Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Perfect. All right, we'll call this June 10th, 2026 playing Commission meeting to order. We'll look for a roll call.

Here.

Michael it's pretty right Burke here rusted sailor here and chairperson Urbanski here all right I'll look for a motion to adapt the agenda motion made is there a second second motion made and seconded on favor say aye on to number four visitor presentation so this would be if anybody wants to address the Planning Commission for something that's not on the agenda tonight I don't think we've ever had somebody do that but anything online or nope nope move into look for a motion to approve the previous meeting minutes from the May 13th meeting.

So moved. Second.

Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. We have no consent agenda items tonight, which brings us into our one action item, which is a public hearing to recommend approval of the preliminary site and building plan, preliminary plat. rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment for Big Woods Business Park, BWBP North, Phase 1, Scannell Properties, PC number 2026-08. Liz, I believe you're presenting this tonight?

Yep, I just got to bring it up here. all right i'm assuming you can see that in front of you thank you all right we have a preliminary site and building plan preliminary plat rezoning and a comprehensive plan amendment request this evening for the building one in big woods business park specifically on the north side this project is being proposed by skinnell properties So to give you an understanding of where the site is, it's located on kind of the southwest area of the city up to its western boundary that borders with the city of Carver and Dahlgren Township. The area in question this evening is outlined in blue on this screen here. There were a few former Dahlgren Township parcels on kind of that west edge of the project area that were recently annexed this year. And this again is a site that's positioned on the north side of Big Woods Boulevard and immediately east of Jonathan Carver Parkway. So we're at the second step in our three-step review process. So we're in more of the technical review, looking at civil drawings and reports and starting to identify and satisfy some concerns that were raised during concept plan and establish additional conditions into the third and final step. In terms of background and previous approvals, the concept plan was approved back in February of this year, and then we did get those two parcels that are in Dahlgren Township annexed into the city of Chaska in May. We did go through that environmental review stemming back from September of last year, and then it was formally adopted in April of this year Existing conditions of kind of the overall area. It's over 300 acres total, both on the north and south sides of Big Woods Boulevard. It's made up of 16 parcels. Majority on the north side is made up of parcels owned by the Razor family. Also owned on the north side is one parcel owned by the Morshon family. two parcels owned by Traditions and then one parcel that's owned by the city of Chaska Skinnell will be kind of the main developer of those 300 acres. However, don't have that land control over traditions or the city of Chaska parcels Today, the property mainly consists of agricultural use, as well as some wooded areas. There are a total of 27 wetlands across the 300 acres, and then you have West Chaska Creek kind of on the north side there. The comprehensive plan guides this area to have two key community entrances, one that's positioned at the Jonathan Carver Parkway and Big Woods Boulevard intersection, and then one that's on the south side near Chaska Boulevard and Highway 212. so phase one that's moving forward with preliminary approval again as shown in kind of the green outline here on the upper image and is roughly 44 acres proposed for the first user which is a distribution center So the current request, again, includes a preliminary site and building plan for that distribution center user totaling 218,000 square feet on 44 acres. It also includes a preliminary plat request, a rezoning to a planned multi-use district, and a comprehensive plan amendment. The pre-plat includes two lots, one lot for the distribution center, and then another lot for the future water tower on the north side here. And then seven remnant out lots for future development and storm water ponding and the wooded ravine area. The comprehensive plan guides this first phase for business park, open space, rural residential or greenbelt, and then the former Dahlgren Township growth area, which is in that hatched out area. So the comprehensive plan amendment request would include three different components with it. One, to allow for cluster development in the Greenbelt area. The second, to expand the Musa boundary, which is the metropolitan urban service area, and establish land use guidance on the former Dahlgren Township parcels. In terms of the greenbelt and where that is situated, it's basically on the west edge of the project area, shown in green here. This greenbelt edge is established around the city edge to physically and visually separate the city of Chaska from adjacent communities. The objective of that is the protection of the rural character at key community entrances. With phase one, it includes a little under 30 acres of Greenbelt area. In terms of the impacts or impervious surface within that area, there's roughly about nine acres within that, so about 31% of the Greenbelt area. That would be proposed with the site plan. There is a policy within the comprehensive plan that does allow for cluster development within the Greenbelt area, which I'll go over in the next slide here. So cluster development is allowed within the Greenbelt area if it meets the 10 stated objectives from the comprehensive plan. I'm not gonna go through all of them. Those are included in the staff report analysis. Just a few of them that we'll touch on. The area does need to be serviced by Chaska Utilities. This is proposed as a part of this project as utilities will be extended to the site. Viewsheds at key community entrances are identified prioritized and protected So the key community entrance in this area is at that intersection of Jonathan Carver Parkway and Big Woods Boulevard I'll show in a few subsequent slides here the proposed ponding berming and landscaping that's proposed in those areas There are a few refinements that are being requested for the final submittal to bolster the landscaping in certain areas along that edge specifically the northwest edge of Building one site and then near that vehicle entrance proposed on Jonathan Carver Parkway And then the other piece is development activity is limited to approximately a third of the site. And yes, they are meeting that with the development activity limited to approximately 31% of that area where 33% would be allowed. This slide includes a couple view sheds from Jonathan Carver Parkway and Big Woods Boulevard showing the proposed landscaping both at kind of that initial installation or five-year growth as well as what it would look like in 20 years, which I'll show the comparison of that through a video analysis on the next slides here. uh those two areas needing refinement are identified as one and two on this exhibit so again on that northwest side here you can see portions of the building at that five year growth period and then number two where that vehicle entrance is there's definitely some ability to fill in there to bolster that view shed from a more natural standpoint at the beginning stages of installation. Hopefully this will work. I've got two videos to show you one is showing the five-year growth And this would be traveling from Big Woods Boulevard and then on to Jonathan Carver Parkway So we're on Big Woods Boulevard here and we'll start to round the corner to go north here on Jonathan Carver Parkway and And again, this shows the edge of the property along that greenbelt area with the proposed berming and landscaping. And that's kind of the area on that northwest side that will need some refinement into the final.

