Good evening, everyone.

Uh, we will get started here.

I'll call for roll call, Ryan.

Roll is noted with Jameson absent.

The Board of Adjustments is a seven-member board with which has the power to hear requests for variances and special exceptions.

The concurring vote of two-thirds of the full membership is necessary for approval of any action by the board.

In accordance with Robert Rules of Order, we require a motion to approve a request before the request can be debated.

As a matter of policy, all motions are made in the positive.

The board under specific powers granted it by the state shall authorize variances from the zoning requirements where special conditions existing on the land will result in unnecessary hardship for the applicant.

First item on the agenda is approval of the agenda.

Is there a motion?

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Um approval of last meetings minutes.

Is there a motion?

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion passes.

At this time, any member of the public may make a brief announcement or invitation or request time on the agenda for an item not listed.

Items to be added to the agenda will be scheduled at the end of the meeting.

Any requested action items may be scheduled for a future meeting date.

Individuals will state their name and city of residence for the record.

Public comment is limited to a maximum of three minutes per person.

The comments and views expressed by the public are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the City of Brookings or the City Planning Commission.

Is there anyone like to add anything?

Seeing none, we will now convene as a board of adjustment.

Ryan, would you like to introduce the topic?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

The first item is a variance on lot 10 of block 12 and Prairie Hills edition.

The variance request is for a second access drive.

The applicant for the variance is David and Lori Schaefer, owners of the lot.

The lot is located in a residence R1B single family district.

The request specifically is to have a second access drive onto Sweet Grass Drive, and this would be a variance from Section 94 343 B1, which states that no more than one access drive shall be permitted onto any street, which the lot or block of butt abuts.

The site plan shown here is the uh proposed site plan for a new construction, a new home on that lot showing the two access drives.

Um it was noted on the application.

This lot was preliminary plated as two lots, and then final plated as one lot.

So the preliminary plot approved with the initial prairie hills development uh on this block.

Had this as preliminary platted out as two uh lots, or final platted as one, and that would be then the ordinance that we apply is no more than one access drive per plotted lot.

Uh so the site plan shows uh two 25 foot wide um access drives and a U-shape uh orientation leading to a three-stall garage.

And that ends the staff report and we'll stand for any questions.

Thanks, Ryan.

Yep.

Is there a motion to approve the variants?

So move.

Second.

Thank you.

Now open the public hearing.

Is there anyone that would like to speak in favor of the variants?

Thank you.

Uh my name is Kyle Rouse with Dakota Land Design.

Uh Ryan, do you have the a couple other pages of the application packet that I'd sent in there with that?

Not on the PowerPoint here.

These are the only two slides that I have on the PowerPoint.

Okay.

Yeah, yeah.

So those are what I'm speaking about there.

So Dave and Lori Schaefer, who I'm working with as a contractor, uh, they've been working with Mills development uh on lot planning along this area of sweet grass drive since the early stages of development for this for these parcels.

Uh the Schaefers had asked for two lots to be combined into one larger lot.

And so originally these were more segmented lots.

You know, I would say the average lot in Prairie Hills is about 85 feet wide.

Uh this lot ended up being 174 feet of uh road frontage on this lot.

Uh the the Schaeffers had our company work on several driveway designs over the last few years.

Uh with the with the garage uh being angled on the home.

Dave and Lori had challenges finding a traditional driveway design that they felt like was safe for ingress and egress, and also just something that flowed with the architecture of the home.

Uh, the U-shaped driveway plan will be narrower than standard at each approach.

Uh you know, it is allowed 36 foot for a standard driveway on our two curb cuts.

We're asking for two, uh, but they are only 25 foot of width.

Uh and they just feel like it's going to be safer.

Uh, it's going to complement the beautiful architecture of the home and that angled driveway.

Uh the Schaeffers also purchased the lot across the street, which is in your guys' packet.

And so the lot across the street, it borders a wetland Zman area, and they wanted to make sure that uh that it would be a nice landscape buffer.

They've got a lot of beautiful things planned for that area.

They've got a uh really cool Dale Lamphier sculpture that's going in this area.

Uh and that has a similar road frontage to their lot across the street.

And so essentially what what Mr.

and Mrs.

Schaefer are asking for is two driveway approaches in an area that essentially uh would be the width of four city lots between the east and the west side of the home.

Uh Mr.

Schaefer has reached out to several nearby neighbors.

Uh, the three homes uh to the north have been constructed from this lot.

Uh all three neighbors have given us letters of approval, which we can uh submit upon request.

And also the developer has a uh approved this uh U-shaped driveway as well, the the John and Jacob Mills.

So if you have any questions, otherwise uh Mr.

Schaefer will come up and speak a little bit about it also.

All right, thank you.

Thanks, Kyle.

Well, good late afternoon, and thanks for the opportunity to to get a chance to talk to you about our our proposed uh variants.

Kyle hit on uh almost all the the key elements, but uh as he mentioned, we worked with Mills development early on in the process to try to have a larger than than normal lot, and uh this is the largest lot across the frontage, and as he mentioned, it was two lots, but it was recommended to put them both together at the time, just in terms of getting the plat right the first time, so to speak, and so that was all done.

