Finally yes. Oh, and over there. >> I will call to order the Rosemount Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday, June 23rd. Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Do we have any additions to tonight's agenda? >> Madam Chair, there are no additions to the agenda. >> Thank you. Is there any input from the audience on items that are not on tonight's agenda? Okay. Seeing none, we'll move forward to the consent agenda. Our consent agenda this evening consists of one item, our meeting minutes from our May 26th regular meeting. Are there any comments or questions on the consent agenda? Seeing none, I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Commissioner Kennegar, seconded by Commissioner Reed. All those in favor, please say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? Motion carries. Next on here, we have no old business and I'm throwing my pen. Thank you. Um, we have no old business this evening, so we will move on to our public hearings. The first item on our public hearing agenda tonight is a request by Marcus Ramos and KDP Biscayne LLC for a conditional use permit for a major auto repair business located within the business park. And Julie, I'll turn it over to you. >> All right. All right. So, a little summary of today's requests. Uh the Planning Commission is being asked to consider conditional use permit request to operate a major automotive repair and service business within the Biscayne Business Park located at 2501 150th Circle West. Uh so, just a little context. Um this property is in the B2 employment zoning district, and major automotive repair is a conditional use within that B2 zoning district. Uh so, um the definition of a major automotive repair is shown below, which is repair garages and specialty establishments for motorcycles, passenger automobiles, and trucks of all sizes. Um and then um they all may also include repair of machinery and equipment as well. Um little context to the site. Uh site plan review for the property was approved back in 2024, uh which went in front of the Planning Commission uh for the development of multiple multi-tenant office and warehouse buildings. Uh that proposed business in front of the Planning Commission today will occupy a space within one of those new multi-tenant buildings, uh which is currently under construction on the site. Uh so, a little um aerial image of the site. So, you can see um highlighted in red is where the multi-tenant buildings are being constructed, and also where the proposed business would be located. Um so, the business park was originally designed uh with a private roadway system, which you can see 150th Circle West is a private roadway. Um and as well as uh private stormwater ponding around the perimeter of the Biscayne Business Park area. Um the whole site is under a planned unit development as well, um which included a couple deviations from the um zoning code at the time, which allowed for um accesses in between the different parcels, um which you can see um the existing [clears throat] building at 25000 150 Circle West does have that roadway in between the two parcels. Um, did also want to mention that that one singular parcel was developed by the original developer of Biscayne Business Park and a couple businesses located within that building include um Conquer Ninja and then also um Valley Owned Bake House. Um, also the Planning Commission did see um the three parcels to the west of that existing building did have a site plan review and conditional use permit come through last year for approval of a major automotive repair as well. Um, obviously that is not under construction currently, but there have been different um projects approved throughout the Biscayne Business Park. A little overview of that site plan of the multi-tenant um buildings that I had mentioned prior. So, like I had said in 2024 Keystone Development um did receive site plan approval for the construction of the different um multi-tenant buildings on site. Uh, the development does consist of a couple different types of configurations of the buildings which you can see um one of the one located east on the site is a double um back-to-back loaded building which you can have multiple businesses in between the two and then also single um unit one which is located in the building to the west as well. Parking you can see is provided along the perimeter of the building and as well as in um in between the two buildings as well. You can kind of see it a little bit better within this site plan. Um, did want to mention the proposed business is shown as South South Metro Auto Solutions which is um outlined in that blue area. Um in this plan it also shows that there's four parking spots reserved for that spot, but there are additional parking areas um located around the perimeter. Um, the applicant did submit this um parking plan which showed about 88 different parking stalls throughout the whole site um and along the perimeter and again along in between the two buildings as well. Um so you can see that there is an abundance of um parking throughout the site and there is also landscaping provided along the perimeter as well to act as um screening for the parking as well. Um so for the conditional use permit portion, so all conditional use um permits must um meet seven general conditions in order to be permitted and approved. Uh the seven conditions um in addition to any um use specific conditions as well which with major automotive repair there are an additional 12 standards that need to be approved. Um so you can see in front of you those are the