you you you you okay good evening everyone it is now 6:30 and I'll call this meeting of the Planning Commission to order the first item on the agenda is adoption of the agenda the staff have any changes no changes from staff commissioners is there a motion a motion to approve second any discussion all those in favor say aye all those opposed say nay the motion carries the second item on the agenda is to approve the minutes from the December ninth 2019 Planning Commission meeting staff any changes no changes from staff commissioners no is there a motion I move approve a second any discussion all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed say nay motion carries the third item on the agenda is to continue the public hearing for Northland real estate group for rezoning from r11 family residential to mix PUD mixed-use Planned Unit development preliminary and final plan of a tool a commercial subdivision known as the retreat on Crystal Lake concept and development stage PUD variance for setbacks and building height conditional use permit for impervious service coverage and gradient and steep slopes for an apartment building to be located at 1:5 309 maple Island Road presented by Miss gay Rose thank you the application we have this evening is got a number of different items associated with it this is not the first time that this project or renditions of it has been before a planning Commissioner City Council has kind of a long history going back several years of various concept plans and and different things the most recent would be last year there was a comprehend an amendment for the site changing the land use designation from low-density residential or single-family or one to mixed-use in the Comprehensive Plan so the first item is to consider a rezoning application to rezone the entire site from our one single-family two mixed-use Planned Unit development and that would be to bring the site into consistency with the comprehensive plan the second application is to consider preliminary and final plat of the retreat on Crystal Lake and the proposal is to consolidate the four separate tax parcels into basically a larger parcel and then have two Lots one for Grace United Methodist Church and then another for the application you'll be reviewing this evening the third application is concept and development stage Planned Unit development and that is to allow for the church an active senior apartment project specifically the senior apartment project is for a 100 unit senior active living apartment complex and there are a number of deviations that go along with that that we'll discuss further and that's why there is the Planned Unit development aspect of this there is a variance from the subdivision ordinance which is a little bit different than variances for the zoning ordinance that we typically deal with and that's based on state statute changes so there are a couple of variances relating to lot area and lot width for the subdivision ordinance there are variances requested for the shoreland ordinance and again the shoreland ordinance is something that was adopted by the city that's required for all cities counties townships to adapt Shore land management regulations and that is administered under Department of Natural Resources the city adopted its regulations back and I believe the 1990s and the provisions have remained pretty much the same ever since so they're in the shoreland ordinance the way Burnsville ordinance was adopted there are no Planned Unit development considerations or performance standards so when we're dealing with a Charlaine district any deviations from that need to be processed through a variance or conditional use permit the next item again shoreland related is a conditional use permit and this is related to impervious surface coverage it's something that is allowed by the ordinance but again we need to specifically call it out because that's how things work with the show of an ordinance in terms of the subject site we're looking at the Grace United Methodist Church site throughout this presentation or a deferred of it to G UMC just quickly the subject site is a 6.1 acre property it was developed back in the early 60s before the city of Burnsville even was incorporated and it's completely surrounded by Crystal Lake West Park except for on the west side we have maple Island Road and then the i-35 corridor and then across from the site is the Buck Hill Ski Club and on the right this gives you an idea it shows the individual parcels there are actually this is off a little bit this actually goes up to this point they're four separate parcels that comprise the entire 6.1 acre site and on the as part of the application they did do an Ulta survey so that gives you all of the existing conditions and as I had indicated the subject site was planted back in 1916 as part of the crystal oaks development and way back then the area was planted considering small cabins those for whatever reason did not materialize over time later in 1962 that church the initial church was built was a smaller church then we have out there today 1964 the city incorporated as a municipality in 1979 the first conditional use permit was issued for the church and that was to allow signage that exceeded the ordinance at that time for a Montessori School after that in 1986 several of the roads within the plant were vacated it was petitioned by the church to consider vacating some of these roads and actually the city Vake had more than what the church petitioned because they just determined what the steep slopes and with the development pattern out there and also the city was in the process of acquiring the adjacent properties for Crystal Lake West Park that they did not anticipate a future need for those rights of way so they were vacated and in 1987 and 2004 there were COP amendments for additions to the church the one in 2004 was a result of there was a big fighter a lot of fire damage so in order to reconstruct that and expand it somewhat that conditional use permit was approved and then in 25 or excuse me 2015 16 and 18 different sketch plans were provided by grace Church for the property looking at the potential to how they could develop the site further and then in 2019 there was a concept plan that was provided by the current applicant which is Northland real estate group LLC and then we did the comprehensive plan amendment and based on the City Council review of the concept plan they thought that it had merit and they wanted to see it continue so the comprehensive plan was amended to allow for this type of use and at this point in time we have the actual application in terms of the subject site itself there again this is part of the survey there are a couple of encroachments that I need to call to attention to Planning Commission one would be the left or the west side of the property the church parking lot the west part of it actually encroaches into the city park this actually dates back many many years the church built this initially in 1962 and the right-of-way was planted and available for them over the years as a right-of-way was vacated and the way that vacations work certain properties go to different Lots so ultimately what happened is this part of the driveway is no longer within the it's no longer within the actual easement because that's been vacated but it is within the park land the other area where there's an encroachment is that there's a small fire pit area and benches in this location which would need to be removed and brought in to the site so there's not an encroachment in the park and for this this is just the near map which gives us our most current aerial information and again we talked about some of the signage and the comprehensive plan amendment what I'd like to call attention to is that we have the south part of this parking lot is ultimately proposed to be removed and redone and then the building that's proposed for the apartment building it's going to be proposed in this area and you can see that the site is heavily wooded really on all sides and the purpose or the intent of having the Crystal Lake West Park is as an open space a large open space park grants were used to obtain certain parts of that parkland and so it is really not something that's going to be actively developed but more open space in there are trails and a couple of small parking areas that's really at for development in the park the preliminary plat identifies the subject site being split into two Lots we've got the northerly lot which will be retained by the church and they are showing they do have frontage that is proposed along Maple island Road and then the apartment building to the south and the entire property will be accessed through the one driveway access in this location here and then they will be doing PUD to have joint use of the parking lot zero line setbacks for the joint parking lot those types of things one of the items that was uncovered as part of the review of the project is the project is complicated because there are many different sections of ordinance and also different ordinances that apply and in looking at the subdivision ordinance which is separate from the zoning ordinance there are requirements for what needs to be planted for drainage and utility easements and along the front property lines there supposed to be a minimum 10-foot drainage and utility easement and then also five feet on all of the side property lines unfortunately with this PUD what occurs is they are they have retaining walls that are shown in this area and the city engineers determined that they really do not want to do an encroachment agreement for those there is drainage that is available within the public right-of-way and then they do not need to have the easements through the middle of the joint parking lot in order to address that one of the items is that in the recommendations from the city engineer is that a separate variance application be provided to the subdivision ordinance basically allowing these Lots not to have those particular drainage of utility easements the site plan is identified above it's very busy but basically it shows us again existing Church and the apartment building in this location here to the south and there will be joint use of this parking area there's an additional parking area seventeen spaces that is proposed directly west of the existing Church and then the turning radius has been identified and provided for as needed by our fire department for emergency vehicles the as people come in to the site there are they will come in and there are two garage entrances there are two different levels for garages and one of