Call to order for the planning commission regular meeting November 6th. Uh roll call please. >> Pearson >> here. >> Willen bringing >> here. >> Campbell is absent. McCauley >> here. >> Data >> here. >> Wilson >> here. Shaba is also absent. >> Pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> First is the approval of the agenda. Can I have a motion, please? >> So move. >> Second. >> Second. >> All those in favor? I. >> Any opposed? Thank you very much. Uh we have two sets of uh minutes to approve August 7th, 2025. Does anyone have any changes to be noted? >> Seeing none, may I have a motion to accept as presented? >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion passes. September 4th, 2025. Uh do we have any changes from anyone? >> Nope. >> If not, I look for a motion to accept as presented. >> So moved. Second. All those in favor? >> I. >> All those opposed. Motion passes. Uh first order of business is a public hearing. Uh rules for public hearing is you're welcome to come forward to uh speak on any issue not on the agenda. Uh limited to a couple of minutes. Uh limit. Yeah, limit it to a couple of minutes. And don't be repetitive. So, anyone wishing to come forward to make comment, please do. I need to offer it a couple more times. So, I'll offer a second time. Anyone wishing to come forward to make comment on anything not on the agenda, please come forward. And the third time, anyone wishing to come forward? Seeing none, we'll move on and close the public hearing. Uh, open forum. Chair, I think there's a typo on the the agenda. So, uh I think if you're okay, we can just roll into the the next item. >> Be okay. Because it standing by itself, it has no meaning. Uh old business is none. New business is a public hearing for Kelly at 7684 Still Waterway North. A conditional use permit for an oversized accessory structure structure, a second garage. you have the uh presentation, please. >> Thank you, chair and commissioners, and good evening. Uh before you tonight is a request for a conditional use permit for an oversized accessory structure. Uh in this case, a second garage at 7684 Stillwater Way North, which is a few blocks east of uh 694 and Stillwater Boulevard. The zoning here is R1, large lot detached residential, where single family homes are permitted to have one garage attached or detached by right and one shed or accessory structure by right, and any additional garages are permitted, but only through the conditional use permit process. The applicant here is seeking to add a new garage in the northeast corner of the lot, as shown on the screen, uh, which they have stated would be used primarily for recreational storage. The property as a whole is uh 1 acre in size and contains a single family home with an attached garage. So here we have the applicant site plan for the building. Uh the applicant is showing a 30x 50 footprint with 10-ft setback shown uh which are al defined as distances to the property lines here to the north and east property lines. The setback requirements for the R1 district where this property is located is 10 ft uh for accessory structures. So this requirement is met. Uh the applicant here is not proposing a driveway um stating that it would be used mainly for storage. Uh the city has historically not required driveways for second garages intended for storage. [clears throat] Here we have the applicant's elevations for the garage. The applicant is showing a two-story structure that is approximately 32 feet in height. Uh per the city code, garages are required to be no higher than the existing home. Um per the applicant, this garage is a few feet taller than the existing home. So if this application is approved, the applicant would be required to revise the height structure in order to comply with the zoning code. Additionally, garage doors are required to not exceed 10 ft in height. Uh here they're showing 14 on one of the doors. So to address this, staff has added a condition requiring that the garage door height be reduced to 10 ft. Here we have the floor plan of the proposed garage. The garage footprint is 50 by30 uh with 1,500 square ft on the first level and 600 square ft on the second level totaling a gross floor area of 2100 square ft. It's worth noting that the city code does not specify a maximum size for second garages, only that they receive city council approval through the conditional use permit [snorts] process. Um, one additional note, uh, the applicant here is showing a restroom in the plans. Um, staff had some concerns with this initially. uh to ensure that this garage would not be used as an accessory dwelling unit or a residential living quarters. The staff has added a condition that the applicant shall not use the garage as a dwelling unit. Further, we received some comments regarding concerns with potential commercial uses occurring on the site. As a result, staff is planning to add a condition uh for no commercial activities to occur on within the structure prior to city council consideration. This condition would be uh in line with past conditional use permits for accessory structures. As a reminder, conditional use permits are subject to certain review criteria found in the city's ordinance. Here we have a summary of the review criteria uh that we must use in the evaluation. Compliance with the comprehensive plan. Compatibility of the use with surrounding zoning. No nuisance effects being generated. No traffic congestion or parking issues. The use must be adequately served by public services. No excessive costs incurred for public services or infrastructure and minimal impacts to the environment or natural features. In the review, staff finds that the conditional use permit review criteria of the ordinance has been satisfied as detailed in the staff report on file. Staff is recommending approval of this request subject to the following conditions. The structure shall meet setback and height requirements. The structure shall not exceed 2100 square ft in gross floor area. The structure shall not be used as a dwelling unit. Uh garage doors shall not exceed 10 ft in height. A building permit shall be obtained and removal of any existing temporary accessory structures on site. As a reminder, this is a public hearing and if the applicant is here with us in attendance, uh they'd be happy to answer questions. And with that, I'd be happy to take any questions from the commission. >> First question is during your report, you said you were going to add an additional requirement of no commercial use. So there will be line item seven on the the requirements. Yeah, we would be looking to add that chair um at the city council as that's based on comments we received after the staff report was drafted. >> Okay. >> Anyone have questions for Max? >> One question. Uh so would that the um that structure function as a shed because you're saying that they're not required to have a driveway to it, right? That's how the applicant has described it as being primarily for storage, though it would be equipped with two overhead doors, which under the city code would function more as a garage. