Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call the July 28th, 2025 City of Gardener Planning Commission meeting to to order. Um, would you all please stand for the pledge of

allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Um we do have two new planning commission members on with us tonight. Um so we have uh Philip Lansburg and Joe Oluchi I believe. So um I guess we can go through a call but you know just state your pre you know commission. Starting on my right,

Commissioner Sza here. Commissioner Con's present. Commissioner Aluchcci present.

And we have a quorum. Okay. Moving on to the consent agenda. All matters listed within the consent agenda have been distributed to each member of the planning commission for study. These items are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion with no separate discussion. If separate discussion is desired, an item may be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda at the request of the planning commission or the applicant. Um, right now we have the we only have the standing approval of the minutes as written for the meeting on June 23rd, 2025. Is there anything anybody from the planning commission would like removed from the consent agenda? Okay. Hearing nothing. Um, I'll entertain a motion to approve it.

We'll make the motion. Second. We have a motion by Commissioner Combmes with a second by Commissioner Sza. All those in favor? I I opposed. Motion carries. 5 to zero. Okay. Moving to the regular agenda. Item number one, Tuscan Farm second plat revised preliminary plat and final plat. Um, this is item number 25-312-07. And we have staff presentation. Good evening, commissioners. Hello.

The applicant is requesting approval of a revised preliminary plat and the final plat for Tuscan Farms phase two. Phase one of the development was approved on December 18th, 2017 and is under development. The developer is proposing to move the amenity area on the currently platted tract farther to the west. Relocating the amenity area allows for the development of three lots using infrastructure constructed with the first phase. The proposed preliminary plat is for six single family residential lots and two tracks. One is for the relocated amenity area farther to the west and the other is for a detention basin to the south. The total area included is 2.8 acres. The preliminary plat includes only that portion of the property that is proposed to change. The currently platted amenity area is zoned R3 which is the garden apartment district while the rest of the property shown on the preliminary plat is zoned R1 which is single family. the applicant. The six single family houses and the amenity area are both allowed in R1 and R3. So, you can have a single family house in the R3 district. The section outlined in red is the area that will be final platted. The proposed final plat is for three single family residential lots located in track C where the amenity area was previously approved and tract F that will contain the detention area. The final plat is 1.15 acres in size. The street water and sewer are already in place since they were installed with Tuscan farm phase one. No additional rightway is proposed to be dedicated. However, additional utility easements

for electric are needed and are shown on the south side of those three lots. Staff finds that the preliminary plat is in general compliance with the land development code, that it is consistent with the character of the neighborhood, and that the plat provides access points for further development of future phases. Staff also finds the final plat is in substantial compliance with the preliminary plat and that the detention basin will need to be built prior to the houses and excise tax will need to be collected. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat and final plat with the three conditions listed. Condition one is for the detention basin. Condition two is for the excise tax and then the third is to ensure the plat is recorded. staff is available for any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Hunter. Um, is the applicant here and would like to make a make a presentation. Can't see me very well, but um I'm Jim Long. I'm with Schlaggel. Um, I'm just here to answer any questions. I don't have a whole lot to add to what Jesse put out there. So, I'll be here if you need if you got any questions. Thank you. Yep. Okay. Uh, we'll move on to commissioner discussion. Um, any questions or comments? Starting on my right. Sorry. Questions. Okay. Commissioner Sosa, I don't have any questions either.

Only question I have is related to the storm water bas and and the comment of it needing to be built obviously prior to the homes. I would imagine with the followup and the things that we're doing as a city, we're ensuring that that process stays the same meaning that the track F and the storm track basin is going to be constructed before the the lots. Yes, with that condition, it will be built before the houses are built. So the storm water will be properly detained according to title 14 in our code.

And more of a procedural question, maybe this is more for me, but we or staff follows up with the builder or or how does that how can we ensure or how are we to know that that condition will be met, I guess, is the question. So, the developer would apply for a public improvement permit and then it would be inspected and approved before any building permits were released. Perfect. Perfect. Thank you. No other questions.

The the other thing I will just add to this for discussion purposes is that this is an interim basin. So if future phases of Tuscan farms move to the south as were planned through their preliminary uh previous preliminary plan and plat um the basin would be taken out at that point and then the permanent basin may show up in another location at that time. So the tract is really intended to handle the detention for this portion of this added three uh lots at this point in time. So and and Jesse's absolutely right. Um, we would not release building permits for those three lots until that basin is in place. Perfect. Thank you.

Questions? I have no questions at this time. Thank you. I don't think I've had any had any questions either. So, um, I will entertain a motion on this. I I'll make a motion. Uh, the planning commission. I got a little head. I don't need to go first. Read it out.

Oh, sorry. Sorry. Uh, here's my motion. The planning commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Tuscan Farm second plat subject to the following conditions. items one, two, and three listed in the staff report. Second motion by Commissioner Combmes with a second by Commissioner Sosa. All those in favor?

Mr. Chairman, just just to clarify, so on these plats, the uh plane commission is the decision-making body. So, I'm going to clarify the recommendation. You're actually approving of the preliminary plat and the final plat, correct? Yes, that that's my Do we need to make a motion to amend that? I think that if we just start from the top because we didn't vote. So, start from the top because there was no vote yet. Just to be safe.