And as was mentioned, uh we also purchased across the parcel, and that parcel we've spent quite a bit of time laying out the the design plan for for the landscaping, and our intent would be to irrigate that as well so it doesn't dry out and uh get pretty messy over time, and so that's really the intention with quite a bit of foliage as well.

He also mentioned the Dale Limpair part.

Uh Dale, as you know, is a famous South Dakota sculptor and and a friend, and so we worked with him to make a grouping of uh different sculptures, and there'd be a large one there on the way it's proposed on the west side, and then a kind of a series around the house on the east side.

So we're excited about that, and he is as well, and uh it'd be nice if that would work out.

Um, in terms of the V design of the home, the with it with the V shape to it, regardless of how we do the driveway, it's gonna end up with a curve type approach.

And so when you look at the geometry and the setbacks and the overall lot spacing, what what happens is you start to get some uh you know curves and stuff that are a little bit of a cumbersome, I suppose is the right word to use.

But with the arc design or the horseshoe version, it just makes it so much easier to uh move about in any fashion uh around to uh enter the garage and to get back in and out.

Um we also were it came up about other hardships, and so one thing we wanted to mention is is my wife was uh hit in a car accident back in 1990, and she had whiplash, it was rear-ended, but anyway, you know, physical therapy over time, she still has some limited movement to her right side, and as she gets older that becomes an issue.

I just wanted to mention it because uh it was discussed just in terms of are there any other hardships associated with it, and to a degree, you know, if you have limited movement, uh it's a lot easier to drive forward than back up.

But all in all, uh one other thing I would ask you to consider in this is uh this is a pretty distinctive design of the home and the character of it and the positioning on the lot and what's also across the street.

And you know, in 80 years from now, this will be a Brookings historical district, right?

And I think it's always good to have some distinction in uh historical areas, and this will become one someday.

And and I think the way it's laid out, including the driveway, is is part of that distinction.

And so with that, I'd open up if you have any questions or or comments.

Those are just some thoughts.

But as Kyle uh said, we had approval, you know, from all the neighbors.

One thing I wanted to read from Jacob Mills's memo that he sent when when he offered his support, quote unquote.

As for the driveway layout, I think that you are proposing what you're proposing is perfectly fine as you have submitted on the attached site plan, since you have such a large front yard and wide lot frontage, and we appreciate you keeping the wings of the driveway 30 feet or more away from the neighbors' property lines.

So we wanted to make sure that there was plenty of room uh in regards to not encroaching on the the homes beside it.

So anything I can provide further clarity on or any questions, Mr.

Chair.

I actually I have one.

So you said you have the the lot across the street, your own as well.

Yes, and that's where you're doing landscaping and some is there a driveway on that property?

Okay, no, it's a good good question.

Thanks for asking that.

That is a non-buildable parcel.

On one end it's 20 some feet, and on the other, it's like 80, so it's a trapezoid, basically, if you look at the way that's laid out.

But when we originally worked with Mills development, our concern was is you know, we'd look out the front window, and with that being kind of a wetland, it could kind of get messy over time.

And they said, well, if if you're interested, if you're willing to commit uh, you know, basically uh landscaping it and then managing it or or maintaining it over time, so we include it in the process.

Our intent is to irrigate that just like our lawn and and take care of it as if it's just part of our lawn.

Any other questions?

I just have a question for staff.

So the recommendation on this is not to approve.

So can you explain further why that is?

Uh the recommendation would be to deny.

I think uh based on this being a vacant lot with the orientation as proposed, that would create a self-created hardship essentially.

You know, a variance should be the um minimum required to alleviate a hardship, kind of should be the avenue of last resort if we're self-creating a hardship here.

Uh that would be the basis for the recommendation for denial.

I guess I don't understand that.

How could that be creating a hardship for them?

So based on the explanation of the V-shaped pattern of the home, it was stated that because of that orientation of the home, uh the driveway requires this horseshoe kind of U-shaped um orientation.

But right now we're working with a clean slate.

It's a there's nothing on this lot, it's a brand new construction, so all options are on the table for how you design and construct your house, could be designed and constructed in a way that doesn't require uh a U-shaped horseshoe driveway that requires two access drives.

So it's coming from the design, it's it's self-created by the design of the house.

Okay.

I drove out there today and got to see not only the property that you're looking at, but also the property across the street, great location, and then drove through the neighborhood as well to see if there were any other houses that do have two access drives.

And there are.

There are um at least two that are very close to you.

One I noticed at the corner of Sweet Grass and Wood Duck Trail, 2820, which has two access on the corner, which to me would mean a more hardship for people coming and going on a corner lot.

And then there was also one at the corner of Goldenrod and Sweetgrass, where there's a second garage creating two access points as well.

So I guess I'm not quite sure how this would create a hardship for you.

Yeah, I guess I appreciate you bringing that up because I'm very familiar with those two properties, and yes, there are two within just a few blocks.

One is just two blocks or pretty much on the same block, and the other one's to the south a couple of blocks.

In regards to the house design, you know, we when we picked the house design initially and worked with an architect to kind of personalize it and actually uh expanded it substantially.

