Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, let's get started. Good evening everyone. I'll call this meeting to order. Our first order of business is to adopt the agenda for uh tonight's meeting. Commissioners, is there a motion to adopt the final agenda? Motion. Is there a second? Second. Have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. Motion carries. Our next order of business is to adopt the minutes from our August 6, 2025 planning committee meeting. Commissioners, is there a motion to approve the minutes from that meeting? Make a motion to approve. Thank you. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Thanks. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor?

Any opposed? Very well. Thank you. Motion carries. We'll now move on to our discussion items. Uh our first item for discussion tonight is item 3.1 sketch plat for Victoria condos mixeduse development. The sketch plat review process as you know is our opportunity as a planning commission to review and consider development proposals. Um, no formal actions or recommendations this evening at the sketch plat review stage, but it's our chance to uh receive initial feedback from the applicant to give the applicant our input and and comments uh as well as the city council which uh will take our comments and give their own in advance of the necessary uh preliminary plat um proposal or any reasonzoning applications. So, with that, um, I will now turn it over to, um, city planner Brian McCann.

Thank you, chair and commissioners. Tonight, we have a request for a sketch plat review for Victoria condos from Monarch Development and Ghana Homes. Uh, so they, as you mentioned, uh, have submitted this to receive initial feedback from the plan commission and city council on their proposed development. So, no actions or formal motions. this evening. Uh simply providing guidance for the applicant to consider as they move ahead with a potential preliminary plat application. So the location and area, these are three parcels. Two of them are city-owned parcels and the other is an existing unplatted private garage storage structure. Um, those two city-owned lots include public parking, sidewalk, and landscaping improvements. This is located right in the heart of our downtown. So, it is west of Quamlit, uh, east of Ry's Way, north of Tower Boulevard, and south of Vixs and Stiger Lake Lane. They are proposing 10 condominium units as well as two groundf flooror commercial spaces and a additional space for a private storage uh similar to the existing use that's out there today. So the existing conditions as I mentioned there's that private private garage structure as well as the existing city parking lot which contains 43 parking spaces. Uh there are also utilities available on Quamoclit to the east and Tower Boulevard to the south and it's also within 1,000 ft of Stiger Lake. So the shoreland standards come into play. Uh I think only one of you was actually on the commission when this first came around back in mid 2022. So they had

originally proposed a 63 unit apartment building with uh the same groundf flooror commercial and storage concept. So these are the renderings that were provided with that submitt about 3 years ago. Um just as some awareness for the commissioners, there was some misinformation that spread in the public about this proposed structure. they increased the height of the building and um exaggerated the parking demand that this would increase on downtown. So there is some significant history with this site. Uh but the applicant took that feedback and revised the concept for consideration from the plan commission and city council. So on the left is the building that they had proposed in 2022 and on the right is the new proposed structure that they are bringing forward this evening. And then breaking it down floor by floor, on the left here is the underground parking garage for the condo units. They're showing 20 residential stalls, so two stalls per unit. Uh then moving up to the ground floor and the city parking lot. They do have those three commercial spaces uh shown in red here in the image on the right with an entrance to the main lobby on the northwest side of the building. And then with this, they are proposing some parking lot modifications to our existing parking lot with that entrance into that their underground uh garage for the building. And then moving up to the second and third levels, they are proposing four condo units on each of the second and third unit floors. These are all twobedroom condo units. And then moving up to the top floor, they have those final two units for that final count of 10, as well as the stairwell circulation

space, as well as an amenity room and a roof deck for uh the residents to use. They also provided some exterior renderings of what this building will look like. So you can see how the parking changes onwamlit and in the city parking lot as well as their access to the garage. Uh their main entrance here off of Ry's way and then just some exterior elevations of the final product. So, our comprehensive plan does guide this area as downtown mixed use, which allows 24 to 75 units per acre. Um, in our downtown description in our comprehensive plan, it envisions a mixeduse type of development similar to this with ground floor retail and office and highdensity residential on the upper floors similar to what the applicant is proposing. Uh the density lines up uh just over 30 units per acre. So it's within that density range. So staff are not anticipating a comprehensive plan amendment being required with this development. Then it's currently zoned central business district which is our downtown district. Uh also allows mixeduse buildings and various commercial uses with a conditional use permit. uh depending on the type of uses that would move into those commercial spaces, those might be permitted outright uses, but if they're conditional use uh uses, they would come back to the plane commission and city council for review. Uh, additionally, some amenities are conditional accessory uses in our code. So, if they end up proposing a pool on the rooftop or something like that, that would need a conditional use permit as well. And then our downtown district is different than our other districts. We don't have a lot of setback requirements. We are really only bulk

standard is a 50ft maximum height. They are proposing 49 ft for the structure. Uh so they're compliant with all the bulk standards. And then for reference on scale of what this building might look like when it's completed, it's about the same scale, a little bit less than the Victoria Flats building currently. So looking at the streets and pedestrian connections, uh Quamlit currently has three access points noted in the areas in green. Um so they would be removing those two northern access points here uh to close off that parking to allow that oneway parking under Ry's way. Um, those two accesses will remain the same, just one will be one in, one out. Uh, they also have the underground parking entrance in yellow that I mentioned, and they also have concrete sidewalks shown uh, throughout the entire area that would extend down towards Vix. And looking at that specifically, our fire department did have some comments related to the two accesses on Quamoclit. They would like one to remain uh due to parking requirements and fire access. So that may impact their parking calculations a little bit. They might have to end up taking two stalls away for an additional exit onto Quamlit. Uh but that's something that we'll flush out in the future. And then also our engineering staff requested some additional details just on parking layout and functionality as well as uh the four stalls that they're proposing for parallel parking in front of the building on Tower Boulevard. So looking at parking specifically um

right now as I mentioned there are 43 stalls in the public parking ramp. They are proposing a total of 86 parking stalls between the underground um parking garage, the modifications towlet tower boulevard and the city lot. What this results in after taking away those 20 private underground stalls, it's a net increase of 23 public parking stalls. Um and then of those available, 66 stalls. So the 86 minus 20 15 of those would be needed for retail uses if these two commercial spaces become retail. And then the parking garage only requires one stall. So that is 50 parking stalls of available parking area. Um, so those numbers might fluctuate depending on what type of uses go in these spaces, but overall there is a significant increase in available parking downtown from this project. And then looking at landscaping and tree preservation, as with all of our developments, boulevard trees are required uh as well as foundation plantings for any of our highdensity or commercial products. And then what the central business district is exempt from because we expect a lot more hard surfacing and building and pedestrian connections. These uh open space and minimum planting requirements are exempt for the central business district. And then we'll also look at tree preservation with pre preliminary PLA plans. Um but there are only a few trees on the site currently. So, we're expecting all of those trees will be removed and they will have to make that up in some form. For the Shoreland Overlay District, I mentioned they're within 1,000 ft of

