[Music] [Music] [Music] Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] Good evening. Welcome to the April 24th, 2005 meeting of the Minnotonka Planning Commission. The commission generally meets twice a month, always on a Thursday. The schedule and tentative meeting agendas can be obtained by calling the planning division or by checking the city website at minnotonkammen.gov. The commission holds public hearings on land use applications. For these applications, the city notifies property owners within at least 400 ft of the site and posts plans and information on the website. For some applications, the city also places signs on the properties and notices in the Sun Sailor newspaper. From a specific process standpoint, the commission makes recommendations to the city council on resonings, subdivisions, conditional use permits, and amendments to the city's comprehensive guide plan, zoning ordinance, and subdivision regulations. We also make final decisions on site plan, signage requests, variance requests, and expansion permits unless those requests are part of an application that must be heard by the city council. In that case, the commission makes the recommendation and the council makes a final decision. Anyone agreved by a final planning commission decision may appeal to the city council. If you wish to appeal, you must submit a written request to city staff within 10 days of this meeting. From a broader standpoint, the city's comprehensive guide plan, zoning ordinance, and subdivision regulations are the city's best efforts to codify a balance between individual rights and community responsibilities. Individual rights are easy to understand. Community responsibilities are more subtle, but the idea is that we as members of the community agree to limit our individual rights for the common good of the group. The planning division, the planning commission, and the city council are charged with managing this sometimes difficult balancing act. We ask that you please keep this broader perspective in mind as we review tonight's applications. Again, welcome. Staff, will you please call roll? Hansen here. Henry here. Minion here. Waterman here. Banks here. Brink here. Chair Maxwell here. There are seven of us seated tonight. Uh, next on the agenda is approval of the agenda. I believe there's a change memo. Miss Thomas. Uh, Chair Maxwell. Yes, we have two changes. The first is to uh consent agenda item um excuse me 7B regarding the accessory uh dwelling unit. There was an air uh kind of a cut cut and paste error from a previous uh report and so those numbers are are updated in your change memo. And then the second change has to do with a condition for 8A that Mr. Inglesson will go over during his report. Uh, thank you, Miss Thomas. May I have a motion to approve the agenda considering the change memo? I'll make the motion. Motion, Henry. I'll second. Second, Waterman. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next is approval of the minutes from the April 10th uh planning commission meeting. Does anybody have any changes? No. May I have a motion to approve the minutes? So move motion Brink second. Anybody second? I'll second the motion. Second. Waterman. Uh all those in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Uh next up is item five, report from staff. Uh council members, the city council has met once since your last meeting. Just this last Monday. They had four items on their agenda uh related to planning uh type work. First, uh they approved the cups for the various accessory dwelling units. Um one was a detached unit on Lewis Avenue. Uh the second was uh if you'll recall an increase in height of an exist existing accessory building on Dominic Drive. They also approved the four lot subdivision of Tonka Flats which was at Tonka Wood Road and u Minnetonka Boulevard. Finally, they introduced uh the ordinance that's actually before you this evening for um items concerning First International Bank and Trust. So, that was all from that particular meeting. Um the planning commission also requested an update on 12620 Minnitonka Boulevard. That's that property uh a concept plan for um English Rose. at their April 7th meeting, uh the council did approve a purchase agreement uh for that property. I don't know that the closing has happened yet, but the purchase agreement has been signed um using community investment fund money that has been set aside since 2009 for improvements along the Minhaha Creek uh corridor. So there has been in money there um waiting for for use for um various purposes along the corridor and they council chose to use some of those funds in that way. Uh my only other uh update is that we currently have no items for the May 1st uh planning commission meeting. So we have cancelled that meeting. Um we also do not have any items right now for May 15th. So more to come on on that. And with that, I would turn it back to the chair. Thank you, Miss Thomas. Next up is report from the commission. Does anybody here have anything to report? No. All right, moving right along. Next is item seven, the consent agenda. The city staff places items on the consent agenda that are considered routine. So, no staff or applicant presentations will be made. The commission will hold one public hearing and approve all items on the consent agenda with one motion subject to the staff recommendations of approval, conditions of approval. Before voting on the consent agenda, I will open the public hearing, announce each item, and ask if anyone wishes to have a separate discussion or vote on that item. If so, we'll remove it from the consent agenda, hold a separate hearing on it after voting on whatever is left on the consent agenda. I will now open the public hearing for the consent agenda. The first item is item 7A, a resolution approving an expansion permit to increase the height of the existing garage at 15817 Woodgate Road South. Does any commissioner or member from the audience wish to remove this item from the consent agenda? No. All right. The next item is item 7B, a conditional use permit for an attached accessory dwelling unit at 4219 Oak Drive Lane. Does anyone wish to remove this from the consent agenda? All right. As no one wishes to speak on any of these items, I will now close the public hearing. Uh, commissioners, can I have a motion to approve the items on the consent agenda? I'll make that motion. Motion. Thanks. I'll second. Second, Minion. Uh staff, do we have to call roll here or is this uh uh cherry? Yeah. Pull the commission, please. Thank you. Uh Hansen, yes. Henry, yes. Minion, yes. Waterman, yes. Banks, yes. Brink, yes. Chair Maxwell, yes. The motion carries. Item 7A is a recommendation to the planning commission that will be heard on the May 5th meeting