And the trail stays there also, correct?

Yep. And then this is... the 20 year growth view shed. Still on Big Woods Blvd rounding the corner going on Jonathan Carver Parkway now. Continuing the comprehensive plan amendment request, so the amendment would include establishing land use over those Delaware and Township parcels. And the existing is on the left, the proposed is on the right here. Also included is the expansion of the Musa, the area that's serviced by city utilities. And again, because we didn't have that guidance established for those hologram township parcels, that expansion would basically continue into that growth area that has been annexed. This is the phasing plan just to show kind of what's proposed at phase one here and what's for subsequent development later on. So phase one really includes everything in turquoise and then the pink areas as well. So building one effectively is that turquoise area on this screen. here and then also part of phase one would include public improvements to the intersection the main intersection into the development at Big Woods Boulevard and in access on to Jonathan Carver Parkway also included would be the extension of that local public road public road a which would end in a cul-de-sac on the north side there Also included would be the extension of a public trail that would follow public road A and extend across the wooded ravine up to Chaska or Creek Road and Chaska Creek Boulevard to the north there. That would basically follow where the utility extensions are proposed across the ravine. And then masquerading basically to the extent of kind of where the blue area is shown for the north side at the beginning here. in terms of access and right-of-way so again a new collector road or local road is proposed to be kind of that main north-south spine road into the development this is also a state aid road so it has its own set of standards that need to be met from a state review perspective The intersection of where Public Road A meets Big Woods Boulevard is proposed to be a single-lane roundabout. And then an additional access would be at Jonathan Carver Parkway, which would be a private access into the site for a ride-in, ride-out. not a part of this project but eventually will be constructed in the near term would be another roundabout project at Big Woods Boulevard and Jonathan Carver Parkway which was a county project identified for this area So a couple of things the applicant will need to work on into final is there are spacing requirements along a collector road or public road A that need to be met, which is a 600 foot spacing requirement between access points. The two that don't meet that are where the truck loading dock accesses and one of the van lot parking lot access points. They're roughly 100 feet from each other, so they'll need to work on a plan that meets the spacing requirements into final. Additionally, they'll have to continue coordination with Carver County given that this abuts two of their county roads and they're proposing two access points and improvements on those roadways. Carver County will have the final say in what those intersection designs need to look like since it's their road. So that will be a requirement going into finals that we'll need that certainty from Carver County that the designs proposed are good to go. From a traffic standpoint they did provide an updated TIA with this preliminary submittal And really focused on the traffic generation for building one as a distribution center and The proposed user or distribution center user would have roughly 3,000 daily trips from their site, and this is broken down from kind of personal vehicles, the trucks that would use the loading dock area delivering the goods, and then the delivery vans that would be dispatched from the distribution center. The personal vehicles would make up a majority of the daily trips there. The majority of these trips are when these employees would come to the site would be during off peak hours for the most part. A lot of them will work overnight doing sorting as trucks are dropping off goods. they'll be doing sorting activity during the overnight hours into the early morning hours and then have other subsequent shift employees that will work within the distribution center during the day The trucks will be roughly 88 daily trips, and these will be mainly overnight, during the overnight hours, and then sporadic few during the daytime hours as well. And then vans, those, again, will be dispatched out of the site kind of after off-peak hours in the morning. So they'll have most of the van drivers arriving at the site in their personal vehicles around 9 a.m. and then start to be dispatched out around 10 a.m. And they have... eight hour to nine hour shift so they typically come back around 8 or 9 