Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. I'm calling this Monday, September 22nd, 2025 planning commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Tonight's meeting is being conducted both in person and online. Members of the public may attend in person or the public may also watch this meeting online at Burnsville Minnesota. MN burnsvillemn.gov. gov/meings or view us on Comcast channel 16 or 859. The public can also join us on Zoom by going to zoom. us/join. More information is available on our meetings web page and in the agenda. All right, first agenda topic is the adoption of the agenda tonight. Commissioners, any changes to the agenda? Seeing none staff changes.

Can I get a motion? So moved. Can I get a second? Second. All right. All those in favor? I opposed. All right. Moving along on the agenda. Second topic is approval of the minutes from our August 25th, 2025 meeting. Any changes to those minutes? staff changes. Oh, no changes in staff. Can I get a motion to approve the minutes? Motion to approve. Second. Beautiful. All those in favor?

I opposed. Motion is carried. All right, we are through to our third agenda topic, which is a public hearing of an application of DRF concrete construction for a conditional use permit for an open storage lot at 1154512th Avenue South. Being presented by our community development assistant, Kevin Truinski.

Thank you, chair, and members of the commission. Uh, tonight Before you is a public hearing for uh an application of DRF concrete construction for a conditional use permit for an open storage lot. It's at uh 1154512th Avenue South. So you can see the site here. It's zoned I1 Industrial Park and it's also guided as industrial park on our 2040 comprehensive plan. It's surrounded by all industrial uses. Uh to the north and south we have other uh warehouse type uses. To the west is a centerpoint energy site and to the east is a bus garage. So a little bit of background on the site. It was originally platted in 1976 as Riverluff's first edition. Uh it was a subdivision of four lots. Uh the northernmost lots in that were all administratively uh replatted into one larger lot and that's how the site ended up developing with the uh warehouse structure as it is today. Um the applicant DRF Concrete Construction currently is based out of St. Paul. They've indicated to us that they would like to purchase this property and occupy it by the first of next year. Their proposal tonight is for a couple of conditional uses. So, uh they need a conditional use permit for a proposed 7,230 ft open storage lot. and that would be located in the northernmost portion of their site um in the front yard off of 150 115th Street East. They also need a

conditional use permit for 8ft chainlink fence with slats that would be utilized for screening and then additional screening would be provided with uh some additional landscaping. So, I thought I'd show you a site plan right away to kind of give you an idea of what's going on here. So, in the the dark gray area here is the proposed new area. So, this is north on their site. Uh, right in this area is the actual open storage lot that they're uh seeking a conditional use permit for. Currently, their site has access over here and down here. And there's some loading docks along this eastern side. Uh they're looking to construct new loading docks on the northern side of the building, which would then uh improve traffic flow for semis coming through the site. Uh so the it would be a one-way access. They would be entering off of 12th Avenue and then exiting onto the northern street here. There's three proposed access doors into the open storage site itself. um two that would access the actual storage of materials and then the third would go right into a trash enclosure that they're proposing to include within that storage lot. So that's just kind of a a quick overview of what's going on on site here. Um yeah, like I mentioned, those two new dock doors would be on the north side of the building. They would be looking to maintain the existing dock doors on the eastern side of the

building uh for seldom use of their own and then for potential expansion to include a potential additional tenant in the future, but they haven't specified at this time as to when that would be coming. Uh, as far as the materials that they'll be storing, it'll be primarily scaffolding frames, lumber, steel, brick and stone type things. Just general construction materials that they need to have storage for. It's a a pretty standard uh storage situation that we would see in this industrial park district. Uh they have indicated that the truck traffic for their own operation would then primarily be relocated out of the existing parking lot and through that new paved addition on the northern side of the lot. The landscaping on site is going to be a overall a quite a nice enhancement. So they are required to have 25% of the site be landscaped. They're proposing 27% exceeding the ordinance. So, it'll be a mix of sod, shrubbery, and trees. Uh, one thing to point out is that they are required uh 3% of their internal parking area to be landscaped. They currently do not meet that, but as they are not doing any uh changes to the existing parking area, that's legal non-conforming and they do not need to do any updating to that parking area landscaping at this time. So, what they're proposing is three swamp white oaks, uh, six lilock shrubs, and three juniper shrubs, and some Carl Forester grasses. and it'll be an overall enhancement to the site. I'll show you here. The swamp white oaks are going to

be on this would be the western side of the site. Those are going to provide uh some nice screening from the road uh looking in towards that truck loading area and towards the open storage lot. Uh they've got some shrubbery along this northern piece here. that's actually going to be on the outside of their proposed uh chainlink fence with the slats. So, they'll be kind of getting some extra screening there. They'll have the fence that'll provide the required screening and then the shrubbery is going to provide some nice decorative screening of the fence. So, it'll be really nice looking from the road. And then internal to the site is where they'll have the tall grass plantings that will help screen that trash enclosure area. So the fence will go around the open storage lot area as you can see here. And then they've got their access gates within that. This is a sample that the applicant provided of the chain link fence with slats. So you can see it. It looks really nice. And then you can see an example of some uh landscaping plantings on the outside of one of those. So it will overall be a a really nice enhanced landscaping for this site. Parking on site, they are more than sufficient. They are required to have 39 stalls. So the warehouse use would require 13 stalls. The open storage use requires four. and the office would require 22 stalls. We calculated the parking for the entire building. Uh it's just to assume that they would have that expansion that they mentioned of a

