This transcript is of a **Lakeville Planning Commission** meeting. While the names of the City Council were provided for context, the primary speakers are the Planning Commissioners and City Planning staff. Based on the context and Lakeville's public records, the "Miss Bern" referred to in the transcript is **Melissa Botton** (Senior Planner), and the board members are Commissioners **Zimmer (Chair)**, **Sweeney**, **Swanson**, **Graphos**, and **Tinsley**. [0:54] **Chair Zimmer**: Good evening. I call the uh January 15th planning commission meeting to order. Ask you to stand for the pledge of allegiance. [1:23] **Chair Zimmer**: Miss Ericson, would you please call the role? **Miss Ericson**: Tinsley? **Commissioner Tinsley**: Here. **Miss Ericson**: Graphos? **Commissioner Graphos**: Here. **Miss Ericson**: Zimmer? **Chair Zimmer**: Here. **Miss Ericson**: Sweeney? **Commissioner Sweeney**: Here. **Miss Ericson**: Swanson? **Commissioner Swanson**: Here. **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you so much. Um, approval of the minutes. Does any have changes to the December 18th minutes? [1:44] **Chair Zimmer**: And uh such a good job done uh by Miss Ericson, then we will accept those as presented. Uh fourth item on the agenda is announcements. Do we have any announcements for today, Miss Johnson? **Miss Johnson**: Thank you, Chair Zimmer. No, I do not for this evening. **Chair Zimmer**: Okay. Thank you very much. [2:02] **Chair Zimmer**: Moving right along uh to public hearings. [clears throat] If you would like to speak for one of the public hearings, please sign up at the back of the room just so we know and uh can indicate which one you want to to uh speak on. Uh the first item is the uh to uh consider the application of John Koltoff on behalf of Sarah and Steve Muman for a conditional use permit to allow the combination of accessory buildings to exceed the gross floor area of the principal structure in the RA rural Agricultural District located at 19730 Judicial Road. We're going to invite up I believe this is Mr. Koltoff? [2:49] **John Koltoff**: [laughter] Um, we're looking at building a 42 foot by 72 foot pole barn 18 ft high below the eaves um for family use um basically. Um and that's pretty much it. [laughter] **Chair Zimmer**: That's great. We will then have staff present and then if there are questions, we'll call you back up. [3:14] **John Koltoff**: Okay. **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you, Miss Botton. Looks like the computer's died again. So, you're gonna have to do it all from memory. [laughter] **Melissa Botton**: Oh, no. It came back. [laughter] Printed them just in case. [3:35] **Melissa Botton**: I just don't really know where to put this. very fickle computer system tonight. We'll see if that's the right spot. Well, the request in front of you, which hopefully you all looked at it— **Chair Zimmer**: Move the microphone a little bit. **Melissa Botton**: Oh, there now we have at least we have the picture of this but— **Chair Zimmer**: Yes, you can see this. [3:55] **Melissa Botton**: Okay. Hopefully they can zoom in a little bit in a little bit. Uh so what is— **Chair Zimmer**: So the audience can look at something as well as we go through it. **Melissa Botton**: Okay. Hopefully they can see it. The request is for a conditional use permit. [4:11] **Melissa Botton**: Okay. That way is that. So the property is located on Judicial Road on the east side. Uh it is about 11.41 acres in size and it is zoned RA which is our rural agricultural zoning district. [4:34] **Melissa Botton**: The request is for a conditional use permit to allow the gross square footage of an accessory building to exceed the square footage of the principal structure. So the applicant is proposing to construct about a 3,000 square foot detached accessory building. And then when you include the existing attached garage, the total of accessory building square footage would be about 3,792 gross square feet. And looking at Dakota County property records, the gross square footage of the house is about 3,706 square feet in size. So because the accessory buildings exceed that principal structure size, the code does allow them to do that with a conditional use permit. Um, so the proposed structure would be metal, which does comply with the zoning code requirements in the RA zoning district, and the maximum height of the building that they could go up to is 20 feet. [5:20] **Melissa Botton**: Uh the proposed building would be compatible with adjacent residential land uses and other accessory building. The location would meet and exceed accessory structure setbacks. Um and it would be located over 400 ft from the closest neighboring home. So there would be screening on the property by trees from like the north, east, and south. uh minimal screening towards the west, but the applicant is proposing to put in a privacy fence along the westerly side to help screen from the road and right-of-way. [6:01] **Melissa Botton**: The property owner has stated that the use of the building would be for their own the family's recreational purposes and just for own personal storage. It would not be used for a home occupation or storage related to a home occupation. So staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit with the six stipulations listed in your staff report and including the findings of facts that were also included in your packet. I'll stand for questions. [6:32] **Chair Zimmer**: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to speak uh on this particular item? **Melissa Botton**: And I should say I did hear from one resident that just had general