[13:21] good evening and welcome to the June 30th 2025 planning commission meeting if all commissioners will please mute your

[13:27] microphone until it is your turn to speak that would be appreciated members of the public may join using a PC Mac or

[13:34] iPad iPhone or Android device members of the public can access the meeting online at the city's website and public can ask

[13:40] questions and comments during the meeting by using the link to the virtual meeting to join and submitting the questions via the online Q&A feature

[13:47] within the meeting questions regarding this meeting can also also be asked during regular business hours at city

[13:54] hall if you are a member of the public and wish to speak on a topic please fill out one of the yellow forms at the back

[14:00] of chambers and provide that sheet to staff you will be called on after the project in reference is presented for

[14:06] residents viewing online please add your questions to the Q&A fields along with your name and address and with that we

[14:12] will call the meeting to order all right so Dan would you please start

[14:18] the roll call

thank you chair john Jarrett

here

sauren Shaw

[14:25] here

marshia Kennedy

here

shannon Olsen here

thomas Harrington

here john Colum

[14:33] here stephanie Swanson

here

adrina Galling

here

daniel Cho

here

chair we

[14:40] have a quorum

all right thank you very much uh we do have three discussion

[14:46] items on our agenda this evening however one is going to be tabled until a future planning commission date that's item B

[14:53] 4B on the agenda for the ranch road edition resoning preliminary plat

[14:59] project number 28-2025-00574 so if anyone is here today or watching

[15:05] online in regard to the ranch road edition that item has been tabled and we'll only be discussing items A and C

[15:13] this evening so first item this evening then will be item A the 4255 Woodlane

[15:19] Drive planned unit development concept project number 29-2025-0000582

[15:26] and the staff member presenting this report will be Eric

thank you Chair land and Resources Consultant or LRC has

[15:34] submitted an application for a concept planned unit development on behalf of a potential property owner Jed Schmidt for

[15:41] a nine lot subdivision the property is located at 4255 Woodlane Drive on the

[15:48] souththeast corner of Woodlane Drive and Hargus Parkway the property is currently

[15:53] zoned R2 single family district and it is guided as rural estate on the land use plan

[16:00] the application in front of you this evening is uh being processed under code section 24207

[16:07] that uh portion of code does identify an optional opportunity for applicants to

[16:14] have feedback provided by the neighborhood by the planning commission and by the city council at a concept

[16:22] level prior to uh incurring significant costs the concept PUD process has been

[16:30] used very infrequently in the past but it is a good riskmanagement tool for

[16:35] property owners that again are looking to balance the uh risk of the

[16:40] significant capital costs to provide a preliminary plat application including

[16:46] the civil plans and professional services that come with creating

[16:51] a packet for city review the code does identify three steps it identifies a

[16:57] neighborhood meeting process uh planning commission review and the city council it is important to note that the city

[17:04] council will not take any formal actions when they review this at a public hearing they will not approve or deny

[17:09] the application no comments suggestion remarks or observation made by city staff the planning commission or the

[17:16] city council shall be binding on the city for future FA stages but this is an opportunity i encourage planning

[17:22] commission to provide your feedback for the applicant they will be making decisions based on what they hear tonight and at the planning and at the

[17:28] city council the property again is zoned R2 single family estate district that is

[17:34] a one unit per 3 acre minimum lot size the reason for that is during the comprehensive plan process it was

[17:41] identified that there would not be city sewer and water available and therefore any future lots would be served by

[17:48] private well and septic to meet those infrastructure needs this evening the

[17:54] applicant is requesting feedback in three areas uh the request uh would be

[17:59] to have a ultimately a comprehensive plan amendment from rural estate to urban estate urban estate is the

[18:05] category within the 2040 comprehensive plan that allows density at one lot per

[18:11] 1 acre of land area a reduction of minimum lot size from 3 acres to just

[18:17] over 3/4 of an acre and a reduction in the minimum lot depth from 160 to 135

[18:24] it's important to identify the the purpose of the urban estate district

[18:30] within the comprehensive plan the purpose is a buffering district so we'll touch on that a little bit later in the

[18:35] presentation but really the intent of where the urban estate has area has been used is uh in between more urban

[18:43] densities which is our three and a half units per acre and more rural densities whether that's 20 acre or the one lot

[18:50] per 3 acres access to the property is off of Hargus Parkway the applicant is proposing two

[18:57] culde-sacs initially the western culde-sac would could be extended as

[19:02] development could occur in the future again nine lots total and these lots

[19:09] would be served by city sewer and water

[19:14] really the driving factor for the availability of utilities was the Arbor Ridge development again as part of that

[19:21] subdivision two significant events did occur that have frankly changed the highest and best use of the adjacent

[19:28] lands the first was the extension as shown on the screen of Hargus Parkway that was important from a utility

[19:34] extension standpoint but it was also important as it created uh additional uh

[19:40] traffic movements through the community in an eastwest fashion access or reliever to Bailey Road and uh was uh

[19:46] beneficial uh to having that constructed in advance of surrounding development

[19:52] the second event was the construction of a municipal drinking water that uh drinking water supply well that's shown

[19:58] by the red arrow on the screen due to close proximity to that city well

[20:04] allowance of additional private water wells should be greatly minimized by the

[20:09] city in order to reduce draw down and uh contamination risk to the aquafer the

[20:17] proposed utilization of city sewer and water would mitigate those risks by uh again connecting with municipal services

[20:24] versus the protrusion into the aquifer and also adding additional septic

[20:29] systems as a transparency note if a subdivision is not finalized as part of the concept

[20:35] PUD process in front of you this evening staff would recommend an evaluation of

[20:41] density be conducted as part of the 2050 comprehensive plan this would look at

[20:46] the uh uses again likely either a urban

[20:51] uh estate which is what's in front of you this evening the one per uh one acre

[20:57] or low density residential which is a third 3.5 units per acre in the on this

[21:03] parcel that would be 35 units maximum so if the applicant does not move this

[21:10] forward this likely would be something that would be looked at in greater detail as part of the 2050 comprehensive

[21:16] plan the review as part of a concept PUD is

[21:21] not exhaustive there are a number of things that will need to be reviewed in the future and the city has full rights

[21:29] to review all of these components that are shown on the screen as part of those future review processes all requirements

[21:36] within city code and the comprehensive plan also remain in full force in effect a neighborhood meeting was held in on

[21:43] June 18th with 16 property owners attendance questions were raised regarding anticipated grading storm

[21:48] water management perimeter tree impacts and project timelines and with that

[21:54] staff recommends planning commission provide feedback to the applicant related to the questions on the screen

[22:00] and any other relevant feedback that the commission may see fit the applicant is on hand for any questions thank you

[22:06] chair all right thank you very much would the applicant like to add anything additional at this time

[22:14] please come up and state your name and address

thank you Madam Chair thank you commissioners um Todd Olen i'm with Land

[22:20] and Resource Consulting um not a ton to add eric always does a really comprehensive job but I would like to

[22:26] publicly thank the staff that's worked with us so far and the neighbors neighbors we had 16 neighbors on a 10acre site here that showed up took

[22:32] time away from their homes and lives and whatnot to come and share concerns uh several are here tonight um just wanted

[22:39] to add a few details that uh the water in the sewer is currently located and stubbed in this direction on the south