I'll I'll make a motion. We're not great. I just want to make I'm I just want to make sure I don't need to read something so that we have to do this again. You're good. This is one of the tricky ones where you guys are the final say on this one. So, it's like you're approving, not recommending it because it's understand it ends with you. Understand

the pl Yes. All right. I'm going to start over with a motion. Uh the planning commission approves the preliminary plat and final plat for Tuscan farm second plat subject to the following conditions items one, two, and three listed in the staff report. Second motion. All right, we have a motion by Commissioner Combmes with a second by Commissioner Aluchcci. All those in favor?

I I opposed abstensions. Motion carries five to zero. Moving on to item number two, Hilltop Ridge Preliminary Plat. Um, this is located at the south side of 167th Street and Scott Street presentation.

Thank you. Before you this evening is a preliminary plat that most of you saw 5 years ago. It has expired and therefore they're coming back to get that preliminary plat reapproved. And this is the exact same one that you saw 5 years ago. So the property you can see is outlined here and the first plat has been recorded and homes are under construction. So it's for the remainder of the development for Hilltop for orientation purposes. North is on the left or towards the left of your screen. Um the overall the development is 150 lots and that is on 71 acres. This is zoned R1. There are no deviations. It's just a straight plat, not a planned development. And staff is recommending approval of the Hilltop Ridge preliminary plat with the four conditions outlined on the screen and in your staff report. The first one relates to providing a second point of access um specifically to the south to connect with Osage Street and there may be some additional modifications to the minor modifications I would say to the layout for traffic calming purposes in this development. So that's what this second sentence is referring to. Then we have a condition related to the open space. The third relates to storm water and is a standard condition. And then we also have that the fourth condition also relating to storm water in terms of they may be doing some interim phasing, overdetaining, under detaining. And so we've included that in terms of the full buildout for the development. So if you've got any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. The applicant is present and available to answer any questions

you may have. Thank you. Um been informed the applicant doesn't have a presentation. Is that correct? All right. Well, well, we'll move into commissioner discussion then. Um start on my left this time. I have no questions at this time. No question. Okay. So, it's it's coming back to us because it expired, right? So, nothing Nothing else has changed. That's correct.

That's correct. The plat is the same. The preliminary plat is the same one that you all reviewed five years ago. I don't have any questions. I don't have any questions. Okay. And then so similar to last time, this would be an approval, not a motion. Just to clarify, I will entertain a motion on this item. I don't have any questions. I can make a motion. Uh the planning commission approves uh the Hilltop Ridge plat with the following conditions one through four as noted on the staff.

I'll second. We have a motion by Commissioner Rza with a second by Commissioner Combmes. All those in favor? I opposed abstensions. Motion carries 5-0. Okay, moving on. Item number three, Grand Street Revised Preliminary Development Plan. Uh, this is a public hearing item. We have a staff report or yeah, staff presentation. Sorry.

Yes, we do. Good evening, everybody. Again, this is for Grand Street. Uh back in uh the application is for resoning for uh and revised preliminary development plan and preliminary plat. Sorry, jumped again. property includes approximately 10.75 acres of land located just north of both Grand uh Grand Street Elementary and Trow Ridge Middle Schools. It's uh bound north uh a little further to north by the BNSF railroad tracks. Uh this was originally annexed back in 2022 and the site was historically used uh for agricultural. Uh part of this has already been approved, but uh the reason why they're coming back before you is that uh they're looking at the deletion of the threetory 90 uh unit assisted living facility and redeveloping that into fourplexes. Uh the original plan on the village of Grand included 89 compact single family lots, 27 forplexes, two duplex buildings, uh the 90 unit three-story building I just mentioned, and then also to the north of that is 132 unit fourstory independent living and a couple amenity areas. This slide shows the current zoning. As you can see, the uh where the threetory 90 unit assisted living facility was uh

reszoned to RP5 uh back in 2023. Uh because of major changes are being proposed, that's why they're back before you today. Uh and this uh area, the new layout is shown on this slide. uh it's being proposed to go to RP3, what was zoned RP5. Uh same types of buildings uh that were previously approved. I'd say replacing the 90 unit building with basically like 11 forplexes and a couple of road changes have occurred too with the extension of the Cold Sack to the north or White Drive. staff finds that this is consistent with the character of the neighborhood as a traditional suburban pattern buffered from buffering single family to south. It's an infield residential uh development of long vacant lot. Uh they've requested flexibility that supports lower density development patterns and more open space. Uh the applications are generally consistent with the comprehensive plan. The development plan and plat do not deter any existing or future development on adjacent properties as well. They have five deviations that they are requesting. These deviations were approved with the the original final development plan that came back in in 2023. These are the same exact deviations uh that were requested back then. Uh 8ft uh sidewalk for a

parking with vehicle overhangs. They're proposing 6 ft. Uh reduced uh sidewalk width should only be needed along the parking for the amenity area. Um we're uh staff is supportive of this deviation. Second deviation is a 8 foot primary route between the street and parking area proposed they're proposing six feet. Again the staff recommends uh or is supportive of the uh deviation as long as both of these deviation requests conform to ADA standards. Third one is parking lot design. Uh residential parking subex will be 25 ft uh except uh parking permitted in driveways of detached houses, duplexes or row houses should not be uh should not count as parking lot. Parking amenity setback of 15 ft for the pool track is what they're requesting. Uh the parking lot for the amenity area is required to have 25 foot setback based on residential zoning. uh staff is supportive deviation. Fourth uh deviation is for building setbacks. Front yard setback for the garden apartment building type or the forplex pin wheel quad plex is 25 to 50 ft. Sideyard setback uh minimum is 7 ft. Rear yard is 25. Uh they're proposing all exterior lot setbacks of three feet for the garden apartment building type in the RP3 zoning district. Uh again the staff is supportive of this deviation. And the fifth deviation request is building coverage uh from 40% to 76%. And uh staff is supportive of this deviation as well. Staff recommends approval of the