seven general um conditions which within the staff report staff did meet um believe that the proposed uh use would meet those seven conditions. And then also like I had mentioned there are an additional 12 additional um standards that need to be met um which staff did also go through the findings within the staff report for those 12 but here are three that um staff did kind of want to point out. Uh for instance um the first one the proposed automotive repair business is planned to occupy one of the vacant tenant spaces which I'd shown you within that site plan within the um building. According to the applicant's narrative all auto auto automotive repair and maintenance and assembly and disassembly uh would um be completely done within the enclosed building and then no operations occurring outdoors. Also another finding the proposed site plan contains no outdoor storage area. Um the applicant's narrative also states that the outdoor activities will be limited to minor vehicle related functions such as uh customer drop off and pick up. And then another condition that I wanted to point out was that um it is found that this condition is um being met which is um that everything is contained within the um multi-tenant building and then the city does also retain the right to revoke the conditional use permit um unless the applicant or operator can demonstrate that they are in compliance with the city code. Um but there is one motion in front of the planning commission today which is a motion to recommend the city council approve a conditional use permit for major automotive repair and service business within the Biscayne Business Park located at 2501 150th Circle West. I do know the applicant and then also the developer for the site are in the audience today and can answer any questions that the commission may have, but I am also able to answer any questions that the commission may have as well. >> Thank you, Julia. Are there any questions from the commission at this time? >> I saw on the list of like places, like wasn't there another Sorry. I saw on the list of locations, is that another automotive at the top, the Chaz? >> Yes. Um I know that if another major automotive repair business is planned to be throughout the site, they would have to go through the conditional use process again as well. >> Okay, so each one goes independently. >> it's a separate business, so they'd have to go through the process of a conditional use permit as well. >> Any other questions? >> Okay, thank you, Julia. This item is a public hearing item, so at this time we will open up the public hearing. Anyone in the audience would like to speak may do so at this time coming to the podium, stating your name and address for the record. >> Mr. Pasch, I'd like the applicant to come up. I'd like to ask a couple questions about the parking. >> [snorts] >> Hello, my name is Ben Yunan. And you wanted me to say my address? >> yep. >> 5417 Woodlawn Boulevard in Minneapolis. >> Thank you. >> Mhm. >> I think you have a pretty simple question, but four spots seems pretty tight. Have you talked to the building owner about where you would be parking employees or if you do have cars that are queued up for for the next job, that sort of thing. How are you going to handle that? >> Yeah, I'm I am the building owner. >> Okay. >> Um Believe the applicant's here, yep. Um but we we've had conversations about how many spots would be allowed and four spots are allowed for every Yeah, for every tenant per 2,000 square feet, So, that's been made clear with everyone. >> Mhm. Um there aren't any allocated spots, but all of our tenants know that that's the spots that are available. There's also enough room for approximately three or two to four cars inside to be worked on. So, there'll be space inside and then those spots outside as well. >> Are there any any other spots still like in the central area or anywhere else on the perimeter that could be used as overflow if you >> Oh, absolutely. The whole the whole space, yeah. Absolutely, yeah. >> thank you. >> The only the only thing we want to avoid is having clients having to walk a long way. And so, our job as the owners is to space tenants out so that parking is used in heavy areas and not used in other areas. So, yeah. >> Got it, thank you. >> Yep. >> And as you said four spots per per tenant. >> Per 2,000 square feet. >> Sorry, most of these 2,000 square feet? >> Most of them are. We have three tenants right now that are taking 4,000 square feet. >> Okay. They're taking two squares then on here. So, if I just count the squares, right? >> Yeah, yeah. Two right there. >> If I count the squares, there's 18 squares I think if I counted right. Um >> Being occupied so far? >> No, just total. In there, right? >> Oh, um 18 plus the the double unit, yep. Yep, that's right. Yes. >> And you had 88 parking spots. So, there's >> There's 4.3 spots per tenant. And that doesn't include the accessible spots and it doesn't include the four approximately four more spots that we're going to capture without having those islands on the north and south side. Um those got removed because of draining. So, we have over 90 spots. >> Okay. >> And that's right. Some of the tenants only need one or two spots just for doing their shipping and distribution inside. >> [clears throat] >> Thank you. >> All right. >> Any other questions for the applicant? Anything else you guys would like to say? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right, thank you. >> Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak on this item this evening. Seeing none, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Commissioner Kinyua, seconded by Commissioner Ellis. All those All right, was you? All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carries. The public hearing is now closed. Any other conversation on this item before we move forward to motion? >> No. >> Okay. Entertain a motion. Oh. >> Yes. >> My question we can for staff. How would the process work if we found that they weren't meeting the requirements? So, if it was a situation where they were, you know, doing repairs out in the parking lot. How does that How does that process work? We've talked other times about how there's not active enforcement of some things, and I This is the first time I've gone through this, so I'm just curious. Is this a situation where, you know, somebody complains and then we investigate and then we determine it is and we ask them to stop and they don't stop and then it gets pulled, essentially? >> Yes, correct. Yep. Usually we try we try and avoid and work with the the proper or, you know, property owner the applicant and everything trying to mitigate that trying not to have to revoke the conditional use permit, but essentially that is um the course of action for that. >> Okay. And that makes perfect sense. I just wanted to confirm. >> Mhm. Thank you. We can entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to recommend the city council approve a conditionally use permit for a major automotive repair and service business within the Muskie Business Park located at 2501 158th Circle West. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Bednar. All those in favor, please say I. Opposed? Motion carries. This item will move forward to city council tentatively on July 21st. Thank you. The next item on our public hearing agenda this evening is a request by Zamira Salakhutdinova for a variance increasing the maximum area of an accessory dwelling unit to 1,000 square feet, and I apologize on your last name. >> She She's not here. >> Oh, she's not here. Oh, okay. >> Um okay, so this is a case that is very familiar to the Planning Commission. This will be the third um Planning Commission meeting that this has been reviewed at. Uh it is related to an existing illegal duplex at a property in uh the Lanoken addition, 132nd Court West. When the applicant had originally approached the city to do some repairs, uh submitting building permit applications, it came to light that the property that she purchased that was marketed as a legal duplex with active rental licenses was not the case. So, staff did um recommend that um the area be rezoned since there were existing duplexes in there, um and those were legally allowed as they were in place prior to the current zoning designation being applied to the neighborhood. Um the Planning Commission received public comments that were opposed to the rezoning and directed staff to identify a path to accommodate uh the applicant on a one-off basis. Um so, staff uh went back to the zoning code and uh discussed some options with the applicant. The zoning code does allow for accessory dwelling units subject to certain conditions, uh specifically in this case related to the size of the accessory dwelling unit. Um reducing the basement dwelling unit from its 1,000 square feet or 983 square feet uh to the 800 square feet um maximum would be unfeasible, according to the applicant. Um staff suggest to the Planning Commission that a variance to allow for a larger um accessory dwelling unit up to 1,000 square feet uh could be considered if the Planning Commission was able to make the a finding that uh would um allow for the approval of a variance of that um on that site to allow for the second dwelling unit uh in the basement of that property. So, staff did draft some findings for the Planning Commission to make as well as a resolution to adopt uh that would allow that specifically uh related to the unique circumstances of the property uh which are not created by the uh current landowner, which is one of those standards. So, I'm just going to go through the variance findings. I don't want to spend a whole lot of time rehashing this. It's all available on um the city's website and on the YouTube videos if if uh anyone would like to review the requests, but the findings that must be made are that the variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance. Um staff does find that uh it is in in harmony with that. The standards applied to ADUs are to ensure that the unit is accessory or subordinate to uh the primary dwelling unit. So, even at 1,000 square feet, it is still less than 75% of the primary unit. Uh the specific language in the code is that the accessory dwelling unit be no more than 75% of the primary unit or 800 square feet. In this case, this the Planning Commission would be considering uh increasing that 800 square feet to 1,000. The uh percentage uh of the of the primary uh unit would be uh 58%. So, below the 75% threshold. Uh the second finding is that the variance request is consistent with the comp plan. Uh the proposed um the proposed dwelling unit would not cause the the um site to exceed the maximum density allowed by the comprehensive plan, and the comp plan allows for twin homes and duplexes in the LDR land use designation as long as they're properly zoned. The third finding is that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. Staff does find that to be the case. There it is consistent with others in the vicinity, and they are not proposing to change it from what it has been used for in the recent past, albeit illegally. There are unique circumstances