Okay, you all ready? >> Good evening and welcome to the July 6thmeeting of the Prior Lake Planning Commission. I'd like to invite everyoneto rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of theUnited States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nationunder God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> It's great to see all of you tonight. UhI was on Prior Lake uh for the 4th of July and was having a great time beforethe storm rolled through and I think we might have more people here tonight thanwas uh at least where I was on on the 4th of July. But seriously, it's greatto have all of you. We welcome our community feedback and commentary and wewant to do our best to be transparent about our deliberations and our process.Um and it's my hope that we will do that this evening. So again, thank you forbeing here. Um, with that, I will seek a approval of the agenda. Are there anycomments or agenda items or additions to the agenda from council members orcommission members? >> Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion anda second to approve this evening's agenda. Is there a motion?>> So moved. >> We have a motion and a second. All thosein favor, please signify by saying I. >> I.>> I. The agenda is passed. Next, we will uh seek a motion and a second to approvethe meeting minutes from our June 1st, 2026 meeting. Are there any comments,additions, or deletions to those minutes?Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion and a second. Is there a motion?>> So moved. >> We have a motion. Is there a second?>> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All thosein favor of approving the June 1st, 2026 Planning Commission meeting minutes,please signify by saying I. >> I. I.>> I. Those meeting minutes are hereby approved.>> Agenda item number four. There are two public hearings uh on the agenda forthis evening. Uh the first is PDEV26-00000017 for 14163 Shady Beach Trail uhNortheast. Before I turned it over to staff for their report, I'd like tooutline how u the public hearing uh will commence. First, staff will present itsreport on the request or issue at hand, and planning commissioners will have anopportunity to pose questions to staff about their report.Next, the applicant, if they are in the chamber, will have an opportunity toaddress the planning commission, and planning commissioners can respond tothe applicant with comments or questions. Following the applicant'spresentation, I will open the floor to public comment. If you wish to addressthe commission, I'd ask that you please approach the podium, press the redbutton to turn on the microphone. It will turn green, so you'll know thatit's on. And then I'd like you to clearly state your name and your addressfor the official record so that everyone has a chance to speak. We ask that youlimit your comments to five minutes in length and that you make concisestatements of fact pertaining to the specific application. We will keep timeto make sure that everyone has a chance to speak and we can uh keep them themeeting moving in an orderly fashion. This meeting is the official publichearing and your primary opportunity to be heard on the matters. We have two uhfor the um public hearing this evening. The city council has no obligation toaccept further public comment and in many cases they do not. So please do nothesitate to speak. And with that I will turn it over to staff for agenda item4A. >> Thank you Mr. Chair.Uh here is the location map for the subject properties on Lower Prior Lakeoff of Shady Beach Trail Northeast. Highark Builders on behalf of theproperty owner Jason House is requesting approval of a combined preliminary andfinal plat to be known as the House edition.They are proposing to subdivide the property to combine two parcels andcreate one lot of plus or minus 47,733 square ft. Um outlined here is lot oneblock one house edition. Access is currently available from ShadyBeach Trail Northeast to the west. Um the comp plan currently guides thisproperty lowdensity residential. The zoning is also R1 lowdensity residentialand it conforms with the comprehensive plan land use map. Uh utilities areavailable and appropriately sized to serve the area. No changes to grading orstorm water are proposed as part of this action. However, those requirements andgrading plans will be reviewed as part of the future permit review process.The total site area is give or take 1.25 acres. There is no wetlands on the site.Property is subject to the 30% impervious surface coverage. Um maximumlot one square footage for 30% would be about 14,320ft. No park or trails are proposed as part of the action. The development willbe subject to the standard development agreement. However, trunk um and relatedutility service charges have already been satisfied with previoussubdivisions. Uh the neighboring property uh 14143Shady Beach Trail Northeast has private utilities that currently intersect theproposed lot one block one house house edition as you can see outlined here. Umas a requirement uhuh private utility easement shall begranted in favor of the neighbor and that shall be completed prior to orconcur conc concurrently with the recording of the final plat. Uh the additional split for 14143 ShadyBeach Trail Northeast is proposing to give 566 square feet um from proposedlot one block one house addition to that neighboring property. The purpose beingthat the driveway currently is over the property line. So, this would rectifythat. Um, this will allow the driveway serving that property to be locatedentirely within their property lines. Uh, the additional lot split forP259300510. The applicant is proposing to completean administrative subdivision uh to split approximately 566 square feetagain from this rectangular parcel C um that currently serves as a privatedriveway access for these three properties that will no longer be neededfor this lot 20. Um so they're proposing to remove that section of the privatedrive. Both of these administrativesubdivisions and combinations are require consent from the adjacentproperty owners and shall be completed prior to or Concurren sorry concurrentlywith the recording of the final plat staff comments. We do have sixconditions. Uh the applicant shall dedicate standard drainage and utilityeasements for lot one. The applicant shall submit an administrativesubdivision to split indicated 566 square feet from 14145 Shady Beach TrailNortheast and combine that property with 14143 Shady Beach Trail Northeast viadeed prior to or concurrent with the recording of the final plat. Theapplicant shall also submit a administrative subdivision applicationto split the other 566 square feet from P2593000510 and combine that property with lot oneblock one house edition via deed prior to or concurrently with the recording ofthe final plat. Uh, additionally, the applicant shall relocate the privatesanitary sewer and water services servicing the neighbor 14143 Shady BeachTrail Northeast parcel over under lot house addition or dedicate a privateeasement for sanitary sewer and water services in favor of the neighborsproperty prior to or concurrent with the recording of the final plat. one of thetwo existing single family homes within lot one block one of the house additionshall be removed prior to recording of the final plat and any future proposeddwelling will need to meet all minimum uh setback and impervious requirementsof prior lake city code. So, we're asking to hold a publichearing um and then provide a motion in a second to recommend the city councilapproval of the combined preliminary and final plat for house editions subject tothose staff comments and conditions. That's all. All right, we'll move to uhCommissioner questions. Commissioner Brook, the adjacent and impacted uh propertiesor neighboring properties I should say. Um no no impact to their ingress, egress orany utilities around those properties. Is that correct?>> Correct. besides the relocation of those private utilities or the dedication ofthe easement >> and that is obviously um a mandatewithin moving forward with this project. >> Correct.>> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Rook.Commissioner Yo, >> regarding the private sanitary sewer, isthat common in this area or is is there an opportunity to get that fed into thecity utilities?>> Yep. So, the the sewer and the water within the public rightway are public.This is just the private service going from the main within the rightway toserve the individual lot. >> Thank you.Thank you. Commissioner Smoke. >> Yeah, Jake, can you bring up uh I guessthat's the one I'm looking for. Um so I drove past that and that is seem thatone little corner there does seem a little weird. I see that there's a housevery close to the road. It's a dirt road and then I can see that you jog in quitetight there. If I look at the ordinance, um it says that the resulting lots andI'm going emphasis on the plural uh shall conform with all provisions of thezoning code. Going forward, can we see that that uh can we imagine that thatother adjacent lot will have any issues? Would this be an opportunity to correctsome of those issues? I mean, we wouldn't put future planningcommissioners in a position to say, "Hey, I need a hardship because and herewe have an opportunity to improve or eliminate a hardship. Um, as part of the administrativesubdivision request, staff would review to make sure that no property isbecoming any less compliant. As part of the action, um, it would be anopportunity to maybe address the driveway setback. The minimum setback tothe property line is 5T. Um, it is a pre-existing driveway. So, there wouldbe a conversation around that. >> Anything to add?>> Yep. Uh I would just add commissioner so the lots being created need to conformto all city standards which is the case here. Uh the adjacent lots althoughthere is an administrative lot split going on that is not included in thatdefinition of having to conform. >> Okay. So, was it just a convenience thento have a a one for one split of what 566>> feet or was there a complication that if they wanted to to do a a more creativesplit? They could not >> uh commissioners they could do a morecreative split, they could provide more property, more land to the adjacentproperty owner. Uh that negotiation was done between>> okay >> the two private property owners and itthe amounts exchanged are similar. So, I'm assuming this existing propertyowner did not want to lose any land area by doing the the split to get theneighbor's driveway entirely on their property.>> Okay. Most of my questions are for edification, personal edification. And Ithink you said that the adjacent owners on board with all the land swap andissue everything. >> Yep. They're aware of it. Um like Caseysaid, the discussions have been private, so we weren't involved with them. But asfar as I know, Hi, Mark has prepared um the paperwork or at least the startingthe paperwork for the administrative subdivision.>> Okay, that's the end of my questions. Thank you.>> Thank you, Commissioner Schmokl. Um I think my fellow planet commissionerswere dancing inside my brain over the weekend, so you asked you asked all allmy questions, but I do still have um maybe one maybe one or two. Um do wehave a sense staff what the final layout or dimensionssquare footage um impacts of the proposeddwelling will be. >> So we have been provided verypreliminary plans just to show that they can conform with all of the city's codessetbacks and impervious. Um, as of no means is it a final plan. So, we can'tcomment on that quite yet, but any kind of finished house will need to meetthose minimums. >> Are you Are you able That That's good.Um, are you able to give give us a sense of what the dimensions will be in termsof square footage? >> Um, it'll be a large home, so the lotitself is going to be over an acre. I believe the the conceptual footprintprovided is around 9,800 square ft >> for the for the the footprint of thehome. >> Correct. Okay. >> And a related question before I go backto uh Commissioner Euro. Um, when will we have the benefit of any renderingsof the the the final final just before the the ribbon goes on? Yep. The thatwould not be an item that would come before the planning commission. So, therequest tonight would is to combine these two lots into one parcel. So allof the reviews would be done administratively through staff unlessthere was a variance requested which is one of the conditions of this that novariances should be requested because the new design will need to meet citystandards. So it would just be administrative uh planning building andengineering review and issuance of a building permit. So I would like to goon the record saying that if if there is because things change in the buildingprocess, right, for any sort of variance that that that item does come back to usuh before final approval, >> correct? Yeah.>> Okay. All right. Just wanted to go on the record. Um Commissioner Yuro,>> I was trending on the same line there. I'm just confirming that there was notbased on what you've seen thus far in preliminary plans, there is not also aneed for setback or impervious surface coverage variances or anything like thatat this point in time. >> No.>> Thank you. >> Any other lingering commissionercomments or questions for staff? >> All right, seeing none, I'll invite theapplicant if they are in attendance to uh step to the podium and and let usknow what you would like us to know about this uh proposal. Uh, thank you. Matt Eastman with HigharkBuilders. I'm representing um the property owners here. I think Jacob dida good job covering our basis today. I think at the end of the day, what we'retrying to do is have a clean parcel and then submit something that's completelycompliant with city code uh for the new construction project.>> What's your timeline on that? When do you think that that would be? Umobviously it's all dependent upon city approvals in this process. Ideally wewould start construction uh this fall and then the timeline for thatconstruction would be approximately 18 months.18 months you said okay yes those are all my questions. Uhcommissioners any questions for the applicant commissioner commissioner?>> Okay. All right. Thank you. Uh, right now at 6:17 p.m., I willentertain a motion and a second to open the public hearing. Is there a motion?So, moved. Is there a second? >> Second.>> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of opening the public hearingon this agenda item, please signify by saying I.>> I. >> I. Motion carries. The public hearing isnow open at uh 6:18 p.m. If there's anyone in the audiencewho would like to approach the podium and speak to this item,please feel do so. Now, by my count, there are at least 43people in this room. Are we sure there's no one who wants to speak on this agendaitem? I'm required to ask three times. So, that was two. Are you sure there'sno one in the audience who would like to address the commission? Okay. With that,I will There's no takers. I'll entertain a motion and a second at 6:19 p.m. toclose the public hearing. Is there a motion?>> So moved. >> We have a motion. Is there a second?>> Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the publichearing at 6:19 PM, please signify by saying I.>> I. >> I.>> I. Public hearing is closed. We'll move to uh Commissioner comments.Commissioner Schmokle. >> Yeah, I'm supportive of this. Um, Ithink the one comment I would have is I would hope that the adjacent propertywould not come to us in the future if they're a future builder or a tear downthat they're asking for some changes or variances because this is a perfectopportunity to do any corrections. That's all I have.>> Thank you, Commissioner Schmoko. Commissioner Yorko,>> no comments. >> Commissioner Rook, no comments. I alsohave no comments um other than to echo those of Commissioner Schmoke. I dosupport this recommendation. And so at this uh point in time, I'll entertain amotion and a second to recommend to the city council the approval of thecombined preliminary and final plat for house editions subject to the staffcomments and conditions listed in the memorandum and resolution with a specialnote that any request for variance variances will come back before us.Um is there a motion? So moved. We have a motion. Is there asecond? >> Second.>> All those in favor, please signify by saying I.