[CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL]
[00:00:03]
OFFICER ELECTIONS ARE HELD ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
THE ELECTION PROCESS WILL GO AS FOLLOWS.
WE'LL TAKE NOMINATIONS FOR THE CHAIR, THE VICE CHAIR, AND THE TREASURY/SECRETARY.
AND THEN IF THERE AREN'T ANY MORE THAN ONE NOMINATION FOR EACH, THEN WE CAN, MOVE TO APPROVE THOSE NOMINATIONS ALTOGETHER.
SO DO I HAVE NOMINATIONS FOR A CHAIR? BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, CAN YOU REMIND US WHO IS UP, WHO'S NOT GOING TO BE HERE NEXT YEAR? YEP. I THINK IT WAS MARK VARGAS, CLARA WOLFE.
AND THEN, MIKE NOVITSKY THEY'RE UP.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE TIMELINE AND SCHEDULE.
THE APPLICATIONS ARE OPEN RIGHT NOW.
SO IF YOU ARE ON THE COMMISSION AND INTERESTED IN REAPPLYING, PLEASE.
I COULD HAVE SWORN I HAD ONE MORE YEAR.
THAT WAS PRESENTED AT LAST NIGHT'S WORK SESSION.
BUT WE'LL WE'LL CONFIRM AND MAKE SURE WHO IS UP TO GET THAT BACK TO YOU.
BUT CURRENT SLATE, CAN YOU, WHO ARE THE OFFICERS FOR THIS YEAR? CURRENT CHAIR IS TOM KAISER, VICE CHAIR IS ERIC, AND THEN THE TREASURY/SECRETARY IS MARK VARGAS.
I THINK THAT'S REVERSE FOR ERIC AND TOM.
REVERSE? OH, THAT'S WHAT'S IN OUR SPREADSHEET.
AND THIS IS RIGHT THOUGH THE WAY THAT THEY HAVE IT.
SO NOW THAT IT'S MY TERM IS COMING TO AN END, IF YOU WANT TO REFER TO ME AS THE OUTGOING CHAIR.
THAT'S FAIR. VERY HAPPY ABOUT THAT.
[LAUGHTER] SO DO I HAVE A NOMINATION FOR THE CHAIR? ANOTHER QUESTION. CAN OUTGOING MEMBERS NOMINATE OTHER PEOPLE? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. I GUESS, I WOULD NOMINATE COMMISSIONER WOLFE FOR CHAIR.
I HAVE A MOTION BY SAHNOW AND SECOND BY KAISER.
SORRY. WE'LL GO TO, ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ALL RIGHT. WE CAN MOVE ON TO VICE CHAIR NOW.
DO I HEAR, NOMINATIONS FOR A VICE CHAIR? I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE COMMISSION MEMBER VARGAS FOR VICE CHAIR.
SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY KAISER.
SECOND BY SAHNOW. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OH, SORRY.
NOT DOING THAT YET. WE'RE GOING TO SECRETARY OF TREASURY NEXT.
DO I HEAR NOMINATIONS FOR SECRETARY AND TREASURY? AS THE OUTGOING TREASURER, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE GIANOULIS FOR THE SECRETARY TREASURER PLANNING POSITION.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO I'VE GOT, NOMINATION FOR COMMISSIONER WOLFE AS CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER GIANOULIS AS VICE CHAIR.
OH, SORRY. IT WAS VARGAS FOR VICE CHAIR.
ALL RIGHT, SO WE'VE GOT, COMMISSIONER WOLFE, YOU'RE NOW THE CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER VARGAS IS NOW THE VICE CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER GIANOULIS IS THE SECRETARY/TREASURER.
THE NEXT ITEM IS APPROVING THE MEETING MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 24TH, 2023, AS AMENDED.
[APPROVE MINUTES]
IF YOU GUYS WANT TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THEM, I KNOW SOME OF THE CHANGES WERE THAT, STAN HOIUM IS NOT ABSENT BECAUSE HE'S NOT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.AND THEN WHETHER THE PARKING WOULD BE ADEQUATE AT THEIR NEW FACILITY.
SECONDED. I HAVE A MOTION BY KAISER AND A SECOND BY DENEEN.
[00:05:04]
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.MIC] ERIC, DO YOU FINISH OUT THIS MEETING THEN? OKAY, SO THE FIRST CASE THAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU IS REGARDING 1650 40TH AVENUE AND 3987 JOHNSON
[PUBLIC HEARINGS]
STREET NORTHEAST.IT'S A UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION AND A PROPOSED ORDINANCE VACATING, ROADWAY EASEMENTS.
AND THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS APPLIED FOR THIS.
IT'S OUR EASEMENT. IT JUST KIND OF MADE SENSE FOR US TO.
BE THE ONES TO KIND OF CORRECT THIS.
WE MADE APPLICATION TO VACATE UTILITY AND ROADWAY EASEMENTS SERVING THE PROPERTIES THAT I MENTIONED 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST AND 3987 JOHNSON STREET NORTHEAST.
AND SO ONE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS TECHNICALLY OWNS PART OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THE EASEMENT DOESN'T REFLECT WHERE THE ROAD WAS ACTUALLY BUILT OUT.
SO WE ARE PROPOSING AN EASEMENT VACATION FOR THESE.
AND THEN AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE NEW EASEMENTS TO SERVE THESE PROPERTIES.
THIS IS SUBJECT TO REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR EASEMENT VACATIONS PER 9.104 J AND SECTION 111 OF THE CITY CHARTER VACATION OF STREETS.
AND THIS IS JUST KIND OF AN EXISTING EXHIBIT.
SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE PROPERTY OWNER ON 40TH, HAS A SIGNIFICANT CHUNK OF THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND THEN YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HOW THERE'S EASEMENTS THAT DON'T ALIGN WITH WHERE THAT WAS ACTUALLY BUILT OUT.
JOHNSON STREET CURVES TO MAKE A 90 DEGREE TURN, AND IT WAS PLATTED ORIGINALLY AND DEDICATED IN THAT STRAIGHT, ANGULAR, CONFIGURATION. SO JUST CORRECTING STAFF DON'T KNOW THE FULL HISTORY OF HOW THAT EVOLVED IN AT THE TIME, BUT NEVERTHELESS IT HAS CREATED SOME INTERESTING, EASEMENT CONFIGURATIONS AND RIGHT OF WAY CONFIGURATIONS THAT ARE ENCUMBERING THE NEXT APPLICATION IN THE PIPELINE FROM EXPANDING THEIR GARAGE.
SO THAT IS WHAT INITIATED THIS ENTIRE INVESTIGATION.
AND, YOU KNOW, PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE CITY RATHER THAN PUT THE, OBLIGATION ON THE HOMEOWNER TO CORRECT IT, EVEN THOUGH THEIR PROJECT WAS DRIVING THE NEED, THE CITY RECOGNIZED THAT IT'S THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CLEAN UP THE UNDERLYING, RIGHT OF WAY ISSUES.
AND THEN WITH THIS EXHIBIT AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IF YOU WANT TO SKIP TO THAT.
THIS JUST KIND OF SHOWS YOU ALL THE DIFFERENT EASEMENTS THAT WE'RE VACATING.
THERE IS A SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, A ROADWAY EASEMENTS, AN UNDEVELOPED ALLEY, THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR JOHNSON STREET NORTHEAST, AND THEN A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL, ROADWAY EASEMENTS.
VACATING THE EASEMENTS. ARE WE THEN REDRAWING THE EASEMENTS? YEP.
YEP. IT'S KIND OF IT GOES THROUGH A SITE LIKE A SEQUENCE KIND OF WE VACATE THE ORIGINAL ONES.
NEXT CASE WOULD BE PROPOSING NEW ONES.
THANK YOU. NEXT? YEP. IS THERE A PROCESS IN REPORTING THE VACATION OF THE EASEMENTS TO THE COUNTY SURVEYOR THROUGH THE CITY? YEP. WE WOULD BE AS THE APPLICANT, WE WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR FILING THOSE, EASEMENT VACATIONS WITH THE COUNTY.