or a recommendation to the city council. Uh heard on the May 5th meeting and item uh sorry I screwed that up. A is a final decision. B is a recommendation to uh be heard by the council on May 5th. All right. Next up is non-consent item eight. And before we begin consideration of those, I'd like to review the steps in the process and the public hearing that will be followed uh for each proposal. First, the item will be announced and staff will report on the subject. The commission will then ask questions. Next, the applicant will be invited forward to make a presentation or offer comments. Commissioners may ask additional questions at that time. After the applicant is finished, the public hearing will be opened to give anyone else present the opportunity to comment on the proposal. If you wish to speak, please come to the podium and state your name and your address for the record. We ask that you keep your comments brief and try not to repeat points already made. The first item on tonight's agenda is item 8A, a conditional use permit for a detached accessory dwelling unit at 9597 Sandra Lane. Staff, we're ready for your presentation. Thank you, chair and commission. So, our first item here is located, just to give you some bearings, here's Minnetonka Boulevard. Here is 169. So, it's on the very edge of town of Minnetonka, and then um south here is Highway 7. Uh so, it just uh it's funny, the city border goes along 169. It does bump over for this and bumps back, but we we've checked. It's in Minnetonka. We know that. Uh so, here's a look at the property. It is 1.79 acres in size. It's R1 guided low density. Currently, the site is vacant. Uh however, a home is being proposed to be built uh which is uh currently in for permits right now uh and would be built sometime this year per the applicant's plans. Just to give you some more looks at the site. Uh here's some street views. Uh here's at Sandra Lane at the end of that loop. Uh you can can't really see much of the site due to a lot of the vegetation. And this is some looks of where the proposed ADU would be located. This is facing west towards a single family home which you can't really see because a lot of the trees and different vegetation there. Then this is a look to the south that actually faces St. Louis Park. Uh but and then there's some town homes in that area. So the area where the app's proposing to build is relatively flat. It's a pretty flat area of the site. Uh there is some topography near the pond that you'll see over here. It is just a pond. It's not a wetland. It doesn't have those characteristics. I just marked this green line is the drainage and utility easement. So that's essentially the last spot they could build back there. It's a little steep in that area. Uh however, the site that they're again building is very flat. Um but this isn't a steep slope. So it's not something we looked at. Again, also distance from here is over 100 ft. So uh definitely far away from all of those different characteristics of the site. Here is a look at the proposed home uh the applicant's proposing to build. That doesn't require any approvals tonight. That's something that can be done administratively. Uh it would be a two-story home though with five thou over 5,000 square feet in size. And looking though at the proposed ADU, which you see here in red. So as you enter the site, you would have an opportunity to turn to the home and then that driveway would continue down to the ADU where there's an attached garage. Uh along the site like we looked at, this is where we looked uh where there's a lot of trees and vegetation along the south and west property lines. Here's a look at the floor plans of the accessory dwelling unit. Uh again, there's an attached garage where you can then enter a mudroom or you could enter the mudroom from outside. First level has a living room, a little kitchenet. Then you travel upstairs to a second level that includes a bedroom, uh a walk-in closet, and then also a bathroom and a deck that would be above the garage. Here's some looks at uh the the outside of the building would look like. It'd be 21 feet tall. Uh it has a bit of a more modern style. I think from what all a lot of the other things we see here in Minnetonka. So it's just a slanted roof of a per code. We would measure it at 21 ft high. Uh here's some exterior views of what the structure would look like. And uh I also included some of the plans from the U building permit that they've sent in for the proposed home. Just to note that the architectural style is definitely similar. Uh the new the home that that's being proposed also has that sort of modern slanted roof look to it. So definitely similar and also has a matching deck on top of the garage. So definitely going for that deck on top of garage style. Um but definitely matching in style between the two homes. Something staff always looks at to make sure they are sort of compatible, similar in nature. So with that rather quick look at this proposal, uh the applicant again is proposing to have a the structure is a thousand a little bit over a thousand square feet. So the buffering was something that we did look at. So looking at u the visual impact that would occur from offsite and with that staff did feel comfortable though there's really limited visual impact from those neighbors as you could see you can't really see through that vegetation. So staff did feel comfortable with the visual impact the structure would have. And in addition to that, it'd be located 21 ft and 70 ft from property lines. So decent to spacing from those other property lines there. And lastly, it is architecturally compatible with the home. Another rationale for approval is it meets all the conditional use permit standards. Uh staff reviewed them and look through them with uh all of our engineering and fire and uh all of their staff members and it meets all those rules we have outlined in the code. So tonight, uh, the plan, uh, staff is recommending approval of their request for a conditional use permit for an ADU. Uh, and I turn it over to the commission just with the note that this is a recommendation to city council which is being tenatively uh, scheduled for the May 5th council meeting. That I'll turn over to the commission for any questions. Thanks, Mr. Engles. Anybody have any questions? Commissioner Henry. Thanks, Chair. A couple of questions. Can you just confirm or review for the commission and the people watching at home too that this is not on the on the consent agenda primarily because it is more than a thousand square feet? Is that the sole reason? Uh, sure. Uh, Commissioner Henry. A couple reasons. One of the big ones too is that it's a little bit unique to be having a accessory dwelling unit being