p.m. at night after their deliveries are done. utilities so as I mentioned before utilities will across the ravine utilities are currently available at that intersection of Creek Road and Chaska Creek Boulevard to the north so those will be extended across the ravine to access the project area They will need easements and agreements from the abutting property owner traditions as they own the property immediately north. They are fully supportive of the extension of the utilities to the project area as it will also service their area as well in the future. For trails and sidewalks, the project plans to incorporate a layer of sidewalks and trails within the development. So off of public road A, you have a sidewalk on the west side and then a trail on the east side for the public streets. The trail also shows to extend across the ravine. to connect into the trail system to the north there. There's also an offshoot that kind of winds its way into the wooded area too to provide public access into that wooded ravine system. And then also a trail extension off of that regional trail on Jonathan Carver Parkway that would extend on kind of the west side there and into the wooded ravine as well as proposed. For outdoor gathering spaces, the site itself will have its own area for employees. They're just on the outside of the front entrance. They're showing tables. They'll have a ride shelter for people who will get picked up at the site from carpoolers or family members, friends. And then another outdoor gathering space is shown in a city outlot, kind of where that trail extends off of the northern cul-de-sac there. Just one thing for the applicant to work on into their final is enhancing the outdoor gathering space for building one site. um to make it a little bit more desirable and shaded for their employees there so that's one thing they'll have to refine into final for screening landscaping and tree preservation we did kind of touch on that in those initial slides here There are a few areas that they'll need to further refine kind of on that greenbelt area side that we mentioned before. They'll also need to show boulevard trees along public road A. And again, that's the area that's between the curb and the sidewalk within the public right-of-way there. So that will need to be shown on the landscape plan. And then also... provide enhancements for berming and landscaping on that east edge of building one's property where the van lot abuts the public road a there to try to screen that area as well as the loading dock area from the public road For building one, again, this is on a roughly 44 acre site. It's over 200,000 square feet. It's a 40 foot building. The building proposes to use a mix of form liner, glass, and concrete panels, smooth application concrete panels. They meet the city's ordinance in terms of industrial buildings. The parking lot our parking provision for the site as well over the city's requirement as we'll have to park both employees and deliver delivery vehicles on site And then there's also an accessory building which would be a fleet service building for the delivery vans on site and that also meets the industrial standards It'll be stone and stucco to match the the colors of the primary building a Couple other things to work on for final that I haven't already mentioned I'll need to get a fully approved wetland mitigation plan as there's one Incidental wetland on building one site that will be impacted as a result of the project and Also need to get an approved comprehensive plan amendment done by Met Council, which would follow the city's approval of the comprehensive plan amendment. and then ensuring through out lots and easements the green belt implementation strategy strategies so and For any areas within the green belt that aren't owned by the city or plan to be owned by the city They'll need to either be in an easement or have some type of preservation Document over it So in conclusion, we are asking three motions this evening. One of them is to recommend approval of the preliminary site and building plan and preliminary plat for Big Woods Business Park, specifically Big Woods Business Park North, Building 1, based on the conditions listed in the staff report. And then a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning from the rural residential RR2 zoning district to the planned multi-use district, PMD 24. and then a motion to recommend approval of the comprehensive plan amendment to allow for cluster development in the greenbelt to guide the former dahlgren township parcels and to expand the musa If this moves forward this evening, this will go to council on Monday, which would be this upcoming Monday, June 15th. Happy to answer any questions. Otherwise, we have representatives in the room on the applicant side as well.

