good evening it is 6 30 p.m and i am calling the monday october 26 2020 planning commission meeting to order tonight's planning commission meeting is structured to allow virtual participation on zoom or participation in person while following social distance and mass guidelines members of the public are welcome and encouraged to participate when invited throughout the meeting if you are participating virtually and experience audio problems we suggest you leave the zoom meeting and then rejoin this is usually fixed the as usual tonight's meeting is available live and recorded for later viewing on bctv and on the city's website if you are unable to participate this evening and would like to submit public testimony i encourage you to email your comments to city staff or mail your comments directly to city hall you may participate in the meeting tonight online by going to zoom dot u s backslash join and typing in meeting id 953 4079 1645 once you are logged into the meeting please use the chat feature to tell the moderator which item you wish to speak to you may also call into the meeting at 651-372-8299 and enter meeting id 95340 your call will be muted until there is an agenda item that contains a public hearing i will provide further instruction and notify you when you may speak please note there may be a slight delay due to the differences in technology if speaking by phone please mute your computer to avoid any feedback and now on to our agenda the first item on tonight's agenda is adoption of the agenda do any members of the planning commission have any changes to tonight's agenda do not know staff do you have any changes to the agenda no changes all right seeing none may i have a motion for adoption of the agenda so moved i second the motion all right moved by commissioner john and second by commissioner wad and all those in favor say aye aye opposed a and the motion carries uh the next item is approval of the uh the last meetings minutes which was september 28 2020. uh commissioners do you have any changes to the minutes from the last meeting staff any changes no changes from uh seeing none may i have a motion for adoption of the meeting minutes from september 28th so moved second moved by commissioner wade second by commissioner john all those in favor say aye and the motion carries all right on to the next item we have a public hearing which is an application of patrick emerson for a conditional use permit for a detached accessory structure exceeding 1 000 square feet in the r1a zoning district located at 15480 loop road south and tonight deb garros city planner will be providing a presentation of this item ms garros thank you commissioners this is a public hearing this evening for conditional use permit and what the applicant is requesting is to have a an accessory structure detached accessory structure exceeding a thousand square feet the property is located in the r1a which is our rural residential single family zoning district the property is shown up on the screen the property backs up too or just to the west of the property is murphy hanahan park reserve and then there are single-family large acreage single-family lots surrounding the development within the neighborhood on this this is an aerial photograph of the site and the yellow box represents approximately where the accessory structure is proposed there is a house and attached garage that were built in about 2017 and then this proposed accessory structure is proposed to be sighted and have metal roofing to match the existing house it is it requires a conditional use permit because they want the building to be larger than a thousand square feet they're asking for a 1200 square foot building so 30 feet by 40 feet for all practical appearances it will look like a garage they've got a very long driveway into the site it's about 300 feet so there is plenty of room for parking of vehicles etc so we don't anticipate any particular issues with this this would be the survey submitted with the application it has been reviewed by the city engineer and our building inspections fire department and police there are no issues or objections that any of those departments have raised this is the floor plan basically what you'll have is the end wall the 30 foot wide will be facing the street so it'll just have an overhead garage door and then an entry garage door facing the street so that's how that will appear they are proposing to have as i said metal roofing which is the same as the existing house and then pre-engineered siding lap siding from a staff perspective uh one thing to note is that in the r1a zoning district if you have a lot larger than two acres you can actually have up to two detached accessory buildings and so up to two thousand square feet one thousand each uh they are proposing one uh at twelve hundred square feet so we're looking at just a two hundred foot um two hundred square foot addition with that the recommendation from staff is to we recommend approval of the application subject to one item and that be that the structure will need to be set back at least 10 feet from the south side property line we believe that they can do that their driveway is beyond that and they propose to line that up it's just that we didn't have a specific certificate of survey showing you know the proposed building location and setback we did receive one comment from another property owner that lives in southwest burnsville her name is sandy duque and she lives at 3112 marcia and lane i believe that she may be either in attendance or looking on zoom to make a a comment on the application if she's not i can come back and and indicate to planning commission what her item is with that we can stand for questions very good thanks mrs uh commissioners any questions yes commissioner wadd uh what's the normal accessory buildings setback for this property for accessory buildings basically it would be a 50-foot setback so this is over 300 feet the house and building were set very far back on the site that would be from the front property line and then the side property line is 10 feet so okay so the condition of 10 feet from the south side yard line that's the normal yes accessory building yes setback okay thank you that's correct commissioner john you said on a two acre lot this is over two acres it can have two accessory buildings is that correct yes uh if you have a lot that's two or more acres you can have up to two detached accessory buildings 1 000 square foot each so yep in this case they're looking for one at 1200 square feet got it all right any other questions commissioners all right i'm going to open the public hearing then at 6 30 8 p.m and i do understand that the applicant is joining us on zoom and so i'd like to allow mr emerson the opportunity to discuss this project before we uh go to any other public members so if we can get mr emerson on that would be great uh can you hear me uh yes mr emerson sorry i was muted uh yeah the the structure was just i just wanted it a little bit wider i was thinking about doing a 25 by 40. i do have a couple boats that i'd like to store that