built at the same time as a home. That's something we don't really run into a whole lot. So that size, those are sort of things we thought about when we brought on to put it on to take it off the consent agenda. So, um, those are some of the things that are a little bit unique from the ones that we usually see. Thank you. Uh, second question is, if I looked at the map right, is part of this property in the city of St. Louis Park or is this property entirely within Minnetonka? Sure. Uh, Chair Maxwell and Commissioner Henry, the entire property is in the city of Minnetonka. Uh, if you look back here, the this is just a mapping error from our GIS system. It just gets cut off along that line. So, both those two, the property is bolded. That one is fully in the city of Minnotonka. Okay. I could get into theoreticals about if there's a property that's half on half and how that works, but I don't think I will. Thanks. Any other questions from commissioners? Commissioner Brink? Yeah. Hi. Just a couple of questions. Um um are are there any um uh requirements that have to be met regarding tree removals? I know there's quite a bit out there, but you know, it's it's all mostly screening the property, which is great. And my other question is, um, the site just seems well suited for this kind of thing. Like, was there ever a structure there before? Uh, Chair Maxwell, and Commissioner Brink. Um, not to my knowledge, there wasn't a a house there before. I actually worked on the subdivision for this one. I believe it was vacant at the time. Uh, so I think it's been sitting there for a while, unless it goes farther back. Um, but yeah, I know there was some grading in this area a long time ago, so that could have been part of it that made that made this occur. Um, that was your first question. And then as far as with tree removal, that's something that staff will look at as part of the building permits for both the main home right now. So staff will review then to make sure it's meeting all the tree requirements when the plat was created and then also uh will be looked at again with the ADU to make sure it's maintained them. But there is very lial limited tree removal because most of the trees as you look all all around the outside of the site. Any other questions from commissioners? All right. At this point, the applicant is invited forward. If you'd like to make any presentation or offer further comments, you may do so. Hello. I'm Maurice and I'm uh the one that's going to be living there and building the house. Um I agree with the staff's recommendation to approve to approve it. Um and tree removal. There will be no significant trees impacted whatsoever. And they were out today. Luke uh something or other with natural resources that's already been approved and it's already all uh all the significant trees are already all marked and protected. Any other questions? Thank you. We may have you back up later if we have uh if we have questions. Thank you. Thank you. All right. I will now open the public hearing. If you'd like to speak, please come to the podium. State your name and your address for the record. All right, it looks like there's nobody here who'd like to speak. So, I'll close the public hearing and I'll bring it back to the commission for any questions or comments. Commissioner Waterman, I'll go. Thanks, Chair. Um, I'm in support of this one. I think it it makes logical sense, Drew. I think it was a very good uh presentation and and packet. I thought it was very straightforward. I get why we would put it on the uh non-consent agenda. I was really just curious if there was any public feedback, which there isn't, but so I agree with everything you said. I mean, no variances. Um large lot, plenty of screening. This makes a ton of sense, and I know the city is supportive of ADUs. So, um hopefully this is a good project that comes to fruition. Anyone else? All right. Well, I guess I'll go. I get to be the last one. Um I I think it was good to have this first one on the um non-consent agenda just to have see what the discussion looks like in the future. For me, this seems like it could potentially be consent agenda, but I'm in in support of this one. Uh I'm sensing like we may be ready for a motion. Anybody uh want to make a motion to approve item 8A, conditional use permit for attached detached accessory dwelling unit at 9597 Sanderlane. I'll make the motion. Motion Minion, I'll second. Second. Waterman. Staff, please pull the commission. Hansen, yes. Henry, yes. Minion, yes. Waterman, yes. Banks, yes. Brink, yes. Chair Maxwell, yes. The motion carries and that is a recommendation to the city council to be heard on May 5th. Good luck with your application. The next item is item 8B. Uh items concerning First International Bank and Trust at 10801 YZA Boulevard. Miss Thomas, you have this item. I believe uh Chair Maxwell, I'm going to have uh Mr. Englesen. All right. Thank you, Mr. Englesen. Also me. Thank you, Chair Maxwell and Commission. So, our next one here is located just uh to get your bearings east of the Hopkins Crossroad I394 intersection on the south side of the highway off of the Weisetta Boulevard frontage road. Uh here is a look at the existing site how it currently is laid out. It's on 2.75 acres. So again, another large lot for office building. Uh there's a few improve there's obviously improvements on the property as it's been used for the last 40 years as an office building. It's a 55,000 square foot office building. A little uniqueness with this one is that they have underground parking, which you don't see in a lot of office buildings. So, as you'd come into the site, you would turn through here and you would enter into an underground garage that has 29 spaces. Also, some uniqueness with the building is that it does have a non-conforming uh set back to the west property line. This is a bit closer than what would be allowed by city code. Um, moving on to the outside of the building, there's a fairly large parking lot with sort of two main areas, a northern parking lot and a southern parking lot. There's a total of 169 parking spaces, uh, which is decently over parked with that combined with the underground parking for what's needed for the site. Also, looking at the site, there's a lot of vegetation. You can see this sort of a bubbled area along the property line to uh Archwood Road since it does front on two sides, Archwood or Archwood Drive and then also Wisetta Boulevard. And then also to the south, there's a pretty thick vegetation around that area too. Here's a look at the existing building. Uh it was previously occupied by Aramark, a food service company they use for office space. Uh but in January of 2025, the property was p purchased by First International Bank and Trust, a