[music] [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Good evening and welcome to the July 23rd, 2026 meeting for the Minnitankka Planning Commission. The commission generally meets twice a month, always on a Thursday. The schedule and tenative meetings agendas can be obtained by calling the planning depart division or by checking the city website at mitankamn.gov. The commission holds public hearings on land use applications. For all land use applications, the city notifies property owners within at least 400 ft of the site and post plans and information on mitakamn.gov. For some applications, the city also places signs on the property in places of notice or or in places a notice in the sun sailor. From a specific process standpoint, the commission makes recommendations to the city council on resoning, subdivisions, conditional use permits, and addendums to the city's comprehensive guide plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations. We also make final decisions on site plans, signature requests, signage requests, variance requests, and expansion permits unless these requests are part of an application that must be heard by the city council. In that case, the commission makes recommendations to the city council and and the city council makes the final decision. In addition to theseformational acts in this in addition to these formal acts actions the commission also providesformational feedback and development and concept plans. Anyone that's aggravated by the agrieved by the final planning commission decision may appeal the decision to the city council. If you wish to appeal, you must submit a written request to the city staff within 10 days of the meeting. From a broader standpoint, the city's comprehensive guide plan, zoning ordinances, and subdivision regulations are the city's best efforts to codify a balance between individual rights and the community responsibilities. Individual rights are easy to understand. Community responsibilities are more subtle, but the idea is that we members of the community agree to limit our individual rights for the common good of the group. The planning division, the planning commission, the city council are charged with managing some difficult this sometimes difficult balancing act. We ask you to keep this broader perspective in mind as we view tonight's application. Again, welcome. Staff, will you take role? >> Sure. Brink >> here. >> Johnson >> here. >> Sher is absent. Shoemaker absent. Banks >> here. and chair minion >> here. Thank you. Um, are there any changes, staff? Are there any changes to the uh agenda tonight? >> Uh, Chair Minion, uh, no changes this evening. >> All right. May I have a motion to approve the agenda? >> I'll make a motion. >> May I have a second? >> I'll second it. >> All right. Motion brings seconded. Johnson. >> Um, next, approval of the minutes for our July 9th, 2020. You can have a vote, [clears throat] please, on the a voice vote on the minutes. >> You had a motion and a second, but you didn't have a vote. >> Oh, sorry. >> That's all right. >> Voice vote on the minutes. >> Say, all in favor? >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Thank you. >> All right. Next, approval of the minutes from the July 9th, 2026. Commissioners, are there any changes? No changes. All right. I get a motion on approval of the minutes. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Second. >> Second. All right. >> Motion Banks, a second Johnson. Uh, all those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> Motion I. >> Motion carries. Staff, is there any report? Uh chair and uh commissioners, just uh one item to report from the last city council meeting. That was the Excel Energy Line, the large replacement. Um that was approved, excuse [clears throat] me, on the actually the the consent agenda. Um the staff recommendation and your commentary part of that decision to put it on the the consent agenda. No other items at that meeting. I did not have to attend. Thank you, Miss Wishnack, for doing that. That was great. Um, I have a bunch of meeting related um items for you. Uh, if you'll recall, next week, uh, Thursday, July 30th, uh, is the boards and commissions tour. We have a an interesting tour uh, lined up for you. We'll meet here. Dinner is from 5 to 5:30. Um, hopefully we'll have it out on the deck out here if the weather is good. uh we'll be leaving city hall promptly at 5:30. Then your next meeting following will be August the 6th. We have a few items already on that agenda. And then I just wanted to put kind of a tickler out there. September 3rd, your first meeting in September, um Julie and I will be presenting um to you what you've kind of the first time. Um a comprehensive update on the zoning ordinance update. Um so we presented that to the council at their study session uh on Monday of this week and we'll present that to you on September 3rd. We'll also be taking that presentation to the DEI commission and the sustainability commission also. So if you are interested in that, mark your calendar for September 3rd. And that's all I have. Chair. Thank you. Um are there any reports from planning commissioners? Okay. Uh tonight we have um a non-consent agenda. And before we begin consideration of the non-conent items, I'd like to review the steps in the process in the public hearing procedures that will be followed for each proposal. First, the item will be announced and the staff will report on the subject. The commission will then ask questions. Next, the applicants will be invited up to make a presentation or offer comments. Commissioners may ask additional questions at this time. Closer. >> Just a hair closer. >> All