Perfect. Thank you. So we do have a public hearing tonight, but before we go there, any questions for staff from the commission here?

I have one question.

So road improvements on the Jonathan Carver and the intersection, right? So would that be completed before the actual building operational? Or like it's not yet decided?

I'm sorry, the intersection of Jonathan Carver.

The intersection of Big Woods and the Jonathan Carver, the roundabout.

It's likely that, well, that is planned for 2027 construction. So it might be kind of at the same time that the user will be under construction.

Because we see a lot of vehicles coming in and if if that is not completed by the time building is operational like that Intersection will be a mess. I mean you can't even turn left or right or whatever Yeah, because all the trucks and delivery things going on and they just need to stand there.

So right So it's actually 28 So there will be a bit of a mess but you know messes are part of developing areas The developer is in direct coordination with Carver County. The roundabout that's being programmed at Jonathan Carver Parkway and Big Woods Boulevard is a county-led project. It's part of their highway improvement program, their identified CIP program. you know, timeline and things. So we are working with them to coordinate. They're aware of this project. And, you know, it'll definitely, I think, benefit from the improvements. But the county would have been pursuing this project in that timeline, regardless of this project coming forward or not.

Yeah, because if they are not completing by that time, probably need to consider some mitigation plans, like having four-way stop sign or something. Otherwise, like, it would be really messy. Yeah. I see that.

Nothing more a resident's like and close the road one year to work on part of it and then close the road the next year to do the other parts.

Other questions for staff?

No? I've got one. On the utilities that are going to come through the ravine to service this, would that be stubbed then on the other side of Big Woods Boulevard to service the south side right way?

Okay.

Yep, it would extend all the way to Big Woods Boulevard.

Okay. If we have no more questions for staff, we'll call the public hearing the order at 7.32. I think we've got a couple representatives from the developer here. I'm sure we've got a couple questions for them, and you might have some presentation you would like to...

Jacob is now properties. All Commissioners and staff.

Thank you very much. Here and happy to answer any questions.

I think the presentation that lives put together was pretty thorough. We've obviously been working with them very closely and doing our best to accommodate not only from the conceptual phase, but also what is forthcoming here in the future.

Questions for Jake. I'm curious, for this facility, this first building, how many employees do you see when we talk like job creation?

Yeah, roughly about 300.

About 300? Yep. And that's 24 hours a day, seven days a week type thing?

Yep, the facility will operate 24-7, correct.

And, you know, when I look at this and I kind of get an idea of who the end user might be, a lot of truck traffic, a lot of van traffic, a lot of car traffic there. And you guys have studied this and it all looks good. And I know being close to a major freeway like that makes a lot of sense. Right. It's hard to configure it or kind of hard to picture it right now with the roads set as they are. Right.

And you're building is to you today like do you consider adding like a renewable energies like a solar panels or something on top of it that would like to make the. Reduce the carbon emissions and all right.

Solar panels not at this time, no we're not.

We go back to traffic in and so we've got you know the historic downtown down here and It looks, if my guess is right on the end user anyways, they've already got a facility over in Shakopee, so it doesn't look like there'd be a ton of traffic going through the historic downtown portion then.

This facility will service the southwest. Obviously the proximity to Highway 212 is very attractive to run north and south.

Any other questions for Jake? Or staff? No?

Absolutely.

