Good evening. I'd like to call the April 16th Planning Commission to order. Uh, I'd like to have you stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance. Sorry. Thank you so much. Uh, is there someone who can please call the roll? Travis? Here. Kaluza? Here. Zimmer? Here. Eink? Here. Swaney? Here. Swanson? Here. Next on the agenda is the March 19th Planning Commission meeting minutes. Do we have any changes? We will let them stand >> [clears throat] >> as prepared. Uh, next item is announcements. I'm not sure if we have any announcements, Ms. Jensen? Uh, thank you, Chair Zimmer. Yes, uh, before you you should have the motions from the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Committee from last evening as they reviewed the Haven at Lake Marion Preliminary Plat. And that's all my announcements for this evening. Thank you. Uh, the next item on the agenda is public hearing. If you would like to speak, please sign up at the back of the room. And, um, the first item, uh, 5A, Haven at Lake Marion for Progressive LLC. This is a public hearing to consider the application of Progressive LLC for a preliminary plat of fi- excuse me, a 51 detached townhomes and twin homes to be known as Haven at Lake Marion in conjunction with the following applications that were tabled at our March 19th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. One, comprehensive land use amendment to regu- reguide property from low-density residential and medium-density residential to low/medium density residential. Two, zoning map and amendment to rezone property from RS3 single-family residential district and RM1 medium-density residential district to RST2 single and two-family residential district. And the third, conditional use permit for a planned shoreland development within the shoreland overlay district of Lake Marion. And lucky enough, a fourth, vacation of a public right-of-way. Um, we first will have our, uh, applicant come forward and give us a presentation, Mr. Steve Sauber. Could I identify yourself for the record, please? Good evening, Planning Commission. My name is Steve Sauber. I'm with Country Joe Homes and Progressive LLC. I'm here tonight to, obviously our applications for the Haven at Lake Marion development. This development is or what I've brought forth tonight is just a couple of our renderings showcasing what we're going to be bringing into this community. We're going to have a combination of villa homes and twin homes. There's going to be two builders in here, Country Joe Homes and Bell Park Homes. Um, the villa plans are going to, you know, incorporate stone, hardboard siding. They're all going to have foundations. There's a combinations of full basements, lookouts, walkouts, um, open Same thing with the twin homes, we have, you know, foundations in all of them. They're going to have two and three-bedroom options. We have a two-story option, main level master options. So, we're excited about the development and what we can bring to the community with it. So, I'm here for questions and, uh, Pioneer Engineering is here as well in case you have any questions for them. Great. Thank you so much. And now we will have a presentation from Mr. Lecht. Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the Planning Commission. Daniel Lecht with the Planning Company. I assist the, uh, city staff in review of development applications from time to time and pleased to be here tonight. Uh, if we want to switch to the other PowerPoint or is it on this one? Okay. There we go. All right. So, the property location that we're dealing with with this application is 21 acres located southwest of Kenwood Trail, which is County State Aid Highway 50 and I Pava Avenue. Uh, it's adjacent to the east shoreline of Lake Marion on a portion of the property. Surrounding it are single-family homes to the west and southwest. Uh, Antlers Park is across the street from, uh, the subject property and then, uh, east of I Pava Avenue is a property that's undeveloped and guided for office park uses by the comprehensive plan. To the north, you have, uh, the railroad right-of-way and Kenwood Trail, which creates separation from any of the uses on the north side of the roadway. Uh, the applications, as the chair read off in announcing the public hearing, each of these requires a public hearing, uh, which is the purpose of the meeting tonight. Uh, pre- proceeding the public hearing was a neighborhood meeting held by the developer on December 10th of 2025. As the chair indicated, the meeting was originally noticed, the public hearing was originally noticed for March 19th. Uh, the developer requested an extension to tonight to allow some adjustments to the plat realizing that the Planning Commission and City Council had made changes to setback requirements, uh, for, uh, detached townhomes and two home two-unit buildings. Uh, they allowed them to incorporate one additional unit thus altering the preliminary plat that had been previously noted. Uh, specific to the preliminary plat that's before the Planning Commission tonight, the, uh, proposed development consists of 11 detached townhomes, uh, which are effectively single-family dwellings, and 40 twin home units. Uh, the first application that needs to be considered is the amendment of the 2040 Land Use Plan, which guides the anticipated development of the site. Uh, this has been in place essentially since