i i normally keep up in grand rapids where a cabin is and that was the reason for the additional width of five feet i believe the person who wanted to comment um or make a comment today did contact me over the weekend we had a discussion i think her concern was around um having animals structured there and it's basically a garage for uh i have a skid loader i have a couple boats like i said i meant like i mentioned i like to store there and that's pretty much it so um i just i just wanted the extra square feet i don't ever plan on an additional building um of you know 1 000 or 800 square feet at any time now or in the future so that's pretty much the extent of my project is basically a garage to store some uh some some extra items i don't want to keep out in the bowl all right thank you mr emerson if you would just stay online for any questions absolutely question thank you no i think he answered anything okay and i just want to clarify the um the 25 by 40 is that what's existing because that's a thousand square feet so that's what i was originally going to consider building and then i wanted the additional 500 5 square feet on the on the right so the additional uh to make it 1200 square feet so my apologies i was originally thinking 25 by 40 to go under the or to be in line with a thousand square feet it's just when i laid it all out of what i have and what i'm gonna try to get in there the extra five feet would be uh would be really nice to have and that's why i'm asking for the variance okay thank you for clarifying okay and it does look like we have um ms decay on the zoom as well and so i'd like to open it up for her if we do have anybody who's calling into this meeting you can dial star nine to raise your hand if you'd like to speak um and at this time if we can get it over to uh sorry ms garros you would want to open the public hearing and then we can take the public comments i did open the phone i'm sorry thank you thank you so mrs duque if we can get her on as well hello are you able to hear me yes perfect so i did speak with patrick over the weekend and my only concern on this was that it should not house any animals i don't know if the city can recommend that or even enforce it but i do want to be put on record that any building that goes in in this area i am going to put my two cents in and restrict any animal containment that includes corrals pig pens stables chicken coops goat pens whatever animals are being brought into this area when i did speak with patrick i'm confident that that is not his purpose for this and i do not have any objections to anything that has been discussed on that at all all right thank you very much ms ducay and maybe we can get some clarification from city staff on on those uh ordinance requirements as they currently exist but do either of you have questions for mr k i do know okay um miss girls can you help us understand just what the what the zoning requirements are for animals in a property like this yes in the r1a zoning district which is commonly referred to as southwest burnsville this is the only district where you can have animals such as horses cows you know chickens etc as long as they are kept in a way where you have the proper housing etc for that so that is a permitted use if the applicant wanted to agree to that as a restriction that could be included but otherwise it would be difficult to preclude somebody from having something that is permitted in the district now is that something that the restriction would follow ownership of the property yes it would yes with the conditional use permit it would yes mr emerson is that something you would be open to as far as adding a restriction on this variance i do know um or sorry conditional use permit um i have no problem with that whatsoever it's fine i shares any questions for miss girls or anyone else at this point i'm sorry i was closing the door so animals are allowed in in this zoning district the r1a zoning district is really the only district where you can have cattle or horses cows pigs those those types of animals so if if the applicant is willing to add the restriction to the conditional use permit we can do that otherwise i think it would be hard pressed to be able to support that because it is something that's permitted uh for anybody in the r1a zoning district that's what i was getting at that it's it's allowed and so i don't know that we should be the ones to say you can't do it on this property but the properties on all around it could still do it you know um and you know we're kind of relying on the applicant's uh you know statement that he's not interested in keeping animals there and i believe him and so there won't be animals there but in that i think it's a bigger maybe a bigger issue if we're going to restrict that zoning type it should be done kind of ordinance wide not just on a single property you know what i mean yeah i'm concerned uh about the the restriction following the property in perpetuity i mean yeah yeah i don't know um really if mr k were to move or if mr emerson were to move what would the new property owners desire in an area where animals would be allowed and i cannot totally understand mr k's point of view having you know animals that close to her property so sure i think the i think the understanding um and maybe we can move this more to discussion after the uh the public hearing but i think that you know my thought at least is trying to go with the agreement and the understanding that they already have commissioner john uh i was just wondering if mr emerson had any um any objections to the uh south side setback that the city is proposing oh no the setback yeah no not at all i i wasn't planning on being that close anyway okay thank you all right so let's just see if we have anybody else who is wanting to speak to this item i don't see anybody in the chambers here and i don't believe we have anybody else on zoom who does want to speak to this item um so mr emerson mr k please bear with us here i am going to close the public hearing at 6 47 and open up for discussion further discussion from the commission members commissioner i you know i don't have any issues with the recommendation i think it's pretty straightforward and i would be supportive of it i just i'm just gonna i'm just just just gonna say that so the condition is that the setback is at ten feet which is the standard condition for any accessory building so we're really just kind of clarifying what if that condition wasn't listed as a condition it would still be kind of a condition of adding an accessory building to your property correct that's correct okay so just clarifying what what the standard zoning rules are but uh great presentation and i'm fully supportive of it commissioner john yeah you know i'm actually going to make a motion i i agree with both you guys on on the animal thing as you know it is within the code so we can't just have that one little island of non-code conformity anymore so i think we'll just i'm going to make the recommendation as as it stated here the uh that we recommended the city council approval of