That V design, you know, once you kind of go that far down the road with it, you know, it is what it is.

We would uh essentially need to start over, I think, if we if we're unable to figure out how to you know come up with a an approach that works effectively with that V design.

Yeah, along those lines I have a question for staff.

What what would this design look like if only um on this drawing the right driveway existed and the garage access uh was not to the street?

What how what are the setbacks right there?

Uh the setbacks are drawn on here with the red dashed line, those would be the front side and rear yard setbacks.

Uh in this case, uh it's a a sidewalk would be required on this portion of Prairie Hills.

Uh so they would have it be a 20-foot front yard setback in this location.

Um your question was how would the driveway?

So in other words, if we eliminated the driveway or the access point that comes off of the garage, what would that look like?

If you were to remove this access drive here.

Then leave as much concrete as possible.

So essentially that would be you'd be looking at a separate or uh you know different variants for that that type of situation where we'd be creating basically front yard parking uh to get to that garage and access drive should be um it's a driveway that would lead directly to a rear side yard with access to a garage.

So really this driveway on the north side would be the approved you know driveway by ordinance.

I think only the south one, you know that would potentially be a separate variance for uh front yard parking essentially to get to that driving through the front yard to get to the garage.

Uh but I think if the north access drive were um allowed and you know it was denied to have two driveways you could potentially essentially run the driveway uh from the side of the garage at that angle, you know, to roughly a point here, can I at the top of that uh that curve there?

Um I think would be probably the approved driveway area without any variances needed.

Okay.

You know, and that could potentially then allow an area to back, you know, back up uh turn and and drive out going forward, it would be an option.

I think to alleviate any potential hardships for unit to turn around on your driveway.

Mr.

Chair.

Before we move on, and he moves off.

I I do have one more question for the applicant.

Um is this safety concerns?

Is that your wife's condition with not being able to turn?

Like I'm a I'm just asking if that's okay.

Uh it's you know, it it's a factor.

Let me put it that way.

Right.

Um the our recent properties have either been on cul-de-sacks or like horseshoes, they generally call them, those small uh loops across a main road where maybe you got like two or three houses on them.

So it's it's been less of an issue.

I mean, it's a concern, you know.

You everybody can be the judge of how big a concern that is.

Uh the other part, like we said, with the V design, we fiddled around and and with Kyle as well as ourselves and looked at the geometry and so on.

And and uh it's hard to come up with one where you can back around without feeling like you're backing in front of your house, and you kind of got this chunk of concrete in front of the front door, which feels a little odd if it doesn't kind of tie to something.

But anyway, just when we've looked at different options.

So we we've done our best to look at at them and felt like this was the best alternative.

And and with the width of the lot and the support of Mills development and so on, we felt it was worthy to come forth and have a conversation.

Thank you very much.

Excuse me.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak for or against the variance?

Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and open for board comment.

Comments.

Mr.

Chair.

Um, I I'm looking at this and I'm I'm thinking this was originally two lots, if I'm not mistaken, and the way it was originally platted.

So given that, had you developed both of those lots in independently, there would have been two curb cuts.

And and so that property line disappeared between the two.

Um, and so now we're gonna say you can only have one curb cut.

Um I I think this is a uh very well laid out plan, and and you know, I I like the design of the the V-shaped home, it's something you don't see a lot, but if all we're deciding on is whether we allow one curb cut or two, well, like I said before, um there would have been two curb cuts there anyway had those two lots not been combined.

So uh I'm I'm in favor of uh approving this uh this provision, uh Mr.

Chair Actually I I find uh Roger's points compelling.

I think the thing that I'm struggling with is to see a hardship here given what we have on the table.

Um but uh I I think that is a fairly compelling point for me.

Um I guess I might have to think about it some more now.

Thanks.

Commissioner Akin, did you have something I thought you were motioning earlier?

Uh yeah, I mean mostly I think it was covered with uh Bill Joe's comments and um and the others here.

So appreciate it, but yeah, I think I think they're answered.

Mr.

Chair.

I would I used uh Commissioner Limmer's pen to roughly measure, so this is not, but I was looking to see the only way I could think to where the concrete would look less odd if you had one would be you would almost have to rotate the home clockwise so the garage was facing straight, but you're also creating closer, you know, you're creating um the house would be closer to both setbacks then.

Um I'm just gonna ask this because how wide could if these were two lots?

How wide can is it 36 feet?

Is that the max width of each of each other?

Are you asking for a driveway?

Yeah, if you if if this was platted as two lots like it was supposed to be, and somebody put two garages.

If there's two garages, how wide can those curb cuts be?

36 feet, right?

Or the width of the max width of this garage?

The curb can be up to 24 feet in width.

It can be expanded to 36 feet to match the width of a garage.

So uh if there were two homes on two lots and both had 36 foot wide you know free-stall garages, then both could have 36 foot wide curb cuts.

Okay.

36.

That's 72.

So yeah, everywhere.

Can I can I get some clarification?

I I'm just in curious in general.

Um what is the city's concerns with having two curb cuts on this?

Is it snow removal?

Is it safety ingress onto the road?

