Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We have uh approval of the agenda before us. I move to approve. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? I I opposed. The motion carries. Agenda is approved. Uh the the the minutes from the last meeting are in your packet. Are there any additions or corrections to the meeting minutes? If not, is there a motion to approve the meeting the meeting minutes? Motion to approve. A motion by Wayne. Is there a second? I'll second that. All right. Second. All in favor? I. All opposed. Okay. Motion carries. Minutes are approved.

All right. So, we have one order of new business tonight and then we have one order of old business. So, I'll call on Clara to talk through the new business item.

Thank you, chair, and thank you for stepping in for um Ala Smith, who is unable to be here with us tonight. Um, tonight we have a conditional use permit for a pylon sign in front of us. And I don't have exhibits. Sorry for those of you who are in the audience. So, I'm just going to talk through what it is. And then um if there are questions, we can certainly address them before we open up for um the public hearing. Um there is development occurring on what was previously the Burger King site on the west side of town. uh this body or a previous iteration of this body went through a platting process for that property and it was split and there are now two development sites there but they are shared development sites. So you can see one building that's going up. There's still space for a second one. They will be sharing um entrances and and parking facilities um to access both of those businesses. Uh the reason that we have a conditional use permit request before us tonight is um due to our B2 zoning code and this is in the B2 zone. It does require a conditional use permit for placement of a sign, a pylon sign taller than 7 ft. And in this case, what our conditional use permit is going to be accounting for is both the the height and size of the sign, but also the fact that it is um accounting for both of those two shared the the shared site as as essentially one site. So just to clear up any ambiguity in future changes to the sign, etc., this is accounting for the sign taking care of two sites. So um right now the site is still currently under construction. Again, it is zoned B2. Um, adjacent zoning is also B2. The adjacent uses are gas station and convenience store. Um, there was a sitdown restaurant. It is, I believe, currently closed and there is a hotel use fairy nearby as well. Um, actually sharing an entrance point with the the

site in question that we're talking about tonight. Um, so the request is for a 112t square foot illuminated pylon sign. The sign was divi designed by Indigo Sign Works. They provided um engineer drawings as part of their application which are in your packet. Um they are signed by an engineer showing that the wind loads, footings, etc. are going to meet um requirements for that sign to be up in perpetuity. Um there I I don't have any concerns with it. I have shared it with the city engineers office as well and have not gotten back any concerns from them regarding the engineer drawings. Uh so essentially this is just kind of accounting for size, height, etc. of this sign. Nothing unusual or out of the ordinary, just a requirement of our city code. Um any questions on the the application or the project itself? I do have proposed findings in your packet um which would be what you would be approving uh after the public hearing should there not be too much um comment or feedback from the public. I did not receive anything in writing regarding this request. It was noticed appropriately in the paper and mailings were sent out to property owners within within 350 ft of the property. Um it met all of the requirements it would need to meet for a conditional use permit. And maybe just to forgot to go over the conditional use permit part of it that I said I was going to go over. So for new members, conditional use permits um have very specific rules related to them both at the state statute level and then here within the city of Fergus Falls in our zoning code. Um conditional uses must be based on something that's already existing in our city code. So it has to be a use that's already given as a conditional use in that zone. So you can't just have a conditional use for

whatever you want. It has to be based on something that's already allowable in that zone, accounted for in our zoning code. Um, so in this case, a pylon sign is accounted for as a conditional use in the B2 zone, which is what we're basing this on. Then, um, in order to be able to approve a conditional use, you have to make sure that it is meeting the findings of facts that are laid out. These are based on state statute requirements for a conditional use. It has to it should not be detrimental or endanger the public health, safety or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. Must be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the comprehensive plan and code provisions. And just as a reminder, the city of Fergus Falls does not have a comprehensive plan. So that one is kind of automatically met by the fact that we do not have one of those. um designed, constructed and operated to be compatible with the surrounding um neighborhood and um served adequately by existing public facilities. So, streets, water, sewer, um law enforcement actually can be considered in that etc. does not involve uses, activities, processes or materials that are um going to be hazardous or detrimental. In this case, we do have a sign that is lighted. So you could question like is the lighting lighting of the sign going to be an issue at all. In this case it is um it does abut some residential but it's far enough away and it's in commercial enough of a zone that we are not concerned with that. Does it have ingress and egress for vehicles to reach it? In this case again it's a sign. It doesn't really need its own ingress egress. the site itself has um appropriate ingress egress as based on the plat that was done in 2025 um and does not result in a destruction loss or damage of a natural scenic or historic feature. So those are the the um criteria that a conditional use needs to meet to be able to be approved by the planning commission and then ultimately sent on to the city council. Do you have any questions about that process?

