report from Bob Generous with the planter at that time for them, just

[1:07:06] as some additional background information.

[1:07:09] However, the current project is a different piece, part of the submittal for staff review

[1:07:13] and ultimately planning commission and council review.

[1:07:16] But yeah, I can pull together a plan approval or will there be any, what was it, PUD amendment

[1:07:24] requests are variant like anything like that?

[1:07:26] Mr. Commissioner, so they would be coming for a site plan approval.

[1:07:29] The site plan, the density is established by the lot area.

[1:07:35] So in this case, it would not be a subdivision.

[1:07:37] It would be a preliminary platter, a final platter, it would just be that site plan review.

[1:07:41] Thank you.

[1:10:05] I mean, I don't believe so, but if the commissioners have any questions on things they're seeing around, around the city, I'd be happy to. One reminder, we are having you gathering tomorrow, 430, left, but we'd also like to welcome you guys if you are interested in attending. No business of the planning commission will be discussed. It will be duly noted on the tack board, those that are coming on board. And no business of the planning commission will

[1:10:35] We'll be discussed.

[1:10:36] And if you're interested, Jean Larkin from the twins fame

[1:10:40] will be there citing autographs.

[1:10:42] If you want to meet a former World Series champion

[1:10:45] from the twins.

[1:10:48] I move to adjourn the meeting.

[1:10:50] We have a valid motion.

[1:10:52] Do I have a second?

[1:10:53] Should pass the 7-0?

Planning Commission

Transcript