[00:10:01]
SO THERE ARE EIGHT EASEMENTS THAT ARE SERVING 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST AND 3987 JOHNSON STREET, PROPOSED FOR VACATION, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS WITH THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ATTACHED TO THE REPORT.WE HAVE A SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PER DOCUMENT NUMBER 177165, A ROADWAY EASEMENT PER DOCUMENT NUMBER 217982 A ROADWAY EASEMENT PER DOCUMENT NUMBER 727283.
THE UNDEVELOPED ALLEY PER WALTON'S 1ST SUBDIVISION OF RESERVOIR HILLS.
RIGHT OF WAY FOR JOHNSON STREET NORTHEAST PER ANOKA COUNTY'S HALF SECTION MAP AND THEN ROADWAY EASEMENTS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NUMBERS 727279, 727278 AND 732576.
AND THEN IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, THE GRAY DESCRIBES THE PROPOSED ROADWAY EASEMENT.
AND THEN THE UNSHADED IS THE PROPOSED ALLEY AND ROAD VACATION.
AND THEN WE JUST HAD THEM DRAW UP A PROPOSED DESCRIPTION FOR THE NEW ROAD EASEMENT AS WELL.
FIRST IS THAT NO PRIVATE RIGHTS WILL BE INJURED OR ENDANGERED AS A RESULT OF THE VACATION.
THIS IS CORRECT. THIS ENABLES THE PROPERTY OWNER TO USE MORE OF THEIR PROPERTY AS THEY'RE ABLE TO, AND THAT THE PUBLIC WILL NOT SUFFER LOSS OR INCONVENIENCE AS A RESULT OF THE VACATION. LIKE I SAID, THIS IS VERY MUCH KIND OF LIKE AN ADMINISTRATIVE THING WHERE WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EASEMENTS ACCURATELY REFLECT WHAT'S THERE.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING TO CITY COUNCIL.
MOTION MOVE TO WAIVE THE READINGS OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-011.
THERE BEING AMPLE COPIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-011 VACATING THE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT AT 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE CITY SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF ALL EASEMENTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO BE CREATED AND REVIEWED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FILING THE EASEMENT, VACATIONS, AND PROPOSED EASEMENTS WITH THE ANOKA COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE.
GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS HERE? QUESTIONS. AND THEN.
YOU'VE LOOKED AT THE AS BUILTS FOR THE SANITARY SEWER.
AND THERE'S NO WORRIES ABOUT, THE GARAGE BEING BUILT IN THAT AREA.
THAT WAS LIKE THE FIRST THRESHOLD ISSUE WAS ENGINEERING DID A REVIEW WITH THE HOMEOWNER O NCE WE INITIATED THE WHOLE PROCESS AND WE HAD A LARGE LIKE UTILITY EASEMENT THAT JUST WAS OVERSIZE, AND WE'RE NOT ENTIRELY SURE AND NEEDED TO VERIFY THAT VERY QUESTION THAT NONE OF THOSE UTILITIES ARE ACTUALLY RUNNING THROUGH THE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE.
AND THEY ARE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO HAVE BEEN DEDICATED.
SO THEY, YOU KNOW, RUNNING, YOU KNOW, 10 TO 12FT BEHIND THE CURB EDGE, WHEREAS I DON'T HAVE THE DIMENSIONS, BUT THE WIDTH OF THAT EXISTING EASEMENT WAS 25 PLUS FEET.
I THINK ON THE EXISTING CONDITIONS IT'S CALLED OUT AS 30.
THAT, SANITARY EASEMENT IS MET COUNCIL THE OWNER ON IT.
AND IS IT IN A RELATIONSHIP TO THE FORCE SANITARY LINE THAT'S NEAR THERE? AND WAS THAT ALSO A PROPOSED SITE FOR A LIFT STATION AT ONE TIME? OH. COMMISSIONER VARGAS, YOU MIGHT HAVE TAKEN US OUT OF OUR DEPTH.
I KNOW THE CITY ENGINEER HAS REVIEWED OWNERSHIP, AND, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S GOING TO ENCUMBER, ENCROACH ON, YOU KNOW, ANY OF THE CITY'S NEEDS AND HAS DETERMINED THAT WE STILL WILL RETAIN ALL OF THE ADEQUATE SPACE THAT WE NEED, YOU KNOW, TO OPERATE THAT EASEMENT AND WORK ON UTILITIES.
I CAN'T ANSWER THE LIFT STATION QUESTION.
IT MIGHT BE IN THE DOCUMENTS AS FAR AS WHO ALL IS PARTY TO THE EASEMENT, THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL H
[00:15:03]
AS NOT COME TO MY ATTENTION.SO YEAH, I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT EITHER.
I CAN CHECK WITH [INAUDIBLE] AND GET BACK TO YOU GUYS ON THAT.
CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT? WELL, IF IT'S A SANITARY LINE, NOBODY REALLY KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE UNLESS YOU GO TO THAT D SEGMENT AND THOSE ARE RUN IN HVDPE PIPE, WHICH FLEXES A LITTLE BIT. AND THEY'RE NOT EXACTLY WHERE THEY SAY THEY ARE.
THAT'S WHY YOU CAN LITERALLY GO TO A SANITARY PIPE THAT CROSSES A MAJOR INTERSTATE AND SPEND A DAY LOOKING FOR IT AND NOT FIND IT, BECAUSE IT'S DONE A LITTLE BIT OF VECTORING AND IT'S PRESSURED LINE, SO IT DOESN'T MATTER ANYHOW.
SO THAT'S BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, THAT AREA IS NOT FORCE MAIN AT ALL.
SO YEAH. AND PIONEER ENGINEERING, THEY WENT ON SITE.
THEY CONDUCTED A COUPLE DIFFERENT, IN-PERSON LIKE SURVEYS THEY.
LIKE, ANDREW SAID, THEY HE AND SULMAAN HAVE SPENT SEVERAL MONTHS WORKING AND ANALYZING THIS, AND I KNOW THEY'VE LOOKED AT ALL OF THOSE ANGLES AND MADE THE RECOMMENDATION, AS ANDREW SAID, THAT, THAT THEY SIGN OFF ON IT.
OKAY. I MEAN, THAT SEEMS CONSISTENT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE IN MY PROFESSIONAL LIFE SEEN WHERE THEY VACATED AN EASEMENT AND THEN THEY DETERMINE THAT THERE IS ACTUALLY A GAS PIPE WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO PUT A BUS STATION. SO, JUST MAKING SURE THAT EVERYTHING, INCLUDING PIONEERS, LEVEL OF, WHERE THEY WENT ON THEIR ABCS WITH THEIR, SURVEY, WOULD, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IF THEY JUST WENT A LEVEL, THEY'RE COMING OFF OLD MAPS.
NO, I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THEY WENT AND PHYSICALLY WERE AT THE PROPERTY.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO DETERMINE FROM THE SURVEY DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY PIONEER IN YOUR PACKET, THE LEVEL OF SURVEY THAT YOU'RE REFERENCING, THE ABC? CAN YOU HIT YOUR BUTTON? ARE YOU ON? I'M JUST NOT HEARING YOU.
OKAY. THEY'VE BEEN MORE AND MORE, A POINT OF CONTENTION JUST BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH MORE BURIED STUFF THAN THERE WAS AROUND HERE 20 AND 30 YEARS AGO. SO YEAH, WITH THAT, I THINK EVERYTHING SOUNDS GOOD.
I JUST WAS CURIOUS BECAUSE THIS LOOKS LIKE WHAT I DO.
YOU YOU ARE UNIQUELY PREPARED TO DIVE INTO THIS.
SO I APPRECIATE THE EXTRA ANALYSIS.
AND WE ARE RELYING ON, OUR ENGINEERING STAFF TO FILL THOSE VOIDS FOR US.
BUT VERY, VERY GOOD QUESTIONS.
SO THANK YOU. AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, WE HAVE RUN THIS THROUGH THE CITY ENGINEER THE PAST YEAR.
THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL REVIEW THESE, PROPOSED EASEMENTS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COVERED.
ON A DIFFERENT NOTE, I'M WONDERING IF WE HEARD FROM ANY NEARBY RESIDENTS.
THE OUTREACH? NO, I DID MAIL MAILINGS WITHIN 350FT OF BOTH THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES AND DID NOT RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS FROM ANYONE WRITTEN OR IN PERSON.
YEP. JUST THE TWO MOTIONS THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU.