community bank. So with this, they're making some improvements to the property to accommodate their new use of the building. Here's another look at that property. I talked a bit about the vegetation. Here's what that looks like. Um I'll along to that eastern property line and then also to the south which is very very densely uh filled with trees. And this is the probably unique most unique part of this application which we had a lot of conversations with the applicant about this and how they're going to add on some sort of drive-through component. Uh and this was actually staff's first recommendation was to go over the top of this garage with a bridge. Um there's a lot of expenses along with that. We sort of thought it was a long shot and that's what they came back with. So uh that was a definitely a unique one that I've ever had. I don't think I've had a request with a bridge over anything before. So new for me. But yeah, this is where they'd enter the site and there'd be we'll show some more diagrams later, but this is how you would come around and loop through for a drive-thru right around this location for the bank. And here's a look at what the uh applicants proposing, a graphic design of all of it. So, I'm going to run through a lot of the things that they're doing on the site, and at the end, I'll talk about all the approvals needed since there's a pretty big laundry list of things that they'll need for these approvals. Uh but the first is u sort of a minor modification of the building. They're looking at painting the bricks on the on the building to a different darker gray color uh that would uh match more with some of their different styles they're changing on the site. Also adding metal panel accents uh if you look over here on the side of the panels that they're looking to add on. And then also they're looking to add what's the probably the largest change on the building is this interior entryway and then also this portico uh onto the front of the building as the entryway into uh the building. And then also there's going to be some modifications to the parking lot uh due to the drive-thru that they're looking to add and then also to some sidewalks they're adding on both the north and south side of the building. So, here's a look at the site plan that they have for the application. Uh, here in the green is the drive-thru they talked about. So, as you'd enter, you'd loop around and then come through this area to a window to be here and then you'd exit the site. Uh, they have enough stacking there. Stacking was uh per code is six and they show six vehicles there that would be able to stack through. And then also they're looking to add in this sort of blue purple color is a new sidewalk. Currently, you'd pull right up to this to farther up in the uh closer to the building and then you need to walk through the parking lot to enter. Uh their new proposal actually has a sidewalk. So, you'd park here and then you'd go onto a sidewalk to enter the building. They have that for both the north and south side of the building. Another and it looks small in this uh but this is the portico entryway they're proposing. It'd only be interior for the first level. Uh second and third levels would all be vacant. It's just part of that sort of more of a style I suppose for having this large high portico. And then uh this here would just be an entryway. And then they do have two little small storage closets that would be part of it. So it's in total it's a 340 ft edition. So rather small considering the building's 55,000 ft². And then uh the only other one they have that they're doing a change in here is for this uh trash enclosure which doesn't need any approvals but they did show on the site. So, I thought I'd let you know that they're also adding that with this plan. There's a fair amount of landscaping changes since they're removing some landscaping and adding some more. Uh, but they did submit a landscaping plan that shows uh added landscaping on the front side of the building in the uh drive-thru loop area and then also on the south side of the building. Uh, in total, it's 18 trees, 20 shrubs, and 175 perennials. That might change a little bit uh during review. city still has to review it for tree mitigation then also for landscaping requirements. So, uh this is what they have right now, but there might be actually more additional landscaping with the final plan after those different reviews and working with the city's natural resources staff. Here's a look at the building faces. Um here's again that large probably the large the largest part of this proposal is this uh portico edition which would be 45 ft tall. It's about five or six feet taller than what the existing building's at, but it would be using metal panels. Uh they would both look like wood and also be a dark gray. There's a few other parts of the site. They use those same panels for accents either near doors or also by the drive-thru. Other changes that they're making to do would be uh well, they're actually keeping a lot of the glass. I forgot to add that first. That the glass on the building is pretty much staying the same. There's a few spots are being covered up, but they're really preserving a lot of that existing that investment that they've already made in the building. And then looking at the other part that we haven't talked about very much is the sign variance. So the applicant is proposing a sign variance to have two wall signs on one elevation of the building. To go into the sign code, the first thing to know is that uh for office buildings, city code allows there to be two signs uh for properties that are on a corner lot. So, because this one's on my on Weisetta Boulevard and Archwood Road, it's allowed to have two signs, but one of which could be on the north and one could be on the east. Uh code does not allow you to move those. You can only move them with a variance. So, Davin's proposed again to have them on that one side. Uh but just to for reference, uh the code also regulates the size of those based on the height of the building, the level of stories, and then also how long it is. So, because this is a very long building, it'd be allowed to have 182 square ft of signage on the north elevation and 74 square ft on the east elevation. In total, the applicants proposing quite a bit less than that. Uh they're proposing two signs that would be under 60 square ft in size. So, these two signs combined would be less than would actually be allowed on this elevation. The only reason that's being a variance is required is because they again are on the same elevation. Um, after looking through, there's a couple other things too that I wanted to add that were not in your staff report. Um, just to get a little bit