Good evening and welcome to the January 2020 uh January 28th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.

Uh calling the meeting meeting to order.

This is the open comment period.

This is a time in the agenda that allows members of the public to address the commission on items that are not on tonight's agenda as a public hearing.

If there is anyone uh here or listening that would like to address the commission, please do so at this time.

Is there anybody online?

Please come up and state your name.

Hi, Mark Schuleman.

I live at uh 4177 Berkshire Road, which uh I'm gonna talk about West Meadows development.

Um I'm here to speak just because we're next door neighbors and we have a concern of flooding.

And what I wanted to do, can I hand out a sheet of paper to each of you?

Is it something like this?

Is that the one that I sent?

There's perfect, thank you.

Okay, okay.

Well, good evening.

I'm asking you to table the uh CD 2025-007 cup for West Meadows until some court technical items are resolved.

Not that I'm an out know everything about all these technical items, but I've just reviewed all the documentation that's been sent since the first EAW was approved, and then I saw some just discrepancies that I think are pretty major.

Um first the flood fringe fill math has changed dramatically.

The EAW said there was going to be about 240,000 cubic yards of earth that needed to be excavated, and now the current one says 73,000, which is uh for both fill and compensatory storage, and that seemed to me to be a huge swing.

And I don't even know if the 73,000 covers the footprint of the buildings that want to be that they want built on the property, and second, the stormwater claims rely on a proof of concept, not a final model, and the staff notes say uh the Q2, Q10, and Q100 peaks would all be reduced and drawdown would be within 24 hours, but the city simultaneously says water resources will provide revised comments, and I haven't seen any revised comments, it's all based on theory instead of actual.

And uh second, the traffic impact report isn't finalized, so we don't know uh that drives requirements also for what they're looking for.

And then the wetlands uh from my not from what I understand from reading it, a replacement and sequencing plan is required before final approval of any of this.

And so I'm I'm just as I said, going through all the documents that hundreds of pages that have been submitted.

And then finally, uh we us in the West Meadows HOA wanted uh public notice clarity.

We're an HOA of 100 homes, and on the first quote, neighborhood meeting, I think less than a half a dozen people were made aware of this development, just like on the end of the Cal de SAC, but as an HOA, the whole neighborhood is supposed to become aware and be told and invited to these meetings.

And if we don't know what we don't know, we can't show up.

And so the request is to table it until uh the storage is reconciled for fill versus compensatory, a peer reviewable stormwater floodplain model is submitted, traffic report is accepted, the wetland replacement plan is provided, and the scope is verified.

So we're saying at this point the record isn't ready, and we want to be you know good neighbors, as I'm sure they do also, but we want a time we want it done right.

Yeah.

Okay.

So and as I said, we're we're uh I think one of the rich last time said some of our townhomes are very close to the flood.

Thank you, Mr.

Shilling.

Like inches.

Okay.

So that's thank you.

Is there anybody else who would like to speak?

Do we have anybody online?

Okay.

If there is no more people, then I will close the open comment period.

And I will now call the meeting to order and take roll call.

Commissioner Ross.

Here.

Commissioner Aishan.

Here.

Commissioner Klein.

Here.

Commissioner Krull.

Here.

Commissioner Yoost.

Here.

Commissioner Andrist.

Here.

Commissioner Boyum.

Here.

Commissioner Amund.

Here.

And I'm Commissioner Gupta.

We have a full um full attendance today.

Moving on to the consent agenda.

We will now review the consent agenda items.

Item 4A is the minutes from the January 14th, 2026 Commission meeting.

Has everybody has had a chance to review the meeting minutes?

Any questions, comments, or concerns?

If not, then I would take a motion to approve the minutes.

Motion to approve the minutes.

Second.

Wait the second.

Motion made by Commissioner Aishin and seconded by Commissioner Yoast.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any nays abstains?

No motion passes.

That concludes our consent agenda items for tonight.

We move on to the reports and recommendations.

Tonight, we have two reports and recommendations and the agenda.

Item 5A is conditional use permit number CD 2025 007 C U P by ML Group.

One LLC for the placement of excavated fill within the hundred-year flood-prone subdistrict and compensatory stormwater area improvements for the future development of a multifamily development project.

Okay, thank you, Commissioner Ross.

Can we have a report from staff?

Yep.

Good evening.

Uh chair members of the commission, Elliot Miller with Rochester Community Development, and I'll be introducing the uh floodplain development permit uh by ML Group ILLC.

Um so just some general information.

It's the old uh Meadow Lakes golf course.

Um you see the site on your screen there outlined in red.

Um the location is southeast corner of 45th Avenue Southwest and Country Club Road Southwest.