EACH HAVING THEIR OWN PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL.
YEAH. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ON ZOOM?
[00:20:02]
LET ME DOUBLE CHECK.TO BEAR WITH ANDREW AND I WERE LEARNING.
YEAH. THERE'S NO ONE THAT'S, NO ONE'S ASKED TO COME IN AND NO ONE IN THE LOBBY.
YES. DO WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION, THEN? IS THERE ANYONE HERE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK.
WE'LL TAKE A MOTION TO TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND YOU COULD COMBINE IT WITH A MOTION TO OKAY. DO I MAKE? CAN I MAKE THAT MOTION.
ANYONE CAN. DO I JUST OPEN IT TO.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF THE DRAFT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-012, THERE BEING AMPLE COPIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL RIGHT. AND WE'LL TAKE ANOTHER MOTION WHENEVER SOMEONE'S READY, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE RESOLUTION 202 4-011, VACATING THE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT AT 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
RIGHT. AND FOR SOME REASON, THIS ONE'S UPSIDE DOWN.
I THINK IT'S BECAUSE IT'S WEIRD TO DO IT LIKE, WHY NOT? OF COURSE.
THANKS, ANDREW. THE NEXT ONE IS GOING TO BE PROPOSED UTILITY AND ROADWAY EASEMENTS FOR 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST AND 3987 JOHNSON STREET NORTHEAST.
AND ONCE AGAIN, WE ARE THE APPLICANT.
AND THESE ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO THE REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR EASEMENT VACATIONS PER 9.104 J AND THEN SUBJECT TO SECTION 111 OF THE CITY CHARTER.
WE MADE MOTION TO WAIVE AND RECOMMEND THE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT.
BUT DO WE NEED TO SEPARATELY DO THE ROADWAY EASEMENTS? WE'LL GET TO.
YEAH. MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T MISS ANYTHING.
AND LIKE WITH THE PREVIOUS ONE, WE FOUND THAT THIS IS CORRECT IN BOTH THESE CASES.
WE. OKAY? I'M JUST TO MAKE SURE WHICH.
OKAY, SO WE'RE ON THE ORDINANCE.
DO YOU WANT TO CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE FOR THE COMMISSION, PLEASE? IT SO YOU EASEMENTS NOT ROADWAY OR ALLEY.
SO ROAD RIGHT OF WAY OR ALLEYS.
WE SEPARATE THEM INTO TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THE ROAD AND ALLEY EASEMENTS HAVING A HIGHER STANDARD OF CARE AND HAVING TO ACTUALLY BE VACATED OR ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE RATHER THAN RESOLUTION.
[00:25:05]
SO THERE'S TWO BASKETS ARE VACATED AND ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION.SO THAT'S WHY IT GETS EVEN MORE CLUNKY BECAUSE WE'RE SEPARATING THESE INTO TWO BASKETS, BUT IT'S COVERING THE SAME AREAS, YOU KNOW, AND CROSSING OVER ONE ANOTHER.
BUT THIS IS THE PATH, TWO SEPARATE TYPES OF ACTIONS.
AND I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN HOW THEY'RE BROKEN INTO THOSE TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.
AND ACTUALLY, IF I CAN JUST REFER TO, THE.
OH, WAIT, ACTUALLY, WE'RE GOOD ON THIS.
THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE, WOULD BE VACATING ALL OF THE PROPOSED, LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR THE EASEMENTS AND ROAD VACATIONS AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBITS A AND B, ALL OF THE ROADWAY EXHIBITS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENTS, THE DOCUMENT NUMBERS.
SO, THAT PREVIOUS ONE THAT WE LOOKED AT THAT DOES COVER.
LET'S JUST GO BACK TO THAT FIRST ONE.
THIS WAS JUST A LOT TO UNPACK.
SO THAT WAS THE SAME THEN, WHICH IS A NUMBER LISTED UNDER NUMBER THREE WITH THE VACATION OF EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT.
THERE'S A TWO PARTER FOR THAT ONE.
AND THEN THE 1692 IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
GREAT, BUT ONE OF THEM IS AN ORDINANCE IN NO, WE DIDN'T ACT ON IT SO THERE ARE TWO ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATIONS YEAH. AND THEN FOR THAT FIRST ONE, THANK YOU FOR JUST LETTING US WORK THROUGH THAT.
IF I CAN GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER THREE AND THEN WE CAN JUST, HOW SHOULD WE DO THAT? JUST REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT.
WELL, I GUESS WE DIDN'T OPEN IT FOR THE ORDINANCE SIDE OF THAT.
YEAH, WE'RE NOT IN THAT. SO WE CAN, REOPEN THAT TO FIND THE RIGHT SLIDE MIC]. OKAY.
OKAY, SO THE TWO ACTIONS THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE ON THIS WOULD BE A MOTION TO MOVE TO WAIVE THE READING OF DRAFT ORDINANCE NUMBER 1691, THERE BEING AMPLE COPIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
THEN THE OTHER ONE WOULD BE MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DRAFT ORDINANCE NUMBER 1691, VACATING THE ROADWAY EASEMENTS AND THE EASEMENTS LISTED I N DRAFT ORDINANCE 1691, SERVING 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST AND 3987 JOHNSON STREET NORTHEAST, AS PRESENTED. WE ALSO WANT TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING TOO.
SO, AND THEN REQUEST COMMENTS AGAIN.
SO CAN WE JUST HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[00:30:01]
OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION.DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? REGARDING PART TWO OF THREE OF NUMBER THREE.
WE WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC.
AND THEN WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THIS? I WILL MOVE TO WAIVE THE READING OF DRAFT ORDINANCE NUMBER 1691, THERE BEING AMPLE COPIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC, AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MOTION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION SECOND FOR VARGAS.
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE AYE AYE AYE.
EXCELLENT. NOW I HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DRAFT ORDINANCE NUMBER 1691, VACATING THE ROADWAY EASEMENTS AT 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST AND 3987 JOHNSON STREET NORTHEAST AS PRESENTED.
BACK ON TRACK. ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU GUYS WORKING THROUGH ME ON THAT.
OKAY. NOW, LIKE I SAID, THESE ARE PROPOSED EASEMENTS.
THIS RESOLUTION OR THIS ORDINANCE, WOULD BE TO SET THE NEW PROPOSED EASEMENTS.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING TO CITY COUNCIL MOTION MOVE TO WAIVE THE READING OF DRAFT ORDINANCE NUMBER 1692, THERE BEING AMPLE COPIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE TO WAIVE THE READING OF DRAFT ORDINANCE NUMBER 1692.
THERE BEING AMPLE COPIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION FROM DENEEN SECOND BY VARGAS.
WE ALSO ARE IN A SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARING HERE, SO WE NEED TO, CALL FOR.
WELL, NO CALL FOR ANY COMMENTS.
SO WE NEVER CLOSE THIS HEARING.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST BY ANNOUNCING THE FOURTH ITEM.
WE'RE IN THAT PUBLIC HEARING, SO WE WILL NEED TO CLOSE THIS AFTER ASKING FOR COMMENTS.
AND THEN, YOU'VE ALREADY MADE A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING, WHICH IS FINE.
AND NOW A SEPARATE MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THAT CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CORRECT? I THINK THAT WAS TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO NOW WE CAN MOVE ON THE ITEM.
IF THERE'S A MOTION TO TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DRAFT ORDINANCE NUMBER 1692, ESTABLISHING A NEW PROPOSED ROADWAY EASEMENT SERVICING THE PROPERTIES AT 1650 40TH AVENUE NORTHEAST AND 3987 JOHNSON STREET NORTHEAST, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TWO CONDITIONS ON THE SCREEN.
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. SO MOTION PASSES.
OKAY, LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
THE OTHER TWO WILL BE MUCH EASIER.
I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE WITH THAT.
AND THIS PROPOSAL IS, FOR 1650 40TH AVENUE.
THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO THE OTHER PROPERTY THAT WAS IN THE OTHER TWO OR THE OTHER TWO CASES.
APRIL LAVECK AND KAREN THOMPSON WERE THE APPLICANTS OF A RESIDENTIAL VARIANCE.
