good evening it is 6 30 p.m and i am calling the monday august 10th 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 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 has usually fixed the problem additional instructions on how to participate are posted online at www.burnsvillemn.gov in the public meeting calendar 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 985 2075 532 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 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 your computer to avoid feedback now onto the agenda the first item onto the agenda is adoption of the agenda and i guess i'm looking for any changes from the planning commission to the agenda none any from staff no changes from staff okay so could i have a motion to approve the agenda commissioner john i move to adopt the agenda hey thank you and commissioner anderson hi second okay very good all those in favor aye aye aye opposed all right the motion carries uh the second item is approval of the july 27th meeting minutes and uh commissioners any changes to that item staff any changes no changes from staff all right do we have a motion to approve the minutes i move we approve the minutes commissioner waterproof or make some motion wait a second all right and a second from uh commissioner roberts and all those in favor say aye aye aye opposed say nay and the motion carries okay on to the third item of the agenda which is a public hearing for kmm incorporated for development stage planned unit development to allow interim mining on the east and southwest areas of the existing quarry conditional use permit amendment to allow work within the minnesota river flood plain located at 1020 cliff road west and city planner deb garros will provide a presentation of the item and an overview of what's provided in the background report and then we will open it up for a public hearing thank you commissioners i just wanted to bring to your attention that we did receive a letter from the applicant today and you all received a copy of it there are three minor changes that they would like to see as part of the conditions and staff has reviewed those changes and we have no issue with the changes as they presented in that letter so with that for kmm we have had they've had development out in the northwest or excuse me minnesota river quadrant the northeast part of the mrq since the 50s and we are on a development project at this point in time that is related to a new concept that was approved here a couple of years ago for the area and what that includes are three of the larger property owners in the minnesota river quadrant came in talked to the council and looked at i'm sorry let me back up this is the subject site it's outlined in the purple area and you can see the area of mining um primarily uh in the center part just want to draw your attention to the north part along the river that is an area to remain as a natural open space part of the area is used for wetland banking but we're looking primarily at development on the area to the south the subject site uh right now the entire subject holdings of kmm is about 578 acres that's the area outlined in blue and then the quarry area that has currently has approval is about 340 acres in the solid yellow and then the dotted yellow on the easterly side they're proposing to mine 46 acres additional acres of land and then the southwest another 26 acres of land and this is consistent with what they received concept plan approval for last year the pretty much the entire subject site with the exception of a few parcels on the southeast are located within the flood fringe of the minnesota river so the application tonight also includes a conditional use permit amendment to allow them to work within the floodplain pretty much the way the city's floodplain ordinance is set up is it any work if you're moving dirt if you're filling excavating pretty much any type of activity requires a conditional use permit so the site has received previous approval for conditional use permits and we'll look at that in a minute but this is something that is in keeping with what's been approved in the past for the project as i stated back in 2018 we had the three largest property owners come in and speak with the city council about a concept to look at the minnesota river quadrant and also the superfund site which is on the mcgowan property to the north of the kramer quarry to take a look at options for potentially how that area could be redeveloped the minnesota pollution control agency is in the process of reviewing that superfund site and how it should be cleaned up and the three property owners came in and the city council liked their idea of potentially allowing kmm to do further mining if the quarry is to be or excuse me not the quarry if the freeway landfill and freeway dump are to be dug out and that material moved someplace else this concept includes possibly moving that through the quarry area and then into the burnsville sanitary landfill or waste management landfill so that would allow then further mining in that area so the lake would expand to the north east and then in addition to that primarily have an area of mixed use land development and industrial development along the i-35 corridor when the council took a look at that they instructed or they gave direction to both kmm and um the landfill operators to go back and go through their environmental reviews that were necessary and then to come in with plans to make the amendments to each of their respective planned unit developments to make these things happen the most recent actual kmm pud that the city approved was in 2016 and that's what this exhibit is and i just wanted to draw your attention to on the west side there's a light or apple green kind of color that is an edge treatment that was discussed and we'll get into that a little bit further and then also um along the north side of what's proposed to be mined was another edge treatment that was contemplated and basically in 1994 when the plant unit development was established for the quarry what they did is identified that once the quarrying comes within 300 feet of the extent or the end of their mining that they would take a look at what type of edge treatments would be provided so that they could provide right-of-way needed for public streets major streets and then also trail along the area and also to create some type of a type of environment for especially the areas that would be public um beach or park so that people can walk out so you're not just walking directly into 100 foot drop so that's kind of what those edge treatments are and the one that um that we're looking at primarily with this application and what has been approved before is known as the shallow bay area graphic and what this shows is basically um on the left hand side you've got the property line and then there is a 40-foot right-of-way generally this would be for the north-south street that's in between the landfill and the quarry and then also an east-west street along the northern edge of the landfill primarily and then there is an area between that of natural space that would be left open and then the trail is circled in red approximately a foot trail and then again there will be some area that's either back filled or left in its natural state but to have a shallow area for swimmers et cetera as opposed to just dropping off into the main part of the quarry the city updated its comprehensive plan here a couple of years ago and in terms of the minnesota river quadrant and the area that we're looking at primarily that large blue area is ultimately will be the lake that forms after mining is completed within the core area what's changing with this application is on the southwest area that area that's purple is identified for future industrial and the majority of that area is 26 acres and that's going to be mined so we have a change there and um and that's the blue dotted line around is for a trail system a local trail system around the lake and then also there is a trail system to the north which would be a regional corridor similar to the black dog trail on the other side of the interstate so then their concept plan was approved by the council and it's based on kind of that plan that was put together by the three property owners this was approved in april of 2019 and the two areas of yellow are the areas that were proposed for mining and uh council again felt that that was an area that made sense so they did approve it we included the planning background report from that there are a lot of conditions and things some of the conditions that are applicable to the mining have been brought forward in the conditions that are recommended tonight a lot of the other conditions have been taken care of because the applicant has already gone through their environmental review and the city council determined that the information was adequate and that there was not a need for additional environmental review so many of those conditions have already been taken care of because additional work and study has been done then the concept plan that is proposed is exhibit two and it shows that area kind of the lighter green or apple green up in the north staying in its natural state that may stay as private open