the 2008 Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Uh, per agreement with the property owner regarding acquisition of, uh, land for Antlers Park, no changes were contemplated in 2018 as part of the Comprehensive Plan update essentially freezing this in place. So, the range of land uses that could be developed on the property under the current guidance include, uh, row townhomes, the detached townhomes and twin family units, and then single-family dwellings basically extending north of the existing development. What the developer is proposing is to change the land use to one single category of, uh, low to medium-density residential development to allow for the proposed, uh, detached townhomes and two-family units. Um, overall, we didn't do a direct comparison of the number of units could be developed pre- uh, change to the plan, but in terms of the character of land uses that are available and the type of dwelling units, uh, it's a much less intense development, which also, uh, is evident in the analysis that was done as part of the shoreland overlay district. Accompanying the amendment to the land use plan would be changes to the zoning map, uh, which reflect the land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan, basically changing from the three existing zoning districts to the RST2, which is residential single and two-family district allowing the detached townhomes and two-family units. So, uh, the report that you have from our office evaluating the preliminary plat is based on those RST2 district standards. Uh, the property is also within the shoreland overlay district of Lake Marion, which applies to all property within 1,000 ft of the lake, uh, shore. The analysis that's done as part of this is those standards are designed to limit the intensity of development within that 1,000 ft area and move development away from the shoreline itself so that if you're sitting in a boat on the lake, you're not necessarily perceiving, uh, intensive land use or development. So, the analysis that's completed in order to allow for the detached townhomes and two-family units is based on the lot standards and density for single-family units. Essentially, what's proposed can't be more intensive than if the property was was developed with single-family homes. One of the primary requirements of that is that there needs to be at least 50% open space within the property. Uh, the what's required is 8.7 acres, 9 and 1/2 acres are proposed. And that's achieved not only through outlots, uh, preserving the existing wetlands, uh, but also the open space yards between all of the buildings. Uh, the result of that analysis completed by the developers is that under the shoreland rules, uh, 90 homes could be developed within the subject property. And again, they're proposing 51. So, the preliminary plat itself proposes again the, uh, 11 detached townhomes and 40 twin home units. Uh, the zoning ordinance requires that within the RST2 district, those uses are required to provide 5,000 sq ft of lot area per unit. Proposed plat has uh, 8,700 square feet of lot area per unit, meaning there's more land there than there would be otherwise required by the zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance also establishes specific setback requirements both from public rights-of-way and between buildings. These were recently amended by the planning commission and city council to be more reflective of the type of development and allow somewhat tighter, more compact development pattern for this. The one additional setback that applies is Iapava Avenue is designated as a major collector street, so there's a 50-ft setback required from that right-of-way to accommodate a residential buffer yard. Streets accessing the property include the primary access being from Iapava Avenue, again a major collector street, which is designed to collect traffic from this neighborhood and carry it out to Kenwood Trail and to destinations either within the city or regionally. The connection is off of 201st Street and then the plat itself provides for construction of Itasca Lane as the primary access for the detached townhomes and twin home units off of 201st Street and then connecting to the north corner of the plat to an existing roadway. There's also the um construction of a permanent cul-de-sac at the terminus of Italy Avenue. None of the detached townhomes or single twin homes access off of that. It would only be used to access potential development of Outlot A if that's brought forward in the future. The sidewalk along Itasca Lane includes a sidewalk as consistent with the city's subdivision ordinance standards. Outlot A is the portion of the property that may be potentially developable adjacent to the shore of Lake Marion. Parts of that property are within the flood plain and require further analysis to show that there's adequate buildable area within the lot to accommodate a single family home. So for the purposes of the plat, they've shown it as an outlot, meaning it needs to come back for preliminary plat approval in the future, again involving additional public hearings. That site is also being kept as RS3 single family zoning district, so the only potential development of that lot would be as one single family home. You have the recommendations from the parks resources and natural resources committee as part of your packet. There aren't obviously