BASICALLY ALL THIS WHOLE PROCESS STARTED BECAUSE THE HOMEOWNER REACHED OUT TO US ABOUT A YEAR OR SO AGO, INTENDING TO BUILD AN ADDITION TO THEIR HOUSE, ANOTHER ATTACHED GARAGE, AFTER THEY TOOK DOWN THE EXISTING ONE.
[00:35:01]
VARIANCE, BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUENESS OF THE CORNER LOT.IT'S GOT, TWO STREETS ON BOTH SIDES, DOESN'T HAVE A REAR PROPERTY LINE.
SO THE PROPOSAL IS TO ALLOW FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE TO ENCROACH FIVE FEET AND FIVE INCHES INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT YARD SETBACK PER CITY CODE.
REQUIREMENTS 9.109 C THAT'S, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
BASICALLY, DURING OUR PROCESS WORKING WITH THE HOMEOWNER, WE DISCOVERED THAT THE EXISTING GARAGE WAS PARTIALLY WITHIN THAT EASEMENT AND THAT IF THE OWNER WANTED TO BUILD AN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO VACATE THE EASEMENTS, PROPOSED NEW ONES, AND THEN HAVE OR APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.
VARIANCES ARE SUBJECT TO REQUIRED FINDINGS PER 9.104 G.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS.
THE EXISTING HOUSE CURRENTLY IS WITHIN THAT SETBACK.
SO THIS PROPOSED VARIANCE, WOULD NOT ENCROACH ANY CLOSER TO THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
AS I SAID, THE PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT ABUTTING A DIAGONAL STREET WITH UNIQUE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN RELATION TO NEIGHBORING LOTS, AS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE A REAR LOT LINE. CITY CODE REQUIRES THAT THE LOT LINE HAVING THE SHORTEST DIMENSION OF STREET FRONTAGE IS CONSIDERED THE FRONT LOT LINE, BUT AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION IN 1985, THE STREET FRONTAGE ALONG 40TH WAS CONSIDERED THE FRONT.
SO THE SETBACKS ARE AS FOLLOWS.
THE ATTACHED GARAGE IS PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED 20.4FT FROM THE NORTH FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME DISTANCE AS THE EXISTING PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE.
AS IT ENCROACHES UPON THE FRONT YARD SETBACK.
AND THIS WAS THE PROPOSED ROADWAY EASEMENTS.
YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HOW THAT EASEMENT CHANGES FROM, THAT 30 FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO JUST MORE ACCURATELY REFLECTING THE ROADWAY EASEMENT. AND THIS IS A CONCEPT PLAN, SHOWING THE BUILDING ADDITION.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT DOESN'T ENCROACH ANY CLOSER TO THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
SO IT'S IN LINE WITH WHAT THE EXISTING HOUSE ALREADY HAS.
AND THEN IT MEETS ALL OTHER, ZONING REGULATIONS AT THIS POINT.
STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE VARIANCE MATERIALS AND THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED, INCLUDING FLOOR PLANS, APPLICANT NARRATIVE AND SITE PLAN ILLUSTRATING THE PROPOSED SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE NEW GARAGE AND ITS RELATION TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND STRUCTURES, AS WELL AS THE EASEMENTS THAT WERE DESCRIBED PREVIOUSLY.
THE STRUCTURE AND PROPOSED ADDITIONS ARE WITHIN THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES BUILDING LINE THE FRONT YARD AND DOES NOT INCREASE THE ENCROACHMENT TOWARDS THE SETBACK BEYOND WHAT THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE DOES.
THE FIRST ONE IS BECAUSE OF THE PARTICULAR PHYSICAL SURROUNDINGS OR THE SHAPE, CONFIGURATION, TOPOGRAPHY, OR OTHER CONDITIONS OF THE SPECIFIC PARCEL OF LAND INVOLVED. BASICALLY, APPLYING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO IT AS WRITTEN WOULD CAUSE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES IN CONFORMING TO IT.
THIS IS AN EXISTING CONDITION THAT WAS NOT CAUSED BY THE CURRENT OWNER.
THIS IS HOW THE HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED.
THE PROPOSED GARAGE, AS I SAID, ENCROACHES FIVE FEET AND FIVE INCHES IN THE FRONT YARD S ETBACK THE SAME AMOUNT THAT THE HOUSE ENCROACHES AND WILL BE SERVED BY THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY FROM 40TH.
THE SECOND IS THAT THE CONDITIONS UPON WHICH THE VARIANCE ARE BASED, ARE UNIQUE TO THE SPECIFIC PARCEL OF LAND INVOLVED AND NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER PROPERTIES WITHIN THE SAME ZONING CLASSIFICATION.
IT'S GOT TWO STREETS ON, BOTH OF IT'S ON TWO OF ITS SIDES.
WITH SETBACK REQUIREMENTS THAT DIFFER FROM MOST ON THAT BLOCK.
[00:40:06]
PROPERTY. THEY DIDN'T BUILD THE HOUSE, SO THEY KIND OF MOVED IN AS IS.AND THE LAST IS THAT THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR MATERIALLY INJURIOUS TO THE ENJOYMENT, USE, DEVELOPMENT OR VALUE OF PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY.
THAT'S CORRECT. THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WOULD RESULT IN A NEW FUNCTIONING TWO CAR GARAGE FOR THE PROPERTY THAT WILL ENHANCE THE OVERALL FUNCTIONALITY AND ESTHETIC OF THE SITE. THIS WILL PROVIDE MORE ADEQUATE ON SITE PARKING AND WILL CONTRIBUTE TO THE IMPROVED VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING TO CITY COUNCIL.
THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO ACTIONS.
FIRST IS A MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-012, THERE BEING AMPLE COPIES AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC, AND THEN A MOTION TO MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-012 ALLOWING A FIVE FOOT FIVE INCH ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN YOUR PACKET.
I HAVE A SINGLE QUESTION ABOUT THE DIMENSIONING OF FIVE FOOT FIVE INCHES.
THERE'S NO LOGICAL DIMENSIONAL NUMBER.
IS THAT A REFLECTION OF A CURRENT SURVEY? IT'S THE REFLECTION OF THE CURRENT DISTANCE THAT THE HOUSE IS FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
5.5 IS THE NUMBER OPERATED OFF OF THE CONTRACT.
JUST THAT THAT'S BEEN VERIFIED BECAUSE I'VE SEEN I'VE SEEN THAT BEFORE, WHERE 5.5 IS ACTUALLY FIVE FOOT SIX INCHES AND THE CONTRACTOR GOES OUT THERE AND POURS EVERYTHING A 10TH SMALL. IT'S NOT ALLOWED TO GET ANY CLOSER THAN THE EXISTING HOUSE IS.
OKAY. BUT IT WAS JUST A QUESTION ABOUT OKAY. AWESOME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS. ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? NOTHING ONLINE.
AND WE RECEIVED NOTHING IN WRITING OR IN PERSON REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL.
ALL RIGHT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-012A A VARIANCE FOR A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY ALLOWING FOR A FIVE FOOT FIVE INCH ENCROACHMENT TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY WOLFE.
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. EXCELLENT.
THIS WAS AMENDED IN YOUR PACKET JUST TO REFLECT THE LANGUAGE THAT OUR CONSULTANTS RECOMMEND THAT WE USE IN THE MOTION TO, WE'LL GET TO THAT WHEN WE GET TO, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS KNOW THAT THAT MOTION WAS JUST KIND OF AMENDED TO REFLECT WHAT OUR CONSULTANT SAID THAT WE SHOULD DO IN TERMS OF THE LANGUAGE OF AUTHORIZING THIS.
AND WE ARE THE APPLICANTS OF THIS.
[00:45:07]
AVENUE NORTHEAST.THE PROPERTY WAS LISTED FOR SALE IN DECEMBER 2022, AND STAFF COLLABORATED WITH THE LISTING BROKER TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE ON POTENTIAL PARAMETERS FOR REDEVELOPMENT. THIS IS AN 11.74 ACRE SITE THAT IS FULLY WITHIN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT AND ZONED GENERAL BUSINESS, WHICH ALLOWS FOR A VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL USES BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE PROVISIONS TO ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
DESPITE THE REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL, STAFF INFORMED THE BROKER AND OTHER INTERESTED DEVELOPERS THAT THERE'S NO SPECIFIC GUIDANCE IN THE 2040 COMP PLAN TO DIRECT A DIFFERENT USE OF THE PROPERTY BESIDES COMMERCIAL USE, BECAUSE IT ASSUMED THAT MEDTRONIC WOULD REMAIN THE PRIMARY USER.
