**[0:00] [Music]** **[0:55] Chair Kurtz:** Good evening Apple Valley. I called the November 20th 2024 Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting to order. The first item of business is the approval of the agenda. Any changes from staff? **[1:08] Alex Sharp:** Good evening uh uh Commissioners. We do not have any uh changes for you at this time. **[1:11] Chair Kurtz:** Thank you. Any changes from the Commissioners? If not, can I get an approval please? **[1:15] Commissioner Scanland:** So moved. **[1:16] Commissioner Sandal:** Second. **[1:18] Chair Kurtz:** Uh that was made—motion made by commissioner scanland, seconded by commissioner sandal. Any discussion? If not, all those in favor say I. (I) Oppose nay. Motion carries. Next item of business is the approval of the consent agenda. The consent agenda items are considered routine and will be enacted with a single motion without any discussion unless a commissioner or citizen requests to have any item separately considered. It will then be moved to the land use action items for consideration. Can I get a motion? **[1:47] Commissioner Scanland:** Madam chair, I approve the consent agenda items as listed. **[1:51] Commissioner Sandal:** Second. **[1:52] Chair Kurtz:** Motion made by commissioner scanland, seconded by commissioner sandal. Any discussion? If not, all those in favor say I. (I) Oppose nay. Motion carries. Brings us to number four for tonight, public hearings. We do not have any tonight. And number five, land use action items. We don't have any items there either. So that brings us to number six, other business. And this is McDonald's sketch plan by Alex Sharp. Um, I want to remind Commissioners that there's no action required tonight. Um, again like I said this is a sketch, they um don't specifically State whether or not you would approve or deny the request, rather give them insight and some answers back. **[2:48] Alex Sharp:** Well thank you very much chair. You've kind of taken my next words out of my mouth so uh I do have this at the end of the presentation as well so we'll linger on that there but just as the reminder we are not taking actions though I do have some discussion items in the report and at the tail end of the presentation as well for you to be able to help provide some guidance when a full application is brought forward. So for this application, so that it helps you frame as you're reviewing the different items as we move forward, staff did a preliminary review of what this application would take when it comes in. The actions that are going to be required are a rezoning, subdivision by preliminary plat, conditional use permit for Class 2 restaurant with drive-thru, a variance to the setback provisions within that conditional use permit uh performance standards that require a thousand foot setback from any residential property, and a site plan building authorization. The site is located at 15460 English Avenue. It is at the northwest corner of Pilot Knob and 155th Street West. It is a 2.52 acre site that the applicant is proposing to split into two different lots—a 1.51 acre lot for McDonald's and a 1.01 acre lot for an unknown user at this time. The site is guided for mixed business campus. The mixed business campus does state that retail or office users would be uh permitted on this site which is why the Planning Commission and city council went through the process of having office zoning uh LB for Health Partners and the parcel is you can see to the north of that and then for the Chaffin Vet a retail business zoning designation for that site. Also note the Lunds & Byerlys site, Schuler Shoes Etc. is zoned RB to the South. This site is still zoned sand and gravel. At the time that they came forward with their prior application it was unknown what type of user might want to be here and so they left it open for future consideration. One of the items that the applicant will need to clarify is obviously their application would take an RB zoning retail business not a limited business for office type uses but there is still that 1.01 acre parcel to the north and whether that's going to remain as a sand and gravel designation at this time or whether they are going to uh rezone the entire site to a retail business or split it in another nature that they come up with. This is the ALTA survey that is proving to be very washed out but essentially the uh key point I wanted to make on this item is that uh it is a 2.5 Acre Site and the primary access is through a shared driveway with Chaffin Vet off of English Avenue. Got an aerial photo next to try to help see that a little bit better. So here's English Avenue, this is that shared—or here's English Avenue, here's the shared driveway. It's 40 ft wide so it's uh built for a considerable amount of traffic so there isn't a lot of concern with McDonald's user here right now even though drive-through uses do use a considerable amount of traffic that is a pretty substantial drive lane. Typically the city only requires 24 ft wide for two-way traffic so but this should help orient. Lunds & Byerlys is down to the South. The residential that the variance is from is off to the east here. Health Partners is just to the North and then this is a relatively flat site with a berm on the Eastern side. It is at this time it appears that the applicant is not planning to remove that berm uh so there could be additional screening out of this application from that residential if they were to leave that in place. Quick, the site plan shows