the cup as presented and to allow the proposal of 1200 square foot accessory building to exceed the 1 000 square foot standard subject to the fallen condition the structure will be set back at least 10 feet from the south side yard lot line all right commissioner john makes motion do i have a second i will second the motion commissioner wod seconds any further discussion all right all those in favor say aye aye opposed any and the motion carries uh thank you mr emerson and this item will be on the uh november 2nd it's going to be a monday city council meeting monday november 2nd for final approval okay thank you good night thank you all right so we are going to be moving on to uh agenda item number four which is a public hearing uh an application of the city of burnsville burnsville for a zoning map amendment to rezone the listed parcels of land to the transit oriented development zoning district to align with the city code title 10 chapter 22 d transit oriented development district ms madden our city planner will also now be providing a presentation on the item and an overview of the background report ms madden thank you chair good evening planning commissioners so this item before you this evening is a city initiated application uh you may remember earlier this year seeing the many versions of the transit oriented development district ordinance as we went through that work to take the heart of the city ordinance and bring it up to a little bit of a more modern uh provisions as well as kind of start that implementation process from our comprehensive plan as in the 2040 comprehensive plan the goal for heart of the city was to review that zoning code and the surrounding area to determine how to bring a tod style district to the area and the build out of extending heart of the city so this map that you can see on the screen is brought out from our 2040 comprehensive plan showing the potential future development of part of the city as it grows and expands so the orange circles you can see there show the center of the two orange line bus rapid transit stations that are proposed to be constructed in the next year actually the station at highway 13 and nicolette they've begun so it is currently an active site as of um i believe this morning um so as part of this process to create this transit oriented development district um this step this evening is establishing the boundaries of that zoning district the chapter in the zoning ordinance chapter 22 d was approved on may in may by the city council it exists in our city code and these uh properties that we're going to go over in just a little bit are part of what's going to change to that district it does include all of the existing heart of the city as well as properties that are within a walking distance of the new transit station that will be completed next year and a few just neighboring commercial properties that were in the mix so as part of the development of the new transit development district are we came up with a regulating plan for the parcels that are going to be within the district and so the boundaries here show the boundaries of the new transit-oriented development district and all of the properties that you can see highlighted in black here on this map are what are proposed to be rezoned the map here does show the current zoning of the properties and the future zoning of all returning or changing to this new transit tod district so the bulk of the properties that are changing are within the hoc one and the hsc2 district however there are new properties on the west side of 35w which were identified in the comprehensive plan as a future land use change to to a mixed-use style transit pedestrian oriented development because they were going to be so near the transit stations there are also um a few properties to the south of burnsville parkway that are currently zoned commercial that are proposed to be changed as well by doing this all of those southern south of burnsville parkway properties that are zoned commercial are now part of the transit-oriented development district so everything until it begins to back up to those residential properties so as part of this process city staff sent out informational letters to everyone who owned property within the target area that was proposed to be rezoned as part of that process we um we're giving them information on how to find out more information about what tod is when the changes the timeline for when all this is going to be happening so we updated the we reused the old website from when we were doing all of our engagement and surveys on creating the zoning district guidelines and then used that to kind of continue to send out information to people so primarily we focused on just those who were going to own property that was changing we held a virtual open house which did not have much attendance but had a lot of people asking me about how how to attend and then public hearing notices were sent out to everyone within 350 feet of the affected area um so within the last week i've gotten about 11 i've had about 11 phone calls and three emails generally discussing tonight's action so i'd say primarily nobody wanted to provide public comment for or against there weren't any um people that i spoke with directly that felt that they needed to provide anything for the record generally the questions were from people who owned property who were nearby that had questions about if there would be future street assessments new uh um financial uh consequences to something like this there were some questions on if they needed to do anything uh in order to make this um happen or just if their input was needed at all questions about a timeline on when the transit stations were going to be constructed when some of the proposed streets and the regulating plan might be constructed and just where the new bus stations would be located so a lot of it was general conversations wanting to know what was happening because um maybe many people weren't involved with the creation of the ordinance or these new people that are going to be part of what used to be heard of the city um just wanted some more information about it but generally positive feedback a lot of people excited about the new orange line transit stations um so the next steps after tonight's item there are going to be future text amendments to our comprehensive plan to adjust language from the heart of the city to transit oriented development overall comprehensive plan land use map amendments to change based on a combination of these changes but there's also going to be future changes related to another goal in the comprehensive plan which was for more mixed-use districts throughout burnsville so you will see that within the coming months um as well as the city attorney did comment on the ordinance that was prepared tonight that covers the rezoning that the effective date will be upon final approval of the by the metropolitan council so that is not currently in the ordinance that is attached to your report so i have made an adjustment to my recommendation that um that that statement that he