[0:52] I call to order the March 6 2025 [0:55] Planning Commission meeting please join [0:57] me in the flag pledge [1:18] Miss Erikson will you please do a roll [1:21] call of [1:22] members Z here Tinsley here marovic here [1:27] Zimmer here in here [1:30] all right agenda item number three [1:32] approval of minutes um approval of the [1:35] February 20th 2025 Planning Commission [1:37] meeting minutes any [1:39] changes right and the meeting minutes [1:41] will [1:43] stand Tina any [1:46] announcements the only thing is the um [1:48] two items on the agenda um if they move [1:51] forward um tonight they'll be on the [1:53] March 17th Council [1:55] agenda all right thank you and agenda [1:59] item number five the spirit of Brandon [2:01] Farms 25th [2:05] edition [2:07] um do I have to read thing so [2:11] sorry no chair um we're just looking for [2:13] a motion to table this item until the [2:16] March 20th Planning Commission meeting [2:18] at request of the applicant okay Madame [2:21] chair yes I make a motion to table the [2:24] spirit of branch and farm 25th edition [2:26] preliminary PL PUD development stage [2:29] plan an amendment to the spirit of [2:31] branched Farm planned unit development [2:33] to the March 20th to 2025 Planning [2:37] Commission [2:38] meeting second I have a motion and a [2:41] second will you please do a roll call [2:43] Vote or roll [2:46] call Kinsley [2:49] I I Zimmer I Han I susek [2:55] I all right agenda item number six this [2:59] is a public hearing to consider the [3:00] application of isg Inc on behalf of opan [3:04] for the preliminary plot of nine [3:06] commercial lots to be known as [3:08] Marketplace at Cedar and a conditional [3:10] use permit to allow a lot without public [3:13] Street Frontage and this is a public [3:16] hearing so anyone wishing to speak on [3:17] this item please make sure that you sign [3:19] up in the back of the room and then here [3:22] we have heat to give us a brief overview [3:26] of the project [3:32] good evening Pete Carbono uh op [3:33] Investment Company I'm here with our [3:37] engineer with isg um to answer any [3:39] questions about the project or any [3:40] technical questions about the plat as [3:41] well okay thank [3:50] you good evening Madam chair members of [3:52] the Planning Commission my name is Dan [3:54] lick I'm the city's planning consultant [3:56] with the planning company uh working [3:58] with uh community development director [4:00] goodroad and planning manager Jensen on [4:02] this application along with other City [4:04] staff uh this is the marketplace at [4:07] Cedar uh preliminary plat as the uh [4:10] chair read uh there's also the [4:11] conditional use permit uh for a lot [4:13] without public Street Frontage and then [4:15] as you'll see on the plat they're using [4:17] shared internal access to access [4:19] adjacent uh public streets property is [4:22] located at the southeast corner of 179th [4:26] Street County Road 9 and Cedar Avenue [4:28] County Road 23 [4:30] adjacent to the property to the north is [4:32] the crossroads commercial development uh [4:34] to the east is the Cordelia Town Homes [4:37] to the South is the Edison at avalene [4:39] Avan Lee multiple family development as [4:42] well as the parking ride facility and to [4:44] the west across Cedar avenu is the [4:46] central maintenance facility the city's [4:49] 2018 or excuse me 2040 comprehensive [4:52] plan guides the property for corridor [4:54] mixed use development uh this land use [4:56] was designated to provide for a [4:58] combination of commercial retail service [5:01] and office type uses together with [5:03] multiple family housing in a compact [5:05] Urban form that supports uh future [5:08] Transit service along the Cedar Avenue [5:10] Corridor uh so there's unique [5:12] performance standards that go with this [5:14] development as well as uh a range of [5:17] uses Allowed by uh the zoning ordinance [5:20] and corresponding to the land use [5:21] designation the property is zoned uh [5:24] mixed use Cedar Avenue Corridor 2 [5:28] District what's for the Planning [5:30] Commission at this point is a [5:31] preliminary plat subdividing the [5:33] property uh into nine commercial Lots as [5:36] well as uh four out lots for excuse me [5:39] five out Lots three of which are for [5:42] storm water purposes and then two out [5:44] lots for future development uh the [5:46] commercial Lots being platted all comply [5:48] with the requirements of the M2 District [5:50] in terms of minimum lot area and width [5:52] uh the exception being Lot 8 does not [5:54] have Frontage to a public Street as [5:56] required by the zoning ordinance uh [5:58] that's allowed to occur by conditional [6:00] use permit the main thing the city is [6:02] looking for there is that there's [6:04] adequate uh provision put in place [6:06] through Ingress egress easements and [6:08] shared access uh to allow that lot to be [6:11] accessed from uh the adjacent public [6:13] streets this is a common arrangement in [6:15] this type of commercial development and [6:17] certainly uh appropriate for uh the form [6:20] of development sought within the M2 [6:21] zoning District each of the Lots has the [6:24] ability to accommodate a principal use [6:25] in compliance with required setbacks uh [6:28] the plat also provides for dedication of [6:30] RightWay uh for future expansion of [6:33] Cedar Avenue along the west side uh as [6:35] well as internal RightWay for gland Shaw [6:38] Avenue within the plat itself uh the [6:40] plat provides for uh review by Dakota [6:44] County as part of the County Road system [6:46] adjacent to the property and you have [6:48] their approval letter included as part [6:50] of the report this evening plat provides [6:52] for dedication of easements at the [6:54] perimeter of each lot as well as over [6:56] any storm water facilities or internal [6:58] utilities that serve each of the Lots [7:00] with sanitary sewer and water service as [7:03] I mentioned there are the five outlots [7:05] three of which uh storm water basins [7:07] Outlets a b and c uh A and B will be [7:11] privately maintained uh by the developer [7:14] as through documents establishing cross [7:18] ownership and maintenance of those uh [7:20] outlot c will be deeded to the city as [7:22] it handles runoff from the public [7:24] streets uh outlots C or D and E are for [7:28] again for future development likely [7:30] multiple family housing or uh commercial [7:33] development as allowed within the M2 [7:35] zoning District park dedication [7:37] requirements apply to subdivision of the [7:39] property those are established within [7:40] the subdivision ordinance basically look [7:43] at the uh 2015 Parks uh trails and open [7:46] space plan and determine if there's a [7:48] need for public park land in the area [7:50] none is guided for this property so the [7:52] developer will satisfy those [7:54] requirements by payment of a cash fee in [7:56] Le of land uh that is uh completed at [7:58] the time of fin plat [8:00] approval so the developers provided a [8:03] site plan illustrating uh the potential [8:05] buildout of each of the Lots within the [8:07] development uh the uses that are shown [8:10] are illustrative at this point and would [8:12] be subject to Future application for [8:13] site plan review as well as potential [8:16] conditional use permit applications what [8:18] they are showing does comply with the [8:20] uses allowed within the M2 zoning [8:22] District uh We've highlighted the shared [8:24] internal private driveway that has [8:26] access off of 179th Street and the North [8:29] leg of this intersection of glanda [8:31] Avenue uh to provide access to each of [8:33] the Lots within the development that [8:35] would also be overlaid by Ingress egress [8:38] easement uh providing for shared [8:40] maintenance and ownership of that and [8:42] allowing access to each of the Lots uh [8:44] within the development one of the [8:46] cornerstones of the M2 district is uh [8:48] provision of pedestrian access again [8:50] reflecting that more compact Urban form [8:52] that sought there are existing Trails [8:55] adjacent to the property on the west [8:56] north and east sides of the development [8:59] there will be sidewalk on at least one [9:01] side of gland Shaw Avenue uh accessing [9:03] the property and then the site plan [9:05] illustrates sidewalks connecting to [9:07] those public ways to each of the [9:09] principal buildings uh those will be [9:11] reviewed those internal connections will [9:13] be reviewed as each site plan progresses [9:15] forward uh to ensure that those [9:17] connections are made uh signage within [9:19] the M2 district is limited uh each [9:22] individual use is not allowed a [9:24] freestanding sign again reflecting the [9:26] desired development character they are [9:28] allowed one [9:29] freestanding uh area identification sign [9:32] that can identify the entire development [9:34] and specific uses within that and that's [9:36] shown on the site plan they are showing [9:39] initial Landscaping that would be [9:40] required as part of the screening [9:42] requirements of the zoning ordinance for [9:44] development of the uses on the West Side [9:47] uh or excuse me east side of the [9:48] development uh to screen the uses across [9:51] placea your way uh from uh the [9:54] commercial activity within the site uh [9:57] positive