space maybe public open space but the idea is then to have a regional corridor connection that would connect up ultimately to the landfill site where the city does already have uh trail easements in place and then back up through the mcgowan property and ultimately to the black dog trail to the east and what will happen then in the east area is after mining is completed in that area the intention is then to come back and backfill and raise the elevation so that they will have foundations for future development and there may be a combination of some of the areas maybe not mined as deeply as others or maybe all back filled it's really a combination of some future i guess research and planning that will be going on but ultimately that's the idea is to fill in those areas once they've been mined for redevelopment and then the area that's shown with the hash marks kind of on the north northeast next to the pink mixed use area that's an area that's a concept for a future lakeshore park the exact size of it and the exact location is not determined but it's something that it's kind of a marker if you will for some type of park area to be located on the lakeshore the applicant did provide a an operation and phasing plan they're looking at basically the fill out of the rest of the mining approximately 15 to 20 years it could be more than that it could be a little less it really depends on market conditions and technology but that's kind of the idea so that we're looking at uh 2040 probably the earliest uh that there will be you know the mining will be completed and it it may be beyond that then on the southeast side you see that and that green area again along the west southwest and northwest is the is that edge treatment area that we looked at before and one of the conditions that staff has indicated is on the east side then we put in a condition again for when they're within 300 feet of that mining limit on the east to come in and look at edge treatments that's one of the items that the applicant would like changed instead of being within 300 feet of the east to make that 300 feet of the north because they intend on actually doing their mining from north to south and from staff perspective we don't have any issues with that with that request for the south west part of the mine mining area that the width of that edge treatment is about 220 feet there is about 40 feet of right-of-way that's anticipated on that north-south road the landfill is already dedicated 40 feet in their plat and ultimately when the kmm property is planted they would be requested to dedicate 40 feet so the red line there shows about the 40 foot line right of way and then beyond that is another about 80 feet plus or minus and then the trail would start and just in this corner with with this graphic it gets very close to this methane plant which is intended to stay so one of the conditions that we've included is to take a little bit closer look in this southwest area to see if that needs to be adjusted accordingly just to make sure that a trail can be provided for within this area of the project site and this is showing the same thing this is the semstone property and there are a couple couple of conditions that are included that relate to some stone um some stone is ultimately uh intended to go away or maybe be relocated at some point in time and some of the things that need to be considered as we move on and get closer to the actual development that comes after the mining is done is at what point at what time do these things start occurring you know when does the trail get constructed when does the right-of-way be provided those types of things and just wanted to indicate on here that the based on the graphic approximately where the trail and the mining edge would be based on that graphic so that's just a matter of timing and looking into the future that those types of things will need to be looked at in terms of the regional trail corridor we just noted in the background report and obviously we indicated part of the site is used for their wetland banking program so we know that but there are some canals and different things that have just been used over the years you know some different wetlands and and whatnot that are in the area so we just include it again in the future when we come in and look at development for the area to take a look at some of these places to find out where there's upland for trail to get an idea again of cost feasibility and where something ultimately could go and this regional trail would be something that most likely would be looking at getting the uh a trail corridor through there but then the city in combination with perhaps county state maybe metropolitan council actually responsible for construction of that trail so the recommendations are there are a number on here the majority of them are really related to the engineering items and we have our city engineer jen desrud here and then also ryan peterson if there are particular questions in terms of engineering there are three areas that they addressed one being the drinking water supply there are obviously the quarry water dewatering is used for public drinking water supply and the applicant in the city have worked together for years on that this project is will not have any negative effect on that it will continue to be that resource and it's actually more of a resource regionally it does affect the city of savage as well and by lessening impact on some of the aquifers through this dewatering there is a benefit to the region as well as to the city with this but they are looking at and if you have particular questions you can ask our engineering staff they are looking at or have been working with kmm on a public improvement agreement to talk about uh two phase water intake improvement and how that will be structured so that is a condition that's included mining depth this is something that was part of the concept pud and it's something that's already been discussed in the past so it's just brought forward with this application water pressure fluctuations with that semstone plant there are some issues that sometimes occur because of that site so they're taking a look at how those pressure fluctuations can be addressed looking at options and one of the conditions is that the applicant again continue to work with some stone in the city to address that water hammering that can cause breaks or issues with some of the water lines in the area and the applicant has agreed to do that and they have been doing that in the past so that's another kind of bringing that condition forward and then also another item related to semstone is a condition to help reduce water pressure spikes for the infrastructure for both and again continuing on that the third issue area is related to vibrations and that's really related to blasting and the applicant they do blasting of course as part of the mining operation they've done it you know for 50 plus years they do have a a very controlled way that they do the blasting but sometimes there are complaints that come into the city and then we try to work those out so there's another condition that they just continue to take the same measures that they have always been doing to try to minimize those vibrations during the blasting operations and with that go through the items for the recommendations again it is a recommendation to approve the items that the applicant has requested be modified are for number three and this is again dealing with that condition instead of doing the um when the mining area reaches 300 feet from the easterly side of where they propose to mine are closest to the highway they're requesting we change that to the north so it'd be 300 feet to the north because again they're mining from north to south not totally east or west to east and staff has no issue with that number eight the conditions of the previously approved applications puds eups etc will continue to remain in force in effect unless they're superseded by the conditions and the application here and staff has no issue with that change and the last item that the applicant has reduced or requested to be addressed is item number 17 and this is kmm she'll continue to work with this stem stone to look at reducing pressure spikes to the city and some stones water infrastructure and the applicant is asking that we had as is reasonable and practicable and again staff has no issues with that with that staff is wrecking approval there are 20 conditions and we can go through any of those if there are particular questions that planning commission or the applicant have beyond that thank you thank you ms garros all right at this point i guess i will open it up to the commission for questions for miss garros commissioner john so they're moving over to the east i noticed and it gets really close to the freeway there are there any concerns about erosion or anything like that when you're digging that close to the major freeway uh we did uh oops sorry wrong side um we did submit this to the minnesota department of natural department of natural resources mndot and then also the lower minnesota river watershed district mndot does not have any issues with that and this is a little bit different because you're dealing with stone as opposed to dirt