Planning - Regular Meeting

Good evening and thank you for joining us. I would like to call to order the April 27th, 2026 planning and zoning commission meeting. Our first order of business is roll call. And for that I will call on Commissioner Bot. Um Commissioner B present. Commissioner Britain here. Commissioner Fischer here. Commissioner Canal here. Commissioner Madison here. Commissioner Stman here. Commissioner Goodman here. That concludes the roll call. All right. Thank you very much. Our next order of business is the approval of the agenda.

I make a motion. Okay. Motion is made by Commissioner Botch. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Woodman. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed say no. Motion carries. 7 to zero.

Our next item on our agenda is open forum. So this is an opportunity for members um at the meeting with us here tonight to speak to us on something that is not already on our agenda. So, if you have something that does not um apply to anything that's on the agenda, you can have time now to speak. Okay, seeing none, I'm going to close the open forum. Sorry, I just turned off my microphone. Uh, next is the chair's explanation of the hearing process. The planning commission is a volunteer advisory group to the city council. One of the commission's functions is to hold public hearings and make recommendations on land use and zoning matters. The purpose of these public hearings is to provide an opportunity for each applicant and citizens to present information, ask questions, and express opinions. Since these proceedings are televised and recorded for the public record, anyone wishing to speak must step up to the podium and give their name and address before addressing the commission. Staff reports are prepared and provided to the applicant and planning commission in advance of the meeting. The first step in the hearing will be for staff to present a summary of the report. The applicant will then have the opportunity to briefly explain the proposal and provide additional information or comments. Anyone wanting to speak in favor or against the proposal will then be heard. Upon completion of the testimony, the hearing will be closed to public comments. The planning commission will then discuss and act on the matter. Two complete agenda packets are available for viewing on the back table. Please do not remove those items. The city council will act on agenda item 6A, the Kimbro Avenue shed varants, and 6B, Hoenstein's low potency hemp warehouse, at their meeting on Wednesday, May 6th, 2026, which starts at 7 p.m. The city council will act on items 6C, Geneva

Meadows, and 6D, Quick Trip, on Highway 61, at the meeting on Wednesday, May 20th, 2026, which starts at 7 p.m. Our first application tonight is uh variance 2026-011. Uh oh my gosh, who's presenting this one?

Kelly with Kelly presenting. Sorry about that. Thank you. All right. Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission. Before you is an application for variance requests for an accessory structure addition at 102000 Kimbro Circle. The subject site is located on a 2.68 acre lot in the Eagle Ridge subdivision. The lot is situated at the end of a culde-sac road serving eight properties total. The property is zoned R1 RO residential and is guided as RO residential in the 2040 comprehensive plan. The single family dwelling with attached garage on the property was originally constructed in 1998 and is served by private well and septic. In 2001, the property owner at that time applied for a variance to construct a 660 square foot detached accessory structure approximately 145 ft from the front property line um in front of the principal structure. The variance was required at that time because the code required accessory structures to be no closer to the front property line than the principal structure. Uh the variance was approved then uh due to unique circumstances present on the lot such as the site's topography, lot boundary configuration and the location of the existing house. The applicant is proposing to construct a 42x 42 ft addition onto the existing detached accessory structure which previously was granted a variance as I mentioned to be constructed within the front yard um with only 660 square ft. The proposed addition today will be 10 feet at its closest point to the side

lot line where a 20 foot setback is required by code. The code um also still requires accessory structures to be placed behind the principal structure. Um so the applicant is requesting variances to the minimum sideyard setback and the additional square footage onto the accessory structure in front of the principal structure. The R1 district allows up to two accessory structures for a total combined size of 2500 square feet, which does not include the primary garage. There are no other detached accessory structures on the property and the proposed addition um added on to the existing uh accessory structure will be approximately 2,424 square ft which is compliant with the code standards for maximum permitted accessory size. As I have noted, the addition does not meet the 20ft sideyard setback to the north property line. However, the setback to the rear yard has been met. The front yard set back for principal structures is 30 feet in the R1 district and the addition will be approximately 100 ft from the front property line. The addition will also stay out of the existing 5-ft drainage and utility easement which runs along that uh north property line. The applicant has provided a rendering of the proposed addition which would be constructed of materials to match the existing uh color and materials of the house and uh existing detached accessory structure. A condition has also been added um that the structure addition be compliant with the 20 foot maximum height standard in the R1 district. As was found in the previous variance request in 2001, this lot has several unique characteristics which limits buildable area for an accessory structure. The front property line is relatively narrow, about 45 ft wide at

the right ofway and gradually widens out further into the property. The house itself is situated further back into the lot and the area behind the home contains steep slopes, ravines, and dense woods. Um, also including an eagle nest on the treeine south of the home. A retaining wall wraps around the back of the home, again, further limiting access to the rear yard area for a compliant location behind the principal structure. The septic drain fields and its replacement area are located on the opposite side of the driveway from the existing detached accessory structure, uh limiting uh placement of a second detached accessory structure on that side. It is critical to preserve that replacement area um for the septic as public utilities are not uh foreseen to be brought to this area anytime in the near future. The private well is located on the northwest corner of the home. The applicant did explore adding on to the back of the existing accessory structure towards the rear yard. However, construction at that location would limit access to the well for any maintenance reasons and overall accessibility within the garage. It also require a significant amount of filling and grading due to the slopes in that area. The property contains many mature trees in the front yard, including three rows of mature evergreen trees on both sides of the northern property line. The applicant has indicated that four of the evergreen trees in one of those rows may need to be trimmed uh possibly removed for the accessory structure addition. However, every effort will be made to maintain those four trees so they are not removed. Uh should the trees be removed, there is still adequate screening um from the property to the north with the existing row of trees. The intent of the R1 district is to

maintain a roll character by achieving a visual buffer and distance uh between structures. The proposed location of the addition requires the least amount of trees um and vegetation impact and maintains vegetative screening and a considerable distance yet between uh neighboring structures therefore preserving that rural character in the neighborhood. I will note we have received some additional comments via email this afternoon from uh the neighbors in the area in opposition to the accessory structure in the front of the principal structure um which has been distributed to you. I will also note however there are other properties in the area um also zoned R1 which have detached accessory structures either in the front yard or uh very visible from the road. The applicant's proposal um is not entirely unique therefore to the area and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. So with that, the recommendation is on the screen before you and we do have the property owner present tonight as well for any questions.