the entrances is on the north side here and the entrance to the other level is on the west in this location in terms of improvements they are showing a plaza area general plaza area in the front on the north side as you enter the apartment building and then there will also be a patio area to the rear of the building so those are the basic improvements that are shown in terms of development summary chart again this is much more extensive than we typically see because of the shoreland standards versus the mixed use standards vs. etc so what we can say in general for this project is that the there are several PUD benefits and also some deviations that we'll go through but in general they're providing more in green space overall and within the parking lot and building perimeter green space fence required they're providing more underground parking than the general ordinance standards require they are proposing less impervious surface and they could have out there and they are proposing less tree removal then they can do based on the standard ordinance for the planning and development the project is is identified above you this would be looking at the north side of the new apartment building facing the church and then of the joint parking lot as far as PUD benefits there are a number of them number one the existing Church has got a septic system and it's not really a positive thing to have a septic system especially in a shoreline district so what will occur on this is the church is already hooked up to city water they will be hooked up to sanitary sewer and septic system will be removed as part of this project that is seen as a benefit to the site in addition to that stormwater facilities will be introduced on the property there currently are none and I'll show you in the site plan next where those stormwater facilities will be also the apartment parcel because it will be sold and then owned by a private entity the apartment parcel will become a taxpaying parcel currently the entire 6.1 acres is owned by the church and they're tax exempt the existing overhead electric power lines that are located on the west part of the site will all be removed and put underground which is a definite improvement the project as I said exceeds ordinate standards for green space we are moving fewer trees there is legal non-conforming shed on the property that's proposed to be removed it's currently in the southeast corner of the existing parking lot so that will bring that situation into compliance more underground parking is provided and required and also this project will result in a multi-use trail connection for a gap that currently exists so that is a benefit that occurs actually outside of the site the trail connection will be provided along Maple Island Road in terms of the deviations there are a bunch of deviations like to call your attention to the ones with kind of a yellow or orange circle these are elements of the ordinance where these things are allowed provided you go through a conditional use permit or PUD so it's not really a deviation but we've always called them out as such so these are allowed per the ordinance the project will result in once they plat the two Lots the existing church signage and cross for the freestanding sign will actually be located on lot two which is the south piece to be sold so there will be a deviation for that off premise sign that's needed nothing physically will change out you know when you're actually looking at the property but the lot lines make a change so we will need to have some easements for access and maintenance so they can continue to get to that signage also there's a deviation which allows for the existing driveway encroachment into the park that's an existing condition this will memorialize that and that's one of the benefits of doing a Planned Unit development the there is a deviation as I said the overall green space exceeds the ordinance standards however when you look at the individual Lots the existing Church has 43 percent building perimeter landscaping as opposed to the 50 percent standard the PUD allows you to flex and have overall which does exceed the perimeter landscaping because this is an existing condition or identifying it as deviation and again memorializing that as part of the beauty items number H and I are different standards are related to lot area one is related to the mix zoning district and the other one is deviation that's actually a lot area standard found in the parking schedule so there are two different things and deviations are needed for both of those primarily because the second lot is somewhat smaller than what the standards call for in these cases however again getting back to that multiple multiple provisions or sections of the ordinance the actual lot size based on just the next district would it does meet that standard so these are these conflicting areas of the current ordinance then item J is a deviation to request a lot setback standard and I'll get into that when we talk about the site plan a little further okay is the driveway to the underground garage there is a standard in the ordinance that indicates that 7% should be the maximum slope when you have accesses to townhomes or multifamily projects and they are proposing with there's one of the drives into the apartment building has an 8% slope and the other has a 9% slope there's another deviation for setback for the level 1 garage to be one foot as opposed to 10 feet from the West property line there's a deviation for residential density this again is one of these things where the overall density falls within what's required or what's allowed in the mixed district but when you look at just a lot - alone it's it's over the density for that so the PUD again allows you to take that density and spread it over the entire project site there is also a deviation there is a different standard when you have an apartment building or multi-family adjacent to a collector Street this is a higher level street that the front setback changes from 30 feet to 50 feet so they are requesting deviation from that standard and then also another deviation for the parking lot and this is a setback again related to the front property line and the last one is for retaining walls eight feet and taller in the side yard those are can be done with the co p or PUD and they do have a tall retaining wall in the side yard so that will apply in terms of the apartment building itself it is a four four-story apartment complex and the materials are shown and provided in the packet on the west side this would be the side that's going to face 35w this is the lower or lowest level garage and then on the north side this would be the the second-story garage access so that's what those happen but this would be what you would see primarily when driving by have 35w and then from the lake you would be looking at this lower lower graphic in this location as far as the exterior materials that you will meet the ordinance they're looking at a series of different colors and types of siding materials these are cement board type it's not just straight wood so it will meet the durability aspects of the ordinance and they've got multiple colors kind of deep blue grays light gray color the roofing is supposed to be asphalt shingles again a darker color they have accents wood tone accents and lap siding on parts of the building and then the also the decks will have this wood appearance as well and there are trusses for accents on the gables and in addition to that they do have concrete stone masonry veneer over substantial parts of the building as well for the underground parking they have two levels and they parking actually exceeds the minimum requirement for the uses so there's not in this case although they're doing joint parking they technically can they're providing enough for each space so it's not like they need a deviation for lesser parking and then the unit types that are proposed are one bedroom one bedroom plus den two bedroom and two bedrooms plus den units range from 699 square feet to 14 31 square feet and they are mixed throughout all four floors so you don't have certain areas just smaller units etc it's mixed throughout the entire building also wanted to indicate that they do have this is the community patio that our food referred to earlier they've got a fitness room and then also area for gaming for people to get together community rooms that type of thing on the first floor getting to the site development itself this shows the existing property and this is the removals plan as I indicated they are basically going to be removing the southern part of the existing parking lot pavement it's it's in need of being fixed and then they also are going to upgrade the existing driveway the driveway will be upgraded to provide concrete curb and gutter on both sides which will help to direct stormwater instead of off of each side it will direct it to maple Island Road it will also improve the appearance of the site and help the parking or excuse me the driveway to last longer because they won't have that break up of the sides of the driveway the area that's shown here is the area primarily of the tree removals so they are proposing to remove 31% of the trees the ordinance allows them to remove up to 60% of the trees so there were no very much less than what the ordinance would allow them to do one of the items that we had gone over previously was related to the steep slopes in the shoreline district in the shoreline district there is a shoreline bluff standard and what this shows is the green line at the bottom here of the yellow area this is the top of the bluff and then there is a minimum 20 foot distance from that type of bluff that's called the bluff impact zone and this is set up really no structures are allowed to be within this except for stairs and landings so otherwise the ordinance is set up not to allow any structures within that the Purple Line at the top is a 30 foot setback and this is a 30 foot setback from the green type of bluff line and what the applicant is proposing is they are showing parts of the building that are shown in this red color these are proposed setback to allow them to be set back 20 feet as opposed to 30 feet from the top of bluff so these are variances that are being requested for these four parts of the site in terms of the utility plan we do have our engineering consultant Sarah that's here that can address this further but they're basically showing four different underground treatment systems and that would be there is one located here there is a large one also located here maybe there's three I'm sorry this one and