It's directly across the street from the Del Webb property that you've seen previously.

Excuse me, Elliot.

Yep.

I just see a lovely picture of all of us at the day.

I have that on my screen.

It's every other screen.

Oh, it's that's the way it's set up in the room.

There's nothing I can do about that.

Well, that was not very good thinking.

I apologize for that.

I'll slide over.

Slide over.

Yep.

And so again, tonight the request is placement of excavated fill in the 100-year flood-prone subdistrict and compensatory storage stormwater storage.

Um excuse me, city teammates tonight are approving uh approval with recommendations.

Um be acting as the recommending body, and city council will uh be the final decision with a public hearing being held at that city council meeting.

So just a background information the current uh the properties currently zoned R3, so medium density residential, so it's prepped for uh medium style uh apartments, and the underlying land use is uh matches that as medium density residential, it's surrounded all by low density residential um land use and uh you know those homes similar to uh down to the south along Berkshire Road.

Uh the creek that you'll see right there, um that's all city-owned land, and that's a majority of the floodway.

On your screen now is the proposed excavation and fill exhibit.

So red would denote where they're excavating, uh, and then blue is where they would be placing the fill.

Um, and this would be to ensure that uh the development is at least two feet above the base foot elevation.

I tried that one moment.

All right.

Okay, so then uh the next one on here is just the compensatory storage exhibit.

So at the end of the day, with all the excavation and fill, um, and I apologize for not being fully screened here, but there'll be three compensatory storage ponds.

Um, and that blue outline that you see on the bottom is the floodway.

So all this is occurring outside that floodway, which is required by law.

Um, and so each pond is about 20,000 or so cubic yards of uh you know space to hold that water.

So when we look at the floodplain development permit, we're really making sure that a couple of things, um, the main two being that there's no downstream effect or any detrimental effect to neighboring properties, um, but then also that there isn't a reduction in um the capacity for the floodplain uh for any flood event.

Um so that way, you know, water isn't going towards other neighbors or across country club road.

Um, so that's what we really worked uh along alongside with our public works teammates um as well as the applicant to ensure um that that math is correct.

So the findings in fact and brief.

Um I kind of just went over them, but again, the applicant has hired a professional engineer um to calculate all that uh required compensatory storage, and it's all been reviewed by our own public works teammates.

Um, we do have Seth Logan in the um back here to answer any technical questions that you might have.

And based on um the sheet that we were provided today, um, there might be some uh questions he can answer for you, but um more or less uh he's just here for the specific um application, so don't get used to seeing him.

Um so again, public works reviewed it um and they've concurred with the analyses.

Um, and then the project is designed to avoid negative impacts to nearby and downstream properties.

Um, and and you might be reminded of the DNR stream uh bank restoration that's happening at Del Webb, um just west of here, which is upstream.

Uh so tonight recommendation uh city teammates are recommending approval with conditions.

There are three conditions.

Uh, the first to be the work contained within the conditional use permit is subject to a grading permit approval.

No work may commence until a grading permit has been obtained, so no excavation or filling.

Uh, two being any permanent or temporary wetland impacts will need to be permitted with a technical evaluation panel prior to any work commencing.

They have a wetland delineation for the site, um, but the tech panel review doesn't occur during the until the grading uh permit process.

Um and lastly, a second floodplain development permit will be required for future construction of buildings on the site to go over this basically again when the when they're building um those buildings.

So tonight they are not building anything uh that's not being proposed on this, it's just the fill um and excavation.

So with that, I'll answer any questions you might have.

Thank you.

Uh I would like to call the applicant up.

Please state your name and you have 10 minutes.

I'm speaking on behalf of the applicant ML group one.

Uh on the virtual meeting should be Joe Wall, who was the engineer that had done all of the work for the modeling.

He has signed a memorandum, it's in your packet to attest to the fact that we are filling this to the 100 year, and we have 73,000 cubic yards of compensatory storage.

So in the neighbors um comments here that I just got this evening.

Talks about the 240,000 cubic yards of fill.

When we did the EAW, we were going to fill this entire site to the flood protection level, just straight across the board.

That's two feet above the 100 year.

We're filling it to the 100-year now overall, but each building pad would have the extra two feet.

So we're substantially less than the 240,000 that we originally calculated.

So we're only putting the compass compensatory storage is only the 73,000.

So we're going to grade that area in white, except for the commercial on the top, place the 73,000 yards and take it out of the area.

That's, I guess I call it purple.

And place it in there.

That's that's the whole request for the uh condition use permit.

Conditional use permit doesn't give us any permission to build.

We can't go out there tomorrow and build houses or anything if you should approve the conditional use permit tonight.