reszoning associated preliminary development plan to reszone 10.75 acres from RP3 and RP5 districts to RP3 planned garden apartment district including the deviations as requested and approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following conditions following two conditions and if you have any questions we're available as is the applicants engineer. Thank you. Um, is the applicant president would like to make a presentation for Yes. the the applicants. Are we able to ask questions? We're we're going to have an open hearing here in a minute.

I just want to give them an opportunity first. Okay. All right. Um, at this time, we will open the public hearing. Um, individuals wishing to speak will have uh three minutes. Uh, individuals representing a group such as an HOA will have seven minutes. Uh, please state your name and address for the public record when you come forward to speak.

Good evening. My name is Sandra Stewart. I live at 620 East Lakota Street. Uh, so I'm just right across from this new development. Uh, I am low hearing, so if you went over this, I apologize for being redundant. Um, I'm just wondering if, um, the 54 plex units and the 90 unit assisted living, uh, and the 14 forplex units, are they single? Uh, are they just one story or how many stories are we talking on these? I'm sorry.

They're all single story. All of these are Okay. All right. And I I understand it's going to go in sections. So, I'm just wondering uh the uh like the ETA of your building. I'm going to let the actually answer that question.

If you want, you can pull up. I say just for the interest of time, if you have your questions, let's get those all listed out now and then that way we can go through, we can, you know, answer as many questions as we can. So, I'm taking notes on your questions about the construction phasing and what that will look like and then after the public hearing if we need to pull up the slides and look at stuff with commi with the commissioner discussion at that time. You're gonna get back to me.

Um, you you can hear and listen, but there won't be an opportunity for you to dialogue with the with the commission itself. So all he's trying to for the order of the meeting is get all your questions out. So if you have some more questions, let's get those too and then as we come up we can answer all the questions at once. So do you have other questions besides those two items? Not to share. Okay. Thanks. Yep. Yeah. Is there anyone else that is wishing to speak on this item?

What I would what I would suggest in this case is keep the hearing open and allow the applicant to come up and speak to those two questions as well at this point. And then if there are other questions that arise because of that I think we by leaving the public hearing open that affords the opportunity for any other questions. Okay. All right. Um if we could have the applicant come forward to address the question about the phasing of the construction. Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the planning commission. I'm Mark Huggin with Payne and Brockway. were the civil engineers on this project. Can I have you speak up into the microphone, please? Sure. Thank you.

Sorry. Uh I'm Mark Huggin with Pay and Brockway. We're the civil engineers on this project uh and surveyors. Uh the town homes are singlestory buildings and the uh currently under construction on the site is the first plat of the villas that ran and it's scheduled to be complete for the infrastructure scheduled to be complete the fall of this year. And uh we have another page two.

Okay. Um I'm sorry. Why don't you go ahead tell me? I'm Mike Brock, uh the developer Grand Street. So on the uh senior bill aside, phase one is supposed to be completed by uh October 1st of 2025. I don't know. And that would include the area that is being replatted here today and reszoned. Yeah, that's what it kind of looks like on the map. It's like, you know, where that threetory, you know, where the uh assisted living was going to be. That's part of phase one,

correct? No, that's that's not part of we're we're not changing the lots on on phase the first plat. Okay.

And then the second phase is 2027 and the third phase is 2029. So the the portion that we're looking at today, which phase is that in? That's in phase that's phase one. Phase one. Okay. Oh, that's phase two. Phase one's already under construction. Okay. So that Yeah, that that portion's phase two. Sorry. That's April 2027. This completion date of that. So, uh, which is only part of that.

Yeah. So, the original final plat went through that, uh, for what's the road right off of White Drive going to the east and west? 178 178th Street.

Uh, that also included the uh the clubhouse was the first phase. So, uh, they're sliding the clubhouse a little bit to the north. Jesse, if you would go to the uh right there. So on on this slide right here, it shows how the clubhouse has moved to the north a little bit off of the uh White Drive culde-sac. Uh additional lots were uh are being created on the north side of the 1660 176 place. So there there are some slight changes to the original final plat. They will have to come back in of course and before you guys with her revised final plat and revised final development plan. Uh tonight is only the preliminary development plan and the preliminary plat. You can see kind of the the changes between this slide and and the previous slide that had uh where this kind of purplish area lavender area is. That's where that uh the threetory 90 unit assisted living facility was. So really the changes are the extension of White Drive culde-sac and that to the north. They deleted a culde-sac that went to the small culdesac that went to the east of White Drive and they've added a couple additional lots on the north side of that 176 place.

Thank you, Bob. Um, I know we still have the public hearing open. Um, thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. Um, we still have the public hearing open. Is there any any additional comments before we close the public hearing based on that information? I have several comments, but if you have comments, now is the time to say if if you have if you want them on the public record.