Thank you. And since I missed your name, that was Kelly Becker, associate planner here with Cottage Grove. So thank you and sorry about that. Um, if the applicant would like to stand and speak, um, would you like to add anything more or are you good? Oh, someone has questions that he has to answer them, but I think she did. Okay. So, he's saying if there are specific questions for him, he'll come up and address us. So, in that case, does anybody on the commission have questions for staff? I have a question. We're not we're not to the open hearing yet, sir. Thank you.

Does anybody on the commission have any questions for staff before we go to the public hearing? No. Seeing none, um I will open the public hearing, but I also want to reference um Kelly did say it, but we did receive and we do have multiple letters that were received today. Um I don't have addresses on all of them, but we've received one from Darren Husabe. Huab Y. Uh second one from Mike Dornaden. Third one here is from Paul Prebble. Hopefully I'm saying your name correctly. I apologize. So there are three letters um that each commissioner has and that we've reviewed and will be entered into public record. So with that, I would now like to open public hearing. Um if you would like to speak for or against this application, you may step up to the podium now. Please state your name and address for the record. Um and we will limit comments to 3 minutes uh just to make sure that everyone has ample time to speak. So with that I will open public hearing on this variance application.

Sir, were you wanting to speak on this one? I was. Okay. Please state your name and address for the record, please.

I'm Paul. So one of the letters is mine, but I didn't think I was going to be here. I just got in off of a flight, but I was able to make it. And I wanted to make an appearance and and say what I have to say. If I run out of 3 minutes, you can just stop me. But um I'm here to formally oppose the requested variances. My wife and I have owned our property for over 20 years. We were drawn to the neighborhood because it's of its consistent character which is defined by the architecture style of the homes, established setbacks and cohesive aesthetics that has been preserved over time. The pro the proposed construction of a 1600 plus square foot garage in the front yard would materially alter that character due to its size and location. structure would be highly visible and inconsistent with the established development pattern, thereby diminishing the visual harmony of the neighborhood and potentially impacting the surrounding property values. In in addition, the requested varian raises significant concerns regarding the impact to adjacent natural features. The proposed location of the structure would place it within proximity approximately 10 ft of my mature spruce tree line. Construction activity including excavation in such close proximity poses a substantial risk of damage to the root system and overall health of these trees which have been an established and valuable component of the landscape for over two decades. I would also like to emphasize that the objection is not to the construction of the access accessory building itself. The property owners David and Mel have been valued neighbors and I do not oppose their desire to construct a garage. Rather, my objection is specifically to the proposed front yard placement and the need for multiple variances to accommodate. When I

purchased my property, I anticipate the possibility of constructing an accessory structure in the future. Accordingly, I considered the placement of existing utilities including well and septic system to ensure that any future improvements could be completed in compliance with applicable regulations without requiring a variance or compromising neighborhood aesthetics. Similarly, other property owners within the neighborhood who have constructed accessory buildings in recent years have done so in a manner consistent with the established standards and overall character of the community. Furthermore, I've spoken with nearly all property owners on Kimble Circle. Those whom I have spoken with expressed opposition to the proposed location of the structure that not to the construction of the garage itself. For the reasons stated above, I respectfully request that the planning and zoning committee vote to deny the variance as currently proposed and encourage David to consider alternative locations or designs that are consistent with the existing character and development standards of the neighborhood.

Thank you. Mr. Privilege, can you say your address for us too, please? Uh, I am the mine is 10176 Kimbro on the north neighbor. I'm on the northern line. So, David and Mel are here and we're right there. Perfect. Thank you so much. We appreciate your time. That's all I have to say. I had to get back to the No, I have a question. Okay. Please come up to the podium and state your name and address for the record. And if you have a question about the specific application, yes, but this is this isn't a forum to argue with other comments. No, it's just I'm curious because he didn't saw the the presentation that Kayie did. So, I saw the total packet that was put together though. Yeah, but

ma'am, if you have a if you have a comment or a question on the actual Okay, thank you. Sorry. That's okay. No, that's okay. Thank you. Does anybody else have any uh comments or questions about this particular Okay, go ahead. Please state your name and address for the record, please. My name is Jake Larretz, 10100 Kimbro Circle. Thank you.

Um, with somebody that's also got a property with septic issues, drain field being in the way, slopes, I I support their their planning, it sounds like they're going to do everything they can to to not disrupt any wildlife or, you know, wildlife nests or or any trees. Um, sometimes you're stuck. you don't have much of an option where you got to put stuff. It sounds like they're doing the right thing to try to try to find a spot that it works. So, that's all I have. All right. Thank you for your time. Does anybody else have any uh anything they want to say for or against the application? Is it time that I should speak or No,

if you want to say something for or against your application, that's fine. Yeah. If you want to just I just want to address That's fine. Yep. Go ahead. Please just state your name and address for our written record, please.