[22:44] side of Hargus at the northeast corner of this property uh as part of the plan

[22:50] the nine lots we would plan on uh extending the path on the south side it

[22:56] would mirror what's on the north side so a 10-ft asphalt batuminous or batuminous pathway and then the water and sewer

[23:03] would extend over to um Woodlane uh so it' be fully improved the as it was

[23:10] stated earlier the the road on the on the west um is extended the property

[23:16] line for possible future expansion but uh and the neighbor to the south is here

[23:21] tonight so those questions can be answered from him we I will go on uh and say that there's just no no interest at

[23:28] this point by that family that owns that property to do any development but

[23:33] things change and and it's there if they want to use it in the future so again we're here for questions if you have any

[23:40] we appreciate it all right thank you very much have there

[23:45] been any yellow sheets received or questions submitted via Teams

not at this time Chair

all right um the Q&A

[23:51] will stay open for the duration of the project discussion please enter any questions and staff will read them for

[23:56] the commission and with that we'll open it up to members of the planning commission for questions and we'll start

[24:01] with you Commissioner Colin thank you Chair um I guess my first

[24:08] question would be for the applicant um as you have put this concept together

[24:14] how did you settle on proposing the zoning use to be changed to urban estate

[24:20] versus either keeping the existing zoning or zoning to um lowdensity

[24:27] residential um there are a number of factor and thank thank you for the question um

[24:32] there are a number of factors uh number one there this is a transition property between what's to the south

[24:39] which is apple orchard to the north is school to the west are larger lots and a lake and then to the east which is

[24:44] higher density 3.5 units per acre so this transitions in just about every direction uh we figured that the the

[24:51] size there is is a good transition a good buffer um and frankly over the

[24:57] course of time um not that it's been completely lost but larger lots are hard

[25:03] to find in Woodbury so we didn't want to go the direction of like an R4 with

[25:10] smaller lots like Arbor not because those are bad or whatever or not popular they are um but there is a shortage of

[25:17] like the one acre one per acre density where you get just a little more room maybe a little bit bigger house um those

[25:25] types of lots and as a matter of fact since we made the uh we've been working on this we've received several calls

[25:31] from other neighbors that are interested in possibly moving over uh one that was downsizing and one that was upsizing so

[25:38] there there's a strong strong desire for it so that's kind of why we landed here the other item that Eric had mentioned

[25:44] is the environmental impact of having uh not only on-site uh drain fields but

[25:50] on-site wells for threeacre lots you probably get three or four lots here but that every time you poke a hole in the

[25:57] earth next to a well you're introducing an opportunity for a contamination spot right there so and you're also uh

[26:04] putting waste in a a drain field and if a drain field acts properly it fails it

[26:09] chokes out eventually and fails um and has to be replaced and whatnot well what do you do in the interim it you're still

[26:16] filtering waste in sand basically so this plan does provide the larger lots

[26:22] less density than say what's to the east uh and it it it uh from an environmental

[26:29] standpoint it's got water and sewer so it doesn't introduce those opportunities for contamination

[26:35] thank you um you want me to stay up here no that's okay thank you um I may think

[26:41] of something else but not right this second um I I guess question for staff so I recall a meeting relatively

[26:48] recently where we approved an urban estate development at the far southwest

[26:56] corner of the city right neighboring with Cottage Grove and um

[27:02] that the nature of that parcel seemed very clear that that was you know the the purpose of the urban estate as a

[27:09] buffering zone i guess as as the staff looks at this particular parcel and how

[27:15] it's placed within the city and I think about the other undeveloped plat around

[27:22] it i guess I'm have I guess I I have a harder time understanding how we one

[27:28] would differentiate this from the rest of the traditional you know residential

[27:33] neighborhood that's been developed to the east arbor neighborhood it seems fairly in I'm sorry it it to me

[27:40] it seems fairly internal still within the city and as I look at the location map in the packet here as well

i'm just

[27:48] thinking about how the rest of this particular node may eventually get developed at some point in the future and how this sort of would serve the

[27:56] purpose as a buffer in that regard yeah I think as the city has looked at the ability to serve a number of these areas

[28:03] with city sewer and water while we can serve these pieces that are near Hargus

[28:08] Parkway and likely a portion of the properties to the south at some point as we move further south and as we move

[28:14] west of Wood Lane it becomes more challenging to serve those with municipal utilities so into perpetuity

[28:20] the comp plan identifies those will ultimately be larger lot subdivisions so it may not be today that it looks um

[28:28] these are larger parcels today but they could subdivide in the future into more 3acre lots and if that were the case

[28:34] you'd have 3 acres here some level of 1 acre here and then transitioning to the

[28:40] urban density here which is frankly very similar to the Cherrywood project that was reviewed before

[28:47] um it it really is intending to provide again that transition or that buffer versus going directly to the 3.5 units

[28:54] per acre okay so in the view of staff as you sort

[28:59] of see this development moving you know west along you know Hargus and between

[29:05] Bailey and Military you would see west of Wood Lane would likely remain

[29:12] rural estate and then this somewhere in here maybe either directly to the west

[29:17] or directly to the east where we're talking about now Woodlane would would would potentially be a transition spot

[29:23] that's right

[29:28] um I don't have any other questions right now chair thank you

all right thank you Commissioner Kennedy

i um he

[29:35] took several chair thank you i have another question have there been

[29:41] other neighborhoods i mean Cherrywood is one of them which is acting as the same

[29:46] buffer type how has that affected the the surrounding neighborhoods i know that was recent so it's not really it's

[29:52] not really a line at all yeah the the construction activity is just beginning on that site so but I can tell you that

[29:59] generally speaking through the the neighborhood process it was wellreceived the concept of a larger lot that buffer

[30:07] and that transition we did have six as it relates to the application in front of you this evening we did have 16

[30:12] residents i although it wasn't verbalized in an in a you know expressly

[30:18] I my takeaway from the neighborhood meeting was that there was general appreciation that these were a little

[30:24] larger lots versus um the urban density is the three and a half i think you

[30:29] there would likely be a different level of participation if the if that moved to

[30:35] three and a half units per acre because of the the surrounding properties in this location yeah it ch to my mind it

[30:42] changes the the um the neighborhood the cultural context of that and the

[30:48] plantings the the scenery etc in the whole area that that was my that was my

[30:54] thought and actually that's it chair

all right thank you very much Commissioner

[30:59] Swanson yeah thank you since we're actually talking about this previous project it's

[31:05] kind of a good segue for my thoughts um so I voted against that other project

[31:12] that we're talking about because I felt like they were asking for too much and when I look at the screen here the more

[31:20] bullet points that are there the more I'm thinking how overdeveloped is the project and so I was playing around with

[31:26] some math and wondering if you would feel okay swapping

[31:33] essentially swapping the acreage on lots four and five and then lot two and three

[31:38] because then you could meet your lot width and you could meet the lot widths because of the the reduced requirement

[31:45] for the culacs it would tinker with some shapes lot two would look a bit more like Utah uh

[31:53] instead of a rectangle and it would reduce some square footages to about 75 acres instead of 77 acres

[32:02] but then you're more meeting code you're still getting nine lots but you're

[32:09] asking for a little less because you're swapping which side of the development