the need to develop a park facility in this area with Antlers Park directly across the street, so the developer would pay a cash fee in lieu of land for park dedication at the time of final plat approval. The developer provided a both a tree preservation plan based on the ordinance adopted by the city within the zoning ordinance to inventory and preserve significant trees within the site. The city forester reviewed that and finds it complies with the requirements established by the city. They also provided a landscape plan for the RST-2 district, there's a specific uh criteria for establishing the landscape tying the value of the improvements to the quantity of landscaping. In addition to those landscaping requirements, there is again the buffer yard requirement along the lots abutting Iapava Avenue to provide screening from traffic on that roadway. The forester again reviewed the landscape plan, finds all the materials to be appropriate. They did recommend planting additional trees behind the homes on the southern cul-de-sac to provide additional screening between the proposed homes and those existing off of Italy Avenue. The engineering division completed their review of the construction plans for the proposed development addressing connection to sanitary sewer and water utilities as the property is within the municipal urban service area. They've also addressed stormwater management in terms of grading, drainage, and erosion control. There's also significant wetlands within the site that are protected both by buffers required by the zoning ordinance at the perimeter of those wetlands. The wetlands are included within two outlots that will be deeded to the city for perpetual maintenance. City staff's review of the application is that the amendment of the comprehensive plan is consistent with the housing policies outlined therein. We also find that the proposed preliminary plat complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance. We have provided findings of fact for consideration by the planning commission pertaining to the comprehensive plan and zoning map amendment as well as the shoreland development conditional use permit. Our recommendations for approval are subject to the 12 stipulations outlined in our report of April 8th. Excellent. Thank you so much. Um this is a public hearing and I believe there were some people that signed up. We are going to ask you to keep your comments brief and to the issue at hand. And not sure if there's a list. Nope. Good. All right, is there anyone that wishes to speak? Please come forward and then give us your name and address, that would be great. And you probably, yes, need to pull that down. Hi, I'm Jill Lawrence, 9715 201st Street West. Um and my biggest concern is this is which I haven't heard or you addressed is um how they will handle parking. Our neighborhood, 201st and Italy, has extensive signage of no parking or residential parking only. Um this will be a real attractive area for overflow. So um I I do think that is something that needs to be addressed in the plan. Um and you know, if that is also going to be signed no parking, I'm not quite sure then that the houses have enough parking for their own guests. Um that was my only real concern with the project. Um My husband and I are for the project. We are been very impressed with our interactions with the builder and um so we are basically here to just lend our support and say, you know, change is hard, but um I think we've got good neighbors in the builder, so. Thank you so much. I know that staff is noting the questions and will address that. There is another person listed to speak, Bob Erickson. If you could come forward, please then give us your name. Good evening. Uh Bob Erickson, 19081 Glendale Drive. Thank you for this opportunity. Chair Zimmer and members of the planning commission. Um first and foremost, I just want to uh thank Dan Lick for uh his report and I want to acknowledge the quality work uh by the developer and Pioneer with the exhibits A through P. Um in that regard, I just have a couple of quick questions that I'm sure Dan can respond to. Uh and I compliment the planning commission on the work they did on the new tree preservation ordinance. Thank you for that. Um tree preservation exhibit N and uh the tree planting exhibit M uh references irrigation by others, which prompted me to ask this question. Are there going to be HOAs governing this development? If so, it wasn't referenced that I in the report. Um the legacy that George Warwick left the community was his planting of Ponderosa pines 50 years ago. 50 years ago he planted those Ponderosa pines and they have a life expectancy of 300 years. So I've been pleased to the best of my ability uh it was a micro version exhibit, but I increased it several hundred percent and it appears that the it appears that the Ponderosa pines are I just like a response to that if that's possible. Um I'm assuming that we don't have an ordinance requiring guest parking cuz there's no guest parking provided and I was uh somewhat surprised historically um there's been guest parking in similar developments, but um I'm sure Dan can address that matter. Um it was hard with micro versions of the exhibits, which are all very well done, to determine sidewalks. I think it showed sidewalks, but it wasn't very very clear. Now, the last and most important issue is, in