good evening and welcome it is monday march the 14th 2022 that is pi day and i called to order the planning commission meeting for the city of burnsville tonight's planning commission meeting is being held in person and virtually via zoom as chair i'll be leaving the planning commission meeting and the public is welcome to participate when invited throughout the meeting members of the public may attend the meeting in person or join us online with zoom if attendees experience audio problems we suggest you leave the meeting and then try rejoining that usually has fixed the issue additional instructions on how to participate plus all kinds of good information located on our city's website and that's burnsvillemn.gov in the public meeting calendar as usual tonight's meeting is also available for viewing on bctv and on the city's website if you're unable to participate this evening and would like to submit public testimony i encourage you can either send your comments to city staff or mail your comments directly to city hall you may participate in tonight's online meeting by joining us on zoom dot us slash join and typing in this meeting id 947 to once you're logged into the meeting please use the chat feature to tell the moderator which item you're planning to speak to you may also join us by calling in the meeting that phone number is 651-372-8299 again you would use the same meeting id which is 947-2007-3823 for each public hearing i will open up some time when callers can speak to that item and we'll give you more instructions at that time if you join by phone your call will be muted until then and please note there's going to be a slight delay due to technology so if you're speaking by phone please turn down the computer or mute the computer to help the delay with that all this information is of course also included on the website burnsvillemn.gov in the public meeting calendar and now let's move on to the agenda we should have received a agenda through your packets this evening or this this week any changes commissioners any change of staff no changes no changes i would like a motion for the agenda get off the agenda commissioner watt i move that we adopt the agenda move by commissioner wad commission wallace i'll second because he can second bike mr wallace all in favor please respond by saying aye aye anyone oppose hearing none that passes that's great you also should have received the meeting minutes that was from february 28th hopefully you got a chance to look through them uh commissioners did you see any changes you'd like to make staff no changes from staff good deal with that i would uh take a motion commissioner anderson i'd like to uh make a motion to approve the minutes thank you commissioner anderson moved by commissioner anderson second second by commissioner timmerman all in favor please signify by saying aye aye no one opposes that brings us to number three on our agenda and that is a public hearing the application of the city of burnsville for a zoning map amendment to rezone 41 parcels of land in the burnsville center area and county road 42 retail corridor to the mixed use zoning district and one parcel to the park district to align with the recent update to the 2040 comprehensive land use plan here to speak to that is our city planner sarah madden this man and the floor is yours thank you chair good evening planning commission i'm just getting the powerpoint pulled up sorry uh so the item tonight is related to um something that's been discussed many times before the planning commission other city commissions and the city council which is related to the center village vision implementation so um before getting into the specific parcels that are being rezoned this evening i'm going to just go through quick history for some of you who may not have been on the commission when some of these projects kicked off um so the metropolitan council is a kind of governing agency over the metropolitan area here in the twin cities and one of the things that cities like burns will have to do is submit a comprehensive plan update um generally every 10 years so beginning in 2016 the city as a whole but kind of spearheaded by planning staff here and consultants that we were working with began the process of updating from the 2030 comprehensive plan to the 2040 comprehensive plan that takes some time to work through involves a lot of engagement as well as just financial study looking over previous plans to see like what maybe needs to be tuned or changed or maybe there's new focus areas that we wanted to add with the 2040 update one of the new focus areas that was added was the county road 42 retail corridor so after kind of that period of study we end up with what we have adopted today which is the 2040 comprehensive plan so the metropolitan council did approve that in summer of 2019 and shortly after the city council voted to adopt it and so that is the comprehensive plan that is a fact for burnsville what happened is during the review of the comprehensive plan knowing what we had proposed and submitted to the metropolitan council the city staff and additional consultant work began what we call now is the center village vision but when that process began it was just knowing that we had submitted a draft comp plan with a focus area of the county road 42 retail area we put out or began to study what was then called the county road 42 retail area so um i guess i'll go back a little bit but just to kind of go over here the conference plan which i had mentioned um this is our long-term cities very long-term goals you know 2040 to be adopted in 2019 and the goals of for the city for 2040. it's a long-term vision for the city and one of those small areas does become what you know as the center village area so as part of what we knew we would be focusing on in the 2040 comprehensive plan um the proposed future land use plan at that time showed the areas including the burnsville center mall itself and those south of county road 42 they were proposed to be re-guided um from a commercial land use to mixed-use land use so that is part of what was adopted um as part of the 2019 um adoption of the 2040 comprehensive plan while that was still pending and under review by the metropolitan council the city began their separate center village vision process so that actually began i believe in summer 2018 so it was all kind of being reviewed at the same time and one of the things that came out of the center village visioning process for this general retail area was that the area that we had identified in the 2040 comprehensive plan for mixed use should actually be expanded to the retail corridor areas that are north of county road 42. so this is an excerpt from the adopted 2040 comprehensive plan that kind of was the um summary of what our new focus area would be and what we would go on to study um so looking into that burnsville center mall and coming up with a market or development study of the area such as what was done for some other malls in the region and kind of create some best practices and um explore the zoning that it could be not just on the mall but on the area outside it so with the center village vision um which some of you were able to kind of be a part of as that went through in 2018 and 2019. um there were new goals for redevelopment of the retail area both north and south of county road 42 and kind of a new vision of what a neighborhood style development could look like with mixed use in the area and so as i said earlier the areas south of county road 42 were rezoned to mixed use after adoption of the comprehensive plan but the areas north of county road 42 were not included in the focus area until staff and our consultants and got further into that center village vision study work so as we're working on that from 2018 to 2019 the comprehensive plan is also under review at the same time so there's a lot of studies that are going on um outside of that uh once the comprehensive plan was adopted in the summer of 2019 staff moved forward with the rezoning to be consistent with the comprehensive plan so that was in december 2019 and um we began the next sort of process which you were maybe involved in which was the center village traffic study and something that just completed itself earlier in 2021 was a what's called an alternative urban area wide review which is essentially a kind of pre-emptive environmental impacts or other impacts review of the area so there are a number of city studies that are related to this area that were all happening um because they were recommendations of the previous studies but also all happening kind of around the same time so as part of this december 2019 the where the uh approval of the mixed-use land use subject to metropolitan council approval that is the specific item that is related to what we're looking at