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else have a question for Max? Okay. If the applicant wishes to come forward to make any comments, please do. I don't really have any comments besides the 10 foot garage door height. Do I have to stand up to the podium? I can do that as well. >> Yeah, give your name and address, please too. >> Yeah, Mike Mansfield, 7684 Still Waterway Boulevard, Oakdale, Minnesota. Um, I guess my only question would be how come I can't go over 10 foot for the garage door height? And if there is a possibility, can we, you know, get a variance or whatever we have to do to make it over 10 feet? Because I know if you have an RV, most of them are 10 feet or higher. So why would I want a 10-ft opening? I figure go bigger now than have to do something about it later. If I have an RV, there's a guy down at the end of the street. He's got a nice garage in his backyard right on Still Water and Helmo. He's got a huge RV parked right in front of the thing, probably 12 feet high. I mean, to me, why not have a 12ft door to fit your RV in your garage? So, and I know the guy across the street, he's got a 12 foot door, so I don't know how that happened with. But other than that, I have no other questions. I mean, I'm willing to go with that 10ft door if we have to. But if there's a way around it, we would like to do that just in case we do get a bigger vehicle or an RV or if we have a extra large boat or something. I don't know. I don't see it being a problem unless you want it sitting in front of my house or something like that. So, that's kind of my thought about it. Okay. >> You know, store it away. >> Question for >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you. >> Anybody have questions for >> Yeah. Can I Can I uh Do you have a chance to talk with staff about this? >> Yeah, I talked to staff about it. >> Okay. What was the outcome? Was it yesterday? >> I just told them that if we could do it if we had to do a 10ft door that we would be okay with that. But like I told you guys, obviously most RVs are 10 foot or higher and it's hard to fit a 10ft RV in a 10ft door, right? That'd be a tight squeeze. So, I would like to go 12 foot, 14 foot, I just said because then I know I can fit anything in there that I want to, you know, with all the hail storms and everything else that we've had and all the damage I've had to my vehicles or, you know, recreation vehicles. I'd like to be able to put them away. >> So, if I understand correctly, the 10 foot would not work for you. You want a little higher? >> Yeah, I'd like to go 12t, 14t. I like to go big or go home, you know. >> Okay. go big now than rather buy something later and say, "Oh, I built the garage with a 10-ft door. Now I got a 10-ft RV that I can't even park in this garage that I built." You know, to me, it doesn't make sense. I don't see it being too big of a nuisance to have a little bit of a bigger door. I mean, I know there are people in Oakdale with over 10ft doors. So, if there's a way around it, I would like to do that. If not, I guess we have to stay within the guidelines. >> Thank you. Yep. Thank you. Anyone else [clears throat] have questions? respond to any of it. >> Chair, would you like me to respond to the garage door? >> Uh, yes, please. >> Sure thing. Um, generally, it's been one of the specific criteria for reviewing a second garage. Um, in our time here with second garage applications, it's a a condition that we've included in each application. If the commission is interested in permitting that, um, we would have to check with our legal department ahead of the city council uh, in order to determine if that's something we could do. >> Just as an added comment, I believe that you'd have to go back, you'd have to go back and seek a variance because that's not what's before us right now anyway. >> Any other questions? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh, at this point, I'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to make comment on this may come forward. Please state your name and address, please. >> Hi, my name is Dave Rebel. I live at 7697 Stillwater Way. I'm directly across the street to the west of this property. I lived at that address for about 30 years. I've lived in Oakdale for 40. Um, this proposed structure is 30 ftx 50 ft by 33 feet tall. It's huge. again 30 feet by 50 feet by 33 feet tall. I'd like to start out noting this area structure will be built in as a very small sliver of R1 zone properties. The property is sandwiched between two R2 zones. One adjacent to the south, one 200 ft away to the north. As Max said, R1 zones are normally granted one accessory building no larger than 200 square ft by city code without cup variances. The home on this property, I'm nearly 100% sure, is the largest single felling single family dwelling in the city of Oakdale. It doesn't really fit in our residential character of the area. The proposed structure would amplify that substantially. who has seen a structure accessory building of such size as 50 by 30 by 33 feet tall in our city. If any exist, they shouldn't be. In order for this conditional use permit to be granted or approved, it must meet seven general criteria as listed in section 25-03-302 part C of the zoning code. The structure the applicant is proposing fails to do that. Thus, the structure can't be approved as currently drafted. Under section two of the seven criteria, it states the conditional use shall be located designated maintained and operated to be, and I quote, compatible with the existing or intended character of that zoning district in which it is located. The city review committee stated the following in regards to that. The accessory structure is located in a residential area where similar similar structures are present on nearby properties. That is [clears throat] 100% undeniably false. There isn't a house nor an accessory building of such gigantic mammoth size with a footprint of 30 feet by 50 ft and 33 feet tall anywhere around. Most if not all the structures in this R1 R2 area nearby this property are all about 20 ft tall. This structure, as proposed, is well over 50% taller than any other home or structure in the area. The city review committee also stated the proposed structure would not alter the residential character of the area. This is also false. Who has an accessory building in their backyard that's over 30% larger than a twostory house? that most certainly will affect our neighborhood character. The applicant's home is already daunting in size and this proposed structure will make that visual effect much much worse. It will