I I don't um I'm Sandra again. Um, I don't plan on selling my house anytime soon, although I get an offer a month. Um, but I'm wondering if that will change with the three and fourtory buildings that I'm going to be looking directly at. So, that is a very big concern of mine. Uh, I can only speak for me, not my neighbors. Um, so, um, I understand that that you got rid of the four story. Uh, and I would ask you to please consider those of us who live across the street from this. uh that you would consider our line of vision and um that is a very big concern for for this woman. Um so uh I guess my question is is this set in stone? Are we for sure going to go ahead and do this or is this something that uh may change just like these plants have changed or we we don't know.

So I'm going to help to alleviate some of your concern. I think this proposal is removing the three-story building off of the off of the development. So, the three-story building will not be there. Was there ever a fourstory and is it going to be removed or is it still in the offing? the only building that'll have scale and I can't remember the number of stories that it is but up to the north adjacent to where um the industrial tracks are north of the area that still has that building is still in place there but it's further north than any of the residential development. So for your area, what street did you say you were on?

East Lakota. Yeah. you're going to you won't be adjacent to that. The the fourth well the larger building is up in the northeast corner of the property. So if you look at the graphic that's up on there um the space that is in the far upper right corner where you see those larger kind of rectangles. Yes,

that area there that is being will remain the same and I don't know how many stories are projected there is at a fourstory at that location but the threetory that is further south that and if you look again at the graphic there and Jesse will you put the cursor on that so she can see it. So, the area that's further to the south where the threetory was proposed right there, which is closer to Grand Street and is adjacent to um the residential development. That three-story building is being removed from the development plan and will have singlestory buildings in its place. So, the and the singlestory buildings will be in that forplex kind of format that the other villas are in.

Thank you for that help. Thank you. Okay. Thank you for helping clarify that, Dave. Um, is there anyone else that would like to speak at the public hearing? Seeing as um no one else is approaching the stand, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. We have a motion by Commissioner Oluchcci and a second by Commissioner Combmes to close the public hearing. All those in favor? I I

opposed. Okay. Motion carries five to zero. Okay. Moving into commissioner discussion. Um we'll start on my right this time. I'm just gonna interrupt for a second on its real quick and I may have a question involves you on this one here and I just noticed it when I was reading this not had a chance to discuss this. I'm wondering if we need to have a third condition because the way that this is written essentially and the PL commission would be to the council or to the governing body regarding the zoning development plan, but the preliminary flag is actually approval that belongs to them. It's not a recommendation that moves forward and in light of what we had procedurally last month where we've had issues where we may have to come back and I'm wondering if the third condition should be added to this that indicates that preliminary is with the condition of council approval of the development plan. That way if something goes different in council or things don't move forward, we've got don't have an approval hanging out there and the council goes a different direction.

Then our problem is we got to come back again because then we got to reestablish the old right at that point. So that we should probably have a third condition added here that says plan is subject to the approval of the governing the development plan being yeah so if this ends up being recommended for approval I think that would be smart if that's a concern that the if the governing body would deviate in any way so

I'm not anticipating that I'm just simply based on last months where we had situation where we had a preliminary that we had recommended denial which had denied. It's that same procedural step. So for the applicant and I want the applicant to understand this has nothing to do actually with proposals or anything else. It's a procedural point that we're taking out if something goes different, right? It'll still essentially be approved tonight.

Yeah, I think if somebody ends up motioning for approval on this, that would be a smart third condition to add. I see no issue with that. So, your the third condition. Can you spell that out? So third third condition would be something essentially the third condition would be preliminary approval. It's contingent contingent upon the preliminary development plan and reszoning approval by the governing body. That make sense? I'm trying to keep it as short as possible. Yeah,

I guess if it clarifies it, it's like if you guys if someone approves it now and then it goes further and one of one half of it is denied, then like you said, it's hanging your approval is hanging out in there. So, we can discuss more about last month and different things when we get into discussion items, but that's that's just a concern I have. that. Okay. So, we would still recommend if we move forward that's way, we would recommend res approving

recommend preliminary development plan and then we'd also approve the preliminary plat with condition three that the approval is contingent upon the governing body's approval of the resin. Right. All right. The new guys are getting some Yeah, they're good. It's over your head. They'll never want to make the motion.

Did we close public hearing? Yes, we did. We had a motion by Commissioner on that. Yes. Um so, um now we can have commissioner discussion if there are any questions on the on the development plan. zoning preliminary flat itself. Start on my right this time.

I don't have any questions. Yeah, I just I just have a question for staff on on the analysis here showing that it says that the says requires an adjustment to the zoning from RP5 to RP3. And then I see that it says IP3 to IP4. I've so I don't know if we're talking about the same thing on the analysis staff analysis right before plan air development plan.

Yeah, I can I can answer that. So if you look at the uh the slide that's up in front of you right now a port because our zoning districts are are associated with those preliminary development plans. The preliminary development plan had stuff that has already been approved. Something an area where the uh 90 unit the deleted 90 unit uh assisted living facility was zoned RP5. A portion of the original layout and development was also zoned RP3. But because this is a change in the preliminary development plan, we wanted to make sure that everything was consistent. And so even though you have that originally previously approved development plan, this is not kind of this does not followed it exactly because those are major changes that were made to the preliminary development plan. That's why we brought that's why we requested the applicant bring everything back in under this RP3 umbrella. Does that make sense? So I'll I'll add to what Bob is talking about. Essentially what you have is the if you look at the red area, the red lined area, right, that's being covered by this proposal. What Bob is explaining is that a portion of that which is in that light blue shaded color, okay,

is RP5, right?