potential future tenant. They are proposing having 70 stalls on site. So they're not even close to being over or underparked in this situation. So it actually by rerouting the semi- traffic for their operation into that northern site, it it provides a major benefit to the site since it'll be safer and more efficient to not have the uh higher volume of semis going through that staff parking area. So, yep. Like like I mentioned, they've got the three dock doors and the one drive door on the east side that will remain for potential expansion with future tenants. Some planning considerations is that their overall plan will provide a much safer and more efficient flow to the site. It's extremely compatible with other surrounding industrial uses with outdoor storage lots being very common in this industrial park area. Uh we don't anticipate any adverse impacts to the adjacent properties and it exceeds overall landscaping and parking requirements. So with that, we have our recommendation tonight as staff recommends the planning commission recommend to the city council the approval of the conditional use permit for an open storage lot and chain chain link fence with slats at 1154512th Avenue South subject to the following 17 conditions. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans and as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans as determined by planning staff shall require review and approval by the planning commission and city council. Conditional use permit approvals shall expire one year from the date of city

council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the city council. The city council may extend the expiration date of such approval upon written application by the person to whom the approval was granted. That's basically just to say that they uh will come in for a building permit within a year or they can get an extension with council approval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a letter of credit or cash security in the amount of not less than 100% of the total estimated landscaped value shall be submitted. Landscape financial security shall be held for two full growing seasons. In the event additional parking is needed on the site, the applicant shall work with the city to implement additional staff parking on site. The chainlink fencing shall be black all-weather vinyl coated. Fencing shall be maintained and kept in good condition. If the privacy slats are damaged, broken or degraded, they shall be replaced within a timely manner. Material storage shall not be stacked higher than eight and a half feet. Signage is not permitted on the fence. If any modifications to signage are to occur on site, a permanent sign permit must be obtained. Exterior storage of materials shall not be permitted outside of the approved area. If the approved outdoor storage area is unused for material storage for a period of six months or more, the fence shall be removed upon notification from the city, and a building permit is required for the proposed fence. Access gates shall remain closed for when vehicles are entering or exiting the storage area. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, planning staff shall approve a final fencing plan. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, planning staff shall approve a final

landscaping plan. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, all items from the engineering comment memo dated August 20th, 2025 shall be addressed to the satisfaction of the city engineer. A storm water maintenance agreement will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit and the conditional use permit shall be signed and returned to the planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. With that, this is a public hearing tonight and I can stand for any questions. Thank you, Kevin. All right. Beautiful job. Commissioners, do you have any questions for staff comments? Great presentation.

Thank you, Kevin. All right, with that, I believe it is time to open the public hearing at 6:44. So, if anyone wishing to speak actually, do we pull up the applicant? No. Okay. If anyone wishing to speak to this would like to, you can state your name and address for the record and approach the podium.

Good evening, commissioners. I'm Joe Ratic with Contour Civil Design. Um, I'm here on behalf of DRF Construction, uh, the applicant. Uh thank you for having us here for the conditional use permit. Um we are in agreement, general agreement with the uh conditions proposed tonight. We did want to ask uh the commission to consider a 12t height for storage. Um that just allows the uh end user to store some more materials in that confined space. So other than that, we're generally happy with the uh conditions. Um but we would like for a little more storage capability in that north area. questions. Thank you,

Commissioner Anderson. Kevin, can they does by city code do they have to stay to the 8 and 1/2 ft? Uh, yes. They that is in city code that the storage would have to be to the 8 and 1/2 ft. So, can we amend that by conditional use permit? Uh yes, we we can amend that.

If I can add commissioners, um ordinance requires the product to be 100% screened by fence. So reason why the 8 and 1/2 was added because generally in most cases if you drive past these places, there is a little storage that goes above the fence. That's why we usually do the 8 and 1/2 9 ft. So per code, it needs to be screened by 100%. So, if they want 12 feet storage, the fence would have to go up to probably 10 feet or 12 feet. Um, that's just the way the code is written. So, um, that up to the applicant if they're willing to increase the height of the fence up to 10 ft and we can maybe live a 2T over if you guys are comfortable with that as a commission saying 10ft fence with a twoft overhang. Um, depends on direction the planning commission would like to go with that item. Commissioner,

are there other examples of storage fencing that is exceeds 8 ft that you're aware of?

Yeah. Yes. Um, Commissioner, last year we approved um for United Paper Products or United Packaging Products. Yes. UPI. United Yeah, whatever. Case 24-P27. We approved a fence that was 10 ft high and allowed for storage to go above that up to 12 ft. um because they had some storage of materials. Actually, they want 12 they have a 12 foot fence, I believe, and they have storage materials up to 14 feet. That's what we did to kind of allow for some flexibility. As we know, the intended orange is 100% screening, but it's hard cuz there's always stuff that goes above that fence line. It's no matter what you do. So I like to give a little grace with that. But

so Hamilton, is that something that we approve or it goes back to city staff?

Nope. The planning commission can approve. Sorry, Commissioner. Um the planning commission can amend the conditions of approval to require the applicant to either install a taller. Uh what I would recommend is that the applicant works of city staff to either raise the height of the fence up to 10 ft or um or they can store product up to maybe 10 ft. We'll see, you know, we can talk to the applicant and see what they think about that. I could work on a condition too in the meantime to bring back to the council here if there's or commission here if there's more questions for the applicant. We also do have a condition in there allowing staff to approve a final fencing plan. So we can work with that as well.