questions on what the application was for, but then didn't state if they were for it or against it. **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you. [6:52] **Chair Zimmer**: Doesn't look like we have anybody interested in speaking. **Commissioner Swanson**: Madam Chair, move to close. **Chair Zimmer**: Move to close public hearing, please. **Commissioner Sweeney**: Second. **Chair Zimmer**: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I. **Commissioners**: I. **Chair Zimmer**: Opposed. The public hearing is closed. Now we have time for questions uh from commissioners for either staff or the applicant. [7:18] **Chair Zimmer**: Anybody have any questions? **Commissioner Swanson**: Madam Chair, doesn't look like anyone has questions here tonight. So maybe I'll just do the commentary. Excellent. Thank you. You know, these this—this is again a very straightforward application. We understand what you're you're doing. I think some of us are jealous of the ability to have that personal storage. But in terms of where in the city this fits everything else, this is a a reasonable proposal. I'll be affirmative [clears throat] for this one because it does meet our requirements. **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you so much. [7:52] **Commissioner Graphos**: Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to recommend the city council approval of the conditional use permit to allow the combination of accessory buildings to exceed the gross floor area of the principal structure subject to the six stipulations listed in the planning memo dated January 5, 2026 and the findings of fact. [8:11] **Commissioner Tinsley**: I'll second that. **Chair Zimmer**: We have a motion and a second. Uh, Miss Ericson, would you please take the role? **Miss Ericson**: Zimmer? **Chair Zimmer**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Sweeney? **Commissioner Sweeney**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Swanson? **Commissioner Swanson**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Tinsley? **Commissioner Tinsley**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Graphos? **Commissioner Graphos**: I. **Chair Zimmer**: There you have it. Uh Mr. Muman, it looks like a great opportunity for you to uh enjoy your property with your family. [8:40] **Chair Zimmer**: All right. The next uh item on the agenda item B, consider the application of LENNAR for uh two items. [clears throat] One, comprehensive plan amendment to reguide property from low density residential to low medium density residential. and second zoning map amendment to rezone property from RS3 single family residential district to RS2 single and two family residential district. Um it's I have a little bit more verbiage on my form. So the request includes three parcels totaling 20.06 acres and is located east of Holyoke, west of Highview and north of Heritage. And as I understand it, Mr. Steve Trosky will introduce the project. Is that correct? [9:31] **Steve Trosky**: All right. Good evening. Steve Trosky with LENNAR. We're based up in Plymouth. Do a lot of work in Lakeville. We're excited to be back. So, I'm here this evening to respectfully request your recommendation of approval for a comp plan amendment and a rezoning for a what will be a 46 single-family home new community staff presentation. I'm happy to come back up and answer any questions. Uh after approval through council, we anticipate to submit our preliminary plat for this item, I'd say within a month of the council approval. So, uh we're looking to move forward. And so with that, I will step back and say thank you. **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you. Miss Botton again gets to—Oh, no. You get to have a computer this time. **Melissa Botton**: Oh. Oh. [10:32] **Melissa Botton**: I'll put this here just in case. Maybe. Yeah. So this request is for property that is located. Um it is east of Holyoke, west of Highview and kind of north of Heritage Drive. The property it's three parcels totaling about 20.6 acres in size. All Saints is to the west on the other side of Holyoke. Uh there's town homes located to the south and then single family homes to the east and north. [11:07] **Melissa Botton**: So the request in front of you tonight is the comprehensive plan amendment to change the current designation of low-density residential which allows up to three units an acre to change that to low to medium density residential which is up to five units an acre. Uh they're also asking for a rezoning to change the zoning from RS3, which is a single family zoning district, to an RS2, which allows for single and uh or two family residential homes on that type of property. When we're looking at amendments to the comprehensive plan or to the zoning code, the zoning map, we should um only items that should be considered would be for developments that serve Lakeville's long-term goals and policies and interests. [11:52] **Melissa Botton**: Uh the proposed low to medium density land use guidance meets these goals and policies. It includes one of our thrive um kind of uh designations of providing a home and for all ages and stages of life. The proposed changes provide an appropriate transition from the town home development to the south which is a medium to high density residential into the transitioning to the single family homes to the north. Uh staff believes this is also an appropriate transition for the single family home surrounding it to the east and to the north. [12:38] **Melissa Botton**: With this request, uh sewer capacity uh study was requested by the city for the applicant to do uh because these