a 3,859 ft building with a 50ft setback off of Pilot Knob which is what's required from our arterial roadway and the site plan actually shows a 50ft setback off of 155th Street West as well. All that is required is a 40ft setback. Speaking with the applicant it looks like they were trying to line up with the Chaffin Vet building to the West which took a 50ft setback because to the South they have a dog run that they were meeting that 50 foot setback or the 40 foot setback for. They do have the ability to shift things slightly on the site if they so choose uh however the setbacks are met on the site per the code right now. There's not a lot to say on the utility plan at this time uh as you'll note in the city engineer memo the utility plan has not been flushed out enough that we can make very substantial comments at this time. Uh the primary comment that I would make is that all utility meters will need to be screened. We have been consistent with that in other areas; we required it out of Schuler Shoes, we've required it out of the Schwab Tire, I believe Popeyes and the Chase Bank. The landscape plan uh appears to actually be pretty good towards the 2.5%. Uh we think that they will potentially be able to meet that with the ample space they have on the site as you can see there's still additional green space available. Staff's comments and the staff report though were that on top of the berm particularly in this area where there's going to be headlight directionally towards residential—if a tree can't go in that area due to utilities that would be understood but perhaps some small bush or other screening on top of that berm could be added. Uh it might be additional screening for the residential to the west or east, I apologize. The applicants worked with us pretty substantially on the building elevations. So originally I noted uh in the staff report that we were looking at Hardy plank which is a little bit more of a residential type uh material. I want to applaud the applicant because what they've come forward with is a predominantly face brick, accent metal, and then the small area of EIFS that I did note in the staff report is largely in this area up here where staff is less concerned. EIFS is a a solid product but once damaged very difficult or impossible to repair and so when you see that around drive-throughs with people perhaps not driving as carefully as they should, you can result in some damage to the buildings that ends up being rather unsightly. And so placing it up this high really doesn't have much of an impact and still allows them to use the material that is uh fairly predominant throughout the market. So they do have some utility rooms; this may be where they're planning on putting all utility meters. If so, they would not need to do any additional screening for that area uh this is just the note that staff had made would only be for utilities that are mounted on the exterior of the building. Lots of buildings have started moving away from having utility cabinet room and started displacing all their banks on the outside. These are a little bit more fun to look at is the renderings; they allow you to kind of see where or what the materials would actually look like and what that face brick would look like as we start getting into your discussion items. One of the primary ones I uh feel will potentially come up once the 350ft notice is sent out is the setback from residential. So depending upon how you measure it, you could do a 200 foot separation between that ponding which is technically a residential designation which is what the code says, or you could take the strict of going to the trail, or you could even potentially go to the corner of that property which would be slightly beyond that 227. The applicant will need to provide us with exact measurements; these are taken uh as an estimate for now for illustrated purposes which is kind of the purpose of the sketch plan um but I can also come back to this screen if this is an item of any discussion point for the commission. Staff came up with some preliminary potential discussion items for the commission to begin discussing, see whether there are any concerns and if you have any suggestions to help the applicant when their future application comes forward. These are things like: does the retail business zoning District fit for the uh property? Staff feels that it could be either LB or RB based upon the surrounding zoning districts. Does the subdivision cause any concerns about the future use? I noted in the staff report that a 1.01 Acre Site is limited in what types of uses are going to be able to go there, but we do have much smaller retail business sites or even office sites in town. Uh for instance I was working with one today along uh 42 just east of Galaxie uh that's .56 Acres. So we do have these sites in town, I don't feel that it is unbuildable, but it could limit the types of uses that we would see. And what concerns or types of uses could we encourage? We can't actually state and I do want to be clear of that. And then the final items uh that staff was able to come up with is what concerns does the setback variance present and what other mitigation than what staff has already presented would the commission be able to provide? With that, we are not actually looking for any action and the approval or denial I'm going to remind you we are not stating whether uh the commission would approve or deny at this time simply providing any input and feedback for the applicant so they