requested will be added um overall a staff is recommending approval of the zoning map amendment um to the parcels that are provided both in the map that was seen in this presentation and in the list of legal descriptions that's in your background packet this evening presented with the additional language as suggested by our city attorney and this is a public hearing this evening and i can stand for questions if needed very good uh commissioners any questions for ms madden at this point commissioner john yeah i was just curious on um so the the district's not going to cross over highway 13. is that correct that's correct okay so stay south yeah everything else seems about what we what we talked about before so yeah that's all i have okay very good so i will open the public hearing at 6 57 pm and it does look like we have somebody in chambers here who would like to address the commission so if you would please just come up to the microphone state your name and address for the record you may you may take it okay well i didn't expect to speak tonight but my name is sandra schlafer and i'm a resident of burnsville as well as a business owner in the heart of the city of burnsville i own king and companies which if you're familiar with that area which you are because some of these ordinances sound like they're going to be changing um in cub foods you know where nicola plaza is where everybody lives above and then where the where the uh retail on the bottom and 2007 i think is when i bought my spot so i was one of the first if not the first person to go in there so i don't know if the business is so you said you had a lot of positive feedback maybe i mean i i do business in that area and i don't think i've heard of anything from anybody having these discussions so when i got the i feel like i got a letter so in the mail and then i'm like what what is going on now granted we also have covid right so maybe i don't have all my eyes dotted and t's crossed right for communication and being aware because i'm just trying to run a business as well so i mean jensen's cafe were they did they give you positive feedback mediterranean cruise cub foods um king and companies my company the chiropractor i mean we invested a lot of money in that heart of the city and we get surcharged every year special assessments for somebody's going to do choose to do some construction on a sidewalk and all of a sudden in september i get a bill and it's been going on the whole time so now i mean heart of the city in burnsville i mean we i went there i chose to go there now it sounds like when you're using past tense words i guess i'm a little a miffed because i spent a lot of money i mean i have a mortgage and everything there on my commercial building i own my space so i don't lease my space i own my space as well as everybody else in that retail center so if they're going to be vast changes i think we maybe don't know about them i could be the only one in the heart of the city that doesn't and maybe it's just again like i'm going to blame covet i don't want to do that but being a mom kids at school you know now at home running a business i just don't think um well i wasn't aware of it so maybe i'm the only silly person that wasn't but um i guess i'm really nervous what my investment's going to look like am i going to be taxed more in the heart of the city we love the heart of the city i mean i put on the music and the park program as a volunteer my family every sunday night for like nine years so we as a family and a business community really support that area so now that's going to change i mean change is good right change is good we just don't know what it's supposed to look like because i feel like we weren't involved in the conversation thank you very much for your comments we will be sure to ask some detailed clarifying questions of staff just to get you a little bit more background on this too thank you um all right it does look like we have somebody on the zoom call who would also like to speak brian salmon and if we can get him on the call that would be great and brian if you would yep i'm here yep would you state your full name and address for the record and then go ahead yep brian salmon i'm over at 151 west burnsville parkway okay the floor is yours okay uh my question is i i've i know some things were going on i kind of like the other person i just talked didn't know the extent of things going on so i was i was honestly a little surprised at uh the extent of this tod but uh for myself i need to know so is this going to restrict future use of my building i'm not really sure if i've had that anyone talk about that so am i going to be able to keep using doing the use i do in the buildings i own the other part is is i went through the whole cedarvale process 15 years ago where the city made a plan and then they decided to do the eminent domain and they literally moved us out is uh is that the plan for this is to move to the the new uses or at a certain point or be done uh i need to know that for my future in this area those are my questions thank you mr salmon we'll make sure to uh address those questions and get some answers for you here thank you so much for joining us is there anybody else online or on the phone and if you're on the phone please dial star 9 if you would like to raise your hand and contribute to the discussion all right i'm not seeing anybody else right now in chambers or on zoom so i am going to close the public hearing at 703 and uh if we have questions or any follow-up we'll we'll let you know mr salmon um and uh at this point commissioners what questions do you have what questions uh did some of those comments uh spur and uh what clarification type of questions should we ask of staff here commissioner john yeah um so ms madden do you want to talk to what the differences are between a new tod district comparison with the heart of the city uh yes commissioners so the uh heart of the city is two things uh kind of what we're talking about tonight is specifically what the designation is on the zoning map and not what part of the city is as far as part of a like focus area of the city and like a highlight of burnsville so it is still going to be called heart of the city part of the city will just exist inside of this transit-oriented development zoning district um so the branding of it isn't changing at all um the reason that it's being rezoned to transorder transit oriented development is a part of a policy initiative but it's also playing off of the existing changes that we are seeing construction wise for these transit stations for the orange line that's coming in as far as um change in restrictions the heart of the city code and the transit oriented development code are very similar so the development kind of boundaries for new development or redevelopment of properties for the properties that are currently zoned hoc1 or hoc2 is largely the same so that would include landscaping requirements the building materials um setbacks things like that it's just that it's a newer ordinance as far as the way that staff will administer the ordinance