so they are keeping far enough away from that right-of-way area to be able to avoid that and that's part of to some of the additional work that will be done when they start getting closer to those mining limits as to more not so much i think an issue of when they do the mining but when they do the reclamation how does that occur and i think if i don't know jen if you have any issues with as far as we've not had any issues with erosion control on the site they do have stormwater ponds they do implement measures to make sure that they don't have issues with either collapses or water pollution those types of things mr and john i think the applicant is here tonight so we can ask that question of them too in a moment there any other questions for mosquitoes all right very good uh if the applicant is here and i believe it's these fine folks sitting behind me uh would you like to speak to uh the item in france right now sure um good evening my name is kirsten pauley i'm with sunday engineering working with kmm on this application and that's being considered tonight and um i think that deb gave a great overview of the project we have been in front of the city on a number of occasions with this concept we've gone through the environmental review um so i feel like that there's been a really thorough explanation um i do have a couple comments and and of course we're here to answer any questions that you may have or the public may have um but um just a few clarifications um the eastern mining area will be mined from the south to the north and that's why that northern and and this was a change that that we just submitted to this not a change but some details we just submitted to the city so that's what um is bringing about that proposed request to the northern property line and that will enable that area to be reclaimed more efficiently and more timely um by mining in that direction so that's that's that point to clarify um the other um point that i wanted to make was the the semstone operations as well as the methane um energy facility those facilities are located on kmm property and are operating through leases so whether or not they will you know remain both of those entities may have a life and there may be final development that does not include them that's just to be determined in the future which is part of the the idea of some of this concept planning and looking at more detail in the future as we get closer to development um and then um to address your question on the the setback from the highway we did look at slope stability and it's a 300 foot setback from the right the right-of-way along the freeway there and it is bedrock so it's a much more stable slope but that slope stability is part of the overall design as well as engineered backfill to bring that area up to a buildable usable condition that can support the mixed use and potential development for that area that's envisioned so i think with those clarifications um i really am here to answer any questions and again if the if the public has any questions be happy to try to answer those as well commissioners questions for the applicant you said just a quick question you said that the the eastern portion of the i'm looking at the map of the yellow dotted line we're talking about you're saying that's 300 feet from the highway yes from the highway right away the right-of-way so from the edge of the highway it's even more so uh the scale on on this map so would it can i point would it be helpful to point out you see what i'm looking at the upper right corner yep where the yellow dotted line is on the east side correct that upper where the upper yellow north south yeah that's that's at 300 that's about 300 feet right chris i mean it's yeah it's over 300 believe commissioners where the um you know where the property line kind of jogs in there to the west um that was the former volkswagen site so there is a you know there's another property in between the highway and the kmm property so it's hard because you're looking at such a huge property so it looks like it's very close but they it is actually they said three four hundred feet from where the right-of-way starts other questions for the applicant i have one or two questions uh just so the residents of burnsville can kind of get an idea of the timeline in the process where are you in negotiations with the state right now as far as i guess the preferred option that the city is looking for with the freeway landfill and with the waste management landfill are there updates that you can provide to us at this time from your side of things yeah i think you can maybe jump in on this too but um my understanding is is that the burnsville waste management landfill is working on their environmental review both this project as well as um the burnsville landfill expansion require environmental review bears is uh environmental impact statement because of the thresholds that they are exceeding in terms of environmental review so that process is a little bit longer and then um i believe that there's john as far as the freeway the freeway and the pca closure can you give a little insight into that i can address that thanks i'm john rovisto i'm chief operating officer for grammar mining so you might want to step over to microsoft thank you yes yes rearrange my hearing aids it always follow fall off john vista the chief operating officer for kramer mining in regards to freeway landfill mpca waste management virginal sanitary landfill and kramer we still are very engaged in that process we have nothing that would we could report that as we have any binding documents or agreements with freeway landfill we do have agreements with burnsville sanitary landfill and kramer to handle the waste should we be successful and that's going to be in that relationship and those agreements uh will be part of our bid package as far as a dig and haul option as opposed to a dig and mine option the big green pyramid versus a developable site so we're still very engaged with that we're very open and still engaged with the mpca the state we've been in front of uh i think i can't i think every senator and representative that has either uh you know regional responsibilities or to that site we've been in front of all of them and others so and we remain there i can't speak to where the freeway landfill owners and uh the mpca are at i i don't know that so but we're still there we're still engaged we still want to do this project uh we still believe it's a you know whether we have a an agreement with uh freeway landfill or not that for the region the the best solution we've been excited about a better solution from day one whether we're ownership or not let's get the waste moved let's develop that area let's make it beneficial to the region happy to answer any other questions yeah i just wanted to say thank you so much for the city of burnsville and the city of savage obviously you guys are pumping out water so that we don't have our water contaminated and that's a huge benefit to our cities and i mean you don't have to go any further than flint michigan to know how bad things can get really quickly and so i very much appreciate that you guys are willing to do that for us and uh it's been a great partnership and and we're working right now uh with uh ryan and the city on an expansion of that and that'll be something that i'm very very confident is going to happen in the very near future so thank you you're welcome thank you so much um and i did think of um well i might save that um this is a public hearing so i am going to open the public hearing now at 7 03 pm um is there anybody on the telephone or online that wishes to speak to this item okay okay thank you miss dean is there anybody in the chambers who would like to speak to this item very good so i will close the public hearing at 7 04 p.m and i will turn it back to the commissioners for any discussion or further questions mr wade um my only comment is that this is a pretty cool kind of the long-term development is going to be pretty cool and so i'm i'm thrilled to see that that's still being taken into consideration and and uh yeah i hope to be around to see this happen i know it's long i know it's a long road but it's going to be pretty awesome thank you thank you just to piggyback on those comments uh i think i want to appreciate how much work the staff did on putting this together you have to realize how big this project is for the city and how easy it would be to put blinders on and not cross every t and dot every eye but you guys have gone above and beyond in doing that and to ensure that every everything's in place and we're not risking safety to get to that end goal that um could easily be done thank you mr anderson i actually did have a little bit of a question um when when you're talking about the the beach development there i was just kind of curious because it does show it does do a pretty significant drop off um how deep is it when it's going to get to the point where it's going to drop off is it going to be well above people's heads or is that any kind of a safety concern at all commissioner i could answer that question for you um the the design and the details will be um fleshed out but the idea is to have a gentle slope for a distance so that there's