can bring a better application forward when they do uh bring this forward I believe early into the new year. **[12:44] Chair Kurtz:** Okay, okay Alex. Can I ask you the first question? Uh for Popeyes and Chick-fil-A what was their variance? What was the—do you remember the distance? **[13:00] Alex Sharp:** Mhm. Popeyes was—the variance would be by around 200 square ft, the distance then would be around 800. Chick-fil-A would be—and I'm going to have to estimate on this one because it wasn't my project—I'm going to say somewhere on the order of 6 to 700 would be the variance because it's immediately across Cedar. That one also had a sound wall that was built up on that western side of Cedar okay as a further barrier. And in the case with Popeye's uh there was the RB closer that had been approved before the housing development had been— **[13:51] Chair Kurtz:** Right, okay. And the last question is um is it a 24-hour service McDonald's? **[13:58] Alex Sharp:** Uh Chair Kurtz, that has not been established at this time. **[14:02] Chair Kurtz:** Okay, okay. Commissioner Pruit? **[14:04] Commissioner Pruit:** Yes, thank you Madam Chair. Alex, you touched on it a little bit and I was curious if you do recall—you said there was a uh maybe a sound wall barrier. Were there other things they did to mitigate? You had mentioned you know there could be the possibility of the headlights so maybe the berm is of a height that that's sufficient. Just curious at the Popeyes and the Chick-fil-A, were there any other things done to mitigate the distance that you recall? **[14:26] Alex Sharp:** To mitigate the distance, no. Uh that that wall was put in place um I would look to the City Attorney on whether we actually can place this restriction but I do believe that limiting the volume of or hours of the drive-thru have been discussed. We may not have the legal authority to do that so I don't know if we can limit hours of a drive-through or not. **[14:49] Sharon Hills:** I'd say when there's a formal application we can address those issues. **[14:52] Commissioner Pruit:** Madam chair thank you. **[14:54] Chair Kurtz:** Thank you. Any other—Commissioner Pruit? **[14:56] Commissioner Pruit:** No thank you. **[14:57] Chair Kurtz:** Commissioner Scanland. **[14:59] Commissioner Scanland:** Madam chair, Alex um I was just going to go through a couple questions on the site plan elevations and um couple other things from the report and then I'll take and uh take a look at your questions that you had for us um concerning the elevations. I I can definitely see where the applicant has put some effort into um working on our need for you know balance foursided design. I'd like to still see some additional um the front some of those details are—it's you know they McDonald's has gone to such a contemporary type look um makes it a little more difficult but if some of those elements can then be transferred versus just—I noted they've put the overhangs over the um the um drive-throughs and so forth. Something can be done a little additional like we've done in the past on some of these restaurants. Chick-fil-A is an example where we've helped balance out the design over and above what's being shown here. So that would be some initial comments on that. Uh concerning the site plan um can you kind of walk through how the flow of traffic is supposed to take place here? **[16:29] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Scanland. The flow of traffic right now is set up to come in through the shared drive here on the North. So this is the remnant lot here. It will then flow down and for drive-through use would pull into one of these two lanes here. Ordering would be in this location here and an additional pickup would be in these areas here. You can see that you can do some pickup from the building here through those windows at the overhangs we saw and then for the meals that are taking a little bit longer they do have built-in pull through space. They've also got the full escape lane fully around the building and then it appears that they will be sufficient on parking um I made one note in the staff report that they're missing six inches from the depth of each stall but they've got more than enough ability to be able to make that up um one of the items that I should have touched on a little bit more is the sidewalk connections out to Pilot Knob um that is something the city engineer is seeking. The applicant has stated a concern about that due to the grades and cutting through the berm so we will need to look at that a little bit closer at their application um it may be that the city wants to require it due to crossing and of that nature at 155th and Pilot Knob but it felt like a detail at the high level that we needed to speak with the applicant about while we still work out internally. Uh there's the narrow sidewalk along here that coming off English Avenue. You'll note in both the staff report and in the city engineer memo that we are seeking that to be wider uh it's only a 4ft wide sidewalk and when adjacent to uh the drive aisle uh we are requiring it to be 6 feet to give the pedestrian a little bit more room. Does that—oh uh trash enclosure is located here and is probably one of the easier movements for most of those drivers on some of the sites we've reviewed lately. So does that establish kind of the— **[18:36] Commissioner Scanland:** Yeah that helps out, that helps out um just kind of confirm what I was um um thinking that how it was working. It seems like the stacking is