Uh my name is David Lincoln, 10200 Kimbro Circle South. Um I think Paul brought up uh a few points which he had written in his letters which are I think very valid points in general. However, he didn't spend the time and I spent time, you know, with the city's plan review looking over everything to make sure that there wasn't another viable way to do it. Um, unfortunately, there's not. If uh if this doesn't get approved, then we won't be able to put an alternative uh um shed there. There's a reason why it was approved the first time. Um while we're asking for two variances essentially the first variance was already approved and I feel like given the fact that none of the circumstances have improved since then and in fact in some sense have gotten worse because the garage structure was built uh and which limits us even more. Um uh there's there's no real reason in my mind why it wouldn't be approved the second time. I understand that we are going to be uh encroaching closer to our property line uh than before, but it it still is our property line. Um we are we're not moving on to his lot uh or anything like that. We uh talked with Kelly in the city is like what is our minimum? What is our maximum? um we're having to ask for a minimum just to make sure that we're within uh allowable limits, but it's very likely uh that we're actually going to be uh uh have a larger distance from the property line than what we're proposing at this point. Um, additionally, the concern with the mature trees, I think to be quite frank, is nonsense. Um it's uh we're trying to preserve all the trees that we can. Uh Paul has gone through and pretty much clearcut his entire property. Uh, and so us, you know, my wife and I trying to

preserve everything that we can, I think we have two legs that we're standing on pretty firm with that one. And regardless, um, we're not even removing, there's actually three lines of pine trees. Uh, two staggered ones that are planted over on Paul's side and an additional one that's planted over on our side. That being said, we're trying to preserve even the ones that we have on our side, which, you know, that being said, we're 30 ft from his uh tree lines. There's no pine tree on the planet that has a root system like that. Uh, additionally, uh, building a garage like this is not a full foundation, which means we're not clear cutting down uh, and digging out roots and stuff like that. We dig uh just you know 12 inches into the the lowest part of the earth uh put in our our slab on grade foundation and build on top of that and nothing really gets harmed. The only reason we have to modify some of the trees is just to make sure that they're not rubbing on the on the side of the garage and the trees can continue to grow up and above it. Uh one we might actually have to remove the other day the top of it was actually rotten and fell down. Uh, but we're even going to try to preserve that one if possible. So, I don't know if there's anything else I need to address, but I think I covered it. So,

sounds good. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Just hold on one second. Are there any other audience members who would like to speak for or against the application during the open public hearing or not open public hearing, sorry. All right. Seeing none, I'm going to close the public hearing. Now is the time for uh commissioners, if you have questions, um now is your chance. Commissioner Bot,

I do have a question on the street rendering that was shown in the application, but when I look at the site plan, is there a are you going to build an additional driveway for the new construction? Because the site plan mentions an driveway. Are you asking Kelly or are you asking the owner? I think any anyone can take this question. It's not particular to the owner.

I can address uh yes, the applicant does have uh a driveway approach shown um to garage doors facing the um right of way. Uh that would be reviewed with a building permit. Um currently we have a 20ft setback to the property line for the garage as well. Um so a temporary approach um such as gravel or uh pavers which can be easily removed would be um a viable option at this point. Um should the chode change in the future um asphalt would be permitted at that location.

I mean when I look at the picture in one of the pictures I do also see the trees in front. So would they be at that point would would they come in picture for removal? And maybe I need to clarify your question. Okay. Um are you referring are you're asking a question whether or not the trees are going to have to be modified in the future for the driveway or if you're going to build a driveway, would that then entail removal of the trees? No, not at all. So, the way the property line goes, uh, I don't know if there's a basically a Is there a way to show the

the actual lot line? Ah, there. Perfect. So, where the lot line goes around the trees, you can kind of see how the trees have a belly. So, they start on a corner and then swing out and go back. The driveway would kind of follow that, but they would actually be outside of that farther. So there'd be some green space before you get to the trees and then it would just widen off into the into the kind of swing over into the the garage door, but the trees would all be maintained. Okay, thank you. Any other questions for the applicant or for Kelly? Okay, Commissioner Seekman. This is a question for Kelly, I think.

Okay, it's okay. So, Kelly, in this little uh development, are there other properties that have more than one accessory uh building on it? Uh yes, Commissioner Seekman, you can see the property to the north does have two accessory structures. Uh those are behind the principal structure. Um and they are within a uh permitted uh total square footage allowed in that district. And are they viewable from the street when you're standing kind of in the center of the culde-sac? I believe include the picture in there. Um I believe the property owner has supplied a photo of the view from the road.

Can I bring it up or Yeah. Okay. Okay. These are pictures from a little farther away and a little closer up. You can see it's a pole barn. Uh, and you know, their complaint, uh, this is actually Paul, the one that was here. His complaint is that it's an eyes sore, but I would argue that even though his garage is technically compliant, it's off to the side and behind, and clearly from the from the road, you can see it the whole the whole way, but there's a couple of pictures there. Okay.

Okay. We can we can take your word for that. Um, I think that Kelly did touch on too and had some pictures in her presentation that there were other structures um in the immediate area that were were before the principal structure. Correct. You I think if you could go through your pictures. So yeah, so there's a there are some examples of those structures. Okay. Um closer to the road than the principal structure. And in this picture on the right hand side, um the one that's furthest back, do you know the size of that that uh accessory structure? uh in the back there. Um yep. So we did review that earlier today. The the larger building in the back is about 1,600 square feet and the smaller building in the front is about 800 square f feet.

Okay. So the larger one be would be comparable to the proposed one in this proposal about the size. Uh combined together those would be comparable to the proposed size. All right. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions? Yes. Uh, yes, Commissioner Madison. Thank you. My my question is, was there any objections to the original variance when it was requested if there's any history of that? I don't know. Uh, I'm unsure of that. We would have to go back and and check the record.

Okay. Any other questions? I think I just wanted to make a comment about a previous variance if there was any. I mean, it was approved, so we have to go with the that it was approved, right? Emily wanted to weigh in on that. Maybe I saw you.

That's okay, Madam Chair. Commissioners, I was just going to indicate to Kelly's point. So, it was reviewed and approved obviously at the time, Commissioner Madison. Um, we would have to go back and review the meeting minutes to better understand some of the questions or concerns that might have been presented. Um, however, none of those were outlined in the in the staff report at that time. All right, last call for any questions from the commission before I would look for a motion. Okay, seeing none, I'll look for a motion on the application. Madam Chair, I make a motion to approve uh based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report.