then there's one right here so there are three underground storm water treatment facilities that are proposed for the project in terms of the other utilities I had discussed and they're shown on this particular plan taking the overhead power lines and under grounding them and then the site has already served with water that will need to be continued to the apartment and then there are a couple of conditions that we've identified from the fire department but they just want to make sure that there's adequate size water lines and that fire hydrants are put based on the separation standards this would be the landscape plan that's proposed they are proposing to do landscape on both Lots this light line here that divides the two is in this location and they are proposing to add landscaping along the front of all of the parking areas which is a standard also you have these are uphill so you're as you're driving along Maple island Road you're not going to see those parking areas but they have done a nice job of providing landscape screening in addition to this area and primarily along the back of the building here proposing a total of 53 evergreen trees for their landscape plan one hundred ornamental trees those are the smaller crab trees shrubs etc 72 shrubs and then perennials and grasses like day lilies and those types of things so it should be a year-round interest in terms of the landscape plan and it does meet the ordinance and exceed the ordinance standards tree preservation we talked about that the areas where trees are proposed to be removed they're shown with the X's it's kind of hard to see on this scale but basically in the area where the apartment building is proposed and also the improvements for the parking lot in terms of lighting the lighting it does meet the ordinance they are the closest lighting that's proposed for exterior lighting is within the parking lot in a landscape parking island and the periphery perimeter lighting does not exceed one foot candle so it meets the ordinance there are no wall pack units that are proposed on the side facing Crystal Lake and then this would be the stormwater protection plan if there are questions related to that they can be further discussed in terms of the variances that we outline there are a couple of differences the Planning Commission is most used to seeing zoning ordinance variances and there the standard is to find practical difficulty when we deal with the subdivision ordinance it's a little bit different it's called practical hardship basically the same thing but they're just worded a little bit differently in the statutes so I just wanted to call your attention to that the City Council has a variance guideline policy and the purpose of that is to have consistent review of certain factors when taking a look at variances so that we can be consistent in terms of the factors that we review when applied in this case there are 16 positive factors 3 negative factors out of a total of 19 the non-conforming septic system will be removed so that is positive stormwater management will be added the erosion should be reduced from the existing site condition the more trees are going to be preserved also in this area and within Crystal Lake West Park wilt is present and the city and the church have worked together for years to address oak wilt so there are some conditions that are listed or part of the recommendation that address oak wilt and the applicant I'm needing to work with our city Forester in order to make sure that that doesn't progress or affect any other trees in the area less impervious surface than with the ordinance allows and the irregular property shape is really also one of the main reasons for the variances of the recommendation from staff is to approve the project as presented there are a number of conditions the majority of a lot of the conditions really relate to the infrastructure improvements for city sewer this project when it was initially considered and even back when the comprehensive plan amendment was looked at the proposal was to bring sewer through Crystal Lake West Park basically from the lake underneath the park directional bore were digging to the site and that was something that was highly controversial with residents and also several the council members what this application is proposing is to route the sewer long maple Island Road and that would involve also the city obtaining a grant for public infrastructure improvements which would allow that and then in addition for those infrastructure improvements would also include that trail connection to make those two those two items which I think make this project much more positive in terms of how it will be viewed from the public and then also from the city so the specific items that we've included I've talked about most of them we have the variance application that will be needed from the subdivision ordinance to get rid of those easements access easement will be needed for the driveway in the park the fire pit and benches that are encroaching will need to be removed they will need to be across or the crosswalks are proposed within the development but they're just shown as painted and the ordinance does require that they need to be of a different material they can't just be painted on so we've added a condition which is the minimum ordinance standard they're also proposing vinyl vinyl coated chain-link fence along retaining walls especially where they're quite high and they're very close to where people could be parking and walking etc where they did not show anything on the common on the patio area and that retaining wall is quite tall as well so we have included a condition that somehow safety provisions be incorporated be it if they want to do a fencing or if they want to do retaining walls or whatever just to provide protection from the maximum slopes are limited to three to one there is a note on the plans that indicate something about four to one slopes but for the shoreline district and just in general meeting the city's ordinance our maximum slopes are three to one and then item number seven is actually a duplicate so condition number seven can be removed that's the same as number one number eight is the septic system be removed and then public sanitary be connected out by the church number nine because this is residential development being proposed adjacent to the freeway the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has noise standards the applicant has indicated that they are willing to do the noise mitigation to address those we've just included a condition that that is something that will need to be addressed at the time of building permit tree removal permit will need to be obtained before any work at the site they need to provide a woodland preservation Security Letter credit cash and the amount of ten thousand eight hundred and thirteen dollars they need to provide a tree protection plan and fencing to be approved by the city Forester and this gets to the oak wilt situation number fourteen that all mechanical equipment etc and these are ground mechanical equipment because nothing is proposed to be put on the roof of the building but they they do need to be screened in terms of sign of permits there is one sign that's proposed on the apartment building it's on the north side above the main entrance which is about 64 square feet or might be even smaller than that it's well within the ordinance standards but they do need a sign permit so that is included and then number 16 is related to the existing signage for the church freestanding sign and cross so that there is a an easement provided for them to be able to continue to maintain and access that facility exterior light fixtures will need to be downcast and shielded the light plan did to show that they would meet the ordinance in terms of the illumination levels but they did not yet have specifications for the specific lighting so that would be something that would be looked at at the time of building permit and then from there on we get into the requirements that are associated with the public and private improvements for the site and then also funding and grant timelines associated with that so these are part of the city engineering comments that were provided to you and they relate to the deed grant force mains and payment of those and specific dates on which the development contract and other items need to be included the development fees for this project would be their park dedication fee primarily and that would be I need to be paid and that's in the amount of four hundred seventy eight thousand dollars low impact litigant is a standard requirement so they need to provide that and that's just so that they are showing that they're going to continue maintaining their underground stormwater facilities now the developer is required to enter into a development contract with the city with the cost share items identified and access easement needs to be provided actually number 33 I think yep 33 is another duplicate of item number two so 33 conditions number 7 and 33 can be deleted and the last two relates to specific items related to the fire marshal for spacing the fire hydrants and sizing of the main water lines to the site with that that's majority of the application there was a neighborhood meeting that was held November 20th was attended by about 15 people say in general folks were more accepting of this plan than earlier plans and they thought that was an improvement there was still concerned raised by folks about stormwater management and how that would be treated and also how the building would appear from the lake screening of that building through the park in addition to that the city did receive comments from the Department of Natural Resources to this plan their initial comments that they provided to us were related to a couple of things number one initially and these plans have been revised since but initially the top of the bluff was shown in a different location and the reason for that was because this area is highly wooded and it's hard to see just topography information when you have a heavily wooded site so after the comment from the DNR about the location of that the applicant did go back out and actually survey these lines so we have the accurate survey information and so the highlighted the green line is the top of the bluff in addition to that DNR was not supportive of any encroachment into a 30-foot setback from a staff standpoint we believe that what's proposed is reasonable they modified their plan significantly an initial plan showed having parking Ashley in the city park over to the east that has been totally