So that a portion of it was RP5. It's proposed to go to RP3 as part of this The pink portion that's within that redlinined area is already RP3. But because the preliminary development plan covers all of that area, the split zoning like that, the reason staff is referring to it is because a portion of it is going to technically remain RP3, but it has a new preliminary development plan associated with it. So that's essentially it's a reszoning by technicality because of the associated revised preliminary plan, but it's the same zoning district for that portion of the property. It's it's one of the strange things in our land development code that talks about the preliminary development plan having to be associated with that plan district. So when we have these revised, technically they are reszoning the property to the revised plan opposed to the plan that was in place previously. [Music]

A little bit. Okay. I think it seems we have two new commissioners here. Dave, do you mind kind of explaining the difference? RP5 to RP3 or vice versa kind have broad

so for everybody actually that that's here you have a couple things that go on with our with our zoning districts and our residential districts in particular. So our residential districts allow for different types of buildings in each of the districts. So an RP5 tends to be a higher density type of zoning district. So it's a very traditional when you think about um zoning in a traditional sense you'll have R1, R2, R3, R4 and generally as the number goes up it allows for a greater density of housing in our zoning code because we have design criteria associated with residential development. As you move up you may be allowed greater density but you can also have different housing formats or building types. Okay. Under those things. So sometimes what you'll see in an RP5, the density goes up, but the allowed building types that are in that R5 district are are restricted, if you will. And so one of the reasons this goes to RP3 here or an R3 district in this sense is because the building type that's being proposed would not be allowed in the R5, but it is allowed in the R3 district. So that's that's a nuance to our code because of our design criteria. Those building types on top of our zoning districts, it's not all about density. Sometimes it's about what building types are allowed in each one of those zoning districts. That's a that's a general overview. I think that's also why you heard Bob refer to the architecture of these new proposed build uh forplex units are the same as what was proposed in this pink area as well. So their architecture is going to be consistent in the way it

looks. And that's an important point to note because it's not just about, okay, this is a building type that's allowed, but in our design consideration of the elevations and what we're looking at from the buildings, it's important that that architecture is consistent across the area. Thank you, sir.

I don't have any more questions, Mr. I do have really one question for the developer and I believe it's been answered several times. I just want to verify of course when uh this was either recommended for approval by us and eventually approved the assisted living portion was a major component of the whole RHID part of this project that the fabric of that is not changing. Correct. I understand the total count may be going down, you know, nine or 90 units or the three stories versus now the fourplexes, but the the purpose remains the same of those developed properties. Correct.

So, so and I we're walking a line here, so just so you're aware. Um and that line is simply um I will say as the developer was looking at this process the he assessed the market for the different types of buildings and the different types of offering. What has remained consistent is that this will be a senior living location. Okay. But in a different format than the assisted living side of that.

Understand? The governing body at its last meeting took a look closer at the RHID and the workings of the RHID and the elements involved with that tool and how it's implemented. Um, I'm going to refrain from talking too much about that because it's really outside our consideration, but I'd say part of what you're raising was discussed in that process last week. And maybe I'll revise my question. The senior living aspect of it, that's a condition. Yes. That clearly is the same. Correct. And I believe Mike, you could verify that. Yeah, Mike's shaking his head. Yes. That Yeah, it'll remain as senior living. It's just a different format. Understand? Perfect. Uh, no other questions.

Okay. I have no questions at this time. Thank you. Yo, you have no questions. Um, I don't have any questions. I appreciate all the discussion and the background information. It's helpful for for new and existing people on um so if we don't have any more discussion um I mean and just keep in mind we talked about that kind of revised um condition there you know to make it contingent. So I'll entertain a motion.

I'll make that motion. Can we clarify how the motion was made? But it does include that. Yeah. Yeah. I think as Commissioner Combmes gets ready to do this again, the beginning of this would be the plan commission approves of correct, right, of the resoning associated preliminary plan and the approval of the preliminary plat. You know, it's still in that. So, if you read that first paragraph, this plane commission uh approves, then you could add with condition three being added to that and the wording for three.

I'll take a shot. That's what you

I'll give it a go. We'll only judge you. Uh so the planning commission approves of the reszoning and associated preliminary development plan to reszone 10.75 acres from RP3 and RP5 districts to RP3 district including the deviations as requested and approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following conditions items one two and a third which was added which should be the preliminary plat that uh excuse me, the planning commission will approve with the condition of the governing body's approval of the preliminary development plan and the associated development plan.

Yep. Second for the nod. That's no issue. Just we're clearing associated development plan still going to the governing body. ary plaid ends here except that right. All right. So, we have a motion by Commissioner Combmes. They second by Commissioner Sza. All those in favor?

I opposed abstensions. Motion carries. Five to zero. Okay. Uh item number four, um officer elections. Okay, we've held off on the officer elections for a couple of months because we expected some transition with the planning commission. We now have a full planning commission. However, we have two of our long-standing or

longer standing uh members absent. So we we can have the election this evening or we can table it for our August meeting. I would tell you in the context of the report that was in your packet. We are looking at our bylaws because there's a conflict between our bylaws and the code in terms of when that elections when elections are held. So in the upcoming months you will also see some changes to the bylaws coming before you for consideration. So with that, I would leave it up to you if you want to hold the election this evening or table it for a month.