He goes on to the council for review.

The wetland replacement plan is currently in process with Ken Arnt, a national uh wetland firm.

And he will be able to produce a replacement plan for the wetlands that are impacted on the site.

That's not on the agenda tonight.

That's why it's a condition of the conditioners permit.

So conditional use permits work this way is that under certain conditions, you can do what you want to do, and then you list them and you have to satisfy them.

Then you have the next step, which is your mass grading, your letter of map revision to the FEMA, a final grading plan, a preliminary plat, the final traffic study, uh, and the wetland replacement plan.

So those are all underneath.

We we can't get off first base if we don't get a condition use permit approved with conditions.

And we it's on a burdens on us to prove that we can get the other these three conditions satisfied.

So if you approve this tonight, you're subjecting it to those three conditions to which our development team and all the engineers are involved in it, have to satisfy those three conditions.

Um if you have specific questions about the hydrology, I would suggest that um Joe Wall answer those.

Um the second comment they had was stormwater reliant proof of concept, not a stamped final model.

Well, the model is stamped.

We do have that, as I mentioned.

And the other thing is that um the comment about we did get some additional comments from public works, so we have the best, and I think Mr.

Logan could confirm that before you so that was item two, and then the traffic impact report doesn't weigh in on this part of the project that comes comes later with our preliminary plan.

So we have done a preliminary traffic study.

We have dealt with the county, we have dealt with the city.

Uh counties, uh reconstruction project of county 34 move from 2027 to 2029.

And if we got started, luckily started this year on our project, which is a questionable, it takes us probably a couple years before we get people living there.

So you have any questions?

So again, as a condition you we agree with the three conditions that are on here.

We've had additional documentation on or we addressed additional questions of the public works folks, and um again, the EAW was a mass grading plan.

It put it two feet above the hundred-year elevation.

Okay.

Any questions for the applicant?

I think I want you to go over the math that you went over in the beginning about the two feet and the 24,000 uh cubic yards.

Can you just go over it again?

Okay.

So in the um EAW, when you start EAW, you don't you do not necessarily have exact building pads and layouts.

So we did the best we could.

We had a layout that looks pretty close to this.

And instead of filling the site and digging it out of the purple and filling the site to the 100-year level, we went to what's called the flood protection level, which is two feet above that.

Okay, and that's what created the high increase in cubic yards shown in the EAW.

So, how is it when we do an EAW?

You want to make sure you don't understate what you're doing.

You want to make sure you give it the worst case scenario so that any questions come up from the environmental folks that are viewing it, we can we can address them.

Okay.

Okay.

So we're down here now, we were up here.

Okay.

Okay.

And I just want to make sure it's you everyone understands that the compensatory storage is you dig a cute, you fill a cubic yard of dirt on that site, and in the white, you dig another cubic yard of dirt out on a purple, and you're placing it from there onto the site.

Yeah.

We're not hauling material into the site.

Okay.

Anybody to ask staff questions?

Say that again.

Well, we have an opportunity to ask staff questions.

I think so, yes.

Okay.

Now or later.

Uh we can ask now, I think.

We have everybody here.

What is the difference between a floodplain and a flood way?

Assume the blue is the floodway, and the white, purple, and blue together are the floodplain.

Yeah.

So the blue line extents, that dashed line there, is the hundred-year floodplain extents.

So imagine it is a big basin that would be in a hundred-year storm event.

It's planned to fill up to the very minimum or to that elevation.

The blue flood way is a lot where I'm sorry, so there's a blue dashed line.

It's hard to see it.

Could we pull up the county map?

Okay.

Again, what is that?

I can do it, Elliot.

Is it towards the top of the screen?

Yes.

Oh, it's okay.

So the floodway is a planning exercise that you do when you're modeling a floodplain.

So in the floodway condition here.

So this will show it a little better.

That red and blue area is the floodway, which they are not impacting at all.

Um you want to turn off the flood prone, the county.

Yeah, perfect.

Um, so you could in theory, other places within FEMA mapped areas.

You could fill the blue hatched area completely, and you would be able to contain the hundred-year flood within that red and blue hatched area.

Rochester, as part of the UDC, adopted the compensatory storage requirement.

So any fill placed within the hundred-year floodplain, which is the blue area, is required compensatory storage, which is what we're here today to discuss.

They aren't building buildings with this plan, so there's no elevation requirement for a low floors.

There's no rate control requirement because they're not installing any impervious surfaces.

This is purely an accounting exercise.

They are putting in X amount of fill within the floodplain within that blue area.

They need to replace it with a compensatory storage of Y.

Those two have to equal.