WE ADVISED DEVELOPERS THAT WE NEEDED TIME TO TAKE THIS THROUGH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO JUST PROVIDE SPECIFIC GUIDANCE FOR THIS PROPERTY AND KIND OF SET REDEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS.
THIS JUST SHOWS YOU THE EXISTING CONDITION.
IT'S A FAIRLY IMPERVIOUS SITE.
AND SULLIVAN LAKE IS AN IMPAIRED WATERBODY.
AND THEN WE DO HAVE ISSUES WITH INVASIVE SPECIES AS WELL.
IT'S RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF OUR MUNICIPAL BORDER WITH FRIDLEY.
AND THEN WE HAVE COMMERCIAL, TO THE EAST WITH SOME SINGLE FAMILY TO THE SOUTH AS WELL.
THE CITY UTILIZED ANOKA COUNTY'S REDEVELOPMENT GRANT TO CONTRACT WITH A CONSULTANT, HKGI.
WE PREVIOUSLY USED THEM TO PREPARE THE CITY'S 2040 COMP PLAN, TO DEVELOP A DESIGN FRAMEWORK AND CONDUCT ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES OVER THE LAST FOUR MONTHS. THIS IS JUST SOME OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT WE DID.
IT STARTED WITH A STAFF KICKOFF MEETING WHERE WE EVALUATED THE REDEVELOPMENT SITE AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT THROUGH AN INTERNAL STAFF WORKSHOP IN OCTOBER, AND THAT JUST KIND OF EXPLORED AND CONFIRMED SOME OF THE DESIRED GOALS OR EXPECTED, REDEVELOPMENT GOALS.
AND THEN WE HAD A JOINT SESSION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 17TH, 2023, WHERE THOSE GOALS WERE KIND OF FLESHED OUT, WITH A FOCUS ON LAND USE PATTERNS AND THEN DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE.
AND THESE ARE JUST KIND OF WHAT WAS DRIVING THE POLICY.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A BRT STOP.
AS I MENTIONED, THE IMPAIRED WATER BODY.
VERY IMPERVIOUS, INVASIVE SPECIES.
SOME OF THE MARKET FORCES THAT OUR CONSULTANT KIND OF BROUGHT UP TO US AND JUST ANALYZED WAS THAT RETAIL SALES SELECTION DEMANDS HAVE DECREASED DEPRESSED OFFICE MARKET A LISTING PRICE OF 12.5 MILLION.
AND THEN JUST SOME DENSITY FIGURES.
AT FIRST GLANCE, RESIDENTIAL MAY NEED TO BE IN THE 450 TO 600 UNIT COUNTS.
AND THEN THEY WERE SHOWN A SERIES OF FOUR CONCEPTS WHERE THEY WERE JUST KIND OF ASKED TO GIVE THEIR FEEDBACK ON WHAT THEY THOUGHT OF, YOU KNOW, THE LAND USE AND THEN THE DESIGN COMPONENTS.
AND FROM THAT JOINT SESSION, SOME OF THE KIND OF KEY GOAL POSTS THAT WERE DETERMINED WERE THAT HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE SCALED TOWARDS CENTRAL, AND THEN IT WOULD SCALE DOWN TO LOWER DENSITY OR LESS INTENSE USES SUCH AS TOWNHOMES THE CLOSER YOU GET TO SULLIVAN LAKE.
IT WAS EXPRESSED THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, LIKE THE PARK STAYS PUBLIC AND THAT PEOPLE DON'T FEEL LIKE JUST BECAUSE THERE'S REDEVELOPMENT, THAT THAT SUDDENLY MEANS THEY CAN'T USE THE PARK.
AND THEN THERE WAS A FOCUS ON SULLIVAN LAKE EXPANSION OF SULLIVAN LAKE PARK, AS EXISTING COMMUNITY ASSETS IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY FOR SULLIVAN LAKE AS AN IMPAIRED WATERBODY.
AND THEN, AS I MENTIONED, THE TARGETED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IS 450 TO 600 UNITS WITH SOME LIMITED COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, MOSTLY ON 53RD. THE NEXT STEP.
[00:50:05]
LAND USES, SITE ACCESS AND VISIBILITY, AND ZONING.AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE HOSTED A TWO WEEK ONLINE ENGAGEMENT CAMPAIGN FROM JANUARY 9TH UNTIL THE 23RD FOR THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED CONCEPTS BEFORE THE CONSULTANT SYNTHESIZED THOSE CONCEPTS INTO THE FINAL DRAFT PRESENTATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU TODAY.
AND SO THESE WERE THE TWO CONCEPTS THAT WERE PART OF THAT ENGAGEMENT.
THERE'S A DESIRE TO KEEP THE TRAIL LOOP.
WE, WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RETAIL SPACE WAS MOSTLY FILLED AND FILLED WITH RETAIL.
AND THEN SOME OF THE OTHER COMMENTS WERE TOO MUCH RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.
IF YOU WANT TO GO TO THE SECOND ONE.
TOO MUCH RESIDENTIAL INTENSITY.
BUILDINGS ARE MOSTLY ONE AND TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS ARE FALLING SHORT OF THE NEEDS OF PEOPLE TODAY.
STORMWATER FEATURES AND GREEN SPACE SEEM MORE APPROPRIATE AND BETTER DESIGNED.
MORE HOUSING INSTEAD OF BUSINESS SPACE.
THERE'S DESIRE TO MAKE IT WALKABLE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
AND THEN THERE WAS THE DESIRE TO FIND A BALANCE BETWEEN HOUSING AND RETAIL.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL REVIEW AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE SUBMISSION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PER 9.104, B FOUR AND FIVE, AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT CONSISTS OF THREE PRIMARY CHANGES AND ADJUSTMENTS TO TECHNICAL TABLES, WHICH WE'LL GO THROUGH NOW.
THE FIRST CHANGE IS, A REVISION OF THE TRANSIT ORIENTED, DEVELOPMENT LAND USE TEXT DESCRIPTION.
A CHANGE IN THE SITE'S FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM COMMERCIAL TO TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN IDENTIFYING THIS AS AN AREA OF OPPORTUNITY. MODIFICATIONS TO THE CITY'S 2040 POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD FORECASTS AND THEN TECHNICAL TABLES.
THAT WOULD NEED TO BE ADJUSTED BASED ON PROJECTIONS CHANGING AND THE FORECAST, FOR ADDITIONAL POPULATION HOUSING UNITS, THE FIVE TABLES THAT ARE GOING TO BE MODIFIED ARE THE REGIONAL SETTING, THE SOCIOECONOMIC FOR HOUSEHOLD AND EMPLOYMENT, THE SEWER TRANSPORTATION ANALYST ZONES AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND.
AND THIS IS JUST KIND OF, OUR CONSULTANTS MEMO DESCRIBING THESE CHANGES AND PUTTING THEM INTO CONTEXT SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HOW THE EXISTING, TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT CHANGED. ORIGINALLY IT WAS 25 TO 50 UNITS THAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO 25 TO 65 UNITS PER NET ACRE.
AND THEN THEY'RE REMOVING, THE 1 TO 3, FLOOR AREA RATIO, WHICH SOME OF THE OTHER CHANGES BEING PROPOSED.
DENSITY RANGES ARE SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN THE HIGH DENSITY, THAT'S BEEN CHANGED JUST TO REFLECT THAT TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IS THE HIGHEST DENSITY LAND USE PATTERN.
AND THEN THERE WAS AN EMPHASIS TOWARDS SERVICE ORIENTED COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, WITH MIXED USE PROJECTS THAT SHOULD TYPICALLY ORIENT TOWARDS MAJOR STREET CORRIDORS OR PROMINENT OPEN SPACE AMENITIES.
[00:55:02]
AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF THAT YOU CAN SEE IS THE FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE, AN AREA OF OPPORTUNITY.THE LAND USE CHANGE WILL RESULT IN THE EXISTING LAND USE COMMERCIAL 1000 OR 135,000FT² OF OFFICE MANUFACTURING STRUCTURE WITH A LARGE PARKING LOT.