So one of the stated Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I just have probably more of a question for the applicant, but what are the materials that will be above the 10- foot if we approve the 10ft fence? What are two additional feet materials? Anyway, it's really the 12T number that allows us to store three pallets of block. Other than that, we don't anticipate any other materials going beyond that, you know, 8 and 1 half, 9 foot, but that kind of allows us those three pallets. I that would be it. Okay, um was one of the was the 8ft fence listed as one of the conditions?

We had a condition about uh stacking no higher than 8 and 1/2 ft. So that would be the condition that you could amend. Um there's no condition that refers to the height of the fence. Not the this is the height of the material. The applicant states in the approved submitted site plans that the fence is 8 ft in height currently as proposed. That was okay. And the code is 8 ft. Uh the code is for 100% screening. So, it can be as high as they want it to be, but we'd need the 100% screening. That's what we're going for.

Um, not to do math at the day. Can I ask the applicant a question? How many pallets of this do you plan on storing on site? Um, I'll ask David. Um, yeah. Can you come up to the podium, please? Just, uh, have your name and record name and address on record. Hi. Uh, David Jocelyn. Um, sorry, you need my address as well. It's uh 595 Randolph Avenue in St. Paul. Perfect.

Um, we're probably talking maybe 20ish. It fluctuates a little bit. So, a lot of times what this is is like excess materials from construction sites that are coming in and out. We might need to store some stuff temporarily at our yard before we bring it out to our project. So, it would fluctuate a little bit, but you know, I would say like 20 to 20 to 30ish. Um, and we have room behind the fence, so it's not like all of that material would would necessarily need to be stacked right up against the fence. It it'd be depth into the storage area as well. All right. One more follow-up question if you don't mind playing. Christian, are you guys comfortable for 10 foot fence?

Uh, yes. Espe if and if it can be stated that we do have, if you want to call it like a two-ft buffer over that, um, we that would probably be our preference. We don't I don't think anybody wants a giant sky-high fence in there. So, I think that'd be a great compromise. A 10-ft fence with a a twoft grace over it. That would give us everything we needed. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Commissioner Hamilton. Based on code, are there any guidelines of what can be stacked? Are there restrictions at all?

Um, Commissioner, no. There's nothing in code that says it needs stack. This needs to be screened. So that's generally when we have these kind of situations, we kind of just do what we did there.

We kind of negotiate and see what it is. Um my sense as we're looking at the code as an update, I think there should be a little grace with there's always that height that sticks up above that fence. You know, it's just tricky. Um because you people say they don't don't intend to go higher than the fence. You drive by one day and it's higher than the fence. So that's why I usually like to give a little leeway, especially with a conditional use permit, get that flexibility built into there, so we're not constantly have to amend it if they have different product on site. So that's where I feel from a staff perspective, um, not to speak for Kevin here as the project manager, um, that the 10ft fence with a 12T overhang or 12T stacking, I think that's something we could be comfortable with. It's very similar to the what we did for, um, that other project I referenced earlier. Commissioner Allen,

is there a way that we can I'm not opposed to a 10ft fence and 12 foot high material. Is there a way that we can approve this so they don't have to come back here at our next meeting?

Yep. So, what I would recommend here is amending condition uh when you do a recommendation or make a motion um I would make a motion to first I would make a Let me back up here. I apologize everyone. Uh first I would ask the commission to see if there's support for all the commissioners to amend condition 7 to raise that height to 12 ft. Right now it says material storage should not exceed 8.5 ft. So we would raise that and then I would add a condition stating that the fence shall be 10 ft in height. So right now we're going off the site plan. Then it's memorialized in the conditional use permit that the fence is 10.

You said two feet less than the stacking. Is that better?

Uh, I think that's if we go Yeah, I think that's fine. It's consistent with what we did with um the other project the little flexibility and the height of going above it slightly. I think that would be that's fine. 2 feet 3 ft is fine. When I when we get above that 3 ft that's kind of out there. I feel that's not you're not meeting the intent of the ordinance from my interpretation as a zoning administrator, but I think two 3 feet you're meeting the intent. It's only a few pallets that are going to be doing it for the vast majority of the most of the product on site will be screened. One other option we could do is work with the applicant to store the materials closer to the building, you know, so they're not up in front there. So they store the block closer to the building and then kind of taper down as you get closer to the roadway. That's another option, but that's can into the weeds.

So we amend number seven. Yep. To 10 ft or 12 ft. 12t. Number seven was the the height of the storage. Number seven should be amended to state material storage shall not be stacked greater or higher than 12 feet in height. Sorry. Could could I just add in could if could we could we have it stated just up to um that way there there is a chance that we might look at this and just say you know 8 ft's going to be fine and we're not going to push it. So if we just have the flexibility to go up to those heights then we still might go I like that. I think that's a good compromise there up to. So

beautiful. Commissioner has any additional questions for the applicant. Is there any else that wishes to speak to this? All right. With that, I can close the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. Would anyone wish to make a motion? Commissioner Al. Uh I will make a motion uh that we amend condition seven to read material storage shall not be stack shall not be stacked higher than 12 ft. And then we'll add a condition. Was there 17 conditions on this? So it would be condition 18. Yep.