Um, with Commissioner Ber, I know he's wanting to let I know he was going to be absent. Had you heard from in him that he had interest in from Commissioner from Commissioner Ber? I did not hear anything from Commissioner Berg in regard to interest on any of the positions. Again, it's for chair and vice chair, the two positions. Um, Commissioner Vander Schmidt, I received an email about 5:00 this evening about him having to be held up at work a little bit. Um, I'm I may ask uh Commissioner Sosa to comment a little bit about that. As far as as far as Commissioner Vander Schmidt's interest or non-interest,

I don't think he is interested because I talk to him. I don't say I don't mind waiting another month. It's not the only the only thing it does is it makes whatever term you can get to a little bit shorter till the next election because we want to get back in the cycle. The problem is what one I can't remember which one says January and one says May. The code says May. Yeah. Yeah. No, the code says January and our bylaws say May.

Yeah. So, there's a conflict on the elections anyway. So, it just means we may be back in January, depending on what we can do with the bylaws to align things. You'll still serve as chair until then. Commissioner Sooza would still serve as vice chair until the election is held. Yeah. Can I input in here? Being new to the commission. Okay. I don't think it would be fair, you know, with the first meeting for the new commissioners to vote on positions like that. Be honest with you. You know, I've I've watched you on the video, but I think it wouldn't be fair to the two commissioners that have been present for all the meetings that I have. So, yeah, I would I would consider table.

Write that down. Well, if we want to we want to table it, make a motion to table. Let's do it just to be safe. Um, sometimes you're not required to, but because there's like a weird conflict with bylaws and code, I think it would be nice to have it on the record that you're tableling. I'll make a motion that we table the election of the officers to the August meeting. Second, we need to have the date for the meeting. I know sometimes it's like time. Just say August meeting. Is that okay? Or should we just say until the next until the next schedule. Yeah.

So, I motion that we table the election of officers until the next planned commission meeting. I'll second. We have a a motion by Commissioner Aluchcci with a second by Commissioner Sosa. All in favor? I opposed. Motion carries 5 to zero. All right. Uh staff updates. We have anything?

Just quickly again. two new commissioners. A couple things. You saw the nuances. I'm going to talk I'm going to talk for a second here about what I was referring to. Um what we discovered last month, if you remember the case that was before you last month, the two new people won't obviously, but um we had a similar situation with kind of a reszoning plat situation. And as part of that, we were recommending or you recommended denial of the development plan and the resoning and denial of the preliminary plat as presented, which which this would this was on 199th Street. Is it the commercial one? Yes.

Okay. So, so as that happened, we we were looking closer at some of the procedural items in the code and that's when we recognized that because you have approval authority on the plat, right? by recommending denial. If the city council comes back on this with a different direction than the denial, we would have an approval hanging there and the applicant would have to actually refile the preliminary plat and bring it back to you again because you had you had actually denied it. Whereas, if we would have put that condition on there at that point in time, it would have given the flexibility either way. it's either would have been an approval if those things were approved or a denial if they were denied. Um, so it's a procedural it's kind of a procedural nuance that becomes a problem for the applicant as much as for us. Um, because then we're asking them to come back, reapply, bring the stuff forward again and do that. So, um, that's that's what we caught last month and that's why I raised the point here. I I hadn't been thinking about it until I saw it in front of me here on the screen. And it's kind of that same problem, but in reverse in the sense that yes, you're recommending approval, but if the council, if the governing body decides to go a different direction, now we've got this approval hanging out there. And by it being approved, if they decided to come back and and because of the denial on the change, go to the original plat that was there, the preliminary plat that was there, they'd have to come back again to get that reapproved. And so that's it's a odd kind of procedural element. Um it's one of the fun things about ordinances and governance. So, it's a little bit odd to explain, but that's why I raised the question I

did today on that is as I was looking at that and we didn't we didn't catch it when we talked and it was just something that slapped me in the face and I said, "Oh, wait a minute. I don't want the same thing potentially occurring here." Um, the other thing I wanted to do just very quickly as an orientation for everybody and especially our new members and I mentioned this I think to to both of them when we uh met with them prior to this meeting in the fronts of your packets. I just want to make sure that we have provided sheets now that have the review criteria for the different types of cases that are in front of you. feel free to to utilize that as a resource especially on plat. And the reason I'm I'm saying that on plat is platting is a very technical process. Um in general what you'll hear from staff is when it we review it, the engineering staff reviews it public works and utilities and all the easements are there. We're reviewing to make sure they're meeting the specifications for lot sizes according to zoning for easement widths that are needed for different types of utilities for rightway width that's needed for the roadways and things like that. So plats are a very technical type review and generally when they're coming to you we're going to be looking at it as a recommendation of approval because they've met all those technical criterias and specifications and that's really all platting is doing is subdividing land for legal lot sales purposes. So when we think about that it's not really a land use question like a reszoning is. When we deal with reszoning, we're in those other criteria where sometimes we're looking at, okay, what's the context of the neighborhood? What's going on here there? Platting is merely dividing the land, legally dividing the land so it can be sold off

in in parcels versus the large property. And so we have to be very careful about that when we're talking about those things. And that's where the sensitivity to to the to the denial versus approval side of this becomes important because if you have cause for denying a platter, you think you do, we need to be discussing that formally because we want to make sure we're in those review criteria when we're talking about those things. So those sheets that are there are a guide sheet for you to help you with the process. Um, don't be afraid to refer to them when we're in a plat or something like that. You can simply go to that sheet and go, "Hey, you know, staff, I was looking at this after we got the case. I'm noticing this thing here, but I don't see how it fits review criteria number five or whatever it is." We can have that discussion with you and and we can talk about that and how it was looked at. Um, Maggie, I don't know. Did you do you want to add anything to that at all as far as the use of the review criteria?