[32:15] the larger lots are on just moving them from the north to the south essentially

[32:20] i'm sorry I had a hard time following could you redescribe what your changes you would you recommend or do you did

[32:27] you draw them

well I didn't draw them i did a lot of math

okay

so essentially if

[32:33] you move this lot line down to make lot two look a more like Utah instead of a

[32:39] rectangle and shrink this one a little bit and then move this one down a little bit so you meet your minimum widths up

[32:46] here you still meet your minimum widths down here because of the reduced requirement for the cul-ac and the other

[32:53] thought I had was if we're talking about lot sizes and if people are

[32:59] uncomfortable with going down to a 75 if you could potentially even get rid of

[33:05] lot one and rotate your storm basin over here and you can expand a little bit

[33:12] east and west this is very unofficial i'm sorry no this is this is great because

talking about Utah informal

[33:19] format on purpose so we can have these open discussions so I appreciate this a great deal

but so essentially my thought

[33:24] was the more bullet points the more I wonder if it's overdeveloped and I was looking at this how could we get it more

[33:31] to code i'm completely in favor of this zone change i think it's very appropriate but the zone change with all

[33:40] the other requests I think add a bit of a question to me so I'd love to have

[33:45] this tinkered a bit

i think it's going to be a really great project i don't think it's there yet

this is the right

[33:51] time to tinker

yes

the only uh boomerang in the conversation there is that the

[33:56] owner currently lives at the residence of Northwest Corner and that's staying oh I see

so they're going to remain

[34:02] living there

okay

in that home and then that's going to be become a lot in the plat

but all the other items

comment too

[34:09] well all the other items though I mean yeah we can look at all those different adjustments or whatnot to get it closer

[34:15] to

I really think you can get there if you tinker with lots 2 three four and five

okay

[34:21] thank you

i have no other comments thank you

all right thank you Commissioner Jarrett

[34:28] thank you Chair um yeah we all seem to have the cherry uh wood or cherry um

[34:36] bump-in neighborhood down there on the southwest corner of um the city next to

[34:42] Newport and Cottage Grove and I also did not vote for that one these little bump

[34:47] bumpin culde-sac neighborhoods I think kind of get an orphan feeling to them uh

[34:54] they don't connect very well with the you know kind of the fabric of of everyone else's neighborhood they

[35:00] typically don't have a neighborhood name they don't have monuments people you know like to have a monument and they

[35:06] like to tell people I live in I live wherever I live in you know Sper Cove or

[35:12] whatever it is um so I I was really disheartened when I when I opened this

[35:19] package i think I was actually talking to myself and my wife said "What's wrong with you?" Um but then I really I

[35:26] started looking at this in a little bit different context and I I agree with Stephanie that this if you tinkered with

[35:32] this a little bit um there's an odd pies-shaped kind of outlot here above

[35:37] number two uh and to the right of number one that I I don't know why that is not

[35:43] included um I know we have some of these odd orphan lots along County Road 19 and

[35:51] on Lake Road and I think if you included that in two and maybe reshape the pond a

[35:58] little bit you could you could get this a little bit closer to being compliant

[36:04] um I think the biggest problem I had with uh the Cherrywood uh development

[36:09] was that it didn't connect well with anything and uh when we saw it in planning it didn't even have a sidewalk

[36:16] so my thought was where are kids going to stand when they're waiting for for a bus in a ditch you know uh later that

[36:24] was revived and I think when it did pass council they did add a sidewalk on the

[36:30] west side of the development

yes

east side

east side

on the east side of

[36:36] Sentry

correct so I was I was really happy to see the sidewalk here uh having

[36:41] the double sidewalks one on the school side and then one on the development side i would like to see some sort of a

[36:49] connector and I really thought a lot about this because having orphaned deadended sidewalks or trails cause a

[36:56] problem um but maybe a trail between uh four and six or five and seven kind of

[37:02] in the middle i know that uh adding sidewalk or a trail uh on either side of

[37:09] the culde-sac on the right between uh two and four and three and five um it

[37:16] kind of it would be it would be a little bit wonky and if that street ever does

[37:21] go through there's going to have to be some realignment of the culde-sac and the street so you know maybe between the

[37:29] houses that would be a very nice connector to the school but again I'm on

[37:34] the fence with you know are we going to have an orphan sidewalk with that goes nowhere people don't like that either um

[37:42] but uh you know I think the green space is good uh you know figure out that odd

[37:48] pie shaped thing and maybe tinker around as Stephanie said with the with the lot sizes so you're a little bit more

[37:54] compliant and uh figure out the connectivity on it and I think it I think it would be good uh the other

[38:01] thing I was going to ask is do we drop down to 52 foot widths on our streets

[38:09] culdeac right ofway would be 50 ft the actual that's from a right-of-way

[38:14] standpoint the width of the street is 26 feet

26 so

[38:22] we're actually this is going to seem a little bit more spacious

[38:29] in in reality I mean they're they're nice lot sizes i I think it's a really good buffer so I

[38:35] think I think maybe tinker around with it a little bit and consider a connector point with a path and I would I would be

[38:44] for it that's all I have chair thank you

[38:49] sure please come on back up thank you again Mr commissioner um

the odd shape of the rightway there is actually a

[38:56] result of a uh in most cases in Woodbury a dedicated rightaway is is mandatory

[39:02] when you're platting prop properties like we are here we would dedicate those rightaways to be public in the case of

[39:08] Hargus in this it sits in an easement that was granted by the school

and that's the actual shape of the south

[39:14] side of the easement so it's not ours to give or take at this

[39:20] point there may be some there may be an alternative with the city we can certainly investigate that see if we

[39:26] could make it more uniform there isn't really a use I don't think from the city side to have that squared off that way

[39:32] at this point but we can certainly look into it

so it's just an easement

correct

[39:37] for utilities and roads

so can't we have a memorialized easement on a plotted piece of property

so this property is

[39:44] owned by the school district so the school district would have to transfer that to the private property which I

[39:50] would say is a fairly fairly large

i would encourage the planning commission

[39:55] members to think about

what this will actually look like ignoring the lot

[40:00] lines this will remain as a wooded piece lot two will look and feel like a larger

[40:06] lot than it really is in reality the lot line presence will not be

[40:12] identified identifiable when it's in the built environment

well and I think having a

[40:18] little bit of elbow room I think the lot size is nice especially for the tree preservation so

right

[40:26] yeah that certainly was a comment we heard very clearly at the neighborhood meeting and you can see on the air photo

[40:31] there is perimeter trees here and that is one of the nice parts of the lot sizes is they should allow for grading

[40:39] activities to preserve these perimeter areas obviously a tree inventory will be conducted to see what type of tree

[40:45] resources are there but generally we're not starting from a standpoint where

[40:50] grading impacts are immediately putting them the the existing vegetation at risk

[40:59] thank you all right Commissioner Harrington

[41:05] thank you Chair Olsson i think my questions um will be directed to staff

[41:12] so uh the so the request you identified three items in the request here for this

[41:18] concept PUD the first one changes the comprehensive plan for the zoning of

[41:24] this from rural estate to urban estate which is one lot per acre then it

[41:30] further uh requests reduction from that standard down to 77 those smaller lots

