Good evening. I will call the August 20th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting to order. Uh first we will uh have the Pledge of Allegiance. Please join us. All right, we're doing a little bit of punting today. So, uh is Ms. Goodroad going to take the roll? Ms. Jensen, please. Thank you so much. >> Tinsley. >> Here. >> Caluza. >> Here. >> Zimmer. >> Here. >> Eink. >> Here. >> Shanky. >> Here. >> Swanson. >> Here. >> Thank you so much. Uh next on the agenda is the approval of the August 6th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting minutes. If anyone has any changes, let me know. Otherwise, we can let them stand. Okay. Ms. Ericson's done a great job. We're going to let those stand uh as they are. Next on the agenda is a public hearing. Um >> Chairwoman, we have announcements. >> Oh, did I skip announcements? I did. Please, Ms. Jensen, would you do give us the announcements? >> have announcements this week, so. Uh one, you have a handout which is revised stipulations for agenda item 5A, Kenwood Meadows, and I will cover that within my presentation. And then a couple of announcements. One, I would like to introduce our new assistant city engineer, Chloe Anderson, who's joining us uh for the first time this evening. Uh and then also bit of good news, the September 3rd Planning Commission meeting is officially canceled. So, our next meeting after that will be September 17th. >> All right. So, everybody mark your calendars tonight before you forget, no Planning Commission meeting on September 3rd, and the next one will be September 17th. Thank you so much. Thanks for stopping me in time to catch up on announcements. Uh so, the public hearing uh the for agenda item 5A uh has three components. It's a public hearing to consider the application of Kenwood Meadows, LLC, for uh comprehensive land use amendment to regrade reguide a property from low medium density residential to low density residential. Secondly, preliminary plat of six single-family home lots and out lots to be known as Kenwood Meadows, and three vacation of a street easement. As I understand it, Mr. Joe Sullivan is here to introduce the project. Would you please come forward and identify yourself for the record, and then after we have you introduce it, we'll have staff come up. Thank you. >> Excellent. Uh Joe Sullivan, Eden Prairie. I represent Kenwood Meadows LLC. >> [clears throat] >> Uh Madam Chair and Commissioners, thanks for your time tonight. Uh this is not going to be a lengthy introduction. This is a straightforward six um lot single-family development. Uh what we're hoping is the first phase of um the greater piece uh of Kenwood Meadows. So, we're got six lots along 172nd. And then to the south if [clears throat] and when we can figure out the extension of Keats Avenue, we'd also be like to be before you to continue development on the southern portion of the property uh that we own. So, I'm happy to answer any questions and we also have our engineer here, Nick Polta with Pioneer, uh to answer questions as well. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. And next we'll have Ms. Jensen come up and give us a staff presentation on Kenwood Meadows. >> Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Uh yes, this is a public hearing for Kenwood Meadows. As Chair Zimmer said, it is a preliminary plat, comprehensive land use amendment, and street easement vacation. Uh it is located south of 172nd Street and west of Kenwood Trail, which is CSAH 5 in that area, kind of southeast of Orchard Lake. And then the property is zoned RST-2, which uh just for reference allows single-family detached townhomes and twin homes. Uh there is a comprehensive land use amendment uh associated with this. Currently, the property is guided low-medium density residential. Um however, with the six lots that are being proposed uh being entirely within the Orchard Lake Shoreland Overlay District and needing to meet those Shoreland requirements, uh the density for those uh does not meet that minimum threshold for the low medium. So, we are requesting a comp plan amendment to drop that down to that low density residential. It is just for those lots along 172nd. The remainder of the property will remain at that low medium uh designation. Uh so, in the existing conditions, it's about a 36-acre parcel. As I said, it's at 172nd Street with the frontage uh on the north end. Uh there will be dedicating a 40-ft half right-of-way for Kia or I'm sorry. 172nd Street at the north. I'm getting ahead of myself. There is a 40-ft half right-of-way for Kia Cook Avenue on at the southwest corner. Uh it's a little tough to tell here, but there are significant wetlands across the property here and some additional down here. Um and then just wanted to note and this does relate to the stipulation that I added uh and it was handed out. Uh the parcel to the west has a a shed that uh does encroach across the property line and a little bit of the driveway. Spoke with the developer. The property owner is aware of that. They are um surveying the the property to confirm that information and will look at options for either removal or something to address that encroachment. Um the property is currently for sale, so they'll address that with that. Regardless, the stipulation would be that those encroachments be resolved either through removal or some sort of a carving out a piece of land for that property uh prior to city council consideration of the final plat. Preliminary plat. Um this is