my opinion, is the intersection of Iapava and 201st. And the reason I think that's significant is I believe there's a likelihood that there'll be a matched road coming from the Warwick property on the east to align with this. If that's true and that's possible, I was wondering why there wouldn't I know the road is brand new, by the way. I'm well aware of that, but I was hoping that there might be a demonstrated design from Itasca to Apava showing that maybe there would be a three-lane in a three-lane portion to provide ingress and egress considering the 51 new units on this side of Apava and then the unknown on the on the east side as well. And when the as as a neighbor who's not able to be here because of a track meet responsibility, um he just wanted me to mention that the um when that traffic signal turns green he wanted me to say this that um traffic volumes mornings, afternoons can and with the park now can be challenging. So, again, I thought there might have been three lanes ingress, egress, and maybe a turn lane scenario only in the context of what might happen in the future. And I thank you for this opportunity. Thank you. Thank you so much. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? I don't have anyone else signed up. There's no one else. I think we Ready for a motion? Madam Chair, seeing no one else come forward, I move to close the public hearing. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed? Same sign. Opposed. Mr. Lickt, we can have you answer some questions and we can also have the developer answer. Madam Chair, um so first with regards to the parking issue, it is noted in the planning report that city staff is aware of the need to evaluate the capacity for parking on Itasca Avenue and the uh Italy Avenue as well. Um we expect that city staff will continue to work with the developer on a signage plan, parking plan for those streets as it moves forward to final plat. Uh parking restrictions are approved by resolution of the city council. Um so that would occur concurrently with the action on a final plat requirement or request. Um with respect to guest parking within the RST 2 district, uh the city doesn't require dedicated off-site parking or off-street parking. Uh we've changed the approach to this to uh be more accommodating to uh more dense housing types that are accessed off public streets, uh recognizing that there is opportunity to park on those streets uh to some extent based on the city's design standards for those roadways. Uh sidewalks for uh the development would be provided on Itasca Lane on the west side of the road and south side, so directly adjacent to the homes, uh which also then allows for maintenance uh because if it was on the east side, obviously you're running along the right-of-way adjacent to the railroad with no adjacent property owner. Uh the zoning ordinance does require a homeowners association for the development based on the uh configuration of the homes where the owner will own basically the property immediately under the structure, all the land surrounding the structures, uh the yards essentially are held in common by the homeowners association, which addresses ownership and maintenance of that property. That is also addressed as part of the final plat application uh and reviewed by the city attorney and city staff uh prior to approval of that. Um the final issue uh raised was the uh potential for impacts to traffic on Apava Avenue. Uh city staff's review is that the 51 units proposed with this project, uh there is adequate capacity within the road to accommodate it. Obviously, the road has a certain amount of capacity. This will take 51 homes worth of capacity out of that. If there's a proposal for a development to the east, uh either as the current office park or proposed change in land use, uh that would have to be evaluated at that time based on the capacity that's available. Uh and that may require uh the need to look at potential improvements to that roadway, or it may be determined that there is capacity, but that's a matter to be discussed at some point uh when a proposal comes forward to the planning commission for that property. And then I believe the final question was the preservation of the ponderosa rosa pines, and I would leave that to the developer to explain their intent with that. As again, the tree preservation plan as presented, it does comply with the uh requirements of the zoning ordinance. Thank you, very efficient, Mr. Lickt. So [clears throat] we'll ask um Mr. Sober to come back up or his talk about the trees. Steve Sober back here again. I wasn't aware of the ponderosa pines and the history behind them. We currently do at the intersection of Itasca and 200 or Apava and 201st Street, we have some of those ponderosa pines being saved. Feel free to and give us your name. Oh, Jenny Thompson. I'm the landscape architect on this project. Is it Mr. Erickson? Is that who is or Bob? Sorry. Okay. Mr. Erickson. Um are you specifically speaking to the pine on the corner or which ones were you? >> Yeah. Yep. Yeah. Yes. And some of them might be in the right-of-way. And then and of course we wouldn't Okay. Yeah, it it would be best to address Okay, I'm sorry. I just wanted to make sure I understood what he was talking about. Yes, those trees on the corner, the pine on the corner we are saving, and we're saving the trees he's referring to along the railroad track as well. So I think those trees should be covered. Thank you very much. >> Madam Chair, maybe we could pull up the landscape plan just to show so that people can That would be great. In the right direction, Mr. Lickt. It would be the trees shown here along the railroad right-of-way. And these are at the intersection. And it appears those are all being preserved. Correct. Thank you very much. Um Did we answer all the questions? It would be my first off if staff was keeping track. If I think we've addressed those questions, so I would open it up to planning commissioners to um ask questions and give comments. Please, Mr. Kaluza. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um just kind of want to go back uh to parking. Um I thank you, Mr. Lickt, for kind of explaining the process and the timeline on doing that. I know that city staff um will be keenly watching as this uh neighborhood is constructed and developed, kind of what that what the natural tendencies of people that are trying to access Antlers Park do. I you know, it's not just the uh streets in this development, but kind of with that um connection now to Itasca Lane, I think uh as someone who has driven around for about a half an hour trying to find parking at at that parking lot in Antlers Park, um people will will try to find wherever they can. So I'm I know that city staff will be watching that both for this this neighborhood as well as um the existing neighborhood to the north side of the lake as this kind of develops. And that is definitely something um that is concerned of me. Um I you know, the city has a great problem in that Antlers Park is a wonderful amenity that a lot of people want to use, and um you know, we just need to make sure that that does not affect uh you know, the desire of people to to go there and and and uh find convenient parking does not impact uh the existing neighbors or our new neighbors that are going to be coming um their ability to kind of enjoy their property uh without people um you know, clogging up the street in front of there. So, I appreciate uh your comments, and then um you know, I appreciate that the city staff will be kind of keeping an eye on this as this goes forward. Thank you, Mr. Kaluza. Other questions? Madam Chair. Commissioner Swenson. We have a question for Mr. Lickt or for our city engineer. Um can you kind of go over what the the street widths are for Itasca Lane and maybe the cul-de-sacs if they're kind of city standard? Um just kind of what the sizes of those are going to be. Madam Chair, um so the standards for the street are the basic standards specified by the subdivision ordinance, uh 60-ft wide right-of-way, 32-ft wide section uh with sidewalk on one side. There isn't sidewalk on the uh two cul-de-sac streets uh as per subdivision ordinance specifications. And then just a follow-on comment if I may. Please go [clears throat] go ahead, Mr. >> One of the things I haven't heard talked about here tonight is the fact that this actually will provide a second outlet to a large neighborhood um right now that is only accessed by Jaguar Avenue. Um so this actually will provide the ability for ingress and egress of emergency services say in the event that a train is blocking the tracks at Jaguar Avenue, which has been a long-term issue and concern of the community. We know there's potential for a future railyard, that type of thing, but there's a lot of unknowns with the railroad track and what it can and can't be in the future. So, I'm grateful to see this connection be made. Thank you. Uh ma- Madam Chair, Please go ahead, Commissioner. Uh and this may be a question for Mr. Lichter or Mr. Sauber, but there uh are 51 homes close to Lake Marion. Just a question about the storm sewer. Um will these 51 homes and their fertilizer and their lawn chemicals have a connection to Lake Marion? And if so, has there been some sort of assessment about what the lake can take? Madam Chair, so I'll start and if the assistant city engineer wants to jump in, they can certainly do so. Um So, the requirements for the property as part of the stormwater management plan that they uh provide is it collects all the water runoff generated by the development, directs it to a stor- a storm basin that holds the water. Uh it also provides treatment where sediment, chemicals, et cetera can filter out of that before it's discharged downstream towards Lake Marion. And the expectation is that uh the water is as clean, if not cleaner, and doesn't leave the site at a rate greater than it does today. Thank you. That would be Commissioner Travis stepping on Commissioner Swenson's toes. Nice job. >> [laughter] >> Uh other questions for Mr. Yeah, a couple of things. One on the retention, is there a additional pond or is it going to use the existing? Madam Chair, >> get pretty full? Uh the uh development does have additional stormwater basins. Uh there's proposed in all lot C uh along I Pava and Kenwood Trail. Uh and then additional basin uh I believe it's in the area where I'm not seeing it. There it is. Uh up here on the north side of out lot B. Very good. And then this uh the second comment I would tail back on as a person who lives up in that area and had kids have to miss stuff because of train issues. Uh it's about time. Madam Chair, I would say this is the perfect example of why the city advocates for multiple connections