[41:36] yet so the even though that I'm sure it

[41:41] fits into the idea of transitional zoning whether it's 1 acre or 3/4 of an

[41:47] acre the question to staff would be um is is that something that you would um

[41:55] see maybe um needing a variance should this go from concept UD to the next

[42:01] stage of review would that require a variance

it would not i think it would

[42:07] be processed through the planned unit development process

and as part of that

[42:12] um some of the trade-offs would be the construction of the trail that currently is a gap within our system so the

[42:19] applicant would be required to wholly construct and fund that improvement in return for the flexibility there is a

[42:26] bit of a zoning question that staff did spend a fair amount of time

[42:32] thinking about the we have really three we have three residential zoning districts the R1 district which is a

[42:38] 20acre minimum lot size that's intended to be a holding district in advance of development from a phasing standpoint

[42:46] the next is the R2 district which is a 3 acre minimum and then the R4 which is

[42:52] the the more dense um development pattern so we have a fairly

[42:57] straightforward zoning approach in comparison to other cities we did spend some time thinking about

[43:03] whether the resoning application should be to R4 and if it were to R4 you

[43:09] wouldn't have any of these relaxations because the minimum lot width is 80 ft the minimum depth is 135 ft so it would

[43:16] meet those the unintended consequence of an R4 is then by right you could have

[43:21] additional densities and so really we we struggled with that a little bit from a

[43:27] standpoint of the long-term ability to

[43:32] um the neighborhood process and so on that if ultimately it was reguided and

[43:37] the zoning was R4 there could be additional development that could be approved versus moving it towards the R

[43:45] two at the 3acre minimum so there was some discussion in the end it will take would take some flexibility under the

[43:50] plan unit development process but it's ju just because we have the three zoning districts

[43:57] so So you're talking a zoning district versus

[44:03] originally you talked about the comprehensive plan categories so I'm getting a little mixed up between the

[44:09] two but let me let me ask a question back to what you had mentioned and it's listed here under land uses so in the

[44:15] comprehensive plan shouldn't should this not go through sounds like you would

[44:20] have um this as part of your next comprehensive plan cycle and review that

[44:26] you had mentioned the most appropriate land use would be this urban estate that's the one lot per acre or the low

[44:34] density which allows for was it 30 35 units that could be on this site

right

[44:40] if you looked into your crystal ball which which of those do you think it

[44:46] might land on

i think it's a buffer site i think the tool that's appropriate

[44:52] because of the context that surround it is the 1acre minimum lot size which is in front of you this evening

okay

i

[44:58] think if ultimately staff thought the highest and best use was R4 we likely would be making a different

[45:04] recommendation to be patient but I think because of the anticipated development

[45:10] patterns to the west at some point to the south when we can't serve those from utility standpoint

[45:17] um the R the the 1 acre lot size would

[45:22] be the recommendation from staff standpoint

i was assuming that's what you're going to say based on when you

[45:28] when you talked about the different zoning and sort of the step down of the transition and how this lot would be

[45:35] transitional so that makes sense and it jives with what you think it might land on so that's a good thing um I I guess

[45:42] I'm just having a little trouble then going from one lot per three acres to

[45:48] one lot per one acre and that now we're down to one one lot uh what is it 3/4

[45:53] acre lots so I I can see the configuration i'm not

[45:59] here to draw and help you draw lot lines i'm just here to say I I think we've

[46:04] taken it down one step too too far would be my would be my preference um the

[46:12] other the other question I have since it's under further review or future

[46:17] review so as this moves forward you had mentioned in the report that future reviews would be needed and it related

[46:25] to other items and I there are six items here does staff have any concerns

[46:32] currently on any of those six items as being a non-starter for taking this any

[46:38] further

no we we don't we've done preliminary analysis the applicant has spent um some

[46:46] resources a reasonable amount of resources evaluating um

[46:52] there are because of the lots sizes they are larger so things like you know the

[46:58] tree preservation and the grading

that normally we would need more information

[47:03] to be as comfortable as we are now

okay um but again these things are needing to

[47:09] be fully vetted to make sure that there are not any issues the we have fully vetted the sewer depths and the ability

[47:16] to serve the property from a sanitary sewer and water standpoint but um they have not been finally designed but there

[47:23] is not significant we have done uh comment letters to the applicant and um

[47:30] the development is fairly straightforward storm water is probably the least vetted and what I mean by that

[47:37] is storm water management is done through storm water modeling um so could

[47:42] the size of the basin shrink or grow it could

certainly could as the full analysis is completed

and that will

[47:49] inform the ultimate patterns of the lots and things of that nature but that's probably the biggest variable at this

[47:55] point okay

is the storm water basin and the sizing of that

okay great thank you

[48:00] that's my last question

all right thank you Commissioner Sha

[48:05] thanks Chair um so I I had um kind of a question regarding this which is you

[48:12] know the the west culde-sac as shown in here and and in the language that was

[48:19] said is that it's the way it's left it is it could actually have a future extension so is there like more land for

[48:29] development you know to the south side of that that's why you are actually talking about future extension

yeah so

[48:35] the culde-sac that you're referencing is here and I'm going to move screens here in a second the parcels to the south are

[48:43] larger lots so there could be a number of different development patterns again that as of right now the zoning and land

[48:50] use would be a one unit per 3 acres but there is subdivision possibilities even

[48:56] under the current zoning so it's appropriate to stub there are two two

[49:01] access points into this property uh there is one right here that was stubbed

[49:07] as part of Arbor and then another one is proposed in this location and that will provide appropriate patterning dependent

[49:14] upon future decisions on whether this two is served by city sewer and water or whether it remains a 3 acre we believe

[49:23] and these are things that we have not seen the final information on we believe that this portion will be able to be

[49:29] served how far south do we go to be able to serve by Siri sewer and water those are that's information we're waiting to

[49:34] receive as part of the final application but we want to be able to make sure that we can route traffic back to Hargus

[49:42] Parkway that'll help limit the number of access points along Wood Lane as well

[49:47] so and and the the lot which is to the south of one that you have highlighted

[49:53] that's a different owner

yes

so and they there is no intention on that owner to

[49:58] actually partner on development that's our understanding at this time

[50:04] so we just leaving for future maybe needed this access through this uh

[50:10] westside culdeac

yeah it is uh standard for us to stub infrastructure provide

[50:16] infrastructure to prepare for the future okay and and the next question was

[50:22] actually you kind of answered part of it is you know the capacity for the city

[50:27] sewer and and water u has that been sized or that could that's going to be part of what you're here to assess

yeah

[50:34] that's a part of that future review under the sanitary sewer and water to understand full capacities how much of

[50:40] those properties could be served again under the current comp plan they are not served by city sewer and water it would

[50:45] have to be able to be shown that it could be

okay thank you that that's all

[50:50] I have chair

all right thank you Commissioner Engali

um most of my questions were already answered like the

[50:58] um tinkering with lot sizes and the concern with the storm basin but the only other question that I have is that

[51:05] um will the trail along Harus Parkway how will that be managed or will it be

[51:11] like maintained seasonally and will it be lit up in the dark

i could probably answer that um it would be owned by the

[51:17] city so it' be maintained by the city um so that would be maintained

[51:23] likely unless there's a policy change uh 12 months a year um we do not light