Like what is the concern?

I think when you get into areas with smaller lots, um a concentration of driveways, you have reduced on-street parking.

Um you would have more ingress and egress in a smaller area.

Obviously, this is in a uh a larger lot in a development with other larger lots, so it'd be less of a concern in terms of on-street parking.

Um, and the point is valid uh noting that there would be two here if it were two lots, so all valid points.

But I think the original intent was um in smaller lots, yeah.

You eliminate a lot of opportunities for on-street parking.

Okay.

Any other comments?

Ryan would call in the role.

Michael?

Yes.

Limmer?

Yes.

Spear?

Yes.

Heinrich?

Yes.

Braun?

Yes.

Solemn?

Yes.

Aiken?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um, next item on the agenda 5B variants uh for 3106th Street sign size.

Ryan, would you introduce the topic?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

The next variance on the agenda is at 3100 6th Street.

Uh the variance is for a larger than allowed sign.

The applicant of Stein sign display on behalf of the property owner John Mills.

The property is located in a business B3 heavy district.

Request is for a 268 square foot sign according to section 944 73, table three.

The maximum size for a sign, an individual sign on the B3 heavy district is 160 square feet.

Staff recommendation would be to approve a variance up to 240 square feet.

And the Board of Adjustments action would be to approve or deny.

The lot in question, 3100 sixth street is shown here outlined in blue.

It's just southeast of the intersection of 6th Street and LaFever Drive.

And the sign would be located approximately in the red uh box area.

Here's a site plan uh presented by the applicant showing where that uh sign would be located on the lot.

It would meet the required setbacks for a sign and sign diagram here showing if you have 14 by roughly 19 uh foot sign.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um is there a motion to approve the variance?

I'll make the motion with the uh 268 square foot allowed.

Second um thank you.

We'll now open the public hearing.

Is there anyone here that would like to speak in favor of the variance?

Good evening, board.

Um, I'm Jason Crow.

I represent Stein Sign Display.

Um thank you for the opportunity today.

Um we at Stein Sign Display are requesting a variance for a digital billboard measuring 268 square feet with a setback of 140 feet from the roadway.

The current code limits uh boards up to 160 square feet.

Um our request is based on three things uh safety, consistency, and community enhancement.

Um, first safety, um the United States sign council has studied sign legibility extensively at normal arterial speeds of 35 miles an hour.

Drivers need letters in the range of nine to eight eighteen inches in height to read a message safely in a single glance.

On 160 square foot sign, that size of the copy is very constrained, especially when you add multiple lanes, logos, and spacing.

Uh the 268 square foot face provides about 30% more usable copy area, which gives drivers a safer, clearer message, meaning their eyes are on the road longer and not strained to read smaller copy.

Um, second is consistency.

Burkings already has a digital billboard that's 171 square feet with only an 85-foot setback.

Our request is at 140 feet is proportional, in fact, slightly more conservative when you compare square foot per foot of setback.

Uh the current Qdoba billboard billboard is 2.01 square foot per foot of setback.

Our proposed location would be only 1.91 square feet per foot of setback.

Um, our third point is uh community enhancement.

The city ordinance requires spacing, landscape planning, and architectural treatment for free standing signs.

We would like to meet those requirements.

We'll install landscape planning bed with four native species of shrubs and grasses, and we will wrap the pole in decorative cover that complements the existing building on the lot.

This ensures the sign not only serves its purpose but also contributes to the corridor's aesthetics and character.

So, in summary, the variance is not about making the sign bigger for its own sake, it's about aligning with national safety standards, ensuring fairness with existing approvals and adding value to the property through thoughtful design.

For those reasons, we respectfully ask for your approval.

Thank you.

Any questions for the applicant?

I do have a question.

What will be on the display?

It'll be off-premise advertising for any advertisers that we can advertise on our billboards.

And so far, our markets include um Yankton, Madison, Vermilion, Aberdeen, Watertown.

That's kind of like the east eastern regional platform.

Any others?

Thank you.

Oh, go ahead.

Sorry.

Um looking at at the dimensions of that close up, you know, 14-4, 18 foot nine.

It is there some physical reason that you've come up with those dimensions.

I'm I'm thinking about LED modules.

I mean, it absolutely that that's what I'm wondering as far as putting the sign together.

You know, you you stack your LED blocks, and that's what you end up with is 14.4.

And so then what would be the next step down from that?

Um, so the the reason why we come up with these dimensions is it's a standard of what we currently carry in our portfolio.

Um so the the reason why we come up with these dimensions is it's a standard of what we currently carry in our portfolio so just for ease of use of um graphics and spending time on graphics that you get in your advertiser you give a sub one graphic we don't have to sit and and kind of parse it for each dimension of billboard that we do have um and the step down I'm not sure what that would be I'd have to go through our dectronics representative and kind of look at the various um options so it is this a decronic sign it is yep okay we primarily source uh their products I have another question um the display itself will it be static or will it be changing and if it's changing at what rate is it changing?

Yep it'll be a digital um so it'll it'll flip every six to eight seconds based on um but most commonly they're six seconds long so the stats that you presented with respect to safety are they for static display or for one that is changing at that same frequency um they they mentioned that distance it's it's mostly for digital billboards the US sign council um kind of uses that as a research topic Mr.