affect our sightelines. It will affect neighbors solar panels that they've spent thousands of dollars on. It just be a gigantic eyesore to the people in the area. It's simply way way too large for our residential area. Therefore, because the building proposal fails to meet number two of the seven require requirements for the approval of the planning commission can't approve it as currently drafted. my solution for approval. I and some of the adjoining neighbors who couldn't be here because they're doing more important things like going up deer hunting have [snorts] stated that this property have no we have no issue with the 30x 50 footprint. We're okay we're okay with that of the proposed structure. We have issues with the excessive height of 33 feet of this structure. We feel the planning commission should limit that height to a maximum of 20 ft. If that is done, the proposed structure would be a much better fit in our neighborhood character without causing all the negative visual effects from a mammoth gigantic size structure that's 33 feet tall, which is comparable to a three-story building. The applicant's home is The applicant's home already has a near 1,000 square foot attached garage. Adding this 1,500 square ft 30x50 structure would increase that to 2500 square ft. Limiting the proposed structure to 20 feet in height will result in only a small loss of loss of loft space of 600 ft which is only about 30% the size of the structures footprint. I and some other adjoining neighbors are open to that 600 ft [clears throat] loss being added to the structures footprint if if the the square footage is absolutely needed to reduce the structures height to 20 ft and give the applicant the 2100 square foot floor height or floor footage requested. it would still meet the city's 25% structure land ratio with that additional size 600 ft added. In closing, I'm against the planning commission approving the accessory structure as currently drafted. If the planning commission will limit the height to a maximum of 20 ft, I believe that would then meet the cup's general criteria for the planning commission to then approve it. I have a few questions. one with the full bathroom. What What will the sew What will the sewer line floor drain requirements be? Would it be attached to the main houses mainline or to the street sewer mine where the street would be tore up? Driveway. I know the city doesn't require a driveway for this structure, but there will 100% be a driveway on this structure shortly. Where would that be allowed? Still Water Boulevard or to Still Water Way? I feel that needs to be addressed, including driveway setbacks, city rules, rules, codes about second access points where now you're only allowed one access point on your property from the road. Finally, I would like to limit all construction traffic, street parking for any construction workers, cement trucks, etc. to Still Water Boulevard only. Still Water Way is very narrow street and very difficult to accommodate traffic flow and emergency vehicle flow if vehicles are parked on the street. I would like to see this added to the permit. Thank you. >> You does anyone else have wish to come forward and make comment? Please state your name and address for the record, please. Um, >> Dennis Foust, 7779 Stillwater Boulevard, North Oakdale, Minnesota. My property is on Stillwater Boulevard and it's directly across the street to the south. Um my concerns are clearly as stated previously the height and eventually the driveway um Stillwater Boulevard is actually a county road. [clears throat] The county I'm not sure if they're aware of this but I'm not sure how the garage is orientated. They showed it but um where would the driveway access he's there's already an existing driveway to the property off Stillwater Way. So, the orientation of the garage would probably exit that way, but that's you're proposing the longest driveway possible either way. Um, so I know the garage itself, the height is of huge concern of many neighbors. So, those are my concerns. [clears throat] Anyone else wish to come forward? Uh hello, my name is Gretchen Bidd. I live at 2909 Hyo Avenue North. Uh just directly across from the proposed garage structure. I think um our main concern is just the height of the garage. Taking into consideration the neighbors um solar panels. if it goes as is, we're worried that that could limit their utility of their current investment. So, we just want um to clarify that we're totally fine with the um size, but the um height is a concern of ours um aesthetically and also uh functionally for the surrounding neighbors since this structure needs additional approval. So, that is um what we wanted to raise to the council. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> And then also to add myself like >> could you give your name and address again? >> Yep. >> Maybe the same address but please give your name at least. >> No problem. Troy Troy Bidd and uh 2909 Hy Low Avenue North. And kind of the same concern as well just as like I drove a half mile norththeast west. Didn't see anything that's relatively the same at all. And just worried that we're starting to veer off to having somewhat of the same. And also the aspect of that solar panel deal like just feel like it's in a way being forced on something that doesn't need to be forced just wanting. So that's kind of my viewpoint. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else wish to come forward? >> Hi Barb, 7784 Stillwater Place North. I live to the east. I'm a neighbor. Um the first picture that you showed like this is this to scale that doesn't look I mean a 2100 square foot building and the size of that house is that to scale. >> Yeah. Are you referring to the aerial or the site plan? >> This color one that you showed >> on the screen right there. >> Um >> is that to scale? >> That would be a staff estimate. Um the maps are generally off by several feet as these are aerial maps that come from the county. >> Okay, just so that people who aren't familiar with it, it I believe the building would be quite a bit bigger on the lot than what that shows. Um and again my if this went through my sympathies to the on that there you can see the garage that's already there um with the solar panels and you know you kind of wish if there is going to be a building there that you wouldn't um [clears throat] inflict that upon a neighbor when they already have that there. And um on item two, I know this has been said um by Dave, where are any other buildings that big where it says that's part of the conditional use permit and that there's similar structures? The only one I know of in Oakdale would be the fire station, which it's not residential. So, if you know of any other buildings, I'd like the addresses of them. I I haven't seen them. So, whatever they're basing that off of, can somebody