>> I. I. The motion carries. Thank you. >> Next on our agenda, um I'm just guessingthat's why we're all here tonight. Um theuh important topic and one that we willtake um special care to deliberate um fairly. Uh this is PDEV26-000018- Tower Street Southeast land use mapamendment and zoning map amendment. Uh and before we commence thisdiscussion uh and deliber del deliberations on agenda item 4B, I wantto offer a few brief comments just to keep us moving forward um in a good andappropriate manner. The question in my mind, the substantive question beforethe planning commission this evening is a specific one. whether the proposedchange in land use or zoning for this parcel is appropriate under the city'scomprehensive plan or future land use and zoning use map applicable ordinancesand sound planning principles. We recognize that many residents haveraised additional questions and concerns related to this proposal. Those topics,including issues such as traffic, infrastructure, public safety,environmental impacts, development timing, and other communityconsiderations, are all important and deserve thoughtful discussion. However,many of those matters fall outside the specific land use and zoningconsideration before us tonight and will be addressed through subsequent stagesof the development review process. With that in mind, I want to respectfully askthat those providing testimony and members of the commission as well keeptheir comments focused on the zoning and land use question currently before us.Doing so will help ensure a fair, orderly, and productive public hearingwhile creating the opportunity to consider other related issues at theappropriate time and then the appropriate forum. Thank you. And withthat, uh, I'll turn it over to staff. Thank you, Chair Fleming. Good evening,commissioners. Uh the request tonight is from RoarsAcquisitions LLC on behalf of the property owner, which is BK TowerProperties LLC. They're requesting a comprehensive plan, future land useamendment to change the land use guidance from retail general business tourban high density residential. They're also requesting an amendment to thecity's zoning map to reszone the property from C2 general commercial toR3, which is highdensity residential. What is not included in the requesttonight, as uh Commissioner Fleming just mentioned, this action is not a siteplan approval. Um the action will not approve a preliminary or final plannedunit development plan or a preliminary or final plat. So, some of thediscussion may overlap those bounds, but just so the public is aware, the onlything being requested is a land use plan amendment and a reasonzoning. If thisitem were to move forward, uh the planning commission recommendationtonight will go forward to the city council. If the city council were toapprove the land use plan amendment and the resoning request, the applicantwould then submit a full plan set for preliminary planned unit developmentapproval and preliminary PUD approval. So at that time there would be anotherpublic hearing. Everyone who received a notice for this hearing would receive anotice for that hearing. in the PUD meeting would be where building height,number of units, parking, setbacks, drainage, storm water, all of those areare appropriate. I'll touch on some of that this evening because it's hard toseparate the two. I realize that. So, just to provide an overview and contextfor the commission and the public. I will review some highle uh buildingproposed concepts. >> AC for that good clarification.>> Yep. So the the two parcels in question are located west of the school districtoffice site at the intersection of Tower Street and Toronto. There are twoundeveloped parcels. Uh one is lot one block two invid first edition and theother is part of outlot A on the western side. So the the school district officeis proposed for redevelopment. It's not highlighted on this map because it's notpart of tonight's request. The school district office is already zoned forhighdensity residential. So the request to reszone and reguide is only for thetwo parcels highlighted in pink. So this is kind of a zoom in on the onthe survey for the two highlighted parcels. Uh as far as we can telllooking back on historic aerial photographs that the city has available,neither parcel has ever been developed in the past. Uh they are guided andzoned for general business uses. The western parcel which is just under oneacre is largely encumbered by a drainage and utility easement. So this roughly1acre parcel is not developable. Uh the eastern parcel is just under two acresin size. So the future land use map the city ofprayer lake comprehensive plan. It's updated every 10 years. It's aforward-looking document that guides the development of our community. everythingfrom land use to storm water and sewer and water pipes and transportation andparks. Uh that future land use section in our land use chapter has a exhibit3.2 which is our future land use map. Uh that's being proposed for amendment. Sothis is our current map which shows the subject property is guided for retailgeneral business and then the request this would be the proposed map to guidethis. I understand the colors get a little uh tough to read. Uh it would beurban highdensity residential with low density to the south and retail generalbusiness to the north and the west. Along with that would be a zoningrequest. So this is the current zoning map. Pink is our C2 general business.Brown is our R3 highdensity residential and there is low density residential tothe immediate south. This is the current land use map showing commercial. They'rerequesting that this property here be changed to brown so it would be highdensity residential use. The developer concept plan includes amultifamily apartment building that's three and four stories tall, 166 unitsand again it's conceptual at this time. They are prop proposing undergroundstructured parking and surface parking roughly a 50/50 split of both. It wouldequate to two stalls per unit. There are outdoor amenity areas on the conceptplan as well as improvements to the pedestrian connections currently in thearea with the trails and sidewalks. So again, I'm going to stress conceptualonly. Uh but the the concept plan, the western side of the building is athree-story building, the southern portion is three stories, and then thisuh L-shaped portion at the corner would be proposed at four stories. Here's an aerial image provided by theapplicant and architect showing how the building would look on that site. And then some updated renderings. I knowthese are very similar uh but not exact. The developer did host a neighborhoodmeeting a couple weeks ago. So some of these conceptual images may have changedjust slightly, but the building elements itself, the height and the setbacks havenot changed. So this image from Toronto Streetprovides kind of a a street level view and shows the building in relation tothe adjacent residential properties and how it sits a little bit lower on thesite than the single family properties to the south. Here is a view from TowerStreet looking towards Toronto from the west side of the building. So you cansee the the lower level parking is uh partially exposed on the westernfacing wall and then it gradually uh disappears as you change into the gradeas you get towards Toronto. Here is an image from the rear parkinglot looking towards the single family homes. So we had we did receive a lot ofquestions on the retaining wall. It's it's difficult to see on a site plan. Isthat retaining wall holding back the apartment site or the single familysite? So this shows the retaining wall on the on the apartment site with afence above. So the adjacent residential properties to the south are at a higherelevation than the apartment parking lot would be.Uh as a followup to one of the questions raised by the planning commission duringthe the earlier meeting in June where we considered whether to accept this PUDapplication. Um, a question was raised on thebuilding height across the street. So, it's kind of difficult to see. Uh, it'skind of small font, but that building is 44 and a half ft from elevation to thepeak of the roof. It's about 36 feet, three-story building from the parkinglot to the roof line. The applicant also provided a comparison of the singlefamily residential homes and again these are conceptualestimates but the grade elevation of the single family homes is around that 980foot mark with uh building heights reaching 1,00 to,05 ft. So roughly 20 to25 feet to the peak of the roof. Their grade would be at around a 970. So about10 ft lower with a 35- ft wall. So this was provided to illustrate that the peakof the single family residential home roofs and the 35 foot high portion ofthis building would be relatively similar. Then the building increases inheight to four stories by 10 ft. So that elevation at the corner would be about5compared to the elevation across the street to the peak which is at about uh130. So the building to the east, the existing three-story building is at athe grade is at a higher elevation to start with. So the site is currently C2, which isour general business use. So the uses that are permitted there, this isn'teverything, uh, but it's most of our uses in C2 that we think would beplausible to locate there. So the the permitted uses which means a prop anapplicant can come in and simply apply for a building permit because the use isalready permitted would be bank liquor store service type businesses, funeralhomes, a showroom, um all of our cannabis and lower potency hemp ediblebusinesses that we were required to allow are allowed in the C2 district, amedical dental office, business services or just a general office. Prior LakeCity Code also has uses which are permitted with conditions. These alsowould not require a public hearing, but the applicant would be required tocomply with specific conditions that are identified in our city code. Maybe it'sa setback, maybe it's hours of operation, screening, something likethat. But there's a little bit more. Uh so state licensed non-residentialappliance uh small engine repair, medical dental labs, shopping centers,community centers, motor vehicle service and repair,um outdoor sales and display, dry cleaning, nursing home, privateentertainment, indoor or public surface structures, hotels. Those would all beuses that would be allowed on that site currently, provided they meet theconditions identified in our city code without needing a public hearing.We also have uses that would require a public hearing and would require aconditional use permit be approved by the planning commission.Those are adult uses, a micro distillery, cocktail room, animalhandling, which would be doggy daycare, pet grooming type business. Um,convention exhibition center, motor fuel stations, gas station. Again, not likelyto be a gas station on that site, but it's an allowable use. uh brew pubs,utility substations, car sales, and car wash would all require a conditional usepermit. So, one of the questions that we got atthe last meeting was about land inventory. Um when we're considering areszoning, it is not something this city does often or takes lightly as toconsider reszoning a commercial property for residential use. Uh we had amaxfield study completed. This was done through the Scott County CDA for allcommunities in Scott County. The study itself, I believe, was from 2016. Theydid an update in 2022, and it's currently being updated again, but it'snot going to be completed until later this fall. But that identified a prior aprior lake submarket which included what is now the city of Credit River andSpring Lake Township. And that study projects commercial industrial demandfor our submarket. Now, it's not an all-time projection. It is This studylooked out to 2040. The update will look out to 2050. But in that study, theyidentified a demand for about 930,000 square feet of total commercialindustrial in the city of Prior Lake. And with that, they projectedapproximately 92 acres of land needed to accommodate that demand.Right now, the city of Prior Lake has about 800 acres guided for futurecommercial and industrial uses. Uh included in that with our AUR that wasrecently adopted by the city of Prior Lake. So that's the alternative urbanarea review that was done in our annexation area and the southwesternportion of the community. There was another 35 acres of commercialindustrial identified in that study from residential to commercial industrial andso when the next comprehensive plan update is approved in roughly two yearsthat would be formalized within that plan.It is noted that most of our undeveloped commercial property, we do haveum roughly 150 to 200 acres within our current city limits, but the majority ofthat 800 acres is in that orderly annexation area. And most of our currentvacant commercial and industrial property is not served with sewer andwater. The city has capacity when the utilities are extended to serve theseareas, but they don't currently have a pipe. So, I can't review a buildingpermit and issue a permit. There's a much bigger process to go through tomake that buildable. >> Casey, just a quick pause. Um, if if youmight please. Um, do we have a visual of that 800 plus acres of land that'sguided for CI? Something you could get quickly, maybe another member of thestaff could, not right now, but maybe a little bit later in the presentation.>> Yep. Yep. following the presentation uh while you're taking questions I can Ican find that and have that available. Y >> thank you. >> So this subject property is adjacent tolowdensity residential development to the south. Uh it is a bit unique in thatis a split commercial and highdensity residential redevelopment site. So thewestern half of it is guided for commercial. The eastern half is guidedfor highdensity residential. We did do some research to see when that wasreszoned, why it was reszoned, and it in I want to say 1994, it was a requestwhen the school district purchased what was a bowling alley. Uh it was guided ascommercial development prior. The school district requested it be reszoned to aresidential use because that allowed a kindergarten to operate there. Soschools in our zoning ordinance are not approved in commercial districts, butthey are approved in all of our residential. So it was reszoned to R3 atthat time. So in addition, I I have a note on heretoo because the the commercial land supply that we maintain as a city hasbeen a goal to build that land supply to provide utilities to serve that. Uh mynext slide talks a little bit about why that is the case, why it is a priorityfor the city of Prior Lake to find more commercial industrial land and diversifyour tax base. So the the top left shows the the estimated market value and theseare 2025 payable numbers. 4.43% of Prior Lakes'staxable market value is commercial industrial property. Uh that compares toSavage at 13 and a half percent and Shakipi at over 26%.The net tax capacity. So this is this is estimated market value is just kind ofoverall what the county assessor says your property is worth divided by theclassification. The net tax capacity is probably our best indicator of taxburden. So 8.73% roughly of our tax burden in Prior Lakeis on commercial industrial properties where Savage is pushing 25% and Shakapiis pushing 45%. The residential improved which would bewhat you think of as your your single family home, your duplex, your twinhome. uh that tax burden in Prior Lake is 85.7%of our levy compared to Savage at under 69% and Shaki at about 45%. Uh the apartment uses in Prior Lake. So4% of our tax base comes from apartment uses. Savage is at 5% and Shakape is atroughly eight and a half. So high level looking at this you know when you knowPrior Lake has done an excellent job at maintaining a low tax rate. Prior Lakehas the second lowest tax rate in the city. So I don't want this message tofeel like taxes are high because we don't have commercial industrial. Allthat means is a single family property owner share of the pie. Um, if therewere more commercial industrial in the city, the portion that went to singlefamily homeowners, twin homeowners, villa, everything uh would be would beless. We did get a lot of comments on trafficand again traffic is probably somewhat appropriate discussion for tonightbecause a reasonzoning from commercial to multifamilydoes invite a traffic conversation but traffic specific to the use. It would bemore appropriate for a future PUD hearing if we get to that point. So, theapplicant is completing a detailed traffic impact study which would beavailable at whatever point if there is a future public hearing on this item.Um, access circulation, rightway dedications, other intersectionimprovements that may or may not be needed are not part of tonight'sdiscussion. We did get a lot of other comments too on pedestrian safety. So,we are just noting that, you know, the existing trail which is right on theback of the curb and sidewalk in that area. We had comments on kids wait therefor the bus and they're right next to the street. Well, all of those things aspart of this project would be redone. Um, they would be brought back furtherfrom the curb. There would be an actual green boulevard created and and betterenhanced crossings and and safer staging areas for the students. So, as far as traffic, we do have sometraffic counts in that area. We routinely uh every few years on ourmajor local routes and collector roadways do complete traffic counts. Sowe have 2025 traffic counts for Toronto Avenue which are north and south ofTower Street and 2021 counts for Tower Street east of Village Lake Drive. Sothe Toronto counts show that there's 2371combined north and south annual average daily trips. So that's how these studiesare are