And that's what they demonstrated working with us.

Please go ahead.

Having done this work.

So the we worked extensively with the DNR to review this, which helps administer the FEMA program for the state of Minnesota.

So the I guess is the question how you take the blue area and you put it in a smaller compact area.

So the plan would be that the compensatory storage basins are something that needs to be maintained in perpetuity.

So they would put a conservation easement over that.

When they fill in, they would need to replace that over time via maintenance agreement.

So my concern is actually, no, my question is more that everyone, if there if a bad event happens, everyone will do their best to avoid contributing to restoration and repair, including FEMA.

And my question is, is this an out for something like FEMA to say you built in a floodplain?

You changed a floodplain.

No, they would be following all the regulations and requirements provided by FEMA in the city.

Um so there they are required to elevate their buildings two feet above the flood protection elevation.

You'd be following all the ordinance and standards set forth by FEMA, the city and the county.

Seth, if I may.

Yeah.

Uh at Cables Development.

I'd also just add to that, you know, Seth's talking pretty extensively of the regulations associated with filling in the in the in the flood plan or whatnot.

I'd also note that with the UDC itself is based on um a model given to us by DNR.

And the DNR has to approve our floodplain ordinance.

So whenever we make even minor tweaks and revisions, including updating a panel, we have to go to send it through the DNR, and the DNR has to sign off on it.

So everything that we do within the floodway is run by and through the DNR.

Seth, you made some good points and just wanted to clarify a little bit more on the storage pond, composite compensatory storage ponds in specifics related to long-term impact.

Like what mechanism exists or ensures that it's being maintained and not modified by future owners.

Um, and then like is there a covenant that exists or some sort of an agreement in terms of long-term outlook?

Yeah, so it's a good question.

Typically, um these compensatory storage, we've had them on other projects throughout town.

They're put on its own separate outlaw, so it's a separate property, and then it's completely encumbered by a conservation easement.

So no development can occur, no changes can occur.

Um, and then any future changes, modifications would require this very permit again.

So there's permits throughout the Zumbro that the city pulls that um people that live along the Zumbro, any time you place fill within a map floodway or do any work within a map floodway or um map floodplain, it requires this permit, and within the floodway itself, it requires a DNR public waters works permit.

Got it.

Do you have another question?

I do well come back to someone else in the okay.

Does anybody can we show the question?

Why is this what I'm going to call site work?

Why is the fact that it is site work and not the actual permitting of what will likely be intended to be built there at all relevant for what we're talking about tonight?

I don't understand your question.

Can you say it again?

Certainly, I'll say it a different way.

But it's certainly about getting something built shortly.

Yes.

And I think it was mentioned within the year.

So why is the very preliminary nature of this site work relevant?

So it's a good question.

I think it might be better directed towards the applicant on the decision to fill ahead of development.

And I can answer you is that it's allowed per the UDC.

Um and so while we we've talked about this doesn't give them the ability to build buildings.

I'm guessing the reason, but I would probably defer to them is that they would like to set up the site so somebody could come and build a building if they're not building the building themselves.

Um so that's why you know I was pretty adamant on it's an XY exercise.

That's down the way we'll have um uh grading permit and a stormwater management plan that will address the actual development of this site.

But when they go out and put out equipment and start building the compensatory storage and filling in the floodplain, there won't be an increase in impervious.

There shouldn't be an increase in a runoff once that re-establishes is grassed area.

So there's no requirement for extensive modeling at this time.

Can that question go to the Yes?

I will invite the applicant back up.

Commissioner I shouldn't you have something.

Yeah, I just have a question for staff kind of along these lines.

This is just a step.

Correct.

The final greeting plan will have to be ready when they're when they actually have a building or whatever they're gonna put on there, correct?

Traffic study will have to be completed before they can build a building, correct?

So this is all just step one in several steps where there will also be opportunity for for um the neighbors to ask questions in future meetings.

Is that correct?

That'd be correct.

Yeah, thank you.

Commissioner Emma, you had something.

I do have one more question for Seth, which is related to the memo and the no-rise flood modeling uh on that for the certification.

Is that something the city holds?

Um, or does it come with like any ongoing monitoring obligation?

So the no rise condition isn't something that would be um required as part of this development because there are no impacts to the floodway.

Got it.

Okay.

So the when you impact the floodway, that red and blue dashed area, that is when you need to update a Hack RAS model and update and do a letter of map revision with FEMA.

Um, as I stated earlier, City of Rochester has more uh or adopted a stricter ordinance, kind of a belt and suspenders approach that if you fill with outside of that floodway, you have to replace it.

Um so it it it won't they've provided and looked at it, but it wouldn't have been a requirement of development.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Commissioner Glenn.