designed for three four cars on each lane so just where we take encode stacking is from the pickup window. **[18:49] Alex Sharp:** Okay, for coffee users we have tried to have a significant amount of stacking so that it doesn't go out on city streets. In this case the amount of stacking that can be done before it gets to a city street is very substantial—that would be all the way out on English. Okay so if they're backing up and causing issues within their own site we present it as a concern but ultimately we can't state that they can't do that. **[19:15] Commissioner Scanland:** Okay. My I guess my one question I have is where you go into the drive-throughs then you have traffic capable of going either direction and if that stacking would come out a bit um I guess my comment then is what is the fire department going to think of that? To me I could see where that could be a kind of an area of um congestion at the right time and whether there's going to be the ability of fire or um medical to be able to get into the um other end of the site. **[19:35] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Scanland, I we did actually discuss that with the fire department. Uh the fire department would likely be able to use this lane around the building okay that's what it's established for. It appears it's going to meet all turning radius pieces okay so they would be able to bypass that area entirely to go around the building for emergency response. **[20:19] Commissioner Scanland:** Okay all right. Um youve already kind of mentioned—I was just going to bring up to support what you've mentioned in your report about the pedestrian access um the importance of uh doing that and the medical office building that just went in or the medical building that just went in they did a pass through the uh berm for doing connection points there so showing on how that could be done so um and then also supporting the need for the parking um that we've consistently been um maintaining especially with the size of pickup trucks, the length thereof, and then um make sure that they incorporate a bike rack into the system. **[21:03] Alex Sharp:** Yes we would place that as a condition. **[21:04] Commissioner Scanland:** Yeah um do you want comments at this time about the subdivision variance and so forth? Zoning? **[21:08] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, I believe that's up to you if you want to establish get started on that. **[21:10] Commissioner Scanland:** Okay um with the concern of the subdivision I have—I'll concern with the um the the open lot and how that's going to be developed in the future. I think it's going to be very limited it um just what we've seen recently about um what could go in there that would then sit vacant for an extended period of time um for you know possible tenant to um build on that so it's concerning um to um especially with the smaller size of it um McDonald's here is a restaurant they basically have a half acre an additional space and what that lot would have uh for um you know any other type of fast food uh that would be considered there so um um that that's concerning. Um as far as the variance goes I um I think you did a very nice job in your report as far as kind of explaining where we have done variances in the in the past on a couple of occasions that each brought had their unique circumstances that allowed that to take place um in this particular uh situation um looking at um um one backup that as far as as long as I've been here for 15 plus years that we've been really consistent about maintaining that 1,000 ft uh for class two type restaurants and um with the exceptions that we have done. And to um in this case the residential neighborhood was well established before this coming up so um I guess my question as far as trying to look at or mitigate that in a class two restaurant are there good better or best ventilation systems or there options over and above a standard system that could um mitigate or take away our concerns with the um having a restaurant like this so close to a residential zone? **[23:31] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Scanland, far be it for me to say I'm an HVAC expert. I do know that there are things that can be done. I don't know whether they can—I don't know the cost of those items, I don't know whether they are something that McDonald's can build into their systems or not. I think it's a good question to ask them. The applicant is present yep and so it's something that you could establish for them to further research and come back with their application to answer or see if they can answer this evening. **[24:06] Commissioner Scanland:** Mhm um yeah and then as far as the zoning question goes um this has never been a part of that discussion in terms of the way we looked at using this property—was for just as you originally explained it for um versus U a restaurant type use which was all planned for the South and um so I I see that as another difficulty and giving up giving up that um um plan that is in place to uh be able to accomplish um what we had already talked about for a number of years on that uh for this piece of land so. **[24:54] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Scanland if I may. The guiding does note for mixed business campus for this in the blob plan that was adopted in the comprehensive plan does mention a retail component could be present in this location otherwise Chaffin Vet wouldn't be consistent with comp plans so that's why staff