to developments for uh emergency vehicle access, but also uh service vehicle access, mail trucks, service trucks, Amazon delivery, et cetera. Uh and simply distribution of traffic. Uh it provides multiple directions for people to go, so that if there is congestion on I Pava, there is still the opportunity to go different directions. When I was first brought on as planning commissioner, I do remember that lesson. Commissioner Swenson. One one one last question. Um I I noticed um it looks like on the end of the existing Italy Avenue, we're building a new cul-de-sac end. Is that going to be built as part of this development? Just kind of keeping tabs on who's building what and where. Madam Chair, it is part of the preliminary plat approval. Um I think um city staff can weigh in on the timing of this, um whether it's included to be done with the first phase or if it would be done if out lot A is platted. City staff, would you like to weigh in? Ms. Jensen. Yeah, it is to be constructed with the final plat with Haven at Lake Marion this first addition that that we're looking at here today, uh not with the the proposed out lot. Thank you very much. One other question. Commissioner Go ahead. For a Taska Lane, particularly and probably even the ones since that's going to connect up into I Pava, it's via Italy. Help me on the widths of those, cuz I know in our development they got really narrow and you cannot park both sides. Well, you could, but you're not going to get an emergency vehicle through there, certainly. So, are these wider than those? I don't know if someone somebody from the engineering side can comment to that. And I'm thinking like Jersey Avenue, 199th, um those are pretty darn narrow and like exceptionally narrow that are many times in the summer when people have events that you can't get through there even with a car. Uh th- this would be just the the standard road width that you would have seen in any recent local development that's taken place. Uh the that roadway width consistency is a an important aspect at play here. But I can >> And as as has been stated, there the city staff is taking a closer look at additional parking restrictions that may be a requirement with this plat as it's an an abnormal occasion that that you may see more of these occurrences in other communities, whereas in Lakeville, it's kind of a an abnormal occurrence to have these sort of uh parking issues at play that need to be considered with the final plat. Madam Chair, In my development, there's a lot of them at play. Just telling you that. And it's and it's it's uh a safety issue that people need to start thinking about before somebody dies or a house burns down. Because if somebody has a party and you have people parking on both sides and they don't want to be on anybody's yard, so they're I mean, literally, you can hardly get a full-size vehicle through there. You would not get a fire truck through there and maybe not even an ambulance. So, something to people to consider. Those roads were built too small. Madam Chair, so the street again, the section is 32 ft wide. If you assume most passenger vehicles are less than 8 ft wide, that still leaves 16 ft down the center of the street even if there is parking on both sides, uh which is more than a standard traffic lane at 12 ft. So, there should be adequate space to get through. And again, that's one of the issues that city staff will be working with both with the police department and fire department on the parking plan. Excellent. >> [clears throat] >> Any other questions? If there are no other questions, then I think we're ready for a motion. Madam Chair, Commissioner Kluza. I motion to recommend to City Council approval of the preliminary plat to be known as Haven at Lake Marion, the comprehensive uh land use amendment, zoning map amendment, conditional use permit, and vacation for Progressive LLC, subject to the 12 stipulations in the planning report dated April 8, 2026, and the findings of fact. Second. We have a motion and a second. Ms. Erickson, will you please take the roll? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. The ayes have it. And the motion is approved. Thank you for your development and uh continue work here in Lakeville. Appreciate that. The next item on the agenda uh and both of these items are going to be uh Oh, no, no. I'm sorry. Where where is that piece? It's going to be May 4th, City Council. Um the next item is the preliminary plat and conditional use permit for Globus Business Park and we'll have a presentation uh Come on now. How am I supposed to organize this? Here we go. Um Mr. Muzaffar Gafarov. Good evening, everyone attending. My name is Muzaffar, president of Globus Transport. Uh we currently call Lakeville home for our operation. Uh we're just down near the intersection of Dodd and County 70 on Humboldt Road currently. And uh we're excited to uh you know, present this you know, like development project that we're working on um on just the recently acquired land uh parcel um you know, on County 70 and um near the Kenrick uh intersection. Um and uh yeah, I guess um um what we do is we are a trucking company, logistics uh company. Um I would say more of a logistics consolidation company uh consolidator that we use warehouse space to bring uh freight, cross-dock it, you know, fill trailers out and send them over the road. Um for the most part, we