Jason Vangless, owner rep for the end user. Just on the job component, obviously the number of vehicles and the number of jobs that we're creating don't totally align. And part of that also is the vans are directly employed by small businesses that we contract with, and then they create the jobs for the delivery drivers themselves. But they operate that business out of this facility. So it's a direct, indirect job creation and that's probably about another 300 plus jobs or so from that. Those are full time as are the folks that were working what we call under the roof in the building and they've received those benefits that start on day one.

Independent contractors basically.

The small businesses, but the folks driving are not independent contractors. They're employees of those small businesses that we contract with. And then just as a comment on the sustainability, while this building won't be fitted with solar, there's a number of sustainability initiatives that are being run out of this or that will be run out of this facility. during construction they'll track kind of the the carbon footprint of those materials and that that's then used to impact our total global build program or at least here in north america to sort of reduce those and i have a list because i don't have it committed to memory just yet but low carbon concrete it's about a 20 reduction in in carbon impact there Low carbon rebar will be included in this. And then certainly the native landscaping, which I know is part of the city's plan anyways, but that's a key part of our build program going forward as we kind of look at some of those things.

And your name again was? I'm sorry.

Jason, last name Vangelis.

Thanks. Thank you, Jason. Is there anyone else that would like to speak at the public hearing here?

You look familiar. Been here once or twice. Travis Olson, 1439 Sophia Drive. For those of you who don't know, the green belt is near and dear to my heart. And anything that encroaches on it, it kind of hits me. And for those that don't, or haven't read it, it's the three key parts or two of the main ones are to help preserve and strengthen Cheska's sense of community and identity for freestanding community and to preserve and protect the value of open space and natural resources. So those are two of the three bullet points for why the Green Belt was created. So when they're going in and pushing the limits and Yes, they're allowed to, yes. It's a great project, I'm not saying not do it, but they're pushing the limits on what they can do. Now it's the, this is where you guys can say too much. Push it back, push it away from the road, It doesn't have to be that close, because they are pushing the limits. You saw from the video, the berm is right there. It's not open space. That berm is right there. It's not natural. And then back to the bullet points, which is bullet point seven, talking about what is allowed. Per the policy, the development activity is limited to approximately one-third of the site. The remainder of the site remains undeveloped with permanent protection measures. Undeveloped. The berm is actually development. The retention ponds are development. So I don't get how they can get away with saying that that's... undeveloped. So keep that in mind as you're going through the decision making policy. So this is the part where obviously they're a business, they're trying to make the most out of what's available. You guys have the ability to push back. Not saying stop, because like I said, it's a great opportunity. I love that they're coming, but Don't allow them to push the boundaries. The other one is the access road onto County Road 11. I don't know why they need that. I don't know why they need a ride in, ride out. For one, it's not needed. And if it is, it's just gonna create confusion because now you have people coming up, they're gonna drive in there, they're gonna get stuck, and now they're gonna have to come out. It's, as you saw in the video or saw in the presentation, you've got now two crosswalks going across that driveway, which is kind of odd, so they really need to take care of that. So if you do allow them to keep that drive, you do need to have them fix the bike path or the paths they have because they have one that's going up onto the berm and hopefully the bike path that's still staying along the highway or so by whatever you do they've got to fix that because right now they have two which is silly um So that's why I'm here. So I do thank you. Please keep that in consideration when you guys are making your decision.

Thanks, Travis. Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this project? No?

Gone once, gone twice.

Any other questions for the developers based off of Travis's comments?

I am curious about the right in, right out. Just what is the purpose of that? Why is that part needed?