removed all the improvements are totally within their sight in addition to that a previous plan did show part of the apartment building actually encroaching not only into this bluff impact zone but a little bit into the bluff itself so they have modified that and moved the building and modified the design of the building so there still is some encroachment but it's not in the bluff impact zone and there are actually just these four areas that encroach ten feet into that 30-foot setback so with that city staff is recommending approval of those the Minnesota Department of Transportation also commented and their primary concerns were related to noise and as a condition for meeting the MPCA noise standards addresses that and they're also very happy to see an early on recommended the trail connections be provided so the project will address those two items with that the only other thing I'd like to call your attention to is that we did receive specific comments from Michael Young to Planning Commission and they were incorporated into the report with that I can stand for questions great Thank You Deb commissioners any questions for staff sure thanks for an excellent presentation there's a lot of a lot of pieces to that so I appreciate that my question is about the bluff setback as I understand it there's that there's a 20-foot setback from the top of the bluff that's defined in by that yellow area and that's considered sacred there's no you can't do anything in there and that's the bluff impacts impact zone and then there's a third the 30-foot setback is it just an additional ten feet and so it's that ten foot is I mean as you've kind of described can be in play by by variances yes okay thank you any other questions commissioners Commissioner E Anderson I was kind of curious about the noise mitigation is it like a sound barrier that is gonna be put up on 35 and you know what is that gonna be looking like exactly what MnDOT says they will not do they have provisions usually for meeting sound mitigation it's in how the building is constructed and it's usually a number of different things can be additional wall depth if you will additional insulation that's provided so that you get that attenuation sound attenuation also a different classification of windows that where they have less sound or noise that's able to permeate through that so those are the standard things and then there's a decibel level that they need to show that they would be within or below that was the construction of the the building itself is gonna mitigate the sounds yes any other questions commissioners I ask another question it's about the that there's a grant for the sewer infrastructure improvements and there's it appears to be a timeline that needs to be met which is coming up yes yeah okay and is that minused is it realistic to get through everything in that timeline do you do you think or what happens if if that timeline isn't met our engineering city engineer has been working with the applica for many months now and then also our former economic development coordinator its grant program through indeed and with that there are certain parameters and dates that need to be met for that so what we have established is these are kind of the drop-dead dates kind of per the state program if they do not meet these dates then what would happen is the city would drop this project in terms of application for a grant and we would propose a different project and the applicant is aware of that so they are aware that these deadlines do need to be met no miss Deane if you have anything Deb explain that very well Thank You Deb thank you I have a couple questions I know in the beginning of your presentation you had mentioned that it was changed to make this site was changed to mix use in the count plan when was that did you say that was done I believe last was last fall I don't know the specific date but then what for the commissioners what we had done is we initially submitted the comprehensive plan including the land use plan to the Metropolitan Council and they have a 60-day review period and then we knew that this and several other sites including the Healy Ramy property you know that there was interest in developing for those so we also submitted separately for those particular sites to be considered for the land use change and it all came about at the end of the year I believe yeah I believe it was the end of 2018 like November timeframe and then can you just you definitely described the mixed use definition please yes for mixed use in each of the zoning districts and in the comprehensive plan there are general descriptions for all of the different land uses and then also zonings and the idea of a mixed use district is to allow for flexibility basically getting away from the standard like single-family segregated from commercial segregated from industrial the mixed land use is intended to allow for multiple types of uses to occur in one area yet commercial say on a first floor with residential above the heart of the city for example is a mixed-use type development we call it heart of the city but that's generally what that refers to it's allowing for a mix of different land uses that can be developed in a compatible manner Thank You commissioners any other questions the height change that's not included in any of things we're talking about here yes I'm sorry I did not call that out the shoreland district has a 35 foot height standard maximum and in the mix zoning district there is no standard and we have the proposal is 60 feet and that is a deviation that is identified or excuse me not a deviation but a specific variance that's being requested is to allow that higher but that's not this hummus thing that we um it should be I guess I'm looking at what we just read off 1 through 30 you think it's helpful yeah when you do a fight with a couple of ones that were removed we did include in the shoreland variance to allowed the apartment building high to exceed 35 feet 60 feet is proposed in the recommendation I think he's talking about in the recommendations recommendations that you read up so that's different than what okay the recommendation Lenny we did not include all of the specific different variances and things only the ones that had need for a condition or a deviation and in this case if this weren't in the shoreland district and the mixed district had that 34 to 35 foot height you would have seen that PUD deviation but yeah this is Shore land and they did not recognize TVs so we have to go with the variance any other questions then I will continue the public hearing at 7:21 so if there's anybody from the audience who wishes to speak about this topic please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record and please sign in if you haven't done so already mmm my name is Patrick server said the site grows 49:31 West 30th Street single apartment so I represent the applicant and thank you for having an opportunity to hear public hearing this evening Deb has done a phenomenal job and the entire staff has been fantastic and giving us opportunities and challenges in order to have the site meet a very challenging site existing conditions but she's a bit very helpful and the entire staff has been great to be able to give us an opportunity to engineer site to respond to the conditions that we have here the site up or the site challenges are that there's a steep slope situation that really challenges and pushes the site pushes months to push the building as far north as possible if there's a parking lot where we want to try to economize and utilize existing pavement areas with that wants to push that as far south as possible so we've worked and evolved the building to follow that line rather closely and that means outlined the benefits that we've done that come in the form of beauty benefits to the site one of the items that I wanted to drill down and specifically is the stormwater opportunity currently that existing parking lot all drains to the south and across an extended green area and then extended down into the what would eventually encounter that runoff eventually encounters steep slopes so in those steep slopes there's been significant erosion corrosion that's happened and been caused by the increased runoff because the paved surface and so because of this project we're proposing to capture that stormwater runoff and capture it and treat it in infiltration basins so those in those underground tration basins are basically underground pipe that allow for the opportunity that for that water to be captured Burnsville has a unique situation in treating both the water quality and the water volume required to meet site we far exceed the requirements that are listed specifically as far as the volume control the overall that is required to infiltrate well our particular site is infiltrating is it captures and holds the 1.75 inch rainfall so in simple terms 90% of the rainfall events that we have over the course of a year are under that 9 that 1.75 rainfall event so those current rainfall events hit the pavement we're all off site and then roll down and eventually into Crystal Lake those rainfall events now will be captured infiltrated and won't run off site so that will be something that doesn't drain off on on to the existing area or off into the existing Park area that was really one of the additional you know the detailed pieces that I want her to respond to that the same opportunities the benefit to furthering improve the quality of the rain of the storm water and the water quality of Crystal Lake that we believe is a great asset for this area and we think as an asset for our overall site as well I'll stand for questions if you have any additional ones great Thank You Krishna Robert yeah initially when this was proposed this whole idea and this is just my own curiosity the property was gonna be based on it was like a retirement property for people over 55 and above yes is that still the goal for that or is an open apartment complex no it is active living it is it is for 55 plus that is that is what it's targeted for okay targeted but is there you're gonna by law that says if you're under 55 you can't live there I'm gonna get you can change that as it goes but our bylaws will mandate it go okay that's what I was wondering would you like me to repeat that through the microphones hoods no that's it was something I needed to know just based on the fact of the area and stuff and and the type of housing that I was gonna who was gonna be living there you know yeah there's a whole different concept of who's gonna be living there based on we've got areas in Burnsville where you