Add condition 18 that says the uh the SC the screen fencing. What is that what we're calling it? the uh screening be no higher than 10 ft. Is that right? Yeah. So, just to clarify, condition 18 would say the screening fence shall be maximum of 10 at a maximum of 10 ft. And that kind of leads to the applicant to kind of figure out how they want to do it. So, they go up to 10 feet, it's 12. If they keep it where it's at, it kind of leaves it leaves them some flexibility. Okay,

thank you for writing that down in the proper manner. So that that's the first motion. It needs to be second and voted and then we Okay, got it. All right, we have a motion on the table. A second. Beautiful. We have a second. All those in favor say I. Opposed. All right, the motion has passed. Now we're on to the next agenda. We want to do one more motion. That's just the motion on the conditions. We want to do one more for the of the actual approval of the item. Got it. Okay. Can I get another motion to approve the item?

Commissioner, I'll keep going. Yeah. So, I move that we recommend to the city council the approval of the conditional use permit for an open storage lot and chainlink fence with slats at 11545 12th Avenue South subject to the uh 18 conditions as we just discussed. Beautiful. We have a motion. Can I get a second? I'll second. All right. All those in favor?

I I opposed And the motion has passed. All right. Thank you, Kevin. On to agenda topic number four. And this is a public hearing of an application of Trumbull Properties LLC on behalf of Chimney Doctor for a conditional use permit to allow for an open storage lot at 14450 Euing Avenue South presented by our associate planner and I'll let her introduce herself. Hi everyone, my name is Kira Chapman. I'm an associate planner here. I've been working here for about four months now. Um and uh I had prior experience working at the city of New Prague for about 3 years and did an internship in Duth. But I just want to say thank you for having me today. I'm excited to be here and present these topics. So item number four um today is an application for chimney doctor for a conditional use permit to allow for an open storage lot at 14450 Yuing Avenue South. So on the left hand side is an aerial image of the property um highlighted in a red um line and then the right hand picture so shows the zoning of the area. It is zoned I3 office and industrial park and it is guided as industrial office um in the comprehensive 2040 plan. Um there are abuing properties to the north and south and east that are similarly zoned and guided. Um and directly west of the property is uh that boundary to Savage um where there are residential lots. Some general overview and history. In 1979 uh Burnscott Industrial PL industrial park plat was platted. Um

that was a subdivision for 21 lots. Um the district is zoned as previously mentioned I3 which allows warehousing, light manufacturing and office uses um in which the applicant currently uses the property. Uh Chimney Doctor moved to its current location in for uh in October 2020. Um this application was brought to or this situation was first brought to staff's attention when there was a a complaint from a resident. Um and then staff investigated it. It was mainly about exterior storage and this application is to get that into compliance. So the proposal is to utilize 20,200 and uh 200 square ft of the rear property for open storage space. Um it would mainly be two different fence types that would be a maximum of 8 feet tall. Uh, one of the chain link or one of the fence types would be chain link with vinyl slats um on the north and south property line. And then there would be solid wood fencing on the far west side of the property. And then to access the property will be a double gate um that's 24 ft wide on the east side and it would store three containers uh 15 delivery vehicles and pallets of masonry. So this conditional use permit is for open storage lots in the I3 district. Um it is al this conditional use permit is also required for chain link fences with slats. Um as required by code, open storage lots must be 100% screened from the ground level. Um and industrial fences with uh must be at least a minimum of 8 ft tall. Uh staff suggested a solid w wood fence on the far west side of the the property to best obstruct view from residential lots.

And here I made an a diagram to kind of illustrate those different fence types. So on the far west side um there is in this pink color represents the solid wood fence that would be installed and then to the north um there would be uh in that blue colored line and also to the south and also blue represents the chain link with final slats and then on the far east side it would be the double gate fence and that would be also chain link with slats. So, in terms of screening, uh, as mentioned previously, open storage lots must be 100% screened, um, and have a minimum fence height of 8 ft. Um, fences must obstruct the view when abudding residential lots and wood fencing is proposed on the web. Did I just press the same one? Oh, no, sorry. Fences must obstruct a view when abudding residential lots. Um, the wood on the west side was best to obstruct view. staff does not have any concerns with the chain link fence because that is a common material type for industrial lots um and is found on neighboring properties. So this proposal does not trigger any additional parking requirements. It will actually free up um and make more available parking in the front parking lot. Vehicles will be started on the far west side of the property which will be in that open storage lot. Um there are currently 19 stalls on the property um which will make it easier for um employees or guests to park at that location. And um and for planning considerations, the proposal meets the findings for the approve for approval of a cup. The proposal meets the intent of the zoning ordinance and comprises a plan. Staff is recommending that the planning commission recommend the city council the approval of the conditional use