no steep drop off by the time that it gets steep drop off and unless you're on android the giant perhaps you will be under water anyway so there's not going to be um that kind of a steep drop off and there is potential for some lake level fluctuations and that will be accounted for as well um but that certainly is part of the design so it's you know whether it's 60 feet out or 80 feet out before there's a drop off and a gentle gradual decline before you hit the edge and i have a question for you how large would the lake actually be how many acres once it's fully i guess filled um you know i i don't know off the top my head but it's going to be probably in that 340 to to 380 depending upon edge treatment maybe maybe even a little bit more of lake area because the the um well it's probably going to be closer to 400 i would guess because you've got your your mining limits your quarry limits and then the edge treatments will bring that shallow bay area closer to the property line and so that will expand that overall area somewhat of of lake area and the current [Music] southeastern expansion area will also become lake area the eastern expansion area or the southwestern the eastern expansion area will be developable but the southwestern will be additional lake area so i guess that comes out to be closer to the 400-ish kind of general range so so as a comparison that's about 100 acres bigger than crystal so it's lake be a pretty nice sized lake in burnsville um i had a question uh ms garros regarding one of the conditions um sorry let me pull that up really quick here one of the conditions requires plating and some development fees that will be paid at the time of planning will that i guess mitigate any future fees would any future developers be required to pay any of those planning fees for replating would they need to pay any of those development fees when they're developing um i i guess can you explain the process of that or is this a one-time plan fee and future development would not have to pay those costs sure i think just we wanted to get on paper so the applicant is has this too as you know they know what is happening usually uh what happens at the time of platt it really depends on how the property is planted any areas that are planted into lots and blocks for development park dedication is collected on that and then in addition through the plat process we do obtain the right-of-way for streets trails and those types of things now if part of it is planted into lots and blocks but other parts are left as out lots they're not required to pay those fees at that point in time a lot of developers will leave out lots as well because there's a lesser tax burden on them as an outlet and then those out lots before anything can develop those need to be planted and so it goes uh that in that direction these are this is generally how the city operates but i think just to make sure you know for the applicant it's actually been part of their pud at least since the concept and maybe prior to that just so that it is identified that they definitely can do outlots and how you know the fees are when they come due very good thank you that helps um other questions i'm going to ask one more question of the applicant um just to be a thorn on condition 17 adding the language reasonable and practical practicable uh i guess to me is adding ambiguity to an already ambiguous condition um what measures are you taking with some stone to to mitigate the issues with the pressure spikes so um there has been conversations with semstone and kmm to determine the cause of the problem what potential solutions there may be and those have been done in conjunction with ryan um this and the um current thought is drilling their a well to serve the facility so it may be that it it brings some ambiguity but the the fact of the matter is is there's been collaboration and cooperation and movement in the right direction on this issue and and that's what the intent is and and the idea is is the solution has to be reasonable it's got to be practical um and and it looks like we're heading in the right direction there and and coming to a resolution well and i think that's fair i think that i mean it's it's kind of in good faith on you know the city's part accepting that it's in good faith on your part and it's in good faith on samsung's part so i i appreciate that and i think it's good that it's at least memorialized that you're continuing to work with those uh or work that relationship to create a solution so thank you and and then one other comment too regarding the plating so you know in terms of when that gets planted again that's when it's ready for future development and because there's still time and there's still some uncertainty and we don't know where the burnsville the freeway landfill you know how that's going to come in and the so because of some of these unknowns that planning and those fees and everything you know that will be sometime in the future okay very good any final questions or comments all right it is time for a motion yes sir commissioner robert yeah if everybody is good with this uh two things one there's a lot of stuff on this staff nice job nice job a lot of information to go through um i would like to make a motion that the planning commission recommended the city council approval of the development stage pud amendment to expand mining for 72 additional acres and cp amendment to allow work within the minnesota river flood plains subject to the following 20 conditions with the changes on condition 3 8 and 17 as we're submitted to us be accepted as well with those changes that's good very good commissioner i will second the motion very good any further discussion those in favor say aye aye aye opposed and the motion carries thank you very much thank you all very much and this item will go to the city council next week at their tuesday meeting and it will be put on their consent agenda because it's been recommended unanimously for approval great thank you thank you thanks take care all right i will move on momentarily all here so that brings us to item number four this evening uh which is going to be presented by ms madden uh regarding building expressions ms matt thank you chair uh so this work plan item um so i'll start from the beginning uh late last year a um large entity within the city of burnsville reached out to city staff about a rebranding effort that they were potentially going to undergo sometime in the coming months and one of the items that they wanted to talk about of course with rebranding is signage and burnsville sign ordinance you guys have seen many times over the last uh two years and um even with all those changes uh signage is kind of a technology based industry so it changes and it kind of goes with the market so one of the things that they wanted to do they called it building expression while uh we as a staff had not heard that term before and told them that what they wanted to do if they wanted to do it this property owner happened to be under a plan unit development they could amend their plan unit development to do what they wanted to do as far as large um swaths of signage because we do have size limits for signage anywhere in the city whether you're under a pud or a cub or not um so we said that they could do that but we would research the topic and bring it to planning commission so kind of one of the last minute items that we added to the 2020 work plan was this title building expression so um while we've been looking into it kind of what we've learned is the building expression isn't a concrete term it is kind of something that maybe is used from a marketing lens and it steals from a concept known as architectural expression which is where uh let's say um kind of in a floaty term where the um personality or the um the ideals of the architect are expressed in the way that the buildings are designed so for building expression the idea that these marketing people came up with was that the ideals and the um image of the building owner or the tenant is expressed through the design of the exterior of the building so um the ways that the this kind of term practically comes about maybe they are recalling a building expression but practically it's it's signage is what it is so um some of the options to consider tonight after some of the staff research are pretty much related to signage and most of the research that i did by reaching out to our market cities has to do with signage requests that other cities have received and what it has looked like to get to this point of what was described to us as architectural expression um so the person who brought this up to the to us their idea of building expression was a building wrap or some sort of wall decal that you might see on the interior of a building but of course manufactured in order to be applied to the exterior of a building weather resistant things like that the other idea that was brought up was what if instead of fixing something to the building we utilize building materials themselves to illustrate this concept so this was seen uh previously this year as we looked into the fire station one project and the large one that was expressed on that building and that's a building expression of the building owner or tenant