felt that it could be zoned either a retail business or a limited business because both types of uses are noted in that comp plan designation. **[25:12] Commissioner Scanland:** Okay thanks for that clarification I appreciate that so thank you um that's all I have right now. **[25:16] Chair Kurtz:** Okay thank you. Commissioner Hillas. **[25:18] Commissioner Hillas:** Thank you chair. Uh Alex nice job on on the presentation. Got a couple questions and uh in regards to the variance, I think that uh Pilot Knob Road gives the accent or or the uh enough noise variance and noise uh on the barrier right there to the residential across the street I don't see that as a big issue but the uh the traffic on the way that's being dealt with to go into this facility um looks like one way in one way out and um hasn't been looked at for other ways to access the facility? And this might be further down the road to take a look at this but further access on 155th Street? **[26:15] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Hillas. I will let the assistant city engineer weigh in here but the access spacing for this area was set long before and additional access onto a 155 roadway will not be permitted. Um I don't know what the access spacing is—perhaps assistant city engineer could weigh in on that. **[26:26] Brandon Anderson:** Madam Chair, Commissioners um we did review the access spacing with the applicant when they first came forward and we explicitly said that we're not comfortable with any additional accesses to 155th. That was made clear kind of immediately upon considering any use for this site um so that that's a firm stance that our engineering department and Public Works will take. I I don't have the exact spacing um of what the minimum spacing standard would be off of Pilot Knob um could provide that but but just know that it it will be well outside of this site. **[27:14] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Hillas, if I can just elaborate on it. If you think of the access spacing off of Cedar for say the Starbucks site that went in at the old gas station that was there, we closed one closer access at that site when it developed that was very close to Cedar and even our roadway access is too close for current standards with how uh big of a roadway that is and you we've seen issues where those access spacings when they tighten up cause problems with that intersection. So that's why we have those distances and when this comes forward for a full application sure we can elaborate a little bit more on that detail and provide you examples of where it's happened in the past and doesn't function as well and why we're doing it this way in the future. **[28:02] Commissioner Hillas:** Yep. Uh the thing that I was looking at is um I did take a drive by there today, I happen to be in that area and just take a look at that through that access lane. I can foresee people coming south on Pilot Knob going West on 155th, they're going to say "I don't see how to get in here." So that'll be something you'd address in the future but signage is going to be very important to get people in without getting frustrated on how to find the place. **[28:22] Alex Sharp:** I believe that that is why the signage is located here uh rather than out on Pilot Knob. The city does not allow for off-site signage so when this site was originally created—I know I read uh the former city planner Tom Lawell's staff report on the creation of the site—upon its inception we noted that this was going to be a buried site from one parcel and that was a staff concern and it was something that the applicant decided to move forward with. If you recall this application was actually combined with the Health Partners site; the site to the north of the Health Partners site and the Chaffin Vet was all one large application that came in and submitted at the same time. Staff noted in that staff report that this was becoming a buried site and would have potential for people to have difficulty knowing how to get into it. Ultimately it was approved and we are at a point right now where the access drive has all of the easements over it that it needs to have but we aren't going to be able to change how the site is accessed with the Health Partners lot immediately to the north going right up to their setbacks and this access drive already being established. So it's a difficult situation I think for users over time. I think they will have to get used to it and it was certainly a a concern noted by staff and the Planning Commission at the time of the lot creation. **[29:43] Commissioner Hillas:** That's something to deal with in the future but I think good signage is going to be very important thank you. **[29:48] Chair Kurtz:** Thank you commissioner Pruit. **[29:50] Commissioner Pruit:** Yes um thanks Chair Kurtz. Um Alex I want to expand just a little bit on what Commissioner Scanland had touched on which is the 1-acre site is that that would be left you know um not developed at this point? That's it right there correct? **[30:11] Alex Sharp:** Correct. **[30:12] Commissioner Pruit:** Who maintains that? Part of the reason for my question is just as we continue to see this whole area develop uh it gets a very professional look and it's obvious when you look at areas where it's still the the mining area that it's an unfinished property and I just wonder what this appearance would be, who has responsibility and what would go in there because I do share concern that a 1.01 acre lot could be uh could