Has this happened elsewhere recently in town?

Uh filling ahead of development or just a compensatory or a conditional use permit?

Yeah, no, the compensatory filling.

Yep.

So uh the Nigan property directly to the West has applied for this permit as well.

Um the preserve at Maywood uh is a residential development along the Zumbro.

They would have had to do compensed for storage.

Uh West Transit Village, the city project also triggered compensatory storage, a very small amount, but it triggered it.

Um and then the past few years in my time at the city, the only other one I can think of is the uh on 37th Street.

It's it's a uh women's shelter development that also required compensatory storage.

Which was the first one you mentioned.

The Negan property to the West Dell Web.

The Doweb.

Yeah.

Right.

So they're doing something very similar to this.

Yes, yep.

They're I would say they're following the more typical process that it's following their development plan.

So it's paired with their preliminary plat and a few other items.

That one is being done by the DNR, and this one is being done by the applicant.

Uh no.

So the compensatory storage on the Dell Web property is done by the applicant.

What is simultaneously occurring on that one that has already occurred on this one is the DNR is restoring that stream.

So look at this picture here.

You can see it's kind of a straight line through that parcel.

It'll meander through, and so they'll be working within the floodway.

Understood.

I think that's another step thing because we approved the shoreline protection permit for the Dell Webb property, and now they'll do the same thing and um follow the steps.

So to me, it looks like you know it's an extensive plan which is going to help the hundred-year flood area, right?

Any other questions?

I have another question.

Commissioner Klain.

You just I think what you said, this will help the 100-year flood.

Yeah, yeah.

I have an issue with that.

And perhaps staff has another opinion, but the concept of the 100-year floodplains is widely discussed as marginally relevant today because the things that used to be a hundred-year flood now happen next year or 10 years from now.

There the things are happening more frequently.

So we will hear concerns from people in the community.

And I think you will end up hearing people say that the hundred-year floodplain versus a 500-year floodplain situation is lacks the relevance and the comfort that you may find in it.

Yeah.

Um can we have the applicant back up?

I think you had a question for him, Commissioner Klein.

Yes.

My question is on the two stages.

Uh digging the ponds, flying the fill, and then building on it.

What happens?

Yeah, I can't imagine building a house, going out to build a house and saying, well, we're going to dig the basement first and see how it goes.

And it seems like this two-stage deal that's before us doesn't.

The city's not on the hook in any legal way.

Is that true?

That's true.

The burden of proof is on us.

The city needs to review this information as we go forward as well as the DNR.

And we have to buy all the rules that everybody else does.

The reason you start with the conditional use permit, if you can't get that approved, we're not we're not going to be able to do anything.

We're not going to spend money on finishing up the mass grading or the wetland replacement or any of that thing because you can't move forward.

This required to fill in a hundred-year flood area, we have to have a conditional use permit.

That's what the ordinance says.

And the planners can tell you that that's the way the process goes.

So we know we can build buildings on it if we can get the conditional use from it to fill it to the hundred year, and then we'll just carve out the building pads where the new buildings would go.

And we provide two feet of uh floodproof elevation so that they have that margin of error in there.

If anything happens, it rises a little bit more.

But that's how the sequence goes.

It's been I've been doing this for 55, 56 years, and I can tell you I've probably done 40 conditional use permits, and it's mostly related to floodplain.

So there's going to be uh uh these homes are going to have basements.

No, no basements, just yeah, please.

We can address the home building question when that comes back to us right now within our purview is just the grading aspect of it.

And so in order to maintain that scope, I'm gonna make a motion to forward a recommendation of approval with conditions for conditional use permit CD 2025-007 C UP with the findings and support outline in the community development mill dated January 28th, 2026.

Second.

Seconded.

Okay.

Uh motion made by uh Commissioner Crowd and seconded by Commissioner Ayshon.

Do we have any more discussion about this?

Yeah, uh we'll have more questions.

Yeah, but if I can come up okay.

Oh okay, Commissioner Blink.

Okay, but I so I'd like to see that.

In regards to the question that came from the member of the community, he'd asked about um whether or not we could stay this because of what he perceived to be a lack of communication from this to the development.

Um I think I was looking at the at the um I'm not exactly sure how this works.

This is a question to the city and to the rest of the commission.

Um, as I was looking at the actual maps of the notification region, it overlaps with what appeared to be the addresses that were on the communication notices and the community meeting.

Um because it's part of an HOA, is there an obligation to tell the rest of the community, or do you just tell the people who own the whose name is on the plat that's within that range at cable scheme development?