right. Can you hear me now? >> There you go. >> All right. Thank you. I'll talk a little louder. Thank you. Commissioners may ask additional questions at this time. After the applicant has finished, the public hearing will be open to give anyone present to open to be give anyone present the opportunity to comment on the proposal. If you wish to speak, please come to the podium and state your name and address of record. We ask that you keep your comments brief and try not to repeat points already made. Once everyone has spoken, we may ask speakers to return for additional comments at a comments at larger meetings. Neighborhood spokespeople are encouraged to give uh are encouraged and given up to 15 minutes to present. The first item on tonight's agenda is the minor addendum to the existing master development plan for the addition of the existing auto service and dealership Morris Mitaka Subaru at 12520 Weisetta Boulevard. Um, >> thank you, chair. Uh, so yes, the first one we're looking at, it's a staff is recommending that the commission adopt the resolution approving a minor amendment to the master development plan for a building addition at 12520 Wisetta Boulevard. There are four votes needed for this item and it's a final decision subject to an appeal. Looking at the location, we are on the north side of the city. You can see that with this black square up here. And then looking more specifically, we're just north of Weisetta Boulevard, uh, between Plymouth Road and Hopkins Crossroad. Here's a look at that existing site. Uh, looking over at the on the right hand image, the subject property is about 4 acres in size, includes over 300 parking spaces. Um, most of the property is again parking spaces. And this existing building, the existing building is a fullervice auto dealership. It is two stories, 75,000 square ft. It was built in 1968. An important part of this important part of this building is there's a recess right here in the building. It sort of jumps in and then comes back out. Here's a better look at that from the aerial. And what is being requested tonight by Morris is to u fill in that area essentially. So adding 1,400 square ft uh 1,400 ft² addition uh which would expand the building's auto service and office space and that's outlined again in red on your screen. Uh so that would be about a 100 foot setback from the existing uh property line on the front the front property line. So easily meeting the 50- foot setback. And looking at that floor plan, the first floor will have again that um the addition but with for auto services, but the second floor would be open. So there won't be a second floor to it even though it will be appear to be from the outside that there's a second floor. Here's a look at that elevation uh from uh looking from the street. It's going to be really consistent with what the building currently looks like. It's just going to be basically pulled forward. So, they're using brick and metal panels and metal trim for that addition. And it'll be almost even with that front building line. It's also going to maintain the same height of the building, which is about 25 ft roughly. So, a pretty quick one tonight. Um, again, staff is recommending that the commission adopt the resolution approving the minor amendment to the master development plan for this building at 12520 Weisetta Boulevard. Four votes are needed for approval and again the decision is final subject to an appeal. With that, I'll turn it back to the chair and the commission for any questions. >> Thank you commissioners. Any questions? Mr. Brinks Brink. >> Yeah. Thank you, chair. Um it appears that there with this addition there's going to be losing some a small amount of parking space. Do they have to um um provide parking spaces somewhere else on the site now to make up for what's being lost? >> Yes. Uh Chairman and Commissioner Brink. So they have adequate amount of parking. They're significantly overparked from a city code perspective. Most that's used for vehicles, but um in short, they wouldn't need to add additional parking for the project. Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions? Okay. Uh, at this time, uh, the applicant is invited to make a presentation and offer some comments. Please state your name and your address of record. >> Good evening. My name is Dan Bham. My address is 400 South Second Street in Hudson, Wisconsin. I am the architect on the project and Drew did a pretty good job of describing what we're doing. We're just pulling that front facade of their service reception part where you drive in, drop your car off for service, just expanding that just due to the um increase in volume that they're seeing. They just need more space for service and repair. So essentially, we're just filling in that gap in between the two buildings. And if you have any questions, we have a representative from Morris and the contractor if I can't answer it. >> Hang one, please. Commissioners, Mr. Brinks. This is for Mr. Banks. >> Thanks, Chair. Um, thanks. I'm sorry I didn't catch your last name. >> Dan Bernham. >> Bernham. Okay. Thank you for the the um taking the question. Just curious as to if you had the ability to add more space on the second floor, why why would you not opt to do that >> at this point? It's Well, right now there the existing room is open to the second floor with the tall ceilings other than a current bridge skyway for lack of a better term that crosses. So, we're just matching what's currently existing with the taller service bay kind of look and feel. >> Okay. All right. Great. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> No. Okay, we might call you back up later in a little bit. Thank you. >> All right. Um, commissioners. Oh, anyone else questions? Nope. Mr. Brinks? >> Yeah, just one more quick question. Um, as part of approval, building permit approval, um, are there um, sustainability or any energy efficient measures that are required as part of this also? And, and if so, what what might we see on that? >> Yes. Uh, Chairman Minion and Commissioner Brink. So, there's nothing that the staff can put on there or the city could for requiring uh sustainability items. It'll have to meet state building code for all of their energy requirements and things like that, but nothing that we've put out that's requirement on there that's been added to the resolution. >> All right. Thank you. Any other questions? >> Nope. All right. This time I'll open the public hearing. If you'd like to speak, please come to the podium. State your name and your address of record. staff, is there anyone online? >> There is not. >> All right. Seeing no one's coming forward, we'll close the public hearing. Um, all right. Commissioners, any questions or comments? >> Mr. Brink. Yeah, I was going to say this is um looks like a very straightforward project. Um I don't have any problem with with approving this. I mean what they're adding is uh just a very very tiny percentage of the uh u of the whole building site existing uh the building and the site itself. Um and it's all currently hard surface area as it is. So it's not a it's not a really huge significant change to the site when you look at it as a whole. So, um, you know, I think it looks like it improves, uh, uh, you know, the use of the site for what they need to do there. And, um, looks good. I don't have any problem with this. Anyone else? All right. Um, all right. Well, I appreciate the fact that, uh, it seems to be, um, reasonable and consistent with the neighborhood. I think it's also consistent with our our codes and they like the fact that it meets the height requirements and the setbacks and I'm looking forward to supporting it and uh appreciate everyone's time. Um does this sound like we're about ready for a motion? I think so. >> All right. Would someone like to make a motion on Let me get the deal right. We are looking at item 8A. Would someone like to make a motion on item 8A? Mr. Banks, >> I'd like to make a motion that we approve the um minor amendment to the master development plan uh for the building at 12520 Wisetta Boulevard. >> All right. May somebody like to make a second? >> I'll second it. >> Second, Johnson. So a motion Banks seconded uh uh Johnson staff please call for a vote. >> Brink, >> yes. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> Banks, >> yes. >> Minion, >> yes. >> Well, thank you. >> Um, this will be a recommendation to the city council. >> No. >> Uh, no, chair. This is a final decision. So, subject to an appeal. If anyone has an appeal, they have 10 days to submit appeal to the city. >> All right. This is a finance decision subject to appeal. If anyone like to appeal the commission's decision, they may provide a written request to the city staff within 10 days of the meeting. Um otherwise, this recommendation will go to the city council to be considered because it's a final decision. Thank you very much. All right, back to item 8B. Um, tonight's agenda would be 8B. Is there a staff presentation for 8B? >> Yes, Commissioner Minion. Uh, and or excuse me, Chair Minion, Commissioner Ricks. Okay. Um, the subject property for this item is located east of Hopkins Crossroad and south of Cedar Lake Road. um and just west of Highway 169. The 18,000 foot property was created in 1958 as part of the Cedar Crown second edition. Uh the house on the property was created that same year, built that same year, excuse me. It's located at the highest point of the property with slopes uh grading downwards towards the rear of the site where the flood plane is located. Here's some additional photos of the property both in the rear of the yard. The one on the right is obviously looking at the existing single family home um and towards Cedar Crest Road while the other is looking towards the back of the property and the neighboring um lots to the east. Uh the homeowner is proposing to construct a twostory 320 ft addition to the rear of the existing home. The project also includes the demolition of the existing deck and uh as well as a walkout uh patio adjacent to the proposed addition. Uh variances are required for principal structures constructed less than 2 ft above the flood plane elevation and for accessory structures located less than 1.5 ft above the flood plane elevation. Because both the addition and deck and patio do not meet those standards, variances are necessary. The city may approve a variance from city code requirements only if the application meets all the variance standards as required by code. [clears throat] In this case, staff finds that the proposal meets the intent of the ordinance as the proposed grading will improve the existing site conditions by creating additional flood storage and a more favorable relationship between um excuse [clears throat] me, the structure and the flood plane. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan as it supports flood plane management goals on site um while also allowing the reinvestment of the existing single family structure. Practical difficulties exist on site because the request is reasonable, allowing for the homeowner to construct an addition that improves uh the functionality of the existing single family home. There are unique circumstances on the property, including the existing development patterns and flood plane constraints that significantly limit the buildable area. And lastly, the flood plane or the excuse me, the neighborhood will not be altered as the rear edition maintains the established building patterns of the neighborhood and is consistent with surrounding single family homes that also experience similar flood plane constraints. With that, staff recommends that the planning commission adopt the resolution approving the variance to the minimum minimum lowest floor elevation standard for the construction of an addition deck and patio to the existing single family home at 2606 Cedar Crest Road East. Five or excuse me, four votes it should say are needed to approve this uh request. >> Thank you. Commissioners, are there any questions? Yes, sir. Mr. Brink. Okay. >> Um, yeah. Thank you, chair. Um, I just have a question. Maybe, uh, if it could be clarified for me a little bit. Uh, when we use the term flood plane here, we're not talking about a FEMA designated flood zone like we would along Minihaha Creek or the lakes where there's actually a established FEMA elevation. And um, because I I think if that was the case, it'd be a whole different level of conversation here, right? >> Yeah. Commissioner Brink, uh, Chair Minion, this is not a FEMA designated flood plane. Um, so those additional standards or requirements are not uh in play for this project. >> And uh, was this flood flood elevation that established here? This was just established by a regular uh, hydraulic hydraologic study done by the city or somebody else or >> Commissioner Brink and Chair Minion. We have the Atlas 14 which is provided to us by a uh consultant. I don't remember the name of the consultant off the top of my head. Um but our engineering staff works with them and they are provided that information um which then they provide to us and put in our modeling. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Chair, I'll I'll just add on um to what Ms. Rooney said, all of which was totally accurate. You may recall in 2023 the city updated its flood plane um model throughout the community um using the Atlas 14 information that Ms. Rooney um noted before. And so we found that um flood plane elevations based on that more specific data based on current conditions that that rose in certain areas that 100year. So that's what this is on. >> Okay. And then maybe just one last question. I think in the report it mentioned that um later after the um model was done that a pipe was discovered that lowers it even more. Was that correct? >> Yeah, Commissioner uh Brink Chairman. Yes. There was a pipe that was actually identified um by the property owner and their neighbor um on the property to the south. um that was not included in our modeling initially and uh essentially changed the elevation by a foot or so. Okay. >> Um which definitely impacted the recommendation for this application. >> Okay. Thanks. Okay. Commissioners, any other questions? Mr. Banks. >> Thanks, Chair. Um just wanted to be clear. Um wasn't I wasn't certain if there were two variances. one for the principal structure and then one for >> um the the patio or is it is there a third for the stairs or is the stairs and the patio considered one structure? >> Uh Commissioner Banks Chairman Minion um there would technically be three so three different structures I should say. The stairs of the deck, the patio and the structure. The stairs of the deck and the patio have different requirements than the principal structure. Whereas that is to the other are 1.5. >> Okay. And the stairs um [clears throat] looks like the stairs would be 1.1. >> Yep. Uh Commissioner Banks Chairman Minion. Yes, that's correct. They would be just above um the elevation but not enough to meet the 1.5 uh elevation above the flood plane. >> Okay. Okay. Great. Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't sure if it was one or two additional commissioners. Any other questions? Nope. Okay. Um the applicant I'd like to invite the applicant to come up and uh make a presentation or offer some comments. Please state your name and your address or record. >> My name is Garrett Sarnon. Uh address is 2606 Cedar Crest Road East in Minnetonka, 55305. Um yeah, good evening, chair, commissioners. Um again, my name is Garrett and with my wife Celeste, uh we own the home at 2606 Cedar Crest Road East. So, thank you to Eric and Riley uh and the city's engineering team for the time and care that they've put into this. Uh when the 2023 remapping ran the flood plane through the property, they worked with us and our civil engineering firm uh to find a solution that fits the site rather than fight against it. So the result is our modest uh singlestory um addition over the walkout basement um that keeps you know uh storage balanced meets the flood plane setbacks through some grading and needs only a small variance because of our existing walkout floor uh carries that same elevation. So, our immediate neighbors who we contacted are supportive of this and we've got uh some letters on file noting no drainage or water concerns and we're comfortable with the conditions staff has recommended and happy to answer any questions that you all might have. Uh and thank you for your time. >> Okay, commissioners. Any questions for the applicant? >> Mr. Brick. >> Hi. Thank you for um um your presentation here. Um it doesn't sound like there's ever been any flooding back there or even standing water is my understanding. I mean does your back your yard ever just even get soggy? I just >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Uh correct. Um we've been at the home for uh just over 11 years and we've experienced no issues. Um our neighbors to the south um uh one of their letters is on file. They're the