Thank you. I have a motion from Commissioner Steckman to approve subject to the stipulations in the staff report. Do I have a second? Second. Second from Commissioner Woodman. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.

Opposed say no. Motion carries seven to zero. Our next application will be presented by our senior planner Samantha Puret. It is the Hoenstein Cannabis Warehouse conditional use permit application 2026-014. Thank you. Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission. Tonight, Carl Hoenstein has applied on behalf of Hoenstein Real Estate A for a conditional use permit to operate a low potency hemp edible warehouse and wholesale facility on 95th Street. Um, currently Mr. Hostein and Honest operates as Honstein's distribution, a wholesale distributor of domestic and specialty beers on the site. The property and business must comply with city code 11418, which is our cannabis ordinance. The business will be at least a thousand feet from other cannabis and low potency hemp edible establishments and will meet all of the other buffer requirements found in the code. The applicant and the property meets all of the applicable standards of the city code for low potency hemp edible uses. The Office of Cannabis Management has been overseeing the enactment of statute 342 as approved by the legislature in 2023. The applicant has been warehousing and wholesaling low potency hemp edibles on site as allowed by previous state rules. New statutes require low potency hemp edible businesses to obtain state licenses and local approvals. The applicant has obtained state lensure as notified to the city by the office of cannabis management. Businesses must also meet local zoning codes and in Cottage Grove obtain a conditional use permit and local registration. Um, now that the state has issued its license, the applicant may continue

their operations on site as they work through these conditional use permit and local registration processes. With that, the recommendation is on the screen for you. The applicant is also here to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to add anything to the presentation? Nope. I'm getting ahead. No, thank you. All right. Then with that, I will open the public hearing. If anybody in the audience would like to speak for or against the application, now is your time to do so. Please step to the podium. State your name and address for the record. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Do any commissioners have any questions for staff or the applicant? I am seeing none. With that, I will look for a motion. A motion to approve subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report.

Thank you, Commissioner Britain. I have a motion to approve. Do I have a second? I second. Okay. Second from Commissioner Bot. All those in favor signify by saying I. I.

I. Opposed say no. Motion carries 7 to zero. Our next application is a zoning amendment and preliminary plat for Geneva Meadows second edition cases ZA 2026-010 and 2026-010. And this is with Max Ericson presenting for us. Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission. Lenar has applied for an approval of zoning amendment and a prelim preliminary plat uh for a development to be called the Geneva Meadows second edition. Uh this request includes a single parcel which is 13.14 acres. The parcel is currently zoned R1 row residential and the applicant is proposing to reszone the parcel to R3 single family residential um and plat 23 single family lots. The parcel is located at 8159 Geneva Avenue South uh which is south of 85th Street South and west of Geneva Avenue South. Uh it is located along the St. Paul Park and Cottage Grove City municipal boundary. The site is currently a rural residential lot uh with one residence uh which is um on private well and septic. There currently exists a gas pipeline easement that intersects the northern portion of the property. Um the site is currently accessed by Geneva Avenue South uh from 85th Street to the north. Uh Geneva Avenue South is a private drive within the city right ofway. um which also services uh 8701 Geneva Avenue South and other development u undeveloped property

to the south. Uh as Geneva Avenue uh private drive crosses the St. Paul Park Cottage Grove municipal boundary um there's an active joint powers agreement between the two cities um which exists to provide uh the right of way for Cottage Grove to maintain the ability uh to provide access to 5 uh 891 and uh 8701 Geneva Avenue South. The applicant is proposing to reszone the parcel to R3 with a density of 2.08 units per acre. This is consistent with the future use of the property being lowdensity residential uh in the 2040 comp plan and density requirements uh for the requested zoning. The proposed plat consists of 23 single family lots which intends to meet the zoning district standards of the R3 zoning district. The existing home at 8591 Geneva Avenue South will be included uh in this development as a remnant parcel. This proposal will create a mix of 65 foot to 75 foot lots which are consistent with the R3 zoning standards. There are eight outlots uh that have been proposed with this development. Um two of the outlots A and H will serve the development storm water needs. Uh as per city code, these two outlots will be deed to the city for maintenance of the stormwater features. Storm water plan has been reviewed by the city uh and a plan review memo has been issued to the applicant. Uh a final storm water plan will be submitted uh with the application of the final plat. Uh there are five outlots that have been proposed to incorporate the pipeline easement uh and the remaining wooded tract which borders the feld addition subdivision to the north. Um as a developer uh does not desire to implement an HOA. This area has been found to be impractical to

maintain um as unmaintained land within the development. Um the developer is working with the adjacent land owners of the feld edition to the north and will deed these outlots to the adjacent land owners. Um as these outlots are in separate subdivisions, they may not be combined. So a deed restriction will be required uh for each outlot to maintain that they remain under common ownership uh with the adjacent feld edition lots should they ever be sold. Uh this is similar to uh what was approved for Summers Landing fourth edition in 2020. uh where small area uh outlots were adided to adjacent land owners. City code requires 10% of land to be dedicated as park space. Uh as a city uh parks and trails plan does not in indicate uh a planned park area within this parcel. Uh no outlaw may be granted as park dedication. Uh and cash in the physical dedication uh is required. Primary access to this development will be from Summit Avenue which is currently being constructed in St. Paul Park as part of Geneva Meadows first edition. Uh this development will consist of one road with a culde-sac to be known as Geneva Court. U a 5-ft sidewalk will connect to Gene Geneva Meadows First Edition uh sidewalk system. Um to prevent through traffic, uh the developer will remove a segment of the existing Geneva Avenue uh private drive from 89 or 8591 Geneva uh Avenue South and the new connection to Summit Avenue. Um 8591 will continue to utilize Geneva Avenue South connected to 85th Street as a private drive. And the developer will preserve the remainder of Geneva Avenue uh south of Summit uh which services