Stiger Lake, which is a recreational development lake. So, they have 150 foot ordinary high water line setback. They're about 400 ft away from the lake, so they're fine there. Uh, also the impervious maximum in our central business district per our shoreland ordinance is 80%. So they're already exceeding that. So when you change something, uh, they lose that lawful non-conforming status. But since the storm water is already going to be captured like it is right now in our regional storm water for the area, uh the plane commission and city council could consider a variance for that since it's not a net increase in the storm water being generated. And then when we have highdensity residential products in our downtown or within our shoreland district, we have to look at a residential shoreland uh PUD. So that's for buildings more than four units. That would come into play here. It typically requires a density tier analysis and open space requirement, but we did adopt a provision just a few years ago in our shoreline ordinance that if a development meets these three criteria here, they are exempt from that. Uh based on the development that's come forward tonight, they're not providing any riparian access. It's consistent with that density range in the comp plan like I mentioned and it's consistent with the other requirements of the shoreland district. Um, with that variance possibly being considered for the impervious, it's anticipated that this would meet that exemption. Looking at signage, lighting, and architecture, uh, those haven't been formally submitted yet. They did provide a few renderings of some of the types of materials we could expect with the

building. um as well as some design standards like building variations, roof designs, uh enhanced entries and the high quality exterior material. So we believe these will meet all those requirements as well. And then for park dedication uh comes out to a fifth of an acre or $21,000. Um the rate is 10 condo units at one and a half residents per unit and any commercial projects less than an acre in size are exempt. So that would fall in here as well. So we're really only looking at the condo units for park dedication. And then with this, they're not proposing any parks or trails because we already have a lot of great park amenities in our downtown right now currently. for grading and storm water management. It has to meet the MCWD rules, including wetland impact mitigations. That's not anticipated to be an issue with this development, but it's always worth noting. And then storm water facilities, as I mentioned earlier, rely on that regional storm water. So, our city engineer will uh look at that closer with any preliminary plat submittals for the utilities. I mentioned earlier, they're available to the site. So, the water is anticipated to come from Quamlit and the sewer from Tower Boulevard. Our engineer did have a few comments in the staff memo on that just about uh future uses of those commercial spaces when we're doing our water calcs. So, with that, as we mentioned at the beginning, there's no actions or motions this evening. And I have a few questions on the screen to help guide discussion if the plane commission needs a little push. Otherwise, staff is available for questions and there are multiple representatives of the application in the audience tonight as well.

Great. Thank you, Brian. Does the applicant wish to speak?

Hi, commissioners. I'm Carl Bron, Monarch Development. So, I'm an applicant with Ghani Homes and Representative Ghani is not not here tonight. Um, but we're here to answer any questions and we we put a lot of thought into the original design intent for this building and now it's a much more downsized boutique version as you can see with a lot of um enhancements that it'll bring to that block we believe of of downtown. So, we're here to answer any questions you have.

Very good. Thank you. Let me now open the floor to the planning commission to discuss. Commissioners, any questions or comments? I guess the only question I really have is you're going from 63 units, if I heard that correctly, down to 10. How does that happen? Where's the original design was multifamily apartments. The revised design is condominiums. So, the unit sizes on average are 2,000 square feet and larger on the new concept. So, that's the explanation. All right. Thank you.

I have a question for Brian. What if any of the city land is affected by this development? Um chair and commissioners. So at first um the impacts are directly related to that city parking lot. Um I highlighted earlier there are 43 spaces in here. What this results in is 41 spaces within the parking for the city lot. So, a reduction of two spaces, but then they're also providing stalls along Quamlit and Tower Boulevard to make up for that difference. Good. And what happens to the parking on the opposite side of Quamlit that is there now? Does that remain? Correct. Yeah, the parking in front of Vicks. Is that what you mean? Oh, the flats.

The flats. Yes, that remains unchanged. Okay. So, we have parallel parking on that side and then diagonal, not diagonal, but 90 degree. Correct. On that side. Is it wide enough to accommodate all that? Yes. As far as we're aware, our city engineering staff looked at that and they didn't seem to have any concerns. This was meant to resemble Ry's way, which has no in parking, not angle like tower that.

Yes. Yes. Okay. Good. And I know that parking is very much in flux, but I'm sure as we as this evolves, it's going to be the issue. People are going to be there are three restaurants right there. Parking is always in scarce supply in Victoria. I mean I wouldn't be surprised if there were a lot of questions about that. So other questions commissioners um can you clarify does the parking lot remain public or is it remain in the cities like it's not being absorbed by applicant? Correct. That's my understanding and that's how they've broken up the lot lines with this development. So you can see here there's this break.

Yeah. You can see essentially where our ramp is coming down. There were stalls and we're flipping them to the other side along our building. So that will be partly on the property um that's owned by you know Rich Cannon currently. Um so there would need to be an easement agreement of some sort um an access easement for us to get into the ramp but it's kind of a swap. Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.

And if you could go back to the aerial or the aerial view. So ones on um on the right, those trees are going to be removed and that's going to create some of those additional spaces is what I'm seeing because that's where some of that 2123 ad was. Correct.

A totally different question here. Nothing to do with parking. Um under the project narrative, you guys talked about having both local and historical precedent for the building design. Um, I guess personally I'm not seeing a whole lot of historical aspects to it. It looks just kind of like every other modern building events, but like how are we incorporating the historical and how is it going to look a little bit different and also the same?

Sure. If we go to the presentation, we can see the precedents that we used as a part of our design. So, originally the um the design intent was to um because Rich Ganon, who currently owns the lot, houses his collection of cars there. And so, um and he plans to continue to house his collection in a portion of the building. Um, and so our uh when we looked at precedents uh for for what we actually looked at like fireh houses and carriage houses as an inspiration for buildings that have large openings that have you know uh garage doors that may open um arched windows above. So, if you keep going, there's a page of uh precedents. Um, those are the Victoria precedents. Those are the KGR precedents. But here's the So, some of the detailing that we took, the large um parapet is a is a is a nod to the historical kind of stepped parapit that you would see in historical buildings. The arched windows at level two are a nod to the historic carriage houses and and firehouses that we were looking at. and um also what the building currently is. it used to be the firehouse for so I think there's a nice kind of connection there between um so in some ways you know it has to have operable windows that the the tenants can use and so there's going to be some of those elements that are are you know a slightly modernized version but we want to bring in through uh the the detailing essentially uh having uh brick detailing and having uh uh the light fixtures and all those things are going to we that's where the detail of of it will will continue to take from these historical precedent Other questions, commissioners?