I don't know if it'd be helpful to pull up that site plan at all when we talk about this. Sure. Well, that's taking place. Our goal primarily is to maintain safety on the site. There's obviously a fair amount of activity. And so the primary driver for the ride in, ride out is really safety. So the blue is where all of the van fleet will be. The way that the vans kind of operate, and I don't think an ops clock has been set for this facility yet, but typically between the hours of nine to noon, there's a two hour block in that window where the vans will dispatch. And so drivers will come in, typically starting at 9 AM. They'll park in that blue lot, so that allows for an extra more efficient flow of traffic. for the number of entrances that are there and then they'll pull into they'll pull into an empty spot they'll get into the van and then they'll go and they'll queue and i don't think you can see the queuing lanes but that's kind of the just to the left page left of the building there there's kind of like a i think a green greenish color they'll kind of pull their vehicle there and and then they'll disengage the ignition there'll be a a sizable number of electric vehicles that will launch at this facility And then once it's time to kill, they'll enter a canopy, they'll disengage their ignition again, they'll load up. That process takes about 20 minutes start to finish. And then they go out in waves, and that process takes about five minutes. So the total dispatch process is about 25 minutes per wave. And they do that over the course of a two hour block of time. And so you can imagine they'll service different areas and different routes. And so this makes sure that some will go onto the right in right out with intersection A. Others will go into the public feeder road and then exit that way depending on where their route is servicing.

Is this kind of a norm for the facilities that you build? Is this kind of a normal layout form, or is each one somewhat different?

We try to template it as much as we can, obviously, based on the parcel of land that we have and kind of where we're at. I would say that what you typically find is on either side, you typically have a van lot. And then in this particular design component, you don't see that. But this is fairly standard. Okay.

Yeah. Have you been in contact yet with, I know you've been in contact with Carver County, but specifically for that right in, right out there, would there be like an acceleration lane going, would that be north there? Or a major turn lane coming from the south then also?

So you're talking in relationship going north on Jonathan Carver? Yeah. So we're in direct coordination right now with the county and the design and meeting all the design standards.

It just seems like you get a lot of vans that are going to be coming in and out of there in short periods of time, and that road gets kind of busy in the mornings and, well, 24 hours a day now it seems like.

Yeah, we again. The county has been out on site. We've looked at site distances, making sure the proximity to the proposed roundabout as well, and also the right in right out. Also lining up with the city carver on the West side of the road. So we've been able to talk and work through not only with staff, but also the county on top.

All right. Any other questions from? No.

Thank you.

Any other comments for the commissioner? Hearing none will close the public hearing at 7 45 PM. And bring it back to the Commission here for discussion. We've got four pieces here that we have to look at tonight. We've heard the comments from the developer, the builder, and from Travis.

So based on the comments from public hearing, so the 31% of the development like total land usage, is it considering the berms and like retention ponds and all those things or is it like excluding those things?

The impact area includes all of the parking area, the building area, so the impervious surfaces, essentially, are in that impact area.

Okay, so you consider that also as part of that event process?

Correct, yep.

There we go. The precedent that we have for development within the Greenbelt under the Greenbelt policy, the cluster development policy would be the Cheval neighborhood. And so that neighborhood implemented the policy, obviously that's residential, this is industrial, different uses. But there's, in that calculation that occurred at the time, the way that that worked, there's a lot of stormwater ponding, there's a lot of berming. The way that a lot of the screening, creating that vegetated natural edge relative to the county roads that surround that site. So County Road 11 going east on the west boundary, it's not a county road on the north boundary. It's at 82nd, 76th? 86th. 86th Street to the north. The way that that screening occurred, if you drive out there, you'll see there's Birmingham. It's vegetated. And that's how that was achieved to create the edge relative to that boundary of the city there. The one-thirds and two-thirds is not all dedicated to the edge in the Cheval neighborhood. The preservation areas are woven throughout the whole neighborhood. And the ponding and things were counted towards that preservation native area. natural area in that scenario. So what we're attempting to do is take the precedent that was set with the Cheval neighborhood and apply those principles to this site to come up with an outcome that preserves that edge in a way that is consistent to the extent that we can do that in a very different context.

Thank you.

Anyone else? Is there lighting ordinances for this with some of the overhead lights and a 24-7 operation?

Yep, so our lighting ordinance doesn't necessarily limit when they can have lights on, but it does limit the amount of foot candle or glare that can spread out to other properties. Okay.

Okay.