more of the visual understanding of what's going on out there. So, here's a look at that building from Weisetta Boulevard. You can see the existing Aramark sign. Uh, again, the applicant would be allowed to have a sign on this elevation, but as you move farther away to the east, uh, that that elevation really gets blocked pretty by that vegetation. So here is it from about at the corner at the corner of was that a boulevard and there's Archwood Road and then by the time you get to Archwood Road you can't see the building. So there's a real limitation there and uh we would tell that we would if they came to us and said we want to tear down all this vegetation, we would also say no to that because we want the landscaping there for the drive-thru. So there's definitely a two things pulling on sort of what that view looks like from Archwood Road. Uh, one other thing as I worked through this application, I kept thinking this really seemed familiar and I was getting a lot of deja vu and that's because a very young planner uh, back in 2017 named Drew Englesson worked on a project actually here. It's one year into my um, working at the city of Matonka and just two buildings to the east of this property is the Mill City Credit Union and they requested a very similar variance to this one which was again they were had a similar situation where they're on Weisetta Boulevard. They have a side road over here to the east and this sign would have been allowed on that elevation but they made the same request to have it located on Weisetta Boulevard and uh that was approved back in 2017 so quite a while ago but I was just thinking of a just kept coming back to me that's a similar situation that the city had just a a few well I'd say a few years ago but I've been here now for nine years and that's eight years ago so time flies. Um so now to go through I want to go through all the different approvals that we have tonight after talking about the assigned variance. Um there's a master development plan site and building plan review. Um the master development plan is actually triggered because this is in the planned I394 district and when there's a request for a variance or conditional use permit there's a requirement that that has a master development plan. So those the conditional use permit and variance request actually trigger that requirement. Uh so both of those the site and building plan would have been required but the master development plan is required due to it being in that district. There's also a conditional use permit um request for the drive-thru. That's uh something that's outlined in city code in the P. Then lastly there is a signed variance being request tonight. So uh with that staff is recommending approval of all of those. We can when there's a motion you can say the items related to don't need to go through all of them. Um but staff is recommending approval of all of them. To break them down a little bit for the master development plan and site and building plan review, uh it meets all of the requirements outlined in city code. So staff is recommending approval of that. Um specifically the building the updates will provide an updated architectural style for the building. And then also which the building was constructed 40 years ago. So it's need of a a little bit of an update. Uh and staff does find that to be an attractive update that they're making. Uh, also for the site, the site's going to continue to provide appropriate circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. The conditional use permit for the drive-thru has been reviewed by staff uh, including the city's engineering department and uh, not only does it meet all the standards, but uh, staff also finds it to be appropriate for the circulation that they've made and doesn't foresee circulation issues. And then lastly, for the sign variance, uh, the sign variance is reasonable as it would reduce the total wall signage. As I talked about, just that one face could have 180 square feet and they've reduced that down to uh around 112. And then also it's going to improve business visibility and wayfinding for visitors. Uh specifically when considering the existing vegetation that they have on the site and then in general, most of the signs in this area do face Wisetta Boulevard. So it'll be consistent with the neighborhood character having two signs facing that area instead of having one face a local street where there's really not as much traffic. So, um, this is a little bit different for the commission. We don't have many requests like this, but, uh, there's sort of two there are two levels of actions being taken tonight with these decisions. For the sign variance, that action is a final decision subject to an appeal to city council. So, the sign variance by itself requires an affirmative vote of five uh, commissioners. And then all the other requests tonight are recommendations to city council, which would be heard tenatively at the May 5th council meeting. With that, I complete the presentation and hand it over to the chair and commission for questions. Thank you, Mr. Anglesson. What questions do commissioners have? Uh, Commissioner Minion, great job, Drew. Um, the signs to me look great. Uh, however, I didn't see anything about replacing that backlit monument sign out front to the pennant sign out front. Can you talk a little bit about what direction that is is or what's going to happen with that existing sign mean the one out by the curb? Uh, Chair Maxwell and Commissioner Minion. So, this sign that we have out front, I'll scroll back to it. Uh, there hasn't been any conversation with the applicant about that. As far as this sign, um, if they come in with a sign that meets city code and they're just refacing it, that's something that can be done administratively. It only come back to the commission if they proposed something that didn't meet the requirements. So, um, didn't talk about a lot tonight because it's not part of the request. Um, again, if it meets city code, something will approve administratively. So, that will still stay. Um, the other thing is is uh when I drove the property saw some some higher density residential to the basically be the south and uh a little bit to the west. Can you tell me just give me a reminder on the uh guidelines for driveups, speakers, things like that and and what that means for the residents uh immediately adjacent to the properties. Thank you. Uh thank you, Chair Maxwell and Commissioner Minion. Uh there are some requirements. One of them is that there's not allowed to have a PA system. So that's something that's not permitted. Uh, also our code talks about how it can't be directly adjacent to those properties, but due to the site, there's a lot of buffers between this