Yeah, the main floor commercial spaces, um, you've indicated that a portion of that would be maintained for private garing of of car collection. Do we know what percentage of it? Is it is it that one space that is used? Okay. So, so Rich Ganon plans to keep those three spaces and use one as he currently uses the whole building for as storage and the other two spaces being retail. and he's not identified retailers yet. He's waiting to see this project, you know, when it happens to identified retailers. If I can just build on that question, Brian, is is car storage, private car storage an appropriate mixed use in a commercial district?

Chair, that's a good question. Uh, I don't believe it's an allowable use in our central business district right now. So, we'll have to maybe modify that section to make it a conditional uh use. very specific with specific standards like we have in some of our other uses like drive-throughs for example. We can apply specific conditions in our code that would work for this site because we don't want that to be a standard use throughout our central business district. But it makes sense in this situation. It does seem I have to say a little out of character because presumably it's going to affect the aesthetic of the building. You're not going to have the same windows open.

That's that's not true. the the aesthetic is the same around the sides of the building of a lot of glass. So Rich wants it to look consistent and he's looking out someday that could become retail too. You know, there was his space is proposed. He's owned that building downtown here for well over 25 years. And the only way that he would work with a developer, which happened to be me, was he could stay there instead of moving outside of downtown Victoria to somewhere else. And so this was really a you know a combination for Rich to stay here in some capacity but a retail type front storefront.

Yeah. I guess my concern when I look at that condition would be when we look at creating walkable sustainable cities um eyes on the street is one of the things and I would assume that if this is a a car collection there might not be a lot of individuals in that space um with with great frequency. So I just think about a city that's um trying to support development and growth and walkability um in its downtown. I'm concerned about that being mostly a vacant space. Yeah. Car the car nights in downtown Victoria in the summer of course is when he does open or in the history of his owning that building his open it up to the public to see his car collection and so it' be limited to that. It's not like it's year- round activity but that's the intent.

Yeah. And chair and commissioners just an additional thought on that. This could qualify as more of a showroom than a warehouse or storage. So that that is a conditional use in our CBD. I believe. So that's something it could potentially fall into without having to change our code.

I'm just speaking to the, you know, it's, you know, it's onethird of the space and so the other two spaces are anticipated to be retail with large windows, lots of activity and then um as well as the condo units above. So I I agree with you. Active us is obviously very important uh on the street um side. Uh, but I do think that like because we've maintained the architecture and kept everything to look consistent and it shouldn't feel like hopefully it won't feel like it's like a dead space. It should feel hopefully more like a showroom as

what is the width of the sidewalk on that side of the building currently showing? It looks sort of narrow to me. I think it was 5 ft and our standard is six and I think in our downtown we might even want to bump that up to eight or our engineering staff did note that as a comment especially as there's an overhead door there presumably vehicles coming in and out maybe periodically but still happening just to create a safe condition there for pedestrians and chair and commissioners just going back to that showroom point Travis just passed our code over to me since we have a discussion on that later and showrooms are a permitted use in our central business district. Just as an additional note,

have we maximized the underground storage? Is there any possibility that the storage could be underground? No. There I mean, so as far as car storage or Oh, his storage. Um, I think that would uh defeat his purpose of having a showroom and wanting to open it up to the city during the car, you know, events. And um and then the underground garage currently is housing our necessary parking for the condos above which is essential to be able to market those condos.

And and what is the plan for visitor parking? I don't believe we allow overnight on street parking and at least not over 24 hours. So you know people are going to have visitors. I know I live in an HOA in which people have visitors. We have visitor parking areas. They can stay for several days, weeks. What What is the plan here? Brian, if you could comment on that. Is there a requirement for visitor parking with this?

That that is what I was just asking Jen because I'm not sure myself there might be some parking lots where there are exceptions to that. Like the flats like the flats obviously has parking available for visitors that I would expect to be overnight, but I don't know the answer off the top of my head unfortunately. Okay. And based on the market knowledge we have, we don't think every stall is used necessarily year round in there. So there could be inventory available in the garage of 20 with people that have one car, for example, or it's a part-time resident, they're not even there full-time could be some of the buyers.

But I think what you're um you know, what's being mentioned is yeah, guests, family members or whatever that are in for the weekend or whatever, where are they going to park that car? Is that the question you're getting? Yeah, I mean at our place we have people staying, you know, and we have only 16 units, so it's relatively comparable and and it seems like there always two or three people using the scarce visitor parking we have. So I think that that's what I was hearing when mention that people coming in from out of town,

right? Right. And where do they go and do they park at a a level city lot or street or is there space available in the 20 stall garage? Uh some of the units you might have noticed are smaller facing north because the best views are facing this way. Sager Lake that there might be one car for example and that's licensed for one car that the other car maybe is a visitor saw for the HOA. I mean there's there's 20 stalls for 10 units. So I think we're we're still going to be okay for the market there and having potentially a space or two available.

The last parking comment I promise. Um, I just think that the diagonal parking is is sort of nice on Tower Drive outside of Winchester and Ry and and the shops there. Um, I just urge someone as you consider parking to think about that. I know it may not give you the length uh but possibly for compact car parking or something in that space. Are you talking along? Yeah, where all those 90° spots are shown on um Victoria Drive. Yeah, we've, you know, we've drawn it both ways and gone back and forth, but I do believe we got a comment um from some the city to do them at 90 degree just because of it being a two-way

um and and having the parallel parking on the other side and it matches what happens on Ry's way, but that's certainly something that could be revisited if it's it's, you know, becomes an issue. Just an idea. I've got one followup which it was the sidewalk. So, this is proposing five feet and we would like to be thinking about eight. That's a that's a big delta. Um, so that's probably the one thing that I'm hearing that is probably going to want to have more discussion around I think for maybe a couple reasons.

We'll take a look at that. You know, one of the things we are trying to accommodate is more parking out front on tower, those four stalls, because you know, everyone in Victoria wants to park right in front even if they can't. The perception is can I park in front? So that's why we're trying to add some stalls and tower and hopefully fit that with the city standards as much as we can. Would those be handicapped spots or available to anyone? Where?