for restriction of uses um again if you are in hoc1 or hoc2 one of those zoned properties currently the variety of uses that are allowed um is not changing with the update if anything there are a couple things that are now allowed in transit oriented development that were not previously allowed in heart of the city so there is a wider variety of what types of uses could go in if a building were to flip either tenants or redevelop completely um the largest changes that property owners are going to see are in those properties that are west of 35 because they are changing from mixed use and commercial and in one case high density residential to go to transit oriented development and in that transit oriented development district all commercial uses are allowed or the majority of commercial uses are allowed outside of like car lots and storage type uses as well as that high density housing that you see in heart of the city so in most cases the standards are why they may be changing from an aesthetic standpoint because of the look and feel and kind of pedestrian and bike oriented goals that the city has for the heart of the city area generally the zoning provisions are more broad in that there are a wide variety of uses that can go in a district like this um so i hope that answers your question that really helps i got to follow up so financially speaking that was a couple questions that came up are there any changes or new assessments or anything that business owners should be concerned about or aware of given this attorney over to a transit oriented district from the current heart of the city district so there's not a direct impact on those type of financing concerns then that was the frequent question that came up during phone calls particularly from residents that lived in the area that was affected by the heart of the city special assessment so that special assessment that is done throughout the engineering department and is put in place from a policy a very long time ago with the establishment part of the city is not at all related to the boundaries of this new district so there's no impact at all in either direction on special assessments with the proposed zoning change other questions okay um so is it safe to say then that we're we're not turning heart of the city and that moniker into the past tense and that the city is still really pushing this this neighborhood for lack better term and i i mean this this was a huge vision that the city took on and has really implemented and uh in partnership with a variety of private businesses um you know we've we've taken ownership of this area and so is it safe to say that the idea of this is simply rezoning to bring in some of these businesses and properties on the west side of 35 and a few others it looks like on the east side of nicolette to really make it more standard in this area and almost make the heart of the city bigger that's correct that's an excellent way of putting it so speaking of part of the city in the past tense is more um i guess my vernacular that was affected there because the heart of the city is still going to remain heart of the city all of the branding the way that it looks the signage none of that is changing um because heart of the city is bigger than just what's on the zoning map the zoning map in particular is what's changing to this transit oriented development district so that we can encompass more properties within this that are so close to these new high density transit and high frequency transit stations that are going to be constructed next year um and to just ask the the straight forward question um that mr salmon asks there's no intention on any type of taking or any plans like what happened in the cedarville area uh no that is not a part of this initiative uh the initiative is just for the existing land um and the current boundaries that they have very good thank you right commissioners any other questions or thoughts again i i excellent presentation and i'm supportive of the recommendation so thank you i'd be happy to make a motion if if this is the time i i would stand for that yes okay sounds like a plan so i will recommend that we uh recommend uh are we recommending approval to the city council are we are we just uh approving the zoning map amendment ourselves you are recommending approval to this okay so yes i move that we recommend approval to the city council of the zoning map amendment of the parcels as listed in the provided ordinance with the attached well with the language that was added by the city attorney before we take a second and i'm sorry to put things on hold but because of the timing of uh zoom in the questions here we did have a follow-up question and i will allow it from um mr salmon so mr salmon if you're still on the the call i'd happily hear your your follow-up question sure thank you uh yeah the question is a little bit about the map i own uh a number of properties in that area and oddly enough all my properties on the map look considerably different they all look like high intensity housing um is is was that just for aesthetic value or was that kind of what what uh i even lisa place on over in the gateway area that is no longer going to be there either so i'm just curious what what the intention on that was i might need to ask you for more clarification unless city staff can um so on the heart of the city potential redevelopment plan that was a a part of the 2040 comprehensive plan update uh our consulting group put together multiple scenarios of what people could do in the area based on what the zoning allows so there are in this case the green and orange properties that are in between the two transit bubbles do show high density residential there where currently there's an existing well-established multi-tenant commercial building i believe that this is what the um the person on the call is referencing so this is just to show conceptually what could be constructed in the zone because now in the heart of the city existing as well as in the transit oriented development from a zoning standpoint high density construction is permitted whether that's high density office commercial or residential mr salmon does that address your question it looks like it was a visualization of possible uses more for the looks than anything else okay that that that helps out i've been involved with uh over over the last 15 years i've been involved with three eminent domains that's why i'm concerned because valley ridge down on the other side of burnsville over there started out as a concept moved into some other things and then became an eminent domain situation so uh i just just want to be aware of what's going to be coming up okay thank you mr simon so again to clarify i mean this was this was just a rendering visualization and i think you've answered the questions that mr simons asked about his concerns with potential eminent domain and that at this point there's this is simply a a rezoning to transit oriented development to help the uh i guess the universal neighborhood that we're looking at here that's correct okay thank you okay so