be challenging potentially to to find somebody that would be a tenant. **[30:46] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Pruit. They would need to establish enough that there wasn't runoff from the site but other than that until they hit essentially a weed complaint we generally don't get involved. We had a lot of that with some of the sites to the South if you recall some of the like Le Schwab site in that area we did need to urge the property owner to go out and maintain, cut down and strip some of the area to look a little bit better. Um it would be a good idea for the applicant to think about that consideration with the site as it does sit vacant and depending upon for how long. But ultimately it would come down to a code enforcement piece if the grass were to get too long and they would need to establish enough of a barrier to prevent erosion. **[31:26] Commissioner Pruit:** Thank you. **[31:27] Chair Kurtz:** I kind of look at it differently with that one acre up there where sometimes the business isn't looking for that two point something right? I mean sometimes maybe you can get additional people looking you know for just that smaller acre. That's my opinion anyway. Uh Commissioner Scanland. **[31:53] Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair uh go back to the signage question. I know we don't deal with signage but are they—they're allowed one sign correct? **[32:00] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Scanland, they're allowed one Monument level sign or one freestanding sign and then they are allowed one menu board per drive-through lane and they are allowed one uh wall sign per wall face. **[32:32] Commissioner Scanland:** Okay. So if they put—either you mentioning that they're showing the signage um Monument type signage to the West they then won't have an option of having anything to the east then other than the signage on the building. **[32:40] Alex Sharp:** And Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Scanland, that is correct. If they get their one Monument or freestanding sign—right now their preliminary site plan places it in this location here. **[32:41] Commissioner Scanland:** Okay all right. Thank you. Nobody can miss those golden arches. **[32:46] Alex Sharp:** That's true. **[32:47] Chair Kurtz:** Anybody else? Yep Commissioner Sandal. **[32:53] Commissioner Sandal:** Madam Chair, Alex um I was just kind of looking at the questions um and so I'm just going to kind of go through those. Um the retail business zoning I—that doesn't concern me personally um just seeing what's right next to it and below it and then it just feels like it's a question of where are we ending retail business and starting limited business um and so that that doesn't feel like a big concern to me. Um the future development piece um um yeah I just I don't think I know enough about what kinds of businesses would go into that small of an area and so um I would feel a little more comfortable if we just had an idea of maybe who would potentially go in there. Um I just don't know enough about that to know even what kind of questions to ask um about if that would be developed and when and how quickly it could be. Um so that would just be one of my concerns about that. Um the in terms of the difficulty accessing that site for McDonald's I actually feel like McDonald's is kind of kind of a good business to put in a place that's difficult to access because people want to go to McDonald's and they're going to find it so I'm not as concerned as I think I've been hearing some people saying about the difficulty in accessing it um it seems like there's a decent plan there for getting there um and then for for the variance um I'm I would be curious to know the reasons that we allowed the variance in the Popeyes for instance um are those reasons different from the reasons here? And the the one thing that I'm hearing is that this is an already established residential site and the Popeyes was not um which that's a really that's a fair point. I also understand that Pilot Knob is very busy and loud and so I'm not sure if that's enough of a mitigation factor um but that would just be another one of my kind of questions as well. So just kind of a lot of thoughts. **[34:25] Alex Sharp:** Chair Kurtz, Commissioner Sandal, if I may make a comment because I I did study this a little bit. The Popeye's did come in after—well after the residential was established. **[34:39] Commissioner Sandal:** Oh okay. **[34:41] Alex Sharp:** That's what I meant um the primary reasons or the and the findings for uh the variants for Chick-fil-A I did review as part of this and that was largely due to Cedar being in between them and then the wall and the storm water Pond being in place before you actually—similar to how there's a storm water pond in this location, there's a small storm water feature at that Town Home Association and a sound wall that would basically be here to screen that. These homes clearly don't have that same feature that are up here and they're the single family—this is a a multi-family senior development but it has an increased distance with the pond. So that was the primary reason for Chick-fil-A and the primary reason for Popeye's variants and the findings there uh were largely due to the fact that Arby's was closer uh it was still a pretty substantial distance um they were utilizing an outlot parking lot um that largely hadn't been filled in the last I would say 30 to 40 years since it went switched from an interior