So does like the visibility of for traffic get considered at all? like if it would interfere with visibility for people driving. It's pretty tall, but is that considered in this?

Yeah. So, thank you for the question actually. So, with a conditional use permit, if you do have concerns about visibility or something specific to that site or the design that's in front of you, you can place conditions on the permit. So, you can say, "Yes, we approve your conditional use with these further conditions listed." And it could be something. So, we did this for a a sign that was downtown. Um, the condition is that somebody go out and measure and make sure that it's a certain amount of space like place away from the street and that it's not going to cause any issues. So, you can place conditions that it be checked in that regard. And I will say our building department goes out and does check the footings themselves, not necessarily the placement, but the the um engineering of the footings and checks off on that. So that is accounted for in in that building permit process.

Any other questions? Appreciate it, Clara. Yeah, I'll turn it back over to you to With that, we'll uh open up public hearing if there's anyone who would like to speak about it.

Going once, going twice. Okay, we'll hereby close the public hearing. So, staff recommendation is to approve the conditional use permit. Do we have uh I guess I'll entertain a motion in that regard now. I'll move to approve. Okay, we have a motion to approve the recommendation of staff. Is there a second? Second. Okay, if there's a second, I'll open it up for any further discussion on the motion. If no call call for a a vote. All in favor of the motion to accept the staff recommendation say I. I. I. I. All in favor or sorry. All opposed.

All right. Motion carries. We had uh Mr. Stan uh Jeff Jeff Jeff uh and then we had a second right there. Yeah. Sorry, Claire. Okay. Moving on to um old business. Uh we we had the item of truck stop ordinance. Claire, did you want to give some background on this? Yeah, I will.

Okay. And I I'll just note as Clara steps up to the mic that in our packet that we received on February 20th, uh there was a number of things including some comments submitted from neighbors to this proposed project. Um so I just want to let the the record reflect here that we've all received those comments from the neighbors. Um and we're very thankful for those and the feedback of the residences and and um you know certainly if there's any questions on those on those comments themselves. I know Claire you provided some also some kind of um information to some of those comments too those are also included in the packet. So feel free to reach out to Claire too for any more context surrounding those.

Take one of each. Sure.

So, I am passing out some further outreach that we've received from um neighbors on Tower Road. They are neighbors to a previous resoning request regarding a quick trip um truck stop. Um so, they've been very engaged in this process and uh Friday afternoon and then this morning they sent some further comments. I just wanted to make sure you had hard copies of those and these will also be um shared with the city council likely be via via email before their Wednesday committee of the whole meeting. Um and just for for those who are in the audience, this this is not necessarily a public hearing and I'll leave it up to the chair to determine if he would like to hear comments from um those in the audience. Um, this was mostly just an update from from me to give you some information about where we are in this process and what the next steps are going to be. Um, maybe I'll just give you a little bit of a minute to read before I ramble at you. Yes.

Can I have Thank you. How we doing? Ready to move on? All right. So, back at the January meeting, you saw a first draft of a truck stop ordinance that was um requested to be drafted by a subcommittee of council members. Uh I took a first pass at some language using Canon Falls as a starting point and we had some really good discussion in January. Made some updates to a draft. um had received some initial outreach from neighbors again in the on the Tower Road area near where the the Quick Trip would be located. Um like I said, they've been remaining engaged. So, they sent some followup afterward. That's what's in your packet for you with comments already in there. Um a lot of the comments have had to do with the uh proximity of housing or a sensitive use