tonight so as part of that northern part of the county road 42 retail area in december 2019 is the last time that that went before the planning commission for a public hearing there were two years of study in between before the metropolitan council would finalize looking at the amendment to our comprehensive plan because there was a lot of studying to be done related to the whole area and we wanted to submit to them a complete package of the information so once that was finalized in july the metropolitan council and some images maybe i'm out of order here of the generous family of the traffic study that was conducted in 2020 prior to some of those traffic impacts we saw as a result of the kova 19 pandemic as well as the alternative urban area wide review the aur which is development scenarios showing those impacts of development on an area so after that the metropolitan council did approve our land use plan amendment from 2019 this past november of 2021 and then that was adopted by the city council in december of 2021. so that does bring us to the rezoning that is the public hearing and the zoning amendment application and that's before you this evening so the parcels that were proposed to be re-guided to mixed-use land use had a period of study they were adopted by the city council in december and then this public hearing this evening is moving forward with the to be consistent with the comprehensive plan changes that were made to the land use map the zoning map amendment to follow um so shown here is the existing zoning of the area so highlighted here in the black bold line so there are and the darker red is b3 zoning and there's a small area of b2 which is neighborhood business owning so in b3 is a general business and then there is some single-family zone property that is also part of the rezoning this larger piece and the three uh hatched parcels are vacant land and then there is one non-vacant parcel that is also included in it on the same block um so the proposed zoning for the area is mixed use there is the carryover of those plan unit developments so where you can see on the map that there's some crosstalk as you can see the majority of the area is planned unit development zoning that carries over as the zoning for the site and the island of green that you can see here is the one parcel listed in the item's title which is rezoned to park this is the fire station one land which of course has been relocated to another area of the city and so this is proposed to be rezoned to park at this as part of this action this evening um so uh the intent of the uh proposal before you this evening is to be consistent with the adopted land use plan um with the 2040 plan so there are 41 properties that's approximately just under 192 acres and then one property which is the former fire station one property to be rezoned to park district and the pd zoning does carry forward with this area and then just as a general engagement and notification process since it had been some time since there was notification to these property owners since the last land use amendment there was some outreach and a virtual open house for the property owners that are being rezoned held at the end of february um so we did have one attendee at the virtual open house and then kind of a number of phone calls with different property owners in the area just asking about their pud and how that would be affected moving forward um so with that it is a public hearing this evening but staff is recommending that the planning commission recommend to the city council approval of the proposed zoning map amendment and the ordinance for rezoning which is included in your background packet as drafted and presented this evening and i can stand for questions perfect thank you before we go to public hearing i think we'll start with uh council or council jesus commissioners do you have any questions for ms madden concerning our um rezoning of the mixed use saying that no okay i i know i was going to ask about the the park area so they're going to make that into a park is that the plan or we are so that's a great question right now there is not an official plan or direction but we received kind of some information about possibilities and right now the zoning is proposed to be park that can change with the direction of the city council or any initiative but right now it is proposed to be reason to park there are no formal directional plans okay and then that that one space it was uh r1 i believe up top there now that looks like there's a street there is that uh or is that non-existing street one of those so the street is actually cut um it's only it's basically a stub street so it does access the one non-vacant parcel but uh with the right-of-way does extend to the end of the block but the street that is constructed itself is is stubbed after the one occupied parcel we're probably seeing a better use of that land being some type of a business so with there's been some engagement with this property owner and in the past there were uh pud amendment proposals that came through some i think as a sketch plan that never made it to full development application and then maybe some that did make it to development application which were for commercial type uses they didn't go through some of those uses were senior housing and other kind of assisted or long-term care facilities so with that type of facility is still something that they would be able to apply for their pud amendment uh when they maybe do decide to move forward with a development like that like that was shown conceptually but it is a planned unit development so it would require an amendment before anything could be constructed at the site because it is they're both they're all vacant and owned by the same property owner okay and it speaks to you so it could go either way right that's right yeah okay thank you um with that it is a public hearing it is 6 46 i'm going to open up the public hearing anyone here in person can uh please spec step up to the podium or we can uh take your phone calls or your zoom just let the moderator know that you'd like to speak to this issue if that's the case if you're on the phone you dial star six to speak with the moderator last time i checked there was nobody on zoom and it sounds like there is nobody on zoom well absolutely come on step up and please uh we just asked that you state your name and address for the record yep um tracy engel 2100 friendship lane and i'm near that one property owner that has questions and um this is the first i've heard about any of this and i live like i said on friendship lane so that's right we a butt work in a kitty corner from that vacant or that single family owner and i guess what are the next steps because like i said we haven't heard anything about this and i know some of the other family members on that street are also concerned with what the impacts are for our homes as well as you know the community that we have established there at this point great um so this is the final step in this study that has occurred the last engagement that would have been or any notification that would have been sent out would have probably been in 2019 uh related to um i'm not sure if you were here for the whole presentation but when the uh studying was beginning for the land use change um this most recent time uh the notification we had uh with the property owners themselves we had extra i guess information that was sent out to them ahead of time um but otherwise for this public hearing tonight it was the standard 350 feet notification um which would be you i'm assuming since you're near the property but not on it yeah yeah so um the last kind of larger engagement effort related to it was probably in 2019 but this is the last step of adopting the zoning to be consistent with the work that was already studied i don't know if that helps answer your question it may not be well it does but you know what i guess you know that's a long time and if there was nothing done at that point you know i would have thought there would have been more notice then all of a sudden it's here for changing of the zoning i guess i i don't have a solution for that part yeah i'm the only one here i know there was someone else that was going to come but i don't think he was able to join so if what can we as a community do if we do have concerns about the rezoning or is it are you saying it's too late i'm not saying that it's too late i mean you can always speak with me so i'm kind of the staff person that's running the rezoning application part of it okay um and i can be happy to talk with you separately outside of the meeting um the each of the properties that are being rezoned are a separate line item in the ordinance so there are ways for moving around maybe scheduling of certain items if you'd like to talk about them