8701 um and will remain as a private drive within the rightway. Uh as a roadway connection will be through St. Paul Park. Sewer and water will also be serviced by St. Paul Park. Uh a joint powers agreement is being coordinated with uh staff to provide for sewer and water of the uh new 22 or 22 new lots of St. Paul Park from St. Paul Park. The remaining remnant residents of 8591 Geneva will continue to utilize a private well and septic. Um water and sewer will be stubbed to this property to provide a future connection uh should this resident um choose to do so. Lenar is proposing to meet city code with all required lot trees. All lot trees are required to remain outside of the public rightway. Uh as boulevard trees are no longer allowed. A few trees will be planted inside the rightway within outlot A to ma maintain curbside appeal. Uh these will be approved by the city forester. Uh as storm water is currently being reviewed. Uh this may change final grades uh which may affect tree placement. A final landscape plan will be provided uh for the final plat. As part of city code requirements, the applicant has provided a tree inventory and preservation plan for this development. The applicant is proposing to remove 2,111 qualifying tree inches defined in city code. Per city code the developer is required to provide mitigation for 583 of these qualifying inches uh as plantings or in cash or cash in lie of uh per city code the developers required um or allows for per city code the developer the I'm sorry

city code allows for landscape plantings to be credited towards tree mitigation as major developments take up large amounts uh of space which limit three planting areas. Uh the applicant has provided mitigation in the form of landscaping for all of the 583 in worth of mitigation. As the final landscape plan may change with any additional grading uh new grading changes, the final number may may also change. Uh any mitigation which is not provided in the final landscape plan shall be required uh as cash in lie of any missing inches uh as indicated on the final landscaping plan. Uh there was the developer hosted a neighborhood meeting on April 10th, 2026. Questions and comments pertaining uh to the development included the removal of trees within the area between the pipeline easement and the adjacent residences of the Feld edition. Uh the proposed plan for this area does not include any tree removal um in this area and all those trees will be preserved. uh develop the the the developer is working with the property owners to get this area deed uh to the adjacent residents. Um an additional question which was presented included truck hauling routes for construction activities. Uh St. Paul Park attendee asked whether the truck hauling route would utilize Geneva Metal's first edition truck route uh which goes through St. the city of St. Paul Park on Pullman Road. staff identified that the truck hauling will utilize uh the the least impactful and most efficient route uh which will utilize Summit Avenue uh and Lincoln Avenue uh in Geneva Meadows first, then from 85th Street to Graange Boulevard uh out to Highway 61. Um the indication of a truck route of the the truck route is on screen. Um the developer has shared that a significantly less amount of truck

traffic will occur with this development uh than in Geneva Meadows. First on screen are a couple of examples of home products that LAR has provided that will um maybe in this development. And with that I leave the recommendation before you. All right. Thank you so much. Is the applicant here tonight too or? Oh yes, the applicant. Okay. If the applicant would like to stand up and add anything, we invite you to do so now. Just please state your name and address for the record.

Steve Trosky with LAR, 16355 36th Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota. Thank you, Mr. Ericson. He did a a great job on this. Um I always say this when we're here, but happy to be back in in Cottage Grove. Um 22 new home sites. We're excited about the area. We think it's a great product for the community. Uh we're hearing a lot of good feedback about the area. So, with that, I'm I'm happy to answer any questions you may have about Geneva Meadows second.

Awesome. Thank you very much. If there aren't any initial questions, maybe we'll do uh the public hearing first and then we'll address all questions afterwards. Does that sound okay? Unless anyone has any burning questions right away. All right. Um, let's open the public hearing. If anybody in the audience would like to speak for or against the application, uh, please come up to the podium, state your name and address for the record, and again, we're going to keep you to about 3 minutes. Okay.

Thank you. My name is Karen Hamer and I live at 6123 85th Street, which is the property that they're going to, I don't know, sell sell or deed it to us. And then will they add taxes to that property that the you know to our to the lot because our property is already I mean I'm I'm on disability and I'm having a hard time paying the property tax as it is. Sure. So how much more taxes would it add to the property is what I'm wondering. Okay. Because I'm I'm not sure. I mean, it's kind of useless land because you can't really do anything with it,

but it adds on to my property, of course. Okay. Do you have other comments, too? Typically, we'd kind of take all the questions and then we come back to all of those. No, that that's about it. Okay. That's all I wanted to know. Perfect. And I like to keep the woods, you know, this this behind there. I I like to feed the deer. So, they do come in my they come back there. And there's two that come to my yard every night. And if they don't have food, if I don't have the food out there, they look at me like, "Hey, where's my food, baby?" I mean, like, thank you. Thank you for your comments. I've got your question and we'll address it after everyone has a chance to speak. Thank you. Are there any other audience members who would like to speak for or against the application?

Oh, please come up to the podium and state your name and address for the record. My name is Amanda. Can you please wait until you're Cuz sorry, I know, but it's recorded for the record, so you have to stand up there and smile. Thank you.