where there's the south half right-of-way of 172nd Street um being that would be dedicated. The six single-family lots. There is an outlot here with access along 172nd. And then the remaining 30 acres or so would be included with an Outlot B, which is a potential future development area. Development of that would require the extension of Keats Avenue in some manner. As I said, currently there is only 40-ft half right-of-way. There would need to be some cooperation or consideration with other property owners to extend that at least as far as would be needed to provide street access to this southern portion here. Wetland buffer, this area kind of in the tan color is all wetland buffer. That is will be included within the Outlot area. Stormwater ponding on the south side is here for lots as well. This red dash line here is also that shoreline overlay, so you can see that all of those lots are within that. There is also a sewer and water trunk lines that run through the the southern portion of the property and you can just see kind of the northern chunk of that. So, the development of this area does not impact those utility lines in any way there. Grading and utility, again these are a little tough to read, but the the tan here is that wetland buffer area. These areas here when surrounded in the purple are are some steep slopes area. Each of these lots will be custom graded. So, the the grading plan will be, you know, tweaked with each of those. And then utility lines in here, this is some drain tile area to lead back to that ponding area at the back. And then underneath the driveways here in the in the street boulevard area. A tree inventory was done. Everything that is in green is a tree that uh will remain. The brown are ones that are being removed. There were a number of Siberian elm on the site as well. Those are exempted from our tree preservation ordinance considering that they are considered an invasive species. Um so the calculations show a minimum tree replacement requirement of 15 uh caliper inches. Each of these lots is required to do uh two trees. So each will be doing uh at least 5 in of of caliper replacement per their 2 and 1/2 tree minimum. So uh that required replacement will be met through that requirement uh on there. And then finally the street easement vacation uh that's included. There is a this small easement area here. Uh it is proposed to be vacated and then uh it would be replaced with platted right-of-way 4172nd. So there really isn't a change in that area. Uh staff does recommend approval of the preliminary plat compliant comprehensive land use amendment street easement vacation subject to the 15 stipulations uh as shared with you earlier this evening and adoption of the findings of fact uh dated August 20th and I will stand for any questions you may have. >> Great. Thank you so much, Ms. Jensen. This is a public hearing. Don't know if that many people in the room so you don't have to sign up. You could just come forward and give us your name and address if you'd like to speak on this issue. Please come forward. Thank you. Feel free to tip that down. There you go. I'm Donna Tracy. I live at 11485 West 172nd Street. So I live directly across the street from this. Um I I need to have the street easement clarified to me because right now the center line of the street easement is on the southern border of the road. And and twice now I've had my yard taken paid for granted, but but my yard taken because it's easier to take my yard than build on the other side of the street, which I I personally find um ridiculous. That that shouldn't be happening. So, what does it Please explain the easement vacation to me? So that so so that I don't have to be concerned about that happening again in the future. >> Right. And we'll take the questions uh and give them to staff, okay, to answer as best they can now in this in this uh time frame. >> Okay. So, >> we all have our expertise. >> Got you. >> Um but I do I think we'll have staff give >> Answer that. Appreciate it. Also, I I find six homes there. How big are these homes? How many square feet of of space are they taking up? I could see three being there. Um six is wow, that's what an eyesore that's going to be. Um but and and honestly, they said, you know, the only trees remaining are these few along the back and a few along the front. That's cuz they bulldozed the whole thing. They took 100-year-old trees and bulldozed them. So, having a two-tree minimum for these for these lots is is really minor. Uh obvious or really minimum. Um I can also see that the that the drainage to the back ponding will also affect me because there's drainage that goes underneath the street and into my backyard. So, I would like an estimate of how much additional water this is expected to add. That I will be responsible basically for taking care of. Right? Making sure it continues to flow and all. Through my through my area. >> Okay. >> And and and I really I I would like to know the size of these houses. Okay. How many square How many square foot they are cuz six in that in that small space just seems like an awful lot to me. >> Excellent. Thank you so much for all your questions. Staff takes really good notes so that we can be sure we cover things. So, great. Appreciate you coming forward, Ms. Jensen. >> Is there anyone else that wishes to speak? >> Madam Chair, seeing no one else come forward, I move to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Those opposed, same sign. Uh the hearing