and so we've kind of been able to see it used practically now um both in the city and then now as i've talked to some people outside of the city so some of the comments that we received uh were actually quite a lot almost i'll say every city planner that i talked to had some concerns about um the building wrap concept mainly durability um could this be weather resistant could it be sun resistant uh is this better as a temporary signage solution rather than a permanent signage solution um there were also some current concerns on just the sign installation uh the length of it because of those reasons um and the size of it as a whole because most cities just like burnsville do have maximum sign limitations whether it's a percentage of the building can be covered in signage or it's just a flat number so in burnzo we utilize both it's a percentage but up to a point and typically we don't see requests to go above that point um also in burnsville and many other cities painted signage is not allowed for some of those similar reasons uh when you see things like murals there are specific paint types that are used in those types of installations so that they can last for 50 years um that doesn't mean that every painted sign would utilize that particular type of material so that's why it's not a permitted wall sign material in burnsville or one of the reasons um some of the other comments that we re i got back from other city planners when i asked them what about if they did something like what we did with fire station one and um generally everyone was like oh yes we don't regulate the color of buildings in our city unless it's in some sort of specific town home development or pud and we don't regulate patterns in the design so probably we would approve something just like you did if we got a request for something like this again painting brick is may not be allowed for signage but painted brick is allowed as an exterior material that's a recent change within the last couple of years um and then one city planner that i talked to was adamant that plastic was not an approved building material so any viewing of this type of wall decal would need to be a signage because we they didn't want to open that up the plastic and vinyl was a an approved exterior material um so just a little tiny here but some of the um i reached out to our market cities got some feedback i'd say most of the cities that i talked to had not really received requests for this type of a sign whether and i was specifically asking at this point about building wraps and wall decals the ones that did either approved it as just a generic sign permit because their sign ordinances allowed kind of some flexibility in the material of a sign burnsville does not i will get to that um and or it was through a pud or some other sort of plan so i've got some images later in the powerpoint where i'll kind of show you the different areas and where they've been approved at least that were identified to me through my conversations with different planning offices around the metro some concerns with burnsville's ordinance for assigned materials is so for wall signage permanent wall signage we ask that wall signs be constructed of individual channel raised letters that are a minimum of an inch in depth generally if you're going to a retail establishment um most anywhere that's kind of how signs look you know they have their message and it's in some sort of a lettering we do allow um as a portion of the total sign area what's called a cabinet sign but it does have to be subordinate to the channel letters a cabinet sign is a internally lit box sign essentially stand-alone cabinet signs are not allowed within the city flat signage panel signage is not allowed within the city except by conditional use permit and integrated into the design of the building or in some of the older you'll you'll see this particularly in industrial buildings and they'll all kind of have a panel outside it has the name the tenant everyone uses the same font that's some sort of a pud approval generally or it predates the sign ordinance as it stands um so you actually do see that quite if all over the place in burnsville particularly in our industrial districts for temporary signage as we went over earlier this year and last year and the year before there's temporary freestanding signage and there's temporary banner signs a wall decal is not a banner so one of the options to consider could be incorporating an additional type of temporary signage for a wall decal or a building wrap or something like that but it would still be limited to those size requirements that are in the ordinance and haven't changed much over the years um so moving on here are some examples so i did talk to some planning staff in bloomington uh so this is the crayola experience at the mall of america and this was approved as signage through the mall of america master plan um they have their master plan they have their plan unit development and they have a master sign plan so there are a lot of elements that work here this was approved not administratively but this is a uh the equivalent of coming in through a pud amendment like we would see yes what type of sign are we looking at and which part of the signage so the kind of the color shifting that is building wrap okay so that similar to how you would see a bus wrap all right yep yep okay but in on top of that they have the crates they have an actual sign yes okay so the building wrap is so there's kind of layers of their signage here as well as the fascia around it so this is kind of a hole and when i talked to the city planner he was explaining that too that this is this is kind of multiple elements at play as part of their branding here um but it was not approved administratively it did it was approved as part of their kind of master plan um from a city staff uh perspective there were some concerns so this sign is about five or six years old and there's already some sun damage to the sign and so they did express that if they were asked to do something like this again that they may try to add some conditions to it or just talk about it more with an applicant just because they've been able to see that there is damage to it after definitely now after five or six years but even soon after installation with sun and just weather concerns durability concerns um but that they haven't really gotten any requests for it outside of the mall of america which is kind of its own um beast a sign of this size would not meet burnsville's ordinance however um in bloomington even though they're limited by the percentage of the building the mall of america is a huge building so they have quite a lot of allotted signage for the whole building buildings at this point um so this location is in minnetonka and it incorporates both a wall uh decal and window decal um so this was approved as part of signage and um based on their requirement and their ordinance for signage size it did meet theirs and was approved administratively through a signed permit and part of that is because windows signage typically doesn't require a signed permit in burnsville in particular um windows signage can cover up to 35 of the windows on the building so that's um kind of how you could see that being administered and you i'm sure have seen plenty of window signs using this decal technology i'll say throughout the city and everywhere this is a wall decal that was approved as exterior signage in blaine so this was approved again through a sign permit so administratively the typical sign permit process their city planner was able to approve this because in blaine they don't have materials requirements for wall signs so um that was able to include this type of a decal onto the building and this is a really good example of building expression because it's not showing you um specifically who's in the building but you maybe are able to guess what the tenant or owner of this building is based on their style of their imagery on building yes is the sign the large rectangle or is it the smaller rectangle that has the photograph of the confined to the photograph of the motorcycle so um the from what they told me the sign that was applied for as part of the sign pyramid included the entire face okay of this white area so they they applied for 300 feet of signage okay and that would not be meet burnsville's ordinance we have a maximum 300 square feet that's our so percentage up to a point and that point is is 300 square feet yes so not shown in this photograph but then does the right side of that building also contain a sign yes okay um so some of the other cities that i talked to in egan this is part of the vikings complex and they have so this is the parking area and not specifically their building their building they utilize more of the building materials and this portion of it on the parking garage though where they have images of the team and just various marketing materials this was approved of signage and it was approved by their council as a planned unit development they have not received any other requests for this type of signage at all in egan other than this one and they would only have been able to do it through a planned unit development and the property owner in burnsville that kind of