So I think that would have to be a part of a larger discussion in terms of like currently the public lot doesn't have any handicap spots. We're showing one I believe or two. Um but uh I think that looking at the whole district holistically and how many handy cap stalls that you'd want to have because right now there's a couple on Ry's way but there so I yes there will be and it how however best it makes sense for the city to have it spaced in a in a kind of fair and equitable way. Brian, is it plan to take out the boulevard because there's a treelined boulevard currently on Quamoclood in this area past the current the old fire station, Mr. Ganon's garage. And does all that go away then to accommodate the parking?

Correct. Yes. Okay. So, that's to Eric's question. We're shrinking that area to capture some space for parking. Yeah. And then those boulevards would essentially be closed off for one way in from Ry's way and then one way out back onto Ry's way. Okay. In the current design at least. And the the most narrow sidewalk is the front. It's the east. It's the east side. It's that side. Okay. Correct. In front of Rich Gan in space.

Okay. And just additional clarification, there's no sidewalk there right now. Um, so it definitely would be an improvement, but yeah, we'll have to take a closer look at the the width and see if we want that larger for the Tower Boulevard and um I'm struggling to pronounce that street um or yes. Um, is that a stop sign or what kind of intersection is that? I believe there are yields on Ry's Way. Okay. Um, but no signage on Quamlit. That's right.

Yeah. I would want our engineers to double check on that. Yeah. I think there's a stop on Tower Boulevard next to the burrow site. So on quamoclit you can go straight through down to that intersection on five to the south but you have to stop if you're coming from tow tower boulevard east but going south on qualit you can take a right on tower without stopping that's just a yield correct commissioners any other questions comments

I I just had a comment. Um, so in Rich's showroom space, he would access that from Cuomo CL, correct? That's the having just like today there's two doors. He wants a door there. That would be glass. Ryan, can you bring up that rendering of of the four? Yeah. So, the northeast um view Northeast. This one. No, lower left corner. Oh, this one. Yeah. So, am I looking at this correct? That So, where you have your cursor, that's qualit correct.

Correct. And so, is that center that very middle um element there, is that a garage door? Yes. Um, that's kind of was what I was thinking. Hey, so this is just a personal comment. There's, you know, nonviting at anybody in this room, but it'd be kind of fun if you could bring in a fire uh station aspect to that as far as the garage and the arch. And we were looking at historical things that might be kind of fun to make it look kind of like a an old firehouse.

I kind of agree with that because that's kind of where I was going with the historical question, knowing that it was a firehouse. It's like could we play that up and add that to you guys as like a marketing thing too and like play up downtown of like hey this was the old firehouse and we're able to work with this and you had a photo from Minneapolis fire one of them was definitely from Minneapolis and I'm a resident that's what I was thinking when I saw that. Yeah. Yeah. You can the there was one that clearly was MFD but I knew it was before I even saw the logo. Oh,

as I I understand there's a grade slope as we go to the north. Isn't exploring on whether or not it's possible to get a garage door from the parking lot that would be the primary access for storage of vehicles even if you had overhead doors for when it's open for car night on the sidewalk, but maybe that wasn't the primary. Yeah. Yeah, currently the way that he accessire but um we can look at the challenging right there's 12 as you go down the hill and so all of those things are kind of a delicate balance to make all the points sure something

I thought it would be more significant but just looking at the image and looking at where the sill heights line across that elevation it doesn't seem like it's as significant as I maybe thought that first 80 or 100t is less dramatic I think the tower sure faster I think I I think that's just one of the concerns I have is the vehicles going across the public sidewalk it seems like three of those spots were dedicated to be reserved so I don't know if those are part of the parking count or not um but they kind of have a hatched over as they're like a temporary time where it would be available for him 6 a.m. and 7 a.m. um you know parking so that he could move his cars in.

Yeah, I think if it was possible it' be great to have an overhead door from parking that was the primary use even if you maintain the glass ones on the sidewalk from my perspective. So yeah, that would also be going through. What does snow removal look like for this area with all the parking in boulevards?

Chair and commissioner, that's a good question. I I think it will remain relatively unchanged because the site is completely hardcaped right now anyway. Um and they're all public streets and a public parking lot. So I don't think much would change from a snow storage and snow handling perspective, but it's a question we can run by our public works department

and the the homeowners association will eventually take over this building once we sell out the 10 condos. That association will do the sweeping of snow on the sidewalks and maintaining that the driveway down. Only other random thought that I had when looking at the layout is for the garage down below um for the residence. I noticed that the man door for the elevator area is right next to the garage door. Is that all going to be locked down so that like nobody can like any random person can go through there or how is that safety going to look? Yeah, that's definitely something that we'll we'll have to I mean often we use key fobs and and then there'll be a fob only access into the garage and so um and then sometimes we even put like a security gate at level one so that it kind of forces you out so you can't continue up into the unit so it would force people through the if they were to somehow breach both layers of security. Um that would force you out through the first floor through the lobby. Um but uh all of those things are going to be of utmost important to the residents. So it yeah I um yeah we will definitely have a comprehensive security strategy there.

Okay. Any other questions, comments? All right. Hearing none. Thank you. Appreciate the discussion. Thanks for the comments.

Doesn't require any formal action as Brian said. So we'll move on. Our second and final item for discussion tonight is item 3.2. Uh we'll continue our march through proposed zoning code article three. This time focusing on the district regulations and performance standards for residential districts. I'll now turn the podium over to associate planner Travis Brierly for a staff presentation. Travis good evening chair and commissioners. Tonight is the last part of the performance standards that we're going to be taking a look at um as we go through the performance standards within our code. Here's a quick background um of why we're going through this. It's because our current code, the way we looked at it over the last year, uh we've identified over 500 or about 500 items or so that we need to review within our zoning code. anywhere from grammatical to application to legality to different things like that. Um, last year in 2024, we addressed some of our more immediate matters such as our business districts, additional use permits, sign ores, and fence ordinances. And as we go through this process, I just want to remind everybody, we want to be transparent as we can through the process. We want to make sure that we're available for questions and comments. Um, primarily staff in that regard. We're more than happy to take any questions or comments from anybody on the commission or anybody within the community that's interested in how this process is going. Uh we also want to make sure that we're flexible with this process. Uh decisions and comments that are made today does not necessarily mean that they may not be questioned in the future or they would change something that's already had a decision on. We're making sure we redline so we can bring all that information back. Um, this is also being done as an update in conjunction with the municipal code with