permit to allow an open storage lot at 14450 Euing Avenue South subject to the 14 conditions of approval. The subject shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans as amended by the conditions of approval and any significant changes to the plans as determined by the planning staff shall require review and approval by planning commission and city council. Conditional use permit approval shall expire one year from the date of the city council approval unless a building permit has been requested or a time extension has been granted by the city council. The city council may extend the expiration date of such approval upon written application by the person to whom the approval was granted. A building permit is required for the proposed fence. Uh the conditional use permit shall be signed and returned to the planning staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. And prior to the issuance of the building permit, planning staff shall approve a final fencing plan. Fencing shall be maintained and kept in good condition. The slat shall be securely fastened to the fence at all times. The slat slats of the fence become damaged, broken, and or degraded, it shall be replaced in a timely manner. Material storage shall not be stacked higher than 8 1/2 ft, and storage of materials on the containers or vehicles is prohibited. Exterior storage of materials shall not be permitted outside of the approved area as noted in the project narrative dated August 13, 2025. The fence along the western property line shall be 100% opaque solid fence. If the approved outdoor storage area is unused for for material storage for a period of 6 months, the conditional use permit shall become void. A maximum of three storage containers are allowed on site and shall be located at all times within the approved storage area. The access gate shall remain

closed except for when vehicles are entering or exiting the storage area. the placement, movement, and stockpiling of materials in the approved storage area may only occur between 7:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. per city code. Um, that last condition, condition 14, was based off um, city code. I believe it was in terms of construction. Um, we thought that was an appropriate time frame considering that is for construction to reduce or considered quiet hours, especially since it's near residential properties. Um, so I will turn this over to the planning commission for any questions or comments you may have. Thank you, Cara. Commissioners,

I noticed in the overhead there's quite a few uh trucks in that area that'll be the storage area. Will they be there in the storage area too, whether they have materials in them or not? So, you're asking if the the current trucks there will remain there or Yes. Yeah. So, the vehicles that are currently there will remain there. There's actually as of right now some of them are parked on that southern driveway. Um so a lot of those vehicles are parked there but it this having this conditional use permit will um memorialize that to have that parking in that open storage lot. Commissioner, uh thank you for the presentation. Yeah,

the solid fencing on the residential side, the west side, was that proposed by us or was that or and or was it discussed with the applicant or Yeah. So that was recommended by staff um to have a solid wooden fence to best provide that 100% screening especially since um it is abudding a residential property and we do have in our code that we should provide 100% screening and be more mindful of that when you are abuing residential properties. Okay. And it whether it's fence or I should say whether it's wood or some other privacy fence that

we we were recommending solid fencing. Um, I guess it's irrelevant the type of fencing, but we really wanted to make sure that there were no gaps so that it couldn't be seen through or have any debris go through either. Got it. Thank you. Yeah, Mr. Low. Uh, two questions. Do we care like how it looks on either side? Usually got the pretty side out towards the your neighbor. Do we care for that as a as staff? I believe there's something in the city code that states that um the nicer portion of the fence should be facing the exterior. So from like if you were having a neighboring property look at yours, the nicer portion of the fence will be seen on from the outside. Okay. You guys will see that as part of the permitting I assume. Yes.

Okay. Y one more question.

Uh the noise for number 14, is that actually a complaint? No, but we were just trying to think that so part of the conditional use permit is to think of any potential adverse effects and we were just trying to be proactive and include that condition. Um but I mean that's open to discussion if that's something we don't want to include. I if I can add to the curious response um commission um this this item did is response of a complaint um from the adjacent properties residential and so staff worked with the applicant to address it and that's why the wooden fence and other items have come up. There was no noise as part of the complaint. However, as part of the review, we like like Kira said, we like to take a think about what other impacts could be created from such uses. And since we do have in our code hours operation, we thought it would be necessary to kind of carry that over. You know, it's already if the trucks start up before the 7:00 time and they leave to go to the job sites, but it's more or less the delivery of materials on site that we're worried about the beeping and stuff like that of the, you know, forklifts and stuff out there constantly running. It's the concern. Just to add on to that for some clarification.

Yeah. Thank you. Mr. Just like the previous one, are we going to have issues with the fence being at 8 1/2 ft? Is there going to be scaffolding that's going to go beyond that level?

So, in the application, they mentioned in their project narrative that um they would have shipping containers in the back of their property on that west side um along that fence. And those shipping containers are expected to be about 8 and 1/2 ft tall. And the fence is going to be eight feet tall. So you're going to have that six inches potentially visible, but with some of the vegetation already back there and maybe view of the angle, it may not be noticeable.

I'm referring to material that's stacked there like scaffolding and other material that would exceed that height because when I saw the site today, there was I think there was scaffolding that went above the current fence line. Yeah, that is correct. So, um if I can add commissioner um applicant um is here. Can um you add some clarification on the material stacking, please? Public hearing. Oh, we'll wait till the public hearing. We'll open the public hearing then we'll let Jeff speak. Dave, sorry. Get ahead of myself. Commissioners, do you have any more questions for staff? Commissioner Long

just have one question. will probably lead into the public hearing. But I love the wood fence idea since the complaint came from the neighborhood behind it. But I also know that wood weathers quickly and can create an eyesore as much as the stacking. I know that in the ordinance they have to keep it in good condition. But the reality is how without a complaint from a neighbor, how how is that ever really addressed? My concern would be and it will be to the applicant any thought of uh more of a plastic material, fiberglass material instead of wood material. So the the neighbors that initiated the complaint won't call it a complaint about the fence being dilapidated or faded or weather whatever. Um I' I've seen plenty of them. So I would hate to see that happen for the neighborhood behind them. So but that will he can probably answer that when we get to the public hearing. All right, any more questions for Seth? All right, with that, I will open the public hearing at 711 p.m. We have the applicant at the podium. Can you state your name and address for the record?

David Trumble and business or personal address? Go business.