[51:29] trails generally outside of intersection lighting

okay that'll be all chair

[51:35] all right thank you Commissioner Ch um same thing all my questions were

[51:41] basically answered but I do have a suggestion for that little weird slice of pie over there maybe there could be a little park in there possibly no

there

[51:50] is a that could certainly be reviewed there is a a public park right in this

[51:55] location

okay

with uh just down the street

mhm

so it does have good access

[52:01] to public park

okay um that'll be all chair thank you

all right thanks um just

[52:08] a few thoughts um I think just going um off what Commissioner Angalling said so

[52:14] this is a trail and it's a trail to the east rather than a sidewalk

[52:20] uh it's a it's a trail in both directions

trail in both directions okay if it were a sidewalk would it be lit

[52:26] i'm just kind of curious okay um

[52:32] so I think just some general feedback and I know we've got work to do on the storm basin but I'll just say it now to

[52:38] generally soften it and not rectang rectangulate it

[52:43] um access of lot one is that that's off Woodlane Drive

that is correct

and just

[52:49] if they are going to go back and look at any of these lots um guess a couple of thoughts i don't know if there's an

[52:56] ability to put a second lot that would have access off Wood Lane Drive and move the storm basin and I'm not a a design

[53:05] expert by any means of those basins but if it's at all advantageous to get that basin a little bit more centralized to

[53:11] the lot just I I also don't know how contours and things are going to be also

[53:17] people like to live on storm basins even though they're storm basins so it would add to kind of that lake feel

[53:24] um I remember commenting this on the Cherry project as well i love the lack of the

[53:31] neighborhood feel i love the large lot sizes i don't want an HOA i don't want monuments i don't care if I have grill

[53:39] outs with my neighbors so this is the type of property that would be most advantageous to me so just lots of

[53:46] different opinions out there and just here to say that I am one of the isolated folks that would would like my

[53:52] lack of neighborhood sorry to my neighbors if you're watching um

[53:59] let's see i think we've done a good job with screening thus far

[54:07] with the So Commissioner Jared also said something that um kind of made me start to think but these 60 foot widths of the

[54:15] culde-sac could those widths be smaller to allow for larger lot sizes

yeah I

[54:20] believe the easterly culde-sac would likely ultimately be 50 feet in right away the western should remain at 60

[54:27] because that is if it does ultimately become an extended public street 60 ft

[54:33] okay so then the other thought if if we genuinely think that's going to become a rightaway I don't know if we want to

[54:39] take away the circular part of the culde-sac and just kind of have it stop also could allow for some larger lot

[54:46] sizes and not have that weird bump out if it does eventually go through

yeah

[54:51] the the question ultimately what would happen and and it could be removed in the future if it does extend um for now

[54:58] it's for stone plowing purposes

makes sense um

[55:05] so on the drawing you have up right now it's not marked on there but there's a kind of

[55:12] hatched blue line that cuts through lots two and three and it's marked the thousand foot shoreland offset from Law

[55:17] Lake what does that line indicate as it relates to development there are some standards as it relates

[55:24] to the amount of open space there's some uh storm water regulations all of which

[55:30] because of the patterning that you're seeing here will be more than met as part of this application

okay

[55:37] um I think

[55:43] Oh the other just bit of feedback for the applicant um in the future if this

[55:49] were to become um separated plots like this would highly recommend no parking

[55:55] signs on the culde-sac um I believe no Hargus is marked that way with all the ball fields just a note for the future

[56:02] to protect kind of their their private street there

very good point

[56:08] um I think then that's all I had

[56:15] um so with that uh were there any additional questions from commissioners

[56:20] at this time or any other feedback rather car just one question for staff um the

[56:27] applicant mentioned

that in their analysis of why they made the request they just they looked at the market

[56:33] demand and there's a lot of demand for this type of use in Woodbury right now um from a city perspective as you think

[56:40] about a zoning change from a to the highest and best use um is there any discernable difference

[56:48] in terms of property tax evaluation in an urban estate uh use versus a low

[56:55] density residential use that would influence um anybody's decision-making

[57:01] one way or the other so I think um as it relates to the

[57:08] overall cost it it's hard to know exactly although the urban density could

[57:14] allow to up to 35 units as I look at this plan because of the access

[57:19] management along Hargus i don't think you'll ultimately get 35 units of development within that location you can

[57:26] start to see how if you look at you know the lot widths within so these

[57:33] are in the Arbor Ridge you're at a 65 foot

[57:38] lot width so you'd likely double the number of units but I don't know if

[57:44] you'd see significant changes in how the development is patterned with that said I would say the

[57:52] anticipated value of these properties because they are larger lots are going to be probably in the million dollars in

[58:00] north range average 65 ft lot can range anywhere from 550 up to Arbor Ridge has

[58:08] 65 foot lots still in the millie so it is a little hard for us to speculate on

[58:13] that but I can tell you that there is you know as we look at it from an

[58:19] overall standpoint we look at it from a lens of housing choice and so we do want

[58:25] to make sure that we have different variety of housing and certainly the more urban product is more readily

[58:31] available throughout the community and will be more readily available through multiple different existing and new

[58:37] subdivisions that occur as the city continues to develop the larger lot

[58:42] subdivisions are a little bit more of a niche product we will have now two of these going um if this were to move

[58:49] forward um including the Cherrywood project that's fairly

[58:55] normal from the city standpoint to have somewhere in the range of 20 to 25 of these lots at any time available um at

[59:02] the same time we have 550 or more traditional lots in inventory so if you

[59:08] look at it from that perspective it becomes very much a niche product but it's important to have move up housing

[59:13] opportunities that are available within communities

[59:18] thank you

all right thank you um have there been any additional questions from

[59:24] any members of the public

not at this time chair all right so this is my seventh year in

[59:31] the planning commission and the first time I've also seen this concept plan so I'm going to assume that if we have all

[59:37] questions and comments we just table the discussion and this does not have to go to a motion to recommend approval

that

[59:43] is correct the the process in front of you this evening was to provide feedback and commissioners have had an opportunity to do that appreciate uh

[59:50] this is I will admit my first time with it and I've been on staff for 24 years so

this is a little bit new

i just while

[59:57] I was sitting here I I did draw it if you'd like it if it okay

[1:00:03] please take that is for you enjoy my Utah drawing

[1:00:09] you're not even charge there you go

yeah am I going to

[1:00:16] All right um so thank you to the commissioners for all the feedback and look forward to seeing how this prog or

[1:00:24] this project progresses and good luck with all the planning

[1:00:29] all right with that this evening um we were going to move on to item 4 C of the

[1:00:35] agenda uh this item is the indoor pickle ball 390 Commerce Drive conditional use

[1:00:40] permit project number 03-2025-00581

[1:00:46] and we have Dan on this project

all right thank you Chair snf Corporation

[1:00:52] has submitted an application for a conditional use permit for commercial recreation use over 5,000 square feet

[1:00:58] the applicant is proposing to install eight indoor pickle ball courts with the exist within the existing building the

[1:01:03] project is located at 390 Commerce Drive uh and the property is zoned I1 light industrial district and guided as places

[1:01:10] to work on the land use plan at the July 26 1995 meeting city council approved

[1:01:15] the 53 acre 9 lot preliminary plat for the Woodbury Commerce Center the 65,000