parcels are at the end of our sewer line. Um the study did come back that showed that the proposed increase even to a higher density, the sewer lines could handle that. Um the surrounding road network has been reviewed and they are um at a design that can handle the proposed increase to what is suggested here. Um staff has heard from a number of property owners. I think I talked to five people in total. Uh some of their concerns involve the school system and if what kind of impact this could have to the school system. Uh the city has notified the school district of three different active land use changes that we have right now for comprehensive plan amendments. Two of those three are actually a decrease in density and homes that are being proposed. So even with this minimal increase, uh the overall impact to the school system is less with those three when looking at all three uh projects. [13:41] **Melissa Botton**: So the applicant has submitted as he mentioned a concept plan that would include 46 single family homes. So as mentioned at the beginning the site itself is 20 acres but when you look at the wetlands on the property and uh what would need to be protected in open space, there's about 12 net developable acres. So with those 46 homes that equals about 3.88 units an acre. Right now, this is just a concept plan. As the applicant mentioned, the next step, if the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning are approved, he would then come back for a preliminary plat. That preliminary plat is a public process where we would notify the same mailing list of the people that got notified of the rezoning and comp plan changes. And that's when we would be looking at um landscaping and buffering um and other, you know, where the wetlands are and any any kind of um the road network and lot sizes. [14:39] **Melissa Botton**: So staff is recommending approval of the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning in front of you. There was one stipulation that was included in your packet that talked about needing that met council approval. Staff is recommending that we add an additional stipulation that states that the amendments would go into effect after approval by the city council and recording of a final plat. So if for some reason the applicant would not come forward, the rezoning and comp plan amendment wouldn't just happen automatically. It would be tied to approval of a final plat. So I will stand for questions. [15:13] **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you. Thanks for that clarification too on the timing of the rezoning. Thank you. Uh this is a public hearing and uh anybody that signed up at the back of the room or didn't and you decide you want to speak, now is your opportunity. Feel free to come forward. We don't bite. Feel free to move the microphone to reach you if you need to. **Resident (Unidentified)**: I... We're just a neighbor. My parents own the property north of this and when the original announcement came out they said they were doing twin homes and there was 76 I think and now they've switched it to single family. So is our property zoned as single family for the development in the future? [16:08] **Chair Zimmer**: That would be a question for staff. Let's get a clarification on that one. Right next to it. Would you like—do you have more questions? **Resident (Unidentified)**: Well, I I don't know. I guess— **Chair Zimmer**: Usually we compile all the questions and then have staff respond. So, we can do that and you can just keep speaking. [clears throat] **Resident (Unidentified)**: I guess I just want to make sure that what they're doing it's not going to landlock us or thing to our property once it's sold to someone else that what they're doing isn't going to affect what can be done on ours. [16:54] **Chair Zimmer**: And you have this single family lot that's large next to it. **Resident (Unidentified)**: It's like four and a half acres. **Chair Zimmer**: Okay. All right. We'll get that your question answered for sure. Thank you. Thanks. Please identify yourself for the record and your address, please, sir. **Jerry Jerick**: Jerry Jerick. I live just to the north side of them. I have a little over five acres. And I have a concern that you're squeezing us out up there. You're going to have 12 acres left with this development down there. If they want to develop that down there, I feel they should buy the whole works and develop it all instead of leaving 12 acres uh leaving us in limbo in the middle of nowhere. I have a street that's a dead ended right to my back door and uh either they either they develop it all or don't develop any of it. That's my feeling. Thank you. [17:46] **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you. Please identify yourself and your address, please. **James Blair**: James Blair, 19841 High View Avenue. I'm just north of the property as well. The smaller than what they are, but uh um and my concern well we again will be landlocked and won't be we'll be surrounded you know with nothing we can do. Um, but also a concern is I know that the uh amount of traffic has been addressed, but it looks like the one street comes out right across from the church and whenever that church is letting out, traffic is a nightmare. Is traffic control being addressed or is that supposed to happen at this point in time? Because if you have people coming out there and trying to come out and the mass of traffic that comes out of the church, that's asking for problems. Especially since the housing between High View and Hamburg, they don't stop coming out now at their stop sign. So, I anticipate nothing