So, so I wouldn't tell you just kind of get used to looking at those things. That's why we're usually stuck on comments like storm water and you know traffic and those kinds of things. They're just very technical reviews. They're harder sometimes for the public to understand because it's really not a public hearing item. the plats are not, but the reasonzonings and the development plans are. And so sometimes when we're grouping those things together, you're going to find staff is going to kind of pull out some of the nuances on you. And when we talk about public hearings, it's really about the reasoning. It's really about the preliminary development plan. The plat itself does not require that public hearing. So yeah. And in in the advance there was a a denial of a plat by the planning commission there it particular item doesn't go to the council at that correct

now the only way it would go to the council is it's an appeals process. So I believe it's within seven days I think by the land development code the applicant would have seven days to appeal it to the the uh governing body. So they could do that. It's a way for them to seek relief from your decision. Um, and that's no different than any other process. So, like when we go through a reasonzoning process, if people are not comfortable with what the governing body, the applicant doesn't like what the governing body decided or didn't feel like it was justified, their appeal is actually to the courts at that point in time. So, it's a little bit different here. you're acting in an administrative capacity under the plat side of this thing, right?

The appeals process goes to the governing body from you and not to not to the court as a first step. So, um that gives the applicant th that opportunity. Thank you. A final word I guess on that would be there's a chart a fun chart in the code and it's online and I pull it up every meeting and it says what the topic is so preliminary plan zoning amendment whatever and it has a tick next to like who is the final decision maker on that and who gets the appeal and blah blah blah so it kind of helps you visualize

Maggie we can let's uh plan on sending a link link out to them or at least if we can cut that piece of it and send them that in a PDF. Let's let's plan on doing that. It's a good point. Um that way you can see that summary sheet and what your role is and and it really does help to clarify what staff's role is, what your role as plan commissioners are, and then what the governing body's role is. And so what we what we want to always plan for is at each level that next player, if you will, that staff, we only have so much flexibility. You have a little more authority and and ability to be flexible, and then you have the city council that can look at it even at a different level for a variety of different reasons. So, it's it's okay if you have a recommendation that's different than the staff's recommendation. It's okay if the city council or the governing body decides to go a different route than what you've recommended again because of that procedural role that each one of us plays. Um it it really affords the ability that something is scrutinized pretty well at each level. So there there's not this necessarily just follow staff because staff recommended approval or denial. But again, you also have to look at when you're thinking about it from the standpoint of um maybe going against the staff recommendation. If you watch, a lot of times we're trying to show you the staff recommendation and you hear Bob or Jesse or Maggie talking to the effect of the staff found this, this, and this. That's their justification for why they're recommending the way they are. Under the review criteria, you as a group may say, "Well, that's fine." and well staff, but we think this item over here gives us the justification for denial

under this review. And we think that that's more important to do it that way. Um, that way it's clarifying essentially that your decision is not just arbitrary type decision. It's based in the review criteria, which is what's really important in these cases. Um, and then the city council or the governing body may at some point when they're looking at it, they may look at those criteria and they pick out another one and they say, "Yeah, that's great that the planning commission thought that and this is great that the staff thought that, but here's what we really think and oh, by the way, we're the governing body. We make these decisions." So,

um, and and all you do is you respect the process at that point. So, you may not like what they they do or you may not like what staff's recommending. Um, for instance, the last month when we made the one recommendation, it was based a lot on a conflict between an ordinance or policy of the city, the comp plan, and what was being proposed. And we felt, you know, that's where we're at. This is this is how this context fits. Um, and would leave it to you guys and the and the city council to determine what's the best direction for the city. You want to add anything, May?

I'm just happy when I read the minutes you don't uh actually repeat all of the motions that I redo. Yeah. Unfortunately, it's recorded. I know. Exactly. I'm focusing on the paper. The

all I have tonight. Maggie, do you have anything from staff tonight? I just had a I just had a few things. Um, as I mentioned, we're working on the bylaws and so you will see those. Just as a recap, the items that you had last month for council, the two food truck conditional use permits were approved. The 199th Street Commerce Center was removed from the agenda, so they did not take action at this point. The item, the Grain Street item on tonight's agenda will go to the council on August 18th and we will have a meeting in August. We do have a few items for that agenda.

Yeah. If you have a schedule conflict, let us know so we know in advance if we have a quorum problem or not. Um the other thing I'm just going to bring up Maggie and I talked today. um anticipate either a report like Maggie just gave so you understand where things moved through the process or we may do like a written item that's just attached to your agenda to show you know what happened to items that you had on your agenda before. So we're going to try to keep you informed as to how things are moving through the process or what's going on there. I think it's nice to do that kind of shoot so we know what happened. This is This is all Maggie's idea.