commissioner wad i believe you have made a motion and i would like a second please huh okay i guess i'll second that's here all right all those in favor say aye opposing a and the motion carries uh this item will be on the city council's meeting uh next monday november 2nd for final approval and if there are any comments from anybody in the community you can submit those by friday of this week at 4 30 to city hall all right moving on we will go to item number five which is also a public hearing uh and it piggybacks a little here it's an application of city of of the city of burnsville for an ordinance amendment to remove title 10-22-b heart of the city zoning chapter in its entirety and remove reference to heart of the city from title 10 749 1029-12 10 30 15 10 6 1 7 1 12 and 3 37 and miss madden will take this as well thank you so as mentioned by chair timmerman the next item is related to the recommendation for the zoning map amendment from the previous item so this is an ordinance amendment to remove the heart of the city chapter from the zoning code and change references from heart of the city hoc to tod within various titles across the city code so the public hearing is specifically about those that are in title 10 which is the zoning chapter which the planning commission um has the authority to make recommendations on and hold public hearings for but there are some changes in the attached ordinance in other titles but they are this is considered housekeeping in nature very minor it's just changing the referencing from district to district um and based on some of the comments we received on the last item about heart of the city as an area and heard of the city as a zoning district just to clarify and this does not remove reference of heart of the city from the city's goals and policies that exist or our marketing strategy just from the zoning map and zoning chapter as maybe an example of where we see this elsewhere in the city the industrial area where the landfill and some of the surrounding properties are located are called the minnesota river quadrant in our comprehensive plan but their zoning district is actually called you know it's i for industrial or something like that um so the zoning does not necessarily equal the goals and policies of the city for our target areas such as the minnesota river quadrant and heart of the city so to move on so the proposed changes this evening with the ordinance included in your background packet are basically um removing any location where uh there are code references throughout the code that say in chapter 22b hoc and changing it to 22d tod as well as removal of 22b from the zoning ordinance and saving the chapter for future use the one change that's part of this that you'll see that isn't just removal of a reference is in the density section of title 10. and in that section the proposed density is changing from 20 to 60 to 20 to 80 and that is what was outlined in the transit oriented development district that was approved in may by the city council so the recommendation this evening staff is recommending that the planning commission recommend to the city council approval of the proposed ordinance amendment uh to adjust and modify these uh requirements oh i've got the wrong one um recommending approval um to incorporate changes um that remove reference from the uh from the hoc to the tod district this is a public hearing this evening and i can stand for questions so the sections that um i've got it wrong in my powerpoint but the recommendation is correct in your background pack it so um to remove title 1022b and then remove reference from hoc in multiple titles throughout the city code and replace with 22d which is the transit oriented development district thank you questions all right seeing none i will open the public hearing on this item at 7 19. and i don't see anybody in chambers who would like to speak to this item i will wait just one moment to see if anybody on zoom does if you would press star 9 to raise your hand if you would like to speak to this item all right it doesn't look like we have anyone on zoom either so commissioners discussion motion commission john yeah i just wanted to say i appreciate miss schaffler coming in today and and bringing up those those questions she had i think that um if i was reading this too i would i would feel the same way about it i'm glad that we're just making a quick code change with that i would like to make a motion uh can i pause you right there we did have somebody sorry oh we did have somebody i'm going to reopen the public hearing at 7 20 and we have somebody on zoom who would like to speak i have patty i don't have a last name but if we could get patty on please hi um i just have a quick question yes would you please state your name and address for the record and then you may ask your question oh it's 40401 east burnsville parkway um patty what's your last name dylan thank you go ahead um is the last point that she made about um i don't i can't repeat the vernacular but it seems to me that you're wanting to decrease the um occupancy to parking ratio is that is that my is that a correct understanding i may need a clarification are you referencing the chart that i talked about in my powerpoint no i'm rep referencing your comment like the 20 60 to 20 80 the uh yes so what that is in reference to is is not related to parking but is related to the allowed number of units of housing per acre so it's actually increasing the current range is between 20 units and 60 units per acre for the heart of the city zoning district and the new zoning district is between 20 units and 80 units per acre so what does that refer to square footage or i'm trying to understand what that actually impacts um that would impact the number of residential units um on a piece of property for new construction or for a major remodeling or redevelopment of a of a site so like if an apartment complex was going in it the it would be able to have more units that's correct so necessarily smaller units um they would need to meet the minimum unit size which we do i don't have it before me this evening but we do have provisions related to square footage in our in our city codes and ordinances okay that helps me a lot thank you so much you're welcome okay thank you mr lynn okay so i'm going to close unless i see somebody else here and i do um so i'm going to pause for sandy sandy when you get on please state your first and last name and your address hello sandy duques the address is 3112 marsha and lane burnsville and i had a question regarding that last slide when you talked about density and you clarified that to mean units or hoses it was my understanding that r1a had a minimum of two acres one acre was grandfathered in and the way i'm reading this is it's 0.05 to 1.0 unit per acre am i viewing this incorrectly or is this being reduced from two acres to one acre uh on this particular slide i don't believe there's any change to the r1a but i will let his madner mosquitoes thank you speak to this there is no change overall related to the r1a zoning district um in terms of the