So if you look at the screen there, the the process that we're looking at is the big one just north of what Seth mentioned was the floodplain.

Um identification requirements based on the UDC is 350 feet from the um lot line, effectively.

And we also notify the neighborhood if they're um register with our neighbors.

Okay.

So page 14 of the packet actually had this, like had these things drawn on there.

Um as I looked at that, it again they sent communications to the people as I saw in the document to the people within that range.

Um I guess I just want to confirm that that was appropriate and that we didn't need to send a communication to the rest of the HOA.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Anland?

Thank you.

That relates to that question relating uh communication.

Since the site sits on two-thirds of a floodplain, really currently the disclosures were future residents um that they would receive about the site's flood history.

Is that is there a method or mechanism that is already in place or a conditional aspect to it in terms of future home owners within the site?

I mean, if they're elevated outside of of the floodplain, there would be no notice.

Um I think if a mayo would, which was before the um commission probably a few years ago, um there was an easement put over those in regards to the shoreland.

Um but I'd say these those are kind of two separate scenarios, and there wouldn't be any um requirement here to to notice a neighbors because they would be elevated outside of it.

Okay.

And then final question that I do have is on phasing accountability.

So if the applicant sells the property before the building is constructed, um, does that second flood permit essentially like require run with the land or do they need to apply for a new project?

Conditional use permits run with the land.

Um if if they deviated from the approved plan, it would require an additional conditional use permit, but they'd be able to build what was approved under the CUP.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any question?

Please go ahead.

Commissioner Klein.

So the clarification.

So tonight we're talking about site prep.

But the actual the next stage that we're not going to talk about doesn't have to occur.

Doesn't have to wait until the work we're talking about tonight is complete.

Only whether or not we approve it.

Is that right?

Sorry, I wasn't following that.

Can you repeat that question?

So tonight we're talking about granting a permit for grading.

Correct.

If we grant that.

So the only expense that the developer may incur incur in the short term are the professional services to design the rest of the grading and the construction of the next phase.

The actual grading work itself need not occur in the short term.

Before the applicant, before the next level of application.

Grading cannot occur until there's an approved C UP and an approved grading plan.

That wasn't the question.

Not following the question.

The question is if we grant the CUP for the grading this evening.

And the applicant does not immediately proceed with it, the applicant can still proceed with all of the design work for the next phase and come to us with that application.

And nothing will have been built there yet.

That's truly what this two-phase, this two-phase process that we're talking about exists on paper, not in dirt.

Um Tony Collison is.

Commissioner Klein, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what you're asking is if this commission were to approve the CUP tonight, does it have some type of an expiration?

So in other words, do they have to do the work within a certain amount of time?

That really wasn't the question, but it just it's just a two-phase.

Can I take a swing?

Sure.

So I believe your question is do they need to complete the grading prior to coming forward with their SDP plan?

Yes.

Yeah.

I I'll let community development answer that.

But there would be no requirement for them to um.

I'm blanking on what that question was again.

Sorry, you repeated again, Seth.

Yeah.

So he's wondering if they need to complete this conditional use permit, all of the requirements within and build it prior to the SDP coming forward.

No, there is no there is no requirement for them to build it prior to the SDP coming forward.

So it exists on paper.

Correct.

But there would still be another checkpoint with us before that building commenced.

Correct.

I think the best way to look at this, and this is the Seth's point earlier is that all we're looking at today is for filling within the floodplain.

What happens after that is irrelevant?

The the applicant the applicant hasn't submitted any information in that regard, and that's not before the commission.

The question is, you know, does the commission recommend approval or denial to the city council to do the the fill that they have requested?

I'll call the question my previous motion.

No, we have to vote on that, and then we vote on the motion.

Yeah.

Okay.

Explain.

So call the question forces us to vote on if we're gonna end debate and take a vote on the motion.

So it first has to pass the call to question, and then we'll take up the motion to approve the recommendation.

Does that require a second?

I'll second that.

Um we have a motion to end the debate.

So uh I uh I'll take a vote on that.

I'll take a roll call.

Uh Commissioner Aishan.

Hi.

Uh Commissioner Klein.

Aye.

Commissioner Krell.

Aye.

Commissioner Boyham.

Aye.

Commissioner Hamlet.

Commissioner Yoast.

Commissioner Andrist.

I also vote yes.

So the vote passes and the debate is ended.

And now we go back to the uh item 5A.

We have a vote on the table, and I will again take roll to take the vote on that.

Uh Commissioner Ayshon.

Aye.

Commissioner Klein.

No.

Commissioner Krell.

Aye.

Commissioner Boyam.

Aye.

Commissioner Amlet.

Aye.

Commissioner Yost.

Aye.