Chair what uh what product is this in Dactronics what is it their digital billboard yep their digital billboard it's um their BD line okay so just so you know the next size down would be 13 foot two inches and 18 foot seven or seventeen foot seven inches but that could not be a that might not be a standard product either so sorry I I'm well aware of the sign like stuff so I just wanted I have these same mods in our video product so I know the sizes of them but I don't know that that's a standard product for Dactronics so custom stuff like that typically can potentially not even be made or it costs a lot to make because it's a weird cabinet they they have standard cabinet sizes that they go with too I just wanted to let you next size down.

Thank you.

And can I add a can I add something um as far as the setback distance 140 feet of all of our billboards that's probably the most furthest setback sign and it's just like a I guess pretty much like a TV if you know you got such a small TV versus your 96 inch you know if you had something that's a 40 inch or less you know it would you would you know just take longer to kind of read that copy and it's just for driver safety purposes it's that's that's our intention any others sorry one more uh and this is like I know it's digital it is a static image correct like that's I I think the highways require static images and then no no movement it can't be flashy um no motion whatsoever thank you Mr.

Chair I have questions for staff one one give me one sec.

No worries um is there anyone else that would like to speak for or against the uh variance we will now close public hearing and open for comment thank you chair yeah thank you right I when I drove out there today and while I appreciate the comments about the setback it looks like that would be the ideal location based upon the parking lot and the property of and it just happens to be a great setback as well my concern is is that that part of town of course is getting developed and what is the city's stance on signage like when do we get saturated with signage?

When does it become too much and I understand now that we're not in that place and that we've already approved some signage for marketplace and so looking down sixth street what's the city's stance on saturation of signage well the city most recently looked at our sign ordinance likely two probably three years ago I think it was the planning commission um looked at some changes to our sign ordinance and it wasn't related necessarily to the number of signs but it was related to the amount of digital signage within the current um and you know future signs would be approved right now it's signs are approved on a per lot basis um so it's depending on the zoning district you're allowed a certain number of signs um depending on the size of your lot and um that wasn't brought up as a concern or changed the most recent time that we looked at our sign ordinance and it was more so controlling the amount of digital

Uh, the planning commission um looked at some changes to our sign ordinance, and it wasn't related necessarily to the number of signs, but it was related to the amount of digital signage within the current um and you know future signs that would be approved.

Right now it's signs are approved on a per lot basis.

Um so it's depending on the zoning district, you're allowed a certain number of signs, um, depending on the size of your lot.

And um that wasn't brought up as a concern or changed the most recent time that we looked at our sign ordinance.

And it was more so controlling the amount of digital square footage, I guess, um, along our um streets in proximity to residential and historic districts.

So I don't think there's been a concern about the number of signs in general at this point, just uh digital in certain areas.

Thanks for that.

The the reason I bring that up is because um some of our citizens have shared with me that there are neighboring um towns and locations that have a plethora of signs and has just been eroded over the years, and so we want to be mindful about how that shows up within Brookings as we continue to grow.

Mr.

Chair, if I may comment, um you know, I think staff's recommendation on why 240 square feet, because that is the largest sign that we allow in the city, and that's kind of where staff's recommendation fell.

They're asking for more than what would be allowed in any zoning district.

I think when we looked at the marketplace property across the street, much much bigger area, 26 acres, and we looked at the signage, we limited their freestanding signs to 240 square feet as well, and so that's kind of where staff recommendation came from is um trying to look at the size, um is it reasonable?

Is it proportionate to the lot area as well?

There is an existing freestanding sign on this site further to the west.

They are allowed because of their frontage, um, you know, an additional sign, but you know, why the 240 square feet recommendation is because that's the largest that we allow in the city, and that's what we treated the marketplace as well.

Mr.

Chair.

Um, not to sound like a broken record, but I'm struggling to see the hardship here.

Um yeah, I agree with the points that you made, but I don't find them meeting the threshold of a hardship, especially considering it's not advertising the on-premise business, so it's not really necessary.

Something that you would like to do, of course.

Um I think hopefully an appropriate question for the applicant.

Uh we currently have uh on the table uh motion to approve at 268 square feet, which is a request.

Uh would would it be worthwhile doing a request uh amendment for a 240 square foot sign?

Um worthwhile.

Yeah, absolutely.

Other comments questions.

Thanks, Mike.

I was kind of wondering how you landed on that 240, so um seeing no other Mr.

Chair, go ahead.

Uh I just want to clarify the original motion is including up to 240 or to allow the 260.

Thank you.

So, yes, that would be the motion that we'll call the roll for I go ahead for the 268.

Limmer.

No spear?

No.

Heinrik?

No.

Braun?

No.

Solum.

No.

Schmeichel?

Yes.

Bacon?

Yes.

Motion fails.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um, next item on the agenda 5C variants for 1016 Oakwood Circle Shed Location.

Ryan, would you introduce the topic?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

The next item is a variance uh for a shed proposed at 1016 Oakwood Circle.

The applicant is the property owner John Spring.