the end goal of wanting to recodify zoning code, municipal code, different things, but they are things that overlap and we need to make sure that we're responsible in that nature. So, the process overall, we're going to review the proposed language for the zoning code. Um, that's anything from bulk standards, foreign standards, overlay district, admin, administrative, and clerical. Um, so that's what we're looking at today. the full review of the zoning code uh is based on uh an updated format as well as new information that comes to the planning commission. Um so there's also some housekeeping items we'll have to take care of as far as a balancing act between where things should go between municipal and zoning code. So not everything in the current zoning code is going to get looked at by the planning commission. And like I said, we're also tracking changes. Everything that's being presented publicly in the packets is getting redlined as well as a summary document being produced um that lists out all the changes. Tonight we are looking specifically at article 3, the district regulations in our residential districts. Um and this is a additional standard that would be applied compared to looking at our all district standard which we looked at just a couple meetings ago. that sets a base and looking at type of actions. This is looking more at the zoning and what actions are allowed within those specific zoning districts. Uh this does fall underneath our performance standards uh that we have. Um just to recap where we've been, we've looked at district classification and uses. Uh we have a list of all the district classifications that are in here including proposed modifications such as the R1A, such as the Lake Mitanka residential becoming an overlay. uh the implementation of a bluff land conservation area, flood plane management zones and things like that. We looked at the performance standards for all districts including the intent of what we're looking at. Uh ran through

all those different things. You'll notice some things in there are going to be similar to things we're going to talk about tonight or we talked about at the last meeting when looking at business districts specifically. And we looked at the business districts, same thing. Looked at more specific requirements for parking. CBD, which was part of the discussion earlier tonight for our central business district. So, that would be an example of being more specific than just a general standard. Um, for residential districts, uh, tonight we're going to look at, uh, decks and porches, lighting, agurism, design and construction requirement, home occupations, residential building design review standards, off- streetet parking, and anti- monotony and design requirements. First thing to take a look at uh decks and porches. Pretty simple stuff in there. Additional requirements. So, we want to make sure that we identify canal levers. Um and how we're going to measure a deck and it setbacks. So, we're going to measure from the post allowing a 3-ft canlever all falls with inside building code. Um attached decks if they're part of the principal structure. They're still counted as needing to meet the setback. So, that is not a not a change what we're doing. Um, and the deck itself doesn't count towards impervious cover. It would be the surface at the bottom if that's impervious or not. So, those are those are not changes that we currently have within our current code. Uh, lighting is the next thing that we're looking at. Um, it it's always a question of how lighting works, especially in residential districts, single family, people like to illuminate their yard, security purposes and things like that. So, we still want to make sure that uh homeowners can feel secure if they feel that they need to secure their property more um than just a standard thing. So, uh we don't want lighting to be directed at other properties as it could interfere with sleeping or just the joy of your own property. Um the glare and indirect, we also want to set a standard for how much light pollution can go into your yard um affecting your neighbors or affecting

your property as far as your enjoyment. as well as looking at what can go into the street and the reason for the street safety of pedestrians, safety of traffic itself. Uh agro tourism uh is a new concept that was uh presented and something that has has been asked for in some of our larger more rural properties that we have. Uh agurism is basically think about it as you have a small Harvey farm and you want to teach third graders about how to raise chickens or goats or or what have you. Um that is listed as a conditional use or excuse me as an interim use within our code. It's only in our agricultural and rural residential areas and would have a minimum lot size of 2 acres um which would stay consistent with the type of zoning that we have with that. Next thing we're looking at is the design and construction requirements. Uh there's a uh interim use and conditional use statement and the process how we're going to go through that and how to review. That includes planning commission's role, city council's role, laying out the documents that we need to look at. Same as when we look at a sketch plat, there's a list of all the different things that they need to submit before we complete their application, bring it forward to be looked at publicly. Uh type one and type two construction requirements. um that is based on a type of material and their construct or in their combustibility. A type one is more fire retardant. Type two has fire resistance, things like that. Um I'd love to get into the details on what those are, but that would be uh the building official would have to respond to those more specifically. Um we also look at when you're doing multifamily, uh 20% efficiency uh units or studio apartments with inside a building. That's to keep the value up. best land use, best tax space that we can get for the community. Um, also looking at minimum storage space for one, two, and threebedroom units. We want to make sure when people move in that it is the nicer

apartments. It is the better use of the property. It does increase the value of it, which goes back to our tax base and how much we pay in taxes in the city. Um, looking at window HVAC units, uh, we want to make sure that they're not being disruptive. So encouraging them if there's a location to place them um sticking out of a window which isn't disruptive to an adjacent property, making sure that's in there. Mind you, this is focused on not only or this is more focused towards your apartment type buildings, not necessarily your single family. Um thus encouraged, not required. Um trash storage, looking at making sure that trash is screened and setting minimum standards for that. If you're in a four units or greater trash, you can have the community trash, but now you need to make sure the containers are screened generally with an enclosed box with sixoot fence. It's just a way you don't want to be driving down the street and just see it out in the backyard or the front yard or just hanging out in the parking lot. And um so uh also looking at elevator requirements, making sure that when you go different stores, you have it with elevators. It's kind of weird that that you'd see it in here, but underneath building code, there are certain exceptions that allow for it depending on the type of the construction of the building. So, this just is another way to reinforce that. At the end of the day, building code will be enforced. And if building code supersedes what we have, it's more restrictive, we will go with that part of the code um to go in there. Uh we're also looking at the same design of a principle and accessory structure when you're looking at multif family. Um, I do want to point out that that's the same design. Later, we're it's going to be a little bit different. Uh, home occupations. Um, in our code, we allow for home occupations. We don't have any regulations on home occupations. Um, right now, we don't know why, but we want to get that corrected. Home the purpose of a home occupation is to work from home, not to run a retail business out of your home.