public hearing is now closed, and I think we'll ask um between staff and Mr. Sullivan to address the concerns that were raised. You want to come first? That order. ordinance on the issue regarding um >> I will get started. All right. Uh as to the the minimum lot size within the the Shoreland Overlay District, the lots are required to be a minimum of 75 ft wide and 15,000 sq ft of lot area. Uh this is significantly larger than the RST-2 District would allow, which would be, if I'm recalling my numbers correctly, 55 55 ft wide and 7,500 sq ft lot area. So, uh lot area twice as large, uh 20-ft wider lots. The city does not dictate the size of a home uh that would be required to be built on there. Because these lots are within the Shoreland Overlay District, each lot will be limited to a maximum of 25% impervious surface area. That's building coverage, driveways, landscaped areas, uh porches, things of that nature. Um so, that they they will have to demonstrate that on a survey with the building permit submittal that they are are not exceeding that 25% requirement. Um Uh I As far as the tree removal, uh yes, Mr. Sullivan did uh remove some trees previously. It was uh spring of 2025. At that time, the city was working on revising our tree preservation ordinance. Um however, there was nothing in city ordinance at that time that prohibited tree removal. So, unfortunately, there wasn't any action that we could take. Uh in August, about a year ago, we did adopt a new tree preservation ordinance um that does have much more stringent requirements about that inventory and removal, and it does now include a look back um provision uh for tree removal prior to development. However, because that ordinance was not in place when those trees were removed, we do not have the ability to apply that ordinance to this project. So, >> That was going to be one of my comments that we passed the tree ordinance. And when Tell us Tell me again, when did we do that? >> Uh it was about a year ago. >> August of 2025. >> August of 2025. >> We had a work session, public hearing, notes, all kinds of stuff on it. >> We have had that various, you know, developers in the past that um have done that, and it was kind of part of the impetus for getting something more comprehensive on the books. So, as far as how the drainage on the in the for the development will impact potentially impact other properties, I'm going to refer that question to the developer's engineer, Mr. Polta, and and he can hopefully explain that much better than I would be able to. >> The other question is Jensen was on the easement and >> Oh, yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. It would appear >> The street easement. So, this So, this is the current edge of the street. The street easement is 10 ft wide. It is on the south side of the property. I'll see if I can try and find It's It's down on this area here generally. Kind of in here. It's about 10 ft. And the It's tough here to tell, but the the right-of-way that's being platted for 172nd Street is is 10 ft wider than what was there previously. So, it is covering So, what was in street easement will now be in in dedicated right-of-way. So, it is a more permanent and then that additional 10 ft is across the entire plat boundary instead of just that limited amount that that easement. So, from a There's no change because what was easement will now be platted right-of-way. So, it's It's simply vacating the easement to clean up the title. >> The title piece. >> Yeah, it's it's a clean-up action. >> It looks to be a clean-up then on the other side of the street from Ms. Tracy or is it both sides? >> It's just on the south side within the plat boundary. Yes. There are no changes proposed to the north side of 172nd with this. >> Excuse me, the south side is the property owned by Kenwood Meadows? >> Yes. Yep. Yeah, Kenwood Meadows LLC. Okay. >> All right. >> All right. Now, I will defer to Mr. >> Thank you. Yes, we'll bring up the engineer to discuss the drainage issue. If you could identify yourself, that would be wonderful. >> Madam Chair, council members, my name is Nick Polta. I'm with Pioneer Engineering. Uh we are the project managers for Mr. Sullivan on the site. As far as the drainage, we met all of the city's requirements for um treating storm water and managing the storm water on site. So, we included a you know, a rain garden pond in the backyard to pick up all the backyard stuff. In the front yards, we have individual rain gardens that are connected um by culverts underneath the driveways. Again, to slow down the water and also to treat the water before discharging into the wetland system. Um uh again, you know, the city engineer, assistant city engineer may will be able to clarify to confirm that we met all the requirements for meeting all of the 210 and 100-year storm events that are you know, as part of your ordinance. So, um we did what uh was required of us to uh manage the storm water on the site. There's a more specific question, I will be happy to answer it. >> I'm thinking we might have. >> I'll stay here, then. >> Okay. You can go ahead, Commissioner. >> I actually don't have a more specific >> And the public hearing is closed, so we'll keep comments um at this level. >> Um was just going to state, so essentially what you're telling us is you've done a storm water management report for the site, submitted it for city staff to review. Um they're providing the technical expertise for us as this commission. Um essentially, as As as