The property is located in a residence R3 apartment district.

Request is look to locate a shed within a front yard setback area on a double front edge lot.

According to section 94 398 B2.

Well this is incorrect.

Sheds cannot be located in the front yard essentially.

Which on a double frontage lot you'd have two front yard setbacks and the requesting to locate it within six feet of the front yard area adjacent to Madary Avenue.

The staff recommendation is approval and the plan the board adjustments rec uh action be to approve or deny.

1016 Oakwood Circle is shown in the uh blue outlined box on this map.

Um, as mentioned, it's a double front edge.

They have the primary frontage on Oakwood Circle and a secondary furniture to the west on Maderi Avenue.

They are proposing to place a 10 by 16 shed in that northwest corner of the property.

Um it would be six feet, uh at least six feet set back from the property line on Maderi Avenue within that um required 20-foot front yard setback.

There is a fence, an existing fence that is located roughly five feet set back from the property line along Maderi Avenue and would um screen and shield that shed from the road and sidewalk and that and staff's uh report and we'll stand for any questions.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um is there a motion to approve the variants?

So moved.

Second, Aiken.

Thank you.

Um we will now open the public hearing.

Is there anyone here that would like to speak in favor of the variants?

I am John Spring.

I am the applicant.

Thank you for uh taking the time.

I this is my first thing that I've ever applied a variance for, so I really didn't uh have anything planned to come up and say other than looking to do what my neighbors have done along the back side there um rather than placing a shed in the middle of my yard, I guess, having uh two front yards here essentially, and uh really just wanted to make myself available for questions if you had any.

So thanks, John.

Questions for the applicant?

Yeah, just a quick question.

Have you had any conversations with your neighbors?

Yeah, I've talked to I've talked to the uh benders, hogies, and uh um yeah, the vendors and hoagies on both sides of me, and they said they have no concerns with with this.

So to be fair though, not across the street.

I have not.

Uh I have a quick question.

Um there's a fence that separates it from the street.

Correct.

And the fence is taller than the shed.

The fence is six feet tall.

And I think the shed is ten.

What's that?

The shed is ten.

That's the ten by sixteen width.

The height of the shed is not ten feet tall.

So I think the walls of the shed are around six or seven feet.

So the fence you'd cover, but then you have the sloped roof above it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any others?

Thanks, John.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak for or against the variants?

Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and open for board discussion.

Questions, comments?

Mr.

Chair, just to comment.

I I think um there's pretty good definition of hardship here having two front yards.

There's not a lot of options for placing a shed.

Um, I think what the uh applicant has proposed here is very reasonable.

And uh I would vote in favor of it.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, I concur with that.

I drove by today, and you know beautiful neighborhood, and where the cul de sac is at, the front yards are pretty tight.

And then when you go down Maderi and really look where he's putting the shed, um, to your point, you you may be able to see it, but I doubt it because there are very mature trees that are back there, and even the neighbors, I don't think will be able to see it either.

Thank you.

Others, Nick, did you have oh sorry?

Seeing no other comments, we will call the vote.

Ryan Spear?

Yes.

Henrik?

Yes, Braun?

Yes.

Solemn?

Yes.

Aiken?

Yes.

Schmeichel?

Yes.

Limmer?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um, we will now reconvene as the planning commission.

Um the city planning commission is a nine-member commission whose function is to make recommendations to the city commission regarding requests for land use classification changes, subdivision plots, conditional use permits, zoning ordinance amendments, and other matters.

The commission makes their recommendation based upon the adapt adopted comprehensive plan for the physical development of the city of Brookings and the surrounding area.

As a matter of policy, all motions are made in the positive.

After a motion is moved and seconded, it is open for debate.

Those supporting the motion shall in turn give their reasons.

Those opposing the motion shall then offer their reasons.

After everyone has been given a chance to be heard, the commission shall review the testimony and the information presented, make finding effects and forward their recommendation to the city commission.

The first item on the agenda 6A, rezone of West Half of the Northwest Quarter, excluding platted area and section 20 Township 110, range 49 from ag a district to industrial I-1 light district.

Ryan, would you like to introduce the topic, please?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

The first planning commission item is a rezone from Agriculture A district to industrial I1 light district.

The applicant is the property owner Annie Hanson LLC.

Current zoning ag requested zoning as industrial I-1 light district.

The staff recommendation for the rezone is to approve, and the planning commission's action would be to approve or deny.

That action would be a recommendation made to the city council.

The property area shown in the red but uh yellow box here is located on the corner of 34th Avenue and U.S.

Highway 14 bypass on that southeast corner.

The current zoning map uh shows the entire area currently zoned.

Um that's it has been annexed now, so it's not joint jurisdiction ag, it is now simply AG district.

Um adjacent zoning districts include the business B3 heavy district and industrial I1 light district to the west with additional I-1 light district to the south on the other side of the uh future uh water treatment plant as mentioned the future land use map uh shows this area as general industrial uh that was changed within the last year.