sparked this discussion it would have been the same thing where with what they were proposing it would have had to have been an amendment of their plan unit development and then as we talked about earlier kind of the other um facet of this building expression is um utilization of the existing building materials to do this messaging or non-messaging in this case so with the large one on fire station one it was composed of the exact same material but in a different color of the material behind it so this was approved as a building material because our ordinance does not regulate color or patterns in the building materials i did talk to someone and i'm sorry i'll get you in just a second and they gave an example but um i just wasn't able to find an image of it because it's kind of new uh where a tenant had removed the the materials from the wall and put their sign back up on top of new color impregnated background so that they didn't have to apply to expand their sign area because it was just the blue backer and they uh added new stucco in blue to be the backer of their their logo so that their sign itself could be larger so some good examples uh yes commissioner one that's clever so this uh this number one is it uh it's wall panel material is it flush with the rest of the wall panel or so it's not doesn't stick out it's just flush and it's just a change in color of the wall panel okay yeah it does not stick out at all it'll it's just wall material okay very interesting so okay so i've kind of put together some options to consider um for what we could do to kind of address this concept so we could create an ordinance provision so there are two sections here 1019 is special requirements in business districts and 1023 as special requirements in industrial districts um and that business does incorporate mixed use if you're curious um so that would address building expression as it relates to exterior building materials um as a comment as i've kind of shown you this evening we were able to make that work so far as the ordinance stands if someone wanted to utilize building materials but we could still add more information under there if we wanted to specifically address this concept second option we could create an ordinance provision provision under 10 30 which is the sign ordinance so we could address building expression as it relates to signage whether it's temporary signage or permanent signage um the cities that i talked to that use these kind of building expression type strategies uh where it was a wall decal or building wrap and they so far have been installed specifically as permanent signage um but we could do we could do either we would need to really look at our sign ordinance based on the materials that are required of a permanent sign right now um whereas for temporary signage and we allow banners but we could shift something to create a new definition and allow this type of a fixed material whether it's a wall decal or building wrap or something like that option three is to leave the ordinance as is we can improve administratively the building materials building wraps or decals would not be allowed as signage construction administratively but an applicant could request through a pud approval or you know other so we're open to any ideas that you may have about how to address this land use issue if you wanted to kind of come up with your own idea we would add a little bit more weeks to our timeline for putting through this type of an ordinance amendment for the work plan and just to bring back some more research to the group for consideration but i am open to uh discussion at this point so we are seeking direction of a general consensus um of what we could do on if an ordinance amendment is needed so i'm open for questions or for discussion thank you ms madden commissioner wadden i have another question what floor temporary when a sign is temporary when uh what does temporary mean is it a year or is it so under ordinance it's 190 days 180 days three months yep okay thank you yeah as we're always looking to streamline the process from um a tenant through this to whatever and through staff when you look at this as staff you know number three leaving it the way it isn't giving you guys the ability to basically approve some things through there what's what's the easiest option for you guys is that a weighted question it's kind of weighted um we don't know if we're going to continue to get requests like this so far we received the one um major um heavily considering it request and um no matter what that applicant wanted to do an amendment of their beauty is going to be necessary um if i can add um one of the concerns i see some of these applications are rather large that we've seen and we do have a cap on our current signage that says was it for permanent 300 square feet so if someone really wanted to dress up their building from top to bottom and and do something bold i think that that could run into some problems approving something administratively as is if we kept with our current our basic ordnance standards the challenge here for me is people wanting to use approved building materials to circumvent that size so if somebody were to use building materials and it wouldn't currently under ordinance be considered a sign they could make it you know half the the front of their building a thousand square feet or whatever it is is that true so it would be an expensive route to take the one city that i talked to where someone did that they went through serious expense to remove stucco and add new impregnated stucco behind it and but it would technically yes it could be an option so as an example like let's say they've got a parapet you know it's however many square feet and their signage or their branding is just a red box with um you know i'll just use target as an example with the white target they could make that target logo the full 300 square feet and use red paneling in the back and that's yes that's part of their sign from their perspective but from the ordinances perspective the only thing that is a sign is what's affixed to the building so they could do that and they have if you look at target their whole building shows you that their target but their sign itself is only 300 square feet so it kind of already happens and that doesn't necessarily mean that they're like circumventing the ordnance so much as they're playing to the fact that they're a major brand and that even the color red makes you think target so i don't think we'll see it a ton where people are going and changing their building materials up i think if they were doing it they were going to do it in a very intentional stylistic way in the way that we saw the fire station building more so than we're going to see somebody just completely changing their facade unless it's a scheduled upgrade but i don't think that you'll see there are only so many ways that you can make your building materials look like a like a logo or like a sign so i don't know that we would see that too much just because we would already be seeing it but it's interesting so what about retaining walls then if somebody were to use building material on retaining walls they could do that under the current ordnance yeah part of the issue is the supreme court ruling for the we can't regulate based on content so we can't say that's the content on your wall it's a pattern i'm just envisioning the huge retaining wall by home depot and i don't know who owns that particular property if that's home depot or the city or whomever but i'm just thinking you know retaining walls is something that i guess could also have this this non-signage signage if somebody wanted and they could already do that yeah oh go ahead john so i'm assuming that our fear is that if we don't have some kind of ordinance in place that we're going to lose out on opportunities with different companies coming in um or we could yeah it's been brought forth because we do want to be able to give people that want to do this an option um it does seem like just based on what i've talked to from other cities that it would be standard for anything that's a really large installation it would be a plan unit development and we've seen that in other places both at the mall america and the vikings facility so it would have to be something very similar to one of our very large land unit developments in the city where they may consider something like this and but we also wanted to bring it up because we want to give some of the small installations for something like this an option if if they want to so an administrative way to do that could be allowing it as a either a temporary sign or a permanent sign some sort of a decal maybe it's not a full building wrap but it could be a a wall decal with the with the city would still have some kind of oversight on what goes where so we don't have you know stripes going next to plaids or anything crazy like that we can regulate size overall size duration and um in a way a location but not too much of a location most of that is the applicant's planning to do but when i approve or review a sign permit um it's regulated specifically for yeah size construction materials and placement and that's that's it not what it looks like and that's if it if it just