Business 14450 Euing Avenue South in Burnsville. Uh in regards to the scaffolding that will be removed, um there was also some items on top of the um storage containers, which I believe I saw in the the writing that will also be removed. Um as far as the wood fence, um we plan on cedar. Um cedar is a lot more expensive than vinyl, but we actually thought that cedar would hold up better than vinyl. Um, but we're definitely flexible on that. If I can add to commissioners, in my experience, um, not to speak for the applicant, um, the use of wood instead of the composite, composite can chip pretty quickly and especially if that industite fence that it could get damaged easily. Um, depending on the type of composite, there's some of that initial panels that can tip out. Um, I can tell you a pretty good story about a project I worked on in Cottage Grove about composite fencing and some nightmares with it. So, from a staff perspective, I think the wood fence um knowing the proximity and how close it is to the um yard would be a preferred option in this sense um due to the potential damage of a um can't think of another word right now. Other fence methods. The other item I'd like to add is we're planning on having steel posts um rather than cedar posts and for that exact reason that cedar posts have a tendency to rot because of the moisture. So we have metal post and concrete you additional questions for the applicant. Is there anyone else in the team? Oh, sorry. Al,

um, anybody can answer if they want, but have you shown this to the complainant, the plan?

Um, yes, I can respond to that. Um, commissioner, um, the plans were or I should say a notice for this meeting was provided to applicants in the area or the surrounding properties so they're aware of what is going on with the proposed fencing and it should be mitigating the concern. Okay. All right. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak to this agenda topic? All right. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. Turn it over to the commissioners. Any discussion? motion.

Commissioner, go ahead. No, I I didn't hear what she said. We're waiting for a motion. Motion or discussion? Yeah, I have no discussion, but I have no motion either. So, can you can you put the motion on the screen? Yeah, sure. That'll make it a lot easier for us. Not a problem. Thank you. I can go ahead and sh Thank you, staff. Uh, I'll make a motion that staff recommends that the planning commission recommend to the city council the approval of the cup to allow an open storage lot at 14450 Yuing Avenue South subject to the 14 conditions of approval. Beautiful. We have a motion. I'll second. Commissioner Hamilton seconds. All those in favor? I

I opposed and the motion carries. Moving on. Thank you. Agenda topic number five is also a public hearing uh of an application of good good sheeperd Lutheran church and school for a conditional use permit amendment to allow a maximum building height of 33 ft and approval of proof of parking at 151 County Road 42 East also being presented by Miss Chapman.

Thank you. Um, so the application tonight is to discuss Good Shepard Lutheran Church and School for use permit amendment to allow a maximum building height of 33 feet tall and approval of proof of parking at 151 County Road 42E. The picture on the left hand side is just an aerial image of the subject property and the right hand image is the zoning of the property and adjacent properties. Uh the subject property is zoned R1 residential district, single family residential district and is guided lowdensity residential in the 2040 comprehensive plan. There are neighboring properties to the south uh east and southwest that are similarly zoned and guided. And I should also mention that um their neighbors directly to uh their west and south are also religious institutions as well. Um that would be uh Minnesota South District of Missouri Sinnod um and then also um Bin Baptist Church. So the subject property was constructed in the 1970s. Uh Good Shepard moved to the location in 1993 and in 2005 Good Shepard submitted a conditional use permit for a 12,245 square ft addition. This addition was mainly consisted of classrooms just because of that increasing enrollment. At that time they had uh 130 stalls on site and uh or they needed 130 stalls at that time. Um they installed 149. So they had additionally 19 extra stalls that they added despite um that minimum requirement. the building permit um for their most recent addition for that 9,000 uh gymnasium edition was submitted in July 2025

um which consisted of a gymnasium, lobby space, and bathrooms. That 9,500 square 9,574t addition doesn't meet the minimum parking stalls required. Um as such, staff would like to memorialize the proof of parking for 30 stalls. Um and this proposal is also to allow a maximum height of 33 feet tall for the existing sanctuary. Here is a site plan um just showing that uh addition of the property to the south um and south uh eastern portion. Um and you can also see the proof of parking um on the south west portion and then and to the very northwest portion as well. And here's just a highlighted view of that addition. Um, as you can see, there's a gymnasium and then there's a lobby space and a few bathrooms outside of that gymnasium. And in this table, I broke down the calculation of how we got to their required uh minimum parking stalls required for gymnasiums. We calculate from one stall per four persons at maximum capacity. Uh the maximum capacity at uh for the gymnasium was 461 persons which calculates to 115 stalls. Um the existing surplus of parking from that 2005 uh commissioner's permit was 19 stalls. Uh total required um would be 115US 19 which equates to 96 stalls. uh the proof of parking that they submitted with us was for 30 stalls. And so taking into account the existing and the proof of parking, that would mean there would be 179 stalls. And here I just wanted to highlight where that exact proof of parking would be located. Um as you can see, most of that proof of parking would be located to the southwestern portion of that