know it's a little sketchy and then we've got places that are awesome there's a lot of 55-plus places going up and that's a big draw nowadays that I know that it's something that's needed so I was hoping that's what you were gonna go after you know because right now senior housing is is that a minimum and we need more of it so a decent place like this that I think is pretty nice-looking and it looks like you're ready to do up right is something that's needed in whether it's supposed to be in this area or not that's determined later on maybe but for right now the what I'm looking for is that type of answer to be more of a senior type housing great yeah any other questions commissioners we share a lot can you put up the list of the recommendations recommendation in and conditions sorry there were a few on that applied to the applicant directly yeah there we go the first one so for number four which is the crosswalk material the number five fencing our safety barrier an outdoor patio and six maximum slopes to not exceed three point one all right you uh are you aware of those conditions yes okay we're in agreement with those other fine that's all I wanted to know if you understood what that meant okay okay thank you any other questions commissioners okay great thank you is there anybody else who would like to speak please state your name and address for the record my name is Mike Hughes I live at 1309 Crystal Lake Road East I have three questions early in your presentation ms gross you mentioned that the city engineer's declined to give an easement for a drainage so my question is does that have an impact on the proposed waste I'm sorry storm water treatment system no no it does not on the plat the subdivision ordinance just has general standards you know regardless of where you are that front yards will have a 10-foot drainage and utility easement and side yards I have a five-foot drainage and utility easement and there's no way to change that except through a specific variants to the subdivision ordinance what the City Engineer is saying is rather than having an encroachment agreement for those retaining walls to be within the drainage and utility easement that drainage is already provided within this public right-of-way adjacent to the property so that will provide for the the improvements they're just saying that they don't need this in addition they would rather not have those easements planted in the first place then have an encouragement agreement to have those retaining walls yes another question about the stormwater treatment system that on the gentleman before me mentioned it sounds like it's designed for 1.75 inch rainfall event but the Twin Cities has already had several rainfall events that exceed that so what will happen to that stormwater management system or structure if our rain event exceeds 1.75 inches Witter city engineer address the 1.75 inch rainfall event will be fully captured and held within that storm of those that stormwater management system so the water will still go into that system and depending on the event it will infiltrate and then pass through the three various chambers and ultimately outlet through the discharge pipe and then enter yep as Deb is so what is natural here there's sort of flared and section one of the engineering recommendations was to do a energy dissipation manifold on that outlet to help disperse that flow even more and then it will be discharged into the right there and then Overland flow but if the rainfall event exceeds the maximum capacity is planned for will it overflow no no it is planned for a larger capacity but the way these are designed it will hold given volume and then continue to flow through so it will be still held within those underground chambers and work their way through okay the chamber okay another question is about the height you asked a minute ago about that Crystal Lake is a an FAA certified seaplane port and this structure is on the flight path are there any requirements along the lines of avoiding conflict between the height of this building and air traffic we do not receive any feedback that that would be an issue no okay also existing to recover yes yeah and the question if the neighborhood meeting was the answer okay another question is about the transportation aspect of this is very close to the freeway and I found a US Department of Transportation guideline not a regulation but a guideline that residential structures shouldn't be closer than 450 feet to a major freeway and it says a major freeways define is one that has 125,000 vehicles per day that part of the freeway I found in a report from the Minnesota Department of Transportation has 109 thousand vehicles per day so it doesn't meet that requirement but future growth might bring it close to that so my question is is this structure or any part of it closer than 450 feet to the freeway I believe that it is however MnDOT specifically gave us the guide instead all they are looking for is the noise requirements to be met and that's consistent with other previous applications that we've had for life a Healy ramming properties and also the ones the new project that's going up on Grand new okay those are my questions thanks for your attention thank you hi my name is Mikey I live at 361 Maple Island Road in Burnsville and I want to address the issue certainly of an excuse this proposed property does not belong in the middle of an open space part if mixed used was intended for areas next to an open space park the 2040 comprehensive plan would have identified them and yet of the hundred and twenty-one instances of the word mixed used in the 2400 2040 comprehensive plan I couldn't find any such areas identified there are two categories identified in 2040 comprehensive plan for which people can reside and they are classified as residential land use categories of which there are three low-density medium density and high density that's for residential areas and for business land use categories there's a subcategory subcategory called mix use the mixed-use designation is intended for businesses related business related areas in areas of high transportation the land that the Church in Crystal Lake West Park occupy are not for business use nor are they in a high transportation corridor areas in the 2040 comprehensive plan that are designated for mix use our areas such as heart of the city Burnsville cross town between Nicola Avenue and 35 W Fairview ridges a number of areas along Highway 13 in County Road 42 satellite and neighborhood retail centers and certainly the Burnsville Center those are areas where the Northland real estate proposed four-story 100 unit apartment complex should be located it does not belong in the middle of an open space park the reason that mix use has to be used for this project according to the developer is that they could not make it work financially with a lesser designation in other words low-density medium density or high density so in order for the developer to have a profitable project the city is rezoning the church's land which is right in the middle of an open space park and that's not right the church wouldn't have to do this except obviously they're probably having some sort of financial issues the acreage that the church wishes to sell could be brought into the park system Three Rivers Park System has acquired residential property that budded up to Murphy Hanrahan Park including the removal of homes and they just and then they would take the homes out and then restore the land to native species in this case there are no structures that would need to be removed and about the only thing that might occur would be to plant some native grasses and possibly some plants funding for this could occur from the following sources city of Burns Oh Dakota County the state of Minnesota charitable organizations and trusts as well as crowdfunding which is quite popular today if the above sale did not bring in sufficient funds for the church's finances here are some other ideas of how the church could take care of their financial situation according to Wikipedia the United Methodist Church has 12 point 7 million members worldwide of which 6.8 million members in the United States if just 10% of those members gave $2 that would come to 1 million three hundred and sixty thousand dollars that would certainly probably help their situation the church could establish a crowdfunding campaign to bring in additional money lots of people do that I want to talk finally about Crystal Lake West Park the land that makes up Crystal Lake West Park in grades Methodist Church was at one time owned by grace Whittier in 1961 she did it she deeded the land to the United Methodist Church which now bears her name around that same time she met Dick and Harriet Dury longtime neighbors of ours on Maple island they met on a boat ride in Lake Superior they built a friendship one that lasted until Grace's death many later prior to building on Maple island in nineteen in the 1960s dick and Harriet approached grace about a by buying a parcel land so that they could build a house Grace's reply was that she did not want the land to be broken up as she wanted it to remain whole as time went on dick encouraged Grace to have this land become an open-space park that would certainly align with the desire to keeping this land whole and not be broken up if Grace had excuse me after grace died she had deeded the land to st. Olaf College dick worked with Santa loft in the city of Burnsville to bring this land into the park system had grace not deeded the original acres the acreage to the United mess there is no doubt that all of the current land including the land that was deeded to the church would be part of the Crystal Lake West Park system none of it would have been set aside for future residential or business development in Crystal Lake West Park there is a nice little beach on the lake locals know it as Cherry Hill Beach there is a silent was put up after the park was came into existence and the sign reads as follows this is a really neat place please leave it nicer than you found it these words are not meant just for the people who are actively using the park they are also meant for those who are in the position of stewardship of the park and that includes members of the Planning Commission in the City Council and enclosing much time and effort went into the 2040 Comprehensive Plan this proposed development of a four-story 100 unit apartment complex does not belong in the middle of an open space park thank you is there anybody else good evening my name is Kurt and Estimate I live at 8:50 Bluebell Bay Road and in Crystal Lake I