don't do any repairs on site or you know, um not um like a typical uh trucking terminal, you know, we just may primarily use the warehouse for cross-docking and distribution. Um and uh yeah, I guess uh that's kind of our main um you know, for this new uh development. Okay, thank you so much. Thank you. We'll have staff present and uh then open it up. Good evening, Chair, commission members. Good evening, Ms. Baden. Thank you. The item was just up there. Don't know what happened to it, so we'll just give it a minute. Um there we go. This request is for a property located on like the southwest side of County Road 70, which is also known as Juniper Way, east of Kenrick Avenue and at the terminus of Kenwick Kenrick Court. The property is zoned and guided for office park use. The action in front of you tonight is a preliminary plat for a one lot subdivision and then a conditional use permit to allow a warehouse in the OP district. The parent parcels are there's two parcels currently and the site is about approximately 10 acres in size. The applicant is proposing an 81,100 square foot industrial office warehouse building. There are two egress points on the property, one in the southwest corner onto Kenrick Court and the other would be a right in right out onto County State Aid Highway 70. Both engineering and the Dakota County Plat Commission have approved these locations for access. Building and parking lot setbacks either meet or exceed the minimum requirements. The site is currently short on the number of parking spaces that would be required. But the applicant has demonstrated proof of parking on the northern part of the drive area here. So if those parking requirements are not met with the final plat, there would have to be a deferred parking agreement that would be recorded against the property and then in the future if there would ever be a need for those parking spaces, the owner would be required to put in those parking spaces. So we'll see what comes in with the final plat if that determination will be needed or not. In the office park district, the maximum amount of outside storage is limited to a maximum of 20% of lot area. The red area out the area outlined in red is the area that's depicted for outside storage. This is proposed about one acre which is 10% of the lot size so they are in compliance with that code requirement. In looking at the grading plan, the applic- the development includes one private privately owned and maintained storm water management system. This will include a pre-treatment area then and then the infiltration basin to the east of it. This will collect and treat all the storm water runoff for the site. A storm water maintenance agreement will be required with the final plat. The office park district has requires a minimum of 30% of green space on a parcel. So the property as proposed demonstrates 3.04 acres of green space. So this is coming in at 30.2% of open space. So they are meeting our minimum requirements. When looking at tree preservation and the landscaping requirements in the like an industrial and commercial type of zoning district, they are allowed to have a 70% tree removal. They are proposing 63% so they are in compliance with the removal threshold but the ordinance also requires that heritage trees be replaced at 100% of the diameter inches removed. So in this case, they are um they're removing 193 inches of heritage trees but then they're also allowed some credits with the ones that they're saving. So then their total replacement would be 97 inches of trees so the tree preservation plan will have to be updated to reflect that requirement with the final plat. The landscape plan shows a variety of trees and shrubs. So city code requires that the outdoor storage area in the back portion that was demonstrating on that was outlined in red before. So that area must be screened and landscaped from adjacent properties. From not from the right away, just from all adjacent properties. But then the industrial district also requires that perimeter plantings be required around the entire development. So an updated landscaping plan will have to be submitted to be in compliance with code requirements. They are showing trees kind of along in front of the building but they need to beef up some of their other landscaping specifically along the southern property line and then some more maybe along the northwest corner. The elevations that were submitted in your plan show a building with smooth texture precast concrete that complies with our exterior building material requirements. Um this may change between now and the final plat as I know the applicant was looking at alternative materials and different design. So they whatever they come back with will just have to comply with the OP district which requires at least 65% grade A materials and not more than 35% grade B or C materials. The staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat and conditional use permit with the six stipulations listed in the planning report and also the requirements and stipulations that were included with your engineering report. So I'll stand for questions. Thank you very much. This is a public hearing. If anyone would like to come up and speak, please let us know. Seeing none, I'm ready for a motion. Move to close the public hearing. And a second? Second. I have motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I. I. I. Those