[1:01:21] foot building at 390 Commerce Drive was constructed in 1998

[1:01:28] indoor pickle ball club is proposing to occupy 22,000 square ft for commercial recreation use the applicant is

[1:01:34] proposing to install eight pickle ball courts uh within the existing building uh the city has identified that

[1:01:39] commercial recreation space is a supportive use uh to the places to work land uses however it is intent of the

[1:01:46] comprehensive plan to deliver places to work uh uses within the I1 zoning district and therefore the building

[1:01:52] shall be capped at 34% total tenants space for use is considered commercial recreation no additional commercial

[1:01:59] recreation uses uh shall be printed above the proposed 22,000 ft unless an amended conditional use permit is

[1:02:05] approved by city council the applicant is proposing to utilize

[1:02:10] the two existing full access points uh from Commerce Drive and Rivertown Drive into the site for vehicle access there

[1:02:17] are turn lanes for both points of access the building has 171 parking stalls on

[1:02:22] site the proposed pickle ball use is anticipated to take 22,000 ft which equates to 73 required stalls for the

[1:02:29] proposed commercial recreation use given a one stall per 300 uh square foot ratio

[1:02:36] the applicant has indicated that they will occupy the remaining building space to to be used as office and warehouse

[1:02:42] based on the uses presented an additional 89 spaces will be needed for the office and warehouse uses it is

[1:02:48] anticipated the peak times for pickle ball will be opposite from the business park uses and the shared parking field will be available for evening events

[1:02:56] with that staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit project number 03-2025-0000581

[1:03:04] for the indoor pickle ball club subject to the conditions found within your staff report staff and the applicant are

[1:03:10] on hand for any questions all right thank you very much would the

[1:03:15] applicant like to add anything additional at this time

[1:03:21] um nothing to be added at this time

all right thank you very much

have there

[1:03:27] been any yellow sheets received or questions submitted via teams

not at this time J

all right the Q&A will stay

[1:03:33] open for the duration of the project discussion so please enter any questions and staff will read them for the commission and with that we'll open it

[1:03:39] up to members of our planning commission for questions you can you can stand you can sit if you'd like

okay all right and

[1:03:46] we will start with Commissioner Colum okay thank you Chair um

[1:03:54] I I think just one of the clarifying questions I had either for the applicant or staff is that um the the current

[1:04:02] building uh the current use of the building today is exclusively office and

[1:04:08] warehouse and is this proposal converting some of that office and warehouse space to this recreational use

[1:04:16] or is there another use for this particular part of this 22,000 square feet Hey

[1:04:23] I'll defer to the applicant to u mention what the current use is i know you're in conversations with

Right so the current

[1:04:29] uses uh we are not occupying this building as of right now okay so we are

[1:04:35] in an active lease negotiation with the landlord so but we are being proactive to uh get the pickable ideas passed with

[1:04:43] the commissioner first before we move on so that is actually one condition before we sign the lease okay our core business

[1:04:51] is SNF Corporation right at the bank of Sam's Club i mean you probably seen it

[1:04:56] so our core business is in uh e-commerce and also third party fulfillments and we

[1:05:02] have currently right now 15,000 square ft of uh office and then about 40,000 in

[1:05:09] our warehouse all right so uh because of how e-commerce landscape

[1:05:15] had changed since 2012 when we were in that building so uh our need for the

[1:05:22] warehouse isn't that huge anymore so we we kind of just want to scale it down

[1:05:27] but we kind of looking overlooking at that building for like the past 13 years

[1:05:33] so yeah we kind of know about what's going on so that's why we we kind of thought about okay can we actually make

[1:05:38] it into a multi-use uh space if that's possible so that's where the whole idea

[1:05:43] come from yeah so uh yeah I hope I answer your question about that

and so

[1:05:48] you would be signing a lease for the entire 65,000t building and

you would

[1:05:54] have a lease that would have the permitted uses laid out which would include

if approved obviously this as a

[1:06:00] recreational use in addition to the office and warehouse use

exactly and you would be able to control the entire building under the lease

exactly yes

[1:06:07] great thank you

um I I guess he's for staff you know and

[1:06:14] sometimes when these kinds of um applicants come forward we take it as an

[1:06:19] opportunity to look at the building and determine you know this is building I think Dan you mentioned built in 1998 so

[1:06:26] um I I drove it uh you know over the weekend it looks like honestly it's in pretty good shape overall just from a

[1:06:33] superficial lens but are there any is there anything that staff has noted in

[1:06:38] the in the condition of the building or anything that if that building was being built today wouldn't be code compliant

[1:06:44] that is worth discussing there was a fairly significant amount of

[1:06:51] investment during the last tenant on the interior and exterior of the building so

[1:06:56] it it's in to your point in pretty good shape um as part of overall our building

[1:07:01] permit and overall review will evaluate condition of landscaping and things of that nature as part of that there is uh

[1:07:08] like many sites there's some refreshing that's necessary in that but that would be handled as part of our overall

[1:07:14] process

okay um and then I guess this is goes back to the applicant since we're looking at the

[1:07:20] site plan here um and looking at the design that you put together is the for

[1:07:27] the pickle ball customers they would be accessing the facility

[1:07:33] through that northern northeast entrance exactly

is that correct

yeah and what

[1:07:40] would be the hours that that those facilities would be open to pickle ball

[1:07:46] members

for right now in our application we would like to open between 6:00 a.m

[1:07:51] to 12 midnight

okay and and will it be are you thinking of

[1:07:57] this as a membership concept or is it open play to the public that they could

[1:08:02] come in during that time

right so membership uh is not required so we will still have the open play drop in play

[1:08:10] yeah uh pay as you play uh concept as well

okay um

[1:08:16] I noticed there are some parking lot lights right um kind of on the perimeter

[1:08:22] of the lot um but uh you know having the

[1:08:27] having I guess more of a retail operation here um is there anything we need to do to enhance the lighting in

[1:08:35] the lot from a public safety perspective i didn't see it mentioned in the staff

[1:08:41] report so just asking if that's a an open item to review

i think that's a fair question it's an item that we did

[1:08:48] not review the application under but I think that's something that staff could take a look at and see if there um in

[1:08:54] many cases with the designs that you can see here the wall lighting on the

[1:09:00] building can handle a portion of that first row if you will of parking spaces and then they do have perimeter lighting

[1:09:07] but we can take a look at whether or not there are any portions of the of the internal kind of the middle row of the

[1:09:13] parking that is not illuminated to a level that would be appropriate

[1:09:19] so I'll let my fellow commissioners uh weigh in but I would propose um when we

[1:09:24] go to move that we would add a condition that the lighting the overall lighting plan for the building and parking lot

[1:09:30] area be added as part of the review process sounds good thank you

thank you chair

[1:09:36] that's all I have for now

all right thank you Commissioner Kennedy yes i just have one um clarifying

[1:09:43] question um in in how you're going to use the whole space that back part of

[1:09:50] the warehouse section will be the pickle ball courts

yes

okay and then the front section had I noticed a lot of it's it's

[1:09:57] a large it's a beautiful section of the building with lots of windows and and your outline said lots of different