property extending off an existing parking lot. And here's a rendering um of that elevation view and what you can see of that actual gymnasium addition. Um it may be difficult to see in this picture, but there is quite a steep slope to that southeastern portion of that property. Um and then I will go into height. um to city code 10733 allows structures to increase their height by 50% uh such as church spires um such as that existing sanctuary. When staff looked at it um we didn't think it necessarily looked like a church spire but there isn't anything in our code that specifically defines church spire. Um height is determined by the average elevation from the ground to the highest point of the flat roof. Um the addition for this gymnasium would actually meet this average uh 30 foot requirement even though it has uh the lowest portion of that building would be three and a half 35 and 1/2 ft. Um and but the average itself would be 30. Um so overall this height request is actually just for the existing sanctuary that is 33 feet tall. Um which is considered a legal non-conforming uh structure. The proposed addition meets all zoning code standards. The building expansion is not intended to accommodate additional students or congregation. At this time, proof of parking is sufficient in lie of needing additional parking stalls. Um, and I should also mention that there were alternatives to um reducing parking. That's through uh the DRC review. And then also doing a parking agreement. Um, we did bring that up to the applicant for doing a parking agreement, but they prefer to do a proof of parking. Um, but I should also note that they do have um, not a recorded like parking agreement, but during times

where they know that there may be events that are maybe a funeral or where they know they're going to have a high number of people coming to it, they reciprocate and tell their neighbors um, to use their their parking on site. and they reciprocate that as well with their neighbors. Staff recommends that planning commission recommend to the city council approval of the conditional use permit amendment for maximum building height of 33 feet and approval for proof of parking at 151 County Road 42E subject to the following conditions. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans and as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to the plans as determined by the planning sta staff shall require review and approval by planning commission and city council. All conditions in the previous conditional use permit from 2005 are still in full effect. If more than five parking complaints within 3 months are received regarding parking, the applicant shall construct the submitted proof of parking found in the building permit. The owner shall attempt to avoid utilizing the gymnasium simultaneous sim simultaneously as when service is in session. I should mention that the applicant does not intend to use this at the same time services in session, but we wanted to provide this condition not to prevent them from having that happen, but to encourage it to prevent parking conflicts. The maximum building height shall not exceed 33 feet in height. The conditional use permit shall be signed and returned to the planning staff for recording prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy, a storm water management agreement shall be signed and supplied to staff for recording with Dakota County Recorders Office. In the event that a future building permit is submitted increasing the maximum occupancy of the building, the proof of parking shall be constructed as part of the building permit submitt. In the event the proposed proof of parking

does not support the proposed use of the property, the owner shall enter into a cross parking agreement with the neighboring property prior to the issuance of a building permit. That is all I have and so I will turn it back to the planning commission for any comments or questions you may have. Thank you, Mr. Chapman. All right, commissioners. Uh, Commissioner, I'll clarify the gymnasium itself is a flat roofed building, but because of the typography of the lot, some of it exceeds 30 ft.

Yes, that is correct. Um, so but the overall we calculate the height of that building as the average of those elevations. So even though they have a dip into that 30 35 1/2 ft, the average itself is 30. So it is meeting code requirements. This is mainly for the sanctuary that is not meeting that requirement. Mr. um for you mentioned this is uh this came about as part of their July 2025 permit application. Correct.

Uh is the application still in process or has it um and the reason I ask is that some of these conditions were tied to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy rather than the issuance of the building permit. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner. Yeah, so that's a good question. We did approve a building permit, but we made a condition that we would not um allow a certificate of occupancy until the conditional use permit is approved. Um that was just to get this pro this project going and to make this process um faster for them, especially since it is getting to the colder season that time of year. That's that's where I was headed. Thank I'm glad to hear that. Thank you.

Good question. Could you clarify just the proof of parking doesn't mean today, but that could be added on later. That's that's what that means, correct?

Yep. So, proof of parking, so by recording this with the county, if there are, and we made a condition about this, if we receive, I think it was five complaints over 3 months, then they would have to actually initiate and execute that proof of parking. So, we're just having them memorialize this in case that were to happen. Um we mainly from a planning perspective we didn't know well we wanted to keep this in a condition just in case maybe this was sold later down the road road and uses may change. Um we just wanted to do that to protect whoever is owning that property.

Okay. And it but so proof of parking means there's land available on their property to expand their parking if so needed. Correct. Right. And and a preliminary design on here's how we're going to get x number more stalls. Yes, correct. Got it. Thank you. Yeah. Continue. Continue. One moment. Uh, Commissioner Low. Yeah. Um, I assume there's been no complaints to date.

Uh, I have not received any complaints. Not that I'm aware of. And in their project narrative, they seem to have sufficient parking already during the school time and also during service. Um, but this is just as mentioned previously in case this changes hands or there are future complaints just because of that addition. Do we know if they are crossing other parking lots at the same time today? Like I'm curious how busy it really is at peak times, right? Is are they always utilizing the other ones today? Yeah, I mean that's a good question. I believe the applicant is in the audience today. They can always answer that question and elaborate on that as well. All right. Thank you. Yeah,

Commissioner Anderson. I would really watch the parking because I know of a situation not in Burnsville where there's a gymnasium and a church and the demand for the gymnasium at the time the church is in session is significant. So you just make sure that you are aware of that.

Yeah. No, I appreciate that. In in the project narrative, they did mention that it was only going to be used for um their athletic team for their school. Um so it was mainly intended for their existing school. Um but I mean we can also ask the applicant as well but it's not intended to increase the number of students or any outside groups. The demand for the building might exceed the desire right now and just to have their own teams in there.