and then the i will say with the specific with a larger vacant piece so that is a plan unit development there's nothing that's currently proposed on the site i the last time that i spoke with the property owner there hasn't been necessarily momentum to move anything forward because it has that plan unit development on it there will be um when it comes forward for development whenever that may happen there will be additional notification as part of the public process um that they will have to go through in another hearing similar to this one with the actual plans of what they may be proposing associated with it that would be for future projects of course for this one though i'm happy to talk with you more about it it would be nice if we would have an opportunity to kind of gather our thoughts and you know as kind of meet as neighbors and just share what our concerns are and what questions or comments and thoughts we would have okay if we could hold off on moving forward with the rezoning at this point yep go ahead something that could happen is if the other sites are amenable to planning commission to continue with those rezonings but then hold up this one and continue it to allow for a neighborhood meeting or neighborhood impact related to this site that would be helpful yeah i think you should also note that it's just rezoning we're not necessarily going to build something there or anything that's coming in right away however i completely understand you're concerned and i you know i was looking at and the reason i asked that question was wondering if any of the homeowners in that area were were curious about that at all so i'm glad you stepped up and said oh i really appreciate you coming in tonight that's um and absolutely it would come to before public hearing like this you the whole neighborhood could be here we've had that happen before and uh let us know what what you think ours is going to be a recommendation to the city council on what goes forward so there's still going to be another step in this whole process as well okay if you don't get your resolved what we got going today um it would take one of the commissioners here to make a motion to separate that out as as as ms garros was saying so okay i hope that helps that helps and and maybe i think i got your card okay out there so um we could also be in touch with you also yes absolutely is that the best approach at this point uh that would be for to for more discussion and then otherwise um it's the uh decision of the planning commission for how they would vote and if they were to split commissioner timmerman uh thank you for coming i have a question for you um this is the opportunity this is the public hearing and so if you would share with the planning commission what your concerns are with the rezoning we can take that into consideration for the decision that we're making tonight um the decision we're making tonight is you know frankly based on information that we've been looking at for onward of four years or nearly four years and so i mean i will tell you that i'm prepared to accept the city staff's recommendation but if you have some information you'd like to share during the public hearing i'd really like to hear it too though i guess i haven't we haven't really prepared our thoughts here a whole lot but i guess first of all the impact of the property value and if it's a larger like um town homes did you say multi-family multi-family or a part would that include apartments or is that it's a it's a mixed use so it could be businesses it could be homes am i speaking out on that no not speaking out of turn um as he's saying with mixed use there's kind of a variety of types of densities that it could be how large is the high um the largest the highest that it could be a multi-family apartment building that is something that is would be a a plan unit development amendment for whoever were to propose it on that vacant land but um that is something that it could be uh the last concept that was talked about with um this site in particular it was maybe close to 10 years ago and it was related to a senior living type of facility and i think just the traffic flow going up and down that street i mean we've there's been many times cars speed down there rather quickly and so traffic flow um impact of the property value a lot more what what what is the apartment i mean is it is it going to be you know subsidized is it going to be low income is it going to be just standard housing you know i don't know so i mean we've all lived there most of us have lived there for quite a few years so i guess what what type of impact will it be i think when you bring multi-family apartments that can draw your property value down so you know sure go ahead and say something absolutely this entire area has the the real uh potential to bring your property value up significantly i think that additional mixed use additional businesses additional people and development and i mean the idea of this is not to draw anybody's property value down and that's something that i think the city council the planning commission and the city staff all takes into consideration when they're looking at plans i mean what i want to tell you is that what we decide tonight isn't the end of your options as chair john said you have an opportunity in two weeks to address the city council i think it's very nice that city planner mad madden you know provided you the opportunity to reach out to her directly so i i don't want to say you know whatever happens with our vote i think it's good that you at least are starting to talk with it uh with your neighbors about it so thank you for coming and like i said we haven't had a whole lot of opportunity to talk and gather our thoughts together this is just off the and there's a lot of unknowns i mean apartment building or or homes or whatever i mean it's it's speculative right now so could be quite a few different things absolutely so there might not be answers to a lot of the questions you guys come up with but i think it's great to to know that you're going to be putting them together and you have a great resource in sarah and i do want to note that when development were to occur on the site whether this rezoning happens or not when they move forward there would be another public review process as part of that similar to maybe what you went through and if you lived in the neighborhood as you were mentioning when the the senior living development was coming through so that a similar process to that would occur when anything like that comes in we do request traffic information from the developer and it's reviewed by traffic engineers that the city consults with when they come in we look at those plans and impacts as part of the wholesome review and some of that does include neighborhood meetings and you know what it takes to to bring forward a proposal that we want to support to the city so when that comes forward from the private sector that would be it would still be a public process that you and your neighbors would have input in okay hope that helps okay all right thank you thank you so much for joining us tonight we appreciate it without anybody else that would like to speak on this issue is more than welcome to the podium is open i don't believe anybody else has joined us from zoom i might double check doesn't look like it well it is 6 57 i will close that public hearing and i'm going to turn it over to commissioners if you have any questions for staff again or if you want to make a motion or discuss this mr timmerman um ms madden um so this goes to the city council in two weeks what is the step beyond that just to clarify um it has to go back to mac council for another look or is this kind of the really the last style this uh public hearing and then city council meeting is the last step so it would be a city council next week for review next week yes commissioner anderson i'm just kind of curious um the idea of switching it from general business to mixed use is more or less the idea to try to open up additional options of what can be there i mean it's the goal to put things like you know apartments or senior living or is that kind of like a goal to be able to maximize that space in that kind of regard or is it just we just want to make sure to have all the options open for for any developers in the future that's a great question mixed use the idea of increasing the number of acreage of mixed use that the city has is mainly about the wider variety of options it does allow i think right now the zoning district as you know we're kind of changing some of that but the zoning district is it's a conditional use for a mixed-use building that has residential and commercial in it it is a conditional use permit if it is a all multi-family building that's kind of how the zoning district itself is set