[1:10:04] offices is this a a mixeduse structure are you going to uh that

[1:10:11] e-commerce is that still part of the concept is that do I understand that correctly

yes yeah the whole idea which

[1:10:17] we are still planning to do that we are thinking that well first of all the office use is being approved for um

[1:10:26] that's one thing that we're still considering is we might be actually opening up some of the office space for

[1:10:32] rent yeah because like you say that the south uh the southwest corner has very good

[1:10:41] appearance for for a very nice office um nice office look and although we we may

[1:10:48] not be able to occupy the entire space but we seriously uh been considering

[1:10:54] that mixed use which um their need for just like lifetime has been promoting

[1:11:01] co-working together with fitness i mean it's like coming you you you because of

[1:11:06] the current landscape people how people work so they can work wherever they want

[1:11:12] um we we are thinking to potentially have that uh mixed use so that people

[1:11:19] can actually come in co and then have the membership to use uh the pickle ball

[1:11:24] club as well yep okay so the So just one last question

[1:11:29] this would be um your not just your company's employees in that office area

[1:11:36] but but almost as a boutique or um um

uh

[1:11:42] probably not in a retail kind of like skin care kind of business well we

[1:11:47] mostly just for people who who would just rent an office like probably

[1:11:52] insurance uh and some financial advisors yeah so yeah office

[1:11:59] not not a retail office yeah we don't think so yeah

just an indep independent business or individual business

[1:12:07] would there be a one one last last question um would there be a a dual name

[1:12:14] to the corporation that sounds like a stupid question but

yeah yes yes we

[1:12:19] think so the the pickle ball club will have its name to to promote the business

[1:12:24] so and so as SNF will still will still be the Dow bag version we don't usually

[1:12:30] promote our business a lot except to the business customers yeah but the pickle

[1:12:35] ball club is a retail facing business so that will have its own branding

okay

[1:12:42] thank you very much all right thank you Commissioner Swanson

[1:12:49] first and foremost I just want to thank staff for condition 4 i have been saying

[1:12:55] it for like six hearings and it finally says gross square footage on the maximum

[1:13:00] so thank you and to the applicant I just wanted to ask um do you anticipate anything like

[1:13:09] tournaments being at the pickle ball court do we need to consider bus parking or anything like that

um typically

[1:13:16] pickle ball tournament um let me answer the first part yes but typically for

[1:13:21] pickle ball tournament they don't usually have big transportation like buses would come uh we probably would

[1:13:29] just do regional which is just within uh where uh like in the twin cities yeah

[1:13:35] and typically because of how um pickle ball tournament usually conducted they

[1:13:40] they are they don't usually go by I'm not sure whether the school would actually have school team yet we haven't

[1:13:48] seen seen it like school team will have to take the bus to come yet um yeah I

[1:13:54] hope I'm not sure that answer your question on this

and we were at 171

[1:13:59] parking spaces is that right so

we're not really anticipating any kind of parking problems

[1:14:05] yes I mean we definitely can cater for at least um a few buses

all right I have

[1:14:11] other questions thank you

thank you thanks Commissioner Jared thank you Chair um I actually like this

[1:14:19] kind of mixed use with this uh it's a lot better fit than we've seen with some of the more traditional warehouse

[1:14:25] warehouse buildings it's got a kind of a natural break and kind of blends well uh

[1:14:31] the parking is separated um with some of the other warehouses i think that the

[1:14:37] cars for or the traffic for the pickle ball park just felt odd with the the

[1:14:43] large trucks semi-trail u you know motor court type things so I think this

[1:14:49] probably has a lot more appropriate parking for it and I don't think that the uh change here is uh it's really not

[1:14:57] that big of an ask um I did kind of think a lot about some of these other businesses you know I think I think we

[1:15:04] have a few businesses that have um you know handball court inside or a gym or a

[1:15:10] yoga studio so I I I just I don't think that this is really

[1:15:17] that out of a an ask i actually think this is a really good use for this building so that that it's all I've got

[1:15:24] thank you

thank you so much commissioner Harrington

thank you

[1:15:31] Charles and um questions to staff um

[1:15:36] let's see under the use Dan there was a sentence that talks about no additional commercial recreation uses shall be

[1:15:44] permitted above the the proposed 22,000 square feet um unless it's amended so is

[1:15:51] that limit this particular applicant that they can not go beyond the 22,000

[1:15:58] square ft

that's correct if they were looking to add additional cores and square footage then they would need to

[1:16:03] amend the conditional use permit

could another entity come in and ask for

[1:16:09] no it would require amended conditional use permit

okay so that that kind of gets me to the to the question and I

[1:16:15] think we've seen at least two other projects like this whether it's pickle ball or it's some indoor recreation park

[1:16:23] where there's a building in and the first person in is is uh got a

[1:16:29] recreational use and so we cap it at exactly what their percentage is and I think we've had this dialogue and I

[1:16:35] think I've asked this question before it seems arbitrary

i didn't even bring it up this morning

[1:16:41] it it seems yes it seems arbitrary and it and I think about okay so the pickle

[1:16:47] ball it's a great it's a great use but what if somebody comes in and is looking for a place to put in competitive chess

[1:16:56] 500 square feet and this is the perfect building for it they can't do that

[1:17:03] they could it's a strange question but I just I'm trying to make a point that

[1:17:08] Go ahead they could and so again what the framework of the condition does is

[1:17:13] set that there needs to be additional city review

through an amendment process okay

and one of the reasons why that is

[1:17:21] uh set from a cap standpoint and that cap has varied is because under zoning

[1:17:29] commercial recreation uses less than 5,000 ft² are a permitted use so your

[1:17:34] 500 square foot could come in without this condition that says we're going to

[1:17:40] make sure that the community has their fingerprints on the decision-m i would think if we had a 500 ft user that would

[1:17:47] not be an issue

right

but there are some uses that I would caution against on this building that are in commercial

[1:17:54] recreation some fitness uses you've got very high quality office use within this

[1:17:59] area one of the conflict points that we have seen in the realm of commercial recreation is is fitness uses with loud

[1:18:07] music certain some of the

um some of the fitness uses that have heavy weights or

[1:18:14] or other things that they're moving around can have can be a not as high

[1:18:19] quality of a fit and so that's why from a staff standpoint we wanted to create a

[1:18:25] system and this is the the third time going through this process

that if there is a

[1:18:32] future request it they can make an application and go through the city process and if it's a reasonable request

[1:18:38] it's likely going to move through fairly seamlessly but it does give the city the

[1:18:43] ability to protect some of the core uses here some of the core assets and they're

[1:18:48] different building to building commissioner Jarrett pointed out that some of the truck courts and some of those other things those are assets to

[1:18:54] those buildings we want to protect that principal use to make sure that we're not having a accessory use kind of

[1:19:02] dominate the future uses and same can be said on this property

well that's that's a great explanation thank you i think

[1:19:07] what trips me up and I think we have picked up on this word before capped

[1:19:13] that's that's the part of all of this that sort of it seems so finite it seems

[1:19:18] so thou shalt not go beyond and I if that's the word that needs to be here

[1:19:26] given there's flexibility should someone come in and and ask to

[1:19:31] bring more recreational use to the building we have the opportunity to review that so be it i get that great

[1:19:38] thank you it's only question all right commissioner Shaw

[1:19:44] thank you Chair um so I think most of the questions that I had they already