Uh previously it was urban medium intensity future land use and it was uh amended um going through the planning commission city council to amend that to a general industrial category and that ends staff's presentation will stand for any questions thanks Ryan we will now open the public hearing oh excuse me thanks Ryan is there a motion um to approve the rezone so moved second solemn thank you we will now open the public hearing um is there anyone present that would like speak uh in favor of the rezone thank you Mr.

Chair Commission members my name is Justin Booker with Banner Associates uh we're the engineer for the project.

Um I think Ryan pretty much hit on everything that we wanted to express um the industrial I-1 zone really does kind of complement the area, most of the surrounding properties are industrial in nature, so we we feel like this is a reasonable request thanks just and are there any questions for him at this time thank you.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak regarding this matter?

Seeing none, we will close the public hearing and open for board discussion.

Any comments?

I think this was been in front of us here a couple of times now.

Um seeing no discussion, we'll call the vote.

Ryan Schwigel?

Yes.

Limmer?

Yes.

Spear?

Yes.

Heinrich?

Yes.

Braun?

Yes.

Solemn?

Yes.

Aiken?

Yes.

Luddy.

Yes.

Motion passes.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um, next item on the agenda six B preliminary plat of lots one through seven in block one of Northeast Hansen edition.

Ryan, would you introduce the topic?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

The next item is the uh preliminary plat for the same area we just discussed.

Um we received a preliminary plat proposal for lots one through seven in block one of any hands in addition.

The applicant has the property or any handson LLC zoning would be industrial I 1 light district as just proposed.

Um site is roughly 54 acres, and the preliminary plat would lay out seven lots uh varying from 4.7 acres on the small end to an 18.1 acre lot at the largest size.

Uh within the preliminary plat, there would be one proposed street, uh, which would be a cul-de-sac.

Um one unique note here on this preliminary plat is this would um uh open up section 5180 5184 of our ordinance uh which would require planning commission to essentially approve a variance for this being that uh a block length.

Uh there's a block length of uh greater than a thousand feet within the preliminary plat.

Um so we'll take a look at that in our our site plan.

Staff recommendation is to approve as presented, and uh planning commissioner's action would be to approve or deny, and that recommendation is to the city council.

And again, um by making a recommendation to approve, that would be essentially building in um planning commission's action on a variance per section 5184 in our subdivision ordinance.

Uh the project location, same area here area in the yellow box, and here is the proposed preliminary plat.

So as mentioned, lots one through seven and block one.

Uh lot one uh starting on the north would be an 18.1 acre lot, corner lot located on the corner of the bypass in 34th Avenue.

Uh then to the south, there is a proposed street uh Ron Reed Circle, which would be a cul-de-sac serving access to lots two through seven.

Um lots two and three uh would be uh corner lots with uh limited access to one onto uh 34th Avenue.

Um the remainder would have access to Ron Reed Circle, and that ends staff's report, and we would stand for any questions.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um is there a motion to approve the preliminary plat?

So move so thank you.

Um we will now open the public hearing.

Is there anyone here that would like to speak um in favor of the preliminary plat?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair Justin Booker with Banner Associates Banner Associates again.

Um I guess I really don't have much to add at this point.

Um just would be available for questions.

I have one.

Go ahead.

How wide is that street on the call de sac?

Um the right-of-way width I believe is 70 feet wide with a 41 foot wide street, and then the bulb is a little bit wider to account for some truck turning.

Okay, that's I was just wondering about semi-traffic.

I believe it's it should be the same dimensions as Century Circle on 32nd Avenue.

41.

And this may have been already brought up, but what are the access points for lot one?

Uh access off the highway is gonna be pretty restricted, um, depending on DOT permitting.

Uh I my engineering judgment would guess it's pretty unlikely that they would grant an access with it being on the curve there and close to the intersection.

So it's likely that any access would be to the west off of 34th Avenue.

Other questions for Justin?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak for or against the plat preliminary plat?

Excuse me.

Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and open for board discussion.

Questions or comments, anyone?

Mr.

Chair, just a quick question for staff.

I I do see that the preliminary drainage plan is accepted by the city, but the it looks like maybe the final drainage plan will require additional annexation.

Is that pretty typical?

We'll require additional property be annexed.

Am I reading that correct?

Yes, uh, we have received um an annexation petition for additional land uh to the east of this area.

Uh that will be coming to the October planning commission meeting.

Um and that came about from uh discussion at our DRT revolving the drainage plan and as a request of the engineering department that um the drainage plan wherever the drainage would be taken care of from this development would be within city limits.

So they did request that uh additional annexation take place to account for the drainage area.

So that will be forthcoming, and with that being the case, staff was comfortable approving or recommending approval of that, given that the they are making the efforts to provide that drainage area through a future annexation.

Yeah, I just never seen that before, so I was curious what the circumstances were.

Thank you for the explanation.

Mr.

Chair, I also have a question, follow-up question on that.

So with the potential of annexation, and then where it shows plotted for what I'm reading as a detention pond that would be for this for the drainage, that would overlay on to the floodplain.

Is that correct?

We will we'll take a look at the annexation area at our next meeting.

But the drainage plan for this project shows that that is where the pond would go.

And so if engineering is comfortable with uh the drainage location area working through the floodplain um regulations and our our drainage ordinances, uh engineering will work out any um issues that that would present.