it meets city requirements, we give approval based on that, more or less. >> Unless there's more information that we're missing, then yes. >> Thank you. >> Question I have is is there any water from the new development going under the road to the other side of the development? >> Not directly. Um the wetland to the south and the channel to the east of the site goes underneath a culvert that goes to the north um and ultimately to the lake. Um that's a city uh drainage system um that's connected to hundreds of acres, you know, downstream. So, um we are discharging to the wetland system that ultimately, yes, goes under 176th Street or 172nd Street. >> [snorts] >> But again, all of that would be back to existing conditions, so there shouldn't be any more than is there today. And in fact, with all the numbers that we've provided, it should be less. Now, this is only, you know, 7 8 acres out of a couple hundred, well, I think it's like 7 or 800 acres that drain through here. So, you know, it's a drop in the bucket, but we are reducing the flow um for our portion. >> Okay. Mr. Swenson? Mr. Swenson, did you raise your hand? Okay, thank you. Commissioners, do we have some other questions or comments? I did have a question and I wanted to ask Ms. Jensen to clarify regarding um however big the places the homes are built um if someone buys it in the future and wants to do an addition, how will they know that they have a requirement on the impervious um buildable plants. >> They should likely be disclosed that is a part of their property sale. If they are not, uh, if they contact the city, uh, or apply for a building permit, it is information that would be brought to their attention, uh, through that process. The survey that they will need to submit, the certificate of survey with the original, um, initial construction of the home will include those im- pervious surface calculations on there, uh, and will show how close to that 25% level, uh, the property is. Uh, so that's also another, um, guide for homeowners to see, you know, how much area they have. Um, if someone, you know, builds a home and and does and they're sitting at 23% and they come in later for a building addition and, you know, they update their survey and suddenly they're sitting at 27%. Well, they're going to need to make some reductions cuz obviously there's been some changes that perhaps didn't require building permit, but they would need to bring the property back into compliance or we wouldn't issue a building permit uh, until that property can be in compliance with that 25%. So, we don't dictate the size of, uh, homes, but these will have some sort of a control mechanisms simply through that Shoreland Overlay District. >> Excellent. Thank you. Other questions? Thank you, Ms. Johnson. >> Um, Chair, if you're ready for a motion. >> I believe we're ready for a motion with no other questions. >> Uh, >> [clears throat] >> I motion to recommend to City Council approval of the comprehensive land use amendment to reguide property from low medium density residential to low density residential. Uh, uh preliminary plat of six single family home lots and outlots to be known as Kenwood Meadows and vacation of public right-of-way subject to the 15 stipulations in the planning report dated August 11th, 2026 as amended and adoption of the finding of fact dated August 20th, 2026. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. Uh Ms. Jensen, will you please take the roll? Or Ms. Goodrow, thank you. >> Calusa? >> I. >> Zimmer? >> I. >> Anke? >> I. >> Schenkey? >> I. >> Swenson? >> I. >> Tinsley? >> I. >> The motion prevails. Um to be clear, the planning commission works within uh the ordinances that the city offers and um that are written and we don't move outside of those other than for very specific reasons. So, we are here to make sure everything is lined up as it should be under the ordinances that we follow. So, that's the purview of the planning commission. Just to be clear. Um the second public hearing is for agenda item 5B, the Spirit of Branch and Farm Commercial Eighth Edition. Uh this is a public hearing to consider the application of Goodwill Easter Seals Real Estate LLC for a preliminary and final plat and PUD development stage plans uh of one lot to be known as Spirit of Branch and Farm Commercial Eighth Edition for a commercial real retail building and vacation of public drainage and utility easements. As I understand it, Mr. Patrick Sarver will be here is here to introduce the project. If you could please come forward, sir. Identify yourself for the record and uh go ahead. >> Good evening. My name is Patrick Sarver. I uh am with Civil Site Group. We provided the civil engineering, surveying, and landscape architecture services for the project. And we're excited and stand ready to answer any questions that you may have. >> Thank you. Um we'll call you back up. >> Excellent. Thank you so much. >> And now we'll have Ms. Barton. I mess that up every time. Present for us. Thank you. >> Good evening, chair, commission members. This request is for a property that is located east of Pilot Knob and south of Casada 46. It is zoned PUD, which is a planned unit development. It's in the Spirit of Brandon Farms um eighth edition with the commercial eighth edition. So, what is in front of you tonight is a preliminary and final plat in a PUD development stage plan for just a one lot sub- division to be known as Spirit of Brandon Farms commercial eighth edition, and then a vacation of certain