done. They're traffic counts over a period of day or days and thenthey're estimated for average trips per day. And there are about 1300 combinedtrips north and south on the south side of Tower Street. The average speeds werenot alarming at 29 to 31 miles per hour. The 85th percentile speed, which is thespeed at which 85% of those vehicles were driving at or under, was 31.8 8miles an hour uh to 35 roughly 36 miles an hour depending on the location theywere going. So in staff's view Toronto Avenue is functioning as a neighborhoodcollector local connection. The the traffic volumes and the traffic speedsare currently acceptable. Uh a lot of the traffic comments relatedto these intersections or this area cannot support a multifamilydevelopment. um reasonable that's a comment we hear quite often butmultifamily developments and this will be in greater detail with the applicantstraffic impact study the multif family developments do not generate the trafficI think like the general public thinks they will so when we look at traffic andwe look at stress on intersections in our network we look at peak trafficvolumes so over a one hour period of time in the morning at the busiest timein the morning and the busiest time in the afternoon. What is thisdevelopment's impact on that intersection?So overall, we would anticipate around 750 trips from this development. Andthese are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generationmanual. My assumption is that's what thedevelopers uh the applicant study is going to reference as well. But so thisdevelopment high level, not looking at this one specifically, just looking atthe manual for a multi-story apartment building, we would anticipate around 60additional trips over the course of an hour and 65 additional trips at thatintersection over the course of the afternoon peak hour. So these areroughly one extra vehicle per minute going through that intersection as aresult. The existing office building, just forcomparison, is about half that. So, 30 trips currently on the school districtsite or if it was converted to another office type use. Uh, if a commercialdaycare were added to this vacant property, those trips would about doubleduring the AM peak and the PM peak because there's more people coming inand leaving at the exact same time. Uh if the office building were to remain ina commercial daycare were added, then you're at about 140 trips between thetwo combined uses. If the existing building were sold as a commercialdaycare in converted, then you're about four times the amount of trips at thatintersection as this apartment would be expected to generate. I don't want toget too deep into parking because that would be in the future, but just highlevel uh those are kind of some comparisons.So, policies for amending the zoning map and the land use map. Uh we have threecategories in our city code. We as staff don't feel the first one applies. Thesecond two may depending on whether or not the planning commission agrees andmakes those findings. So the first one is the area as it's currently zoned isinconsistent with policies policies and goals of the comp plan or the land waszoned erroneously due to a technical or administrative error. So it wasn't zonederroneously and it currently complies with the comp plan guidance for retailgeneral business. So the first one doesn't apply. Uh the second two are thearea has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the publicinterest to reszone to encourage redevelopment. And the third is thepermitted uses allowed within the proposed zoning district which would beR3 in this case would be appropriate on the subject property and compatible withadjacent properties. So as far as changing resulting in theneed for a land use plan and resoning um this shows the 1990 aerial on the on theleft side of your screen and a current 2026 aerial on the right side. So, asfar as changes in this area, when this zoning was put into place in the early19 I shouldn't say I don't know when the zoning was put in place, but it was thisway since the early 1990s. Um, Tower Street was an east west collector toPanama and then there was a north south Toronto. This was before Park Nicollet.This was before Village Lake Drive and before a lot of the other development inthe area. So there was two north south connectorsuh to Toronto Duth Panama and then an east west tower. And then you look atthe right side and the street network changes. What that did to this area isPark Nicollet into Village Lake Drive, took this kind of straight east westconnector, made Tower Street T into Village Lake Drive, and it kind of movedthe commercial development to either side of Park Nichollet instead of eitherside of Tower. So, there were changes. Whether or not that rises to the levelof resulting in the need for a zoning amendment uh is to be discussed.And then as far as compatibility, this is a kind of an overall zoning of alittle bit larger area. So here's the subject property. These two pink parcelshere, you can see that Prior Lake generally usesmedium density and high density residential to buffer a commercial orindustrial area from low density residential. We don't traditionally havelow density residential immediately adjacent to single family districts. Soin staff's opinion, this the planning commission could find that this is anappropriate finding as well as R3 was used to buffer the commercial area fromlow density on you know virtually the the rest of that neighborhood as well.So, if this gets recommended for approval by the planning commission,staff is going to recommend the following conditions to the city councilas long as the planning commission concurs. So, the future land useamendment would not become effective until reviewed and authorized by themetropolitan council and approved by the city council. The zoning amendment wouldestablish R3 as the underlying zoning unless there was revised uh by the citycouncil which I would not anticipate. Um approval of the future land use mapamendment and the zoning amendment would do not constitute approval of thecombined preliminary and final plat future development plans future PUDs orother things. The applicant would provide final legaldescriptions which we would need for the resolution identifying which areas arebeing resoneed and regided. The applicant would confirm feeownership and owner authorization for these requests.And then the final one is approval of any future land use map amendment andresoning. staff would recommend that those are conditioned uponfuture city council approval of a final plat and a final PUD plan. Umthe rationale behind that condition is we wouldn't want to be in a situationwhere this was reszoned to R3 without any supporting documents. In that casethen this proposed apartment or perhaps a larger apartment would be approved byWright. We would want what is being proposed to be specifically tied to thisapproval if we get to that point. So after the planning commission uhopens and conducts the public hearing, if you find that the request for thisfuture land use map amendment and reszoning is appropriate, there is amotion and a second to approved subject to those conditions. If you find thatthis is not appropriate based on other findings, then there is a motion and asecond to deny to recommend denial I should say. And I'd be happy to take anyquestions from the commission at this point. Thank you, Casey. I have several.Um, and I'll start with this one. If if you have a a Chris concise response,that's great. If not, um I know your staff could could get us the answerum within the next week or so. Um the 166 unitsuh give or take how many additional residentsand or school age childrenwho might attend our schools might reside in those 166 units. Uh, commissioners, we have not looked atthat on our other existing buildings. Uh, perhaps that would be a goodquestion for the applicant because they've got similar size structures inthe in the area. >> Great. Thanks, Casey.Um, are there any pending commercial uh industrial development opportunitiesum pending right now? And if so, how many? Uh citywide.>> Yeah, citywide. >> Um yeah, we're working on two or three.So, uh we have a couple in our in our downtown core. Uh potentially oneoutside of our downtown area. >> And this is a related question. It's nota it's not a gotcha, but it's it's sort of puts a focus on where my brain my oneout of four tonight is really sitting. We have 800 plusacres, right? Some might need some work, someinfrastructure, blah blah blah blah blah, but there are 800. Correct.>> Correct. >> Okay.Followup to that or related to that is historically why do you think prior andI've been here 20 almost 25 years. Why have we struggled to develop morecommercial and industrial entities? um high level I thinka big one is access so transportation network so it's not fair to compareprior lake to shakipi we don't have you know 169 going through this the centerof our community it is an interesting comparison though to see with ouradjacent communities um where where we fit I think historically Prior Lake wasfocused on being a bedroom community and that's what the city wanted to be andthat's what they became. Um now as streets and everything else uh parksshow their age and need to be updated uh that's when the divers diversificationof the tax base is noticed and felt by our residents.>> Okay, those are all my questions for now. Thank you Casey. Uh CommissionerSchmokl. >> All right, leading off. Okay. Um greatjob on the the traffic context. That was really useful. I mean I know that adaycare would really be the big ballooning for traffic. Um,you got my second question there, Brian. Um, so if it were to go to commercialinstead, I mean, I know the neighborhood is objecting to residential, but it'salmost like there'd be equal, if not maybe even greater objections if therethis was commercial. Um, so what would a C2 building on that lot look likeotherwise? height setback the neighbors that are on pond view backing up. Imean, how close would a building get to them? What would it look like for them? >> Right. So, we looked at the C2 standardsfor this lot because it's adjacent to residential. Anywhere that bordersresidential, it have to be 60 feet for the building, 20 feet for the parkingspace. Maximum height would be 45 feet or four stories. That'd be a prettysignificant um building to place on that property. But we look at it from astandpoint of what's the maximum bulk and massing that a structure could be onthat and then work away backwards from that.>> Okay. >> Umcan you tell me a little bit more about that storm water drainage um easementthat passes through the adjacent neighborhood and and how it might beaffected by development here and maybe development either direction whetherit's commercial versus an apartment. >> Yeah. So the the drainage and utilityeasement that's highlighted in green on your screen, there is a sewer serviceand a water service that run through there.>> So that serves the development to the south. So those aren't moving. Umthere's an easement granted over the top. So the city would not allow foranything other than potentially parking lot to be constructed overthere. So >> Okay. So, it's not like there' be waterrunoff that's not going to channel any water into their n their their yards oranything like that. >> Correct. Yep. They're undergroundutilities. >> Okay. Um and then I guess my biggerquestion too, can you bring up the map from the aerial view? More of a Googlemap. Um I think you know Okay, maybe that's what I'm looking at.No, go back to the one where the land use. Oh, that one. Perfect. No, thatcolorful one. Okay. So, the houses over like over there, think about it. We lostthose or they've they've since been taken over by other buildings. If Ithink about how with my crystal ball looking ahead 20 years, 15, 30 years,that um area of land, um I guess it's off the off to the left a little bit.there are folks living along Maplehood Maplewood Street where I can see in thefuture someone might come and say, "Hey, let's put um commercial buildingsthere." So, it's almost like there's an opportunity that this commercial areacould build out a little bit more and if we were to surrender some commercialspace here, we might kind of hamstrung future use down.Any thoughts on that? >> Yeah, uh you're correct, CommissionerSchmok. There would be obviously an opportunity to develop commercial in thefuture. I don't know. I don't have a sense on>> if that's in two years or 10 years or or longer. Um there would also be theoption to reszone the school district building back tocommercial at some point in the future too if it wasif it was needed. So, if if this project is not approved by the city councilultimately, my assumption would be the next request we would get on thisproperty would be to reu it and reszone it for commercial because it's unusableum right now and you wouldn't be able to intensify the use at all compared towhat the school district had unless it was reszoned.>> Okay. So, then the other downside is the buffer zone. We're kind of violatingwhat would be desirable practices to have a residential a high densityresidential as a buffering between low density and commercial. Is that right?There's these seems to be like the two things we're kind of weighing here asfar as the big picture. >> Yes, that's true. So, if it wascommercial property, then you know, looking back on those slides, thosecertain uses that are approved by >> Wright,>> there would be no public hearing. They're just going to be constructionstarted one day and it's going to be a commercial development. Again, maybeit's two years or 10 or longer. Um, some of those uses, the more intense ones,like auto dealership, I don't >> Yeah,>> I don't see this being an auto dealership, but that's just an examplewhere that would require a conditional use permit. There would be a publichearing for that. >> That's when hours of operation,lighting, >> sound, that those types of things wouldbe discussed. Um,I think that's it for my questions. I'll leave a few for the rest of the folks.Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Smokco.Commissioner Yo, >> the property to the left of the two thatwe're discussing here this evening, um, who owns that? >> I believe that's a city of Prairie Lakeparcel that's largely occupied by Wet land. >> So itis it undevelopable? >> Yes, it's undevelopable. >> Do you have a view that zooms outfurther to show what else is continues to the left? just confirmed>> parking lot with the trucking. >> Thank you. >> And we did confirm that was it is acity-owned parcel. >> So the city owns the parcel between thetrucking company storage lot and then the two lots that are inquestion. >> Correct. And the city owns them because they areundevelopable. I assume wetland natural resource.Yeah, I assume it was dedicated to the city at the time they platted thatsubdivision. >> Is there So there's a wetland. So, um Iassume there's quite a bit of storm water that comes then into that city lotfrom the residential and the commercial areas.>> Yes. And likely the street itself. >> Yeah.>> So, we have >> pretty depressed topography wise rightthere. So, okay. >> I'll ask my question again on thisproperty. Has there been any look or consideration for mixeduse developmentinstead of giving up all of our commercial land um to residential usesto actually combine both? >> Uh with this current developer, therehas not not been any consideration more than a conversation. Um the developerwas not interested in pursuing a mixeduse. They did not feel it wouldwork well in this site. >> Okay.>> Well, maybe we feel differently. Um,>> can I tag on to your question >> please?>> Please. Um, have has anyone expressed interest inmixed use? Any developers? >> Not on this site? No.>> Not on this site. Okay. Thank you. Um, has there been uh in considerationof the uh building scale, has there been any consideration toactually break up these masses into separate structures instead of havingthem linear and spiny and connecting to one another?>> Um, not that have been shared with us. We have been through seven or eightdifferent concept plans just shared back and forth between the developer andstaff to get feedback. I know they this building is it's a large building, butit's smaller than they originally were hoping for. Um, at a staff level, wereally pushed back on no more than three stories on the south side and the westside. We were concerned about height of the building and impact on adjacentproperties. So, the developer did adjust their building to three stories on thesouth and the west. Um, I don't know if they have looked at two buildings on thesite as opposed to one. Um, we have not seen a concept plan that shows that. Whythe concern on the west with it being a city-owned wetland?>> The concern on the west was due to the building height because the site slopesdown towards the west. So a four-story building on that wall was getting to be55 57 feet tall. >> Okay.