I just like it noted that we'd like to see that our green belt preserved as much as possible. If there's any way we can work with that to strengthen that. I'm sure the answer is no, but I'm going to ask it anyways. Would there be any way of eliminating that exit on County Road 11 and just having that have the bands run along the north side of the building and work off of the new road that's going in there? That's a lot of traffic there.

All right, I will, that does remind me, the crosswalk question that was brought up. Is there any additional clarity on, is there a crosswalk coming up a berm and then down a berm, across a road? What will that look like, I guess, is my question.

On Jonathan Carver Parkway? That would likely be outside of where the berm is. So it wouldn't be going over a berm necessarily.

Similar to the grade it's at today, right?

Yep. So there's a regional trail on the west side there So that basically will kind of stay where it's at and then modifications made if the access Proceeds there and then a crosswalk up to County design standards would have to be made there and then as a Carver County then that has oversight over

how that crosswalk would operate through the new right in right out to the new development that's correct okay yep would would we have a final uh road map I guess or like literally what the road would look like at that entrance exit before the the third stage here from the county

We can certainly ask for one and see how far we can get the design. But usually it's kind of an ongoing iterative process with the county until it's constructed. But we can certainly get as far as we can.

Does the builder, I mean, what are you guys asking for, I guess? Or do you have a design at this point?

So I can speak to that a little bit to give a little more context. Ultimately, it's a county road. And so the access on the county road is an access permit with the county. And it ends up being the county's responsibility to ensure that there are specifications for safety and circulation and all of that with the access relative to their road are being met. So it ends up being a process that is happening in parallel with the city's review process. I think what we can do is aim to share what's relevant and shareable at the time that the final comes through, but also recognizing that it doesn't really be, we can comment on it, we can share our feedback to the county, we can share our preferences, But my experience is that the county often does what their policy says should be done, and that will be what drives that. But yeah, I think we can, you know, as we get into that next process, share information as we know it at that point. It will be in order for the development to proceed into building. They'll need to have the permit from the county squared away. They need to ensure that they have the appropriate access and everything at that time. And that's consistent with a project that's going on right now. um in town um would be uh four stars project um why can't i think high point vistas yes and there's an access on to county road 61 that's being figured out there and you know that that development is grading right now um you know they're they're anxious to get their building permits and move forward with their phase two But a big part of that is moving through the county's process and making sure that that access is fully understood and the design is finalized.

So we're going to look for a motion to recommend approval to the City Council preliminary site and building plan only right now for a preliminary plat for Big Woods Business Park. BWBP North Building 1 subject to 10 conditions here. Is there any further discussion on this portion of it? Hearing none, I'll look for a motion.

A motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

Motion made and seconded for approval. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? That motion carries. Next motion is to recommend approval of the rezoning from rural residential RR2 to plan multi-use district PMD-24 based on the draft ordinance. Looking for a motion for that also. Motion to move. Is there a second?

Second.

Motion made and seconded to approve. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Third, motion to recommend approval of the comprehensive plan amendment to allow cluster development guide to former Dahlgren Township parcels to be open space and business park and expand the metropolitan urban service area, MUSA, MUSA line. I'll look for a motion on that.

So moved. Second.

Motion made and seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. I think that's all we needed for the motions tonight, correct?

Yep.

All right. Moving on then for other business. Is there any other business you'd like to discuss this evening?

one thing i can just mention um for the planning commission to know we are continuing to move forward i mentioned i think a couple meetings ago with an update to the downtown master plan that first task force meeting has been scheduled so that's on june 22nd believe maybe Commissioner Rodberg is gonna be filling in for Commissioner Austin at that one and that'll be you know our first discussion with that group kick off a process that will go into early next year to take the plan that exists and was approved back in 2012 and think about you know what's that next vision for downtown to continue I think the positive momentum that has been built over the last almost 15 years, right?

Excellent.

Just so you're aware.

Thank you.

One thing, and that's with all the talk about the data centers, the city put together a real good question and answer page on the city webpage about it. Okay. With the facts on the data center that's proposed, so- It would be nice to refer people to that rather than all the rumors that are out there.

Thank you. Sure. Anyone else? No? Look for a motion to adjourn then.

Motion. Second.

Motion made and seconded to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Aye.