to the property which are not created by the landowner. The existing illegal dwelling unit on the lower level of the structure was not designed nor constructed by the current property owner. And again, the applicant indicates that reconfiguring the unit to meet the maximum square footage standard of 800 square feet is not feasible. And then lastly, granting the variance does not alter the essential character of the locality. The essential character would remain in place. There's existing duplexes already in that neighborhood. The applicant isn't proposing to expand or increase the size of the dwelling unit that is in the basement. So that finding can be made by the planning commission. So staff is recommending the commission adopt a motion or adopt a resolution to approve a variance to increase that minimum area from 800 square feet to maximum area from 800 square feet to 1,000 square feet. Just note that the applicant will still need to complete the building permit process. They have been going back and forth with our building permit staff. I would recommend anyone in the public who is watching this to understand that when you are submitting plans and applications, they should be high quality and easy to review to um avoid delays and back and forth between our plan reviewers and and the applicants. And then once it does receive its building permit, that would bring the structure up to the current building code standards. They would need to apply for and receive a rental license on the property. The action tonight is simply to allow an ADU up to 1,000 square feet at the address of the subject property. No more than that. Those remaining steps, as I laid out, will still need to be taken. This is not the final approval to go ahead and renting out that unit by the applicant. So, I'm happy to take any questions. I did receive an email from the applicant due to some personal family issues, they aren't able to be here tonight. Um but I did uh um you know, asked them if they if there was anything that they wanted to know or want the commission to know. Uh and there wasn't anything additionally. Uh staff did receive one public comment via mail supportive of the request. Um so, I just wanted to share that with you as well. Um and so uh yeah, happy to take any questions. >> Okay, thank you. Are there any questions for Anthony at this time? Okay, thanks, Anthony. This item is a public hearing item, so at this time we will open up the public hearing. Anyone in the audience who would like to speak may do so at this time coming to the podium stating your name and address for the record. Seeing that, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Commissioner Kennegar, seconded by Commissioner Reed. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Opposed? Motion carries. So, we've got this one back before us. I do want to just thank staff for continuing to work with us on this. I you know, this was a one we went back and forth on to find a solution that that worked for the residents all the residents in that area as well as that myself and the commission felt comfortable with um with doing. So, I appreciate the work staff did to to find a solution here. Are there any other comments or questions? >> The only thing for me is just to clarify for one once again. Uh the only thing for me is to clarify in uh that unique circumstance created not created by the land owner. Like well, in this case, I'm looking at that through the lens of the current land owner. I guess I'm what just want to clarify I'm not setting a precedent where I'm always going to evaluate it whether it was like the current land owner. I think there are situations the prior land owner doing something like we can look at it through that lens as well. >> Oh, was that a question? I'm sorry. >> No, no, it's just a comment. >> [laughter] >> No, it's just a comment. >> I didn't hear a question there, so I'm >> Nope, just a comment for the notes or for the you know, that like what I don't want to have happen is like a like a situation where we're creating like a a back door where somebody could say, "Hey, I'll sell you this property. I did something to it. You get the variance and now I'll sell it back to me and because I'm not the current land owner, you know, that kind of thing." >> Anything else? >> No. I'm I'm at motion to adopt a resolution approving a variance to increase the maximum area of an accessory dwelling unit from 800 square feet to 1,000 square feet at 2645 132nd Court West. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Commissioner Reed, seconded by Commissioner Ellis. All those in favor, please say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. That concludes our public hearing section this evening. Is there any new business? >> There is no new business. >> Any discussion items? >> Um only just a maybe note for the public that just prior to this meeting uh the city council did hold a joint work session with the planning commission to explore a concept plan for large master plan residential development east of highway 52. Um, that packet is online which shows our existing land use plan. If anybody does have questions about that they can certainly reach out to staff. >> Okay. Thank you. Anything else for discussion? Okay. We've got our next upcoming meetings July 28th, August 25th and September 22nd. So if you have any of those that you cannot make if you can let Liz know right away. I will be gone on July 28th. So I'm just a reminder of that. Okay. Well, with that I will adjourn the meeting tonight. Meeting adjourned. >> [music] [music] [music]