less from this. [19:05] **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you so much. **Jessica Feist**: Jessica Feist and I'm just to the north um of the Haglands as well. We have about three and a half acres. Um we share the same concerns as the rest of our neighbors as far as being squeezed out, kind of decreasing our property value. Um We've got older homes that are now sandwiched in between bigger multifamily homes that are a little bit more appealing. Um, our other concerns are the traffic as well. Our driveway comes straight out on Highview and it especially when All Saints is in session. It's been a nightmare getting in and out. Our kids get off the bus. We've had near um accidents with them getting off the bus, people not stopping for the bus, people actually driving through our culvert to go around all of the traffic. So, those are our concerns that we would like addressed as well with this development. [20:21] **Chair Zimmer**: Excellent. Thank you so much. [cough] I feel like an auctioneer, but last call. There's no one on the phone. There isn't anyone else. Uh then it looks like we're ready for a motion to close the public hearing and then we'll get all the questions answered. **Commissioner Sweeney**: Madam Chair, I'll move to close public hearing. [20:50] **Commissioner Swanson**: Second. **Chair Zimmer**: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I. **Commissioners**: I. **Chair Zimmer**: Opposed. Public hearing is now closed. And uh I guess I'd ask Miss Botton to come up and answer some of the questions that were raised. I made a few notes. Other people might have made notes. [21:10] **Melissa Botton**: Okay. So, if we can get the map to be pulled back up here. I think a lot of the concerns were from residents that were in this area. So, to answer their questions or answer at least the one question is that property is still going to remain as it is today. It is not proposed to be changed. So guided for that low density residential and then zoned for that RS3. So those properties are not being affected by what's being requested. Um as far as the developer, you know, an all or none. Um that maybe be for those homeowners and property owners to talk to the developer or to see what that is. That would be conversation between them. [21:55] **Melissa Botton**: Um, we are looking at a development in front of us right now at that next stage with a preliminary plat. A ghost plat would be required just to kind of show how road connections could be and connecting to the single family homes to the north and to make sure that those lots are not um landlocked or undevelopable. So, that is a requirement at that next stage. Uh but if anybody is interested in selling, I'm sure the applicant would be willing to talk to them. So, but otherwise um at that next stage, we do we do kind of look at that just to make sure we don't have an large impact on those other property owners. At this time though, those lots would be guided for that single family kind of development. [22:36] **Melissa Botton**: And then as far as traffic control with All Saints, I am not a traffic engineer, so I'm going to state that up front, but my understanding is that a lot of times they like to have the access points across from one another for safety um safety concerns. You don't want to have those be separated a little bit because then you get traffic that might be like crossing each other at the wrong points. So, I know that was—that location was thought out and there on purpose. Um, hopefully, yes, I I understand how busy All Saints can be when you know, church and masses and stuff are letting out. Uh, but hopefully having them be across from each other, people will be aware of those cross path um patterns. Uh, Holyoke is planned to be reconstructed in the next few years and I know the design will be finalized um with you know development of these parcels in mind too. So I don't know what kind of changes will be at the end but I know there will be changes in the next few years for Holyoke. Hopefully that answers all the questions that were out there from the audience. [23:56] **Commissioner Sweeney**: I—how many lots are in that north section? **Melissa Botton**: Is it easy to pull or no? Six. Six. Okay. There's three small ones along like the easterly side here and then I think three larger ones. [24:14] **Commissioner Swanson**: Okay. Thank you. Um I have a question if we're done with that. Um when I drove through it and the town home have like the dead ends that come right there. Are those to be opened up or we don't know anything about that yet— **Melissa Botton**: —in the town home development to the south. Yeah, there's a plan to have the one access point kind of go down to Holyoke, but I don't think we would be opening up any other dead ends. [24:54] **Chair Zimmer**: I do know what it's like to exit All Saints at various mass times and it's difficult. So, that's certainly a traffic engineering issue for uh the next round if it makes it this far because that's not something involved with the process right now. Correct. **Commissioner Swanson**: Madam Chair, Commissioner Swanson. I think just again stepping back education wise here, this is kind of a multi-step process for the developer to work their way through this and this is merely one step in that journey. So they'll be back with a detailed plan and we'll evaluate those traffic concerns, other concerns related to [clears throat] the actual development proposal like number of units and and all that. Obviously, we have a ghost plan in front of us to kind of have an idea as as we're thinking about this, but really tonight all