My name is Amanda Parin. I am at 6177 85th Street South. I'm not sure if this is the right place to say this. Um, but have you guys considered the speeding on that road? I'm like, development fine. We're not going to change that. It is already a racetrack on that road. If anybody has driven down, it is a straight shot. There are no stop signs with 66 homes going in St. Paul Park and now these 23 here. Um we are right on the end next to the um refinery building. We have even offered our driveway to the police. We've spoken to St. Paul Park. We've spoken to Cottage Grove. Multiple phone calls. Um, so if you guys could just keep that in mind when you're doing your planning, um, start to do something because it is a it's a safety hazard. 65 miles an hour, those motorcycles, everything. So, thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Anybody else in the audience wishing to speak for or against the application? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Um, if Mr. I was going to call you Mr. Max. Mr. Ericson would like to come back up to the to the podium um and address the questions regarding the taxes and the speeding on the road. Yeah. Yeah. Uh Mad Chair, um I might defer maybe to Emily. I don't I'm not unsure about the tax. I'm not sure how that's determined that's a county level or

Madam Chair, commissioners. So the value will be determined by the county um for that area. What I will say, however, is it is encumbered by an easement and I do understand that the county will take that into consideration as they determine the value of that particular area. So, as it pertains to uh the the tax overall for the lot, um I would be cautious to say, but likely it would be minimal um given the incumbrance of that easement. However, I will say again, it is up to the county assessor to determine that value. Okay. Thank you,

Madam Chair, members of the commission. Uh, in terms of the speeding, staff have reached out to the police department. Um, police sergeant has gotten back to us with um some information that they had forwarded. Um, so our traffic cars are aware that there is additional speeding. Um they've added it to uh that stretch has been added to their uh speed data collector list. So they're going to try to track more of that and see what's going on over there. Um they know they have a few uh speed uh signs, but we're only limited to a few that are being used all over. So intermittently u they're going to be used on there as well. Um and then uh they've indicated that they've also forwarded this to uh St. Paul Park PD uh which also patrols that as it's uh right on the uh boundary as well. So

okay, thank you very much. Um with that, do any of the commissioners have any questions for staff? Go ahead, Commissioner Bot. So uh this is regarding the access uh to the construction. I don't see that um the neighboring area is built. The Genova, sorry, Geneva Meadows first edition is not built yet. It looks like an empty place right now. So would those Lamar Avenue and Summit sorry Lincoln Avenue and Summit Avenue are they going to be built first so that these uh plots can be built at the same time?

Yeah, Commissioner Pat. Um yeah, so this we're uh one of the one of the requirements is we're not going to allow uh the use of the Geneva Avenue stretch as part of construction parking. Um so they will be using the Geneva first uh roads uh to get access to this new area. Um and I believe that is under construction as as as we speak. Um, I can forward it to the developer uh to see what stages they're at with uh with the first as well. Okay. Thank you. I mean, in the pictures, I couldn't make out that whether it's under construction or not. Thank you.

All right. Any other questions, commissioners?

I have a couple comments. Um, this is my neck of the woods, too. I live on 80th 85th Street as well, and the speeding is definitely an issue. I actually before I was on planning commission came to a city council meeting and stood up there and was terrified. But it is it's a it's a humongous problem and so I appreciate that some conversations have already been started. Um but that's something that I'm pretty passionate about too for 85th Street. So thank you for coming and and using our public hearing to to bring that to our attention too. So um and then I do know since it is my neck of the woods they are cons they're in the process of constructing those roads um through Geneva first right as you the lingo as you call it. So um it's it's in process. So just from what I see um with that are there any other questions for staff or for the applicant?

All right if not I would look for a motion. Motion to approve uh subject to the uh conditions recom uh conditions laid out. Thank you. Commissioner Bot has made a motion to approve subject to stipulations in the staff report. Do I have a second? Second. Second. Commissioner Woodman. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed say no. Motion carries 7 to zero. Our last application tonight is for quick trip on Highway 61. This is a preliminary plat case 2026-013. Uh what is SP again? Sorry.

Site plan.

Site plan. Thank you. Site plan 2026-013 and conditional use permit 2026-013. This is also with senior planner Samantha Peret presenting. Yes. Thank you. Good evening again, Madam Chair, members of the commission. Quick Trip has applied for a preliminary PLA site plan review and conditional use permit to construct a convenience store with regular and diesel canopies at the corner of Manning Avenue and Highway 61. The property is owned by Quick Trip, which they purchased in January 2025 and is a vacant 30 acre site that was once used for crop farming. The property is zoned B3 general business and is guided commercial in the 2040 comprehensive plan. This property has been guided as commercial um since at least uh the year 2000 with the 2020 comprehensive plan. The applicant had a preliminary plat prepared to dedicate the right of way for Manning Avenue and 114th Street on the north side. Mindot has requested 95 ft of rightway be dedicated along Manning Avenue. The final plat will need to be updated to show this 95 ft as the submitt showed 93 feet from center. MDOT is planning for future pedestrian trails to be located here within the right of way of man Manning and Highway 61. The city requires 20 ft of rightway to be dedicated on 114th Street to the north because it is designated as a major collector in our comprehensive plan. 60 ft of right ofway was already dedicated with the development of the church and the single family home to the north. The required right of way for 114th Street is uh depicted on the plat. The applicant proposes to use approximately 10 acres of the 30 acre site for the convenience store development. The convenience store, canopies, and accessory shed will all

exceed required setbacks from the rights of way side and rear property lines. And for uh these standards are found in the motor fuel station and B3 district requirements. A private driveway will be installed onto Manning Avenue for sight access and turn lanes will be installed for turning movements. The location of the driveway has been reviewed by MDOT for separation from the Highway 61 intersection, sight lines, and compliance with the MDOT access management manual. There will be four driveway entrances off of the main driveway entrance of varying widths to access the convenience store, the pumps, and truck parking. The driveway will be maintained by the applicant and will not be a public street that will be dedicated to the city. City code requires a total of 50 parking spaces for this use. The applicant has proposed 92 total spaces including surface stalls, truck parking, and stalls at uh fuel pumps. Buildings in business districts must be composed of at least three different class one or two materials and be at least 65% class one materials. There will be two varieties of brick and glass, both of which are class one materials on the convenience store. The columns of the fuel canopies must be constructed of class one materials. Proposed landscaping on site meets city code requirements, including the number of trees and shrubs. The numbers were calculated using the disturbed area of the site, subtracting out the area below the high water line of storm water basins. The yard area between the front property line along Manning Avenue back to the parking lot shall entirely be solded. the a 15 foot wide sod strip shall be installed around the entire