Commissioner Andrist.

Aye.

I also vote yes.

The motion passes with one uh nay from Commissioner Klein.

Okay.

So you go on to the next report, which is item 5B.

Can we have uh Commissioner Ross back?

A little dark out there.

One time sit in the hall.

There's no lights on there.

Item 5B is major land subdivision number CD 2026 001 plat by Bigelow Homes LLC to be known as Westbury First, subdividing 34.4 acres into 105 residential lots, three outlots, and a dedicated city parkland parcel.

Staff, can we have a report?

Thank you, Chair Gupta, members of the commission.

Good evening.

My name is Desmond McGill.

I'll be bringing in this preliminary plan or major land subdivision application to you and introducing it.

The subject site is generally located on the northwest side of town, uh near the the fringe of the uh of the city boundary.

Uh our applicant and owner is uh Bigelow Homes LLC.

Um more specifically, uh it's um in this yellow highlighted area uh is where the site is.

Uh which is south of King Arthur Road and east of 60th Avenue Northwest.

Uh their request is for um a major land subdivision um for a it's overall a 68-acre um parcel.

Uh however, phase one is only 34.4 acres.

Um, and uh that would be located on a uh property that is zoned R2.

With this plat, there would also be um three outlots and a an outlaw that would be a uh dedicated park site.

Uh we are recommending uh that the commission forward a recommendation of approval, and uh of course the council would be the approval body.

Uh where we're at on this uh project in terms of their timeline, uh about a year ago they did uh an annexation and zone change.

I think in January is when you saw it of 25, which was approved.

That is a quasi-judicial decision.

After that, they made a submission to this staff shortly after approval for the general development plan, which we reviewed and approved administratively.

And I should note prior to the annexation as well, there was a neighborhood meeting prior to that step in the process.

Where we are now, they just recently did another information meeting with the neighborhood before this major land subdivision preliminary flat, which is a quasi-judicial uh item.

Should the application be approved, they would be then making submission of uh civil plans, uh the engineering uh water sewer, all that.

Uh that's an administrative review, uh, and then submit a development agreement for review that is approved by the city council.

Um after that, then you can submit a final plat, and then building permits can be issued.

Um, this is the P2S land use map.

Uh the site again, it's highlighted in blue here.

Um the yellow area that encompasses most of the site around envelopes it, uh, that is low density residential in our comprehensive plan.

Uh, we also have medium density residential across 60th uh Avenue Northwest.

And we also have an area of mixed use transit supportive corridor, which could be a um you know a variety of things of mixed use and intensities.

Um in terms of zoning, we got uh the site is zoned R2.

Uh we have R2 zoning uh uh to the east and the south and further to the west.

Uh immediately adjacent west, we have R1 zoning and then existing subdivision there.

Uh and up to the north, we also have R1 zoning.

Uh, in terms of the present land uses, again, the site is highlighted in yellow.

Um is generally undeveloped agricultural production land.

Uh likewise the properties immediately to the east and south, and also uh to the west of 60th are all undeveloped agricultural production.

Uh we also have a church to the southwest, and the rest of the uh development around it is single family residential.

Uh this is the approved general development plan.

Again, highlighted in the yellow as the boundary of the general development plan.

Uh, you can see that it was proposed as a two-phase uh development, the first the north portion being phase one, and that's what we're we're looking at tonight.

Uh, and then we have phase two on the south end.

Uh as far as um the approved GDP.

There we go.

Um I mentioned it's 68 acres, uh, a total of 220 units.

Uh lot sizes are generally 55 feet wide and 120 feet deep.

Uh, and there was a requirement for an um dedication of an eight-acre park site, which is located up here on the northwest portion of the site.

Uh, this is the uh Westbury First Major Land Subdivision.

The entire plat includes these outlots to um outlaw C and B down here.

So the overall platted area is 68 acres, but this uh phase one is um phase one is uh about 34 acres.

Uh as noted, this green area here that would be your park plan dedication out parcel, and then these areas here um would be part of phase two development uh outlaw C and outlaw B.

We do have five conditions of approval for this.

The first one being that there's a few things that the public works department was looking for.

Uh, the first is just a standard condition that civil grading and stormwater plans be submitted for review and approval, uh, and that this geometry of the street is considered conceptual at this time.

Um wouldn't anticipate any major changes, but um there that it is considered conceptual until those civil plans are approved.

Um we also need a new development agreement.

I think there was a prior one on this.

Uh so the public works department is asking for uh an updated development agreement there.

Uh also plans um uh should be revised updating outlaw A.

Uh, and it should be changed to a drainage and utility easement, uh, and it should extend to Cambria Avenue.