that that's being installed now [9:58] because it will give it a chance to [10:00] become established and uh form a more [10:03] effective screening going forward as [10:05] each of the sites are developed then I [10:08] again talked about the uh storm water [10:10] basins that will be subject to a storm [10:12] water maintenance agreement as part of [10:14] the final plat [10:15] application engineering provided a [10:18] memorandum uh outlining in their review [10:20] of the application including utilities [10:22] grading and drainage erosion control [10:24] wetlands and overall storm water [10:26] management uh they're also noted a [10:28] specialist assessment related to uh [10:30] Glacier way that needs to be satisfied [10:32] as a condition of final plat approval as [10:34] well engineering is recommending [10:36] approval of the request City staff's [10:39] overall recommendation for the [10:40] applications is that the uses and the [10:42] subdivision of the property is [10:44] consistent with the recommendations of [10:45] the comprehensive plan for future land [10:47] use the plat complies with the [10:49] requirements of the zoning ordinance and [10:50] subdivision ordinance and we've also [10:52] prepared findings a fact for [10:54] consideration by the Planning Commission [10:56] related to the conditional use permit [10:58] our recommendation for approval is [10:59] subject to the 15 conditions we outlined [11:01] in the planning report from February [11:05] 26 thank [11:07] you this is a public hearing so anyone [11:10] wishing to speak on this agenda item can [11:12] please come [11:24] forward my name is Diane Cunningham and [11:26] I'm a resident of the Cordelia and this [11:29] plan is right across from me so I'm a [11:31] little concerned about what it's going [11:33] to be um can you outlay or tell us what [11:38] kind of commercial buildings would be in [11:40] this [11:42] site yeah we'll take all of your [11:45] questions and then once the public [11:46] hearing is closed then they'll answer [11:48] okay and then the second uh question [11:50] would be um would all what is the access [11:54] to I'm trying to follow everything that [11:56] was said but what is the access going to [11:59] be be to this development I you know [12:01] there's a lot of traffic already on [12:03] Glacier so I'm just concerned about that [12:07] those are my two questions okay thank [12:20] you uh Madam chair seeing no other folks [12:23] coming forward I would move to close the [12:25] public hearing second I have a motion [12:28] and a second all those in favor of [12:30] closing the public hearing please [12:31] signify by saying I I I Clos all right [12:35] the public hearing is now closed um so [12:38] the first question if you could share [12:40] potentially with what will be in the [12:46] development thank you um we're working [12:48] with CBRE as our Brokers on this so [12:51] they're uh looking across you know the [12:53] country for users that want to come to [12:55] the space right now um we are working [12:57] with um a bank a grocer um a coffee a [13:02] dental use um an oil change and a car [13:06] wash and a daycare um and there's still [13:08] room for uh two more users at the site [13:11] as [13:12] well and with regards to the traffic um [13:15] we are completing and will be submitting [13:18] um the required traffic study by [13:20] County okay um could we bring up the [13:24] where it shows the access to the [13:27] location [13:30] could we ask Mr was it carbona could you [13:33] give that list again it was rather quick [13:35] I want to make sure uh we had a all had [13:38] a chance to write them [13:40] down absolutely uh apologies for talking [13:43] fast um we're working with a A Bank a [13:46] coffee shop a dental user um a quick [13:50] service restaurant a oil change a car [13:53] wash a daycare and a grocer [14:00] also one other quick question why you [14:01] there those are all single story correct [14:07] correct thank you madam chair so the [14:11] site has two accesses to public streets [14:14] uh the first being is a right in off [14:16] 179th Street uh so people will not be [14:19] able to exit the site to 179th street [14:22] it's very similar to the Argon Village [14:24] access near Wendy's um the plat also [14:27] provides for construction of glanda way [14:30] um off of Glacier way which leads into [14:34] the second access to this development so [14:37] all the traffic exiting the development [14:39] needs to go south on glanda or east on [14:43] glanda out to Glacier way to be able to [14:45] access Glacier way has been constructed [14:48] as a minor or as a collector street it's [14:50] intended to accommodate traffic both [14:52] from the adjacent residential uses as [14:54] well as this U mixed use development [14:57] going forward [15:00] thank [15:03] you uh fellow Commissioners any [15:07] questions Adam chair I just have an [15:10] additional question so if you are [15:12] traveling [15:14] westbound on the North side there you [15:16] cannot take a left into there then right [15:20] correct okay thank [15:25] you I do have one question I'm not sure [15:29] sure if it was said quite loud enough [15:31] but um are they all on story buildings [15:35] each of these buildings is likely to be [15:36] one [15:38] story obviously that'll be something [15:40] that's presented at the time uh each [15:43] site is identified as a [15:46] user do we have any drive-throughs where [15:48] we have to stack them up with two lanes [15:51] potentially the uh uses in the center [15:54] the two Quick Serve restaurants that are [15:55] shown uh those would obviously require [15:58] conditional use permits and would be [16:00] back before the Planning [16:08] Commission any other comments or [16:15] questions think we're ready for a motion [16:17] then uh Madam chair I'd make a motion to [16:20] recommend to city council approval of [16:21] the marketplace at Cedar preliminary [16:24] plat and conditional use permit to allow [16:28] a lotch without out public Street [16:29] Frontage subject to the 15 stipulations [16:32] listed in the February 26 2025 planning [16:36] report second all right I have a motion [16:39] in a second will you please take a roll [16:43] call morovich I Zimmer I an i zuuk i [16:49] Tinsley [16:50] I all right uh best of luck on your [16:54] project thank you uh agenda item number [16:57] seven city of bill this is a public [16:59] hearing to consider amendments to Title [17:01] 11 chapter 23 zoning signs and signs of [17:05] the city code Madam chair um so this [17:09] item comes to the Planning Commission as [17:11] a response and followup to a variance [17:14] application that you previously [17:15] considered for uh allowing additional [17:18] sign wall signage for a medical clinic [17:20] uh the Planning Commission generally [17:22] didn't wasn't supportive of the variance [17:24] approach um obviously when you're [17:26] looking at the criteria for variance [17:28] needing to related to natural conditions [17:30] of the property it's difficult to find [17:33] justification to approve a variance in [17:34] that situation however what the Planning [17:37] Commission was supportive of was looking [17:39] at um alternatives to the current [17:41] language within the ordinance now sign [17:44] ordinances are adopted basically for two [17:46] purposes uh mainly to eliminate visual [17:50] pollution [17:52] example um second and the purpose for [17:55] that is to avoid visual distraction for [17:58] motorists on adjacent roadways and [18:01] enhance business identification make it [18:03] easy to find what you're looking for uh [18:06] might be hard to find that muffler shop [18:08] on that street there um otherwise the [18:10] other thing it does is provide for [18:12] visual Aesthetics uh desired by the [18:14] community so when we're looking at the [18:16] number of wall sign or the wall sign [18:18] regulations in the current zoning [18:19] ordinance there's two areas of [18:22] Regulation that we're focused on [18:23] possible amending uh first is the number [18:26] of signs allowed uh currently the zoning [18:29] allows you one wall sign or two if you [18:31] have a corner through lot and second the [18:33] location where those signs are zoning [18:35] ordinance currently says the sign needs [18:37] to face a public Street um so are there [18:40] options to look at that staying within [18:42] the intent of the ordinance to U make [18:45] modification give flexibility to [18:47] businesses looking to uh locate within [18:50] uh Lakeville and identify themselves um [18:53] and then move forward with that now [18:56] obviously what you have in your packet [18:57] is a lot more more language than just [19:00] that uh we kind of took a step back from [19:02] this entire section and tried to write [19:04] it uh more clearly so that it's easier [19:07] to find information and easier for [19:09] people to uh understand just looking at [19:11] it online versus needing to contact City [19:14] staff so as I said the current uh [19:16] allowances are for interior Lots one [19:18] sign facing the public street corner or [19:21] through Lots get two signs uh then [19:23] there's limits by District so uh as the [19:26] intensity of the district moves higher [19:29] the more signage is allowed uh over time [19:31] the city also made a number of [19:33] amendments to the sign ordinance [19:34] regulations to accommodate more signage [19:37] for larger users like grocery stores or [19:40] industrial buildings of certain sizes um [19:42] we basically carried that language [19:44] forward um or the allowances forward in [19:47] the same form same area U but tried to [19:50] streamline the language somewhat so what [19:53] we're proposing here is to not limit the [19:56] number of signs basically allow the same [19:58] area and let the business decide how [20:00] best they need to allocate that for [20:02] their purposes uh also to allow [20:04] flexibility that these signs could be [20:06] located on any wall that they choose [20:08] provided it doesn't face a residential [20:09] district I think if you drive down [20:11] Kenwood Trail you can see how certain [20:14] businesses as you're driving the [20:15] corridor if they had a side facing sign [20:18] they'd be as visible as the front-facing [20:20] sign so this gives a little additional [20:23] flexibility looking at the Midwest ENT [20:25] example uh that you previously looked at [20:28] the zoning ordinance would allow [20:30] currently the two signs in green the [20:32] address sign and the central [20:33] identification sign and none of the [20:36] additional uh signs that were proposed [20:38] to help identify what other professions [20:41] are in that same Clinic uh to provide [20:43] greater identification to potential [20:46] users the ordinance as proposed would [20:48] allow the signs as originally proposed [20:51] by the business uh again they would also [20:54] because this is a corner lot be allowed [20:56] to sign or signs on the east side of [20:58] their building as well U but for [21:01] Illustrated purposes this accomplishes [21:03] the same outcome as the variants would [21:05] have but applies that same flexibility [21:07] broadly across all commercial and [21:10] Industrial zoning districts within the [21:12] city so City staff is recommending [21:15] approval of the ordinance as presented [21:17] uh we're improving uh business [21:19] identification uh benefiting those uh [21:21] Property Owners within the city [21:23] providing greater flexibility in [21:25] applying the ordinance to these [21:27] properties we're still maintaining Ming [21:28] the same limit on the total area of [21:30] signs within the city so we feel that's [21:33] consistent with the intent of the sign [21:35] regulations to uh avoid visual [21:37] distraction and maintain Community [21:38] Aesthetics and again uh the intent to [21:41] make the ordinance easier for people to [21:43] use uh for their signage uh purposes so [21:47] again the recommendation is for approval [21:49] of the application or [21:51] amendments thank [21:53] you and this is a public hearing so [21:55] anyone wishing to speak on this agenda [21:57] item can please come forward [22:07] Madam chair yes I make a motion to close [22:09] the public [22:10] hearing second I have a motion in a [22:13] second all those in favor of closing the [22:14] public hearing please signify by saying [22:16] I I all opposed all right the public [22:19] hearing is now [22:22] closed um oh [22:25] Commissioners questions comments my only [22:28] question Madam chair uh when we talked [22:31] about it so you're saying that signage [22:33] for the the Midwest EMT the [22:36] example if we didn't allow all those [22:39] extra signs would their Midwest ENT sign [22:42] be able to be [22:43] bigger more font okay all right just [22:46] wanted to be clear yeah Madam chair they [22:49] would have been allowed 150 square feet [22:51] of sign yeah thank you I remember when [22:54] they were here they had kind of said [22:55] they could take all of them and put it [22:57] in one big one but do appreciate the the [23:00] change to it because I think [23:02] aesthetically like this is much better [23:04] than if they would have like put it all [23:05] in one giant [23:07] sign so I think I think it's [23:10] great then Mr like as far as you know [23:14] not limiting having an unlimited number [23:16] of signs is really limited by the space [23:19] correct Perfect The Madam chair the um [23:23] user will have to balance how small they [23:26] can make the signs by the number number [23:28] so it's again gives them the flexibility [23:31] to [23:33] determine thank [23:42] you madam chair I make a motion to [23:46] recommend to the city council approval [23:48] of the proposed amendment to section 11 [23:52] 23-9 of the zoning ordinance of the city [23:56] code second I have a motion in a second [23:59] you please take a roll [24:02] call simmer i m hi hi Kinsley or [24:11] roage all right that is our last agenda [24:14] item so with that the meeting is aded [24:43] [Music]