parking lot in driveway access. The remainder of the area outside of that 15 foot wide strip may be seated. No tree mitigation is required because less than 40% of the existing trees on site will be removed. No plantings shall be planted within the public rights of way. Uh updated landscaping plans that show no plantings in the rights of way shall be submitted prior to the building permit consideration. The applicant has proposed two monument signs on the site, one along Manning Avenue and one along Highway 61. The sign along 61 would have space for future development on the remainder of the parcel and is considered a joint monument sign. Joint monument signs are allowed per code with an administrative conditional use permit. This ACUP will be reviewed during the building permit phase. Joint monument signs are limited to 70 total square feet of copy for all users. An updated sign package must be submitted prior to a building permit approval to show that the copy on the joint monument sign meets this 70 square ft maximum. Dynamic displays are also proposed on both monument signs. The dynamic display is limited to 24 total square feet on a property. Therefore, the updated sign package must also include a reduction of dynamic signage to a total of 24 square ft across the entire property. They have also proposed wall signage on the store and canopies, and the wall signage does meet all code requirements. Lighting on site will be comprised of parking lot poles, lights under the fuel canopies, and down lights around the convenience store. All lighting on the site will meet city code standards and will not exceed a half a foot candle at property lines. The project is proposed to meet surface water management standards established

by the state watershed district in the city. Storm water will be collected and treated in a new storm water basin on site. And this basin will serve the development area and some of the adjacent undeveloped natural areas. Any future development on the remainder of the site must add storm water infrastructure to accommodate their additional imperous surface. Drainage along the Manning Avenue and Highway 61 rights ofway in the ditches will remain in those ditches. The property is located outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area or Musa and will use private well and septic. Wells and septic systems are permitted by the Minnesota Department of Health and Washington County respectively. Verification of well and septic approvals and plans shall be submitted to staff at the time of building permit application. Title 1145 of city code lays out specific standards for all motor fuel stations in the city. The use will meet the required setbacks, building heights, and landscaping standards. No light banding is allowed around the canopies, and an updated sign package without the light banding of round canopies shall be submitted prior to building permit approval. The convenience store and the canopies will be screened from the residences across Manning Avenue with vegetative plantings. The residences are also separated by the distance of the width of the right ofway setbacks of the houses from Manning Avenue and some residences also have established vegetative screening on their properties that screen the quickrip property. As noted earlier, the applicant owns the entire 30 acre parcel, so future development may occur on the site. Uh if a if future development requests to split the property, a replat would be required. Future development should use 114th Street for access. If the private

driveway is extended for access, it may hook up into 114th Street and Mandot does need to review all turning lanes added on Manning Avenue and any future uses on this pro property. The future development would be responsible for costs to improve 114th Street and improvements on Manning Avenue, including those turn lanes I mentioned. Future development must meet all city codes and obtain all proper permits prior to establishment. We did receive a one email comment earlier today that was at your chairs this evening. Um, with that I am right leaving the recommendation on the screen before you and the applicant is here to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you very much. If the applicant would like to stand up, state your name and address for the podium or for the podium for the record at the podium, please. Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Chair and commissioners. Lisa Watson, 9900 Delidge Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55425. Um, as Sam presented, um, we, this would be our second opportunity in Cottage Grove. Um, our first one will be complete in this upcoming year. Um, but appreciate this opportunity. This is our second opportunity to present uh, a full-size Gen 3 Quick Trip store. Um, opportunity to provide 25 to 40 new jobs. um obviously a new opportunity for um customers in this southern metro um that has a gap in the coverage and we look forward to being at the second store as a part of your community.

Thank you very much. With that, I will open the public hearing. If there is anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application, now is your time to do so. I'm seeing none. With that, I will close the public hearing. Um, are there any questions from commissioners for either staff or the applicant? I don't see any. I think this this particular one here for this quite trip, I mean, we've seen one before. They're always very thorough. Um, I don't have any questions. So, I think it's a great application. I think it's it's nice that there's room to expand. More things could be on that corner. Um I will reiterate to what Samantha said. We did receive the letter that she talked about and we do have that and that will be entered into the public record as well. So um if there is no further discussion or questions, I would look for a motion.

Motion to approve subject to the conditions in the staff report. All right. Commissioner Woodman has made a motion to approve. Do I have a second? Second. Second from Commissioner Canable. Is there further discussion on the motion? All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed say no. Motion carries. Seven to zero. Thank you very much. Our next item on our agenda is the approval of minutes. If anybody has any additions or corrections, speak now. Otherwise, I will look for a motion to approve. Motion to approve. Thank you, Commissioner Britain. Motion to approve. Do I have a second? Second. Second, Commissioner Steman. All those in favor say I.

I. I. I. Opposed say no.

All right. Motion carries. Item number eight is reports and we'll go to the recap of the April 2026 city council meetings with Emily Schmidtz. Madame Chair, commissioners, going back to April 1st, I just had one uh item to note that was on the consent agenda for council to uh review, and that was the comprehensive plan amendment for the Rivera Trails project on the east side of uh Keats Avenue. As you recall, there was a small portion of that uh proposed development on the land use map that was identified um as high density uh and the applicant was proposing uh a lower density across the entirety of the site. Um as in the past, we have typically averaged on these projects. However, the Met Council uh guided us to ensure that uh that land use map completely and accurately met the proposed uh density on that project. Uh so we ensured that that project could continue to move forward and the council did approve that uh comprehensive plan amendment and to date the Met Council has also approved that comprehensive plan amendment. So, uh, that developer will continue to move forward towards a final plat application on April 15th. Just two items to note. Those ordinance amendments that we send your way every year as we continue to try to make sure that our zoning code uh is staying uh up to date was approved by the council as well as the river or the riverbend preliminary and final plat uh down there on Greycloud uh trail creating an additional lot a new buildable uh lot on their parcel for a new home. So the council did approve that and with that uh Mr. Council member Olsen, I will pass it your way for anything to add that perhaps I've missed.