Mall in Kmart so and even at that time may not have been fully utilized um so I think those were some of the findings that Planning Commission had on those two sites and then therefore the city council would also have those findings. **[36:53] Chair Kurtz:** Thank you to go through those Alex. Uh the questions—my only question, everything else has been discussed, is my only concern is with the variance and and with the neighborhood being right there and stuff. So that's why I asked if it was going to be a 24-hour service or not. I think that widely or hugely would depend you know depend on if they're open all night or not because I certainly wouldn't want to impose that on the neighborhood at all hours of the night. Commissioner Scanland. **[37:32] Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair that I just stay—my question uh just for clarification for all of us. The um variance—the components that we're looking at for that are noise, light, and then um class two type restaurants, fried food cooking odor. Are those the three main things that we're talking about with the variant? **[37:57] Alex Sharp:** Scanland, I believe so okay. It's performance standards that we have to have the thousand foot variance, but it doesn't specifically state why in code. Those had been the reasons that we brought forward with prior applications. **[38:10] Commissioner Scanland:** Okay all right. Um about of all three of those I mean the light um and the noise aren't so much a concern, but it's the um um cooking odor is the one that I'm concerned with um when it comes to that so. Look forward to hearing from the applicant here and what new and greatest is available maybe to address some of that so thank you Alex. **[38:43] Chair Kurtz:** Alex I think that's it for questions from you—for you. I believe that the applicant does have a presentation so they will be coming up to present that. Thank you. **[38:52] Eli Sanki:** Good evening Chair, Commissioners. My name is Eli Sanki, I'm a civil engineer with Kimley-Horn here today with uh Robert from McDonald's. Um we're excited to be here. I think Alex did a great job presenting the project, he's going to make my life a lot easier. I didn't know exactly what he was going to discuss so some of this is uh going to be a little bit repeat info so we can fly through these first couple slides. So here's kind of the overview um of the site. Um what I wanted to address mostly with this is that the English come—or the access comes off of English um as alluded to uh we were told early on no access was permitted off of 155th or Pilot Knob. So coming through the north side of the vet clinic. I thought this might be somewhat of a helpful um diagram to share. Rather than kind of outline that far northeast corner, I kind of put a dot over the restaurant and showed a 400ft radius. Um as alluded to by Alex, the uh storm water pond adjacent to kind of the senior living building is closest to the site but that's obviously not inhabitable um so just thought this uh might provide a little more context from the store's location in particular. Um here's our site plan and I think uh Alex hit on this well but just wanted to touch on the shared maintenance access and utility easement that'll be coming from uh the north side of the vet clinic and it'll be a continuation down through to the site. There's utilities stubbed in that drive so that that'll be where we're picking up um sanitary water and storm sewer and then depending on the configuration of the potential future uh tenant um there'll be likely some sort of driveway continuation into their site and then sidewalk as a as already alluded to would kind of come down from um the vet clinic as well and provide connectivity to the site. And then we're currently showing an 8 foot wide sidewalk up from the trail on 155th and this was largely placed there based on some uh some grading on the site which we can talk about here with the next slide. So here's—here's our grading plan. As you can tell there's some pretty significant grade change um from the site down 155th as well as down to Pilot Knob. Um unreadable here but the grades down at Pilot Knob um range from or they're close to 939 and then the top of the berm gets all the way up to like 949 so we're talking about a 10ft difference which is pretty substantial. Um so early on we had identified that that as a challenge for a sidewalk which is why we're showing it uh a little bit further west on 155th um as shown here. And removing the berm was discussed with planning staff and with McDonald's and due to the utilities in the berm um there's some fiber, some communication lines um lowering slash relocating those was not desired. Um and then if we lower our site the—we're kind of fixed on the North side in the vacant lot and Health Partners, that berm is pretty well established there so if our site comes down and they stay up high then we're likely doing some sort of retaining wall that kind of wraps around um that's obviously not not desirable from a from a cost perspective and then probably most importantly is those utility connections are set on the north side of the vet clinic. So since those are gravity services we need to drain our sanitary and storm water down to those services. So the more we lower our site um the harder it is to maintain those gravity connections. I was on site a couple months ago took this photo, it's facing south towards the intersection of 155th and Pilot Knob. Um kind of just shows some of the topography I was