we're thinking about is just that land use change. Um and so whether it's this project or another one in the future, it's just considering that land use change by itself. [25:58] **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you. Thank you. I want to make a clarification for folks in the audience and for my own edification. Um, one of the speakers mentioned uh multifamily homes and maybe you could clarify uh what's proposed to be built here and uh how that process works. [26:20] **Melissa Botton**: So a multi-family home like in a town home or like an apartment would not be allowed on within this zoning proposed zoning district or proposed land use guide. What it would allow are these single family homes and then potentially it also could be a two family like a twin home but it could not be a triplex or quad or anything larger than that. So only single family or twin homes which would be allowed by the proposed zoning and land use. Um, as the applicant mentioned, the concept plan in front of you is just what they're looking at doing is the single family homes. [26:57] **Commissioner Swanson**: Quickly, and then as part of the the second step of this, the tree preservation and all that mapping will come through when they come through with the actual plan. Correct. Yep. Correct. [27:12] **Chair Zimmer**: I'd have one question for Mr. Trosky. And there obviously a level of concern here. So the folks in the neighborhood might want to have an opportunity to visit with you. But the intent is to build single family homes and that's—that's what your plan is at this point and— **Steve Trosky**: Correct. Just for a little historical background on the site. Uh when we originally put an option on the property, we were going to move forward with I think it was 71 town homes or duplexes, we did our analysis with what the Lakeville market needs. We looked at your housing study. We realized that the single family home sites here are more appropriate. So we went from 71 originally down to 46. So uh fewer homes, but definitely a different product. So our point moving forward or or what you'll see next if you recommend approval and the council approves will be 46 single family homes. [28:15] **Commissioner Swanson**: Madam Chair, another question for Mr. Trosky. I think given the discussion we just listened to, I think it's only reasonable to ask. The property to the north, does LENNAR have any interest in it and future plans for it? **Steve Trosky**: Just a question. We don't at this time. We'd like to move forward with the property that we have under contract um and keep this discussion and approval to the site that we're discussing now. Thank you. [28:54] **Chair Zimmer**: Any other comments or questions? We might we might do a little bit of a [clears throat] education piece on planning commission and what we're allowed to do. Do you want to give that speech? We could have Heather do it. **Commissioner Swanson**: I don't know that I want to give a speech. [laughter] [clears throat] We can um we approve zoning and uh different pieces. We don't—the plans come to us. We don't design the plans. Just so you know, our scope is limited in what we can and can't do and what we can approve and and what we can change. So, everything has to fit within zoning and um as Commissioner Swanson pointed out, the trees and landscaping and all those other pieces and uh traffic engineering and how the streets come up are a separate part and an additional part if this passes and moves on. [29:56] **Commissioner Sweeney**: Um I also hear the comment about um school district uh related to school capacity and all that. Obviously that is a major concern for our community. Um and you know redistricting reboundary changes and all that is all been in the news as of late and obviously many of us up here have had kids or do have kids in the school district. So we're cognizant of those issues. At the same time the school board is a separate board. They run their organization. uh the city and the school board do try to communicate with each other and provide information as to what's going on as was indicated. [30:42] **Commissioner Sweeney**: Um so this land has always been zoned for single family and it's still going to be single family just a slightly higher density based on what's being proposed. Um so from that perspective I'm still comfortable with this moving forward at this time. Um, I'll also state I also like the concept of the slightly higher density being kind of that transition zone between the multif family housing to the south as we go to the single family housing to the north into the east as well. So, kind of building that transition piece out. Those are my comments. [31:09] **Commissioner Tinsley**: Commissioner Tinsley. My only question is—is will there be a traffic study conducted after this zoning gets approved? **Melissa Botton**: At this point, staff would not be recommending one. Um, according to the information we have, the development that's proposed is not triggering any kind of need that we are seeing. All the traffic counts are way less than what those road networks are able to handle. Even at peak mass time. [laughter] [31:45] **Melissa Botton**: I don't know about the peak mass time, but looking at, you know, I can give you example like Holyoke, you know, right now it's a major collector street. So, and that's what it will be when it's redesigned, too, but it has a capacity for over 9,000 vehicles a day. Um the 2024 numbers that we have has less than 6,000 vehicles. So, I mean there's—we're not close to what the maximum capacity would be for some and that's the closest one. Heritage Drive