get back to me on that? I ask the staff group afterwards. >> Okay. Um, again, I guess it's been mentioned um the driveway entrance. I couldn't tell from the drawings which garage door went where, what was north and south. They're just the drawings are all on a page, but I didn't see any direction on there. And I too am concerned where where the applicant is saying they're not putting a driveway in and they're not accessing it accessing it. Um how are they going to drive vehicles in there? And are they looking for another access point? went to Still Water Boulevard which um that's already busy and I think the development down the road they've already turned down that they said they can't have an access and Still Waterway they already have an access and they're going to [gasps] extend their driveway which it was noted on here that they didn't plan on that. Um and just a thing in the last that the purpose of the public hearing was to gather additional information from the parties. Um one of the neighbors who they're not here tonight um met with somebody on this planning commission and they said that person told them when they asked their questions um that this group here goes by staff recommendations so that they would be approving it. I mean, that's kind of a defeist attitude for that neighbor. So, I understand why they didn't show up. You basically said it didn't matter. Any questions? >> Thank you very much. [clears throat] >> So, I'll stand back up to the podium. I lived in Oakdale since 1986 when I was born. I'm going to be 39 years old in April. And there are multiple houses, maybe not with 30x 50 buildings, but multiple houses with second garages, pole barns, uh, metal pole barns, I guess, if that's not a different structure or whatever, but they might not be 30 by 50, but they're awfully close. Multiple houses with extra buildings on their property for storage. and the driveway thing. I was told by my neighbor Dave, who actually sold me the house, who told me he had no problem with this structure being on there because it's an R1 lot and it should be compatible with that and it shouldn't be an issue. But he said that when he was going to put his shed in or whatever that you could drive right on the grass. You didn't need a driveway, so why can't I do that? I got four-wheelers, dirt bikes, motorcycles. I drive right on the lawn. Don't seem like it should be an issue. I don't know. So that's just what I'm saying. Everybody, you know, I don't I don't get it. There's multiple [clears throat] multiple houses with storage. >> If you're away from the microphone, please withhold because we need to be get it on record. >> Yes, sir. >> He's done. I think so. If you wish. [clears throat] >> Um he's saying there's multiple structures, there's everything. There is not. Um staff [clears throat] staff, we can go around there. We can measure all that stuff. There is no 30 footx 50 foot by 33 foot tall. Like I said before, our issue is the height. I could care less if it was 100 ft by 100t footprint in that backyard. It's a big backyard. It's our visual site. When we're looking out, a 33 foot structure is huge. And that that is the reason why it doesn't meet that cup is because there's nothing around that area that is that height. And if people are saying there is >> Thank you very much. Hold off. Hold off and wait till I we get to the end of other people's comments. Let me answer some questions. >> Anyone else have more comments to make? We're Rich and Cheryl Gispower. We live at 7680 Stillwater Way. We are the solar panel people. We've invested thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars into our solar panel system. And the second story that's proposed on this building will completely our our garage is directly behind the proposed building. And we might as well take them down because there won't be any sun shining on our yard. >> Anyone else wish to come forward to make comment on this issue? >> Preferably hold off on repeats if to wait for anybody else to come forward who hasn't spoken yet. >> Okay. Dennis FA 7779. I know Mike talked about the mo future motor home. Now I live right across the street and I have a fifth wheel trailer that goes in my garage [snorts] currently and that would not fit through a 10-ft door. So I'm not against his 12 foot. Most motor homes now the top of the air conditioner is 132. Um so that's a valid point. So, I'm not against the door being 12, 14 ft. I just worry about the construction of the building. I don't want to see a pole shed, per se. Same construction of the home. And the orientation again with the driveway and the height is of great concern. >> Thank you. Anyone else wish to make comment? [clears throat] You wanted to make further comments. >> Sure. So, when I did come up here, I did say I'm not sure if they're 50 by 30, but most houses, there's a lot of homes in Oakdale with extra garages that are big garages. I'm not going to go around and measure all of them. No, but there are lots of garages, extra garages. I understand I spoke with Max and Luke about the height and we already talked about reducing the [cough] height. [clears throat] I understand it's taller than my house, but I know the requirements in Oakdale are you can build as tall as your house. I'm sorry. They have solar panels back there. Personally, I think it's an eyesore and I don't know if they're worth I don't know if they work. I mean, I I want to work with them. I don't know, you know, I never knew it was an issue until now. So, >> pretty easy going. We can work with it. >> Anyone else wish to come forward? If not, I I close I will close hearing. Close the public hearing. Do you guys want to make any further comments? >> Commissioner, would you like me to address >> Address the height? Make this that statement again because it's not in the requirements. >> Sure. Um, so accessory structures within the city of Oakdale are permitted to be uh they need to be less than the height of the principal building, which would be the house in this case. Um, generally there aren't other specific height requirements for accessory structures in this district or other related our districts. [snorts] >> Okay. Anyone have question questions? >> What's the height of their house? Again, [snorts] >> um, from a email thread, I don't recall the exact height of the house, but it was higher than the 32 feet 6 in of the proposed structure here. And do you happen to know how high the shed is next door with solar panels? It does look like it's on top of a roof. Potentially a one twostory building is I can tell from here. Do you happen to know how high that is? >> I believe that is a one-story structure. >> One story. Okay. Any other questions? >> I do. >> Okay. Go ahead. Um, I do appreciate everybody's um um comments here. Uh, but I have um some concerns. So, I understand that the the uh the garage taller than the house. Is that what I'm hearing? >> The garage as proposed is taller than the house. Uh they would be required if approved um by the city council to change those plans to make it shorter than the house. Okay. How about the width of the garage compared to the house? >> Believe the house would be a wider footprint. >> The house is wider. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um [clears throat] for an accessory building because an accessory building cannot be built without a principal building. Wouldn't we assume that the accessory building should be less a lot less uh than the house in terms of height and width? Commissioner, I think it would be fair to say that a accessory building in general um should be or is required to be smaller than the principal building. Um or with our specific uh garage conditions, the code just does not specify what that maximum height is or maximum size is. for um [clears throat] Thank you for the the intended use of this garage as storage and understand applicants saying that they want to do an RV if that the intent. Um I would assume that they have at least a um a drawing or driveway that leads to it. The city did not receive any drawings of a driveway. If the commission is concerned with the presence of a driveway, uh we would want to check with our city attorney's office, but we do believe that a condition could be added to require that going up to there. There were some comments regarding um Stillwater Boulevard. Um, the city code only allows for one curb cut per property and generally Washington County is pretty strict with curb cuts and wouldn't grant an access if there's already an access off of a side street. >> Are there any design standard for a garage in terms of uh um windows and door openings, you know, that kind of glazing? No. Uh the in residential districts in the city of Oakdale for single family properties there are no specific design standards there is a prohibition on pole barns. Um so at the time of building permit staff generally checks for if it would be of a poleb barn type construction. >> Okay. Um my final one is um what would the exterior finish of this structure be? Would that be comparable to what we have for the house? may need to defer to the applicant. I'm not sure if the Yeah, the the material appears to be similar based on the plans. I'm not sure of what that material is. >> Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] [snorts] >> Anyone else have questions? If the applicant wanted to plant 10 trees in that area and they grew over 30 feet, is there an issue with 10 trees being next to that barn with the solar panels on it? That garage, I should say. >> Thank you, Vice Chair. Um, generally any homeowner within the city of Oakdale would be permitted to plant trees that grow to um a mature height uh with solar panels. There aren't the city doesn't have specific standards other than setbacks which are intended to keep buildings away from each other to ensure solar access. Um we did check with our city legal um to see if it's possible to move buildings and generally if it's meeting that setback um the city would not as long as it's meeting that the in the conditional use permit is granted. We couldn't choose the position so long as it's meeting setbacks. Um, there are voluntary solar easements that some properties have where they can have a neighbor voluntarily sign over an easement that would ensure access to light. Um, we we checked and did not see one on file in this case. >> Just out of curiosity, did anyone do a calculation as to what angle from the neighbor's garage to the this would be met? that would that would indicate whether or not the panels would actually even be oluded. >> Unfortunately, chair, I don't know that staff has the software to do that. We could check with our engineering staff and see if that's a possibility. >> I'm not sure it's gerine to the issue, but it was a quest just a question they had I had. >> Okay. Anyone else have questions? Then I look for a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for an oversized accessory structure at 7684 Stillwater Way North. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> I >> I. >> Any opposed? >> No. Of me. [clears throat] one. No motion passes at this at this level. Uh and I would re reinforce that we are an advisory committee. So the decision it's not actually made by us. It's made by the city council. We merely advise about zoning issues. So moving on to the next point, a public hearing for the GACC capital 6138 highway 36 Boulevard North reszoning conditional use permit preliminary PL final plat site plan for live work units. >> So thank you chair I can take it away here. So as [clears throat] you mentioned the the address for the site 6138 highway 36 Boulevard North. So, the site is located immediately east of Eastgate Apartments and immediately west of JG Hos Construction, which is where my cursor is on the screen. Uh, some property details. This site is accessed off Upper 51st Street. It's approximately 2 and a half acres of vacant land. There are some trees on the property and the developer is requesting several land use approvals here to enable development of 12 live work units. You might be wondering what a live work unit is. And we have a definition in our zoning code. So it's a dwelling unit in combination with a shop, office, studio or related workspace within the same unit where the resident occupant both lives and works. So it's both residential and commercial element u to these units. So the uh request involves five land use approvals. So a resoning, a conditional use permit, preliminary plat, final plat and site plan. When we look at the city's comprehensive plan, uh it was amended on July 8th of this year by the city council. Uh you may recall that there was a comp plan amendment to reggu this area which we refer to as the the Glenbrook area. The reidance was from commercial to mixed use which is consistent with a neighborhood u plan that was completed a couple years ago, the Glen Brook small area plan. So the mixeduse category allows both commercial and residential uses. So taking a look at the zoning of the site. So it's currently zone B1. That's our commercial district. The proposal is to reszone that the site from B1 to the MX mixeduse zoning district. That's a brand new zoning district we rolled out earlier this year with our zoning code update. Live work units are conditionally permitted uses in the MX district. So resoning requests are evaluated primarily by two criteria. So the first one is consistency with the policies of the city's comprehensive plan and number two is the capacity of existing infrastructure and public services. So as mentioned the the comp plan the city's comprehensive plan um guides this site for mixed use. Again this category allows both commercial