But at the at the moment um we're comfortable proceeding, engineering is comfortable proceeding with the drainage plans as approved, just with the requirement that additional annexation takes place.

Great.

And then on I think it's the aerial view.

Is that a residence that is north?

Uh there is one.

I'm not sure if it's an existing residence, but there is a an access drive from the bypass to uh I think it was a former uh university lot there.

Um that would be outside of this preliminary plat.

Okay.

Then I'll keep my questions about potential drainage issues for that house for next next month.

Yes.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments?

Seeing none, we will call the vote.

Ryan Spear.

Yes.

Heinrich?

Yes.

Braun?

Yes.

Solemn?

Yes.

Aiken?

Yes.

Schmeichel?

Yes.

Limmer?

Yes.

Luddy?

Yes.

Motion passes.

Thanks, Ryan.

I believe you mentioned you had a couple more items at the end of uh we're at the end of our agenda here.

Yes, so uh next meetings.

Um we do have a joint board of adjustment meeting tonight for those of you that are part of the joint jurisdiction board of adjustment.

We'll be meeting at 8 p.m.

for one conditional use permit in the joint area.

Otherwise, uh for everybody else, the next meeting would be Tuesday, October 7th at 5 30 p.m.

Um before we go, we wanted to bring up a couple of things uh for future conversation.

Uh looks like in 2026, uh the June and November meetings will have conflicts with elections on those dates.

So we'll be looking to potentially move uh the June and November meetings next year.

Um we'll want to keep that on our radar for um I think the I think the county was planning to move theirs to uh the first Thursday in lieu of the um election conflict.

So those are potentially dates that we'll look at uh doing the first Thursday for June and November.

Uh and then one other thing we wanted to run by everybody was uh an idea for some potential trainings, uh potential planning commission training involving uh maybe you know taking a tour around town as a planning commission and taking a look at some developments um in it in the community.

Um we potentially you know get the a bus or a large vehicle we could all ride in together and kind of do an on you know on site you know field trip through the area.

Mike's got some more to uh add to that.

As long as Mike's not driving.

We we what we typically do is um if there's interest, we'd line something up with beta so we could all get in one vehicle, see if we can get one of their buses.

Uh question is if one is there interest, we'd kind of take you show you some of the projects that you've had to uh come before you in the last year or two.

If there's interest, two is um we'd want to try and schedule something rather quickly, probably in September because um, and it's probably gonna be a special meeting, but because we're gonna lose some daylight, or do you want to wait until the spring or put I hate to do it in the summer time in a nice evening, but is it something you want to try and do in September yet?

And if so, we'd try and see if we couldn't put something together and throw some dates out to you to see if your availability and we'll try and take advantage of the light situation.

I think if we can't do it in September, it's probably best to wait until next year just because you can't see a whole lot in the dark at some of these project sites.

So it's it seems like by the head nods, we want to try and pull something together.

Um we'll see what we can't do.

We just have to provide 48 hours notice of quorum.

Um I did confirm with the city clerk today that uh it's not a requirement to be published in the newspaper.

Um, if we we have to post it on our website and our agenda board, if we can get it to the paper, they will publish it if they have space.

However, we've had some publishing issues um recently, so technically we're publishing in the Volga Tribune, which is a weekly publication that only comes out on Thursdays, and then um we're trying to also publish in the register as well.

And so um the good news is is you know we can probably pull something together rather quickly.

We will try and get some dates out to you.

Unfortunately, if you're hoping for a Tuesday, um, that is doable, but you'll have Ryan and Bailey be your tour guides, and I'll be tied up with city council meetings.

Um is there we like to avoid Wednesdays, but is Wednesdays a concern for anybody if we look at those dates, or do you just want us to throw some dates out and see what works for everybody or a majority of you?

Throw some dates out.

Okay.

All right.

Uh the other thing I appreciate your discussion tonight on the hardships.

Um that was great conversation.

Uh we haven't always not necessarily this group, but other board of adjustments haven't always really looked at the hardship and discussed it, and I like how you guys are trying to um in our world we call it findings of fact.

Um, but I like how you're trying to really point out what hardships may or may not be in these types of uh situations as they come before you.

So I appreciate that.

One other note on training type um things at the October regular meeting.

We will be um having Bonnie Foster, our city clerk join us to do a small um education on open meeting laws.

So we'll have that on the October agenda.

So that is something new with the state law is uh it is a requirement that boards um at least once annually um review the open meeting laws, and so that went into effect July 1st.

We have to do it yet this year, and then we will do it again in 2026.

Um so that's something that will be done annually.

The other thing is is we created on the Microsoft teams some educational uh information.

Let us know if there's something you're interested in finding out more about, and we'll see if we can't find some information to put on there for you.

Um, it's just training opportunities to look at, review at your leisure if you can't sleep or on a long road trip or whatever else may be.

So thank you.

Thanks, Mike.

Thanks, Ryan.

Um no other items.

Uh call for adjournment.

So moved.

Second.

All in favor.

Meeting is adjourned.

Thanks, everyone.

Call 800-410 6744.

800-410-674-444-444-44.