up but as for the darker red area on your map and general business from general business to mixed use is very very similar the key difference is some of that wider variety of uses and the setback standards are primarily the same the green space requirements are primarily the same and the building materials requirements unless you are doing a multi-family building are primarily the same so a lot of the development standards that you'd see in our zoning code for those two districts are very similar and then with the plan unit developments that are vast in this area that's where some of those more specifics may come in about what uses what uh height what things like that are already kind of governed in a lot of these planned unit developments so that's all something that would be reviewed if they were to come forward in the center village vision which talks about this area as a whole there is a big focus on bringing more rooftops to the area and so there there is a focus in that for the center village area as a whole um primarily and the reason why the northern area was not included in the original update of the comprehensive plan is because the residential or the idea the residential could be permitted that was focused on the southern end and as you know you know living and shopping and working in burnsville this northern area for county road 42 is primarily commercial retail some office but none of the land is vacant it is apart from the parcel that we were just speaking on that is on the corner of kenwood five but it's all built out developed a strong thriving retail area so while it would open up options for uses and that multi-family and that mixed-use building style would be available for a developer it does have you know the built form that it currently is right now okay thank you yes you're welcome sure i do have another commission uh miss madden why didn't we consider the speedway super america parcel that's in gray now to connect the other red parcel that's zoned for mixed use can you put up the proposed uh yeah what parcel are you referring to possibly are you talking about gray in this area yep those three gray properties um so this area there's actually a it's a great question i don't know if i'll be able to answer it wholly um as part of this but this area is complex designated as limited business it's and so it's a separate section of our comp plan that talks about as we move west down county road 42 that we focus on employment centers and limited business so that is part of the reason i believe that those parcels are the i'm trying to think one of them is office warehouse and um the ihop and the brand new car wash and the um one of these parcels is a self storage facility so it is still business in a way but the comp plan the way that it's described is that as we move down county road 42 past five it specifically talks about that that a limited business but focused on employment is a key focus in the comprehensive plan and that was probably delineated in the comprehensive plan two updates ago so yeah i mean i'm not gonna throw any wrenches in the in the works tonight but those current businesses seem to fit the mixed type of zoning and you know maybe for opportunities for those property owners down the road that could be looked at as well anyone else commissioners uh one question i was was there a request from the property owner to include that parcel into this um space or what what drove that part of it was it you'd mention that we've had other opportunities in that area um if you're mentioning the the vacant piece it was not a specific request but it was identified as an area that could have impact when looking at the traffic study of what could move forward based on the concepts that were seen before and and the compatible land-use and zoning based on what the uh i think it's technically it has a vacant building on it there's a former church building on the site vacant for a number of years we as a staff do entertain calls from people that may be interested in purchasing it and knowing kind of what the market demanded that's why it was looked at in the traffic study and why it was looked at as part of the sustainability environmental impacts of the aur and kind of why it ended up in this and in the conference plan movement yes in addition to that we've got county road 5 and county road 42 and dakota county has control over access and with mcandrews also being a county road in the past they have not been willing to provide you know a direct access and it's too close to 42 and 5 for another stoplight so it's really thought of because you've got commercial directly to the south kind of a transition area between the commercial and the single family residential and what could happen there we have seen more i think more often residential type uses than strictly commercial just because of that access limitation when we say residential we mean it has to be multi-family it can't be a single family home or anything those lines of excuse right i'm not sure i am not sure about single family homes in particular mixed use has a wide density range for units per acre um but what i would say that when we have heard about someone that may want to prepare a concept plan primarily it's been a maybe a medium density residential as a transitionary area or something like a senior living development which is kind of a in some areas or a lot in commercial zones as a permitted use so it's kind of a transitionary uses is generally what we've heard that someone may be interested in doing in the site um but as i was mentioning earlier it's been a long time since uh someone has come forward with a development proposal on the property and to reiterate if if somebody did it'd come before us again so it would be something we could miss ingle could speak on and we could help that's correct and then you would have the specifics on impacts we would know specifically what was being built right there are no proposals currently perfect thank you well commissioners uh we've done some discussion here unless somebody else has a discussion i'd be willing to hear a motion commissioner tournament i was just opening my screen you raise your hand you raise it off the desk that means you raised thank you oh thank you um yeah i think this is an exciting area of the city i'm concerned with certain areas um as well that are so close to the residential uh i think that the the church or church school or whatever had been in that area was kind of um i mean it's blighted at this point and it needs some refreshing so i think that we can probably come up with something over the the short to medium range that'll work in that area and with that i would uh make a motion to recommend to the city council approval of the proposed zoning map that ms madden so eloquently presented this evening thank you commissioner timmerman commissioner timmerman has made a motion do i have a second mr wallace i'll second the motion all right seconded by commissioner wallace all in favor please signify by saying aye aye anyone oppose it is unanimous that means it will be on the consent agenda on tuesday march the 22nd for the city council it'll be at 5 30 in these very chambers thanks again this madden moving on to the next public hearing we have an application for 2100 frontage road llc for conditional use permit amendment concept and development stage planned unit development for an outdoor storage lot rezoning it from b4 highway commercial to b4 pud preliminary and final plaid of a one lot commercial plant of ivy brook parking east located on the 3.6 acre site at the northeast corner of oliver avenue south and highway 13 frontage road north i feel like there should have been a period in there somewhere here to present is another one of our great planning managers it is a long one thank you commissioners yes lots happening on this site uh lots has happened in the past and uh and then um we have uh an application uh the applicant is here this evening we've got uh trevor uh pune who's here and then also the engineer for the project which is eric meyer so if there are any questions of the applicant they are here in terms of the subject site there are two parcels that are out there the southern parcel actually was planted back in the late 1970s both parcels have been used for uh what used to be the family fun ways amusement park for years years and years like from i think early 1980s probably to almost late 1990s the subject site considering two the two parcels is 3.6 acres of the zoning the south part of the site received cup and pud approval for part of the family fun ways project the north part of the site is just zoned b4 which is highway commercial so the and the land use is they are in the minnesota river quadrant in terms of the site itself there are frontages on both oliver avenue south which is on