and residential. Also as seen on the zoning map which is on the screen there, this uh property is adjacent to both commercial and residentially zoned sites. So the subject property is served by existing infrastructure including city water and sewer lines. Uh the site is also accessible for emergency services and is located near public assets including p uh public parks, trails and schools. And with that staff finds that the resoning uh request is appropriate based on the the criteria. So, moving on to the subdivision plat. So, a little bit of history here. The property was platted way back in 1887. Uh, and it consists of multiple small lots that you can see there on the screen with the dashed lines um in the background. So, the proposal is to replplat the property into two lots. So, lot one would contain the live work units. So you see there's one building there on the east that's three units and then the uh larger building out to the west that is nine units. Um and there's also an outlot that's being platted as well. And the purpose of this outlot is to set it aside for future frontage uh a future frontage road along Highway 36. So I I mentioned briefly the the Glen Brook small area plan that neighborhood plan that was adopted back in 2023. Uh that plan identified the need for a frontage road through this area due to a lot of the commercial uses that are nearby, commercial truck traffic going through the area. So a future access um [clears throat] is also shown uh in this outlaw a area. So that it really has two purposes that it's what we like to call a hammerhead turnaround. So, uh, it will be utilized for large vehicles such as, you know, fire trucks, um, garbage trucks, snow plows, uh, to make proper maneuvers in and out of the site and and it also serves as a potential future access if there's ever a frontage road that's built on the north side there of Highway 36. Um, one of the requirements that, uh, staff is recommending is that the outlaw be covered by an easement for future rideaway purposes. So, as shown on the plat, a portion of the unimproved alley, which is on the the west side of the site, that shown in orange on the screen, that is proposed to be vacated. Um, there's a formal process that the applicant will just have to go through uh and submit a a formal application to vacate it and obtain city approval for that. [clears throat] [snorts] Because this property is adjacent to Highway 36, that is a a state highway. and the Minnesota Department of Transportation, they have an opportunity to review the plat and site plan and their review is pending at this time. So, also as part of the platting and subdivision process, the developer must comply with the city's park dedication requirements. I have a handful of slides, but I want to pause really quick and see if you have any questions at this time. >> The only question I have is in your report there is a mention of holding pond or something for the future. It's not within our jurisdiction, but I was just curious where that might be located. >> Yep. If we can go back to the image on the screen, um the proposed storm water pond would be located here in the uh kind of northeast portion of the property. And the watershed district has very robust standards for managing storm water runoff. >> Yep. >> I have a follow-up question. Yes. So, will the outlaw A will that just be a continuation of I think it's 50th Street. It would just curve up. Okay. >> Yep. That's uh the plan commissioner whenever there are plans and it's it it's really dependent on uh Minnesota DOT's improvements uh intersection improvements and u possibly closing off. There's an ex existing access that's just off the screen where my the cursor is, but um that's the idea is to extend 50th Street and make it into a frontage road when the time is right. >> Okay. >> Okay. [sighs] Keep moving along here. So, the live work unit aspect of the proposal requires a conditional use permit and is subject to seven general review criteria. Uh staff finds that all the seven criteria have been met as detailed in the staff report on file. And just to summarize those key points, the use complies with the city's comprehensive plan and zoning code is compatible with the proposed resoning to the MSMX district. It will not be detrimental to the surrounding property. It is not expected to create traffic congestion. It will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the city and it will not cause adverse environmental impacts. Additionally, there are three specific review criteria for live work units that's found in the the zoning code and those are uh no retail sales can occur on the property. Uh no commercial vehicles or equipment can be stored outside. And then finally, service or repair of motor vehicles is prohibited. So no auto body type activities, no oil changes, those types of businesses are are outright prohibited by code. So staff res recommending a few additional conditions to help minimize the impacts to the surrounding area and these include the following. So customer visits by appointment only. Uh no more than two non-resident employees. Commercial operations must be kept fully within the structures and then signage would be limited to just one sign per unit and that sign uh can be no more than 5 square ft per unit. [sighs and gasps] Uh moving on to some more site plan details. Um again the access for this property it's off Upper 51st and the fire department has reviewed the proposed private drive of that would serve the site and also the layout and the fire department finds it acceptable. However, parking cannot occur along that private street just to ensure that large vehicles can make proper maneuvers. You you you don't want fire trucks or or other large vehicles getting stuck because there's uh too narrow of a street there. So, as such, signage must be installed to prohibit parking along the the private street as well as in the uh the hammerhead turnaround here and also the trash collection area. Signage must also be installed to indicate that snow, excuse me, snow storage cannot be placed in the turnaround area or the trash collection area. Uh further the trash collection area uh must be enlarged or in other words shifted further to the east so that trash collection vehicles can make proper maneuvers in and out of the site. Moving on to parking. So each garage/workshop is shown to accommodate uh multiple vehicles including large vehicles and trailers. In addition, each live work unit will have two surface parking spaces. So the require the parking requirements of the city code have been met. I ju just want to touch on trees here and there are a few trees present on the property but without a a formal tree inventory uh we don't know the extent of significant trees. Uh so the the applicant will have to prepare a tree preservation plan that meets the zoning