like a school, etc. to the location of a truck stop. Um, so I am kind of waiting to get some feedback from the city council on Wednesday morning based on the direction that they would like this truck stop ordinance to go before I make many more changes at this point in time. Um, so I just wanted to give you guys an update of where we are in the process. I did try to incorporate a lot of the um, comments and changes that you had made at our January meeting. I'm hoping I captured them all appropriately. Um just spending some time doing some more research on how industry the industry like the trucking industry and um truck stops in general are uh regulated both at the federal and state level has led me down a lot of different paths. It's a lot of information that I don't know we can appropriately account for in a zoning ordinance like this other than by doing things like placing buffers etc. So, I'm I'm open to continued commentary and questions about how we can appropriately address neighbor concerns, etc. Um, again, we're still in in the drafting phase of this. Um, one of the part of the process of a a zoning ordinance is that there is a public hearing related to it. We are not yet at the point where we've noticed a public hearing. I think we're still in the kind of gathering feedback, getting direction from the city council phase. I wasn't actually anticipating bringing this back to the planning commission at this point um because our timeline was moving quickly from what I had heard from council. It seems we've slowed down a little bit at this point. So, we do have a little bit more time to to look at the ordinance. But, um just from our first draft into our second draft, some of the changes that I made was um looking at the canopy and signage standards kind of taking some of the language that was in there out or

changing a little a little bit. I think we had concerns that um signage uh relegated to only 20% of a canopy maybe wasn't enough. So I did up that to 40 just based on other canopy signs that I that I see around in town, etc. Um also reducing and consolidating the lighting language. We have a section of code that we're referencing there that um stipulates that it must be downward facing things that we felt were appropriate for um this same use and um changing some of our landscaping percentage requirements to uh match or or be more regulated by our MS4 permitting and um other permitting that's already in existence. They also added language that's kind of pointing to the fact that there are federal standards, state standards, etc. that will need to be met in a project like this and would not be necessarily overseen by a zoning ordinance. So I am saying in the start of the of the ordinance that those those rules need to be adhered to and followed um not necessarily at at the zoning level but during the building permit process etc. Um and a lot of those would be looked at during the building permit process. That's when the fire department gets involved. A lot of the regulations that I were seeing were at the fire department level level or the state fire marshall level. They're the ones who are indicating how far away gas pumps and things need to be from lot lines, etc. So, we are really relying on other processes here. Um, and I just want to make that very clear in our ordinance. So, if there are ways that I can change that or ways that you do want this ordinance to be addressing some of those things, again, I'm open to it. Um, so I think the outreach that we've gotten from neighbors, including the outreach that was received today, was um to continue considering the placement of a truck stop or a truck stop use near residential. In this case that we were

looking at in um at the end of 2025, it would have been a truck stop use directly next to a residential zone. Um, some communities allow it, some don't. Some have regulations about truck stops, some don't. So, there's really a lot of different directions that we could be going with it. Um, our definition that we have of a truck stop right now says that it's anything within 2500 ft of an interstate. Uh, that there was some comment about that maybe being too broad of a definition and it should, you know, maybe make them be closer to an interstate. I I think that that is a possibility for us to look at. I think it could also um if we're if we're I would be open, I think, to saying that it can be within a certain amount of space from an interstate like it can't be further away than a certain amount, but I don't know if I want to change the definition of like the kind of road that it's near, etc., just cuz that can change from community to community. and um the community that we are basing it on has a different definition of of their interstate and road systems than we're using in our code. So, I just want to be careful of the language there, I guess, and want to think about that a little bit further. Um I think those are most of the comments that we received. Um is there anything further that you that you've thought about since our last meeting that you'd be interested in seeing? Is there anything that you want the council to be made aware of when I'm presenting this to them on Wednesday morning? They will have all the same information that you've been given, including this new outreach that was received today.

Is the subcommittee still working on this at all of the council members? Um, I am not sure. I have not gotten any feedback from that subcommittee after the first draft was done. So I I believe the mayor still has them, you know, on call to maybe work on this, but they I have not been brought into any conversations.