So limiting the amount of employees that you can have, family members plus one employee, no more 20% of the occupiable space of of your dwelling. So you have your office set up or part of your basement. You do uh whatever craft it is that that you're good at. Um you're not doing on-site sales, so there's no retail component. Um you're not you wouldn't be renovating your home to operate a business. Uh that wouldn't be a typical that you would see within a home. So, if you need to create some type of manufacturing facility in your basement, that's not typical that you'd see in a house. So, therefore, it wouldn't be permitted. Um, parking and traffic disruptions. You can't change the the traffic standards. If you're have a home occupation, the idea is that unless somebody knows that you're doing it, a regular passer by should have no idea that's going on. It should not disrupt the neighborhood. You are permitted to have a sign. That falls underneath our sign regulation. And this provides more guidance into what you're allowed to do. You should still be able to advertise if you're running a business and be proud of your business, but it shouldn't be to the point that your home looks like it's a business rather than being that single family home. Um, and it's not and you're not permitted to use your accessory structure for it. So, you can't be running your business out of your garage. Um, it'd be great if we had another Bill Gates who started his garage, but unfortunately with this, if you're using your garage, your garage is non occupiable space. It also allows for more expansion and if it could be more noise and things like that, disruptions. We want to avoid that type of stuff. We want to encourage people to use their home but to a level that doesn't cause that full disruption.

Travis, can I ask a question on that one? Yes, sir. Or do you want to wait till the end? Go right ahead, Commissioner. I just want to make sure and I think I've read this the right way, but there's a big rise in work from home. This has nothing to do with work from home, right? It's purely only for people who are literally listing their home address as their business LLC, whatever. Right,

Commissioner? That's correct. This is not work from home. So, if if you work a bit if you work a job or you work remotely and you work from home, this is not that. This is if if I want to start say um Travis's consulting firm, I could run it out of my home, but now there's regulations on how much of my home I can use because we still need to make sure the primary focus of my residence is a house. But if it's, you know, I'm going to work from home tomorrow for the city and I can be on my laptop, that's not this. Or if you're a coder that works remotely for a company, it's that's not this. I I have the same question, Traverse. Um, is there a is there a definition of home occupation somewhere to make it clear that it we're not trying to stop people from working for home?

There is what what it is is the simple way to do it is if you're running a business out of your home. No, I understand now, but I just meant in the in the code itself is there if there's a definition that would be helpful just to make sure that because I had the same thought. I mean, we don't want there are two spouses sometimes uh sometimes others that work from home and we just don't want to prevent that. Yeah, you're saying so

we took a look at definitions a few meetings ago and home occupation was in their home occupation means any gainful occupation profession clearly secondary to the main use of the dwelling as a residence which is conducted uh entirely within the dwelling. So this isn't working from home. This is operating your business from your home. Okay. But that wouldn't have any other like qualification of like if you have like a tax ID that says you're a business or that's starting to get that's starting to get into a different realm. Okay.

The intent is to stay a little bit more broader. If you have a uh massage therapy business and you want to use uh your den to run your massage therapy, you get a license from the city. It's a home occupation. You need your condition use permit for it. If you want to run a tax service out of your home and do people's taxes in January and February and March and you have a room set up in your home to be able to do it, absolutely fine. You're still operating your business or your accounting firm out of that property. As far as where it's registered and things like that, that would be part if there's a complaint, that would be part of the investigative process to determine whether it's actually being used for the home or not.

Okay, Travis, one last question. Um, I think I think there's a separate section that covers inhome daycare. Correct me if I'm wrong, but like does this conflict with that at all? If your home occupation is an inhome daycare, technically your whole home could be or one floor is your daycare. Commissioner, that's an excellent question. Um, daycarees are not considered a home occupation because the property is being used as a business. That falls underneath state regulations which we're not going to infringe with or try to make modifications to. But that is an excellent question. That that's a different thing. It'd be the same as uh if it was a group home. Group homes are allowed within anywhere that single family homes are allowed. This does not supersede that state state permission.

Clarifying businesses like uh you own a lawn care company. Can you store the equipment in your garage? We're talking about accessory structures now. So I'm curious where we start to bleed across that line. You wouldn't be able to use the accessory structures. And the main reason for it is that you're going to have coming and going if you're operating a business and now your garage is being used for the purpose of a commercial enterprise rather than the parking of your vehicle which by definition is the purpose of a garage. Thank you. Okay. All right.

And the next part that we're looking at is the residential design re and uh review standards. Uh this particular section is towards our R1 and R1A districts. Um I do apologize in the in what went out the R1A wasn't listed. So that is an update that's been done um to it. Uh this is for new buildings. They need to fit within the neighborhood. When we were talking about infield development and putting say a McMansion in an older part of the community where it wouldn't fit, these regulations say doesn't matter. any R1 or R1A have to be similar to the neighborhood. So, you can't have anything stick out huge. The other thing is making sure entrances face the street. Uh window requirements of 15%. Uh it's may seem like a lot to some people. It's really not that much and just about any home that you see in town is meeting that requirement already, especially with new development. uh uh you have a general setback statement regardless of the footage based saying you have to have a yard period. So if we went to an area where say a variance was granted to reduce the setbacks for a front yard you the city council would need to look at and the planning commission need to look at it as a way of saying is there still a front yard. So this is a generalized statement that's put in there to make sure that that's part of the thought process that goes forward during review. uh principal and accessory structures need to be of similar design. So for single family homes, you're looking at similar designs. For your multifamily, you're looking at the same design. Uh there's a good distinction between that. If you want to have a home that has lap siding and then you want to put in a aluminum or steel shed, those would not be similar design. The shed would stick out. You want it to blend in, but you also don't want to limit the ability for single family property owners to have have a shed or have a second garage on their property, but you just don't want

it to stick out. So, similar design. Uh, it is a loose term. The context for it is going to be under reasonable understanding and reasonable application of the intent of the language by staff. The other thing that we're looking at is encouraged to preserve trees in here. When there is development or redevelopment with inside of R1 and R1A, we want to encourage that trees are kept. You don't want to take down trees that would affect your neighbor. We have tree preservation requirements, but it doesn't say that you should that you have to keep, you know, the shade tree that's adjacent to the property because it shades the neighbor's deck. This would say, hey, you should think about that and be encouraged not to change how taking down trees affect the adjacent properties. Um this is it's encouraging language. Um there is some intent to it but like I said it's to encourage it's to help guide um which is the intent of anytime we look at design or uh design standards for any building or any district that we have. Uh we're also looking at off- streetet parking uh parking facilities. So parking lots uh gets treated the same as an accessory structure as far as the setbacks go. So, if there isn't something specific towards it, this allows that to go into place. This is going to be more for our R2 and R3 districts, which is going to be your um your town homes, your row houses, and your multif family buildings and apartments, condos, things like that. Um the architecturally compatible, if you're putting in an off- streetet parking area and it's enclosed, that garage should be compatible with the design of the principal structure. Uh same thing with a parking lot. looking at where it goes if you have one. It needs to be compatible with the neighborhood that it's in. Um, so we want to make sure that we want to make sure we're screening headlights. If people are turning into a parking space, say in a multifamily or or turning down the street into a town home, we want to make sure that where they're parking