Sure. to add on to that comment. Um, Commissioner, that is a good question comment. And as part of approval, that's why we request the applicant to provide a narrative and a plan on how they're going to utilize that space. Um, and in the narrative, they state that they're not going to run it concurrently. That document's approved by this body and then the city council. So, we have that document to fall back on saying your approved submitt document state you're not going to use these at the same times. In the event that does happen, we do have a fallback ne mechanism. We had a similar concern with the other applicated print. What was that one? We Eden Baptist.

Eden Baptist. Very similar concern. You're 100% that is usually what happens. And so that's why we have like to have that narrative with that site plan or something to fall back on in the event that doesn't happen. Commissioner,

just a clarification, the five complaints of parking complaints that would trigger it to be reviewed. Who who's where do the complaints go? Is that police department their building planning? I mean who and how do you keep track of who the five complaints? So I can follow um Commissioner Long. So generally what we do is on these applications like this once a year we reach out to the police department and we um see where the complaints are at. Also, we have a monthly DRC meeting where we do bring up these items where we identify DRC again is development review committee where we do talk about these items and so we do keep track on that way. So, we have a couple other projects in the community where we do reach out monthly and ask if there's been any parking complaints so we can track these standards. But a lot of times what happens is the applicant will put in the proof of parking before we ever get complaints. they're they know their site and if it's not working, they usually work on installing the proof of parking or they go and get the cross parking easements. To my knowledge, um not to speak for the applicant when they get up here, they have previously stated that um they do hold some bigger events where parking is an issue, but they have those handshake agreements and it goes vice versa for those churches in that general area. So, they all kind of work together. Right. With that, I think I'm going to open the public hearing. There's no other questions for staff at 7:30 p.m. Applicant, did you wish to come to the podium? Provide your name and address for the record.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Rick Osberg. Uh, I'm a properties chairman for Good Sheperd Lutheran Church at 151 County Road 42 East. uh thank you for their time and considering this matter this evening. Um I've been with the church since 1993 when almost when we acquired this property. Um and serving on uh various uh committees but largely with property care and management for probably half of that time span. So I have some history on attendance as men the makeup of the of the building and the parking and so forth. Um the I want to add the one clarification about the new building height. So alongside of our our hill as the as the ground starts to drop way towards the uh the street behind us that corner of the gym um will have the ground elevation drop to the corner and back up again. and it's behind the trees. So you get a effectively a exposed wall height um higher than the typical that you'd see anywhere else around that portion of the building. So that but averages out you know um meeting the code of under 30 ft. Um with respect to um parking, we we our congregation generally is kind of just just a little couple two years before COVID had come almost our peak attendance. Um and we didn't really have any issues with parking. Then we we added a service on a Thursdays for other people more opportunities for people people to worship so they're not there at the same time. When we have a um a a large community event like trunk or treat, uh we reach out to our two neighbors, Burian and then uh Minnesota South District for our our like

volunteers will park in their parking lots and then the guests that come can use our our main parking lot and we use the west side for trunk or treat or whatever event that we have. It's been working out pretty good. Um uh I pleased with the conditions that I mean working with the staff that they came to our building reviewed our our business model and how we you know carry out our our daily activities at the school and the church and the timing of such things. um and looked at how to present different solutions and um the proof of parking um seems a good option although I've gotten I mean Missouri south ended south district they're so friendly you know they just you know park in whenever you want to it doesn't matter and they have an occasional conference and they'll use our lot as well so um so the solutions that are in the um proposed con approval meet our needs So, um, if you have any other questions, uh, you can ask me and Sure.

So, I went by the property today and it looks like there's some type of construction already taking place on the west side. That's correct. Is that takeaway parking or what? Uh, yes. for the term of the construction. Um the the portion on the west side of the building Yeah. Um is a staging area currently for about

six or seven months. That'll last and that that so that's that has um diminished our available parking for the construction period. And that's for the construction of the gymnasium. Correct. Correct. Correct. Okay.

Commissioners, any more questions for the applicant. Thank you very much. All right. With that, I can close the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. and open it up for discussion. Any discussion, commissioners? No, uh, it seems pretty straightforward. I'd be willing to make a motion unless somebody else has a comment or question. All right, I'm going for it.

So, I uh I move that the planning commission recommend to the city council approval of the conditional use permit amendment for a maximum building height of 33 feet and approval for proof of parking at 151 County Road 42 East subject to the listed conditions. We have a motion. Second. Thank you very much. All right. All those in favor? I opposed. And the motion passes. Thank you very much. All right. Agenda topic number six um is updates staff.

All right. So, the only update I have for tonight was at the last plan commission, the plan commission reviewed um the application for the long-term care facility at the Hampton Inn. Um that item was on the city council's agenda um last week at the September 16th meeting. At that time, the plan or city council decided to table the item to allow for staff and the applicant to work on a couple conditions. Um mainly around an upscaling staffing plan and um client plan uh number of beds um for additional outreach, the applicant to do additional outreach to some neighboring businesses and um bring it back to the October 21st meeting for additional discussion. So currently we're working with the applicant on those items and I'll be back before the council on the 21st and that's the only update I have for tonight. Thank you everyone for your help on those items. Great discussion. Appreciate it. Thank you.

All right. Any update from commissioners? I should have asked that. All right. Seeing none, that leads us to our last agenda topic which is adjournment. Can I get a motion? Motion to adjurnn. Second. Second. All those in favor? I opposed. Motion passes. Thank you. And that's it. And now we have a picture to take. Y