>> Got it. And then um you mentioned the 800 acres of C2 general business. Um,how many acres are left in our downtown core areas?I'm considering this zone and the other side of 13 where this is located.>> Uh, our town center area does there's occupied parcels that are candidates forfuture redevelopment, but there I would not say there are any sizable vacantlots ready for development at this point if that's a fair answer. So, as throughour economic development authority, they're doing a lot of work. Um, youknow, Chula's is a good example, a redevelopment of a property. So, thatwas a property that's not available. It was occupied,>> but it still resulted in a very nice uh redevelopment project. We are workingwith the Prior Lake Revival Group currently. Uh they'll be startingconstruction of their second phase building this summer. Y>> there's a couple sites out there that are available, but acreage wise, vacantland, maybe two acres. >> And how big is this one?>> Two acres. >> Okay, >> thank you. That's all.>> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Rook,>> Paul, quick followup. Max he site for C2 you said was how tall?>> 45 feet and four story. Okay. Or for whichever one is was Okay.And when this unique piece of property was reszoned in 94 for obviously schooluse, um do you think the city would have made a different decision if it wasn't aschool asking for that reasonzoning? >> If it was as if the request was for highdensity residential development, >> correct?>> Um it was difficult to say. Sothe neighborhood to the south, I believe it was approved as a plat in 1992. Sothere was in 1994 there was probably I'm assuming a lot>> residential >> a home or two, maybe more that havealready started. Um thecommercial use in that area, I don't know from reading through the reports ifthat was a very successful bowling alley and I guess it was a lounge and bar orsomething at that point as well. There was discussion about reszoning theseproperties to R3 in the planning commission or city council meetingminutes and packets. They obviously decided not to do that, but that wasconsideration at that time. >> Okay.Um outside of this space, do we feel like there's uh adequate R3developable space within the city of Prior?>> I do not. No, we've um over the last several years. So when we do we mentionwe talked about the comprehensive plan earlier. So the way that that worksevery 10 years we have to update our comprehensive plan and our future landuse map needs to identify a certain amount of acreage to hit a developmenttarget that the mech council gives us. So they will tell us next year sometimeyou your land use plan needs to accommodate acreage for750 multif family units over the next 10 years let's say. So we need to show onour plan that we've got 10 12 acres or whatever is required toaccommodate that. If we do not have that within our 10-year planning cycle, theywill not approve it. So right now in our city, I don't know that we have anyhighdensity residential development that's vacant land and pad ready becausewe've done four or five projects over the last 10years in our last compliance cycle that have eaten up the available inventory.>> Sure. the IT study. If you can go back to thatslide, please the um the projections for the AM peak,the PM peak, obviously the daily trips for the 166 unit that is based on 166units. >> Correct. Okay. And then outside of this again kind ofunique property. Do we have an area within the city where R3 so closelybutts up against R1? >> Yeah. Um I would say this is verysimilar to the building that was just constructed on in the Jeff neighborhood.Sure. The Jeffers waterfront building. And I think that one was around 80 82feet from the adjacent single family homes in that neighborhood.>> Okay, other questions. Thank you.>> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Yo, back to you. >> Two questions. I'll start on this onehere while this is up on the screen. So 166 units, I assume two people per unitas an average number for the apartment use.That's pushing us at over 320 residents and we assume that only six it's onlygoing to have 61 during peak hours >> according to the manual. Yeah. So I wantto preface all this again by saying this is we are not>> traffic engineers, Paul and I. Um, we just because we had so many comments ontraffic, we wanted to address it. But the applicant is completing a trafficimpact study. If we get to the point of having a preliminary plat preliminaryPUB public hearing, the traffic study will be a major component of that publichearing. >> Yeah,>> there'll be more refined numbers. But yes, based on the the IT manual, thiswould be the the peak rates. >> Okay. Thank you. Um my other question iswhat is the vacancy rate of apartments currently built in our community?>> I do not know. >> Okay.>> The uh Maxfield again they're completing a commercial industrial demand analysis.They're also completing a residential demand analysis as part of our compgetting ready for our comprehensive plan. And that study that'll be done inthe fall will have all of that information. The last study that we had,our vacancy rate was very low, under I want to say under 3%, but we've addedseveral hundred units since then. I don't know our current units, the onesthat have opened within the last year or two, where they're where they're at withtheir vacancy. >> And when will that study be complete?>> It should be completed at some point this fall. I just have one one question, one morequestion. Um, Casey and staff. Um, what tools does the Met Council have at itsdisposal? um if a municipality in this case usPrior Lake doesn't show adequate progress towards fulfilling theirrequirements per the comp plan>> uh their main as far as multifamily demand if>> they wouldn't have any recourse after the comprehensive plan is adopted andapproved until the next next comp plan cycle came around. So, if we submitted acomprehensive plan that didn't amount to the necessary number of units thatthey're telling us we have for a demand, they simply wouldn't approve ourcomprehensive plan until we updated our map to add more highdensity residentialland. >> Got it.>> We also need just to add commissioner sorry um this cycle of the comprehensiveplan. So, it's a a long-term vision. This will look out to 2050. In the past,communities simply had to show multifamily acreage in their community,not necessarily able to be served or in the best areas. This time around, we arebeing told by the Met Council, you need to show each 10-year planning cycle thatyou can hit your low, medium, and high density targets.>> So, they're being more prescriptive, >> correct? And holding municipalitiesaccountable. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from commissioners?All right, thank you for those really great thoughtful questions and greatresponses from staff. Um, if the applicant is present, uh, would you uh,please approach the podium and, um, tell us what you would like to knowand then we will have some questions for you as well. >> Thank you, chair, and thank you,commissioners, and thank you, Casey, for the the good overview there. Uh, my nameis Nick A. I'm with Roars Companies. Uh we're at two Carlson Parkway, Plymouth,Minnesota. Um really just wanted to cover threethings. Quick overview of Roars. I was going to touch on the project, but Ithink Casey has that handled. Uh and then I did want to identify or justaddress a number of the items we talked about at the neighborhood meeting acouple weeks back. Uh and then we can get into some of the items you guys justdiscussed as well. Um so just high level on Roars, we are a national uhvertically integrated development, construction, and property managementfirm. We're based here in Plymouth. We have projects all over the country. Uh,and really like the suburban Twin Cities market is kind of our bread and butter.And so this this type of project is right up our alley. Um, I also mentionedvertical integration. We uh we develop, build, and and manage because we intendto own for the long term. And so we're really looking to put a project herethat we believe in because we will be owning it. Um,on the project, I'll skip over that. Just a few things on the neighborhoodmeeting. Um, I wanted to make a clarification. I I talked with Caseyafter Um I had I had mentioned that if this project were not to move forward asis um ultimately we could still build 150 call it units and after starting thesite it's probably more like 60 to 75 units on the eastern parcel like as byright uh and then the western parcels would still be commercial. So I justwant to clarify that um there still could be an apartment building. It wouldit would be significantly less than what I initially said. Um, I think thetraffic was covered pretty in-depth. Um, but to the point that I just made, um,and based on the IT stats, uh, I think if if there's a smaller apartmentbuilding and commercial there, um, there would still be significantly moretraffic than what is there now. And so hopefully what we're doing here and whatwe're trying to get at is if we are able to develop the whole thing as anapartment project. Um we're really looking for feedback and input to makecall it the lesser of two evils if you will a a less invasive project to theneighborhood while still achieving the goals that were set out to achieve. Umif that makes sense. some of the other things that we studied on the site. UmI think by right the project could be 25 feet of setback from um the propertyline to our building. We're currently 97 ft. Um I hope that the images with theheight variations and showing that the adjacent apartment building istechnically 130 ft um or sorry uh 1,030 ft tall and the high point of ourproject would actually be 15 ft shorter. Uh and then the piece adjacent to youall would then only actually be about 1,5tuh of elevation which is about what the single family homes currently are. Um,so I I know there were some images brought up. I think that that's a reallyimportant point of clarification there. Um, on the building height, uh, theother comments that we heard were just on the buffers between our project andthe single family homes. I hope that thisthere was one other image that was brought up as well, uh, back here thatbasically showed that if you were standing in our parking lot, youwouldn't see the single family homes at all. Um, we've tried to incorporate asmuch green space. uh the fence and the retaining wall with the elevationchanges that it would be very very minimal um or as minimal as we possiblycan make it to the neighbors. Um so we hope that that is seen because again wecould in theory build much closer. Um and then maybe not as relevant totoday but something that we're we're doing a lot of studying on is just theenvironmental impacts. There were a lot of questions about the environment. Um,and I just want to clarify that we're we're going to go through all the theproper permitting processes with the city on, you know, water management um,and the overall impact that the project has. And so I don't have a lot ofinformation today on that, but that was brought up. And so I just wanted toaddress that. Um, I think that's most of what I heardat the neighborhood meeting. Um, and then in terms of some of the items thatwere just discussed, should I discuss those now?Um there was a question about, you know, mixed use or um the amount of interestthat the property has had. And as far as we can tell, the property has beenlisted for 5 years with the same broker. The broker's had next to no inquiries.It's never been under contract. Um and any interest that has come forward hasbeen for multif family development. Uh similar to what we're showing now, asCasey mentioned, we've been through six or seven iterations of the site plan. Iwould imagine that many of those developers were looking to do closer to200 units. That's where we started. That's what seemed to make sense. Wehave significantly scaled back the project to try and again make it more umof a buffer in the neighborhood. Um and so that's kind of where we're at. Themixeduse thing because the property has been for sale for over 5 years. It justdoesn't if there if there's no interest there, then what what's to say that usbuilding something is going to spark interest? I it's hard to say. Um butit's it's not really something we're interested in.Um, in terms of could this be two buildings? Um, probably not. It wouldjust be extremely inefficient. Um, like I said, we would we would certainly loseunits and we've already lost a bunch of units. Um, and it just it becomes funkyand the underground parking becomes strange and this is just definitely whatwe view as the most optimal um, site plan.Um, and then I think the last piece that Ihad in my notes was the city's conducting a market study. We're alsoconducting a market study. Um, I just want to throw it out there that likewe've done our own kind of internal homework. Um, we would not necessarilybe pursuing a project if we didn't think it would be successful, if we didn'tthink the vacancy rates in the market were low enough,etc. Um, but we will have a third party market study available. We we'd bewilling to share that. um for for the city's interest. Uh and then the samething with the traffic study that um I had mentioned at the neighborhoodmeeting. I was hoping we'd have data available by today. We do not obviouslyum but that will be available going forward. SoI think that covers everything. Um are there any follow-up questions?>> I have just just a couple >> at this point in time.>> Um in terms of theproposed number of units is are is there or are there price points a fixed tothose each of those units? >> So, it's rough, but um a studio unit ora small onebedroom we call it um is around 1,500 per unit. Um the onebedroomunits closer to 800 ft² is going to be somewhere in that 1750 per unit. Um thetwo-bedroom units are 2250 2,300 call it. And then the three-bedroom units aremore like 2,700. Okay. Um,and my last comment for right now, why this location? Maybe briefly take usthrough sort of the internal thinking, right? And I know you did your duediligence on other >> areas in town, I'm assuming.What kept leading you back to this particular>> Sure. >> What?>> Um, it's a few things. I mean, I think generally speaking, we're veryinterested in Prior Lake. We think there's a lot of really exciting growthhappening here. Um, there's a few things at play. One, um, you know, I've hadother sites sent to me, most notably I Kitty Corner 2, the apartment that Caseywas just talking about. Um, that site is available, but it's zoned forcommercial. And it was a quick no. And to Casey's point, there's really noresidential um land available or R3, I should say, land available uh in thecity. So, this the the one parcel that we're not talking about this evening isreally one of the only opportunities. Um and then given that that piece isalso adjacent to two commercial lots that have had zero interest uh for uhmany years um and that they're all for sale, that is also a key component. wecan't just force someone to sell their land. Um, I would say those are kind ofthe obvious maybe key contributors. And then just the adjacencies here as well.Um, you know, we're really we're not that far off of Highway 13. There's agrocery store nearby. The schools are nearby. Um, we're not that far from thelake and just the downtown. It's a really nice place to live and quitehonestly, we just feel that this property is underserved as is and wouldbe a nice ad. I would say it would be a nice investment in the community.>> And then one final one. Um, do you have a sense of the demographicof population that might choose to reside there?>> It's Yeah, it's really hard to say. >> Okay,>> go ahead. I >> I'm particularly interested inuh kids that might attend our schools. >> I would say typically it's not manykids. Um, it's typically kind of twofold. What we've seen in the suburbanarea is you either have couples looking to downsize but want tostay in the community. They want to sell the family home. Maybe they have a placedown south and they want a place here for the summer.Um, or it's younger couples who are not able to afford their first home, butthey don't they don't want to live they want to live in a nice area. They wantto live in Prior Lake. Um, the stat that we always go back to is the first-timehome buyer, uh, depending on where you look, the average age is around 40. Um,and so that leaves a lot of the population looking for nice, attainablehousing that is in a good location and and that's a big part of what ourbusiness plan has been is to create homes like that. Um, and so typically,not always, but typically those folks when they when they do get to the pointof having young children who are school age, they're looking to get into a home.But, um, that those are kind of the two big ends.