is—there's a bigger gap from what's currently there and what it's designed for. So, at this point, staff does wouldn't require that. [32:26] **Commissioner Swanson**: Madam Chair, just to kind of add on to that too, I also heard some comments about um the future of Holyoke, um that there is improvements proposed coming up in the future. Um obviously as a planning commission, we get to see the CIP come through and take a look at what's going on in that document, which is kind of the road map as to where the city's planning on making investments in infrastructure. Um it's always kind of the chicken and the egg. Do you do the development first and then do the infrastructure improvements or do the infrastructure improvements first and then do development afterwards? So, it's kind of this give and take. [33:12] **Commissioner Swanson**: But the long story short here is I know I've been on the planning commission for over a decade. Um there's been multiple projects where we've had development projects come in where we've talked about roadways that um currently feel under capacity, need safety improvements, that type of thing, where the city has had a plan to come in in the years following and the city has followed up with that and done those projects in the years that follow. Um so the fact that it is planned for right now and all that should give some comfort that there there will be an opportunity for improvements to that roadway down the road as well. [33:41] **Chair Zimmer**: Anyone else? And at this time, we'd be ready for a motion. **Commissioner Sweeney**: Madam Chair, I'll make the motion uh to recommend the city council approval of the comprehensive plan amendment to reguide property from low density residential to low medium residential and the zoning map uh amendment to rezone property from RS3, single family residential district to RS2, single and two family residential district in the findings of fact. [34:14] **Commissioner Swanson**: Second. **Chair Zimmer**: Madam Chair, does that need to be amended based on the additional stipulation? I think so too. Commissioner Sweeney, or could you give Commissioner Sweeney some guidance, please, for his motion? **Melissa Botton**: Um, it can just be as amended. um per what Miss Botton had up on the screen for the the stipulation that was added related to um the rezoning and comp plan amendment would subject to not only city council approval but approval of the final plat for the parcels as a part of this application. [34:55] **Commissioner Sweeney**: That was a nice clarification from Miss Botton. So, I will make that uh addition to make the motion as amended. **Commissioner Swanson**: Second. **Chair Zimmer**: And the second extends. Miss Ericson, would you take the role, please? **Miss Ericson**: Zimmer? **Chair Zimmer**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Sweeney? **Commissioner Sweeney**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Swanson? **Commissioner Swanson**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Tinsley? **Commissioner Tinsley**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Graphos? **Commissioner Graphos**: I. [35:39] **Chair Zimmer**: Motion prevails. Um Mr. Trosky, this is a first step. It goes to city council next and I think it goes to city council—is written somewhere in my paper—next meeting, their next meeting. **Melissa Botton**: Yes, it would be the first meeting in February. **Chair Zimmer**: Okay. Uh that's another opportunity for folks that have concerns to weigh in uh at the city council meeting uh that will come up. All of their agendas are posted online through the City of Lakeville, same as our agendas are. So, it'll be another opportunity for you to take a look. [36:07] **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you. We have another item on the agenda. It is a conditional use permit for uh consider the application of Lakeville Soccer Association for a conditional use permit to allow a commercial recreations facility in the OP office park district located at 21300 Juniper Way. And I would invite Mr. James Beard to come forward to introduce this project. clearing the decks for us. [laughter] [36:34] **James Beard**: All right. Good evening everybody. My name is James Beard. I'm uh the finance manager for the Lakeville Soccer Club and I'm here on behalf of the organization regarding our conditional use permit application for a new indoor facility. We've operated our current facility at 21044 Heron Way for the past three years and have grown steadily at this time. As a result, [clears throat] we've outgrown the available space and have had to rent additional winter training space in Dundas, Minnesota. [37:09] **James Beard**: The proposed facility offers a larger footprint that allows us to bring training closer to home for our players and families and will also provide adequate office and storage space. Currently, our staff uses space in the pavilion at Steve Michaud, which can be inconvenient for both our staff and other community members who utilize that space. A larger office would allow us to operate more efficiently and host coach and team gatherings on site rather than renting district facilities. We believe this move supports our continued growth while improving operation and minimizing impact on shared community spaces. Thank you very much for your consideration and happy to answer any questions. [37:52] **Chair Zimmer**: Thank you so much. **Melissa Botton**: It's been busy. [laughter] Thank you chair commission members. So this request is for property located on the north side of Juniper Way. It is zoned Office Park. Um as mentioned