AND THEN THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, WHICH CURRENTLY DOES NOT EXIST.
AND THIS WOULD BE REFLECTED IN A MIX OF HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING UNITS, MULTI-STORY VERTICAL ORIENTED HOUSING, AND THEN THE ATTACHED, ROW HOMES AND TOWNHOUSES. THE TOTAL SITE AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 12 ACRES.
523,156FT². THE EXISTING CONDITIONS GUIDE THIS FOR 100% COMMERCIAL.
THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS ARE 100% TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, WITH 85% BEING HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND 15% BEING COMMERCIAL RETAIL, WITH THAT DENSITY FALLING IN THE 25 TO 65 UNITS PER ACRE RANGE.
A LOT OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT FROM THE CONSULTANT WAS THAT THE FURTHER IN THAT THE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IS FROM 53RD OR CENTRAL, IT CREATES A VISIBILITY PROBLEM THAT IT JUST STRUGGLES FOR BUSINESSES TO BE ABLE TO MARKET THEMSELVES.
AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC AND SEMIPUBLIC GREEN SPACE PROVIDES KEY SITE AMENITIES AND LAND USE TRANSITIONS TO ADJACENT PARKLANDS AND LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WILL INCLUDE A SECTION OF THE PLAN WITH THE SUBHEADING AREAS OF OPPORTUNITY THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS, DESCRIBING KEY AREAS OF THE COMMUNITY WHERE CHANGES ARE ANTICIPATED FOUR AREAS ARE IDENTIFIED SO FAR.
THIS AMENDMENT WILL ADD THE PROJECT AREA AS AREA FIVE, FORMER MEDTRONIC SITE AT 53RD AVENUE.
AND THIS JUST KIND OF SHOWS YOU THE PROPOSED 2040 LAND USE.
IT'S COMMERCIAL NEXT TO IT MOSTLY, YOU SEE, KIND OF DOWN THAT SPINE OF CENTRAL.
AND THEN, CLOSER TO 40TH, WE HAVE SOME TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS WHAT THIS WOULD BE.
THIS IS AFTER THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PERIOD AFTER THE JOINT SESSIONS OPEN HOUSE.
THIS WAS KIND OF THE FINALIZED CONCEPT THAT THEY PRODUCED.
SO FAR. WE HAVE 16,000FT² OF COMMERCIAL/RETAIL, THE 440 APARTMENT UNITS, 50 TOWNHOUSE UNITS.
IT'D BE TWO BUILDINGS, ESSENTIALLY ONE STEPPING DOWN TO A LOWER HEIGHT AND DENSITY.
AND THEN AS YOU CAN KIND OF SEE, THIS CONCEPT REALLY, I THINK ELIMINATES THE POTENTIAL OF HAVING ANOTHER BUILDING KIND OF ALONG THE LAKE AND JUST KIND OF PRESERVES THAT AS GREEN SPACE, EXPANDED PARK SPACE.
THEY'VE INCORPORATED SOME STORMWATER AMENITIES.
YEAH. ANY QUESTIONS SO FAR? I'M JUST CURIOUS SOME MONITOR AND MAINTENANCE CONTRARY TO MOST OF WHAT I HEAR ABOUT WALKABLE CITIES.
[01:00:04]
AND SO IT JUST SEEMS STRANGE THAT THEY JUST WENT WITH THE SAME PLAYBOOK THAT THEY RAN UP IN MAPLE GROVE, BUT JUST DOWNSIZED IT FOR US.AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK HAS KIND OF GUIDED.
THIS IS JUST THE HISTORIC STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT THE CITY KIND OF EXPERIENCES.
AND LIKE I SAID, THIS SITE IS COVERED IN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.
SO REALLY ANY AMOUNT THAT WE CAN TAKE OUT IS GOING TO JUST HELP IMPROVE THAT STORMWATER SITUATION.
I THINK THE STREETSCAPES WERE DESIRED JUST FOR THE FUNCTIONAL PURPOSES, BUT ALSO FOR ESTHETICS TO TRY TO SEPARATE, THE BUILDINGS FROM THE PARK AND THE PARK AMENITIES.
SHOULD WE BE FORTUNATE ENOUGH FOR THAT TO COME OUR WAY.
SO THIS ALL SEEMS EXTREMELY THOROUGH ON THE CITY'S PART AS WELL AS HKGI'S I'M HAPPY TO SEE WHERE WE ARE AT RIGHT NOW . YOU KNOW, JUST THINKING ABOUT HOW THE WORLD AND OUR COMMUNITY HAS CHANGED SINCE THE COMP PLAN WAS PUT TOGETHER.
THIS ALL SEEMS VERY REASONABLE AND GREAT NEXT STEP.
THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THE MOMENT? YEAH. TWO QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY STAFF.
THE COMP PLAN IS A RECOMMENDATION.
SO HOW WHAT IS THE CITY'S VEHICLE TO BE ABLE TO HOLD A DEVELOPER TO A CERTAIN DENSITY, TO A CERTAIN HOUSING TYPE? I NOTICE ON THIS SITE PLAN THAT THE PARK FEATURES NOTED HERE ARE OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
HOW DOES THE CITY HOLD A DEVELOPER TO INCLUDING THOSE, AMENITIES? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
AND TO ADDRESS THE PARK FIRST, I GUESS, YOU'RE RIGHT.
THE PARK EXPANSION BOUNDARY TRANSCENDS THE PROPERTY LINE IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND, A LIKELY REPLATTING.
AND EVEN IF IT ISN'T A REPLATTING TO FORMALLY TRIGGER PARKLAND DEDICATION IN THE CITY THROUGH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROCESS, WE CAN DEMAND, EITHER A DONATION OF LAND OR AN EQUIVALENT IN CASH, CONTRIBUTION TO EXPAND THE PARK.
SO IT MIGHT BE THAT THE BOUNDARY CHANGES AND THAT THE CITY ACTUALLY TAKES OWNERSHIP OF, A SECTION OF THIS, TO CREATE THE PARK THAT WE AGREE IS, YOU KNOW, BEST SUITED.
SO IT'LL BE A NEGOTIATION PROCESS.
THE PLAN RIGHT NOW, PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPMENT.
THERE'S A LOT OF DETAILS, BUT IT WOULD BE FULLY ARTICULATED THROUGH THAT NEGOTIATION PROCESS.
HOW WE PAY, HOW WE DESIGN AND HOW WE LAY IT OUT WHEN IT COMES TO, DENSITY.
RIGHT? SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS GOING TO GIVE THIS RANGE OF EXPECTED DENSITIES.
AND WE EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, WE SAY FOR 40 PLUS MINUS, THEN WE THE NEXT LAYER WOULD BE THE 25 TO 65 UNITS PER ACRE.
SO WE COULD APPLY THAT CALCULATION WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY INCREASE THAT A LITTLE BIT OR DECREASE IT.
SO STAYING WITHIN THAT OVERALL BANDWIDTH OF 25 TO 65 PLUS OR MINUS.
BUT IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE A BALANCING ACT BETWEEN THE CITY GETTING WHAT THEY WANT AND WHAT THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO REFINE THAT NUMBER.
AND THE PUD TOOL HAS BEEN DEPLOYED.
[01:05:05]
ANY, YOU KNOW, STRAIGHT UP R4 DENSITY.WE GIVE A RANGE THAT WE CAN THEN FLEX.
BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THE ECONOMICS OF THE PROJECT ARE GOING TO DRIVE THAT DENSITY INTO THIS VICINITY.
AND THEN, SECURED, YOU KNOW, THE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE PUD AS AN ORDINANCE GETS PASSED.
SO THE ZONING IS SITE SPECIFIC.
IT'LL SAY NOT TO EXCEED THIS HEIGHT, NOT TO EXCEED THIS DENSITY COUNT.
YOU GET THE BASE PARAMETERS THAT YOU WOULD FIND IN ANY OTHER ZONING DISTRICT EMBEDDED INTO THIS SITE, SPECIFIC ZONING, BUT ALL WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THIS UMBRELLA, IF THAT HELPS.
SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ESSENTIALLY LIKE SETS THE GOAL POSTS THAT DEVELOPERS WOULD THEN HAVE TO TRY TO MEET, AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN FOR THE LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS, WHICH THROUGH THE PUD WOULD THEN KIND OF BE SORT OF LIKE A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT.
SO YOU HAVE THE OVERSIGHT OF THE FINAL ZONING.
AND THERE'S ALSO FINANCIAL NEGOTIATIONS.
IT'S ANTICIPATED THAT THIS WOULD BE A REQUEST FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING AS WELL.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE HEAVIER STICKS THAT THE CITY AND THE EDA HOLD THROUGH THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS.
IF THE DEVELOPER IS ASKING FOR TAX INCENTIVES, THAT'S WHEN THE CITY, YOU KNOW, PUTS ITS FOOT DOWN AND SAYS, WELL, WE'RE WILLING TO GET THERE IF YOU PROVIDE X, Y, AND Z.
AND I THINK IN THIS CASE THAT A LOT OF THAT INVESTMENT HAS BEEN, FOCUSED ON THE PUBLIC SPACE AND PARK SIDE OF THE PROJECT, LIKE, HOW DO WE REALLY RAMP THAT UP AND GET SOMETHING FOR THE COMMUNITY IN THAT GIVE AND TAKE PROCESS? SULLIVAN LAKE GETS CRYSTAL CLEAR WATER OUT OF THAT.
ONE OF THE LOUD AND CLEAR RESOUNDING ELEMENTS OF FEEDBACK, START TO FINISH FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY COUNCIL, THE OPEN HOUSE, SUBSEQUENT FEEDBACK.
WE WERE ACTUALLY EVEN SENT A VIDEO FROM ONE OF THE, PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE VICINITY THAT TOOK A DRONE VIDEO AFTER A LARGE RAINFALL EVENT AND SHOWED ALL OF THE, DEBRIS THAT JUST RUNS UNABATED.
I MEAN, IT WAS JUST IT FILLED THE LAKE WITH, TRASH AND ALL SORTS OF, ORGANICS.
SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESOLVE A LOT OF THAT.
IN THE EARLY FIRST PART, IT SAYS 11.74 ACRE SITE IS FULLY WITHIN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT.
NOW, IS THAT A FUNCTION OF THE DNR OR IS THAT SOMETHING INDEPENDENT OF THE SHORELAND? FEATURE THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH.
I BELIEVE IT'S THROUGH THE DNR.
OKAY. SO IT'S IT'S A CITY ORDINANCE OVERLAY BAKED INTO THE CITY'S ORDINANCE, AND IT, IS DERIVED FROM A LOT OF THE SAME DNR SHORELAND STANDARDS FOR SETBACKS AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.
SO THEY PLAY TOGETHER, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY EMBEDDED IN OUR CODE.
AND THEN THE OTHER PRIMARY OVERSIGHT JURISDICTION IN WATER QUALITY IS THE WATERSHED DISTRICT.
SO WE'LL BE COLLABORATING WITH THE WATERSHED ON ALL OF THE STORMWATER APPROVALS THAT WILL GO INTO THIS PROJECT TO MEET THEIR STANDARDS, WHERE THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THEIR STANDARDS.
AND WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN COLLABORATE FINANCIALLY AS WELL.
BECAUSE THEY DO OFFER, YOU KNOW, SIGNIFICANT GRANTS FOR INNOVATIVE PROJECTS.
I HAVE A QUESTION. ARE WE, OR HAS THERE BEEN ANY THOUGHT TO ASKING THE DEVELOPERS TO PROVIDE A NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS? AND IF SO, HOW ARE WE ADDRESSING THAT? SO THE AFFORDABILITY, RATIO HAS NOT BEEN BUILT INTO THIS LEG OF THE JOURNEY.
I CAN SHARE, YOU KNOW, ANECDOTALLY, THE DEVELOPER THAT, KIND OF SPARKED THIS, THIS PROCESS MORE THAN THE OTHERS THAT, YOU KNOW, INITIATED CONTACT WITH THE CITY, HAD A CONCEPT THAT WAS PREDOMINANTLY AFFORDABLE, THAT ALSO INCLUDED A MARKET RATE BUILDING.
SO I THINK IN TODAY'S MARKET AND THIS IS THESE ARE DECISIONS MORE FOR THE EDA AND AND CITY COUNCIL.
BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THAT MIXED INCOME DEVELOPMENTS ARE VERY, DESIRABLE, FAVORABLE FOR ALL
[01:10:01]
MEASURES. SO, YOU KNOW, SOCIOECONOMIC AS WELL AS THE INTEREST OF THE DEVELOPER TO BE ABLE TO SECURE FINANCING.SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN PROJECTS OF THIS SCALE RIGHT NOW IS A MIXED INCOME APPROACH.
AND I THINK STAFF'S OPINION IS THAT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH, WHAT WE SUPPORT AND IS LIKELY VIABLE.
SO WHETHER OR NOT ONE BUILDING IS AFFORDABLE OR ONE IS AFFORDABLE SENIOR OR THAT KIND OF CHURN IS TO BE DETERMINED, DOWNSTREAM FROM HERE.
YOU WANT TO KEEP GOING? SO THE AMENDMENT IS READY TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AND ADOPTION PRIOR TO THEIR ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAN.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED IS REQUIRED.
CITY ZONING CODE GIVES THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUTHORITY TO REVIEW AND HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS AND PREPARE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ANY CHANGES TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE DRAFT AMENDMENT.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR FROM THE PUBLIC? YES.
YEAH. THERE IS, WE KNOW YOU PRETTY WELL, SO WE'D LOVE YOU TO FILL IT OUT AND AT LEAST GIVE IT TO US MIC]. I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS FOR CITY COUNCIL.
DIRK SCHMITZ, RESIDENT UP ON 45TH AND STINSON.
I'M NOT AGAINST RESIDENTIAL IN THIS LOCATION OR NOT.
I GUESS I'M PROBABLY MORE OF THE TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL THERE.
I KNOW WAY BACK IN THE BEGINNING, WHEN THOMAS LOWRY AND WATSON STARTED DEVELOPING, THEY WANTED TO PROMOTE PEOPLE OWNING THEIR PROPERTY AND TAKING PRIDE WHERE THEY LIVE.
BUT IF WITH THE 43RD AND THE OLD RAINBOW SITE GOING INTO ALL RENTAL VARYING DEGREE OF AFFORDABILITY . I FEEL WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT MORE OWNER OCCUPIED TOWNHOUSES, CONDOS, SOMETHING THAT WHERE PEOPLE CAN OWN IT. TAKE PRIDE.
MAYBE THEY'LL STAY IN THE CITY LONGER WHEN THEY ACTUALLY OWN IT.
I KNOW I HAVE FRIENDS, IT'D ALSO BE NICE.
TOWNHOMES ARE NICE, BUT SOME OF THE RULES GET SO TIGHT THAT IF YOUR JOB IS A SERVICE TECHNICIAN AND YOU HAVE A COMPANY SERVICE TRUCK, THEY DON'T FIT IN A RESIDENTIAL GARAGE.
WELL, YOU GOT TO MOVE BECAUSE THEY WON'T LET YOU PARK YOUR TRUCK OUTSIDE.
I AND THEN JUST FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO SHOW THEIR OWN INDIVIDUALIZATION OF HOW THEY DECORATE OR HOW THEY WANT TO SHOW THEIR ETHNICITY IN THEIR LIVING QUARTERS.
WITH THAT, THE OTHER THING I'M QUESTIONING ARE CURIOUS ABOUT IS WITH THE COMP PLAN WE CHANGE THIS AREA FOR A BIG DEVELOPER? WHAT STOPS THE BALL FROM JUST KEEP ON ROLLING? IF ANOTHER PLACE WANTS TO GO FOR SALE AND SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SAYS, WELL, YOU CHANGED IT FOR THAT GUY, CHANGE IT YOU KNOW THE ZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL OR COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL.
JUST CURIOUS WHAT STOPS FROM JUST ONE BIG DEVELOPER COMING INTO ANOTHER.
AND THEN IS THERE ANYTHING ON SAYING HOW MANY RESIDENTIAL UNITS COMPARED TO PRIVATE UNITS.