goes through administratively right not necessarily a pud or something they have to go behind in front of the console or anything all those lines yeah okay and generally what it looks like we we won't comment on anyway even if it was something that went to council okay so help me out with the wraps the the motorcycle as an example and let's ignore the giant white part uh and just envision that that motorcycle is 300 square feet or less that particular wrap how would that be handled if somebody wanted that in burnsville right now it would be denied so because it doesn't meet the construction materials requirements of a wall sign um it wouldn't be approved um so we would i'm not really sure i guess in that case it would depend on the location if it was an existing pud and they wanted to do a full rebranding of their building we could process a minor plan unit development amendment maybe that would be something we would recommend to them if it wasn't a plan unit development um we would try to work with the property owner i guess to see if there's some other way that they could accomplish their goal but um it would it would be denied just because it doesn't meet the construction requirements and the ordinance really is set up now for durability of construction materials so when you look into something like this that is not so durable and is only you know maybe five years or so the ordinance just doesn't it doesn't just set up at all to address that so yeah it's kind of why we're here i mean one of the options would be we'd give them the option to amend the ordinance and yeah and of course you know oftentimes the staff will bring stuff to the planning commission um oftentimes we'll hear new trends in the market and multiple inquiries about what people want to do and that's our trigger to say hey you know maybe it's time to reevaluate reevaluate our ordinances and and bring something to you and that's kind of why we're here today it's just kind of backwards like i don't want to propose that we add an ordinance or or create an ordinance it's more what can we winnow away from our existing ordinances to make this feasible but it sounds like there's a lot of options with the ordinances the way that they're currently written where if somebody wanted to do this they theoretically could find a an avenue to do it for a building wrap or a wall decal there currently wouldn't be an avenue for them to do it unless they applied to him in the ordinance or were some are part of some sort of planning and development proposal uh just because of the construction requirements so because temporary signage if that's on a wall it's a banner that's what's allowed and permanent signage that's on a wall is lettering so there are panel signs within the city and we for example um and again this was kind of part of an older industrial building but when bricks worth brewing company came in they wanted to do painted sign um we worked with them they settled for or i guess we compromised together with panel signage because that was an industrial building that is existing that had panel signage however it was one where the property owner himself or themselves required a specific type of panel stainage and their pud allowed them to have one that's more decorative but it was still a panel so it was not that raised lettering that is required by the ordnance but through their pud they were able to to deviate from that but again it is it is a city council approved process not a an administrative process is is variance an option for something that's denied or is it or is it really pud just based on meeting the the test and the statutory requirements for variants um is not created by the property owner practical difficulty it wouldn't need it yeah got it i if i may comment i think it you know thinking of the long-term health and vitality of our city i think we do want to think about ways to accommodate new types of signage and to be able to allow building owners and tenants to you know express themselves on one hand on the other hand you know building raps as was kind of laid out by the crayola signs at the mall of america they have a shorter life span and maybe maybe there's a you know a longer temporary sign that would apply to building wraps to allow people to put up billing ramps maybe it's a one-year deal or a five-year deal i'm thinking of tenants that might you know be in a five-year lease okay but five-year lease your sign is a five-year you know five-year temporary sign for your for your property um you know i'm thinking about like the vikings facility where they've got pictures of the players interspersed onto their parking ramp you know those players are going to change and so those raps most likely will get replaced as the players or players change um but yeah i think you're right uh you're on the right track in terms of building wraps and decals really not being a permanent building material but like i say i think it would be behoove us to allow for science you know to allow for signage that's maybe not too old-fashioned and stodgy roberts yeah i was gonna make the comment of going from a tube tv to a 4k tv i mean some of the signs that are old old signs aren't that glamorous when you're putting up a brand new building right next to it but if the signage that could go up in a high definition aspect that looks really good is a little more classier in some way than watching just an old sign that is just sitting there deteriorating on its own anyway in regards to like the viking stuff and that um yeah those change all the time so i mean that that really is something that does change the temporary signage aspect of this could be set up to where we allow ourselves to um look at that sign after a certain amount of time if it's just a wrap we can maybe think about what we think would be a lifespan of a wrap that we get to look at it then and say that needs to be changed out to a new one you know that type of thing give us the option to say you have two years with this wrap and at that time we're you know you need to come in and request to have it approved again once it's been and i don't know if that's too much work for staff to be looking at wraps and stuff but hopefully we're not getting the amount of requests that you're talking about that it turns into a big deal and so so far uh there's been the one theoretical request and um there actually maybe we're not sure if it's uh going through but one practical request but as a temporary sign um that they want it as a temporary installation so um what you're talking about um could be uh what you provide direction for this evening um and as far as like creating a new timeline that would be that is something so right now the ordinance um for both a freestanding temporary sign and a banner it limits you to 180 days per calendar year so um a new signage type is what would be proposed with this type of ordinance if this is what we move forward with and that could come with its own regulating um provisions because it's not a banner and it's yeah it's different than that totally a different piece of material yeah and then um there was something else you had said that i wanted to comment on but i've lost it for right now many times the vikings change players or not enough sometimes all right the packer fan and the crowd talk that is something that we could do oh what i was going to mention is that the ordinance already does have and there are provisions about durability uh disrepair and things like that that can trigger a um typically what would be the beginning of a code enforcement process which would be an informative letter that there's a sign or there's a fence or you know typical things that are in disrepair um based on those complaints that we received and i will say that for i won't point fingers but for the people that i talked to and some of the signs that you have seen in the slideshow tonight there were um the staff member indicated they had they do receive complaints of sun damage picture quality and peeling so it exists then but you know i think we can all test that we all receive complaints about every topic so john i would agree with what uh commissioner awad and the commissioner roberts was talking about with having something that would need to renew after so many years whether it be five like you had said or the length of the lease i think that's how we have to work with signs now correct currently no those those are permanent they're there forever oh um well permanent typically they are removed when the yeah the tenant moves out because they're replaced with someone else but there are um yeah they're meant to be removed after they're defunct i guess so would you all be open to having staff go back and explore a i guess a rap ordinance adding some sort of i mean i as it stands it seems there there could be really good uses for this um this concept and there's also some consequences to that and that is peeling and you know the weather damage so if we drafted some type of ordnance where we allow this as a semi-permanent type of usage and the ordinance said okay after 10 years it needs to be reevaluated or it needs to be replaced something of that nature i mean it seems to me we'd be one of the first in the metro to have a comprehensive ordinance on this