>> And I do have one more, and I promise I'll I'll share. Um, as you can see, asevidenced by all of the folks in the room tonight in attendance at at leastone or two of your prior meetings, we care a lot, our residents care a lotabout um, uh, what was affectionately called when I moved here in 2002, a awonderful place to call home, right? And so, we all are good stewards of ourhomes and we're all collectively good stewards of our of our town. So, um, doyou believe that you've been responsive um, to comments that you've heard andhas some of that feedback found its way into your iterative planning>> to date? >> Yeah, I mentioned a few of them, but I Ican reference them again. So, there was I think the setback from the singlefamily homes, the height of the building, and then the buffering.Overall, those were probably the biggest, most achievable um items forus. There were a lot of questions around the dog run. Um there was desire to nothave a dog run, which admittedly I was a little surprised by. Typically, that'ssomething that the neighbors would like to see. Um but there was a request toremove that. So, as of now, we're not necessarily contemplating that.Um, and then I I would say the other comments that we received are mostlyaround traffic, which we are doing our best to address, but um, it's it's alittle challenging when it's outside of the bounds of our property. Um, but I Ithink generally speaking, working with Casey and and hearing the neighborhoodmeeting, there have been a number of updates to the project that have made ituh, more inviting to the neighborhood. >> Thank you. Those are all my questions.Commissioner Rook, >> uh, nearest property that, um, you andteam have developed to this property, where would that be?>> Probably in Shakipi. >> Okay.>> Um, 169 kind of by the Hi-Ve.>> Okay. >> And then there is,>> that's a good question. Uh, there's one in Lakeville.>> Okay. >> Um, North Lake Lofts>> approximately. And then Chanhass probably the next.>> Sorry, didn't mean to. >> Approximately how many units in thoseproperties? >> So the Chanhass projects, there's threeof them. Uh they're 125. I'm going to call it 130 and 180.>> Um Shaka is over 200.I'm not sure. I'm not positive on Lakeville. I would say typically we'rein the 175 to 225 range. Got it. >> For building size,>> um do you have an estimate or do you have a historical for um impact to thetax base once a unit is built, filled, assuming high occupancy?>> Um so like gent like about how much the property would pay in property taxes.Um we're typically seeing around $4,000 per unit.>> Um varies a lot. I I admittedly we have not talked to the assessor here to knowexactly. Um but yeah, I mean that's 5600,000 I think.>> Thank you. Commissioner Jüko, >> I don't um know that I have a questionper se, but I did want to explore the area that um you had pulled up an imageum showing the parking lot with the retaining wallhere. Thank you. Um so that retaining wall that we're looking at, which theneighbors are on the neighborhood is on the other side of that, the singlefamily um development. Y>> um that is what is that 10 15 feet off of the property line.>> The wall that we're looking at >> it's 20 it's 25>> 25 ft with your other properties. Um how doyou maintain that zone >> in terms like just general maintenance?>> Yeah. What's it going to look like for the people that live on the other sideof the wall? Um it's a fair question. It's a hardit's a hard one to answer. I mean in the initial construction phase um we posesecurity, right? And then we have to make sure that the plants andum like the finishes there grow in and are actually like appropriate to what weput in our landscaping plans. Um, and then beyond that, I mean, I I get theconcern, but I mean, we're equally as interested in having like a nice productand well really well landscaped, nicely manicured area as as the neighbors are.So, I I I hear the concern, but I guess I'm not that concerned about it. We'rewe have full-time maintenance where we have snowplow and umyard maintenance and const Yeah, there's there's just constant improvement beinghad there. I'm not concerned about it. I'm givingyou an opportunity to voice to them. >> Sure. Sure. Sure. Sure.>> Um and then my um uh you mentioned the trees and how this is going to provide abuffer. Deciduous trees here in our state don't look like that year round.>> So I would recommend if you further develop some of these things, youconsider some coniferous plantings. >> We we did talk about that. Um, and Iknow talking with staff, um, I think some of the trees in the area are alittle tired and maybe not the best. Um, and so I do think there'd be some goodimprovement to that line of trees. >> Okay.>> I don't have any other questions for >> Thank you, Commissioner Jüko.Commissioner Smoker. Um, so my understanding then is from where we ifyou were sitting on the other side of that wall and retaining wall and walktowards the neighbor's house, you're saying there'd be 25 ft of land thatwould still be part of this complex. >> Yeah.>> Okay. And so again, I suppose those trees that look so nice and filled inwould not exist there for another 20 years. So the buffer zone is really alittle misleading. I think that that slide 14, the buffer zone view, thosetrees, it sounds like, will be gone. That's that's 20 years in the future. AmI right to make that assumption? >> You're just saying that it'll take timefor the trees to grow in. >> Yeah.>> Yeah. >> Yeah.>> Yeah. And um it's it's hard to say exactly. We have not completed a fulllandscaping plan, but yeah, it will take time.>> Understood. Just trying to clear that we're all on the same page on that one.Um, so you're not relying on the neighbors trees for screening oractually you would be relying really on their mature street trees for screeningas they would too. >> And otherwise it would be from thecorner of that building, the edge of the building. It'd be 97 feet to theirproperty line, their actual property line.>> Correct. >> Okay. Um, and someone already askedabout uh when you be first became interested in the property. You saidabout five years ago. >> Oh, no, sorry. I was saying that thecommercial property has been listed for sale for 5 years.>> Okay. >> We probably became engaged maybe alittle over a year ago at this point. >> Was it because of the district officebeing available? >> Yes. Once that became available, thisthe entire collection of parcels made it seem feasible that we could have aproject on site. >> And I found it very compelling how yousaid talked about how the niceness of Prior Lake and we all agree. We're allhere. We all very invested in it. That's why I'm on here, too. Um,>> do any of your properties in Chanhass and Lakeville, Shakabe, are any of themmixed use? You know, um, restaurants down below or is that a lot in yourwheelhouse? >> Um, I would say so. Chanhass, yes. And,um, it's kind of unique situation becausethe city, um, it is basically the main and main of their downtown.>> Yeah. Um, and so there was strong commercial interest there. Um, you know,it's already it's not the buildings aren't built and it's already full.>> Um, we have other projects that do havemixed use. Um, for example, we have a project in West St. Paul>> that is on the main main intersection of, you know, Highway 3 and Wentworth inWest St. Paul >> and it has been vacant for two yearsnow. Um, and so we just retailers these days, it's just a different game. Theywant drive-thrus. They want easy in-n-out parking. Um, and they don'tnecessarily want mixed use unless it's in a very like urban downtown core. So,that's why I say we wouldn't really explore it here. It just it doesn'tquite fit. It's not dense enough. Um, but we have done it in the past. Yes.So, Chenhasten, it's in the downtown area>> where it already has a little bit of an urban feel to it.>> Yes. >> Okay. But you don't think we're on thecusp of that? I mean, we're kind of like an Excelsure or Weisetta in the making.We're we're a few dec >> I think if we were on the main street,like the adjacent building here. >> Okay.>> That could that could make sense. But we're tucked back in a little bit moreof a residential area like where this is the the boundary property, right? So,>> yeah. I'm guess I'm kind of disagreeing with you because I I do see it. I'vebeen I was in Weisetta not too long ago and you can get a little bit off of themain drag and kind of find that Chanhassen feel.>> So I I'm finding that a little questionable, but would you be takingsection 8 housing in these units? >> No.>> Okay. >> Umthat's it for my questions. Thank you. >> Great. Any other questions?All right. Chair Fleming. Um I did have the landuse east map pulled up too if you'd like to see that before you open up.>> I would and I have a a question for for you and or any of member of your staffCasey. So go ahead. >> So this is the current uh version figure3.2 of our land use chapter in the comprehensive plan. the majority of thecommercial property that we have left available. There's, you know, sothroughout the industrial parks, there might be two acres here or four acresthere, but the large chunks are going to be the Verling family property north ofCounty Road 42 at the intersection of Crest Avenue.The County Road 42 frontage is currently guided for commercial and then the CrestAvenue frontage is guided for commercial. There's about 25 acres onthe north uh side of the the main property. So, the southeast corner ofthat 2142 intersection is guided for commercial, but the bulk is going to beout here at the early orderly annexation area. Right now, we have sewer and waterextended to the western edge of the Dr. Horton development on 170th Street. So,those utilities have to be brought down Marshall Road, um which would take asignificant project to get that to happen. The council is certainly open toextending utilities if they are development driven. I don't believethere's much of an appetite of the city just to extend until we know a projectis imminent. This area is changing. So this is the current land use plan. The2050 version will be slightly different modifications. This area has a lot ofplan industrial. The next version will have more business park, less industrialand more general commercial in this area.And we would have until 2050 to do that. >> Correct. Yeah. That plan will be updatedum in finalized before the end of 2029, hopefully sooner. And then that will bea essentially a 2030 to 2050 plan. And this area it's going to I mean thisis a lot of acreage and this is not going to be fully built out in 2050.This is long-term full buildout kind of vision for commercial industrial in thatarea. So the I'm not declaring this in my role. I'mjust just speaking as a fellow resident, right? Umit's going to be just looking at the colorsdifficult for us to achieve smart prudent the right affordable balance between residentialand commercial. Is that a fair statement?>> That is fair. Yep. Yeah. I think you know when when I shared the statsearlier it's not the expectation of the city of prayer lake to be at 45% likeShaki is but >> it's very reasonable to think we shouldbe or could be closer to where Savage is you know in thatlow 20 upper teen kind of percentage range for commercial industrial>> which means we'll have to make some intentionalpurposeful decisions >> correct>> when I say we not these four people but you know through you know policyum and planning in the next 7 to 12 years.>> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Umit's time to open the public hearing at 7:34.Just for the record, is there a motion to open the publichearing at 7:34? >> So moved.>> We have a motion. Is there a second? >> Second.>> We have a motion in a second. All those in favor of opening the public hearingat 7:34 p.m., please signify by saying I.>> I. I. >> Public hearing is now open. Again, if you wish to address thecommission, I'd ask that you please approach the podium, turn on the redlight until it turns green. Um, and for the official record, state your name andaddress. And we're going to ask folks to limit their comments to five minutes. Wewill be taking time. Thank you. My name is James. I live on TorontoAvenue about six houses down from this. So I think what I took away from thismeeting is 30 years ago there was a meeting similar to this and the schooldistrict came in and asked for a kindergarten maybeand here we are because that first piece got changed toR3. I mean none of this would have happenedif that hadn't happened. Is that correct? Yep. So, normally just for the audience,we'll have you ask all your questions or make all your comments, uh, direct themtowards the planning commission and then following your comments, if they wouldlike staff to address or if they would like to address, uh, they'll ask us todo that. But we don't want it to be a back and forth conversation is the goal.>> That's fair. I'll stick with what I just asked. That's it.>> Is that it? Is that it? Thank you. >> I can respond to that, chair. So, yeah.Um, in 1994 or thereabouts, it was reszoned from general commercial to R3.If that didn't happen, it doesn't necessarily mean we wouldn't be heretoday. It means the school district wouldn't have been there. Uh, we couldhave requests for reszoning or regiduing commercial property to residential orresidential to commercial at any time on any parcel. We process the requests asthey come in. Um, like as stated earlier in the report, it's not a regularoccurrence that the city is considering reszoning commercial property forresidential purposes. Um, but here we are today because anapplication was received and we're processing it, which requires thispublic hearing. Can I ask one more question? Does anybody think those people wouldhave approved that 30 years ago if they knew there's an apartment building goingto come? I I wouldn't even want to speculate whatthey would have thought in 1994. The community at that time, you know,was I don't know if it was 8,000 people.Okay, that's all I got. Thank you. >> 7306Horizon Trail. Um, just a few comments. It you guys aren't traffic experts. So,why are you making up numbers that aren't valid, especially since we have adaycare facility right there on Park Nicollet that you could use as anexample? Um, the next thing I wanted to make note about was turning left ontoFranklin Trail off of Park Nicollet is nearly impossible at the currentsituation. And then also um ponds park there is such high volume that I don'tthink is being taken into consideration the volume of people coming and going tothat park. It's backed up all the way to the park from the stop sign. So you areactually adding an apartment building that will be feeding additional turnseither left or right right across from the entrance of the park. And then Ijust also wanted to make one more comment is right now going up that hillI don't know if you are aware of this being not a resident um people can't getup that hill. So what they do, the people that do live up that hill, theyhave to back up all the way to the entrance of the currentum tower uh um the school district buildingto even get up the hill. So there are going to be a lot of challenges I thinkwith redist you know changing the density and then obviously the thegentleman before us it just doesn't make sense and I think the madeup numbers onthe IT are totally made up because we have commercial daycare facilities whichare right on our street that don't even compare to what you have on thosestatistics. So, I'm going to thank you for yourcomments. I'm going to ask staff to, as I did with uh a previous speaker,take take us through your methodology so there aren't any uh misconceptions abouthow you did your work and the elements that you considered in coming up withthose traffic counts. >> Thank you, chair. Yeah. And and I thinkI said at least twice during the presentation that those are highlevelestimates. The applicant is completing a traffic study and that focus would be ata future public hearing if we get to that point. The numbers are based onpeak hour rates. So it's not saying 60 vehicles total during the day. It's atthe peak hour there would be an additional 60 units. This is a a commontopic that we've had on every apartment we've done. And what I always encouragepeople to do is to go out by Lakeidge Apartments or the new one galleryum the Ron Clark project grainwood. It's not the traffic impact that peoplebelieve is going to result in in the development. I guess>> there's issues right now though. Do you understand that there's issues even withthe addition? Yeah. I wanted to make a point of because sir um you can't turnleft at Franklin. You can't at high peak hours. So traffic needs to be addressed.Um can't go up the hill. You know, these are realities that you guys aren'ttaking into consideration. Thank you.>> Thank you. Who else would like to approachand share your thoughts with us? Press the green button. >> Red button. Where's the red button?Okay. Um, hi. Good evening. My name is Phyllis Bros. I live at 4478 Pond ViewTrail. I'm kind of the house on the western end of this proposal. I didsubmit my comments in writing, but now I understand tonight we just want to talkabout the zoning issue. So, I do have a couple comments on the zoning. Um, it'smy understanding that a building of this size needs 10acres. Am I correct? 10 acres of land.>> Yes. staff has requested that you go through all of your comments. Okay.