doesn't shine headlights directly into someone's living room or bedroom or what have you, creating a nuisance. We want to avoid that. Um, and then the parking requirements are based on the intended use of the property. Uh that's going to be the initial use of the redeveloped use and then we have a whole list of all the parking requirements that we already have for spaces listed elsewhere in the code. Um the fun one that we came across and has been asked for is an anti- monotony and design requirements. This is specific to new development. This is not for infill housing. So if somebody purchased a property, took down the home, built a new home, they're not subject to this. This is if we have a new development coming in and I do want to preface this is in the zoning code rather than putting in the subdivision code because we want to apply this going forward as well as some of the application processes that happen in the background. But the entire goal of this is to avoid the same house from being built over and over and over and over going down the street. Suburbia is great, but we still want some variety in the housing stock that exists. So that's anything from the design of the home to the color scheme, patterns, outside texture, all types of things could go in there. It's just to break it up. Um it is part of the uh this is part of the PUB process where the planning commission and the city council would be able to ask for renderings of the type of homes that would be built um including colors and design and things of that nature. It would also allow the planning commission or the city council in the PD process say, you know what, it's okay. We can do uh monot or monot I'm going to mess with monotony throughout the development similar to kind of what we see down in the Marsh Hollow neighborhood as well as some of the other neighborhoods that have been built over the last 15 years. Um so, uh but that would be at the discretion of the city council under the recommendation of the planning commission at that time. Can you clarify? Does that only apply to

R1 and R1A? Then this applies to new development zone R1 and R1A. Uh, it it would if it could be R not R1A. Okay.

It it could be R1, R1A, R2, R3. It realistically it applies to all residential zoning districts. Now, the the reality is we're probably not going to have somebody come forward and say, I want to build 12 apartment buildings in a row or 12 condo buildings in a row. but they'll come forward and say, "We're looking at building town homes or single family homes or row houses or twin homes." Uh, Victoria Ridge is an example of that where you have twin homes and town homes as part of the development. Well, the planning commission and the city council could review and say, "Okay, we don't want them all the same color. We'd like to see some variety of color. What can we do?" Or maybe you say, you know, totally good. everything can be the same color, look exactly the same. That's fine, too. And but that would fall under the PUD standards. They would have to ask to have that exception made.

I may have misread Travis, but I thought that HOA covered developments were excluded from the anti- monotony regul. The HOA developments are that is correct. Often town home developments are exactly as you described, monotonous. They're all the same color, same shape, same everything. mine is

but the one of the so one of the things that we look at uh chair and commission is if it's HOA that's fantastic but it may not be HOA HOA is not a requirement of every development that goes on in town so we want to make sure we cover if it's not um an example would be we looked at a proposal um just a few meetings ago for I believe it was 16 homes on the east side or north or the eastern side of town there's no HOA for that Brookmore more development doesn't have an HOA. Um, so that's where these would apply to. But none of this would apply to commercial, right? So the commercial district in the south part of town, this is just residential.

Should we stay that it only applies to new development? It commissioner um it does state that in the in the language. I'm looking at um 3-35 section 8 anti- monotony anti- monotony and design requirements and detached single family residential developments is is the title. So it only applies that single family excuse me let me back out. It only applies to the single family detached. Would it be more clarifying to put in new residential developments or new detached single family residential uh as a zoning code, it wouldn't apply to any existing. It would only apply to new new developments as the

implies already that it's new. Yeah. Okay. I I think it could be more clarified.

So that means it doesn't apply to town houses, correct? I I apologize, Mr. Remember, that it only applies to detached single family. So that's your Brookmore, that's your uh Marsh Hollow, that's G or well part of the Marsh Hollow, it's going to be your Hunter Glenn and developments like that. So what we're traditionally seeing for single family developments, but that wouldn't then apply to what's that other one that I think LAR was looking at building and they have like the single family but then also the town homes. So So it would apply to single family but not the town homes in that same correct

build. Okay. I do apologize. Um, a lot of the language that's in here actually, uh, CHASA did a really good job creating this a number of years ago. Uh, we reviewed it and made almost no changes to it. There's a couple small things we had to to correct and update besides taking Chaza out of it, but um, it it it's really well written and we've looked at some of their developments and they've had pretty good success with it.

Okay. Now, with that, that is the last part of the of the code that goes in here. Um, future uh meetings, we're going to be looking at the um the uses within districts. Uh if we get if uh the commission wants, we can also take a look at those tonight. Um I haven't prepar prepared slides, but it's something that has been looked at before and we can give a quick presentation on that as well. And then the other thing we want to do is make sure during the next meeting that we set aside any time to go through any additional comments, questions, concerns, uh, and things like that. Uh, we will provide a full red line of any of the changes that we made as well as addressing any confusion that uh, staff specifically me created such as anti- monotony, which I apologize. And then the next phase of the review, we're going to start looking at special overlay districts. Uh right now the shoreland district is an overlay district. The rest are going to be some new stuff to take a look at and flood plane management. Excuse me. That's in there as well. But we we'll get through all those when we get there. Um plan on doing a similar style the same way we did this. We're just going to all the special overlay districts. We'll present we'll put every single one in the packet and then we'll identify which ones we'll talk about. uh staff will go through, we'll make sure to put notes of all the different parts to it. Uh for the most part, overlay districts aren't regulated or aren't written by the city. A lot of times we take our guidance from other agencies such as the DNR. So, or Met Council in some cases. With that, I'm more than happy to stand for any questions on anything we covered or clarify any um any uh gaps in my presentation.

Thank you, Travis. I think we'll leave it there for for tonight. we won't advance to other sections but appreciate that. I'll now open the floor for the planning commission to discuss raise any questions. I had one question on the accessory dwelling unit. We define it as a purpose but where would I find how do ADUs fit within like setbacks and um impervious and so on and so forth? I mean we don't am I missing something? and I don't see it defined anywhere.

Commissioner, uh, an ADU by definition is considered an accessory structure if it's detached. If it is, if it's attached to the building or part of the the home, then it has to meet the principal yard setbacks. Uh, as far as imperous cover and everything else, it all falls within the same regulation. But if it's not attached, if it's not attached, it's an accessory structure. Um, and and doesn't that still technically fall under all of that? that like you can't just build a giant shed and then have it be over like 35% impervious cuz then that falls outside of the guidelines. Correct. You're you're still within all that. So if you put up an an ADU that is an accessory structure.