have two questions for Deb but one is the connection of the trail system can you explain that to me please because I've walked that trail several times and it connects pretty good but I'm confused what in terms of the connection is right now the trail to the south ends at this location so the connection that would be made through this project would be to connect this section of trail all the way up to Maple island Road to the trail that's among Crystal Lake Road West and what happens to the trail in front of the lake pretty good there there are no additional changes just the only thing would be the public trail along my boyhood Road second question has to do with the density you and I spoke about the density of this project several months ago and you indicated that the project's density far exceeds the lot size that are presently exist son but because of the PUD we could use both properties to get the density am i understanding correctly that the likelihood of building a second property here is very unlikely because we have already basically used up the six acres density the for the density the density with a Planned Unit development we calculated over the entire property so and that is considered the entire property is 6.1 acres in the mixed district you can have 15 to 21 point seven eight units per acre their density overall would be sixteen point three one so they're within that standard if we look at just the individual Lots a deviation would be requested to allow this density to be adjusted with lot two alone it would be thirty four point four eight and it's per acre but again because the PUD is allowed to be expanded over the entire site in terms of if this site could ever have additional density they would need to come in and make application for another PUD and another deviation with a plan unit development part of what the city looks that are the deviations and also the public benefits and PUD density is specifically allowed in the ordinance to be increased when you provide certain things like have been proposed here with them having the additional green space more underground parking then the ordinance requires those types of things but it is possible that in the future someone can always make an application because certainly what my concerns is base Lutheran abandons that site and along we come again and we got to stand here again and go through this whole process again and I'll be a lot less excited about that one that I am about this one I'm not very excited about this one because it does exceed a lot of the concerns that we have as residents on crystal lake including the setbacks and so forth and I understand this projects gone a long ways down the road that's not likely we stopped at this point but I don't like a second one there and that's what I'm afraid is gonna happen you know that church is likely to be abandoned in my estimation not in other people's estimation but in mine and I believe that's gonna be sold right to this same developer and we're gonna be back here again with the second building I'm not very excited about putting two of them in that Park one is way exceeding my limitations I anybody can make an application at any point in time I don't know what the future brings I know what's been part of the application and at this point the church wants to retain that piece but yes someone could make an application in the future to to build another building or different type of building or different use and how close are we to the limitations I mean how many more units do you think they could put on their way on the spot well they're at about in the mixed district overall at last fifteen to twenty one almost 22 units breaker and they're at a little over 16 so so their personal limit already um sure if I just may add debs correct at any time anybody can make application for anything for this site and we just can't predict the future of what what might come before us you know we as residents on Crystal Lake have a tough time putting an addition on her house you know without encroaching on the lake or doing something to the lake and runoff is considered and all that so we're setting some precedent here that's a little dangerous so thank you thank you is there anybody else who was just to speak about this topic okay then I will close the public hearing at 7:45 commissioners comments questions Commissioner Anderson I would just like to say thank you to everybody who came forward to speak to us tonight it's good to hear both sides of the argument I'm glad that that that happened so it gives a whole new perspective to everything that's going on here so thank you very much commissioners anything else all personal I thought is there a motion what are you guys thinking well me personally anybody oh I I think the plans and everything looked awesome I think that the the buildings gonna be beautiful in the whole bit but I actually voted against this the first time it went through and I was the only guy that did but I've got different reasons why the park is more sacred to me than a building right now and I'm I'm up here as a non paid volunteer looking as myself as a Burnsville resident and I'm just putting all my feelings like that I guess so for me I'm I'm not interested in putting out emotion right now I'm not saying against it but I'm not throwing this gonna do it well I like the project I think it's a great idea I think Burnsville is in need of more senior housing like this I don't know what the future may hold like we were all talking about before we can't all shake our magic 8-ball and see what comes up so I think what is proposed to us right now I think it's a great idea since we're sharing our feelings I'll I'll say I'm I'm supportive of the project I think it's nicely done I think it's a challenging sight I think too that if for example if the church were to go away and this entire site became available for you know it's a private property if the city you know it's kind of outside of our determination whether the city was should buy it and turn into a park that's that's kind of decisions I guess for other people but as a piece of private property if someone was gonna develop the entire site I think we'd be seeing a lot bigger building that would be oriented north-south with a lot more apartments that are they have lake views I think I think this is gonna have relatively minimal impact from the lake so I don't feel comfortable proposing the you know the the recommendation but I I do generally support support the idea of the project I mean I I do feel like the developers are trying to take all the considerations and when they're under planning and trying to make it as best as possible the fact like you were just talking about you know be more likely to be in north south the full plot better you know view of the lake and here the idea looks to me at least that they're trying to make as minimal of an impact as possible from people who might live on the lake as far as looking at that direction you see the side of the building not a very long north/south building there I like a lot of the ideas behind it but I don't know the the idea like you're talking about said it's a park space it's an open space and those are going away faster and faster and in suburban cities and I'm not a big fan of the idea of removing an e at this time so I don't it's a good just a good development it's good for tax base and all that kind of stuff but I I would not want to introduce the motion for it as well so let me ask you guys who talked about the park space a question then this is on private property it's not on the park space so I guess I don't understand the hesitation as if what's up to the park and as it impacts in a certain way I guess I look at it that way I mean the plan and everything everything looks fine if this wasn't near Crystal Lake Park didn't take two seconds you know I mean staff put a lot of hours into this and there's a lot going on here I don't know the parameters of what happens from Planning Commission to a suit because from what we do it's gonna go to City Council right that's correct yes yeah and one thing to note is that the church was there before the park right many many many years decades before the park the city council directed that they move ahead and changed the land-use to mixed use they did not look at nor that was there any suggestion of buying additional land in fact if you look at the comprehensive plan the city already has too much land and they have looked at ways how are there ways that we could maybe reduce that it's more than what they can take care of the parks and national resource committee you know would be involved in that there's a whole lot of funding that would need to go into that and he would need to get the approval from the owner to do that and they don't want to turn it into park or sell it to park so those are just parameters to consider as as a Planning Commission I'd love to live next to a big park - I'd love for all of the lake to be Park but it's not it's developed with single-family homes so the considerations we have before us are what the actual application is what the owner of the property is requesting to do and the direction that you've received from the City Council during these past several years to add on to it Deb said this project project brings 100 new tenants into the area that can enjoy the park that can enjoy these great resources that we have that can connect the trails that are already in place and that are proposed by the developer so I mean it's a balance and I think the applicant by preserving as much green space as they are and by providing - they're the future residents this great space next to the park I think that's something to add to your consideration as well what's the protocol for this going to City Council whether we're on board or not I mean the Planning Commission you're a recommendation body so you would make the recommendation to City Council this item will be a discussion item on the City Council's agenda because of all of the infrastructure parts and the in the grant so it's something that you know it's within your purview however you do need to make your decisions referencing and based on what the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and the subdivision ordinance provide for so we're not always voting on the personal tape aspect there's other things involved based off the zoning and the land use okay that being said and Steve's not here Steve retired you would have ten more minutes to talk I'm sure yeah then I'd like to propose a motion and although it's is where this is going anyway we're gonna definitely need these oh thank you