alluding to with the berm um and then some of the flags in the berm denoting that there's utilities in those areas. I think that's all I had um appreciate you guys listening today and curious about feedback and any questions uh we can help answer thank you. **[43:24] Chair Kurtz:** Thank you. Anybody have any questions for him? Ask—sure. **[43:28] Commissioner Scanland:** Madam chair, do you have any concerns with some of the items that have been outlined in the staff report in terms of um anything from the parking um and some of the things that have discussed tonight as far as um being able to incorporate some of that? **[43:55] Eli Sanki:** So the parking in particular I think there's there's plenty of space out there to make sure those those stall lengths are shown um correctly. I think McDonald's is happy with the level of parking that is on site um the trail connection I think that'll be some active coordination between uh our team and the city to see what makes the most sense out there. When we originally talked about the sidewalk connection closer to 155th and Pilot Knob um—and I guess speaking for Robert here as well—McDonald's really doesn't like the sidewalk to cross the drive-thru in terms of safety. Um so that was another thing that was discussed which is why it's shown currently further west so we don't have don't have customers um picking up their food looking in the bag trying to drive their vehicle and um crossing the pedestrians. **[44:45] Commissioner Scanland:** Sure, okay. **[44:48] Chair Kurtz:** There's no other questions thank you. Robert, did you want to—? **[44:53] Robert:** Yeah uh if if it would be okay for me to address the the the board. Um so particularly you had questions about the the smell so I mean I could just start by saying that all our kitchens and hoods you know they're designed with the primary grease filters that are routinely um maintained. Um our uh venting system is is an updraft which is meant to just get it up into the air um and you know I realize you have your thousand foot requirement for this type of of building, but the fact that you're crossing Pilot Knob it would be very unlikely I think smell would ever would ever get to those residential neighborhoods. So that's um addressing one of your concerns that you brought up. Um and I don't know if there's anything else that you want answered while I— **[45:41] Chair Kurtz:** Worked at a business right next to McDonald's for 30 years yeah and I'll be honest we never smelt McDonald's. **[45:48] Robert:** And and we have—we have restaurants that are much closer to residences and it's you know we try to be a good member of the community. So this is something that you know our operators who want to maintain you know that kind of relationship with the community they they take pride in you know making sure that stuff like that doesn't bother surrounding— **[46:17] Chair Kurtz:** And will it be a 24-hour service? **[46:20] Robert:** So that is our preference. Um uh everything is open to negotiation but that's—yeah the drive-thru is typically a 24-hour. **[46:25] Chair Kurtz:** Okay. Commissioner Scanland has another question for you. **[46:28] Commissioner Scanland:** Back to the ventilation. Is there other options then what you standard do to better mitigate odor concerns? **[46:42] Robert:** We do not have any other standard options, no. Are there other options? I'm sure we could research something but that's—that's our standard and it has worked well for us for 50 something odd years so yeah. **[47:00] Commissioner Scanland:** Well we're still dealing with a concern with the variance. I'm trying to look at ways to mitigate and go forward so it's one of those things I think it's important that um I'd like to see some type of options that come back that could assist with um dealing with u that concern because as I mentioned the neighborhood was here first—or with the understanding—I don't think the class two restaurant was a consideration at that time um when that was all approved so could do that. I'd appreciate it. Thank you. **[47:45] Chair Kurtz:** Anybody else? Oh that's all thank you. Thank you for your time thank you. Thank you Alex, good presentation. Hey that brings us to Mr. Benetti for the review of upcoming schedule. **[47:53] Tim Benetti:** Thank you Madam chair, members of commission. Uh your next meeting is Wednesday December 4th followed by December 18th of December. We do have a few items coming up uh on those two agendas. Uh we have a couple of projects from our Independent School District, both Eastview, Apple Valley High School and also from our own park systems uh updates or projects that uh I think you're going to see some exciting new things coming up that way on uh the first one up is a Redwood Park Improvement so you're going to see that first and foremost followed by Kelly Park right after it. So uh Council on the 26th and 12th and uh we are hopefully uh uh having a a great Thanksgiving weekend for you and your families if you're traveling safe travels uh feel free to bring in any extra treats or turkeys for for for the Benettis if if you need to so. **[48:47] Chair Kurtz:** The leftovers are the best. Yes thank you that's all I have okay. Sounds good. Can I have a motion to adjourn? **[48:58] Commissioner Sandal:** So moved to adjourn. **[49:01] Commissioner Scanland:** Second. **[49:03] Chair Kurtz:** Motion made by commissioner sandal, second by commissioner scanland. All in favor say I. (I) This meeting has ended. **[49:15] [Music]**