the west side and then the highway 13 frontage road which is on the south and then up through part of the east side of the site so what the applicant would like to do is we are looking at terminating the previous cup and pud approvals anything related to family fun ways just to basically clean up the history of the site and and the parcel and then in this case there's a pud to allow a screening fence with slats you could do that with a cup but since we're proposing or recommending the entire site bpud that would just be included with the pud and then rezoning the entire site to b4 planned unit development and then concept and development stage pud for an outdoor storage use this is very similar to the use that you looked at several months ago along um south cross and county road five and so they are looking basically to have the site for development for storage type use for commercial vehicles commercial equipment and recreational vehicles and some low storage of just exterior material items the site does have an existing building on it the building was approved many years ago basically he has a temporary building for a place that they could sell tickets from it was intended to be movable so temporary it's been there a long long time long after the park closed in 2006 there was a case file taken out because the building was just in disrepair it had holes in the roof and basically looked like a very very in need of shed type of facility so the owner at the time did clean it up and uh recited it and it's looked much better since i don't think it's ever been occupied however since that time the existing conditions there was an alta survey that was provided and probably the major thing to note about this site is just the extent of the existing utility easements on it they are all over the place makes development of the site really difficult this graphic just shows in general the black line is the south property line and then everything in kind of that orangey yellow are existing easements over the property so the building does encroach into one of the easements the applicant has been requested to provide written documentation from the easement holder which would be in this case i believe nsp to allow you know them to do their use they're not moving the building they're not increasing the size of the building it just stays in in that particular location the single line here to the north is actually a metropolitan council interceptor sewer very big sewer serving the region also we've got the overhead power lines so again regional large facilities really encumber the property on this graphic this shows the location of various utility lines maybe a little bit difficult to see but on the south we've got this pink color are the overhead power lines that run through there this green is the interceptor and then uh there are also a number of others a little bit more difficult to tell but there are a number of right-of-way easements along the southern part of the property too the thing that i want to show for planning commission is that the site has lost land if you will over the years through takings for the various road improvements and most recently the 2013 county road 5 highway 13 interchange project and this shows the left is the existing condition and the right is what they had before that project was done there is a vacant piece of property just on the northeast part of northeast of the site and that's owned by the state of minnesota along with this piece across the frontage road and we have understand that they are looking at potentially turning that back for development that and some additional properties associated with this project i mean this area of the city so the proposal basically is to to create the exterior storage lot which is shown there are three accesses that are proposed to on oliver avenue and then this one that is across from the burnsville motors site so there would be three total accesses to the property basically looking at there are existing towers for the electrical power lines this is one and then this is the second one here so you've got those areas and they're trying to develop to the extent they can within within these various easements they do have one sign that's proposed it's a freestanding sign about this location here they have a lot of signage that's available to the site because the building actually has three frontages that can count for signage the height of a freestanding sign that they can have is up to 18 feet there is a requirement for a 20-foot setback though from the property line and then a 5-foot setback from the closest driveway or parking space so those we have included as conditions that they meet those the signage is just a little bit over the 50 square feet that's allowed for a freestanding sign so they would just need to look at reducing that which could be done basically just you know a little bit of modification of the of the sign so should not be an issue for them what this graphic shows is trying to enlarge the site plan a little bit more so that you can see it basically the area that's shown in this kind of pink or light purple color that is a proposed screening fence it's proposed to be six foot tall chain-link fence with slats that does require either a cop or in this case a pud to do that so that surrounds the site the area in yellow is where their proposed trash area is and then this is the existing building and then the area in light green there are a few locations where surroundable curb is proposed generally you need to have a barrier curb you know like the 612 type curb as opposed to surmountable is more the flat type curb so in these locations they are proposing to have that surmountable or flat type curb and that would need to be approved by the city engineer so we've included a condition in addition to that there are three snow storage areas one is located on the east side of site approximately at this area and it's between the parking lot and the fence let's go to the next one this is the southerly part of the site uh same things and then there are two additional snow storage areas that are indicated in these locations as well as far as the development summary the project is being proposed or staff is recommending a planned unit development but they the site is currently 3.6 acres after it's planted it'll be about 3.5 acres and they are dedicating about 0.7 acres on the south for road right-of-way the building will remain the same size 937 square feet the impervious surface that is proposed would go to 76 percent and this would require a pud deviation to allow 24 overall green space as opposed to 25 percent and staff is recommending approval of that there's a section or several sections in the zoning ordinance that allow when you have a situation where there have been land takings for public improvements that certain considerations can be granted green space is one setbacks or other the only thing that they need is one percent um less green space than the ordinance they are actually proposing to provide more green space within the parking or storage area three percent is the standard they have 5.5 percent so that is something that offsets that deviation they are also proposing more building perimeter landscaping 59 versus 50 percent and the parking uh for the project they would be required to have 63 stalls they're providing 97. so in terms of the benefits we have more green space in the parking area more perimeter landscaping the proposed building materials and the amount of windows they have windows proposed on four sides of the building those exceed our requirements and even some of the standards in the architectural tool so those are things that are then uh considered as offsets for what's requested for the the pd deviation uh let's see here they're planning the property so we will obtain the right-of-way that's needed and easements and as far as the building options for the site this site is really really not developable for the most part for most things maybe you could have a car storage lot there you might be able to have a car wash but not very many things so this is actually a good use for the property the deviations we talked about the green space deviations they are also requesting a deviation for light pole height light poles usually uh are not allowed to be taller than the principal building we've got an existing building on this site that's about 18 18 and a half feet tall and this side also is right next to highway 13. so there are a lot of higher taller facilities in the area and they're proposing i believe three three different parking lot lighting poles and staff feels that what they're requesting is reasonable as far as the demo plan you can see from the aerial photos there's a lot of area of kind of broken up previous blacktop so they'll be taking that out and