IF ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU END UP WITH 1300 NEW RESIDENTIAL RENTAL UNITS, HOW DOES IT AFFECT THE RATIO OF PRIVATE TO RENT AND HOW MUCH? LARGE RENTAL, DO WE WANT OWNED BY OUT-OF-STATE CORPORATIONS THAT ARE ONLY IN IT FOR A PROFIT LINE AND HAVE NO INTEREST IN THE ACTUAL CITY OR PROMOTING PRIDE OR WHATEVER IN THE CITY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC DISCUSSION?
[01:15:01]
ANYBODY ONLINE OR ANYTHING? OKAY. THANKS FOR SHARING.DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ANYTHING WE NEED TO FOLLOW UP ON? OKAY. THEN STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE.
I JUST WOULD LIKE IF THE STAFF COULD SPEAK ABOUT JUST TRAFFIC, KIND OF IMPACTS OF THIS, JUST TO HEAR IT JUST IN THIS FINAL KIND OF VERSION.
YEAH. SO, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN WOULD BE MORE FULLY DEVELOPED WITH A SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL THAT'S GOING TO LOOK AT THAT PROPOSAL IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SITE, WE DO KNOW THAT THE ACCESS POINTS ARE MORE OR LESS FIXED, RIGHT, BECAUSE OF THE RECENT CHANGES TO 53RD.
YOU KNOW, IT REALLY KIND OF BOOKENDS THE TWO POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS, WITH WHICH I THINK IS FINE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF, OUR ENGINEERING STAFF THERE ON EITHER END OF THE SITE.
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE GET IT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASPECTS FULLY ARTICULATED THAT WE DON'T HAVE A DEAD END ON THE FAR SOUTHERN END OF THE SITE WITH NO EGRESS OR SOME SORT OF POTENTIAL OUTLET THROUGH THE PARK IN AN EMERGENCY.
BUT WE WILL WORK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES WITH A SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL.
WE'VE IMPROVED THE CORRIDOR SIGNIFICANTLY.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S EASY TO LOOK AT IT AS A COMPLETELY VACANT INACTIVE SITE AND THINK THAT ANYTHING ABOVE THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE CHAOTIC. BUT IT'S FUNCTIONED, YOU KNOW, WELL, IN THE PAST.
WE WOULD BE INTENSIFYING TRAFFIC TO THE SITE WITH THIS PROPOSAL.
BUT, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL USES HAVE A MUCH MORE, RHYTHMIC TRAFFIC PATTERN.
SO IT'S NOT JUST ONE MASS EXODUS, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING FROM LIVING WITH, RESIDENTS NOW IN THIS BUILDING, WE CERTAINLY CAN ANECDOTALLY SPEAK TO THAT.
THIS IS A VERY, INTENSELY, DENSE PROJECT, WITH OVER 350 PARKING STALLS IN THAT GARAGE.
AND, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE I'VE NEVER WAIT TO GET IN AND OUT OF THE GARAGE.
IT'S LIKE 1 OR 2 CARS COMING AND GOING.
AND, BUT IT WILL BE SUBJECT TO, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND TRAFFIC STUDY PLAN THAT THAT ARTICULATES THAT, THAT THIS BODY WILL REVIEW.
HOPEFULLY SOMETIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, SO THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AWESOME STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DRAFT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-013, AUTHORIZING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PER THE STAFF REPORT, AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY PROCEED WITH SENDING THE AMENDMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL.
AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU.
I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A SECOND MOTION TO TAKE ACTION ON.
A MOTION TO MOVE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DRAFT RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-013, AUTHORIZING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE STAFF REPORT, AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY PROCEED WITH SENDING THE AMENDMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL.
ALSO, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
[01:20:01]
I DON'T HAVE A SLIDE SHOW LIKE A CRACKLING LOG.. [LAUGHTER] IS THERE A SITE? SPEAKERS] ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS.
[OTHER BUSINESS]
THANK YOU.SO THE ITEM BEFORE YOU, AS YOU'VE GROWN ACCUSTOMED TO, IS WHENEVER THE CITY OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ARE IN PURSUIT OF A LAND ACQUISITION, IT HAS TO COME BEFORE THIS BODY TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CONTEMPLATED ACQUISITION OR DISPOSITION, FOR THAT MATTER, ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WITHIN THAT CONTEXT, WE'RE ASKING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW THE CITY'S PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF 675 37TH AVENUE NORTHEAST, SHOWN ON YOUR SCREEN.
MOST PEOPLE ARE PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT.
ON THE BORDER OF MINNEAPOLIS, JUST SOUTH OF THE CITY'S PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY.
SO, THE CITY IS INTERESTED IN ACQUIRING THE PROPERTY TO BUILD INTO FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A REDESIGNED AND REDEVELOPED PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY. AND WE'RE NOT SURE OF THAT ULTIMATE LAYOUT, BUT GIVEN THE ADJACENCY AND, DESIRE FOR MORE SPACE WITHIN THAT FRAMEWORK, THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO PURSUE THE ACQUISITION.
SO WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW EVERYTHING WOULD FIT.
BUT UNDER, CURRENT FIT PLANS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT THAT DON'T INCLUDE THIS SITE, IT BECAME VERY PROBLEMATIC TO, GET A ROADWAY CONFIGURATION THAT WOULD WORK. SO THIS IS GOING TO OPEN A LOT OF DOORS THAT, MAKE THAT SITE PLANNING A LOT EASIER.
THE CITY'S REQUESTED BOND FUNDING AT THE MOMENT.
WE'RE NOT SURE HOW THAT'S GOING TO SHAKE OUT, BUT, THIS IS WHAT STAFF THINK IS A, LOGICAL ACQUISITION WITHIN THAT GREATER CONTEXT, YOU KNOW, TO BE DEPLOYED AT A LATER DATE.
SO THERE, YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
JUST SOME OF THE GOALS THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS SITE.
ENCOURAGING INFILL DEVELOPMENT THAT DEMONSTRATES COMPATIBILITY WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND CHARACTERISTICS IN TERMS OF QUALITY, DESIGN, BUILD HEIGHT, PLACEMENT, SCALE AND ARCHITECTURAL QUALITY.
AND THEN OF COURSE, INDUSTRIAL IN THE CITY'S PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY.
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETELY CHANGE THE DESIGN TO HOPEFULLY SOFTEN THAT EDGE TO THE RESIDENTS AND AT THE SAME TIME, CLEANING UP THIS BLIGHTED AND, MORE THAN LIKELY CONTAMINATED PROPERTY.
THIS AREA HELD, STANDING WATER, YOU KNOW, IN THE 40S AND 50S.
SO IT'S FILLED IN WITH WHATEVER WAS AVAILABLE, AND THE FOUNDRY SLAG AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WE FOUND THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AS THE HOUSTON PARK AREA REDEVELOPED.
SO UNTIL WE DIVE INTO THAT, ALL THAT COMMENTARY IS TO SAY THAT IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN THAT UP FINALLY, AND MAKE, CERTAINLY A MUCH HIGHER AND BETTER USE OF THE PROPERTY.
SO WITH THAT, STAFF WOULD BE HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
AND WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS IN YOUR PACKET THAT WOULD THIS STAYS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO THIS DOESN'T GET FORWARDED ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
[01:25:02]
I JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I'M VERY EXCITED TO SEE THIS GO AWAY.AS A 20 PLUS YEAR RESIDENT AND, DRIVING DOWN 37TH ALMOST ON A DAILY BASIS.
SO I'M VERY EXCITED TO SEE THIS HAPPEN.
OR, YOU KNOW, IF WE APPROVE IT, TO SEE THIS HAPPEN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OH. GO AHEAD. SORRY.
FOR OTHER BUSINESS WE DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT.
CORRECT? THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.
SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE AYE AYE.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2024-PZ01, A RESOLUTION FINDING THAT THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND FOR REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES BY THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. MOTION CARRIES.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? MADAM CHAIR, WE DO NOT.
THANK YOU. OKAY, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS TIME TO DO WE MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING, OR DO WE JUST CLOSE IT? MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING.
YEAH. I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING FOR TONIGHT AT 7:32.
THANK YOU. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE AYE AYE. YOU BETTER COME DOWN HERE AND HIT THE GAVEL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.