Yeah, it's a good one. No, it's it's a good thing. I think that way you guys are informed as to what's happening or not happening after you've seen an item. Yeah, because I know like the the pet uh was the uh the kennel. Yeah, like that was kind of like Oh, yeah. I didn't know what happened to that. Yeah. Where that bounced to several meetings. Yeah. Yeah. Know, I appreciate it. All right. Um appreciate staff updates. Um, nothing else. I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Make the motion. I'll second the motion. You do not allow anyone to stand up and talk that's attending the meeting.

We don't typically have that on the plane commission agenda. Are what are you here for? I'm here because I believe gardener has got a serious health issue. Okay.

This may not be the correct port city organization. If you don't start with a planning commission, I believe every organization that works here in the city of Gardner should be aware of the situation. The reason I'm so adamant about this is my own father was in real estate. He built five subdivisions back in Michigan. Five of what he put in a church for the Catholic church. One of the things that he resisted doing was allowing ponds in any of his subdivisions. The reason he did that was the fact that mosquitoes were an issue not only for him but for his family. I am very very allergic to mosquitoes. Very allergic. I swell up and at one time I had to go to the hospital because I was bitten three times on my cheek. didn't realize it because I was sleeping and and the infection actually closed my eye and I could not see in my job. I had to drive and travel and I had to get somebody else to help me do my job because I actually couldn't drive a car safely. Now, as you come in on the second entrance here on Center Street, as you refer to it as Gardener Road, I believe that that area, just as you come in to the right, past the car wash, is an embarrassment to the city of Gardener. It is nothing but scum. It is the size of at least a city lot and it breeds mosquitoes every single day. Now, you got to understand there are roughly 3,500 species of mosquitoes. There's only 175 that we have to deal with in the United States. These mosquitoes carry malaria and more importantly for children, they

carry encphilitis. Some of them can even give you West Nile. Now, maybe none of you are allergic to it. The mosquito is attracted by CO2. You know what CO2 is? It's your carbon dioxide that you breathe out. You breathe in oxygen. The reason I'm aware of this is because I was in polymer chemistry. I was in chemistry for the EI Deon Corporation. I worked in a research lab. So I know a lot about chemistry, etc., etc. So I think

because I'm such a loud mouth and I breathe. so much oxygen out, it literally attracts mosquitoes. I've been bitten four times so far this year in my own garage, not out mowing the lawn. If you come by the house and see me from time to time, I actually wear a Tyvex suit to go out and work on my own lawn and to mow it. Mosquitoes have a tendency to fly anywhere from two box to two miles, but with wind conditions, they can fly 40 miles away.

As you come into Gardener, there's no less than six area ponds. Two of them, the one out here and the one on 186th Street is covered, just covered with algae. This means that there's mosquitoes breeding in there constantly every single day because the water does not move. So you can sit there and say, "Well, okay, smart alec, how do we stop this?" I hate it when somebody suggests something and has no answer. I have your answer. So, wait. Yeah.

So, so what I'm going to suggest here is first of all, did you sign in on the sheet when you came in? Do we have So, we've got your name and and everything. I have my address. I have my phone number down there, but you have my address. Okay. You can drive by and watch me wash my truck almost any any Saturday. Okay. Okay. So, what I'm going to what I'm going to suggest though where you really need to make those comments is directly to the city council. So sir, I'm aware of that. But you see, the planning commission has to be aware of these situations. Yeah. And because to stop this problem, you can either treat it with chemicals, which I know most of you are not going to want to do,

but it's up to the landowner if he's going to maintain that pond or not. I even want you to pass I want the city to pass an ordinance so that you must treat this water at least once a month. But let's say that you don't want to do it, then I want you to fill it in like my dad. We also may have already on the books codes and regulations and that's where we need to follow up with code enforcement on this issue too, right? Especially with the ponds that are in existence because we may already have public nuisance codes regarding this, right? And health codes which the plan commission has nothing to do with. But what we can do, let's make sure Maggie if you'll hear. Sir, sir, I'm just doing this to make sure that you're aware.

Understand? I understand, but there may be there may already be things on the books. We just need to make code enforcement aware of it so they can go act on that. I have to find out that. So, if you don't mind leaving your contact information with Maggie, if you'll get his phone number before he leaves. just have it down there, but I don't have my phone number, but you can hear

Can we You can talk to us all you'd like. But for the record and the cleanliness purpose for public record, the the public hearing portion of this is closed, but your concerns can be heard outside of the meeting. If you want to talk to me as attorney representation about the codes that you're concerned about or wanting to talk about ordinances or any of that, I'm happy to talk with you about that after the after we close out. Okay. Again, I just want to see my father was in real estate in five subdivisions. He would not allow a pond in his subdivision for exactly the same reason I'm discussing.

Okay. Well, we're going to we're going to finish up the regular meeting and then let's let's at least get your phone number and things like that because then we can follow up on some stuff. Okay. Um Okay. I'll entertain a motion to Wait, no, we had we had a motion to We did. Yes, we have a motion to Okay. Okay. U did you make the motion? I did. Okay. Okay. Okay. All those in favor? I opposed. All right. Meeting is adjourned. [Music] Those Michigan were giant.