putting in new blacktop where needed and then repaving the entire the entire storage area in terms of grading and erosion control the property is relatively flat so there's not a whole lot of change that's going to take place in the elevations primarily here on the easterly part of the property and then the site will be graded so that they get their stormwater drainage off the property as far as utilities the only utilities involved in this plan are the private utilities that they're bringing to the site so there are no public municipal utilities that are proposed in terms of the preliminary plant we'll end up with a 3.5 acre basically commercial plant easements and right-of-way provided there will not be a park dedication for this site because what they're they're not expanding the use of the site the building is staying the same size so no park dedication is required for this site for the city engineer and then we have the final plant and as far as the building itself they're looking at upgrading it significantly from the exterior adding cultured stone base at the bottom of all four sides of the building they have both a mix of vertical and horizontal metal metal panel siding that's proposed a darker metal coping and trim and then the windows on all four sides of the building in terms of the floor plan not a lot to demo uh on the left there is not a whole lot there on the right what will what they will have are three offices you know reception area bathrooms and some utility area for the landscape plan something that is kind of unique with this too it's a huge site but again when you're looking at landscaping when you've got utility corridors that include pipelines and power lines those get to be extracted or credited if you will so there is really not that much area to base what is required for plantings they are proposing i believe 18 16 can't clone can't quite their proposal does meet the ordinance the other difficulty about this is again you have those easements and then with the platt they have drainage and utility easements that will be provided along the property lines it doesn't give you a whole lot of area for planting space so they're doing what they can and the area of green space within the parking area is this large area in through here that will be green space basically your standard screening fence and they did provide these section details to give you an idea of what the view would be you know as you're looking across the street to the site what you'll see so you will be able to see the top of the truck trailers but other other types of equipment and exterior storage we have a condition that they not exceed the height of the screening fence and with that the staff is recommending approval there are 14 conditions several of those are related to what the city attorney recommends we do when we are looking to remove former puds eups so number one is the developer applicant applied to re-zone the property and agrees to repeal the previous cops and puds related to the amusement park and then we indicate the specific specific cases and approval dates that would be repealed the use of the surmountable curb or that flat curve is subject to approval of the city engineer the plans should be pro or revised to provide a parking i'll show you this in this area here the ordinance does require at the end of parking rows to have a planter island so this should have a planter island located in here and there generally then there's a size specification that we included which is the minimum requirement and then planted with an overstory tree shrubs and perennials materials for the approved storage are limited to the commercial recreational vehicles equipment and light materials they shall not exceed the height of the screening a sign permit will be needed and then we included the plans to modify the sign accordingly so it meets the ordinance and the setbacks and then i'll written permission from any utility easement holder depending on where these facilities are uh that they have the approval to do that they have provided information from center point that they're okay with um with the project as proposed and we did receive word back from mndot and they have no issues with the proposal either and then the city engineer has some minor conditions outlined in their report basically related to grading permits those types of things there will need to be a lid management practice agreement basically the storm water from this site will be treated to in a larger pond for yellow freight which is more of a regional type pond to the northeast this is within the drinking water overlay area so they are lined in detention ponds because water can't get down into the soil because we're trying to protect our drinking water supply and then city permit will be needed to work within the right-of-way and yeah the last one is written permission from excel for any improvements that are proposed so with that i will address questions thank you ms garros i see that sarah lloyd with our engineering department is here welcome sarah good evening thank you uh commissioners any questions for city staff commissioner wallace yes ms garros uh thank you for your presentation as a former teenager you used to be on go-karts back in the day i agree this is definitely a unique property to be able to develop it all so it is nice to see something come of this vacant lot my only concern that i have is with the fence height right across from burnsville motors there it's a pretty sharp turn and just with that fence setback is that enough to just still be able to have that line of sight plus they also have an entrance and exit on that corner as well yes we have worked with them they are providing there is a site triangle area that is in this part of the site and that landscaping and signage has been removed from that so that provides that here and then the city engineer has reviewed this access so in terms of the location of the fence generally up to the driveway if there's any site considerations they may need to shorten that a bit either way but in general they have found that this is a is the place to have the crossing okay and thank you for that additional information commissioner anderson um yeah i i also remember at that amusement park and those go-karts were a lot of fun uh when i was younger as well um i had a couple questions that's kind of curious first and foremost uh those power lines which like you're saying definitely make it very hard to develop that area and um how high up are those because it looked like the sign was going to be directly underneath it oh i don't know off hand through [Laughter] um they can have up to an 18-foot sign uh but theirs is you know a little over eight feet eight and a half feet oh okay so should not be any issues good just i wanted to be 100 of that and then um if it's kind of a storage location and i know that that sewer line that goes directly underneath it's uh you mentioned uh was that that lid that you're talking about at the end uh kind of designed for the uh making sure that there's no you know guidance to make sure there's no possibility that things that are being stored there could leak into the ground and get into that sewer line or anything like that they did provide a drinking water protection worksheet so the materials that they are proposing do not have issues they are actually providing storm water treatment i can find it here i just want to give you an idea the storm water management basically is going to take the storm water from the site and it will be directed up to this larger pond it's actually a built detention pond and they have the specifics on that as part of their utility plan and i would let uh probably let the applicant's engineer discuss you know in details for you more than that and then we have our city engineer that can respond as well happy to expand on that so the the lid is for the storm water management uh again for that regional pond and then there's also some stormwater management along the west side of the site uh infiltration area that has an underdrain in it so that will capture the water so since we are in that drinking water overlay area and then i believe the the sewer that you were talking about is that metropolitan council sewer line that goes across the property that is not a part of the lid that is just within an easement for um for met council to access that line if they need to so two separate things the sanitary sewer line is not a part of the lid okay thank you yes bishop uh thank you excellent presentation i think it's a great use for this uh this piece of property um why a surmountable curb in some spots and not others do you know what the what the reason for requesting that is uh yes um the let's see if we can find the right one here it was just on this just on the side at on oliver yeah um