[1:19:49] been asked and you answered them uh one that I did have is you know given what

[1:19:55] you're showing about a north entrance and a south entrance you know for different purposes

[1:20:00] uh and you know the the hours of operation for the pickle ball that you

[1:20:05] mentioned um you know what what would the security look like in in in both

[1:20:12] sides of the building um the whole building will be access control so um

[1:20:19] like on the pickle ball site the members or whoever players non-members they they

[1:20:25] do actually need to sign up for the app to use so with with them in the app they

[1:20:30] will create an account with the hours that they reserve um and then they will

[1:20:36] receive a code that punching into the access panel that's when the door open for them yeah in the same way on the

[1:20:42] southside wishes uh for the office our employee or in the future potential uh

[1:20:49] other tenant who might rent the office they will also have the the touchless key card to have access into the

[1:20:56] building yeah and typically uh there are some other time maybe if we actually

[1:21:01] have like open hours like really open with the door unlocked those would

[1:21:07] typically happen during uh the regular daytime towards the evening but I would

[1:21:13] like to say that anytime after 900 p.m we will have the access control

[1:21:18] okay thank you yeah I generally like the the whole idea and you know having kind

[1:21:23] of a mixeduse facility like this um so and if I understood correctly what

[1:21:30] you're saying is that you have you're going to lease the whole building but the conditional requirement for you to

[1:21:37] lease a building is approval of the pickle board

um that's actually our condition with the landlord

or your

[1:21:44] condition

yeah yeah so it's it's our condition that we we would like uh the pickup ball club to pass first before we

[1:21:50] sign the lease

okay

yeah so that's the item yeah

all right thank you that's all

[1:21:56] I had all right thank you Commissioner Going

[1:22:01] um Commissioner Swanson already answered my question about the tournaments and how that would affect the parking but in

[1:22:07] general I really like the idea um especially after school I usually go to the YMCA and I've just like seen the

[1:22:14] like growing popularity of pickle ball and every time like the gym is like reserved for pickle ball it's always

[1:22:21] like packed so I just think it's going to be a really good idea and that'll be all chair

thank you

thank you

[1:22:27] Commissioner Cho yeah um I just got one single kind of silly question when if assuming that the

[1:22:34] pickup ball courts are all full how loud would you think they'll be just not going to answer would you think so some

[1:22:41] of the few offices that are adjacent to the pickle ball pickle ball courts excuse me will be able to hear some of

[1:22:46] the activity from the other side

yeah that's a very good question that we did actually consider uh the architectural

[1:22:52] design in that building they actually have fire rated wall like with bricks of

[1:22:58] like probably about 16 in thick uh in between the office to the warehouse i

[1:23:04] think the whole reason was that building previously was actually Quest building they have they have they have two

[1:23:10] drive-in doors with I'm not sure whether you remember Quest like Comcast truck

[1:23:16] going into the building yeah so they have trucks in the building in in the

[1:23:21] warehouse so which can actually be pretty loud so I think they did very good sound dampering and also soundproof

[1:23:28] control which we actually like that's a very good question yeah

thank you

[1:23:34] all right thank you very much i do not have any additional questions myself um are there any other additional questions

[1:23:39] from any commissioners any other questions come in online

not

[1:23:45] at this time Chair

all right with that staff would be looking for recommendation for this project

[1:23:51] chair uh I would move that we approve project number 03-2025-0000581

[1:24:00] uh as stated with the additional conditional or recommendation additional

[1:24:06] condition uh number five added for the applicant to provide to staff a full uh

[1:24:14] lighting and security plan for the exterior of the building and parking area thank you do we have a second thank you

[1:24:21] all right we'll now take a vote on this motion all in favor please say I

i i

i

[1:24:26] all oppose please say nay all right and with that the planning commission does recommend approval of

[1:24:32] this project and it will be heard um as part of the public portion public hearing portion of the city council

[1:24:38] meeting on July 16th so want to sincerely thank you for your application and your project in Woodbury and good

[1:24:45] luck with the rest of your project

thank you very much all right next item on our agenda this

[1:24:52] evening we have um city council member Donna Stafford here to give our council

[1:24:58] member report thank you for having me mhm

um we

[1:25:05] started out our last council meeting with honoring and

[1:25:11] extending condolences to the Hortman's and the Hoffman families with the

[1:25:17] horrendous news that we had and it was very heartfelt from all of us on the

[1:25:24] council um we have been

[1:25:29] fielding a lot of calls and commentary with regard to the construction

[1:25:35] um we're recommending that people go to Insight for the current and for the most

[1:25:43] part we're hearing very very positive comments about the construction yes there's delays but they all know it's

[1:25:49] for the good of the whole community after if ever we get done

[1:25:55] um we have been able to view the

[1:26:01] ever evolving Woodbury public safety building plans and those are coming

[1:26:06] along what they're working on right now is arranging to move operations

[1:26:14] so I believe it's the in September is when the county service building will

[1:26:21] open and then a good majority of our administrative staff from police fire

[1:26:27] and EMS will be going over to the old DMV building and then they'll be doing

[1:26:34] some things in the different fire departments so they they seem to have a really good handle on how they're going

[1:26:41] to manage it without really the general population knowing or affecting services

[1:26:47] that would be offered either police fire or EMS and we're looking forward on July 28th

[1:26:54] to the start of our new city administrator Jeff Dah i believe when I was here last I knew who it was but I

[1:27:01] couldn't say um he is he comes to us from the city of Weisetta

[1:27:08] as we do a national search for a city administrator

[1:27:13] we end up hiring someone who actually lives in Woodbury and used to has spent a few years I

[1:27:20] believe working with Eric you uh Mr dah was a community

[1:27:25] development intern and in fact has presented in front of this planning commission 20 plus years ago

wow

[1:27:36] and the other bit of good news great news

[1:27:42] that happened this week is Thursday much to her surprise she was absolutely

[1:27:47] astounded the League of Minnesota Cities gave Mayor Anne Bert the emerging

[1:27:54] leadership award for this year um we all knew about it and couldn't say

[1:28:00] anything and her we worked with her husband to get her there and she was just stunned so we're really really

[1:28:06] quite proud of everything that she has done and

[1:28:13] how this the the the obstacles that she has encountered since becoming mayor

[1:28:19] um let's see what else have we got going on don't forget the 4th of July we'll

[1:28:25] all be at Healthy Sports Center for a big celebration most of us will be in

[1:28:30] town um and we are just beginning to take a

[1:28:36] look at doing our five-year comprehensive plan review

[1:28:42] uh project implementation projects and

[1:28:48] I think that's it

[1:28:55] all right well thank you very much Council Member Stafford for your update

[1:29:00] um and next item on our agenda this evening we do have approval of our minutes from our June 2nd 2025 meeting

[1:29:09] uh do we have any comments or edits to the minutes at this time all right with that we'll entertain a

[1:29:15] motion for approval i move to approve the June 2nd 2025 minutes as uh stated

[1:29:21] thank you do we have a second

i second that

all right all All in favor of approval of the minutes from the June

[1:29:27] 2nd meeting please say I

i i

all oppose please say nay

with that the minutes are

[1:29:32] also approved without any men any edits and with that the meeting is adjourned