>> Well, that's one. >> Yeah.>> Um, this is definitely less than 10 acres. So, we're putting even with bothparcels, you're putting this large building on a small parcel. Um,one of the things I came up about was where they have other developments.My neighbor and I did drive around Lakeville,uh, Shagapei and Burnsville. Burnsville is kind of an anomaly becauseit's by the Ames Center in in Burnsville, but the other two, they arelarge, but they're not by residential houses. So, the comparisons aren'treally true. Um, the other thing was, uh, why are we insuch a hurry? You know, it seems like that buildingjust or that this the school building just went up for sale recently.And my question to the commissioner would be,have you given time for any other um potentialdevelopers to come in with any other proposals?My point also would be because it was discussed about for instance if therewas a daycare center or whatever. Yes, there may be some traffic but itwould probably be one story not four.And I would encourage you folks or and even the citywalk over there and try to envision this fourstorybuilding on that corner. It's it was just unthinkable to me. Um Ialso I am somewhat encouraged by the comments of Reyersum because when we attended the meeting that they held um one of the questionswas if it's not approved the reasonzoning isnot approved from commercial to residential on that other hunk. Um whatwould happen? And the answer from Reuters at that time was well we'll justbuild it anyway. we'll just build it higher and we'll reduce the spacethat we provide to the houses. So we fel I feel that we were being heldhostage to the question of reszoning. Now I hear that they could only do 60 to70 units if it were on the one plot.Would that building be four stories? Probably not.just a question. So those are some of the things that have to do with thezoning in my mind and then of course there are you know all the otherancillary issues which I presume will be taken up later. So thank you.>> Thank you Phyllis. Do you want to address the the u the the10 acres and the umelevation? There was one more Yep. elevation height, but the the rushto completion, right? I I don't view it that way, but I understand the sentimentbecause it's a it's a significant event followed closely by the the sale of, youknow, the beloved administrative offices.>> Yep. Thank you, chair, and thank you, Phyllis, for the questions. The the10acre requirement, it's not a requirement for multifamilydevelopments. It's a requirement that we have in our city code for a planned unitdevelopment. So, >> a planned unit development we have thatneeds to be a minimum of 10 acres, but the planning commission can grant anexception. For example, that the project next to city hall is only on a oneacredevelopment. That's 105 units. That building was a planned unit development.They got a similar exception to all that exception did is it gets us heretonight. Um, >> so has that been approved by thecommission yet? >> The exception is>> the PUB exception. So basically, as staff, we're not allowed to take anapplication until the planning commission says it's okay to take it. Sowe took the application, now we're here. Nothing has been approved. This is thefirst real public hearing um on this project. Um as to why now and why therush >> uh the city has nothing to do withreviewing development proposals for this site. We are not in control of, youknow, this developer over that developer. We're processing a land useapplication request that came in from RORS.>> It could have come in in two years or five years or or from somebody else, butall we're doing is processing what comes in as that as it's requested.>> Um the planning commission tonight is going to make a recommendation to thecity council either for or against or two to two. The city council is going toconsider this likely on July 14th at their Tuesday meeting. And then if thecity council agrees, the city council is required to do a supermajority vote. Soto reszone this property and to approve a planned unit development, four out ofthe five councilors need to say yes. If only three say yes, it doesn't getapproved and then this doesn't go forward and there will not be a futurePUB public hearing. >> Got it.>> So hopefully that helps. >> It does. That clarifies it. Thank youvery much. >> You're welcome. >> Okay. So, what do you do here?>> If the green button is on, you're good. >> Okay. So, I'm Lori Nagel. I live at17126 Toronto Avenue. And we've been thrilled living in ourhouse and we love the peaceful atmosphere that we live in.Um, my concern or one comment, I have two comments. umwhether it's 166 units or 70 or whatever, has the computation been madeto figure out, okay, if there's teenagers living in this unit, say it'sa three-bedroom unit, there could be two teenagers living in that third bedroomin the second and third bedroom. And is it fair to say that there would just betwo cars per unit or would there potentially be three or four cars perunit? I'd like to have that u introduced into the calculus.And another one when we're talking about Shakape earlier, I'd like to know whatthe crime rate is at Chakapi versus Prior Lake.Um I have pretty good idea. It's a lot higher in Chakapi, but I'd like to havethat addressed too. >> Just just to clarify, crime rate>> as an aggregate for the city or crime rate disagregated in proximity to highdensity or medium density low density >> bu dwellings.>> The town itself. >> Okay.But it sounds like they have more high density there and I'm wondering ifthere's a correlation to their high to their um to their crimerate. >> I'd like to have that whole topic stud.>> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you for the questions. Hi, my name is Steve Potter. Uh, I liveat 4498 Pond View Trail. This house right here,my house is that 1,5T. That's the top. I will belooking in the bedroom of the people on the fourth floor.There's not enough trees, especially in the winter like you mentioned.to block that out. That's We're somewhat opposed. I appreciate allyou uh neighbors coming out today. And Casey, you cool factualuh transmission of all your data. That was great.We are opposed. I have a petition that most of us here have signed um that hasover a hundred signatures on it that are opposed to this resoning effort. Um,I've submitted it earlier today, but we got another 30 after I sent it in. So, Iwill be sending a um addendum to that. So, I also have the the hard copies ifanybody would like them here. So, >> thank you. >> Uh, good good evening chair, goodevening, commissioners and fellow residents. My name is Alex Sheer. I'm atthe 4466 Pawn View Trail and I have submitted my letter to the chair. I justwould like to go through some items just for the records. So I am opposed andconcerned with this development for the following seven reasons. One is theimpact on traffic which my fellow resident have mentioned. You put in 166units assuming that you have two cars per household. You're talking about over300 cars. And then that being close to that Toronto and then the pawn athleticcomplex during sport seasons is a nightmare. And I understand you're goingto improve some pedestrian safety or whatnot, but you put in more populationin that small corner. So please take a look at it at at a at a larger scale howit's impacted. And also number two is the impact onexisting infrastructure. We we in a small town community, small town roadundivided. And then uh this development will impact that it will impact uh ourwater sever emergency services. There might be special assessment in the laterdate. So just so so those are cascading impacts to the existing residentsand also number three is the humongous size the scale of the structure. If youlook at the bird's eye view it's it's huge comparing to the existing structurein the neighborhood. It's huge. No matter how you slice and dice it, it'sstill big. And like uh my fellow resident fellmentioned, supposed to be on a 10 acre lot. And they asked for a variance fromthe city to do this on a 5.5 acres. And I implore the commissioners to do notapprove this variance. And number four, loss of privacy. likemy fellow resident Steve mentioned that uh I think they they put up a goodpicture here with some trees and retaining walls and stuff like that butthose trees will die when you do a retaining wall they're going to doanchor into the existing soil it will destroy the roots the tree will diethere won't be buffer for the residents and there will be a clear line of sightto people privacy areas so I I implore that uh we take into that that uhprivacy into account as well. And uh number five is I I like to call it likebait and switch reasoning. So when we move into Praik you know 15 20 years agowe love the small town feeling and uh we understand that the two existingadjacent properties like the P number 252690030 and 252690041were zone commercial. We understood that. So we we put in a lot of time andeffort to make the homes into our forever homes. But now that we talkabout reszoning into the highdensity residential areas, apartment complex, itfeels like we're being, you know, in a put in a situation where is a bait andswitch and it's a kind of a, you know, took out the trust of a long-termproperty owners, you know, because when you move into a property, you put in alot of investment time and money and all that. And uh another one that kind of uhrelating to this number six is the negative impact on the property valuesbecause uh uh you know forcing a massive highdensity complex adjacent to uhsingle residential area properties uh it might you know directly compromisethe desiraability of them homes and creating a significant risk of decliningproperty values for existing home owners. And last but not least, zerorelief on existing taxpayers. Like I like I said, there will be specialassessment coming up. And again, I'm not quite sure on the thetax revenue coming from this uh development, but in the communityneighborhood uh town hall meeting the other day, I think something around$500,000 annually on tax revenue. uh which is not a sign significant amountif you consider the impact on residents and and and the environmental impact inthe area as well. Uh this de development offers notangible benefit to the local taxpayers the existing residents who build and sustain the city. I thinkthe neighborhood was develop was developed in the 90s and we've been hereforever. So uh in instead it shift the long-term financial burden of upgradinginfrastructures you know maintaining roads uh expanding schools and cityservices onto the shoulders of the existing residents.So for this reason I implore the commissioners to protect the integrityof our small neighborhood field uphold our current zoning standards and rejectthis proposal. Thank you for your time, your leadership, and continueddedication to preserving our community. >> Thank you, Mr. ChCasey. Um, I want to revisit Oh, hold on. Uh, just just one question. Um, in yourexperience, why what are some reasons why cities evolve their land uses?>> Uh, well, a lot of it is it's changing dynamics of your community. So, when thezoning in this area was put in place, you know, I I guessed 8,000 peoplepopulation earlier. I don't know how big Prior Lake was. I could I could look itup. Um, it was a completely different community at that time. There might havebeen two apartment buildings, three apartment buildings in the town. I don'tknow. So, the city is growing. It's a diversified housing product. So, cities,you know, cities of Prior Lake size pushing 30,000, you're going to havesome apartment buildings. When I showed you the zoning map and the land use mapearlier, and you see 90% of the community is yellow. That's why we have,you know, these hearings because you're, whether it's a commercial development ora multif family development, you're putting it next to lowdensityresidential almost 100% of the time because there'sso much low density residential in our community. So, it's it's difficult inPrior Lake. Yeah. Had they done it differently30 and 40 and 50 years ago and planned for more commercial like I know CherFleming wishes they would have and had the city maintained the the largeindustrial parks that they had approved at one point and then they reszone themfor town home developments. Those things are difficult and it it puts it onfuture generations to to resolve and address. Thank you. Good evening, commissionersand staff. Uh my name is Jeff Parks. I live at 4463 Pond View Trail Southeastin Prior Lake. Um, aside from all the issues that have already been raised,uh, related to traffic and potential school impacts and height, buildingheights and things like that, which are not necessarily related to zoning, um, Istill wanted to, um, bring up apart or bring up the idea of um, appropriate um,buffering. While the current zoning is C1 umadjacent to R1, R3 in my mind is less desirable than theC1. Um and ordinarily I would rather see it go from a um high density residentialto a medium density residential before getting to low density residential. Um,I know that um on this on this 170th Street that goes up to the park, thereis um apartments and high density um town homes that border the other side of170th Street to that back up to single family homes, but at least there's astreet in between it. Um here there wouldn't be. It would be immediatelyback to back on from high density residential to low density resresidential. And I'd prefer to see something that would be less dense uh inwhatever form it would be, whether it be commercial or some other type ofresidential um in this area. That's all. Thank you.>> Thank you. Good evening. Um, I'm Robert Ericson. Ilive at 4562 Pond View. I'm one of I not don't want to measure sticks or anythinghere, but one of probably three or four properties that will have direct line ofsight from my house, my windows, my kids' rooms directly into the apartment.Um, and while I'll save those comments for the city council meeting, I thinkthere's a couple of key aspects that need to be taken in consideration as ituh accounts for zoning and moving from commercial to residential or fromhighdensity residential. I think one of the most interesting things about theconversation that's happened um from staff to um commissioners is thisinflection point of well gee if a couple of years ago 20 years ago we would havehad the foresight to not give up that residential or that commercial propertymaybe our tax base would be different and we are contemplating as a communitythe exact same problem that we are you know year after year decade after decadegoing through to say we are going to seed potential commercial developmentand move that towards more residential more highdensity residential. It's not abell that we can unring. If RORS is going to invest millions of dollars intheir construction, there is no reason to say that in 30 to 40 years thatapartment building is will still be there. A business in that same timecould change hands multiple times. You could have uh a lot of economicdevelopment that could occur with proper planning of this commission to say wehave an opportunity to look at preserving that uh that commercial realestate, that commercial property while still meeting some of those objectivesof the Met Council. I think from a a standpoint of the neighborhood in thecommunity, we're not opposed to development. No one here has said wewant to keep things exactly as they are. We are open to responsible development.And what we're seeing here is the pendulum swing from commercial propertythat hasn't been developed all the way to a uh high density residential with ifyou do the math on how many bedrooms are there, well over six or well over 300bedrooms uh in that facility. It's not compatible with the city ofPrior Lakes's 2040 vision. You're moving from a plan of making sure that we haveum transition between neighborhoods of having this aesthetic uh contemplatedand and and having um the existing neighbors and their property taken intoaccount when you're making these changes. It is a sharp right turn inthat. I think if we were to make any recommendation to this council, it wouldbe to look at what we can do to drive economic development in that space.There is no there is an opportunity for the city and for this commission to goand say how can we drive the same level of investment that we saw within Chulasor other properties and drive further economic development through a mix ofbusinesses and potentially you know residential or mixed residential uhproperties. Um, finally, I I did want to call out, sothere was a comment made that this is fairly similar to the Jeffers Waterfrontdevelopment. >> I think the biggest differentiationbetween those two properties is that there was an extensive amount ofplanning put in place. When you look at the green space, the transitions, thetraffic, it's a multi-phaseed approach that that contemplated not only theresidential need, but then there's commercial and economic developmentthat's occurring in that corner. These are those are apples and oranges.They are vastly different situations. Quite literally, you might actuallysiphon off and choke off all potential uh further development in that corridorby moving in this direction without maybe tearing down the villageor the village lake center or seeing someone purchase the point and tear thatdown and put something else there. that there's very little space to drive trueorganic economic growth if you seed off those two propertiesuh in conjunction with the apartment complex.So, thank you. I I appreciate the comments particularlywhen you mentioned smart responsible growth and I just remind us that ummaybe many of you were here when we had the economic downturn that happenedbetween 2008 second half of 2007 8 through 2011 2012.So that um pretty much forced us to slow down slow down the process um and thenCOVID happened right so there have been some external forces that have caused usto have have to pivot but I I thank you for your your your comments. Who elsewould like to approach the podium? Dean Newman. I live at uh 4623 OverlookDrive Southeast, which is about a quarter of a mile from this proposed uhproperty here. Um early in my career, I used to represent developers who builtuh medical facilities, clinics, mental health facilities,um even foster care homes, group homes. It seems like the property the the umthat that we currently are looking at seems more suited for a clinic, amedical facility, a physical therapy rehab center or something like that.than this um out of it just seems way too large for uh the size of all thosethree lots put together. And I have uh so that's one of mycomments. I have a question uh if maybe uh the planning staff knows how manyunits is the uh property across the street on Toronto. Um it's acondominium. I can't remember the name of the Does anybody have an idea how bigthat is? >> That would be one question that I have.Um the other thing is is as we the the numbers that were shared here earlierthis evening about the um various percentages of commercial propertyversus residential property in the tax base. It would seem to me that it wouldmake sense to preserve every possible piece of commercially zoned land thatyou have right now. That would be my recommendation.Um, and again, I have some concerns also about about traffic and just the thescale of the the building at this time just seems to be too large for the sizeof the the land. >> Thank you.