And then outlaw C and B public works is asking for those to be aggregated into one outparcel.

Uh the second is just that the utility line work.

This was a public or um uh RPU electric comment.

They're asking for uh additional line work to be added, extending a public utility easement uh over the front of uh of the parcel.

Uh the fire department has asked for either one of two things.

Option A would be for um uh a um temporary fire department access road, which would be uh which would be constructed along the south side of the development.

Option B would be for the developer to sprinkle uh um the structures, and I I believe the applicant would probably look to do option A, but uh they can uh um perhaps um provide us some additional information when they speak.

Uh most of the park land dedication uh is addressed with with that out parcel, but an additional 0.9 acres will need to be uh uh provided through uh cash and loo of uh actual land.

And then uh the name of Hazel Drive Northwest uh is a convention issue.

Uh should be Hazel Street Northwest.

So those are the five conditions of approval.

Uh we are recommending approval with those five conditions, and our motion is a recommended motion is to forward a recommendation of approval with conditions for major land subdivisions CD 2026 plant with the findings and support outlined in the community development memo dated January 28th, 2026.

And uh that concludes my introduction, and I'd be happy to answer any questions that the commission may have.

Thank you, Mr.

McGew.

Uh is the applicant present.

Please state your name and you have 10 minutes.

Uh good evening.

I'm Kyle Scove with WHKS here on behalf of um um homes this evening.

Uh we have no um objection to the um five conditions.

And I'm available for any questions you may have.

Any questions for the applicant?

Anyone?

Okay.

If no questions, the I just have one, which is related to the thank you, Commissioner.

In terms of the sprinkler access and fire access, is there an option that the applicant or builder is leaning towards since we've been given option A or option B related to it?

Um they would go with option A.

Uh there was also discussion about limiting the building.

It's possible we maybe could limit the building to the west side and stay under that 50 because they may roll into phase two rather quickly, but um it would be met, it would be discussed with the fire department.

And yes, A would be they don't want to sprinkle.

Okay.

A would be the preferred option.

The the access road.

Yes.

Okay.

Any other questions?

Commissioner Boy.

I was gonna say I think the access road is option B in the documentation, right?

Okay, yeah, the access road would be their preferred option.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Any other questions?

If there are no questions, thank you.

You might sit down.

Uh I would entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion to forward recommendation of approval of conditions for major land subdivision CD 2026 as 001 plat with findings and supported support outlined in the community development memo dated January 28th, 2026.

Second, yeah.

A motion made by Commissioner Ross and seconded by Commissioner Andrist.

Any other discussion?

Any other questions?

All in favor, say aye.

Any nays motion passes.

Um that brings us to the end of the reports and recommendations, and we have no public hearings.

Other business.

City council recap.

Yeah.

Can you have some thank you, uh, Chair Gupta?

Uh, we did have uh city council meeting on January 1st.

We did have one item on that agenda, which was the UCI uh monopole uh wireless communications facility uh development is 50 by 50 area uh with a hundred and five foot uh tall um uh monopole structure, and that was uh approved unanimously.

So that's that's all right.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Just a comment for Mr.

Caples.

Could you forward on to whatever department is in charge of these screens to see if we can get the every other requirement out the door?

If I'm not mistaken, I think that was a city council requirement to meet.

Um I don't remember the exact terminology associated with it, but essentially so that everyone can see everyone online.

That's what it comes down to.

What was that?

Uh so his screen right now is showing.

All I see is the dates.

And mine is showing us that.

Yeah.

Okay.

So he both of us have separate.

So I need to talk to the city council president, you're telling me.

I'll give him a shout.

This is a requirement.

According to I was told during the onboarding, yeah.

Yeah.

But we didn't have this problem earlier.

Right.

I I I would just note, sort of with the new rules in regards to virtual attendance at board and commission and council meetings, is if a council member wanted to appear remotely, the council members need to be able to see everybody needs to be able to see each other.

So maybe not as applicable here.

Um, and I'm not sure how hard it is to switch.

I just know uh heritage preservation also met in here last night and they brought up the same issue.

So maybe it's a quick fix, maybe it's not, but that's it it it is a requirement.

It seems kind of silly, but it uh um it is a requirement.

I mean, would it help if we kind of staggered our chairs a little bit so we could see both screens?

That's an idea.

I will I will leave that to your discretion.

Okay, otherwise we'll wait for Commissioner Ashing to have a word with city council.

I will do so.

Any other items?

Anything else?

Okay, if nothing else, then I will take a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Second motion made by Commissioner Krause, seconded by Commissioner Yoast.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye, aye.

Aye.

Any nays?

We are adjourned.