There seems to be kind of two pieces to this. I don't think either of them really require action by us right now. Well, the first is the application from Quick Trip, but that's been withdrawn. So there's no action there from us. And then the second piece is regardless of that application, do we want to incorporate truck stop language for any future projects? And that seems by your memo, Clara, I know on the bottom of first page, you you say there staff is seeking direction from the city council as Wednesday, February 25th committee of the whole meeting on whether to proceed with a draft ordinance embedded in the B2 uh district there. Well, my recommend recommendation would be at at this meeting, we don't we don't take any action. We need some further direction and definition from council before we do anything. I think maybe the one thing we could do to keep things going would be to maybe identify one or two members from the plan commission that would be willing to serve on a subcommittee, maybe with some council members in case there, you know, there's a desire for some collaboration there.

That's a great idea. So, I don't know. I I mean not that we have to make that too formal tonight, but if there was anyone I mean is anyone interested and you would be interested in that? I I would I would be interested. Yeah. I I'd be I'd be interested in that. Okay. Do you do you have mental note of that, Clara? Yeah, I'll write it down to you though. Unless there's other thoughts. Is there is there anything we want to do with this tonight? I know we got a couple people. Since it's not a public hearing, can we let him have Yeah, I'd speak a little bit. Yeah, if the chair wants to. Probably wouldn't hurt to if you want.

Uh, thank you for allowing me to speak, commission members. My name is Tim Brennan. Uh, I reside at 115 Ridge View Court. um you've seen or probably have looked at or have access to a lot of the comments from the neighbors and uh so just you know obviously our concern is um our our property alone is just over 200 feet from the uh subject property where this project would go and then I've got two other neighbors that are will be right a bit you know adjacent to this uh subject property. So, you know, some of our concerns are, you know, obviously the noise, uh, the fumes, the lighting, uh, you know, more traffic, stuff like that. And hopefully, and it sounds like, you know, those things are being taken into consideration. It sounds like, as we've, you know, and and I apologize because I haven't been in the loop as much as some of the other neighbors, they've been doing a lot more research into this than I have. Uh, unfortunately, tonight, uh, they were either otherwise committed or sick, so they weren't able to be here. So, I got called to maybe step in just at the last minute. So, I'm kind of winging it here. But, um,

from what we've seen of other truck truck stops, uh, you know, along the interstate corridors is that this seems to be a little bit unusual and unique in the fact that we have residential housing, you know, directly adjacent to these properties and and other housing, you know, very close to it. So that's uh our biggest concern is, you know, the things that I just stated and hopefully those will be considered and we can find a, you know, a working solution that'll appease everybody that's involved. Appreciate that, Tim. Appreciate your written comments, too. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Anybody else?

I don't really have anything. I was here for more the first part of this, so it's all good. Yeah, I don't really have a lot more, I guess, until we hear from council on Wednesday morning with their first pass at a draft. Um, but any further thoughts or comments?

Do you plan to like if we get further comments in the weeks ahead, uh, do you plan to disseminate those like the same way? try to get them out about a week before then our next meeting. Yeah, that would be my goal. Um I would probably want to do another update based on whatever direction council is going following this just to keep you in the loop publicly. Um I just feel like that's fair. Okay. All right. Any other discussion on the topic? So just so I understand, committee of the whole is going to discuss this. Then there will be a council meeting.

Yes. So committee of the whole is um it's it's council members who are meeting on a Wednesday morning. It's a little uh little less formal than a normal council meeting and um they have more of an ability to discuss and ask questions and they're not taking action on anything at at normal committee of the whole meetings. Um and then whatever decision they seem to be reaching, they'll push that forward to the Monday night meeting. Um usually we'll have further discussion on something like this and then we'll either you know direct the city attorney to work on something or we'll direct staff to continue working on something. Again, this change to the ordinance will require a public hearing. So regardless of whatever happens on Wednesday and Monday night, they can't take final action on this ordinance and an ordinance process does it takes several meetings. So, this will be back in front of them again probably at least two or three more times.

Possibly not back in front of us. It would depend on um it would depend on if the city council is deciding to send it back for further work or if they feel like it's at a point where they are happy with it or know exactly what they want to be adding. Thank you. Yeah. Do we have a motion to adjurnn? You can actually just adjurnn it. You don't even need a motion. The meeting is adjourned. Okay.