So underneath the rules that are that are laid out that are proposed if you want to build a detached ADU that that could be your second accessory structure that's limited on the property. So if you have an attached garage and a detached ADU, no shed. Okay. So where my confusion is coming from then under permitted uses we define accessory structures and then we and then the next bullet is um accessory dwelling units.

Commissioner, can I ask what section you're looking at or what page you're on? Uh I am looking at 346 section 3-46. I believe the ADU has more restrictions with it because the ADU is like a in-law suite or a you know it should yeah guest house. more livable where like anything else would be anything outside of a ADU would be a shed or pool house or something else that not living structure.

Chair and commissioners question and I think we could be a little bit clearer on is in our permitted uses accessory use we define those as different things. We have accessory dwelling unit and then we have accessory structure and it lists out you know where they're permitted. But if I go back to 3-7, it says no accessory structure. And if we're lumping them together, then we have a provision here that says no accessory structure shall at any time be used as a habitable building.

Okay? So, it's not clear to me that if an ADU is an accessory structure, then it's habitable or or we're going to define it as a separate term, in which case then we should say what parameters apply or not. I'm going to suggest it's a it's a really good point and it could be clarified, but why don't we take it offline and have you speak with Travis and and maybe get to the bottom of that one.

Sure. And chair and commissioners, I was just going to highlight that an accessory structure can apply for an accessory dwelling unit, but once you fall into accessory dwelling unit, that's a use of a structure. Yeah. Where you're making internal modifications like a kitchen, a bathroom, everything you need to make a habitable space. So, there are different regulations. I I understand where uh Commissioner Bean is coming from. We'll definitely look into it and discuss offline. Okay. So maybe you can take it offline and talk through it. Very good. Other comments, questions? I have one small one for you, Travis. In sec on page Roman 3-30, u I think now having heard your presentation, I understand in paragraph 1B, decks attached to the principal structure shall meet the setbacks of the principal structure and shall be not be counted towards the footprint. I thought that was confusing initially. And I think I now understand that the first clause is meant to say that if you have a deck, it has to meet the setback requirements generally for the for the structure, but that you don't count the deck to towards the impervious. It just my input would be maybe break that into B and C and because I think it's confusing the way it's written right now and and perhaps reference impervious in the in the second quality shall not be counted towards the footprint of the principal structure for purposes of calculating the impervious footage of the of the structure.

Absolutely. We could separate that out for clarification. Just thought it would be better simple. Yeah. Uh the where this language comes from is actually a DNR standard within our shoreland where the DNR doesn't count decks as the impervious cover as long as makes sense. But we'll we'll clarify that and get that uh redlinined. Okay. Other comments, questions, concerns. So we could clarify um the residential building design as we talked about. If you're going to be doing like an urban infill, it has to meet the character of know the adjacent buildings. I don't it was on page Excuse me. 15 of your presentation. 17. No, 18. In your slide deck that I was on 18, it talked about

I I wasn't able to quickly find it in this section. Um, talking in here, new buildings to fit within the neighborhood. So, I was just curious what the language how explicit that can be. Um, I apologize. I was trying to flip through and find it.

That's quite all right. I'm trying to get here as fast as we can. All right. So, in here it specifically states, this is on uh page 3-33 uh for the page numbers at the bottom of the proposed ordinance. Design building standards. Relationship to adjacent buildings. All new buildings proposed on existing vacant lots that become vacant through demolition shall relate to the design of adjacent traditional buildings in scale, size, proportions, and character. This can be achieved by maintaining similar setbacks, facade divisions, proportions, porch elements, roof, roof form and lines, rhythms and proportions of openings, building materials, designs, colors, historic architectural styles that need to be replicated. Um there a lot of this will come down to a discretion uh during the review process if an application comes in uh which if for a single home being demolished and becoming vacant to have a new one built that discretion is going to generally lie with staff it that doesn't none of those type of applications for the planning commission. So, what we would do is we would look at the design of the home and if somebody's looking at putting a super modern building in a traditional part of town, we would say, "Well, we have this language that says that that's out of place."

Um, and then we would ask for revisions going forward. There's no clear line of what that means, but it a lot of, like I said, will come down to discretion. And this is to provide guidance to stay within the traditional. Or if we do get super modern, brand new neighborhood somewhere in town where everything looks like a sculpture, one of the homes gets taken down, you got to build a new sculpture. Sure. Very good. Commissioners, any other questions?

If not, thank you everyone. That concludes our um formal items tonight. This one uh does not require a formal motion. So, we'll move on uh to the miscellaneous section of our agenda. Um Brian, Travis, any miscellaneous items?

Yeah. Uh just our next meeting is on September 2nd, so I know that's the day after Labor Day, so if you're planning on missing it, just reach out to us so that we can make sure we have a quorum. Uh we do have two applications for that meeting scheduled. The first one being a sketch plat review for the master plan for our future downtown west uh commercial residential mixeduse expansion. So that's going to be a pretty exciting one uh for everyone to review. And then also Hometown Bank is coming back with their preliminary plat resubmitt. So that one will have a public hearing and we absolutely need a quorum for. So please let me know as soon as possible if you're not able to make it. That's all from staff.

Very good. Commissioners. Um, anyone have any miscellaneous items?

Quick curiosity because we were talking about R1A. Uh, I was curious if that I can't remember the parcel on Victoria Drive came back and split. Did that get ever get resolved? Uh, we have not formally adopted or the city hasn't adopted an R1A. Uh, the intent is to bring the R1A to the next council or next week's council workshop to let them take a look at the language as well as the feedback provided by the planning commission. And then after that, it'll be determined if a public hearing will be scheduled. Um, and if a public hearing is scheduled, that'll be heard by the planning commission. The earliest that would be would probably be the second meeting in September is is likely when that would take place with potential formal adoption in early to late October.

Thanks. Very good. Any others? Was there any more discussion from the state on that missing middle? um language legislation. Yeah, chair and commissioners. Um Commissioner Shower, that's a great question. So, I am part of the legislative review committee with the League of Minnesota Cities for this legislative session. So, we actually did have a speaker discuss uh some points on that today. So, yes, we do expect it to come back in some form, but it hasn't come yet. I will let you all know if there's something new to read on that matter. Thank you.

Excellent. Um, anything else? If not, um, no more items this evening. Can I ask for a motion to adjurnn? Make a motion to adjurnn. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? Any opposed? They are ajourned. Thank you, everyone.