the request in front of you is for a conditional use permit to allow commercial recreation facility in the office park district. So, Lakeville Soccer Club is proposing to use about 21,000 square feet of the recently opened uh 190,000 square foot multi-tenant building. [38:37] **Melissa Botton**: So, as the applicant mentioned, they want to use it for indoor turf and then they'll also have some office and meeting space. So, as you may recall, the property recently received another conditional use permit for an indoor recreational space for a 42,000 square foot pickle ball facility. So that use is now open. Um and there's no other current tenants in the building or that we're aware of um in the docket right now. So right now it would just be the two uses located next to each other on like the southern part of the building. [39:44] **Melissa Botton**: Vehicle traffic or vehicle parking is currently it would be mainly on the west and the north side of the building up in this area and then along the whole front end of the building. Um, when the building was first created and proposed and built, I guess there were 223 parking stalls. So, when the pickle ball facility went in, they actually reduced and eliminated some of the semi-truck parking in the back and added an additional 58 parking stalls. So, there's currently 280 parking spaces on the site. Uh, with semi-truck traffic, there's only the one access point. So they would use the same entrance as the vehicle traffic, but they go directly to around the building to the backside and should not cross paths other than that area there. [40:12] **Melissa Botton**: Um the maximum number of people that would be in the soccer facility at one time is about 56 occupants and that includes the coaches and staff that would be on site. Uh most of the participants get dropped off and picked up but there's not an actual like drop off area. So people would have to park um and then let their their student or their kid out uh and either walk them inside or just you know making sure they cross safely. And my understanding is that that's how their current setup is. So the parents and people should know how that is done. [40:57] **Melissa Botton**: Um but their main hours are nights and weekends. And so we do understand that that is the same kind of busy times that could, you know, be with the pickle ball facility as well. So parking—their peak times will overlap. So looking at the site overall, parking should not be an issue. It's just that you might not be able to park right in front of the building. People might have to park further down and then walk a little bit to get inside. [41:44] **Melissa Botton**: Um if internal traffic congestion does become a problem, the applicants have a couple different options that they can do. Uh, one, they would increase some staff presence outside just to make sure people aren't stopping and just trying to drop off right in the middle, which may cause people trying to like maneuver around unsafely, um, or, you know, people just getting angry if they're trying to get to their pickle ball appointment or something. Uh, so they would just have staff on site to help direct traffic and making sure that they're following the rules. Um, another option that they could do is that they can stagger their arrival and dismissal times of the people using the facility. So if there is a problem, those are some of the options that they have that they can try to um reduce that congestion. But staff is recommending approval of the request with the two stipulations that were listed in your staff report along with the findings and facts that were included. So stand for questions. [clears throat] [42:12] **Chair Zimmer**: This is a public hearing and uh we're happy to take anybody who wants to speak. There's only one person left. Uh about the soccer uh facility. There aren't any. Then we're looking for motion. **Commissioner Swanson**: Motion to close the public hearing. **Commissioner Sweeney**: Second. **Chair Zimmer**: We have a motion and a second. Thank you very much. Uh all those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I. **Commissioners**: I. **Chair Zimmer**: Opposed. Public hearing is now closed and we can uh open it up for questions and comments. Um, I guess Mr. Beard, ask you a couple questions since no one else was jumping at it. Um, does this mean that you're keeping the two facilities or going to one? Not that this is part of it, but just in my brain I'm trying to—are people going to get confused about where they're supposed to be and cause more traffic issues or how does that work? [42:58] **James Beard**: No. Uh, no. So, the current place we we lease at Heron Way is pretty small. So, we have some training that happens there, but because of our size, we're having to uh rent space from the Dundas dome down in in Dundas, Minnesota. **Chair Zimmer**: Far. **James Beard**: Yeah. And, you know, my son has to be down there on Tuesday at 5:30, you know, so girls get out of school at 4. You know, it's—it's a—it's a hassle to to try and get down there and the families don't like it very much. Uh that would we would—the plan would be to eliminate the need for Dundas as well as what we use at the Heron Way location and then just have to go to this—this one location. Then we also utilize the Lakeville North dome um as well. [43:38] **Chair Zimmer**: We know all about the dome, don't we? **James Beard**: I'm sure you do. Yes. **Chair Zimmer**: We dealt with that, too. So, okay. I think that's helpful for what I was thinking of in the drop off and—and maybe we'll have some crossover soccer parents playing pickleball. [43:54] **James