opposed, same sign. Public hearing is now closed. Uh questions for uh the applicant. I wanted to start with just one before I forget it and what will be stored outside would be my question and perhaps that's for the applicant more than it is for staff. If Mr. Sauer could come forward again. No, Mr. Goof- Gafurov. The outside storage plan is for trailers primarily, tractor trailers. >> Yep. Excellent. That's helpful. Questions from others? Madam Chair. Mr. Swanson. So I'm just kind of curious. So you mentioned you already have a location here in Lakeville. Are you expanding in into this facility and keeping the other facility or just moving to this facility and Yep, we're not certain what we're going to do with the current facility but we will move our operation to the new facility. Uh currently we're a little bit we have some sort of a bottleneck with the number of dock doors that we have and sometimes and we do need for cross docking purposes, we need as many of them as possible and with this current development um the the structure of the building the the layout allows us to have like 18 dock doors in a same spot where you know, same square footage where we can only have seven right now. So that allows for efficient flow of operation. Basically, that's one of the main reasons. Mr. Swanson, you got a follow up? Yep and then I'll just state always grateful to hear that businesses are investing more in Lakeville and expanding and so that's that's a great thing to hear. You'd also mentioned that you're not really doing any truck repair or anything like that on site. Just kind of curious, where do you have your trucks repaired or Um we do a lot of our drivers are contractors, owner operators where they own their own tractor and so it's up to them where they repair and primarily like we have a one of the bigger facilities that And so they just go there for repairs. It's a truck repair shop and stuff like that. So but yeah and we use our company But for the most part, we don't do anything on site. We don't plan on having you know, our own repair facilities in the future too. It's a separate headache. We don't want to >> [laughter] >> So Thank you. I'll just kind of put it in the in the perspective then that obviously you have most of your heavy maintenance and everything done off site. That type of thing. It's not to say you might not have someone come in to do like a wheel repair or something like that. A quick trailer repair or something to get someone back on the road, something like that. But that's that's typical of any warehouse operation. The trailer is not mobile for some reason, you know, something that needs to be be called in the service. For the most part, we're able to just go to the repair facilities uh locally and you know, get it addressed. Yeah. Madam Chair. Please go ahead. >> So we understand that there's going to be like 12 parking spots short of the parking that's required for the for the the development. And you know, what what happens when when these semi trailers, I mean, will they be parked there on a you know, on a on a short-term basis or a long-term basis and what are you going to do with when you run out of the spaces? Well, for the over the road trucks here, they primarily you know, come and go. You know, so they might stay here. They might show up. They might stay and you know, to make a delivery next day and then you know, get the reload Um so usually those come and go. I think currently we have adequate space for the amount of truck trailers that we have that we own. Um and you know, I will I guess have to cross that bridge when we get there but I feel like for the size of our current operation and the this building, I I think the requirement is adequate. Thank you. Madam Chair. Commissioner Traffis. Uh just a just to clarify based on some of the other similar projects along Juniper Way Highway 70. Um is Globus the only occupant of of this site you're you're building it you're going to use it 100% or is there another planning on occupying about 24,000 square feet of the building ourselves and then uh we're hoping to lease out the remainder of the building. Um and so um but there is basically for us uh great opportunity to expand you know just you know as Excellent. Thank you. Other questions? Are there any ponderosa pines that you're taking down? >> [laughter] >> Heard of any. I had to better clear. >> [laughter] >> Uh if there are no other questions then I I think we're ready for a motion. Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to uh recommend to City Council approval of the preliminary plat and conditional use permit for Global Business Park subject to the six stipulations in the planning report dated April 8th, 2026 and the findings of fact. Second. We have a motion and a second. Ms. Erickson, would you please take the roll? Zimmer. Aye. Eink. Aye. Swanney. Aye. Swanson. Aye. Traffis. Aye. Kaluza. Aye. Uh the motion prevails and we look forward to watching you guys develop and then to see what you end up doing with your other property as well. Thank you for forward in uh Lakeville and again this issue will be considered before City Council on May 4th. Thank you. Um So staff notices, yep, the next Planning Commission is May 7th and uh planning manager's memo has been included. Need to add anything to your memo? Ms. Johnson, no? That we stand adjourned.