the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the rezoning of r11 family residential to the mix PUD mixed-use Planned Unit development preliminary and final plot of a to lock commercial subdivision concept and development stage PUD variances and conditional use permit at one five three zero nine maple Island Road subject to the following 30 thirty three conditions as we're taking out number seven and number 33 I believe that's what I wrote down the other is there a second I'll second the motion any further discussion all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed say nay motion carries in City Council will hear this January 21st yes the meeting starts at 5:30 in this room hey the fourth item on the agenda thank you the fourth item on the agenda is to have a discussion about the transit oriented development zoning ordinance presented by Aaron Perdue of WSB thank you madam chair and members of the Planning Commission I'm happy to be here tonight to present a complete draft of the transit oriented district I just for discussion purposes tonight this is not the official public hearing and we're not requesting any action from you tonight those sheets that are being passed around we're because the letter size version of the packet cut off some of the portions of the map so there's a full-size version for you I'm gonna just walk you through the basics of the content and focus particularly on things that have been updated since your November 13th workshop we've workshop this a couple of times so I know that you're familiar with the basics but the way the draft ordinance is structured right now is that we have a purpose and intent section an administration section which is new from the hoc district that section does include opportunities for administrative review which I'll go over in a moment we have a few definitions that are specific to this district that we've included the next section which is much of the meat of the district is the regulating plan that includes the map that you got tonight as well as building types lot requirements placement and uses so those are the main categories that are regulated in the district then the last section is the general standards which are standards that apply throughout the district no matter what street type you're on those are listed there many of which were also in the HLC district so I'll walk through those with you in the administrative review section as we discussed in November a lot of the applications within this districts at least it's intended that they would be able to be reviewed administrative Li and so that means without Planning Commission or City Council approval there are a few exceptions to that a proposal would have to meet all of the regulations in the ordinance including the ones listed there on the screen if any variations were requested like for density or for parking if there were conditional uses that were proposed expansions of non-conformities those would all come before the Planning Commission and then ultimately the City Council we've also included language whereby if an applicant wanted to or anyone wanted to appeal an administrative review that could come before the Planning Commission as well and then you have a diagram and we're going to translate this into a user-friendly document that that will go with the ordinance but it's basically a how to use the transit oriented ordinance and so you start with the regulating plan which is the map to figure out what street your project would be on then you take a look at the lot requirements which are the same throughout the district then based on what type of street you're on you'll take a look at the building types and placement to see where you can put the type of building that you're looking for then we have uses and those are written into use groups as we discussed in October and November to be a little bit more general a little bit more flexible about the types of uses there are accessory conditional and a few prohibited uses in the district and then you would get into those general standards which include parking landscaping handling of trash and just building design and material so that's kind of the flow of information in the ordinance so going with that flow and starting with the regulating plan this has been updated slightly since the last time you saw it we've changed the future streets those dashed streets on the screen to correspond with what's laid out in the comprehensive plan so not necessarily saying that streets have to be located and inns acting exactly those locations but those were that was the layout that was envisioned in the comprehensive plan so that's why they're they have been modified in that way they're laid out types a through C and we have setbacks and build two lines associated with each of those streets types the ordinance defines primary Street frontage and secondary street frontage so if you're on a site that has more than one Street on a boundary the city planner can work with the applicant to determine which way the buildings would be facing to help determine which would be the primary street frontage then moving on from that taking a look at the lot requirements we've graphically Illustrated the minimum area the minimum width and the minimum depth of any lot in the district and those are all the same requirements as in the current hoc district next again by street type what types of buildings are allowed on each of those streets and each of those building types mixed-use multi-family townhome and commercial office those are the building types that are described right now in the hoc district notice that we've allowed most all of them everywhere it's for except for a couple of exceptions Street type C which are the wider higher volume streets we would prefer not to see townhomes on those types of streets and then the strictly commercial office type buildings the the flipside a stye a type streets we'd like to see a more of a mix of use on those types of streets then we've Illustrated all of the building types so basically recreating some of the illustrations that were in the hoc district our intention is to once the ordinance is adapted to create reference sheets that will have each of the building types and then all of the information that an applicant would need to know for that particular building type on one sheet so that would be separate from the flow of the ordinance but just so that they would be an easy reference and so again each of these building types is the same as what's in the hoc on the left that's the completely commercial or office building type on the right is a mixed-use building type on the left here is a multi-family residential building and then on the right is the townhouse building type so there's associated text with each of those in the ordinance and then we have the placement requirements so where can the building go on the site and in the previous draft of the ordinance that we presented back in November we had one graphic that Illustrated all of these we've separated them into three separate illustrations because it was a lot of information on one graphic so here we're showing the build to line so the the red line here is the build to line that's where we want the buildings to be closer to the street and for each street type there's a different build to line there's also a maximum setback for each street type and that's the Purple Line so essentially if you look at the build to line and the maximum setback you have a essentially a zone where the buildings can go and there's a certain percentage of the building the building frontage that needs to be located within that zone we've also got parking I'm sorry accessory structure setbacks I'll point out one change that we've made here from the hoc district and that is for accessory structures that's this table down here we've prohibited accessory structures in a front yard in the current ordinance there is a setback but for good urban design we'd prefer not to see accessory structures in the front yard and I don't think that would be likely to occur anyway and then finally the frontage requirements so as I was saying there's a percentage of the building that's required to be in that build to zone it's sixty five percent that's your current hoc requirement there's also a a maximum amount of parking frontage that can be located along the building frontage and that sixty five feet so that just means that you can't have your entire parking parking lot facing the street then looking at use groups these are much the same as when we went over them in November we're using more general terms like shopping dining services employment residential institution lodging recreation and open space and those are all defined in the ordinance so the city planner or Zoning Administrator has some guidance about which use group a particular project would fit into I'll say a little bit about the employment use group that one we based on some feedback that we got from you that we got from our focus groups that there might be some additional uses other than just your traditional office or commercial building that we want to accommodate in this district and so the text that you see in the ordinances is based largely on Tod employment districts that we found Eden Prairie had a good example Brooklyn Park has another good example where there's some allowance for some limited manufacturing some maker spaces some breweries and even some incidental packaging and processing so gives a little bit of flexibility as to what types of uses could go in the district you can see the list of permitted uses so those are the use groups that are permitted anywhere in the district and that's most of them there are a couple that we would recommend the conditional employment being one of them because we have such a wide range of uses here that some of those depending on the site would probably benefit from another layer of review we also have text in the ordinance that says that the employment uses would we would like to see them further from the actual transit stop those areas near the transit stop should be more active uses and not the offices and and that sort of thing so that's something that the Planning Commission would want to consider and the other conditional uses are similar we took those from your existing hoc district so drive throughs and a few others we did change places of assembly that's a new thing in your current ordinance it says religious institutions so to be a little bit more general and and legal we've recommended a change to places of assembly and then finally the general standards and again these are standards that apply