what they are looking at is uh to have yeah there are three areas that are looking at surroundable curb it's the green kind of line located on the north side of this slide and then in a couple of locations in this area and those are proposed for water to drain off the site in those particular locations and those are in the locations where there are going to be i believe the catchment areas that are proposed for the stormwater management okay so it's more about getting the water off the pavement than it is driving over the curb correct okay correct that makes sense i have another question you said that this property it has 97 parking stalls and there's six which is greater than the 63 stalls required so what's like it's like a parking lot so there's how do we i'm just curious how do you get to 63 required stalls sure the ordinance has a standard requiring so many stalls per 2 000 square feet of the storage area so we took that and then in addition to the office uses the actually the building only creates demand for five parking spaces right but it's the 2000 square feet um that gets to that the storage area yep that totally makes sense yep thank any you questions commissioners um i know the applicant is here i would love to have the applicant come speak with us before i open up a public hearing if they'd be so willing and if you could just please state your name and address for the record sure trevor penae um from prior lake 141.98 to mckenna road northwest uh probably like minnesota 55372. great thanks for having me thanks for thanks for coming in um tell us a little bit about your company i was curious sure it looks like a truck stop of some sort almost yeah not quite a truck stop so it's an outdoor storage business essentially um in 2020 june 26th of 2020 i bought my first one in savage right on highway 13 right behind marty's auto kind of near boary trucks yeah so i uh you know had that i bought that facility and kind of you know re-designed it and just kind of cleaned it up there's a grandfathered in property but it was kind of in disappro disrepair so made it look nice and reorganized the whole thing you know made the city happy there um then i uh ex and that's basically a semi truck parking lot right so all these on the road truckers they're gone for two three four weeks at a time and but they live locally right so when they come back home they need some place to park and as you know with the city ordinances and whatnot you can no longer park on residential streets and it's getting a little more tough right so the demand for you know centralized and safe and secure parking spaces for especially commercial trucks that need a lot of space to maneuver around um it's it's pretty high in demand and there's a honestly a shortage of that that's what you've seen with stagecoach she's you know um i know i know pretty well he's uh he's another company that does something similar so um so that's my first property i developed another one new preg um recently last summer um you know so i went through the same process with the city commission and the the mayor and whatnot and that went well developed a 14-acre site and that's a little more it has a little more variety um that's both rvs chart industries a big public company next to that site they rent you know a few acres from us so that has semi trucks boats rvs chart there's two billboards that has everything plus two buildings on it um my next one and um you guys will hear about this probably in the next i believe the next uh city meeting is on my born transportation where it says schmidt roofing on highway 13 i bought purchased that one in uh december 6th that's just you know it was our area has a condition use permit for truck parking but warren transportation didn't really need it anymore so i purchased that for them pretty much kept everything the same just cleaned it up unites it up and you know eventually later on the coming weeks we'll propose to expand a lot towards the back and the north just make some simple changes just to maximize the amount of space and um this one i've been working on for quite a while since you know it's a little complicated it's in converted with easements and you know a lot of back and forth between the sellers and you know engineering plans and whatnot but i think we finally have it to a stage where you know i think it's it it'll look really good and provide a good service to all the truckers and the community and you know be safe secure and keep the trucks off the streets are you from the area are you yeah did you remember it as an amusement park at all no no i'm a lot younger than that yeah wow but i think to make a motion you do realize that if we do make this uh happen we're going to lose that light amusement park designation and you won't be able to put a roller coaster on anything and another property i'll do it you'll be okay okay well i have to tell you um this is one of the most blight properties in the city of burnsville that i've i've seen right and i i couldn't believe that um something so perfect could come in to move into that location so personally i want to thank you so much i appreciate the opportunity building that being able to recondition that building would be is great and to find a good use for that property sure outstanding so thank you so much yeah thank you i appreciate you guys thank you i appreciate you coming up as well with that it is a public hearing i will open it up it is 7 39. anyone wishing to speak this item can step up to the podium otherwise if you're on zoom you can speak to the moderator let him know that you would like to speak on this issue and if you had contact us by phone star six and tell the moderator you want to speak this issue and it looks like there is nobody on zoom i don't believe anybody's coming up to the podium so i will close the public hearing at 7 39 i was going to wait till 7 40 but that's okay with that i am going to throw it back to our commissioners on any discussions motions or anything on those lines mr timmerman i i think it's a cool project i didn't have any questions i remember the amusement park i mean this is great good job you found a niche i think that um you found an idea keep running with it um i used to call it junie's rides because my babysitter when i was three years old took me there and i still to this day drive by it and think oh that's where junies rides was here so i'd like to see a roller coaster but i think this is a nice use of the property so well done commissioner what uh i'd like to make a motion well commissioner you're more than welcome too okay and yeah i had a lot of fun racing um i move that we recommend to the city council approval of the application to remove the former cup approvals for the site approve the concept and development stage pud to allow a new storage new outdoor storage lot for commercial vehicles recreational vehicles equipment and light materials approve rezoning of the entire site to b4 slash pod and approve the preliminary and final plot of iv brook parking east subject to the numerous conditions listed 14. commissioner wallace i was second all right we had a motion by commissioner watt seconded by commissioner wallace all in favor please signify by saying aye aye anyone oppose hearing none it will end up on the consent agenda tuesday march the 22nd at 5 30 in these very chambers thank you so much for coming in and thank you for um speaking to us about your business that was that was really nice with that our next item speaking of city council our city council liaison cara schultz is with us tonight and she is here to speak with us on any issues questions or concerns we have or any other information that we'd like to get from city council and i will start with you council member schultz if you have any comments you'd like to make before we ask your questions not a problem um you know this is just our time to check in and make sure that you guys are getting what you need the information that you need to be able to do your job also for you to be able to ask any questions of me over anything you're seeing on the trajectory of the council on any particular issues or anything you're wondering about or that type of thing so i will immediately lob the ball into your court there it is commissioners any questions for council member schultz commissioner timmerman you know i'm going to ask questions um so city council looked at some um budget projections last week at a session work session yes and i'm curious what you're gonna make me cry no no i didn't watch it i didn't i haven't talked to anybody about it i just saw that it was discussed and there were some interesting projections i'm just curious what your take is on that how that might affect like the zoning project or not the zoning projects the entire city code city code rewrite um and and some of these things