drive-thru and those properties when you look back to it. I'm going here. Um, I'll go back to this one is probably the best. Um, I'll zoom in. So the property to the south is a there's a really thick vegetation between there between this site and then also a parking lot and also a street that blocks between this property and the homes that are along this area. So that buffer area that landscaping is really one of the reasons that this is being recommended for approval because it is buffering and screening it from those sites. Uh so if the applicant in theory came back and said they wanted to remove that that wouldn't be allowed as part of not only their landscaping plan but also a part of this conditional use permit. So, uh, screening's there. The noise, there's no PA system allowed as part of it. Um, so staff felt comfortable with it as far as the closeness to those neighborhoods. Commissioner Banks, I saw your hand up. Thanks, Chair. Thanks, Jes. Um, just a couple of quick questions to kind of stay along the lines of the the drive-thru. Can you go to that photo where you are showing uh six cars stacking up? Yeah. Okay. So, here just curious um as to did the city have any concerns about the cars coming in to the bridge but having to um kind of come across the entryway into the garage that's underneath. any concerns with traffic there or would there be a maybe a stop sign or something there to um let people who are coming out of the garage, you know, check for traffic? Yeah, Commissioner Banks. Um this was was re reviewed by staff. Um so you're talking about something that would be stacking beyond this area and blocking that area. There wasn't anything put in there with co with um there wasn't anything city code requires just six stacking. So it does meet that requirement. Um, yeah, that is something that could be added as part of a condition of approval that there's some signage here that um maybe leaves a space or something in case there is more. Sure. Okay. And then my uh second question, I don't know if you have a picture of it, but we have it in our packet. It looks like there is a pink area in the floor plan for retail and that retail is next to or perhaps part of the drive-thru. So would that is that retail? Do you know if it's planned to be used by the bank or are they are they planning to bring in u a retail company? Chair Maxwell Commissioner Banks. Uh I saw the same thing as a planner right away when I see retail my my lights go off with things. Um but as this is a bank, retail is used in a little bit of a different term. So it's a good question for the applicant just to confirm. But uh my understanding is that retail is for the bank teller. That's their their wording for retail versus the rest of the space. It's office. Okay. Just wanted to check. I saw that the the signage had a different name. Assuming that maybe they're thinking about bringing someone else in, but yeah, I can I can ask the applicant that question. So, thank you, Commissioner Henry. Thank you. Two questions. Number one, the bridge over the underground parking. Does the city have some thought about how high some kind of a railing has to be to prevent I hate to see any wayward child open the door then run out the op the passenger side and then fall down over there too. So I'm I'm assuming there's a certain height, but can you let us all know what that is if there's plans in place for it? Chair Maxwell and Commissioner Henry, we haven't gotten into the details of that bridge at this point. That will come when it comes in for a building permit. will require a building permit as part of the application. And with that, it'd be reviewed by state building code. So, if there's state building code requirements, obviously, that's our place to enforce um any sort of blocking there, but I think that's a that's a good point to make, but is something I apologize. Uh that would be reviewed during building permit review. Okay. Thanks. Second question was, they're adding sidewalks into this and it looks like from the pictures, even the one that's up on the screen right now, the parking spaces that are closest to the building. Is it is it right that how I'm looking at it that the spaces are going to be shorter than the original ones were or are we going to lose any spaces or at least lose any depth from any of the spaces? Uh, Comm uh Chair Maxwell, Commissioner Henry. Um, I did not review to what the size were before, but I did review to make sure that all of these met city code. So, all of the parking stalls would meet our minimum requirements. Uh, as far as the number of spaces, uh, total, I think I heard that question, too. There'd be a 20 parking space reduction. However, there's, um, they're significantly overparked. Uh, so even with that reduction of spaces, they still will meet our minimum standards for the amount. So um in short, it meets both the dimensions for parking stalls and uh would meet the number required for the building of this size. Thank you. One other one I just thought of too with the does a city have any leeway with issuing a conditional use permit to encourage require mandate the the builder to install some energy efficient appliances or make sure that it's uh has a certain carbon neutrality to the building. Uh Comm Chair Maxwell, Commissioner Henry, I can feel our city attorney breathing down my neck. And the answer to that would be no. We do not have the ability to add on addition conditions like those. I had to try. Anybody else? No. Uh I uh at this point the uh applicant may come forward and make a presentation to the commission. Hello, my name is Andy Fet. I'm a project manager with GLG Architects. We've applied on behalf of our client, First International Bank and Trust. Uh, as you know, we're applying for a conditional use permit and the signed variance. And I thought maybe I would just give kind of a brief history on how we arrived at what you've seen this evening um, and give you a little bit background on the on the company itself. So, the bank started as a small bank in western North Dakota. And it's remained as a family business since the early 1900s. They've expanded across North Dakota into South Dakota and now Minnesota. They do have a couple locations in Arizona as well. Um, they've been in Minnesota now for a few years. is they do have a small location in Edina currently, but they're really looking to kind of ramp up their presence here in the Twin Cities, especially with this project. And uh so a lot of the goals with this project are related to kind of that uh presence that they want to create here in the Twin Cities. And this is really honestly a marketing opportunity for them as a company to be so close to the interstate. Um, and they they really do invest in their facilities