original owners of the home since 1958. Um and we work very closely with them and that is also the property where the pipe was located. >> Um they're um through them and then also their son. They're um you know they still live at the home but they're you know >> up there in age so they're not able to communicate as well. But their son, Bill, who we work with quite a bit, um noted that they've never had any record of any issues of flooding or standing water or anything like that on their property, and they've got a pretty good record of it since they've been there for a while. >> All right. Thank you. >> Commissioners, any other questions? Uh just one other um it sounded like in the report there was going to be a little in addition to the uh the house the building addition that you're there was going to be some additional grading kind of beyond. Could you kind of describe what you're doing there with grading? >> Yeah. Yep. Um through the uh slide that's up there. Um very minimal grading that needs to get done to kind of slightly nudge the flood plane uh line back. Um, and with that we're going to create two small swailes on the north and the south side uh to allow to kind of even out the the the drainage so we end up with a uh net zero or even slightly um net negative cut that's in there between the cut and the fill. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you commissioners. Any other questions? All right. Thank you for your time. Uh we might call you back up later. Thank you. Um, I will now open the public hearing. If you'd like to speak, please [clears throat] come to the podium, state your name and your address of record. And staff, is there anyone online? >> There is not. >> Thank you very much. Seeing there's no flood of people coming up, we'll uh close the public hearing. Um, [clears throat] commissioners, is there any questions or comments? Mr. Banks. >> Thanks, Chair. Um, I'll just say I'm in agreement with this uh recommendation by the city. Um it does seem reasonable given that the existing structure um is already below our [snorts] um um required um flood plane. I'm drawing a plane from my word um below our required um 2T flood plane limits is what I was trying to say. And so, um, obviously it would be very, uh, difficult to, um, add it on to the addition of the home, uh, where that doesn't match. Um, also with, um, the additional space, it seems like, you know, um, people are building onto their homes now more and, um, that way they can enjoy them more. And it looks like from the plans, the the addition of the the deck would be a great feature to this home. So, so I am in support of it. Thank you. Any other comments, Commissioner Johnson? >> I too am supportive of this uh project. I think it's a great project. It's going to really enhance the home. And looking at the property itself in the flood plane areas, I don't see any other reasonable location for this project. And so, um I'm in support of it. The intrusion, uh into the flood plane is minor, and new neighbors comments were very helpful to me. >> Thank you, Mr. Ricks. Uh yes, I'm in agreement with my fellow commissioners. I think it's a good project and I uh concur with staff's recommendation. Um you know, I'm pretty comfortable with um the modeling that's been done and um and I think that the grading uh is just going to uh add a little extra measure of protection too in in the event it, you know, it does get unusually wet there. But um and two, I think it's consistent with the neighborhood with their neighbors. It's looks like the neighboring properties have are kind of constructed similarly, you know, with a single story on the front, two on the back, like a walk out and uh just seems consistent with the neighborhood in general. So, um yeah, I'm I'm in full support of this. >> Thank you. Um I as well agree with fellow commissioners. I think that there's u really no practical location for this home to be moved or changed or or or go a different direction with it and u I think it uh maintains the existing relationship between the home and the surrounding areas. I think it's a good plan and I think you guys have appreciate you for working with the city and and uh coming up with the plan that you have. So I'm in support of this as well. Uh commissioners, it sounds like we're ready for a motion. Can we get a motion to approve? Let me get it right here now. Uh item 8B, Commissioner Johnson. >> Thank you, Chair Minion. Um I make a motion to adopt the resolution approving the variance to the minimum lowest floor elevation standard for the construction of the addition deck and patio to the existing single family home at 2606 Cedar Crest Road East. >> Thank you. You make a second. >> I'll second that motion. >> Mr. Banks. So, first motion made by Johnson, seconded by Banks. Uh, staff, will you, uh, take a call, roll a uh, vote? >> Sure. Uh, Brink, >> yes. >> Johnson, >> yes. >> Banks, >> yes. >> Chairman, >> yes. Sounds that the motion carries. Uh, this is a final decision subject to appeal. If anyone would like to appeal the commission's decision, they must provide a written request by to the city staff within 10 days of the meeting. Um, all right staff, is there any other business? Going on to item nine. >> No other business. >> No other jo business. All right. Item 10. May I have a motion for adjournment? I'll make the motion to adjurnn. >> Mr. Brinks. >> I'll second. >> Uh motion Mr. Brinks uh with Chairman Brinks, sorry. Seconded by uh uh Commissioner Brinks and seconded by Commissioner Banks. Uh may we have a call vote? >> Just a voice vote. It's fine. >> In favor? I I >> Thank you. It is confusing. Thanks. Thank you very [laughter] >> [music]