Well, thank you very much. Um, I don't think you missed anything, but there are a couple things that I just want to make the commission aware of. For those who, um, maybe have been living under a rock for the last several weeks, uh, it was announced earlier this month that our public safety director and chief of police, Pete Kerner, has retired from his position. Um, we wish Pete all the best in his retirement. He certainly has served the community well for a good long time. in fact 34 years of service to the city of Cottage Grove, starting as a uh community service officer, cso and working his way up through the ranks of uh regular police officer to sergeant to captain and then ultimately becoming our public safety director and chief of police. Um Pete definitely is leaving a lasting legacy uh that he can be very proud of and one of the things that is part of that legacy is um his dedication to succession planning and developing his team. Pete will be replaced in the interim by um former captain and now interim public safety director Brad Peterson. Uh we're very excited for Brad to take on that position and have no question that uh he will continue to um help the department evolve as it has over the last uh number of years. Um taking many of the things that uh you know former director Willery and then director Kerner have put in place and um putting his own stamp on those things. So the community can be very proud of the work that Pete has done and confident in the work that Brad Peterson will do as our new uh public safety director. I also wanted to mention um

that April is volunteer appreciation month and I think I saw most of you at the volunteer banquet this year at River Oaks. I hope you had a nice time. It's definitely something that we look forward to every year as it is our opportunity to say thank you to all of the people who serve on our various volunteer commissions and in volunteer capacities across our city on a day in and dayout basis. Want to express congratulations once again to our volunteer of the year, Dan Harrison, who serves as the president of the Cottage Grove Athletic Association. Uh Dan's been a friend of mine for a really long time and uh is married to a wonderful lady who I went to high school with. Um he and and his family have done an awful lot for the city of Cottage Grove uh over the years that they've lived here. And Dan was an excellent choice as volunteer of the year this year. We were also grateful to uh honor the group from Basic Needs as the volunteer group of the year this year. And uh basics of course serves the community in a variety of different ways with their thrift store. They also have their free market for people who are challenged with uh food insecurity on a regular basis amongst many many other things that they do to serve the residents of Cottage Grove and South Washington County. So congratulations to them and once again thank you to all of the dedicated volunteers including yourselves who serve the city so well. We very much appreciate that. And of course, uh, I am always available for questions from the commission if there's anything that you wanted to ask or are curious about. Uh, we do have a little bit of business to do before we adjourn the meeting today. But before we get to that, um, I'm going to, uh, obviously open the floor up to you if there's anything else you'd like to discuss.

Thank you very much. Does anyone have any questions for our council member here tonight? Nope. Seeing none. Thank you very much. Perfect. Well, then let's get to the business at hand. You want this one? Yeah. I would like to uh invite Commissioner Canable to join me in front. And why don't the rest of you come down as well? And since we are lucky to have uh another council member in the audience this evening, council member Clawson, I'm going to ask him to join us as well. Come on up. Now, last time it goes.

Hey, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Last time I wasn't able to figure out how to turn it on, so I'm grateful, Jessica. Thank you for your help. Everybody, snuggle in so we can uh make sure we get a nice picture here at the end. Where's Eric? Here he is. Beautiful. Good. Good. Thank you. For those of you who may not be aware, uh, Commissioner Canal, Eric, uh, is leaving the commission. As sometimes happens with our volunteer commissioners, life gets in the way. And, uh, sometimes we find that we have to reorganize our priorities and take care of some things that uh, might otherwise not have been in place when uh, we first joined the commission. and Eric has served our commission proudly since 2019. So, we are extremely lucky that we had him for that stretch of time and uh definitely would like to keep him around and who knows, maybe he'll come back another day when he uh has some more time on his hands. But being that today is his last meeting, I wanted to just uh recognize his service and read a little something from the plaque here that uh he will walk out with this evening. And it says, "This is presented to Eric Nabal in appreciation of your dedicated service to the city of Cottage Grove Planning Commission and your service began in 2019." And uh we'll just say we're going to put it on pause in 2026. We won't say it ends, right? um cuz we just never know. Uh and obviously this is just a small token of our appreciation for the work that you have done over that time and uh we'd love to hear a few words from you about maybe what uh the future holds and uh your thoughts about your time on the commission.

I just want to say a big thank you to everybody. Um staff, you guys have been fantastic in my time up here. Always professional. those reports you give us are accurate and amazing. Uh so thank you very much for that. Um I think some of my core memories will come back from like co when we started talking about that apartment complex and we were here in or on our computers till whatever midnight 12:30 in the morning. That will happen on occasion. That will happen. Um and just all the you know growth that we've had as a city over at least my seven years and I've been here since 92 when I first moved in. So, um, it's just amazing seeing the growth of the community and I was proud to be a part of it.

Well, this is for you and we're going to get a picture here in a minute, but thank you again for all of your hard work and effort as a planning commissioner. I know it's not easy. I know it's not easy all the time, especially when those big thick packets show up and you have to work work your way through those and uh you have to make sure that you're reading all the various nuances of each development. And you're right, our staff does a terrific job. But you've been a great asset to our community and to the commission. And again, we want to thank you. Let's get a great picture here. Can somebody uh snap a pick real quick for us? Happy to. All right. One, two, three. Everybody smile. Don't be afraid. Don't be afraid. Beautiful.

Perfect.

All right. Thank you very much. We'll let you return to your seat for one final piece of business. Thank you, chair. All right. Thank you, Council Member Olsen. Um, we'll miss you, Eric. All right. So, uh we are moving on to we didn't have any planning commission inquiries last month. Uh do we have any requests from the planning commissioners? All right. Seeing none, we will move on to the next item which is adjournment of the meeting. I'm looking for a motion to adjurnn.

Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn for the last time from Commissioner Canal. Do I have a second? A second. Second from Commissioner Madison. All those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed say no. Motion carries. We are adjourned. Thank you.