Beard**: You know, that's—that's a popular thing. If parents want to drop their kids off and while they're there for the hour, go and play some pickleball. I'm sure they'd be more than—more than happy to do that. I myself down over at at TOA up in Burnsville, they have a golf simulator um inside. So, I've while my son's been playing soccer, I've been inside doing golf. So, I'm—I'm sure that most a lot of parents are already thinking about that. [44:15] **Chair Zimmer**: Yeah, because the landlord could put one of those in, too. And they could. Maybe we'll do it ourselves just for—Yeah. All right. Thank you. Other questions? **Commissioner Swanson**: I have a question. Uh, Mr. Beard, as far as the facility use, is it primarily or exclusively training and practice? [44:32] **James Beard**: Yes, it—it'll primarily be used training and practice. Um the there may be an opportunity to have some maybe like adult three on three, five on five tournament as it is big enough. Um we're exploring kind of all of our programming options at this time to—to see where we can drive more revenue to—to offset the cost of the facility. Um but primarily it'll be used for training and practice mostly during the winter uh the winter months. [45:01] **Commissioner Swanson**: Madam Chair, Commissioner Swanson. [clears throat] I'm—I'm certain that the soccer parents will be appreciative of having a space closer as being a hockey parent and having to go down to Shattuck-St. Mary's and Faribault from time to time. I see other hockey parents nodding their heads in agreement. It'd be very nice to have that locally. Um like you said, with time and travel and traveling in the winter in particular, all can be a bit of an adventure. [45:47] **Commissioner Swanson**: Um was just thinking um with the facility um I—I have been in a lot of these different types of facilities um with—with this type of thing um with uses that are—what's the term I want to say here—that are complementary to industrial use where the timing of use is a little bit different and that type of thing. I was a little concerned when I looked at this right off the bat with the pickleball and this being right next door to each other everything else, but when I had the perspective of how big this building is, how big the parking lot is, it's—not—to me became a non-issue. I forgot the scale of this building and how large it is. So, um, but at the end of the day, I think this is a good use. Um, I did want to ask planning staff, could you clarify a little bit, do we have caps or percentages of building that can be used for these types of uses to kind of help with some of that time of day use question? [46:32] **Melissa Botton**: So the the district does not have a cap on that. Um but the building owner itself does the L—like the—they have a maximum number of commercial recreational commercial uses that they want to rent to uh but zoning code doesn't have a cap in this district. **Commissioner Swanson**: Appreciate that clarification. Thank you. [47:01] **Commissioner Graphos**: Madam Chair. Commissioner Graphos. I as Commissioner Swanson, when I saw the the building and the size and particularly the number of loading docks in the back, um I would assume eventually there will be a mix of semi-truck and car traffic. I guess my question, Mr. Beard, is that you—you—you've anticipated that could happen and—that's part of your planning and—and—and you—you acknowledge that could happen and—and you're okay with that. **James Beard**: We acknowledge that could happen. We also acknowledge that most of that traffic will happen during the daytime hours and ours will be most primarily after 5:00 our training time. So there should be minimal. We currently uh lease a building that shares with JD Woodward and um they have quite a bit of industrial traffic in the back where most of our families drop off. Um but it has not been an issue. They are well gone for the day by the time we start showing up to—to do any training at the facility. [47:41] **Commissioner Graphos**: Well, thank you. **Chair Zimmer**: Done with the comment period. Um, is there—would someone like to make a motion? [48:10] **Commissioner Graphos**: Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion to recommend to city council approval of the conditional use permit for a commercial recreation facility subject to the two stipulations listed in the planning memo dated January 5th, 2026 and the findings of fact. **Commissioner Swanson**: Second. **Chair Zimmer**: We have a motion and a second. Would ask Miss Ericson to please take the role. **Miss Ericson**: Swanson? **Commissioner Swanson**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Sweeney? **Commissioner Sweeney**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Tinsley? **Commissioner Tinsley**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Graphos? **Commissioner Graphos**: I. **Miss Ericson**: Zimmer? **Chair Zimmer**: I. [48:36] **Chair Zimmer**: Uh the motion prevails and we look forward to uh the Lakeville Soccer Club being even more involved in Lakeville. Appreciate that. Um let's see. The next item is uh staff notices. Oh, the city council meeting um that these items are going to be held there. I knew it was somewhere in my script. Uh February 2nd. So, that's when those will be coming up. Our next planning commission meeting is set for February 5th. And do we have something you'd like to present from your uh planning manager memo? [49:05] **Melissa Botton**: No, Chair. No, Chair. Thank you. **Chair Zimmer**: Self-explanatory. Very good. Okay. With that, uh no more business in front of us. We are adjourned.