i mean the reason i thought of it is because we had a resident asking about property values and i thought well typically those are really important to us so i'm just kind of curious if you have any information to share with us and how it might impact us going forward absolutely uh so on your on your code review that really shouldn't impact you all too much um the the direction that we're heading is the one where that we're still full speed ahead on you know we do want to encourage you again um as i did when when this first came up uh that this is a time for you all to not just be looking at wordsmithing or simplifying this really is your once in a lifetime chance within this city to make an impact that's going to last for decades do not worry about being too bold or pushing things too far because it comes to us and then we take a look at it so we need you to push the envelope as hard as you can so that when it comes to us we can then look at it in a holistic manner if you don't push the envelope as far as you can that's when you get individual city council members having to do that on their own so you know have no fears on that like go go go the budget yes so what we're looking at is we are looking at several years of proposed 5.7 [Music] levy increases but then we are looking at a 23 levy increase uh reason being we have some funds that are coming in that like chop off right and then you're left with that so um yes when we have property values increasing that does bring in more revenue without raising the levy right everyone's happy their property you know value is higher that's all good we are also having redevelopment and hopefully in the future we'll see even more redevelopment and that also um a lot of times when there's that type of redevelopment that piece of property then becomes much more valuable as well or in some cases it might be subdivided or or it could be pushed together um so you know there's a lot of movement on that so you know since we are really landlocked that's the direction we need to go so what we're looking for is is for you all to kind of bird dog ways that our redevelopment can move forward right so if you have suggestions if someone is coming before you and how things are presently is not conducive towards having some of that redevelopment happen you can put the suggestion forward to counsel to look at something re-evaluate or just take special notice of something we do look to you to give us those suggestions because you guys are the ones that first see it other than staff i mean staff gets first crack right and then and then it's it's you guys then you see it um so you know we're really looking for you to be extremely active partners in that for our our future um so what does that that mean for the the city in general i you know in general when we're looking at this type of of budgeting situation you know you have two things you have level of services and staffing and everything that goes with it and then you have revenue they got a match if there's a mismatch you have to figure it out one way or another and that means you're either going to raise taxes or you may have redevelopment at such a level that that's that's you know cushioned and isn't so drastic or you're going to be doing things like reducing services and that type of thing and that is a that is a decision that is wider than just city council that is a decision for our residents as well to really weigh in on so that's in a nutshell how that's going to affect things and what we're looking to you to help us with great thank you absolutely any other questions commissioners i know there was a there was a couple weeks ago we had a study on the heart of the city area they're talking about signages and different things are we looking at things like that or have you discussed that at all some of those results yes but preliminary so i mean we're just we're just really kind of getting back into into some of those things and and some of those type items are going to be taken up by our citizens code review because it may fall into those specific little pockets of area and so they'll make their suggestions so we have those two parallel groups so um city council is is um being patient while those things are being being worked through we're not known for patients so to know you said that we did not just for the record yes i i own it i have no patience zero zero i'm always like no no right now yeah i know i'm like why why can't we do that and staff is like um i can give you eight reasons i care i can give you eight reasons yeah it takes time exactly i have another question sorry for the rip from the headlines questions but um the oh my gosh now i'm drawing a blank what was the most recent article that i read um yes um you know as you said ringing the bell ringing the alarm i mean that's something we do sometimes with our own dissenting votes and i did that a couple weeks ago with an issue regarding the park identification fee i was not aware at the time that the city burns was involved with some litigation um i after reading the article i realized that pieces were falling together and i knew bits and pieces um but i'm curious if we're successful in that area uh is is that something i i don't want to put anybody on the spot but i feel like the project a couple weeks ago and maybe the project tonight are areas where in the past maybe we would have sought the park dedication fee um i guess what's our timeline on learning more about the appeal on that and finalization and then you know obviously the results of that um will determine a lot of what we can do and potentially what other cities can do but i guess are we talking at all about changes or are we kind of in a holding pattern until we know final results yeah we're in a holding pattern um so the the um the lawsuit that we were in um that ended up being a uh like a published opinion which means it is precedent scenting and it was pretty far-reaching like it was a slap you can't interpret it as anything other than than a sharp slap we are attempting to appeal it to the minnesota supreme court but they do not have to take it i suspect they will mainly because yes it was a hard slap it was published you know it was meant to get people's attention right so how it was worded was was definitely meant to do that and it affects since it's published not just burnsville the state like everyone in the state um so i do suspect that they will take it up um but that timeline is their timeline uh i would think it would be not drug out but i also know that the courts are extremely backed up extremely backed up litigation that normally would have would have been seen in six to eight months is projected out two to three years so i simply don't know now i do know with minnesota's the supreme court they have a little bit more rigid timelines on that i do not know the exact timeline for that but we can get that information for you but yes we and every other city are interested in the results of that and it will have an impact that's bad oh i just wanted to note that we are still planning on having kind of a perk dedication informational educational discussion item at a future planning commission meeting when we can fit it in when we have a short enough timeline at a meeting based on current parameters based on information since it's mainly an engineering related topic engineering and parks that we see a lot of the planning commission it's not something that we get into much detail on so we are still planning on trying to give at least a little bit more background information about why where and what so that's all thanks good deal any other questions commissioners councilmember schultz thank you so much for coming in and enlightening us with your great knowledge and answering our questions really appreciate it absolutely no we we have um great appreciation for the work that you guys put in i know our residents see you a couple times a month doing this but the amount of work that our planning commissioners put in far outreaches these evenings you all do put in a lot of time researching things getting information talking it over with staff and then even after the meeting looking things back over preparing for the next one so i do want to extend our appreciation for the work that you do thank you thank you so much and that brings us to updates commissioners any updates seeing nama turn to staff staffing updates uh the only update that i have is our next planning commission meeting will be cancelled we don't have any development applications so we'll be working on the zoning ordinance a lot uh so your next meeting will be april 11th okay all right april 11th will be our next meeting that means this meeting is coming to a close signify by saying aye aye anyone oppose hearing none that is it thank you so much for joining us have a great night