um, and the customer experience. They really, um, I know you're not looking at some of their other projects here this evening, but they really do like to create spaces that are warm and inviting for their customers, and they really think about that customer experience is really their priority. Um, so with that, I can talk a little bit about the architecture and site design itself. Uh what we're trying to accomplish with the addition, there's a couple things there. One, we're trying to create a kind of nice warm inviting entry for customers. There's a atrium right when you walk in that front door. Um and the existing entry is a little bit underwhelming um as you approach the building. And then the second reason we went with this design was really a it's really a marketing opportunity and just to create kind of a more of a monumental entry, something that can be viewed from the interstate. And it's really, you know, the building that's there now is actually a very nice building, albeit 40 years old. It's a a very nice modern building that's been well maintained. Um, but it is pretty nondescript. So, we think that this addition really will will help provide a refresh there. Um, as far as the sign variance goes, I don't have much else to add beyond what Drew already mentioned there. Um, I will say though, one of the questions, the the second logo that you see there, Kodapay, is a a separate company that's owned by First International Bank and Trust, and they will occupy a portion of this building. So really that honestly was the main driver for the desire to have two separate signs is there will be the you know first international bank is the main occupant and the owner of the building but they also own this code of pay company which will be in the building as well. Um, I think beyond that, I, you know, we've reviewed the conditions of approval, uh, that city staff have laid out and we understand and agree and don't have any objections with what's being requested. So, can also answer any additional questions. May the commission have questions for the applicant? Commissioner Henry, thank you. Is your client planning on buying the building or are they leasing the building? They they own the building now. They do own the building. Okay. Well, I'd be remiss if my dudes I also serve on the sustainability commission, too. So, I'd like to make sure that we're doing all doing our part here. So, since I do own the building, I'm looking at the the potential for good sun loading and it's a great spot to have a bunch of solar panels on the roof. Has your client thought about doing that? I think that's still part of the conversation. And you know, it's important to us too as an architecture firm that we explore these things. Um, so I think that's a possibility. I I can't say one way or the other whether it's going to happen or not, but it's it's come up in conversation. I didn't mention that the building exterior is getting pretty significant envelope upgrades as well. So, we're replacing all the existing glass and the roof. So, we'll have some opportunity for more energy efficiency there, too. Well, I'm glad that you and your client are thinking about those things. So, thank you can tell them that the commission also was thinking about it. So, Sure. Thank you. No obligation, of course. So, I don't want to make the city staff nervous. Just a suggestion. Thank you, Commissioner Banks. Thanks, Chair. Did you say Fets? I'm sorry. Last night. Yeah. All right. Thank you. Um just a um quick question about the drive-thru and the the use of the drive-thru. Um just want to make sure you know we're not bringing in, you know, a burger joint or something that's going to be heavily used. So what would be the use for that space that's adjacent to It will be a bank. Yeah. So is that more like I can come cash a check or Yeah, just like your typical typical bank there. You know, as we all know, banking has changed a lot in the last 15 years. So the they call it a retail uh their retail portion of the facility. I realize it is a bit confusing when you use that term. Um so that those retail spaces have tended to kind of shrink over time, but really it's just your traditional bank. There will be a a teller when you walk in um that also would staff the the drive-thru window here too. So Okay. All right. Great. Thank you, Commissioner Minion. If I heard things right, basically they're looking at occupying just the first floor and they'll be renting out the other two floors roughly. Is that approximately correct? As of right now, they'll occupy the first floor and the third floor. Okay. the second floor. It's a little bit up in the air right now. Um I think there was talk at one point of bringing in another office tenant for the short term, but the goal the long-term goal is for them to occupy the entire building. My my mind's going towards signs. So right now the two signs that are showing on the on the picture before us, they would cover the two floors. Correct. Right. Roughly. And then there's one more potential company coming that may or may not be assigned partner if they bring in another tenant. Yes, there would be another company potentially in the building. And can you answer the mystery question that I asked Drew? The tough thing is that uh penant sign out front on the curb the monument sign. You've done a really nice job of creating a beautiful building and really taking what was a good building and making it look much more attractive. I really like the signage that you chose. makes it very easy to approve. Um, what can you tell us your thoughts are for the penant sign or I'm sorry, the monument sign? Sure. Yeah, we we haven't had a lot of conversations about that yet either, but I think the conversation has just stopped at what are the what are the city code requirements, what are our limitations, and would we ever try to go beyond what city codes allows us to do? The answer has been no. So to Drew's point, there will be something happening with this sign obviously, but whether it's reusing what's there now or providing a new monument sign, we're not we're not going to go out of the bounds of city code, if that makes sense. So it won't be any bigger than what's there now. So I don't know if that really answers your question or not, but I appreciate your honesty. Thank you. All right. Thank you. We may bring you up if Oh, do you have another question? I do have one more. All right. Commissioner Henry, thanks. Uh when uh when Commissioner Mind was asking some questions, it brought up some things, too. We mentioned before the city requires six cars and stacking in the drive-thru. You and your client, do you anticipate six is going to be enough for average demand, even peak demand? Do you do you see any snarls that are going to happen with the entrance to the underground parking and the drive-thru? Yeah, even even six is beyond what they normally see. Um, so we don't we don't anticipate any issues there at all. Um, we understand six is what the city code says, but we don't think there will ever be six cars stacked there. So, and to answer the earlier question about the guardrail, there will be a guardrail. It's a it's a code requirement. So, we'll provide that. Thank you. Well, if you're comfortable with it and the city is comfortable with it, then I'm comfortable with it. All right. Thank you. We may bring up the public hearing if there are more questions. All right. I will now open the public hearing. If you'd like to speak, please come to the podium. State your name and your address for the record. All right. Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing. And I'll bring this back to the commission for any further questions or comments. Who'd like to go first? Nobody. All right, Commissioner Henry. I don't want to keep going after I ask the questions, but sure, I can have some comments. I love it. It's It's a really good use of the space and and kudos to the architects. I think it it like commissioner minion said it takes a really good building and makes it really really good and it's a going to be a good asset to the city of Minnitanka to the people that are occupying the space. I would like to occupy the space. I like all the surroundings of it. So it's it makes it easy for us. All the the hard work has been done and all the questions have been answered. I just again encourage you to make sure that they try to make it as sustainable as possible. But I'm all in favor of this. Commissioner Waterman. Thanks, Shar. I don't have uh too much more to add. Um just kind of echoing that, you know, appreciate the interest in the building and and uh it's a welcome improvement to the property and I think it looks really sharp. Um as to the you know, I'm supportive of what the city is asking for, recommending uh with the master development plan and the signage variance. I think that makes sense. I know we've seen in this corridor, we've had some talk about other signage and creating I don't want to say precedents, but taking a pause on some of those and this one I understand the reasons. So, I'm supportive of it and I think the drive-thru also meets the cup standard as well. So, I'm supportive. Commissioner Brink. Yeah, I'd just say thank you to the applicant and to staff for the presentation. Um, I just echo the same comments as Commissioner Henry and Waterman. It's a good plan and it's um kind of a great uh redevelop shouldn't call it a redevelopment but sprucing up of the property and uh it's a good plan. I'm full support of it. Commissioner Minion, I really like the uh look of the porticle. I think it really changes the entire neighborhood. Um not that the old building was bad, but you've really done a great job of making it more open and welcoming. Um, I really appreciate your eye for the signage. I think you did a great job with that. It makes it very easy to prove. Um, I'm hoping that they retain you for that monument signed out front. Um, but that's out of our purview, but uh, all in all, I think it's a great addition to the neighborhood and, uh, really looking forward to the addition of another bank that's, uh, going to kind of continue to build our community. I think wish everybody went well. you have anything to say? No. Yeah, sure. Thanks, chair. Um, yeah, kind of echoing the same sentiment. I'll just point out a couple things that I really liked in terms of the improvements. Um, the sidewalks, um, I think creating some safety there is is great. um the um the the bridge for the driveway. Um it sounds like there was a collaboration, but whoever came up with it and how you guys ran with it um certainly a great idea. Um and I think those just add value to the building for um your use, but then even beyond that um in the future. So, we really appreciate what you guys are doing and um hopefully it works out and welcome to welcome to the city. All right, I'll go last here. The one thing I was thinking about for this project was the signs and just just because you take a sign off one face doesn't mean you should just automatically be allowed to put move it to the other face. Um so thank you for pulling together that um example of a similar project in the area. Um and the fact that there's multiple tenants in the building helps me feel okay with that. that if it had been just two identical signs, one on each side of the building, in my mind, that wouldn't um be a a good addition. So, but I'm okay with this um the way it is. Um I'm sensing we're ready for a motion. Um staff, how should we make this motion with the one's an approval and one's a recommendation? We say a move to approve or recommend the items related to item 8 B. So, chair, we'll make it very easy for you. So, I would just uh go off of what's written on here, which is recommending all of these together in one motion, and we can do them all approval with one. If there was a concern, we could have split them up between the two, but if there isn't, and there's a consensus, we can probably move at that. The one thing I would add to is I did hear a comment from Commissioner Banks about a request to have a do not block signage near the um near this location. So, I think we can keep that also and have that something added to the resolution before it goes to council with a commission recommendation. Um, so it can be as simple as with uh that comment included within this as a additional condition of approval. But again, no need to go through and read all of the different items being approved. You can just do a all these ones together. And and to clarify, um, Mr. Inglesson, um, the planning commission is approving the resolution, correct? For the for the signed variant. So I I think you can, as Mr. Englesen said, "Recommend the city council adopt the resol the ordinances and resolutions and approve the the resolution." This is one of the more complicated ones we've had. Would anybody like to make the motion that Miss Thomas just said? I'll make the motion. Motion. Minion. I'll second. Second. Waterman. Staff, please pull the commission. Hansen, yes. Henry, yes. Minion, yes. Waterman, yes. Banks, yes. Brink, yes. Maxwell, yes. Motion carries. And this is a final decision on the sign variance and a recommendation to the council for the other items that will be heard tenatively on May 4th. Good luck with your project. Uh the final item is [Music] adjournment. Do we need a motion to have a motion to adjurnn? I'll make that motion. Motion waterman. I'll second. Second. Banks. All those in favor say I. I. We are adjourned. [Music]