>> Thank you. Who else? off.>> Red is off. Green is on. >> Um I'm not as aerodite as everyone else hasbeen. But my concern is the city of Prior Lake is no longer orshould no longer be a bedroom community for the citiesbecause we're now a a city. Um,we also seem to give developers waiverss and variances that the currenthomeowners don't get, which several people I've talked to over the years isa major concern. Umthe other thing isI always wonder about the impact on on the infrastructureas fire and police which I know is not zoningand also we the city narrowedthe Mushtown Street because traffic was going too fast ortoo much. So that traffic has a major impactbeyond what it seems the planning commission seems to think. And nooffense to wars, if we're going to have an apartment,another apartment complex, luxury is better than some other options.That's it. >> Could we have your name?>> Oh, I'm sorry. Mary Evansson, 17266 Toronto Avenue.>> Thank you, Mary. >> Who else would like to approach? My name is Jenny Rhyrs. Um, I am at 4654Oakwood Circle Southeast. I'm in a very different situation than a lot of thesepeople. I don't back up to this um development. I'm actually two roads awayfrom it, but I have had a child that has gone through Prior Lakes softballprogram. Um right down the road from us is Woodridge, which is one of the fieldsthat these kids play at. There's not enough parking for that already.So, I know we're not talking traffic, but as partof the traffic study that's going on, can we make sure that we're looking atwhat the parking is doing? Right now, they park along the side. They park upWoodview. Um on on Toronto, it's you can only let one car through at a timebecause there's parking both sides between renting and between these games.Um, I just want to make sure that that's taken into consideration, too, because60 cars doesn't sound like a lot, but when only one car can get through at atime, it's a lot. >> Would anyone else like toapproach the commission going once, going twice? I actually just said that to kind ofshake the limbs a little bit, but seriously, is there anyone else whowants to share some commentary thoughts with us? Okay, I'm going to uh take a motion in asecond to close the public hearing and then I've asked staff to uh respond tomany of the uh comments and questions and inquiries that you all expressedjust a few minutes ago. Um they may not get all of it, but they'll get most ofit. Okay. Um, so with that, I'll entertain a motion and a second to closethe public hearing at 8:13 p.m. Is there a motion?>> So moved. >> We have a motion. Is there a second?>> We have a motion by Commissioner Rook, second by Commissioner Euro. All thosein favor, please signify by saying I. >> I.>> I. The public hearing is closed. I'll turn it over to staff.>> Thank you, chair. Thank you, commissioners. Thank you, everyone fromthe public who spoke and attended. Um, I'll>> do you need a sip of water first? >> Yeah, I've been just sitting hereenjoying the back and forth. So, um, maybe working my way backwards the theparking, the park events. I I understand that's a concern, but that would not beincluded in this study. So, it's a viable comment, something that could bebrought up at a future PUB meeting, but the developers traffic study would notinclude park events and where to where to park those. Um, the size of thebuilding across the street, I don't know offhand, just looking at an aerialphoto, maybe in the 35 to 50 range. I think those are condo units, so they'rea little bit larger than the traditional multifamily development.Paul's feeding me questions here. >> Yeah, the the commercial residentialthat I think it was Robert, great point. That's something that we talk about atour planning commission and city council work sessions. I have been with the cityof Prior Lake for almost 15 years and we have brought one commercial reszoningapplication through the process. So that's questions that we get often umwill the city resone this commercial for residential? In my time here, we havedone it one time. This is the second time we're to this point with anapplication. So, I don't want the community to think the city of PriorLake is reszoning all of its commercial property for residential. We are not.Um, as far as the tax base, that's not that absolutelyis a reality, but that's not something that weighs in on planning commissionand city council decisions. If that was the case, the tax base generated fromthis apartment building is going to be far superior to any commercial we'regoing to see. If this redevelops as a commercial site, it's probably going tobe in that, you know, 10,000 square foot range of a daycare. It might be afuneral home. It might be the gentleman who spoke about the senior care. Um,we've done those in a few areas in town. Now, I can't we can't go out and demanda senior care comes and builds a facility, but we've had good luck. Um,the one in the Eagle Creek neighborhood and then there's one up on FountainHills. Both of those are very nice buffers between the commercialdevelopments and the adjacent residential. Yes, that would be a goodfit here. I don't know if if there's any what the demand is in the city of ParLake for that. Uh we'll see if we go through some more questions here. Yep. I guess I I think we've got, youknow, a lot of the similar themes. If the commissioners have any questionswritten down that we didn't address, please feel free to to offer them up orI'm available um by phone or email or for folks to pop in and chat with too atmy office. >> Great. Um let's go to commissionercomments. Commissioner. >> Okay. Um, hey, thank you all for yourparticipation and for your passion. I mean, we're up here for the same reasonbecause we care about our town and I love that you've been organized and yourletter writing. I mean, that we did read it all and so it's it's nice to hearfrom you because sometimes when we sit up here on the day, we're like, well,what what does everyone else think? Thank you for giving us your thoughts.Um, so I do feel like a steward for the town. Um during my orientation lastfall, I remember hearing about we are we don't have enough commercial space orcommercial uh uh presence here in Prior Lake. So I'm kind of concerned thatwe're going to be losing some here, particularly in the town center. Um, andPrior Lake is unique in that we've got two town center areas, but you know,they're closer than you think as we get bigger, as we move beyond our, you know,our 8,000 square foot or I mean 8,000 population uh to 27 and so forth becauseit felt like when I was a kid that uh Brooksdale Mall was really far away andthat's what it was called back then. So I I'm I'm concerned that we would begiving some of that up particularly when it has existing served water and sewerand we don't have a whole lot of that whereas most of the other spaces wouldbe green space way out on the perimeters. Um and then if I think aboutin the future our the town personality that expanding um you know I think wecould be at Wisetta or Excelsier have more restaurants especially if as Roorsays more people coming into the snowbirds that want to downsize. Umwhere are they going want to go? They're want to go to restaurants and we alreadydon't have a lot of restaurants in downtown compared to some of the othertowns. So, I I'm a little concerned about getting some of that up. And we'rehere because of that weird little 1994 decision to get the kindergarten there.And I don't know how we would roll back and say, how could we do somethingdifferent? But I'm cognizant that it wasn't intentional. And it's just aquirkiness. So, it's kind of where my my thoughtsare at. >> Thank you, Commissioner Rook. Uh, as stated very eloquently by mycolleague, um, I think the question before us is whether or not this isappropriate or not appropriate from a um, zoning standpoint. Um, certainlyhaving trouble from my lens finding this to be appropriate, especially given manyof the um, I'll say con current conditions of the overall um, city. Andso ultimately, I think we all agree that more commercial and more desirable umbusinesses and entities would be um better served in our neighborhoods, inour city um as a whole. probably a clarification question forfor staff um if now is an appropriate time is ultimately if the commissiondeemed this not appropriate could you talk through the process about the landthat is currently zoned for urban high density >> uh thank you commissioner Rook planningcommissioners so the property that is currently zoned high density the schooldistrict office would remain so the city wouldn't initiate a reszoning at thistime perhaps Perhaps down the road when the comprehensive land use planamendment is done, the city would look at it. Um, we would likely wait until ifthis project doesn't move forward until another proposal was received either forhighdensity residential as a standalone site or a reszoning request to combinewith for a future commercial use. So if somebody buys the building and they'rerepurposing it, we would be required to have a public hearing similar to this,similar notification area to reszone from highdensity residential tocommercial and also to amend the land use plan from highdensity residential toa commercial use. That is going to be the more difficult part because themetropolitan council is not going to love if we get to that point seeing aland use plan amendment request come in to get rid of highdensity residentialcommercial in exchange for excuse me highdensity residential in exchange forcommercial. If we get if we do that, we would likely need to identify anotherpiece of property of equal size somewhere high density in the community.And that property most assuredly will be next to lowdensity residentialsomewhere. So just so we're prepared.>> Thanks for the clarification. No other comments from me.>> Commissioner Euro. >> No, I I I just agree with the sentimentsof my colleagues here. Um I um have grown up in this community. I had abirthday party at that bowling alley, believe it or not. Rained out, rainedout birthday party. Um, so um, so I know >> age or so,>> little bit. Um, so I know the, um, the area quite well. I know this communityquite well and, um, I, uh, agree with my colleagues. I think that, um, there isdefinitely a future use for that property. I don't believe that this isit at this point in time. Um, I want to first start by saying I Iappreciate I always appreciate the iterativeprocess, right? I know firsthandhow many hours um staff spends on these these proposals and these projects. Um, One of you in the audience, I don't Idon't know you know you by face, but I know the name, wrote to me and suggestedthat I do a driveby. Um, and I had already done one like a week ago. Um butI did another one and um this is a this is a difficult one and II don't expect all of you in the audience to appreciate the lens that weare in as factfinders um having tosift through all of the findings of fact um and having to hold what we believe isthe best um evidence-based ideas or plans orproposals for the future of this city, right? It is a wonderful place to callhome. Will always be that. And here's where the balance comes in. If we don'tgrow responsibly and prudently,keeping the legacyuh in a place of honor while being really prudent in planning for thefuture, we will become obsolete. I know thatsounds harsh to some of you, but we are facing some external forces.some of which we know, some of which we can project, many of that which we don'tknow, right? And so that's that's the balance that we and then um in concertwith staff, in concert with city council and people at the Met Council, MetCouncil will be looking will be looking and watching. In fact, they've increasedtheir umuh their scrutiny of every every city that they have oversight for. So, thisis this is a difficult one. What I'm heartened by and I hope that um theReyers team um will continuetheir due diligence. You've heard all of the feedback. You've firstand I knowyou're taking good copious notes. Um but hanging in the balanceright now, given everything that we know that we can reasonably and responsiblyguess and project about um the next 12 to 18 months. The Maxwellstudy is not due for anotherseveral months, weeks, months, >> months,>> months. Right. Um, so, so, so you got to peek into mybrain, right? Multiple layers. Um, and the one that comes down to is moreintuition than science. Um, andmembers of of my team and Casey, Casey's known me for years, and I I have a Ihave a litmus test. If a proposalhas anywhere between six, seven, andsometimes 19. There was a proposal that had 19 conditions,right? That's a signal to me that it's not the right time.That's a signal to me that more work needs to be done. Um, and I'm hopefulthat we'll find a way to respond thoughtfully and responsibly um to theMet Council. Um, but at this at this moment in time, given everything that weknow um, Insular to Prior Lake and outside of um, Prior Lake, contiguous toShakipi and Chanhassen and Savage and Burnsville and Lakeville,um, it's not the right time now. But I'mgoing to be honest with you all. It's it will come back.It will come back. And so we've got to find a way again in concert with staff,in concert with the city council and other leaders in in our town to figureout how we can um have a conversation that is sustainedover time. So it's not just a one-off conversationwith this proposal and one-off conversation with the proposal two yearsfrom now. But this community, we're at the we're at the inflection point. We'vegot to find a way to have a sustained conversation over time. We have to finda way to grow uh responsibly and sustain the the honor and legacy of of our town.So, um I will not be supporting sending this on to the city council.Understanding again understanding that that it will becoming back. Something similar will be coming back.All right. So, can we put up the um the resolution?So, at this time, um we are finding that the request forthe future land use map and zoning map amendment is not appropriate. So, I'dlike to entertain a motion, a second to recommend that the city council deny thereszoning request from C2 general business to R3 highdensity residentialand to amend the land use map from general commercial to urban high densityfor the property is described as lot one block twouh and first edition invid first edition and outlot a innovid first edition. Somoved. >> There's a motion by commissioner Rook.Is there a second? Second >> and a second by Commissioner Schmoko.All those in favor, please signify by saying I.>> I. >> Motion carries. >> We'll move on to an item of oldbusiness. Do we havetwo minute? >> Sounds good.