requirements before you know construction can occur. A preliminary landscaping plan was submitted with the application and uh that plan must be updated to include some additional plantings along those boundaries of the site that are adjacent to uh residential just to to serve as an an additional screen. It it is worth noting that there is an existing house where the cursor is on the screen uh and there's a fence there, but just to add some additional buffering uh we're recommending some some more concentrated landscaping along those borders. Moving on to site lighting. So, the city's zoning or ordinance contains certain requirements for lighting and the developer must provide a phototric plan that complies with the ordinance. I have a few more slides, but want to check in really quick, see if you have any questions. >> I have another one. Uh, so signage, can you help me understand? So, is that going to be at the entrances of the entrance of the property or is that going to be on the doors of the individual buildings? So, Commissioner, as per as proposed, the signage would be connected to each individual unit as opposed to being uh like concentrated at the entrance of the the site. >> Okay. >> There any requirement for height on a sign such as that? A height where location height >> for signage? Uh guess we haven't >> I don't recall. So, I'm just asking. >> Not chair. We don't have a height requirement for the the signage. I know on pylon ones there is there is a a requirement but I can't remember on a on a house >> there's no like monument these would be like on the door or above the garage >> yeah and just a bit of a clarification chair pylon signs would would not be permitted on on this type of property so >> okay so here are the draft floor plans so the lefth hand image shows the the garage/workshop or workspace which is approximately 1,700 square ft² and then the right-h hand image shows the living area and the finished floor area is approximately 1,400 square ft. Uh the live work units must be designed in full compliance with the city's building and fire code and specifically just want to highlight that fire suppression systems are going to be required and the workspace must be fully enclosed and segregated from the living area. Here are a couple more sample images or sample elevations. Um, these are the facads for the larger building containing nine units. And under the zoning ordinance, live work units are subject to certain exterior design standards. And the facades must consist of at least 60% class one materials. So, brick, stone, glass, those types of materials. And um just in one of the conditions of approval, you'll see that we're recommending that the developer provide additional information just so that we can verify that the the uh m class one materials requirement has been met. A few more sample elevations. So the top image shows the north elevation of the 9-unit building and then the middle and bottom images show the smaller three-unit building. And finally, this image shows a cross-section of one of the units. So, building height is proposed at 36 1/2 ft, which is under the 40 foot height requirement. Also, there are images of the trash enclosure area, [snorts] which is shown on the bottom right hand of the screen. And to conclude, so as detailed in the staff report on file, staff finds that the request complies with the city's comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance, and staff recommends approval of the resoning conditional use permit, preliminary plat, final plat, and site plan subject to conditions. So uh first I will read from the resolution that is on page 50 in the agenda packet. Bear with me. There are 11 conditions here. I'll try my best to summarize. So, number one, approval of a reszoning to the MX district. Number two, approval of a conditional use permit. Number three, execution of a development agreement. Number four, approval of the site civil construction plans. Number five, obtain any necessary approvals for vacation of property. And again, that's about the alley on the along the west side of the site. Uh, number six, include certain easements, drainage and utility easements. Number seven, recording of an easement over outlaw A for future rideaway. Number eight, satisfaction of park dedication requirements. Number nine, compliance with the city attorney's plat opinion letter and recording instructions. Number 10, um developer has to submit a tree preservation plan. And number 11 is obtain approvals from applicable outside government agencies. Moving on to the next resolution which is found on page 53 in the agenda packet. So I will not repeat the conditions that were previously mentioned. So I'll just focus on the new ones here. So jumping to number two, no retail sales can occur on site. Number three, no commercial vehicles or equipment shall be stored outside. Number four, service or repair of motor vehicles is prohibited. Number five, customer visits shall be by appointment only. Number six, each live work unit shall be limited limited to no more than two non-resident outside employees. Number seven, commercial operations have to be kept fully indoors. Number eight, signage for the units shall shall be limited to one sign of up to five square feet in size per unit. And then finally, uh the resolution that is on page 56 in the agenda packet. So just jumping to number two there, the condition of approval. Um approval of a conditional use permit. Number six, approval from the fire department for the proposed hydrant locations and fire department connections. Number seven, provide additional details on uh mechanical equipment and methods of screening. Number eight, enlarge the trash collection area to dimensions that are acceptable to the city engineer for turning movements. Number nine, developer has to submit a phototric plan. Number 10, adherence to the exterior building materials requirements of the city code. Number 11, install signage to prohibit parking along the street and the the turnaround area and the trash collection area. Number 12, install signage uh for prohibiting storage within the the turnaround area and the trash collection area. Number 13, update the the landscaping plan uh to provide additional screening elements along the the borders of the site that are adjacent to residential property. And then the plan has to be certified by a licensed architect, landscape architect. And finally, number 14, um again, it's obtain approval from outside government agencies. So, as a reminder, this is a public hearing. The applicant is here in attendance. if you have questions. I also want to acknowledge that uh staff received uh one written comment from a member of the public noting concerns about the proposal which was shared with the planning commission before this meeting. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. >> Thank you, Luke. Anyone have questions for Luke? >> Just a point of I don't know like so the there's the garage doors, but then there's actually like I guess the bay door that lifts up and that you said that the businesses they have to take place only indoors. So, I guess I just don't see why that's necessary in that case if it's all indoors. Commissioner, the idea is to just make sure that business operations are not spilling out into the streets. you know, we're not seeing large vehicles being parked outside. And um you might have someone who's like an artisan doing some type of woodwork or uh similar type of activity outdoors, making a lot of noise, making a lot of externalities. So, we're trying to contain all the the business elements within the buildings. >> Got it. >> Anyone else have questions for Luke? Okay. if the applicant would like to make a comment. >> Uh CJ Rando with Jack Capital. Uh yeah, basically we've been looking for a site that would fit this purpose uh for a while. I went to school in Bosezeman, Montana. These are uh they're like everywhere out there. uh more the reason why we wanted the business aspect is so that when we were selling these they weren't having to go to you guys and the city council every time someone wanted a variance for a business. So we asked the city if you know can we lump some uh small group of businesses in this project whether our view is like plumbers HVAC people that leave to go to work but they need you know they have a couple trucks or some trailers you know like a gutter guy or something like that most of our I don't foresee anyone like having any like business there most of the people we think are going to leave uh they live there, they have a [clears throat] bunch of stuff they, you know, can't have an another spot in uh Oakdale, but when they go to work, they load up their trailers and they can leave. Uh or we see a lot of people just with like the last applicant was here, RVs, toys, and maybe they're in Florida half the year, they're someone else somewhere else. They just need more storage and they don't need a bunch of living space. So, that's kind of our idea with this. Um but yeah, if you guys got any questions, >> sort of like a hanger home on an airport. >> Yes. Yes. Yep. Similar. >> Any other questions? The applicant. Thank you very much. Okay. I will open the public hearing again as before. Public hearing uh [snorts] limit redundancy. [clears throat] If anyone wishes to come forward to make comments, try to limit it to two or three minutes. But anyone wishing to make comment, please come forward. I open the public hearing for that. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to come forward? And for my third time, I'll ask if there's anyone in the audience who wishes to come forward. Seeing none, I close the public hearing. Anyone have uh any further questions before we go for votes? Motions, rather. >> No. >> Okay. I look for a motion to recommend approval of the reszoning for Oakdale Garage Lofts. >> So move. Second. >> All those in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I look for a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for the Oakdale garage lofts. >> So move. >> Second. >> Any opposed? I'm sorry. All those four. >> I. >> Any opposed? A motion to recommend approval of the preliminary plat for the Oakdale garage lofts. >> So move. >> Second. >> I. >> All in favor? >> I. I. >> Any opposed? >> Motion to recommend approval for the site plan for Oakdale Garage Lofts. >> Second. >> Oops. So moved. Second. >> Tom. Motion. >> Second. >> Both second. >> Thank you. >> Uh all those in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? All motions pass. Thank you very much. Uh draft 2026 planning commission work plan. >> So thank you chair. the planning commission work plan. Uh it's intended to guide the commission's work through the next year. State statute of course defines the planning commission's role quite well. Um and that we we still come up with different task and identify key priorities uh for this next year. Um but little has has changed from the 2025 work plan. Just the one item that we want to highlight is that there we expect that there will be a number of workshops for the 2050 comprehensive plan update. So that's the the uh mandatory comp plan update that we have to do every 10 years. It's um [clears throat] in in accordance with the metropolitan council's requirements. Uh so we expect you know just an uptick in in uh work for the comp plan uh not just over the year of 2026 but for really uh the next two three years. Um but if you have any questions about the the proposed work plan I'm happy to answer questions in terms of next steps. Uh staff will incorporate feedback from the planning commission into the work plan and then the work plan will be reviewed by the city council at a future date. >> Okay. Thank you. Does anyone have any questions for Luke on the work plan or suggestions? >> Not at this time. >> Okay. Uh staff liaison update. >> So, thank you. Just a couple updates on some recent development applications. So, the Oakdale Glenn site, that was the uh 32 single family homes off Stillwater Boulevard. Um, so after the planning commission meeting, if you're not aware, the developer did withdraw their request. And then, uh, another recent application, the Ninth Street Landing, that's the the five single family homes next to Platinum Bank off 10th Street. So, the city council approved the reszoning and preliminary plat back on September 23rd, and the developer will have to come back at some point and request a final plat uh, in order to proceed with their proposal. And the last thing I have is to expect a planning commission meeting in December. >> Thank you. [snorts] >> Thank you. Uh commissioner updates. Anyone have any updates they wish to make known? >> No. Seeing none, I'll go to council leaison update. >> Good evening everyone. Just a couple of quick things for you. um what the council's been up to recently. Uh we just did a little tweaking to the 2026 budget levy and budget in a good direction. So we'll be making those the uh public uh truth and taxation for and the final levy will be December 9th. So another month or so. Um, another thing I'll just mention is the uh city made a 10 thou in given the uh question about SNAP benefits uh this month the city made a $10,000 donation to Open Cupboard here in Oakdale um just to help out those that uh that may need the help. So that was a good thing. And then lastly, happy Veterans Day to and thank you to any of you and everyone who has served our country. Any questions for me? >> Great. Thank you. Thank you very much. >> Uh that brings us to adjournment. May I have a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Any second? >> Second. >> All those in favor? >> Any opposed? We are we stand ajourned.