This is where we look at the more detailed applications and focus on all of their reviews, zoning, grading, utilities and then also where we grant the major entitlements. So you usually won't just get [clears throat] a preliminary plat application at this stage. you'll get any conditional use permits, comprehensive plan amendments, anything like that. So, those are the entitlements being considered tonight.

I think it'd be good to have an overall assessment of the environmental impact given the proximity to the wetlands.

So first is just the traffic planning... Second concern... the ambiguity around the LRT access... And then my third concern are just and the question already being asked of just you know a lot of deviations very close to wetland in an area that's being highly developed with everything with the extension of downtown and just really understanding what is the impact to our lakes and parks with this development.

This development is subject to regulations by the Minia Creek Wershed District. And the way the process works is Minia Creek Wershed District won't review and issue permits until the city issues preliminary plat approval... their rules provide for both water quality and volume control and rate control. So those rules protect for both flooding as well as water quality.

You're probably going to see a lot of similar information as the last item just because these two projects are in such close proximity and are going through similar approvals... So, you likely will actually not see this one again because it doesn't require resoning approval with final plat if they receive approval from council on Monday evening.

Staff feel like this would be a good example of that where it would be warranted based on the offsetting uses. We have morning users primarily with the coffee building on the west and this will be more so your lunch and evening users. So those offsetting uses should be able to satisfy the parking for this site.

When we complete our first initial review, we identify anything that doesn't meet our standards... Oftentimes, he figures out a way to make modifications to the grading in order to meet them. So, we have not had that conversation yet, but we tend to work through those things with usually four, five, six plan revisions before we get to final approvals.

I would just amplify the the point that Brian made in the staff presentation that should the use of these two facilities, the retail food building A and B change, I would like to revisit the parking because I think parking is in scarce supply.

Uh just wanted to preface this. Uh Travis did all the work on this. He wasn't able to attend and present tonight. So all the credit on all the work on this goes to him for this item and the next one. I am just here to present it.

Specifically that it shouldn't be plainly visible on sidewalks or create a safety hazard. Um they also shouldn't use any exterior lighting methods like a a lamp projecting from the building to illuminate it. It should be internally lit. Um and then the sign should be properly maintained or fixed within a reasonable amount of time. And then we aren't allowing any movement or color changes that could be distracting to drivers.

Yep. Pretty similar to the last item except this request is for upstream financial. Uh they are also proposing two internally lit illuminated commercial signs approximately 48 square feet each in size.

So with that, uh these have all the exa the same exact proposed conditions as the last item. Pretty typical for illuminated signage. We just don't want it to be a nuisance and reasonably repaired or turned off uh in a certain amount of time. And then we also want proof that this is recorded with Carver County.