city's comprehensive plan which was adopted a couple of years ago for 2040 there were some density changes that were made and those have been incorporated into the ordinance the minimum lot size has not changed so we still have a minimum lot size if you do not have city sewer and water of two acres of dry buildable land so that has not changed i think overall in the r1a zone if you have public utilities you can develop at a higher density which gets you to that point five uh to i can't read that to one unit per acre that's assuming you have city sewer and water available with city sewer and water you're able to have higher density but most of the properties do not have city sewer and water so they still follow the two acre requirement for areas without uh areas that are on septic system and well okay and and this doesn't affect that at all no it doesn't realize that you said that it was implemented a while ago with the new city services um this was the densities were modified somewhat in the zoning ordinance and in the comprehensive plan when they were updated but this is still reflective of basically what's always been available in the r1a area it just this particular chart doesn't make the doesn't state that you can have one is with city sewer and water and the lower density is without so this is really reflective of the highest that you can have the 0.5 to one acre would be with city sewer and water and that's the same as it's been for many many years and then likewise if you do not have city sewer and water then your density is you have to have a two acre minimum lot size for one home okay all right thank you for the clarification sure yes thank you for your question um and i will pause here before i close the public hearing i don't remember if i opened it or i know i've opened it more than once but i will close it at 7 27 um and commissioner john if you would please continue with your recommendation yeah i will make a motion um then we recommended the city council approval of the ordinance amendment to remove title 1022b part of the city's zoning chapter in its entirety and remove a reference to hoc from title 10749 102912 10 30 15 10 6 1 7 112 and 337 and replace with reference to title 1022d transient oriented development tod district desk drafted i will second that motion thank you so we have a motion by commissioner john second by commissioner wad all those in favor any further discussion all those in favor say i i oppose say nay and the motion carries uh to all of you who joined us tonight on these items thank you very much i know that with these it's a long process to make a significant zoning change like this and this is still not the end of that this will go on to the city council meeting which will be next monday november 2nd and i believe then there will also be some follow-up with the met council that will be required in order to get final approval on this item and that was what our city staff alluded to with the effective date of this is it will be after the met council sees this and ultimately approves it okay so with that we will move on to the next item which is item number six on the agenda and number six is another public hearing and it is an application of the city of burnsville for a zoning ordinance amendment to title 10. zoning chapter 30a landscape requirements to incorporate changes related to landscaping requirements on multi-family commercial mixed use and industrial lots and to modify requirements for the installation of building perimeter landscaping and it looks like we will have ms mrs albrexius mr rick says i'm gonna introduce the item the floor is yours thank you for bearing with us so uh this last item on this evening's agenda um will again be a public hearing this is related to two items that were on the planning commission 2020 work plan which was discussed at your last meeting on september 28th uh where we had a commission consensus to move forward with the ordinance that was drafted at that time and it has not changed since that draft that was provided at that meeting but has been put into more the the formal nature which you can see in your background report this evening so the new draft ordinance provides some flexibility in our regulations the city's regulations for the installation of plant materials some greater choice in materials and design options for both building perimeter landscaping and in our plant material requirements for open space on properties some increased administrative which is staff approval options for us to utilize as tools and the zoning code and it but it does maintain the extensive ordnance provisions for landscaping that we have here in the city of burnsville which gets us some high quality results um so our planning consultant um al brexius will speak to this item this evening thank you all right commissioners uh as discussed we looked at this in september and we've moved ahead to bring this ordinance in your packet you have the formal ordinance in front of you when we looked at this we were looking at these landscape requirements specifically the plant diversity and you note that the plant diversity here outlines the number of plants that are required based on open area the issue that we have with the current code is open area is not defined so the changes we're looking at is to establish criteria that can be subtracted from the open area these areas are either not available for planting on or planting areas such as the storm water ponds wetlands utilities containing pipelines and overhead transmission lines where the util where the plantings may actually interfere with that utility steep slopes woodland preservation areas and then our previous definition just included building parking lots and other impervious areas if we just base it on uh letter f then we have a lot of area that has to generate a landscape count but does not really support an area for those areas so that was that is the first change is that we introduced the definition of open space as part of the code the second element that we also incorporated under plant diversity was that we're providing 25 percent of diversity but we're also [Music] subtracting or allowing for parking areas or buffer areas to be counted against the number of required plantings and that's what this deletion would be include the next element we talk about is building perimeter landscaping you can see the current deletion that we're taking out the 50 percent of a parking lot or building perimeter being solid landscaped or proof ground cover and we're replacing it with two alternatives the building perimeter landscaping for multiple family office clinic dairy care and restaurants or industrial sites we retained the 50 of the billing perimeter but we also added that a reduction could occur if there are alternative landscape options such as aesthetic design in accordance with a provision that's already in the code to be located within 10 feet of the building wall this allows some flexibility in additional design components if there's a plasma larger hardscape component that is attractive and maintained it can result in