>> Just going to stretch. One more. recess. Planning Commission is taking a fiveminute resays just for bio breaks and Planning Commission is now back insession. Thank you. At 8:33 p.m., we'll turn it over to staff. This is anitem of old business, agenda item 5A. This is PDEV26-00000012-1703 Sunset Avenue Northwest of Variance.Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh like you said, we are revisiting this variance request.Um applicant is Ryan Bigot. Uh he's requesting impervious surface varianceto remove the existing home garage and driveway to construct a new singlefamily detached home located at 17031 Sunset Avenue which is on Spring Lake.The existing home is on a non-conforming lot with a lot area of only 7,364square ft. Uh which the 15,000 square feet is the minimum for this specificproperty. Lot width uh minimum is 90 ft but this lot is only 50 feet wide. So,it's um non-conforming in both lot area and lot width. The impervious surface isnow proposed at 31.86%. A public hearing was held on May 18thand it was tabled by the planning commission until further reductions tonew impervious were made on a vote of 5 to zero. The 60-day review timeline wasextended by the applicant from June 13th to August 12th. Um so, an action willneed to be made before August 12th. The applicant has provided an updated surveyand plans for reconsideration before the board.Location map um off of Spring Lake here, Sunset Avenue Northwest, just off of170th Street is a non-conforming lot as mentionedearlier uh in the R1 Shoreland District. So, the impervious surface requirementis 30%. Currently, it's at 24.61 with the existing home and garage. They wereseeking a variance of 1.86% for a total of 31.86%. Here's a picture of the existingcondition. Um, the home on the property does not meet uh conforming sidesetbacks. Uh, there's an accessory structure that does not meet setbacks aswell in the front yard. And the driveway, I'll go back. Uh, thedriveway is also exceeding 24 feet at the right ofway, which does not meetcity standards. So, the original request, this is thesurvey we looked at last time, had a 22 foot wide driveway at the garage, slimdown to 18 feet at the right ofway. Um, this will help make that drivewayconforming. Side setbacks have been improved. Um, so that they are alsoconforming with ordinance. Uh, we have 5 and a half feet on this side. Um, 9.9feet or 9.51 on this side for a total of over 15feet. Um, and then there's also 15 feet between dwellings on either side.So, the original impervious request was for 33.11%. They have reduced that down to 31.86%primarily through a reduction of that driveway width at the garage, moving itfrom 22 to 21 ft. Um, they have shown the sidewalk, which can be excluded fromthe impervious with the three foot um on each side. The covered porch has beenreduced as well. Um those are the the main changes for the reduction you seehere. House plans have not changed um sincethe last request. The criteria, as we went through lasttime, variances shall only be permitted when they're in harmony with the generalpurpose purposes and intent of the city zoning code. Variances shall only bepermitted when they are consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. Theyshould only be granted when the applicant for the variance establishesthat there are practical difficulties in in complying with the zoning code. Umthis is used in connection with granting of a variance means the property ownerproposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by thezoning code and the plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique tothe property not created by the land owner and the variance if granted willnot alter the essential character of the locality.And finally, economic considerations um obviously do not cons constitutepractical difficulties. So staff's analysis is the overallimpervious surface percentage is increasing. Um Apple originally proposedtotal impervious at 33.11 and they've dropped that down to 31.86.Uh the new home is proposed to have a roughly 181850 footprint and 497 foot driveway. This is a total reduction of 45 squarefeet as it relates to the front patio and 12 square feet for the driveway. Thedriveway is in conformance now at 18 feet at the property line. The requestis an improvement over the existing condition with an increase in theordinary high water level setback from 38 feet to 65.3 ft. It also eliminates anon-conforming driveway and improves the sideyard setbacks of the existing home.Vad is 50 feet wide and 7 7364 square feet which is substandard for theshoreland district and staffs uh would support that that is a practical diffdifficulty for the property. The condition was not created by theapplicant and surrounding neighborhood homes have similar limitations relatingto imperous surface due to their size. So staff like I said do believe thatthere are practical difficulties in complying with the strict adherence tothe ordinance. Uh, it's a platted lat from the 1950s, smaller in width andarea than what would be approved today. The request seeks to increase impervioussurface, but at the same time improve other conditions. Staff supports therequest and has prepared a resolution of approval. If the commission finds adifferent impervious surface is appropriate, then a motion and a secondto approve that amount is requested. If the commission finds that the applicantdoes not have a practical difficulty, then the commission should vote to denyand instruct staff to prepare a resolution of denial to be considered ata future meeting. Uh staff recommends approval of theproposed variance of 1.86% from the impervious surface maximum at 17031Sunset Avenue Northwest subject to the following six conditions. The applicantshall provide a grading plan confir uh confirming all storm water drainage willbe managed on their site. The variance uh the variance resolution should berecorded with Scott County. Building permit shall be obtained from thebuilding department prior to the commencement of construction. Anysidewalk or walkway shall be 3 feet or less in width uh with 3 ft of previouscoverage on both sides. The existing driveway shall be revised to be amaximum width of 18 ft within the entire boulevard area. The existing drivewayshall be removed between the north property line and the proposed 18 footdriveway to provide a clear separation between the two parcels and eliminatethe ability for parking within the boulevard outside of that 18t drivewayarea. Uh lastly, an asbuilt survey should be required followingconstruction to ensure conformance with the approved variance.And with that, staff would have recommend a motion and a second toapprove the above variance at 17031 Sunset Avenue subject to the listedconditions. Thank you.>> Thanks, Jake. I just have one question. Could you remind us what was theimpervious service surface uh as originally proposed?>> Oh. Um it's >> 33 point>> uh so last time was 33.11. Uh we >> and now it's 31.>> 86. >> Okay.>> Yep. >> Got it. I don't have any otherquestions. Commissioner Schmok, any questions for staff?>> Um, my understanding then that there was no thought of entertaining a smallerfootprint than the 1849 rather more just these uh changes thatmight not be as durable. >> Correct. That's my understanding.Commissioner, uh, the applicant is here. If you wanted to ask if they had anyconversations about reduc or changing the house plans.>> Maybe I'll wait till we're all through our questions and he can answer them atone time. >> Okay.Thank you, >> Commissioner Euro.>> Um, just wanted to call out the number five because I believe in within the 33the original request for the 33 some percent it included uh number of squarefootage from the neighbors but 2 minutes drive which I think is your number fivethat's identified here in terms of the conditions being met.>> Yes. So, um, originally I think they're pretty close.>> The survey, the original survey that was submitted last time with the 33, it hada certain, uh, number of square footage on there that was the neighborsbatuminous driveway. Existing neighbors, 35 square feet alongthe north property line. So, that is getting abated and resolved.>> Yep. That is I believe that is proposed for removal that 35 square feet that wason the >> Yes.>> the subject property. And so there's been an agreement that's been reachedwith the neighbor of some kind or that's been resolved.>> It's to my knowledge. It's another question for the applicant.>> Okay. >> And then>> yeah, come on up. >> Um answer that.>> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Well, commission, thank you for havingme back. Ryan Bigot at 5042 Boulder Lane in Chaska, Minnesota.>> So, has an agreement been reached with the neighbor to resolve the batuminousthe asphalt that's on this property that does not belong?>> Yes, I've talked with the owner of the property that's adjacent to the northside about removing the batuminous that extends into our property line andthey're happy to do that. >> We'll do that as part of constructionfor them. >> So, you're going to remove it for them?Okay. And then I guess I don't know if Ishould continue since you're up here, but I believe at the last the other noteI had on this property from our last meeting was I think there was maybe somediscrepancies between if it was two or three stories because I think we hadheard from someone that it was three but then in the building elevations itshowed two and it looks like in the building elevations there hasn't beenany changes. That's as it was shown before. And to my colleagueu's questionabout reducing the footprint, I guess was is there three stories in thisbuilding or not? And if not, has that been explored?>> This is a slab on grade. So there's >> so slab on grade. So just the twofloors. >> Yeah. Given the soil conditions in thatarea, we can't essentially dig downward given the proximity of the water level.>> But you could go up another >> we could.>> Has that been explored? Umgiven the hook, given the roof line, we can't you know basically make a usablespace on the 35 foot height requirement. Okay, >> the math's not penciling out for me, butokay, I'll work on that. Thank you, >> Commissioner Rook.>> I believe in last uh last time we saw this topic, there was concern aboutproximity to the other neighbor. Um did any of that change in this update? Um, no it has not. Uh, the five and ahalf foot side setback um actually exceeds the city's minimum standard byhalf a foot. Um, so they're and uh the other limiting factor, yeah,by moving the house further that way to kind of put it more in the center of thelot, it would reduce that 15.4 foot setback between the dwellings and itneeds a minimum of 15 ft. Um, so you could push it a little bit over,but it's not going to be enough to really make a difference.>> Understood. Thank you. Another question. Any other questions? >> If you want if you have you havesomething else for >> um Ryan.>> Yes. I just um the height thing's not penciling out for me. So you have eightfeet. You've got about 18 inches joist. >> Did you look at attic trusses?>> Come on up. >> Yeah. I'm having a weird conversation.>> Don't let him have all the fun. >> Come on up. Join him.>> You're the next contestant. >> Yes.>> So the house in one corner sticks out of the ground about 3 feet tall, right? Andthen you got we currently have 10 foot and 9 foot ceiling height, but say youlowered that down anyways. So you have three foot, you got>> eight foot height, you got >> 20inch tall trusses. So you got 10,11, another eight. So you're at 19. And then you have the roof pitch. So herethe roof comes up, that's about 8 feet. So 27.>> Mhm. So you could have seven foot ceilings maybe or room and attic trussesto do a third floor, but again the height situation with the neighbor. Nowyou're really going to be up there in height. You're probably going to be aflat roof of some sort or something like that to accommodate a third floor. Soand then stairway, you know, restricts a lot of space on every floor as well. Soyou have to have four by 1620* four. You have 100 square feet consumedjust by stairway per floor. So I would take away from their other floor too,their second floor. And the foot the footprint, the foundation footprint onthe main floor is not all usable space. So when you look at the plan too, we weput the square footages you guys wanted on there.>> So you have on the main floor you have,68 square ft of usable livingspace, including an office, utility room. So utility room would commonly beused in a basement of a regular home. we can't do a basement because the watertable is so high. >> So, you're not, you know, you have andthen you have to, you're like, well, maybe make the utility room smaller. Youcan't because a furnace has to fit. You have to have code standards just to beable to get into the utility room to replace furnaces or anything of thatnature. So, and we we did people everyone, not everyone, but the one ofthe questions would be that we didn't work towards getting down to thisnumber. We did we have 20 plan reviews that we went through to get to thisbecause I figured there's no sense in bringing you a 40% application orwhen we did the lot survey, we realized the neighbor's house is like 2 feet offthe property line. So, we have to be 15t from a dwelling. So, we had to push itover towards the south to the neighbor's property on the other side that didn'twant to be as close. So, we did have like literally 20 plan revisions, but Ihad to bring them to the city because I'm not going to waste everyone's timeto to do that. So, we we did we did really work towards I mean, this housestarted out 700 square foot bigger on the footprint. And I'm like, no, no, no.And this isn't the first this isn't thefirst or second or third or fourth or fifth attempt. We we made severalattempts to try to get to this point where we're at. So, um what otherquestions do you guys have? There was more questions, but I may have forgottensome of them. >> I don't have any.>> And not that it matters, but we could make up a Saab story. Not really a Saabstory even, but his mom lives down the street. We did his house a couple yearsago. So, that's what why they're trying to move to the area. They're, you know,they his mom lives down the street and they have kids and everything else. Andthey have two. This isn't an overly huge house. When you actually look at theusable square footage of the area, the main floor is a thousand square feet,it's not that big of an it's really, in my opinion, it's not a huge ob, youknow, obscene structure. It's going to be a nice area. And we're not asking forin the 40% which if you go on the north side of Spring Lake within the last fiveyears, several of them there are in the 40%that are new construction builds. So, we're only asking for 1.8 eight somepercent, you know, we're not asking for 10% or15% or 12 or eight or seven or five even. We're we're just asking for asmall percentage. >> Yeah. And I'm just asking questions tomake sure that you actually need the percentage because I've seen many ofthreestory homes that aren't going down and they go up and they have attictrusses and things like this. So, I want to make sure that you're able tomaximize your investment as well. So, it's a win-win. Um, I just want toreally understand is pushing out the only way for you to get there with whatyou're looking for? >> I think we'll be over the height in myopinion or we'll have to do a flat roof and or something.>> Do a 41 that later. >> I just have a just a generic question.What what's the livable uh square footage on theum >> the second floor?>> Second floor. Yes. >> Um the second>> 1658 >> 1658>> like 2700 square. >> So 27 off. Okay.>> Yeah. >> Okay.>> Any other questions? All right. If we could um pull up thethe recommendation. Thank you. So, at this time, I'll entertain a a motion, asecond to approve the variance at 17031 Sunset Avenue Northwest subject to thelisted conditions. Is there a motion? So, move. Is there asecond? >> Second. We have a motion and a second.All those in favor uh please signify by saying I.>> I. >> Uh those anybody opposed?>> Nay. >> Uh so we motion carries 3 to one.Thank you. Um we have I see no new no items of new business. Anyannouncements? We have a uh working session on the 20th. Correct.>> Correct. Yep. That was going to be the only announcement, chair, that on in inplace of a regular scheduled planning commission meeting on June 20th, theplanning commission is going to hold a work session in the Park View conferenceroom across the hall. >> You're you're providing dinner.>> We are. Okay. Just wanted to check. All right. Thank you. With that, any otherannouncements, um, comments, concerns from anyone?All right. Very good, um, meeting tonight. Thank you all for your veryvery good thoughtful deliberations and comments on agenda item 4B. Um with thatI'll entertain a motion and second to adjurnn at 852.>> So moved. >> We have a motion by commissioner. Isthere a second? >> Second.>> Second by Commissioner Rook. All those in favor please signify by saying I. I.>> We are journed.