public drainage utility easements. The property is 1.95 acres in size. Access to the site is internal of the PUD on private shared drives that um connect either all the way to the east to Elmhurst Drive or you can go further south through kind of like the Hy-Vee area, and then eventually you can go west to Pilot Knob. Um and then the building setbacks have been met. The minimum number of parking spaces that would be required for the retail building that is on site is that is proposed would be 83 parking spaces, and 97 parking spaces are proposed. So, they are in compliance. The applicant is proposing a 20,839 square foot Goodwill retail building. I forgot to mention that at the beginning as well. So, that's what's on the one lot plan. The storm water on the site was mostly uh done with the original with the SBF commercial second edition and that treated up to 85% hard surface on the property. So, anything that exceeds 85% does have to be treated on site. So, there is a private system that is proposed in the southwest corner on site that has has to treat any discharge um prior to leaving the property. With this plat, there was no tree preservation plan as there are no significant trees. Uh but their landscaping is still required. So, right now there's landscaping that is proposed along the south property line and within the parking medians and on the east side of the building. The forestry department has reviewed this plan and made recommendation that additional landscaping is located on the north side of the building to help with screening from Casa 46. The elevations that are proposed, uh they are required to have at least 65% grade A materials and no more than 35% grade B or C. So, the majority of the building is with uh brick or windows. Um but the remainder then is with EIFS. What's shown on the plans is that they demonstrate between 35 or I'm sorry, 31 to 42% of that grade C. Um so, revised plans will have to be submitted. But if you looked closely, I don't know if it was just a math error because they were showing over 100% on their materials or if it was an actual they need to reduce the amount of EIFS. But a revised plan does have to be submitted to be in compliance with our building code requirements. Or I should say zoning code requirements. The vacations that are proposed on site uh will be have to be reviewed by the city engineer and the engineering department will have to sign off on those easements and that will be done at the same time as the final plat with the city council. So, staff is recommending approval of the request with the 10 stipulations listed in your staff report. At this time, we do not have a council meeting because because they're asking for a final plat at the same time, we do need to make sure that everything is buttoned up before it goes to city council and that includes all of our development agreements as well. So, at this time we don't have that council date set. But, staff is recommending you like the preliminary approval at this stage. Uh we have not heard from any of the surrounding property owners. Uh but, I will stand for questions. >> Thank you so much. This is a public hearing and if there's anyone that would wish to speak with on this uh issue, please come forward. It appears that we don't have anyone interested. >> Seeing no one come forward, Madam Chair, I uh move to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I. >> I. >> Opposed, same sign. The public hearing is now closed and we would be opening it up for any questions from commissioners. I would have one, Ms. Botton. Is um the stipulation regarding um the math issue one of the stipulations? So, I assume it is. I don't have them in front of me, but just for public record. >> I didn't say their math issue had to be figured out. I just said a revised building elevation complying with code had to be submitted. Uh which is number stipulation number eight. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> Just wanted to clarify that that's in there. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Swenson, did you have a question? >> No, no questions. >> You were just looking at me, so I thought maybe. It's pretty straightforward. Okay. I think we're ready for a motion. >> Madam Chair. >> Commissioner Swenson. >> Move to recommend a City Council approval of the preliminary and final plat and PUD development stage plans of one lot to be known as Spirit of Branch and Farm Commercial 8th Edition for a commercial retail building and vacation of public drainage and utility easements to the 10 stipulations in the planning report dated July 22nd, 2026. >> Second. >> We have a motion and two seconds. Um, and I would ask Ms. Goodrow to take the roll. >> Zimmer. >> Aye. >> Eink. >> Aye. >> Shanky. >> Aye. >> Swenson. >> Aye. >> Tinsley. >> Aye. >> Kluza. >> Aye. >> The motion prevails and uh we look forward to seeing the development. Thank you so much and as you understand, it's not yet set since there's enough stipulations and I forgot to bring that up for the last one and no one kicked me under the table to remind me. So sorry about that for the Kenwood Meadows. >> [clears throat] >> Um Thank you so much everybody. Um as staff notices um said that the first item will be on September 8th agenda. Planning Commission meeting is canceled for the 3rd and we do have a planning uh manager's memo for uh our review in the packet. And there being no other issues before the Planning Commission, I uh hereby adjourn the meeting. Thank you. >> Mhm.