throughout the entire district we've established a minimum density of 20 units per acre and a maximum of 80 units per acre for a project that includes residential units that is reflective of the density in your comprehensive plan we've also recommended a minimum floor area ratio for non-residential projects and again that's with the idea of increasing the activity level in this area to support transit and to take advantage of the transit that's there we have developed a separate section for parking which does not currently exist in your hoc district and that's again we're recommending a reduction in your parking requirements by 25% in this district based on the fact that there's going to be transit and therefore less demand for parking we did a lot of research on what's the appropriate way to handle parking in a transit oriented district and this type of reduction was pretty typical of more suburban stations bus rapid transit and not like rail transit and so we tried to be as conservative as possible with reducing the parking requirement we also recommend a couple of specific changes we talked to some of our developers and our focus groups about multi-family parking right now your ordinance requires parking based on the number of bedrooms and the type of unit mix in a multi-family we're recommending a straight one and a half spaces per unit we also recommended a reduction in the guest parking and that's in there too right now you reckon you require half a space per unit for guest parking which is pretty substantial and so we recommended a reduction in that and finally for shopping uses in particular we would recommend three spaces per thousand square feet again that was on the more conservative side of best practices that we saw for suburban areas that have a transit orientation right now your standard is higher than that and requires more parking and then we also added a section on bicycle parking both long term and short term so we got pretty specific about bicycle spaces short term by parking meaning by your standard bike racks which are pretty easy and then requiring some long-term bike parking too meaning that it's enclosed it protects the bikes and there's a few ways that that can be provided to that's in the ordinance pedestrian oriented design is something new that we've added to this one just a few requirements that new developments include walkways that connect to public sidewalks that there be crosswalks much like you were evaluating tonight with your PUD proposal and street furniture be required along a public walkway we reduced slightly the amount of landscaping required based on the fact that you have granted some deviations for that and some of these sites are a little bit tight we're still testing that to see if the landscaping requirements work so I'll bring you more information on that at the public hearing and then the rest of those signage trash lighting and building materials are the same as in the agency district with one exception the signage requirements are different for hoc one and hoc two so in the transit-oriented district we included an allowance for monument sign so when we're talking about freestanding signs that was up for a little debate and so I had the conversation with staff and decided that monument signs were appropriate but not the tall the pylon signs or the full signs so that's what the transit oriented district allows during between November and now we did an online survey to get focus's impressions of the direction that we were going and to get some feedback so in addition to those focus groups we got some general feedback we had 61 complete surveys filled out and there were some other partial ones but a lot of good comments that we got from there generally there was support for the direction that we're going and people really love the public spaces and events in the heart of the city in general there were some concerns that were expressed general themes were that parking is a challenge you probably know this already but parking is a challenge in the area particularly for events and on weekends so not every day not every night but events and weekends were the the time that folks really had an issue and having more signage about where public parking was located were something that folks brought up they thought that more shops and restaurants were needed and there were a lot of comments about pedestrian safety across 13 and I know that was a something that came up at our two work sessions so not just 13 but there were a few other intersect that were brought up so so where are we going now tonight this is again just for your discussions your discussion I'd be happy to answer questions and take feedback we'll make some revisions based on what you tell us and we're looking at a public hearing I have on here for February PC but I know that you're actually looking at perhaps your meeting in two weeks for a public hearing so depending on how the discussion goes and then that would go to City Council following your recommendation so I would be happy to hear your questions comments reactions Thank You Commissioner Roberts this is pretty cool yeah I mean it from a layman's term mean someone says zoning was cool I have to say I mean the materials we had before we got here was pretty extensive but um looking at the way this is and how you just explained it that I mean I could explain this other people as well this is a great way to understand what we're dealing with because we have a lot going on in the future coming up hopefully so I didn't even know there was indoor bicycle parking available but um no very good job this is this is it was overwhelming at first but this is a lot easier if I may add we're doing a lot of this already in our current heart of the city zoning district what we're doing is making some changes to things like parking adding the bike parking taking a relook at that long list of uses that we spell out and generalizing things and and coming up with new uses that we ran envision you know 15 20 years ago and adding those to the mix and and again we've had an opportunity to test the ordinance over time through projects that were you know in the mid-2000s to even you know as soon as last year looking at things like you know do the setbacks work does the landscaping work how are our developers reacting so I think we have a lot of good fresh information for this area I think it I've worked with the heart of the city zoning ordinance I think having the graphics in place in the zoning district will be helpful for our user it's sometimes hard to go from the design framework manual to another sheet of information to the zoning code and flipping back and forth so having something all in one spot I think will be helpful to the user so look forward to hearing your comments yes great presentation great graphics and I was really pleased to see the pedestrian oriented design I think one of the comments from the survey is more restaurants and you know I think the challenge there really is to get get people you know people live there to get the people that live there and to get people to come there and get them to get out on the street and to because they whenever I've been through there it's usually been pretty quiet and so I don't know that that's a zoning issue but more just a just a general comment but overall very nice thank you I agree with everything everybody said so far to our attorneys had one look at the ordinance we'll run it by them again as well as city staff as well for any additional comments and feedback and a touch point if we can squeeze that in with our stakeholders as well or our focus groups just kind of that one last check in with everybody before it comes before you for public hearing great and I would say one of the other intense when we were constructing this framework was that hopefully at some point in the future you may decide to use transit-oriented zoning in other parts of the city that were the case the idea is that you would just do a new regulating plan so a new map like this for the other location classify the streets there as appropriate and then you'd be able to use the same language so hopefully in the future that's how you would be able to use it great all right well thank you so much thank you hey so the last item is updates staff I just have I guess one inquiry for the Planning Commission one thing that we didn't note during your work plan discussion that we have in the past is is there are there any additional items for the all-day work session for our City Council to discuss typically they discuss larger policy type issues I don't know if there's anything brewing that you've thought of that you would like for them to consider for further discussion and then also we have our ends and outcome statements those are located within our comprehensive plan as well as on our city website and as it relates to Planning Commission typically you see a statement that talks about development redevelopment and our goals towards that and in some specific areas like heart of the city further development within our Minnesota River quadrant and some other initiatives so again if there's anything that you would like to see at the all-day work session or in relationship to the ends and outcomes any additions or changes I'd be more than happy to carry those forward is there work good question January I have it here January 31st at 9:00 a.m. it begins at the Nicollet and so if there's anything that you think of between now and then you can certainly forward to me as well great thanks any other updates I don't have any other updates Jen employee sure so some of you may have heard skip nine house our economic development coordinator retired a week ago Friday and our new economic development coordinator started on Monday of last week her name's Jamie Scheffer she is the chair I'm starting out the chair she's our staff liaison to the Economic Development Commission she's also the point person for any grants as they relate to economic development she'll be working on a TIF tax increment financing projects as they come along and she has over seven years of experience working not only with the city of st. James but the city of rush City and we're just excited to have her so she'll be working a lot on the our different economic development strategic plan initiatives kind of those top five items as well as items with our marketing plan initiatives so you'll see I'm sure you'll see much of her around commissioners do you have any updates is there a motion to adjourn I move to adjourn I'll second pass any discussion okay all those in favor say aye was opposed say nay motion carries thank you