particular issue so we would be so at least as far as people who responded to me that are in our market cities and no one has any um specific provisions related to this at all the cities that did and that you saw installations of just based on the fact that they don't have construction materials requirements for wall signage they were able to approve it as a wall sign but actually creating a new set of provisions there were no examples that i could find um one that came slightly close but um may not they may not be keeping it in their ordinance is there was a city um i want to say woodbury that has a corporate identity uh standard but that's under their building materials ordinance which is that within so many feet of the main entrance of the building they can utilize both building materials and signage to present their corporate identity so some content-based regulations do apply to that which may be removed from their ordinance at some point but the idea of that was for like we talked about for the target entrance within so many feet that they can kind of design that how they will and that it won't be counted towards their overall sign area for the property so there are ways well okay um what i was going to say is in that i think what we're getting from all of us on the planning commission is we don't want to be left behind i mean burnsville what because exciting about this is we actually have the opportunity to be the forefront of what others may look at and say okay this is what we should look to adopt which would be great which gives you guys the opportunity to write something because we're not ordinance professionals you guys are in that perspective so if our leaving this meeting is that you come back with the understanding that we don't want to miss the opportunity of using these type of things i think it's just the parameters of how we want to allow tenants to use these if we can come up with that combination and make it work then i think we're on the right track yeah and i was gonna i was gonna say that you know what we need to do is provide a mechanism for th you know for the review and approval of this new type of signage whether it's an ordinance or a change to our existing ordinance or however and i guess what kind of look to your recommendation for what is that right mechanism the other thing i wanted to say is that if we're looking at talking about building wraps and limiting the lifespan of them probably the one of the biggest factors to consider one you know one is substrate the other one is color you know it's going to be the anything that's got red in it is going to fade the fastest and blues are going to fade and if you know if it's a black and white wrap it could look brand new for 25 years and so i i don't know if that gets factored into this you know timeline um i guess maybe i'll let you guys ponder that but you know something with red it's going to fade after a couple years and it you know it fades slowly and you know you don't notice it and then when you do notice it you notice it so yes commissioner a big fear i would have is what is going to end up on the side of a building that we're all going to be able to see and being able to um i don't want to see the word regulate but there are some things that could end up that we wouldn't want as a city to be up on a on a building or anything in those lines so i would hope there would be some kind of a mechanism in there that would state does that make sense um it does make sense what you're saying based on the supreme court ruling for what we're allowed to do we we cannot regulate the content of a sign we'll stop it's expression yeah that's the freedom of expression yeah i think the tools we use or could use is regulating on size you know making sure it stays under that 300 square foot um you know threshold so if somebody wants to put something you know incendiary or profane it's going to be small okay do you need more from us um maybe a little bit okay so you would like i'll just stay and you can nod uh staff to look into a tool that we could incorporate into the sign ordinance not the building materials ordinance and that would give an applicant the ability to install as i'm going to say semi-temporary signage or semi-permanent signage wall decals exterior wall decals okay that's that is something i can do so um because i as a staff member i'm probably going to need to do some more research on this on what would be the best timing as far as like actual timing for an installation i don't know originally i was hoping to have an ordinance before you the first meeting in september to give me some time to do a public hearing notice but um it might be the second meeting in september so we'll or later we'll see but this will come back to you the probably the next time you see it as an ordinance and as for public hearing then if what you see at that meeting isn't maybe what you had in mind we can you know continue it but um that's what my schedule is then for this very good we'll work with your schedule do you commissioners have any concerns or want any input on if somebody were to use a site or to create a sign out of building material putting some type of size threshold on that because i'm i'm just picturing that that giant retaining wall right now [Laughter] and all it would take would be a couple different colored bricks to make a massive home depot sign commissioner wadden i don't have a strong concern about it because of the the type of investment you know whoever is going to do that is going to make a very huge investment to do that you know they're not that this means taking the wall apart putting it back together so that their sign you know their logo is part of this wall it's more than just painting the bricks and so any of the i mean this is my feeling any any business or entity that's going to invest in some sort of subtle signage that's part of their architectural expression is going to be spending a lot of money to do it and so that's why it's limited to companies like target and and um you know they're going to be be around for a long time theoretically if they're spending that amount of money they're going to want it to look nice yeah they want to know yeah exactly they're making a long-term investment and and to some you know i'm i'm kind of only thinking about stores but because that's typically who would do that sort of thing but i don't have i don't have a concern about that you know that's what the fire the fire station is doing it's a big giant number one that's just different color siding that's in the number in the shape of number one [Music] well and if somebody's building something brand new like that it's going to come before us anyway correct i mean theoretically they're going to put in a request for a plan to build this new building you know we see a lot of that they stay in the lane it wouldn't come to us we only get the things that are a little bit outside of the normal administrative process yeah that's right and um i mean typically you guys see a lot of new development because lots that are left over or are redeveloping in burnsville they either already have a pud on them or they're vacant and have complications that would need some sort of a deviation so it can depend but um you may not necessarily see it if it is able to come through with the building permit and meet all city requirements do you feel more comfortable if there was a a provision in one of the ordinances that stated if if a sign that is going to be made out of building materials based on expression or whatever if it's over a certain limit must be brought forth and be looked at and we then have the ability to ask questions about what's going to happen yes i personally would feel more comfortable with that but i don't know that i want to again create ordinance um for that rare situation and depending on what's worded we may not have any teeth in it whatsoever so let's stick with the the wrap guidance that we've given staff and kind of let them run with that all right miss madden you i'm not going to ask if you're happy do you have enough and i do think that i have enough and i will like i mentioned come back with an ordinance prepared for you to review wonderful thank you so much all right that is the last meat and potato item of the agenda uh so are there any updates from planning commission members any updates from staff just one update for you that the next planning commission meeting we just have one item on there now it's for a a let's see conditional use permit and interim use permit basically for outdoor storage for one of our businesses in the the industrial area um it's over kind of close to the quarry but really lady bird and dupont area so that's the only item that we have on at this point in time thank you thank you and the only other update and i hope you're aware of this but we are having uh immediately following this planning commission meeting we're having a brief work session um with our city council liaison and i would propose we take a five-minute break in between this meeting and uh that work session so with that i would stand for a motion to adjourn sure what i move that we adjourn sucking by commissioner roberts all those in favor aye aye all those opposed and the motion carries thank you you