a reduced uh requirement for our our landscaping we've also looked at multi-tenant commercial retail on sale service retail businesses shopping centers and based on what we examined as far as on a site-by-site basis we found that most of our shopping centers did not meet the 50 percent requirement it's primarily due to bringing parking lots in close proximity to the front doors and loading areas and other activity areas at the rear of the building so what we're asking you to look at tonight is a reduction for these type of uses to 30 percent of the total building perimeter but again we also allow for reduction in that percentage where we allow for alternative landscape options aesthetic design in accordance with the code again this is an opportunity to use hardscape as a means of being aesthetically pleasing and plaza areas seating areas those type of features additionally under aesthetic design would be elevated planting boxes which could also fill both needs then on the buffer yards and in parking areas we're basically have modified this to allow these trees and shrubs to be counted toward the overall landscape count same holds true for the landscape parking landscaping currently your your code requires a landscape plan it has a landscape count parking lot landscaping buffer yards woodland protections heat reductions perimeter plantings and minimum green space for a commercial industrial areas i don't think the changes that we're proposing will influence any of the functional requirements as far as screening because we still have them outlined very specifically in our code but it will allow for a greater reduction and be more site specific as far as the the proposed landscaping if there's any questions i'll try to respond very good commissioners any questions question john like i i remember last time we talked about this is just make sense it's the best way to roll we're just improving our already our regulations and any changes that we we need to make we can through a variance or anything in those lines correct so okay mrs thank you for being here again is it safe to say that this is clarifying the ordinance and taking some burden off of property owners because we're considering some of those spaces in the open spaces definition that we once weren't i believe that in the past we've granted variances in some cases where we had woodland preservation or we had steep slopes and quite frankly if those areas are to be reserved and undisturbed counting them as far as plant locations we have a lot of overcrowding and while some cities require a cache in lieu of the plants it's not something i'd recommend because you'd be using the plan someplace else and i don't think it's a reasonable or legal application not speaking for your city attorney though [Laughter] everyone's entitled to an opinion yes all right this is a public hearing so i will open it at 7 37 pm and it does not look like we have anybody in chambers who wishes to speak to this if there is anybody on zoom who's on the telephone if you would press i have to remind myself here star nine star nine to raise your hand to notify our moderator if you'd like to speak all right i do not see anyone on zoom so commissioners any discussion do you have to close this close the public yes thank you i will close the public hearing at 7 38. commissioner what uh again great presentation thank you for kind of giving our you know giving us more options really and i'm supportive of the uh recommendation i agree with that um thanks to uh everything you guys have done and i'm gonna go ahead and make that recommendation if the recommendations just you can adopt the ordinances in the packet because they have the staff has already outlined it for you and it's and i think that's contains everything um okay you got it yeah um i think we just move forward with with these changes um and staff will prepare the ordinance for a public hearing at the next planning commission meeting is there i don't think that that's about it right uh no i think we have uh you have a draft ordinance in your packet yeah we're gonna recommend that you go forward to the council that's what we're looking for i don't go ahead i'd be happy to make the recommendation if yeah so uh i move that we recommend to the city council approval of the proposed ordinance to city code title 10 zoning chapter 38 landscape requirements to incorporate changes related to landscaping requirements on multi-family commercial mixed use in industrial lots and to modify requirements for the installation of building perimeter landscaping i'll do the easy roll i will second that save the seconds for you that sounds good all right uh any further discussion thank you for the work this is this is a nice change i do think it makes life easier for developers and applicants down the road so uh with no further discussion all those in favor say aye aye aye opposed a and the motion carries all right thank you okay so that brings us to [Music] updates and and sorry this item too will be on the uh city council meeting next monday november 2nd for final approval updates commissioners any updates no updates from the commissioners any updates from staff yes so typically your next planning commission meeting you would have two per month on the second and fourth monday of the month your next meeting will be cancelled on november 9th so the next time that you'll come into city hall for a meeting will be november 23rd and so that will be the week of thanksgiving right now it looks like we're going to have two items on that meeting the first will be a continuation of the building expression topic that we talked about a few months ago um we may have an ordinance actually to look at and the second item we do have a development application uh for a i hope i'm getting it right but i want to send 82 unit apartment building um in an r3b zoned property or proposal to rezone to r3b elsewhere in the city in the off of county road 5. so that application should be scheduled on the november 23rd meeting and then i do not have any further updates to you nope and that's all excited for the the building expression conversation and ordnance um i visited my sister in florida and actually saw a building and i never would have noticed it but the entire side of it said timmerman so my sister i said that is not signage that is building itself which city uh it was near uh fort myers okay so it was off the 95 [Laughter] it stood out to me at least right okay so we are going to move towards adjournment and i would just like to remind folks that members of the public can submit additional public comment related to any of the items at this evening's planning commission until 4 30 pm on friday this week october 30th these comments will be included with the city council background for further consideration at their meeting on monday november 2nd at this time i'd like to request a call for adjournment to our meeting this evening i'll go ahead and make that motion i will second the motion all right all those in favor say aye aye aye aye opposed a and the motion carries we're adjourning thank you you